IT'S FEBRUARY 26, 1987 FOR PROGRAM 9. WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR RECOLLECTIONS OF THE ATOMIC BLAST AT HIROSHIMA.

My personal recollections?

YES.

At that time, I, along with a hundred other students was close to the Southern coast shipbuilding. There we hundred students, all in the same school, worked building ships, at that time, since it was during the war. On the morning of August 6, it happened. The students were, I guess you don't know the word 'tenko', were doing the morning ceremonies. Then we went inside into the school building. When I was seven, I had the habit of writing a diary every morning. So that morning, after I finished writing the account of the fifth of August, I don't remember whether two or three minutes had passed when the student sitting in front of me jumped up, and in the moment that it took to look up to see what it was, a whitish-blue flash had already...that was it...the whole world was wrapped in a whitish-blue light. Or I may have felt that the world had been colored whitish-blue. Right at that time, fragments of glass from the school windows came scattering down. I lost my right eye to a fragment of this glass. That was what that moment was like. Of course there was a loud noise at the same time, a loud sound. The whitish-blue flash and thunder, a big noise. In that moment I thought that we had been attacked, but they were at the same time.

AFTER HAVING EXPERIENCED THE EXPLOSION OF THE ATOMIC BOMB AT HIROSHIMA, RIGHT AFTER THE WAR, IN THE EARLY 1950S, HOW DID IT AFFECT YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARD THE NUCLEAR QUESTION?

The early 1950s...of course it had to affect the way I thought about it. But in any case I was determined that the nuclear, nuclear weapons must be eliminated from the world. I was desperate to see this.

THIS IS ABOUT THE SAME PERIOD, RIGHT AFTER THE WAR, BUT BY WHAT AUTHORITY DID YOU COME TO BE CONNECTED TO THE PEACE MOVEMENT?

I lost an eye, so right after the war I spent half a year in an ophthalmic hospital. While I was in the hospital, I thought desperately about this question, whether this modern civilization that chose atomic bombs, whether this was a good direction to continue. I thought that if civilization continued in this direction the human race might be destroyed. So I thought that this human civilization had to be changed. I thought very hard about this. And about the kind of civilization that we have had until now, well, as a conclusion I criticized a civilization based on strength. And if there is a way for the human race to continue living, it had to be a civilization of love. If we did not take this path then the human race would be destroyed, would not be able to continue living. I continued thinking this while I was there and began to tell people about it. The victims of the bomb were in a truly tragic condition. In particular, among those victims, orphans who had lost their parents due to the bomb were especially tragic. Together with some students, I started working to help these orphans. This was my Movement to Aid and Adopt Orphans of the Atomic Bomb. This was the beginning of my participation in the movement.

WAS THIS AFTER YOU LEFT THE HOSPITAL?

Eh?

THIS WAS AFTER YOU LEFT THE HOSPITAL. COULD YOU DESCRIBE THE DEMONSTRATIONS AND ACTIONS OF THE EARLY PEACE MOVEMENT, AT THE BEGINNING?

At the beginning? At the beginning, the so-called peace movement had few people and was not particularly active...

(ASKED TO REPEAT)

At the beginning, it was not until nine years after Hiroshima that the peace movement became a large-scale national movement at the time of America's test blast at Bikini when Japan's Daigo Fukuryū Maru was bombed. From this time all of Japan began to appreciate the horror of the incident and the horror of radiation and this led to a large movement in opposition. At this time an opportunity presented itself for all of Japan to think again and remember how horrible the atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were. So not only hydrogen bombs, but the atomic bombs like those at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a movement began that said nuclear weapons must be eliminated. At first there was a huge petition drive. In Hiroshima Prefecture, at the end there were one million signatures. At that time, the population of Hiroshima was two million. One million signatures were collected and were sent to the United Nations. That was the very first opportunity.

IN THE EARLY PERIOD THERE WERE DEMONSTRATIONS AS WELL. DID YOU YOURSELF TAKE PART IN ANY PEACE MARCHES?

At the time, this was right at the beginning, there were demonstrations, peace marches, that is, big peace marches, but this did not happen very early. It was in the 1960s. At that time, the whole country was filled with demonstration after demonstration against the Security Treaty.

