ヘリテージ財団でのパネル講演 - ブログ版『ユーリの部屋』

前回のブログ（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20180103）の続き。
アメリカから素晴らしい映像ニュースが届いた。

（http://www.heritage.org/middle-east/event/president-trumps-ultimate-deal-israeli-palestinian-peace-possible）

The Trump Administration is developing an “outside-in” strategy, enlisting Arab governments to take positive steps toward Israel.

11 January 2018
(12:00 pm - 1:00 pm)

The Heritage Foundation
214 Massachusetts Ave NE
Washington, DC
20002

計1時間23分33秒の映像。
アブラムス先生はパイプス先生と「古い友人であり、大学も一緒に通った」と冒頭の自己紹介で述べ（31分30秒頃）、パイプス先生も自分の持ち時間の冒頭（44分37秒から48秒頃）で、「1984年にはヘリテージ財団で働いていたし、エリオットと並んで討論したのは1971年以来だ」と述べている。
（その他、パイプス先生によるヘリテージ財団での1991年6月5日講演については、拙訳（http://ja.danielpipes.org/article/13505）を参照されたし。また、エリオット・アブラムス氏に関しては、2016年10月1日の夜、ストックホルムのヒルトン・ホテルのロビーで一時間ほどパイプス先生とお話していた時にも（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20161028）、私の方から言及した。「アブラムス氏のご著書（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20160801）によれば、『プロテスタントが主流のアメリカ合衆国で、ユダヤ人であることを保持することは難しい』と書いていらっしゃいました」と述べると、即座に「いや。僕はね、アブラムスに言いたいよ。そんなことはない。どれほどアメリカ合衆国が我々ユダヤ人によくしてくれたことかってね」と、否定された。）。
既に長らく人口に膾炙しているエピソードだが、司会者のジェイムス・フィリップス氏がパイプス先生について紹介されていた事項で面白かったのが、「2006年9月に、アル・カーイダがあるビデオで、悔い改めて（repent）、ライバルのイスラームに改宗せよ、と名指しで呼びかけていた」という下り（43分55秒から44分17秒頃）。アブラムス先生は、「悔い改め」の言葉にパイプス先生と顔を見合わせて、意味ありげにニヤニヤしていた。その直後、司会者が「彼（パイプス）は辞退しました（He declined.）」と述べると、会場から思わず失笑が漏れていた。その理由として、「自分の宗教、自分の国、自分の文明に忠実でありたい（But I am faithful to my own religion, to my own country, and to my civilization. ）」というパイプス先生の言葉を添えられていた（http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2006/09/al-qaeda-invites-me-to-join-its-ranks）（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20120713）。
今でこそ、アメリカでも笑いが溢れるほど余裕綽々の状況だが、ここで再び、2001年9月11日の米国同時多発テロ事件発生直後を想起しなければなるまい。あの頃は、左翼やパレスチナ系アメリカ人や過激なムスリムからの激しい抵抗や妨害に直面しつつも、勇敢な精神の下、できうる限り正確に現代のイスラーム状況を理解すべく、保守系メディアでのコメント、大学や研究所での講演や討論を通して、活発に一般啓蒙され始めたことを忘れるべきではない。換言すれば、2006年のアル・カーイダ発言から11年以上も経った今だからこそ、笑いが生じるようになった様相が垣間見えるのであり、記憶を呼び起こす限りでは、確か当時、日本を含めたアメリカその他の世界の大半では、殆どの人々がアル・カーイダを恐ろしく不気味に感じていたのではないだろうか。
この文脈において、日本の中東学者が、論文や出版物でダニエル・パイプス先生を酷評していたのだった（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20121128）（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20130920）（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20160716）。だからこそ、イスラミスト教授を招聘した同志社大学一神教学際研究センターでも、キリスト教主義だと宣言しつつも、イスラミストに加担して、反米言説が優勢だったのである（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20160122）。
一例として、UNRWAとも関わっていたことのある立山良司氏（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20171204）の英語論文でのパイプス批判を見てみよう。これは、パイプス先生が身重の最初の奥様と一緒に、1985年に三ヶ月、東京の国際文化会館を宿として日本で調査留学されていた時（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20120505）、その費用を奨学金として出したNIRAからの1995年の出版物である（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20161028）。

（http://www.nira.or.jp/past/publ/review/95winter/tateyama.html）

Daniel Pipes, editor of the Middle East Quarterly. According to Pipes,

while fundamentalist groups and ideologies differ from each other in many ways, all of them are inherently extremist and all despise our civilization. They despise us not for what we do but for who we are. . . . By definition, fundamentalists seek a way of life deeply incompatible with our own ideals. Therefore, the U.S. government ought in principle not to cooperate with fundamentalists, not encourage them, and not engage in dialogue with them.

