■
生シラスの春漁が３月中旬で解禁になるので、それ目的に行って参りました。
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/d1021/20140316#1394967423
「用宗」の検索結果 - d1021の日記
■
日刊ゲンダイ|元外交官・東郷和彦氏に聞く(上)「右の人の平和ボケが怖い」
それでは、日本はどうすればいいか。答えは２つしかありません。ひとつは「抑止」です。こちらが力を持つことによって、相手が領海侵犯した場合、叩き返す備えを持つことです。もうひとつは「対話」です。こちらが軍事力を強めれば強めるほど、相手は脅威に感じる。だから、軍事力を強めるのは戦争をするためではなく、戦争が起きないようにするのが目的だと相手に分からせないといけない。
日刊ゲンダイ|元外交官・東郷和彦氏に聞く(下)「中国は日米の乖離を凝視」
心配なのは、「戦争」と「平和」についての認識もないまま、戦前の日本帝国の栄誉について狭い理解しか持っていない一部の政治家と評論家が、安倍首相の周囲で軍団をつくっているらしいことです。
そこに、ウクライナ問題という大きな波乱要因が起きてしまいました。ウクライナ国内は、西半分が親ヨーロッパ、東半分が親ロシアです。ソチ五輪の開催中、親ロシアのヤヌコビッチ大統領と西の急進勢力が激突し、大統領は追放されてしまった。西中心の大統領代行が選挙を宣言する事態になっています。
さらに、ロシア人の力が強く、ロシアの黒海艦隊も駐留するクリミア半島の人々が、ウクライナからの離脱を求めて声を上げ、プーチンは、クリミアのロシア人の声に呼応して動き始めた。
西中心の現ウクライナ政府はこれに抗議、アメリカも現政権を支持し、日本を含むＧ７はプーチンに自制を求める声明を出しました。
もし、事態が暴力化すれば、アメリカは経済制裁を打ち出す可能性が高い。日本が同調すれば、いま開かれつつある日ロの進展は壊れるかもしれない。
ロシアと欧州の間にあるウクライナは、ユーラシア大陸の戦略的要諦の地です。ここが、ＥＵを向くか、それともロシアを向くかは、これからの世界の力の均衡の鍵になります。そしてユーラシアの力の均衡の背景には、台頭する中国という、米ロともに無視できない大問題があります。
■
US-sponsored UN resolution on Crimea could aggravate crisis - China ― RT News
The UN Security Council resolution on Crimea vetoed by Russia on Saturday could only further worsen the Ukrainian crisis, the Chinese Foreign Ministry said.
A UN Security Council resolution, calling on countries not to recognize the results of the Crimean referendum, “could currently only lead to confrontation and further aggravate the situation,” according to a statement issued Sunday by Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang.
“This is neither in Ukraine’s interest, nor in the interest of the international community,” the statement said. It warned all sides against taking any steps that would make the Ukrainian crisis worse.
■
クリミア住民投票で95.5％がロシア編入支持、米欧は制裁準備 | Reuters
ロシア通信（ＲＩＡ）によると、ウクライナ南部・クリミア半島で１６日実施されたロシア編入の是非を問う住民投票は、開票率５０％以上の段階で、９５．５％がロシア編入を支持した。
ミハイル・マリシェフ選挙管理委員長の発言として報じた。委員長によると、投票率は８３％。ロシア編入に反対する住民は投票をボイコットする方針を示していたが、高い投票率となった。
Moscow wins overwhelming Crimea vote, West readies sanctions | Reuters
95.7% of Crimeans in referendum voted to join Russia - preliminary results ― RT News
クリミア住民投票最終結果、96.77％がロシア編入支持＝管理委 | Reuters
■
ウクライナ過激派勢力 欧州向けロシア産ガスのパイプラインを破壊すると脅迫 - The Voice of Russia
ＵＮＮによると、ヤロシ氏は、「ロシアはパイプラインを使って石油やガスを送り金を稼いでいる」ため、「パイプラインを破壊する」と脅迫した。
またＵＮＮによると、ヤロシ氏はウクライナ政府に対し、早期に最高総司令部を設置し、総動員令を布告し、国の奥地にも武器を届け、北大西洋条約機構（ＮＡＴＯ）加盟国からの武器供与を確保するよう求めたという。
Right Sector leader: Kiev should be ready to sabotage Russian pipelines in Ukraine ― RT News
If Ukrainian radicals blow up pipeline from Russia, Europe will be in trouble ― RT Op-Edge
The threat form the Ukrainian right wing group, Right Sector, to sabotage pipelines taking Russian gas to Europe must be taken seriously, British MP, author and broadcaster George Galloway, has told RT.
