I have always been impressed by the diplomatic strategy of North Korea -- except for the

all that is right and wrong, justified and offensive from our point of view.

So I tweeted to my wife that I might write a column about it, however, she said

"Don't ever do that"

and I am strictly forbidden.

The reason is that the threat of terrorism to the entire Ebata family will increase (even more than before).

-----

The term "geopolitics" seems to be appearing more and more on TV these days.

"Geopolitics" is, in a nutshell, that a country's positions(political system, etc.) is determined by its geographical condition.

I think the popularity of "Geopolitics" is good.

Above all, the better way is that this subject might be embedded in into geography and history.

The reason is simple.

"It makes me less angry when I watch international news"

です。

It's less stressful because I can see 'where the country stands and what they are doing'.

-----

On the other hand, as a nation, this kind of "cultivation of a well-informed public" is both an advantage and a disadvantage.

In this book, written by Jun Moriya, in p. 354,

Clausewitz's "Trinity"

1. people = in charge of instinct = in charge of passion and enthusiasm for war

2. military = free spirit = in charge of running the war

3. government = in charge of intelligence = in charge of the general framework of war

From the viewpoint of the above classes, "a well-informed public" has less passion and enthusiasm, and this is a little "troublesome" as the whole nation.

Thinking about Japanese people, the following issue is a sample.

-----

I wonder if this is the reason why the MEXT does not require its citizens to take "geopolitics" as part of compulsory education.