He goes on to say that

Fundamentalists feel the strength that comes from being part of a surging international network, somewhat like Marxist-Leninists must have felt in the 1950s. This new network, like that old one, has the United States of America in its sights.

The reality is actually closer to the opposite. Not only did no international network of Marxist-Leninists exist in the 1950s, no international network of political Islam exists today. Pipes's claims only demonstrate that what we can call "Islamintern" is being fabricated as a new "enemy" in America's post-Cold War world. Such remarks cannot be regarded as anything but political propaganda.

（引用終）
現状を鑑みれば（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20170511）（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20171204）、立山氏はいささか緩いというのか、楽観的な見地に立っていたと言えないだろうか。こういう方が、1997年から16年の長きに亘って防衛大学校の教授を務め、今もイスラエルを巡る中東情勢について本を出しているのだから（『ユダヤとアメリカー揺れ動くイスラエル・ロビー』中公新書（2016年））、我々日本側の「独自の」中東政策が甘っちょろく、同盟を結んでいるアメリカから見て常に日本が邪魔っ気なのは、止むを得ないのかもしれない。だが、その責任は一体誰が担うのだろうか？

このように、パイプス先生は、お父様譲りの頑固さと強烈な意志決定に従って（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/archive?word=Richard+Pipes)（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily2/archive?word=%22Richard+Pipes%22）、長期にわたって一貫した粘り強い態度を保持しつつ、さまざまな事象分析に基づいて、同じ主張を国内外の大量の媒体に書き続け、自ら赴いてどこでも語り続けて、ようやく世論がここまで変化するに至ったのだ。
この執念、この並外れた努力と忍耐力は、是非とも私が見習わなければならない叡智である。

最後に、まとめとして二点を。
（１）パイプス公式サイト上のエリオット・アブラムス引用のリスト一覧。

①（http://www.danielpipes.org/6339/elliott-abrams-religious-freedom）
Interview with Elliott Abrams: "Religious Freedom is More Important Today"
by Daniel Pipes and Patrick Clawson
Middle East Quarterly
Winter 2001

Elliott Abrams is chairman of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom. Born in New York City in 1948, Mr. Abrams received his B.A. degree from Harvard College in 1969, a master's degree in International Relations from the London School of Economics in 1970, and his juris doctor from Harvard Law School in 1973. He spent four years working in the United States Senate for Henry M. ("Scoop") Jackson and for Daniel P. Moynihan. He served in the State Department during all eight years of the Reagan administration, as assistant secretary of state for International Organization Affairs, for Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs, and for Inter-American Affairs. He was a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute from 1990 to 1996, and since 1996, has served as president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center. He has published articles in many journals and is the author of three books. Daniel Pipes and Patrick Clawson interviewed him in his office in Washington, D.C. on October 11, 2000.

②（http://www.danielpipes.org/17518/comment-on-habib-malik）
Comment on "Political Islam and the Roots of Violence"
In "The Influence of Faith: Religious Groups and U.S. Foreign Policy"
by Daniel Pipes
Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield, 2001, pp. 149-51. (pdf)
2001

Editor: Elliott Abrams
Contributions by Mark R. Amstutz, Gerald Anderson, J. Bryan Hehir, Allen Hertzke, Charles Horner, Samuel P. Huntington, Robert Kagan, Habib Malik, Stephen V. Monsma, Andrew Natsios, Norman Ornstein, Paul Pierson, Daniel Pipes, Leo Ribuffo, Nathan Tarcov, Arthur Waldron, George Weigel, and Michael R. Wiest.

③（http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005/02/my-optimism-about-ending-the-syrian）

2000: With Ziad Abdelnour, I coedited the Middle East Forum's study group report, Ending Syria's Occupation of Lebanon: The U.S. Role, which appeared in May 2000. The report, signed by such future Bush administration figures as Elliott Abrams, Paula Dobriansky, Douglas Feith, Michael Rubin, and David Wurmser (as well as Eliot Engel and Richard Perle), flatly declares that "All foreign forces must leave Lebanon."

④（http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005/04/sharons-gaza-withdrawal-made-in-washington）
Sharon's Gaza Withdrawal – Made in Washington?
by Daniel Pipes
Apr 11, 2005

Aug. 17, 2005 update: Some timely confirmation of my argument comes in a major article by Aluf Benn in Ha'aretz, on the "Metamorphosis of Ariel Sharon." The account begins in Rome on November 17, 2003, when Ariel Sharon met Elliott Abrams, the National Security Council official in charge of the Middle East portfolio, sent by his boss, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.