■
ＦＲＢ保管の外国中銀保有の米国債が急減、ロシアが引き出しとの憶測 | Reuters
米連邦準備理事会（ＦＲＢ）が１３日発表した１２日時点の外国中銀の財務省証券保有高（連銀保管分）は前週比１０４５億３５００万ドル減少。減少幅はそれまでの過去最大の３倍以上だった。大幅減少の原因はロシア中銀との見方がもっぱらだ。
憶測の真偽の確認は、数カ月後の公式データの発表を待たなくてはならないが、ロシアには、ウクライナ危機をめぐる米欧の制裁の影響回避しなければならないという事情とともに、急落する自国通貨ルーブルを下支えする必要にも迫られている。
ロシアの米国債保有高は、２０１３年末時点で１３９０億ドルで１１位。
ロシア中銀は、同中銀の外貨資産に関するデータは、統計期間が終了してから少なくとも６カ月後、しかも市場の動向も勘案した上で公表すると述べるにとどめている。
■
過去1世紀で最も悪化する米国の深刻な不平等問題｜金融市場異論百出｜ダイヤモンド・オンライン
米国の所得格差は過去1世紀で最もひどい状態になっている。
■
Twitter / SophieCo_RT: Ukraine's #revolution &
Ukraine's #revolution & what's in it for Washington? Watch out for my interview with ex-U.S. intelligence officer, tomorrow on @RT_com
Twitter / francesdavies15: @SophieCo_RT @RT_com hi sophie
hi sophie any chance of sergey lavrov giving a interview yet,i know hes very busy :)
Twitter / SophieCo_RT: Former U.S. intel officer
Former U.S. intel officer: '#Kiev coup orchestrated through U.S.-funded NGOs' http://rt.com/shows/sophieco/ukraine-revolution-usa-support-246/
US foreign aid agencies paid for Kiev street violence - ex-US agent Scott Rickard ― RT SophieCo
The EU is a hurry to sign the long-awaited association treaty with Ukraine, while the new leaders in Kiev are turning to Washington for support. Whose interests were at stake during the Ukrainian revolution? Should the promises of the West be trusted by the new authorities? Sophie talks to former US intelligence officer Scott Rickard to find out the answers to these questions.
Sophie Shevardnadze: You’ve said the US government has been preparing the revolution in Ukraine for years; it’s invested $5 billion so far in the uprising. Where you got this information? Do you have a proof that that’s the case?
Scott Rickard: Well, it’s public information. You have the folks at the National Endowment for Democracy who have been doing this since the unfortunate overthrow of your grandfather [Eduard Shevardnadze, former president of Georgia – Ed.]. The Rose Revolution – there were, at least, thousand NGOs operating in Georgia at the time, in the early 2000s, that were very responsible for the opposition movements that happened in Georgia. This has been the ‘color revolutions’ that started pretty much alongside of George Soros and all of the other folks that have been involved along the way. It’s something that has become sort of status quo with American manipulation of foreign governments. It’s not something that comes as a surprise to me.
SS: You’ve mentioned Georgia and Orange Revolution in Kiev 10 years ago, approximately – and back then, there was a lot of talk about America and George Soros funding them and he didn’t deny actually doing it. What about now? Would you say that exactly the same thing is taking place, because many people argue that it’s not the case this time.
SR: Oh, it’s absolutely the same thing. USAID is implicated, Pierre Omidyar is implicated, you’ve got the National Endowment for Democracy which has over 50 NGOs operating there now. You also have the ties into Tymoshenko and notorious bosses of bosses, Semion Mogilevich who has been sidekick for the American government preceding the wars against Russia in Afghanistan. Semion Mogilevich was a huge supplier of weapons and a huge supporter of American aggression against Russia in Afghanistan in the ’80s.
