忘却からの帰還〜Atomic Age

Despite this negative reception, the Home Office was convinced that it should create a successor to Protect and Survive, which would deal with the perceived inadequacies in the early publication and be politically expedient. Protect and Survive had failed in its objective of convincing the general public that civil defence was viable. Alongside the development of a communal shelter policy, the UK government considered a ‘rewrite’ of the much lambasted Protect and Survive. This booklet was to be larger than the original:

この不評にもかかわらず、英国内務省は、早期公開でわかった不適切な部分に対処し、政治的に適切なものにする必要があると確信した。Protect and Surviveは、民間防衛が実行可能であると国民に納得させるという目的を達成できなかった。加えて、共同シェルター制作の発展もあり、英国政府は酷評されたProtect and Surviveの改訂を検討した。このブックレットはオリジナルよりも大きなものになるはずだった:

Unlike ‘Protect and Survive’, the new booklet will be for peacetime sale only, and its size increased to 70 pages. For crisis information we will rely on material drawn from the new booklet, prepared for newspaper copy and for TV and radio broadcast.[25]

Protect and Surviveと異なり、新たなブクレットは平時にのみ販売され、ページ数も70ページに増える。危機情報については、このブックレットに書かれた内容を引用した、新聞記事及びテレビ・ラジオ放送素材が用意される。

The revised version of Protect and Survive would consist of 19 ‘sequences’ (probably short public information films, or announcements) for TV and radio covering methods of attack/warning sounds, conventional weapons, chemical weapons, nuclear attack, planning a survival kit, wartime broadcasting and regional government, caring for the sick and injured and disposal of the dead.[26]

Protect and Survive改訂版には、警報音・通常兵器・化学兵器・核兵器・サバイバルキットプラニング・戦時放送・地域政府・傷病者対応・死体処理に対応した、テレビとラジオ向けの19のシーケンス（短編公共情報映画あるいはアナウンス）が含まれる。

[25] Home Office letter of November 12, 1981 on Protect and Survive (Home Office Papers, National Archives, HO322/980).
[26] Draft of revised version of Protect and Survive, undated (Home Office Papers, National Archives, HO322/980).

[ John Preston: "The strange death of UK civil defence education in the 1980s", History of Education, Journal of the History of Education Society, Volume 44, 2015 - Issue 2 ]

First, rather than to ‘stay at home’ the advice was amended to include the possibility of taking shelter communally. This was in contrast to much of the advice issued during the cold war when the UK government largely pursued an individualised policy in terms of population protection whereby individuals would be responsible for their own shelter arrangements. The exception to this was those individuals who were in the ‘first sphere’ of civil defence protection, who, because of an essential, privileged role in the government, nationalised industry or private sector, would receive extensive protection by the state.[27] In the ‘hot cold war’ of the 1980s there was some debate in UK government as to whether communal shelter provision for the population should be provided. In a key Home Office circular[28] it was proposed that a mapping of UK buildings would take place at local authority level to consider the PF (protective factor) of UK buildings and structures against nuclear attack. Only substantive buildings with a PF of 45–65 were considered to be of the ‘basic standard’ required for survival. Planning for the population involved the aggregation of individual needs for ‘bare life’ and habitation of up to 14 days following a nuclear attack (although other methods of attack such as chemical and conventional weapons were considered) including essentials such as water (2 litres/person/day minimum) and food stocks (2000 calories/person/day). In this revised document there is attention paid to communal sheltering:

まず「家にとどまれ」という助言に、共同シェルターへの避難の可能性も加えられた。冷戦期において、英国政府が、国民防護の手段として各家庭がシェルターを用意する責任を負うという、家庭対処政策を推進してきたのと対照的である。これの例外は、政府・国有化企業・民間セクターで不可欠で特権的な役割を持つ「民間防衛の第一領域」の人々への、公的な保護であった。1980年代の「熱い冷戦」では、国民への共同シェルターが提供されるべきかについて、英国政府内にいくつかの議論があった。内務省の重要な文書によれば、核攻撃に対するビルや構造物の防護ファクターの検討を行うための、地方自治体レベルでの建物マッピングが提案されていた。生存に必要な「基本規準」として45〜65の防護ファクターの建物のみが考慮対象とされた。国民保護計画には、2リットル/人日の水と、2000カロリー/人日の食料の備蓄のような必需品を含む、核攻撃後の最長14日間（化学兵器や通常兵器など異なる攻撃手段についても検討されているが））の「最低生活」と居住スペースという個人ニーズの集約が含まれる。この改訂文書では、共同シェルターに注意を払っている:

The circular envisaged that encouragement of local sharing and a ‘good neighbour’ attitude would go some way to assist those who had inadequate protection either at home or at work.[29]

その文書では、自宅と職場で適切な保護が得られない人々を支援する方法として、地域の分かち合いと「良き隣人」的態度の推奨を想定していた。

[27] Matthew Grant, After the Bomb: Civil Defence and Nuclear War in Cold War Britain, 1945–1968 (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2009).
[28] Draft of ES/1981, 1981 (Home Office Papers, National Archives, HO322/980).
[29] Ibid.