⑤（http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005/07/jordan-to-the-west-bank-egypt-to-gaza）

Mar. 2, 2009 update: Elliott Abrams, newly free to speak out after eight years in the Bush White House, is also thinking about giving up on a Palestinian state

⑥（http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2010/02/further-reactions-to-my-bomb-iran-argument）

Elliott Abrams of the Council on Foreign Relations (and my friend from college days)

⑦（http://www.danielpipes.org/10427/iran-obama-reelection）
Tehran holds Obama re-election wild card [in Iraq]
by Daniel Pipes
The Washington Times
December 20, 2011

As Obama's popularity has sunk to -4.4 percent and the elections loom less than a year away, his incentive to bomb Iran has substantially increased, a point publicly discussed by a colorful range of figures, both American (Sarah Palin, Pat Buchanan, Dick Cheney, Ron Paul, Elliott Abrams, George Friedman, David Broder, Donald Trump) and not (Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Fidel Castro).

⑧（http://www.danielpipes.org/16625/does-israel-need-us-jewish-support）
Does Israel Need U.S. Jewish Support?
by Daniel Pipes
Israel Hayom
April 18, 2016

Elliott Abrams began a conversation by asking what has caused American Jews to distance themselves from Israel and finding the main cause to be the 50-to-60 percent rate of Jewish intermarriage with non-Jews.

⑨（http://www.danielpipes.org/17626/the-paradoxical-peril-of-warm-us-israel-relations）
The Paradoxical Peril of Warm U.S.-Israel Relations
by Daniel Pipes
Wall Street Journal
June 2, 2017

Former deputy national security advisor Elliott Abrams helpfully compares it to Tinker Bell in Peter Pan: "If you believe, clap your hands."

⑩（http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2017/12/debate-trump-recognition-of-jerusalem-as-israel）
Trump's Recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's Capital – What Does It Mean?
by Daniel Pipes
Dec 11, 2017

Respondents: Elliott Abrams, Daniel Pipes, Max Singer, Eytan Gilboa, Jonathan Rynhold, Hillel Frisch.

おまけに、拙訳でアブラムス氏が言及されているものを一本（http://ja.danielpipes.org/article/16703）。

（２）ヘリテージ財団でのパイプス先生のお仕事履歴。
①（http://www.danielpipes.org/8221/the-middle-east）
The Middle East
by Daniel Pipes
From Mandate for Leadership II: Continuing the Conservative Revolution
January 1984
By Stuart M. Butler, Michael Sanera, and W. Bruce Weinrod
Washington: Heritage Foundation, 1984, pp. 342-48.