SS: You’ve mentioned Pierre Omidyar as founder of eBay and also George Soros. When we talk about big capital and big capital players, we are talking about private businesses who are spending their money on revolution, as you put it. What’s in it for them?
SR: Well, most of the money is coming from USAID and NGOs, and NGOs are actually funded by the government. The US government actually funds the National Endowment for Democracy, and a lot of these folks are really closely tied to [Max] Shachtman that worked for Nixon back in the late ’60s and who created this organization, and [Carl] Gershman now, who heads the National Endowment for Democracy is yet another protégé of that whole Shachtmanite issues.
You don’t have to look very far into Ukraine – the most powerful, most well-known foreigner in the Ukraine today is Yaakov Bleich. Rabbi Bleich is the number one guy that they go to, to get information for the State Department about what’s going on with the government in Ukraine. He’s been there for 15 years and even John Kerry on his last visit had a private meeting with the rabbi and the rabbi is tied directly into these sort of National Endowment for Democracy organizations.
SS: But funding social groups or organizations – is it the same thing as funding the revolution?
SR: Well, of course if they are tossing Molotov cocktails and not having peaceful, and what I would say, intellectual dialog using communications and paper and creating, what I would say, town halls and discussions – that is funding the revolution, if you’re inciting violence and the money is basically going to organization that may incite violence against the standing government. That is inciting the revolution and I think it’s illegal by international laws, by far – the US has done it in half a dozen nations in the last 10 years.
SS: The revolutions that you’ve mentioned – the Rose Revolution in Georgia, the Orange Revolution in Ukraine, the revolution that took place or is taking place right now in Ukraine – many would tell you that those are also, besides everything else, a result of acute social protest. I mean, surely you can’t deny genuine popular discontent – even the Russian president said “the grievances of people on Maidan are justified to an extent.”
SR: I absolutely agree. The popular discontent is one thing, but throwing thousands of Molotov cocktails is a completely different thing. Put yourself in the US – if we had a foreign government funding $5 billion to Canada or Mexico, or maybe a former state that seceded and those people in those protests were throwing Molotov cocktails at government facilities, I can guarantee you they would not show near as much constraint as the Ukrainian government and Russian governments have shown.
SS: The violence that broke out in Kiev – you’re saying that was also planned? Or did things just simply get out of control?
SR: Saying “things are planned” or “gotten out of control” – it’s a fine line. There are individuals who are very well-trained. These NGOs operate on every level. They operate on this peaceful side and they also operate on the violence side. It’s pretty clear that Americans have been wildly successful around militarizing jihad and violence and any kind of operations. Even Graham Fuller, who was very instrumental in overthrowing the governments in the some of the former Soviet States prior to the 2000 timeframe, really, the demise of the former Soviet states, these guys were very calculated about working with violent organizations to create uprisings.
You know, Israel was meddling also in Georgia, and the US almost went to war because of senators like John McCain. These are situations that continue, and nobody has been really held accountable, because the kind of rhetoric that’s played out in the news is pretty much propaganda and that’s putting it lightly.
SS: What Kiev has on its hands right now is a burgeoning black market of firearms in Kiev. Do you see that becoming a serious problem?
SR: Of course, anytime that you have an unpoliced society, and you begin the chaos, it’s much easier - because the patrols are less likely - it’s much easier for people to smuggle things in and out of places. Just look at the last three years in Syria how successful the foreign intelligence operatives and mercenaries that have been operating there, have basically destroyed Syria by the hands of foreigners. And this is what would be in store for Ukraine if the Russians don’t protect the sovereignty of that nation from the foreign interventionists.
SS: If you look at things generally, do you think all these other protests going on around the world – because there are many of them, there is civil unrest in Turkey, there is a whole lot going on in Thailand, in Bosnia-Herzegovina - is there a force behind them? Is it the same force or are there different players involved?