SO IN THE 1960S ...

Yes, petition drives. There were all kinds of groups, groups of wives, youth groups, organized in a kind of PTA. All groups carried on petition drives. I acted as head of an office that all of these groups had set up. So I there was no way to keep out of participating in the movement, even though it kept me up late. As a result, after that, this was in 1954. The next year, 1955, that is the tenth anniversary of the atomic blast, that year, there was the world conference on nuclear and hydrogen bombs. All the way from that time, this was the form of the organization, an organization that ran mass meetings, this continued all the way until the split.

DID YOU PARTICIPATE DIRECTLY IN THEM?

I was the who promoted them, so if you ask about my connection...

YOU MUST HAVE BEEN BUSY AS HEAD OF THE OFFICE, BUT COULD YOU DESCRIBE HOW BUSY YOU WERE?

I was busy, but usually ate, I think. I don't remember not having time to eat... probably it happened, but... in any case we were busy. But in busy periods, I couldn't talk to anyone for more than five minutes before other requests came in. This I still remember. We were busy.

WHY DID EVERYONE GET INVOLVED IN THE PROTESTS AGAINST THE SECURITY TREATY?

Because we felt that the situation was extremely dangerous. Because Japan was getting caught up in America's war plans. This was not just the action of the Anti-Nuclear and Hydrogen Bomb Movement, the Anti-Nuclear and Hydrogen Bomb Movement was just one organization among many. This was a movement of all groups and the Anti-Nuclear and Hydrogen Bomb Movement participated in it as well. As I said just now, Japan is in a dangerous position, it is not secure. It has become extremely dangerous. If ...fights, then Japan's pre-eminence will disappear. There has been nothing more dangerous.

YOU BACKED THE NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY. WHAT RESULT DO YOU THINK THAT THIS TREATY HAS HAD?

Well, without this treaty, the number of countries possessing nuclear capability would increase. So the treaty has defended against this increase in countries with nuclear capability, hasn't it?

WHAT EXPERIENCES AND REASONS WERE BEHIND THE THREE NON-NUCLEAR PRINCIPLES? WAS IT THE RESULT OF INDICATIONS OF PEOPLE LIKE YOU, OR WAS IT THE RESULT OF POPULAR SUPPORT?

It was not a result of our instructions. If the people do not firmly maintain this, and do not refuse to be shifted by the government, then they will be overcome by the government. In any case, the fact that the government publicly maintains the Three Non-Nuclear Principles is due to the outcry of the people.

WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF COUNTRIES WITH THE CAPABILITY OF CONSTRUCTING NUCLEAR WEAPONS?

I think that this is extremely dangerous, Gradually the number of countries with nuclear capability is increasing. Israel for example, or South Africa, or perhaps even, by some chance, Pakistan. This increase in nuclear capability is extremely dangerous. That is the reason for the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. I think I spoke of that before... does that answer your question?

THIS MAY BE THE SAME BUT, NOW, THE NUMBER OF COUNTRIES POSSESSING THE CAPABILITY OF CONSTRUCTING NUCLEAR WEAPONS HAS GRADUALLY INCREASED. WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS?

So, with regard to the nuclear matter, the people should not be seduced into that direction...the people must join hands...in order to see that there is not an increase in the number of nuclear countries...! think that we must do this.

DO YOU THINK THAT IN THE FUTURE JAPAN WILL EVER CONSTRUCT NUCLEAR WEAPONS?

Never.

WHY?

Because the people will not allow it. I hear this often. Japan has the technology and the materials as well, if it wants to make atomic bombs, it can make them whenever it likes. Why doesn't Japan make them? I am asked this question often. And from the outside this may be the way it seems. But we, the Japanese people, the nation, know very well what horrible experiences nuclear weapons faring. We will never recognize such a direction, never allow it. So for our government to turn it's back on the will of the people and become a nuclear country is absolutely impossible. This is what I think. I think that I can affirm this.

THIS IS A QUESTION THAT I'VE ASKED BEFORE, BUT, WHEN THE STANDARDS OF THE NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY WERE APPROVED WHAT WAS THE EFFECT ON JAPAN'S PEACE MOVEMENT?