・The Reagan Administration came to office with an overall foreign policy mandate to strengthen pro-American forces, counter Soviet expansion, and promote free trade.
・The Administration failed to develop a clear policy on the Arab-Israeli, Lebanese, and Iraq-Iran conflicts, or on relations with Israel and Saudi Arabia.
・Lines are clearly drawn in the Middle East: The United States gives strongest support to the area's most democratic and pro-Western country—Israel; the Soviet Union gives strongest support to states and organizations that sponsor terrorism against the West—especially Libya, Syria, and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). Other states of the region fit between these poles.
・Although Israel explicitly aligns with the West against the USSR, some have feared that close U.S.-Israeli ties could come at the expense of weakened U.S. bonds with the less pro-Western but more numerous Arab states. Yet the U.S. can enjoy healthy relations with both the Israelis and moderate Arabs.
・Israel offers special advantages as an American ally. As the only consistently democratic state in the Middle East, it enjoys the most stable system of government in the region. Israel's political continuity sets it apart from neighboring states, many of whose regimes can be overthrown by a coup or a bullet. Israel's freedom of expression and its moral principles make it possible for the U.S., through its support for Israel, to combine geopolitical advantage with morality in its foreign policy.
・Arab-Israeli Conflict
Refrain from imposing solutions: Neither the U.S. nor any combination of outside powers can on their own solve the Arab-Israeli conflict. This is beyond any outside power's capacity, and incautious optimistic rhetoric can raise dangerous expectations and lead to unhealthy dependence. Instead, the U.S. should respond to local initiatives by facilitating communication, serving as an honest broker, and helping to ease the burden of those Middle East nations that take risks for peace.
・Maintain Israeli military superiority: Provide Israel with the arms necessary to assure its military predominance over Syrian forces in particular and any likely combination of Arab forces in general. Make clear to all states of the region that the U.S. does not intend to arm both sides of a conflict. This means providing only strictly defensive weapons to governments in a state of war with Israel (such as Jordan and Saudi Arabia).
・U.S. Relations With Israel
Deepen and extend the strategic relationship with Israel as it relates to the Soviet Union and its proxies: The U.S. should consider the prepositioning of material, coordination of battle plans, joint maneuvers, and shared intelligence.
・Deemphasize the West Bank: While the disposition of the West Bank and Gaza Strip are of great importance to the Arabs and to Israel—indeed it may have mortal significance for Israel—it is not an issue central to the Arab-Israeli conflict, and it is not a vital issue for the U.S. It thus need not overly concern Washington. Arabs and Israelis fought for many years before the West Bank and Gaza came under Israeli rule in 1967; there is no reason to assume that return of these territories to the Arabs would end the conflict. Settling the status of the West Bank and Gaza, often referred to as solving the "Palestinian problem," while important, is in reality but a minor aspect of the overall Arab-Israeli relationship.
・Encourage recognition of Israel: The essence of the Arab-Israeli problem lies in the Arab refusal to recognize Israel. On this issue the U.S. can most effectively marshal its influence. Of the Arab League's 21 member states, only the four bordering on Israel—Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt—can make war on Israel. Three of these four have resigned themselves to come to terms with Israel's existence: Egypt signed a peace treaty in 1979, Lebanon tried to sign one in 1983, and Jordan has often signaled to Israel its willingness to co-exist. Syria alone continues pursuing policies aimed at destroying Israel by force. Not only does Damascus prepare for war against Israel, but exerts great pressure on other Arab nations—including Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, and the PLO—to prevent them from accommodating to Israel's existence.
・For the U.S. fruitfully to address the Arab-Israeli conflict, it must deal, through measures described below, with the problem of Syrian intransigence. Otherwise, Syria will try to block progress on a U.S.-backed settlement by intimidating Israel's Arab negotiating partners.

（Excerpt）
②（http://www.danielpipes.org/5327/the-rise-of-muslim-fundamentalism）
The Rise of Muslim Fundamentalism
by Daniel Pipes
St. Louis Post Dispatch
August 22, 1984

Daniel Pipes is a member of the faculty at Harvard University and a Heritage Foundation visiting fellow.

③（http://www.heritage.org/node/22339/print-display）

Reagan's Blunt Message to Egypt's Mubarak
March 8, 1985

James Phillips is a senior research fellow for Middle Eastern affairs at The Heritage Foundation.
Daniel Pipes "Fundamentalist Muslims and U.S. Policy," Heritage Foundation International Briefing No.13, August 1984.

④（http://www.danielpipes.org/8261/east-and-west-in-the-middle-east）
East and West in the Middle East
by Daniel Pipes
Middle East Focus
March 1985
[Paper presented at the "Conference on U.S.-Turkish views of the Middle East" in October 1984, co-sponsored by The Heritage Foundation and the Foreign Policy Institute (Ankara).]

・U.S. Relations with Israel. Lines are clearly drawn in the Middle East. Whereas the United States strongly supports the only unequivocally pro-Western country of the region - Israel - the Soviet Union strongly supports those governments and organizations that engage in terrorism against the West - Libya, Syria, and the PLO.
・Consistent Soviet support for Israel's worst enemies results from Moscow's noting that a powerful Israel forces Arab leaders to realize that armed struggle is hopeless, inducing them to turn to Washington for help.

（Excerpt）
アメリカの大学での中東研究者や国務省での中東政策の立案者は、元来は上流階級あるいは中東で長く活動したキリスト教宣教師の子弟による、非常に優秀な頭脳集団だと言われていた（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20131004）（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20141121）。3年以上も前にそのことを私が指摘した時、パイプス先生は否定はしなかったものの、「その時代はとうに過ぎた」と一言（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20140613）。
但し、日本の昨今のイスラエル・パレスチナ紛争解決への関与宣言については、2018年1月5日付メールにて、「この問題に関して、日本政府は西欧政府のように、何も考えていないのではないかと僕は見ている」と、相変わらず辛辣だった。
それは、三笠宮崇仁親王殿下（http://d.hatena.ne.jp/itunalily/20161028）を始めとする学者陣を除き、日本の上流階級が中東に深く学問的に関与してこなかったことを裏付けているのだろうか。

［2018年1月16日追記］
上記映像がパイプス公式ウェブサイト上にトランスクリプト付で掲載された。
（http://www.danielpipes.org/18148/trump-israel-palestinian-peace）