SR: Obviously, the times that we are going through now and kinds of austerity that the European Union has gone through, specifically Greece, they’ve had probably the worst of the worst, and then you have what’s happening in Ukraine with austerity measures. People start suffering from an economic explosion that really is in the opposite direction. We’re looking at times like leading to World War I and World War II, where there was a lot of economic despair, and these are the kind of things we are seeing today because immensely inflated economic environment that has been created by the World Bank and the IMF and all the regular suspects that have created false market and a false narrative of around the domestic products in one country versus the domestic products in the other. And that’s why you’ve got countries like Ukraine - the income in Ukraine, the disparity comparatively to the US is almost 10 to 1 - that’s the kind of things that people are dealing with in developed nations and I think that’s the kind of thing that they are uprising against their governments, because some of the governments are corrupt and the people are noticing it.
Now, is it induced – obviously it is induced when it’s in the best interest of the US and it’s very clear that the US has spent billions of dollars on this over the past, I’d say, at least two or three decades.
SS: Apart from establishing a NATO presence in Ukraine, do you see any other reasons for the US involvement in the country?
SR: It’s also economic and it’s militarily strategic. Can you imagine if the Americans took over the ports in Crimea and also, can you image the kind of revenue that they would be able to generate from the gas pipelines, just as they’ve done through Dagestan, Georgia, as well as in Chechnya – these are business individuals who understand the economics of doing business, just like they do with the oligarchs under Gorbachev.
Many people made money during the Glasnost period, and they stole a lot of the wealth from Russia during that period, when Gorbachev and your grandfather were working closely with the West. That was a time at which, obviously, some oligarchs came to power, and some were more honest than others, and you have that same sort of effect that will happen in Ukraine, because Ukraine has a lot of great resources and as well it has the transit lines for a lot of fuel going to Europe. That’s the main income, that’s helped Russia bounce back -three times Russia had to bounce back recently from the kinds of impact that the West has ganged up on Russia, and it’s five times if you include World War I and II and actually, the Bolshevik movement as well. So the Russians had played comeback many times when they were ganged up by sort of a NATO alliance, because that alliance has been there for quite some time.
SS: With everything that’s going on right now, Ukrainians are saying, the interim government says “can you blame us for wanting to be part of NATO?” What about you? Do you understand why they want to be part of NATO?
SR: Yeah, of course – if you look at the way that Ukraine is broken up today, there is really only about 15 or 20 percent Russians in major Ukraine, and probably 60 percent, maybe 70 percent in Crimea. So it’s predominantly Ukrainian – you have a lot of folks there, who were very anti-Russian because of the terrible things that Stalin did and then obviously you have the folks that were taken out of the area during World War II, because they sided with Adolf Hitler’s Third Reich. So there is a lot of different factions and, on the west side, it’s mostly agriculture, and on the east side it’s mostly industrial, so most of the actual financial gains will come from the east and most of the agricultural gains will come from the west.
At the same time it’s much predominantly Ukrainian society and there is a form of nationality that I can understand, you know, why they might want to have it. But I think what you’ve run into is that they’ve fallen into the trap, the EU can’t handle another boat anchor - you know, they don’t need another failed economy, they are failing already. It certainly is, strategically, from the military perspective, and from NATO’s perspective, they’ve been peeling off former Soviet state after former Soviet state, after they promised not to do so, so it’s think it’s not in good faith what the West is doing.
SS: If EU can’t give the money, as you’re saying, what can NATO give them?
SR: It’s what NATO gives every country – they give them massive amounts of financing, they got a lot of financing infrastructure behind it, and they’ll create a lot of jobs around just the administration of that kind of activity. Look at the announcement in January, making Lithuania one of the leadership roles in the strategic alliance in NATO – they’re moving closer and closer to the cusp of… and there’s a lot of money that comes with that. There’s a lot of maintenance of the military infrastructure, airbases, facilities, builders - it comes with the good price tag.
SS: So you’re saying NATO will give Ukraine money?
SR: Absolutely, NATO doesn’t just expect you to invest all your money…NATO is very complimentary when it comes to helping their allied partners in their infrastructure needs, and that includes everything, it includes fuel lines, it is a strategic military initiative.
SS: If what you’re saying is the case, then it would really 100 percent positive development for Ukraine to be part of NATO; I’m not saying for Russia, I’m saying for Ukraine.