It was strange for a country that is now so flexible. Why, when it is so flexible, that is strange isn't it, if we view it from the standpoint of the people. If the people's movement had the strength, it would have been ratified. We the people. For the people, that is the way that it is. That is all I know.

JAPAN TOOK SIX YEARS TO COMPLETE AND RATIFY THE NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY. WHAT DID THE JAPANESE PEOPLE THINK ABOUT THE DELAY?

With regard to this, the Japanese people were impatient, that was the only way it could be, that is how we felt through it all. And it was the same from the standpoint of the scholars. They did things like severely criticizing the state of the government. But for the people, the only thing...they wondered what the Japanese government was dragging its feet for... This kind of expression, these feelings and criticisms existed, for the Japanese people. So, for example, there were editorials written criticizing the government, even though these were done by intellectuals, of course, this is what they did at that time. But fundamentally, it is this nation's anti-nuclear consciousness, it's feeling of opposition to the nuclear, that supported them at the base level. This is what I believe.

I WOULD LIKE TO ASK ABOUT THE PEACE MOVEMENT'S DEMONSTRATIONS. WHAT WERE THE FEELINGS OF THE PARTICIPANTS, THAT IS, ALTHOUGH THEY ARE UNITED, WERE PEOPLE'S OPINIONS AND FEELINGS UNITED?

Ah, demonstrations... in my Anti-Atomic and Hydrogen Movement, we rely principally on peace marches, peace marches on a large scale. There was a period when there were many such marches, but they continue even today. However, if one speaks of their placement, unfortunately there is a problem with splits. The movement is being split up into cuttings, like plant cuttings. More than a movement, it has been split up into cuttings of movements. It is too bad that things developed this way, but it is the way it happened, that the movement split up...of course both sides are doing the same things, but...It weakens our power, and because it weakens us it is very unfortunate.

NOW THAT WE ARE IN THE NUCLEAR AGE, ARE YOU OPTIMISTIC OR PESSIMISTIC ABOUT THE NEXT FIFTY YEARS?

Optimistic or pessimistic? I don't use these words, but if I had to use these words, I'm optimistic. Why is this, to say why...? Ultimately, it is because the people truly know that the nuclear can destroy the human race. So that if the end is to be decided, or whatever is to be decided, depends on the power of the people. The people's anti-nuclear strength will certainly work to get rid of nuclear things. I am working because I believe in the strength of the people — we, the people, this is the only thing to believe in. This I firmly believe. In the strength of the people. In the strength of the anti-nuclear people. The people of the world must join hands and do this, they must. Without fail we can rid the world of the nuclear. I believe in the strength of the people. So from the standpoint of such people, I say that ultimately people will win over the nuclear. I believe this.

WHAT DID YOU THINK WHEN RIGHT AFTER THE WAR, IN THE FIFTIES AND SIXTIES, PLANS FOR THE USE OF NUCLEAR POWER WERE PRESENTED?

I myself believed that the use of nuclear power... The peaceful use?...Is it all right?... When I heard people talk about the peaceful use of nuclear power, I thought how wonderful it would be if an energy as frightful as this could be used peacefully. Unfortunately I fell for advertisements like that. Even victims of the bomb like me. We were tricked.

RIGHT AFTER THE WAR, WHAT DID YOU THINK ABOUT THE PEACEFUL USE OF NUCLEAR POWER, AT THE TIME?

Unfortunately, I believed in it. Now I am ashamed of it but I thought that there might be that kind of future in it. I believed the advertisements. Truly, if this kind of frightful energy could be used peacefully how wonderful it would be. Even I, like the others, believed this. But I was not fooled for long. After that time, gradually, after I studied up on it and was taught by various people, I am just remembering now, but, I believe that it was in 1971 that through the introduction of Dr. Pauling, we heard Gofman, Tamplin, and Inglis, these people, all very important scholars, time and time again said that it was impossible to use nuclear power peacefully. Due to their teaching and leadership, even today I believe that the peaceful use of nuclear energy is impossible. I am as opposed to this as I am to nuclear weapons and am opposing the peaceful use of nuclear energy in the peace movement.