[ John Preston: "The strange death of UK civil defence education in the 1980s", History of Education, Journal of the History of Education Society, Volume 44, 2015 - Issue 2 ]

Despite this desire for a new and innovative successor to Protect and Survive, in practice this did not happen. Some of the explanation for this can be found in terms of the difficulties of reaching a politically viable document within the Home Office itself and the process was one of compromise and eventual standstill.[41] In November 1981 a briefing paper for ministers was prepared, entitled Review of Home Defence Planning, by the F6[42] division, which summed up the desire for change:

Protect and Surviveの新たな革新的な後継を作成したがったが、実際には作成されなかった。その理由として、英国内務省の内部でも、政治的に実行可能な文書に到達するのが困難だったことが挙げられる。そして、そのプロセスは妥協され、最終的に停止した。1981年11月には、閣僚向けに変更要求をまとめたブリーフィング資料「国土防衛計画レビュー」がF6部で作られた。

The pamphlet ‘Protect and Survive’, which was put on sale in May 1980 continues to draw criticism from some quarters. Its contents are being reviewed to take into account the threat of conventional war including the possible use of chemical weapons, and protection against them within the home. The new version, which is expected to be available by the summer of 1983, will include advice on health matters, injuries and sickness and describe the symptoms of radiation sickness. It will also emphasise the need for mutual help and community care arrangements in civil defence planning. A free pamphlet ‘Civil Defence – why we need it’, published on 10 November 1981, was prepared to clear up some common misconceptions about civil defence and its value to the United Kingdom.[43]

1980年に発売されたパンフレット「Protect and Survive」は一部から批判を受け続けている。「化学兵器の使用を含む通常戦争の脅威と、家庭での対処」についての記述を加えるよう、コンテンツのレビューを実施中である。1983年夏までに制作する改訂版には、健康問題・負傷・病気についての助言と、放射線障害の症状についての記述が加えられる。民間防衛計画における相互支援とコミュニティケアの手配を強調する。1981年11月10日に出版された無料パンフレット「Civil Defence -- Why we need it (民間防衛、なぜ必要か)」は、民間防衛と英国でのその意義についての一般的誤解を解消するために作成された。

Despite this apparent release date of 1983, as this approached the plans for the successor were scaled back to become not a public education campaign but a ‘briefing pack’ for emergency planners and ministers.[44] As will be considered, there were moves by the Ministry of Defence to delay the production of a new version of Protect and Survive:

改訂版リリース日を1983年としていたが、国民教育キャンペーンではなく、緊急計画担当者と閣僚向けの「ブリーフィングパック」にまいもどった。後で述べるように、これは改訂版の作成を延期する国防相によるものだった。

Your suggested publication date of October will fall close to large Autumn demonstrations by CND and others and talk of ‘planning to fight a nuclear war’ can be expected. This will hardly have a beneficial effect in the period running up to cruise missile deployment later this year. I would therefore like to see it come out a little later.[45]

10月という発売日は、核廃絶運動などによる秋の大規模デモに近く、「核戦争遂行計画」の会議にもありうる。今年後半の巡航ミサイル配備の期間では、これは有益な影響を及ぼすとは考えにくい。したがって、発売を延期すべきと考える。

[41] Hennessy, The Secret State.
[42] F6 was the department in the Home Office responsible for emergency planning.
[43] Review of Home Defence Planning, briefing paper prepared for ministers, November 1981 (Home Office Papers, National Archives, HO322/980).
[44] Plans for ministerial briefing pack (Home Office Papers, National Archives, HO322/1028).
[45] Letter from the Ministry of Defence to A. Walmsley Esq. of the Home Office on September 19, 1983 (Home Office Papers, National Archives, HO322/1028).

[ John Preston: "The strange death of UK civil defence education in the 1980s", History of Education, Journal of the History of Education Society, Volume 44, 2015 - Issue 2 ]

Although a briefing pack was produced in time for parliamentary debate on 12 October 1983 and there were plans to produce a more extensive public education campaign in 1984, in actuality this did not appear. There are references in 1985 to further plans for a ‘civil defence documentary’[46] drawn up by the COI (Central Office of Information) in which Protect and Survive would be an annex to the overall publicity. There were also plans to merge civil defence into one briefing document, covering all nuclear and civil issues.[47] However, the COI was eventually cut out of the process of producing the new civil defence publicity and in 1986 the contract for civil defence was considered to be one that was to be conducted directly between an advertising agency and the Home Office, with COI removed as a central partner. By this stage, other difficulties had presented themselves in terms of even warning the general public about a nuclear attack. For example, the franchising/privatisation of the Independent Television Networks brought new doubts about what were already overtly optimistic plans to inform the UK public when to take shelter.[48] What did seem to finally emerge from this process in 1987 was a rarely seen, and never generally released, public information film Should Disaster Strike,[49] which makes barely a mention of nuclear civil defence issues.

ブリーフィングパックは、1983年10月12日の国会審議に間に合うように作成され、1984年には広範な国民教育キャンペーンが計画されたが、実際には行われなかった。Protect and Surviveがが全体的な広報の附属書になるという、COI（中央情報局）によって作成される「民間防衛ドキュメンタリー」計画に関する言及が1985年にある。また核問題から民間課題までを統合した民間防衛の文書をつくるという計画もあった。しかし、最終的にCOIは、新たな民間防衛広報から切り離され、1986年に民間防衛の契約は広告代理店と内務省の間で直接に行われることで検討され、COIは中心的役割から排除された。この段階で、核攻撃を国民に警告するという点でも、他の困難が現れていた。たとえば、民営化されたITN (Independent Television News)は、シェルター避難を国民に警報する既存の過度に楽観的な計画について、新たなが疑念をもたらした。このプロセスの最後の動きは、ほとんど見られることがなく、一般公開されることもなかった、核攻撃防護にほとんど言及していない、公共情報動画「Should Disaster Strike」だった。

[46] Plans for civil defence documentary (Central Office of Information Files, National Archives, INF6/2490).
[47] The correspondence regarding this matter may be found in files of the COI of that year (Central Office of Information Files, National Archives, INF6/3490).
[48] Correspondence between the Home Office and the Independent Broadcasting Authority (Home Office Papers, National Archives, HO393/60).
[49] Should Disaster Strike: Civil Protection in Action. Documentary short, London: John Gau Productions, 1987.