SR: Well, I wouldn’t say that either. Let’s say that NATO does want to come in - they [Ukraine] also will have to pay debts to their debt masters - so they [NATO] will bring the banking system with them, and it’s very evident that very few of the new, as well as the existing EU economies…because NATO won’t come in as a state, run only…you know, European Union will have to come alongside it. So will have some financial gain, but it won’t be the kind of the financial gain that will satisfy all Ukrainians. It will satisfy a portion of the Ukrainians that are siding with the NATO alliance.
SS: The new interim Prime Minister Yatsenyuk has been seeing Obama in the White House lately. Do you think he can count on the unconditional help from the US?
SR: Sadly, I think the Americans are going to foot this bill. There is no way that the EU is going to be able to come up with that kind of funding. Russians have already offered $30 billion and that was probably the best deal that they were going to get. Even John Hulsman said in last week’s interview that you did, that they weren’t playing honestly or they just weren’t being serious enough, but the fact is that they just can’t afford it in the EU.
So the Americans will end up footing the bill with the economy that’s totally busted anyway. The only reason it’s still alive is because they were granted global currency rights by the British Empire, after the Bretton-Woods conference, but it is total farce at this point, because it’s all basically paper money that doesn’t really exist in this world. They are just adding another piece of debt to the American fallacy of an economy.
I’ll be honest with you, I would think Ukraine should be able to see through this and work through this, and actually use their industry and create their own economy and stay away from it. I think the Western economy is poison.
SS: You keep saying that the EU can’t afford Ukraine, but the EU is now saying that they will sign an association agreement with Ukraine at the end of May. Is EU membership a prospect, do you think?
SR: Oh, for sure, if they can do that. That’s a coup de grace for them, they are obviously looking for that… it’s the sort of a NATO expansion mode, I mean it’s the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance, and last time I looked I didn’t think that Ukraine was very close to the North Atlantic. That’s the problem that I have with this. You talk about hegemony - the growth and the imperialistic nature of the West – there is no need to keep adopting nations to this alliance. I don’t think there is any threat from Russia, and certainly no threat from the Ukraine to the NATO alliance.
SS: What about these sanctions that the U.S. and the EU are promising? How serious can they be against Russia, because, I mean, sanctions are nothing new to Russia, but they rarely represent any serious threat to its economy. What exactly is the US trying to do with their sanctions?
SR: Well, sadly, the Americans have been sanctioning Iran and other countries illegally - I think it’s an act of war – and obviously it wouldn’t cripple the Russian economy, but it would certainly inhibit their success. They would slow down the amount of success that they are having. The kinds of sanctions that they’ll go after will probably be looking for alternative fuel supplies for Europe and going after any kind of freezing of international accounts. They’ve already stolen quite a bit of assets from the Russian investors and Russian bankers who were banking in Cyprus. That was a theft of assets in the Cyprus banking infrastructure by the European Union, and many Russians who banked offshore in Cyprus took a big hit.
SS: Exactly how far though can the US go? How far can it afford to go in confrontation with Russia over Ukraine?
SR: It won’t be as easy for them to do it to Russia as they did to Iran, and I don’t think they’ll be able to go anywhere near to the damage that they’ve done to Iran. At the same time they are looking at a scenario whereby that kind of pressure that they do put on Russia…you know, it will cripple some of the outlying industry that is associated with that, throughout Turkey and throughout Europe. So they’ll be shooting themselves in the foot and also having to look to other markets. Now, that being said, the Americans are looking at developing other resources, but that will take time.
SS: But what about Europe, we didn’t follow up on that part of the question. Europe – it is under pressure from the US, but it says it isn’t ready for serious sanctions against Russia, despite all. Will it ever be?
SR: Merkel is ruffling feathers with her commentary and obviously Germany and Russia have very good ties on a lot of different projects other than the petrochemical industry. I would say that a lot of Germans would rise up against Merkel for that, because I think a lot of Germans see through the fallacy of the EU and of the NATO alliances and then they are probably more wiser and obviously one of the most successful EU nation states, because the Germans are very industrious and extremely successful at their endeavors. I don’t that it would last very long, certainly in Germany and in other successful EU states.
SS: Germany is the strongest economy in Europe, it’s probably the only economy that’s actually on the rise. Everything else is sort of hanging on Germany…
SR: Well, England claims to be on the rise.
SS: …It is kind of on the rise, but it is really just floating. Europe is promising $35 billion to Ukraine. I mean, we keep saying “Europe is broke, Germany is the only country that takes care of all the other European countries,” how can they afford to give $35 billion to Ukraine which isn’t even a member of the Union?
SR: I really don’t think they can. I can’t wait to see [British MEP] Nigel Farage’s commentary on this. He is one of my favorite guys who speaks at the European Union. I think he’ll just tear them apart, because he knows the truth is that they don’t have the money. I guarantee, the German people will not be happy about footing the bill for the Ukraine.
SS: If they don’t have the money, then what’s the point of promising it?
SR: I think the Americans are basically going to float a blank check to play their cards, and hopefully the Ukrainian people will wise up and realize that they are basically taking ‘funny money’.
■
Punishing Russia for defending the rights of Crimean people wrong - expert - The Voice of Russia
−Many referendums have been announced in Europe in recent years and the tendency of secession is gaining popularity. What do you think, what’s the reason behind it?
I think that there are contravening forces operating in the world right now. We see a trend towards regionalization not only economically but also politically across the world with both of the EU, the North American Free Trade Agreement, the Asian Pacific Economic Community, the Eurasian Union, etc. At the same time we see forces pulling apart at local ethnic levels. We see this in Scotland, in Catalonia, Venice wanting to declare themselves separate at a referendum, a separate republic from Italy. This is kind of a backlash, you could say, from globalization and this trend towards regionalization, you have forces pulling together at the macro level and forces pulling apart at the micro level at the same time.
■
ウクライナ問題、すべての関係者に冷静な対応望む＝中国外務次官 | Reuters
同次官は「クリミア情勢を非常に注視している。状況がさらに緊迫し悪化することを防ぐため、関係国が冷静に対応し、自制することを望む。政治的な解決や対話が唯一の方法だ」と述べた。
中国はこれまで、ロシアへの制裁は問題解決に向けた最良の方法ではない、と指摘している。
■
Kerry urges Abbas to make 'tough decisions' on peace | Reuters
The two sides do not appear to have made much visible progress on narrowing their gaps on the major issues in the more than six-decade dispute, which include borders, security, the fate of Palestinian refugees and the status of Jerusalem.
"The secretary thanked President Abbas for his steadfast leadership and partnership over the past few months and encouraged him to make the tough decisions that will be necessary in the weeks ahead," a senior State Department official said of their three-hour meeting on Sunday.
"He also reiterated that we are at a pivotal time in the negotiations and while these issues have decades of history behind them, neither party should let tough political decisions at this stage stand in the way of a lasting peace," the official added, describing Sunday's talks as "frank and productive."
■
シリア:反体制派拠点が陥落 政府軍が補給路断つ - 毎日新聞
シリア内戦で、政府軍は１６日、レバノン国境に近い西部山岳地帯にある反体制派の主要拠点ヤブルードを制圧した。国営シリア・アラブ通信が報じた。政府軍は首都ダマスカス北方の山岳地帯をほぼ確保し、中部ホムスや地中海沿岸地方に至るルートを掌握した。反体制派はレバノンからの補給路を断たれた格好で、ダマスカス郊外やホムスでの戦闘が政府軍優位に傾く可能性もある。
国営通信によると、政府軍は１６日にヤブルード全域を制圧し、反体制派の戦闘員や武器の捜索を行っている。政府軍総司令部は「（反体制派への）補給路を断ち、致命的な打撃を与えた」との声明を発表した。ヤブルード郊外を拠点にする反体制派活動家は１６日、毎日新聞の電話取材に「大部分は政権側に制圧されたが、近郊での戦闘は続いている」と答えた。
政府軍は昨年春以降、レバノンのイスラム教シーア派武装組織ヒズボラの支援を受けて、西部山岳地帯で攻勢を強めた。６月にクサイル、１２月にナブクと要衝を次々と制圧し、ヤブルードにも空爆などで激しい攻撃を続けていた。反体制派によると、政権側にはヒズボラのほか、イラクのシーア派民兵も加わっていたという。
■
「小保方博士問題」を検証する。stap細胞は存在するのか？存在しないのか？ - 文藝評論家=山崎行太郎の政治ブログ 『毒蛇山荘日記』
湯川秀樹(大阪大学)や山中 伸弥(奈良先端科学技術大学)の発見も、東大や京大の研究室と無縁だった・・・。ただ、その研究の功績を評価されて、「京大教授」になっただけだ。
stap細胞が存在するかどうかが、問題だろう。
「小保方博士潰し」に加担した東大教授たちのタワゴト。 - 文藝評論家=山崎行太郎の政治ブログ 『毒蛇山荘日記』
博士論文やnature論文の書き方にしか興味はないのか。博士論文のために科学研究はあるのか？
教会、大学・・・という建物の中に思想も科学も文学もなし。
■
小保方晴子の不正事件が問うもの - 格差社会の分配と秩序と倫理 : 世に倦む日日
小保方晴子がAO入試に合格したのは、人物評価で高得点を得る家庭環境の持ち主だったからと言われている。父親は三菱商事の役員（理事・事業本部長）で、母親は大学教授（心理学）、姉も大学の准教授（心理学）。
現在の厳しい就職戦線で、何が合否の決め手になっているかというと、言うまでもなく、縁故と人脈であり、その学生の家庭状況である。
小保方晴子からすれば、世の中の大学教授たちは、大なり小なり不正論文で博士の学位を得ていて、権勢を持った教授の依怙贔屓でポストを与えられ、不正と情実で癒着する親分子分が互いに目くばせしながら学術研究共同体を営んでいるのである。
どれほど優秀で才能のある努力家でも、貧乏な者は最初から大学院にも行けず、研究者にもなれないのである。
また、選ばれた裕福な者でも、要領の悪い者や、権勢者に取り入ってコネを作れないコミュ力不足（女子力不足）の者は、博士論文もパスせず、大学院を出て就くポストもないのだ。
民主制の形式をした貴族制の階級社会。文系の世界にも、小保方晴子は無数にいる。アカデミーだけでなく、新聞社、テレビ局、広告代理店に。永田町にも。霞ヶ関にも。他とは違う収入と名誉と自由が与えられるこの職場に、才能や実力とは無関係に、縁故と人脈の貴族制のルールで人が入っていて、奔放に資源を享受している。
■
新しい学力、正規雇用の決め手は「自律的力」と「人間関係力」 ‐ 斎藤剛史
これからの社会では、単なる知識量の多さによる学力ではなく、習得した知識を活用する力やコミュニケーション能力といった新たな「学力」が求められていることは、既に多くの人が感じていることでしょう。
「キー・コンピテンシー」（主要能力＝自律的に行動できる「自律的力」、データや知識などを使いこなす「道具活用力」、他者との関係を築ける「人間関係力」の3つの力）
世帯年収とコンピテンシーの関係では、人間関係力の高い人ほど年収が高いものの、自律的力や道具活用力との関係はあまり見られませんでした。これに対して、生活の満足度では、自律的力と人間関係力が高いほど、現在の生活に対する満足度が高いという結果が出ました。
現在の学習指導要領は、基礎・基本の学力の向上とともに、知識を活用して自ら問題を発見し解決する力、コミュニケーション能力など人間関係形成に関わる力など「生きる力」の育成を重視しています。
■
ウクライナ南部のクリミアで１６日行われたロシアへの編入の賛否を問う住民投票は開票作業が終了し、９６．７７％の賛成多数でロシアへの編入が承認されました。
これを受けてクリミア自治共和国の議会は１７日、臨時議会を開き、主権国家としてウクライナから独立することや、外国と対等な関係を築くという決議を賛成多数で採択しました。
さらに、ロシア連邦の新しい共和国として編入を求める決議も採択されました。
ロシアのプーチン大統領は、これまで「クリミアの編入は検討していない」と述べる一方で、地元住民の意思は尊重する考えも示しています。
欧米各国が住民投票は違法だとしてロシアへのさらなる制裁に踏み切る構えを見せるなか、クリミアの議会の決議を踏まえ、プーチン大統領が最終的にどのような判断を示すかが焦点となります。
