“A country that denies its own history is destined to fall.”—Toshio Tamogami, former head of Japan’s air force, concluding an essay that won a contest denying Japan’s role in sponsoring wartime atrocities, as quoted in “The Ghost of Wartimes Past,” The Economist, November 8, 2008
(Allow me to correct that last quote: A general who denies his country’s past is destined to fall. Not to mention make a fool of himself, and cause his country’s neighbors to shake their hands and ask why it was taking Japan so long to accept that it had a problem in its history.
For a long time, I’ve felt that actors should not be allowed anywhere near keyboards lest they type something beyond their understanding, such as screenplays in which people are expected to speak intelligibly. Now, I’m ready to broaden that blanket prohibition to the military—or, at very least, Japan’s.
I mean, what can you say when Gen. Tamogami was just one of 78 members of Japan’s air force who entered this writing contest? I guess they’ve been reading so many flight plans that they never bothered to read how pissed off other nations were—like the Philippines, North and South Korea, and China—upon reading denials by Japanese leaders and institutions that they ever mistreated anyone in what Tamogami called a “defensive” war.
Maybe if you’re Newt Gingrich—who, when he’s not bloviating for Fox News, has taken to writing what-if scenarios about, among other events, the Battle of Gettysburg, Pearl Harbor and 9/11—you like the idea of alternative histories. But you have to keep that straight from real history.
Fortunately, an anniversary today provides an opportunity for a history lesson that Gen. Tamogami never received all these years. You see, on this date in 1948, Gen. Hideki Tojo—part of the militarist cabal that beat the drums for an unprovoked war against the Chinese in the 1930s, then the virtual dictator of Japan from 1941 to 1944—was found guilty, along with 24 other defendants, of war crimes by the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE). Tojo and six of his co-defendants were sentenced to death for their roles.
(The charges referred to crimes against other nations, but as far as I’m concerned, Tojo and his associates could just as easily have been charged with crimes against his own country. The recklessness of Tojo’s actions led to a furious reaction by the Allies, who proceeded to launch devastating air raids—and, of course, two nuclear bombs—on the country.)
The 2 ½-year Tokyo trial of Tojo and his compadres has been called the “other Nuremberg trials,” and like that judgment in Germany there were problems with the proceedings. (The Allies decided not to press charges against Emperor Hirohito—and even stopped the trial to persuade Tojo to reconsider his testimony that the monarch knew of and approved his decisions.)
Nonetheless, a mountain of documentary evidence and eyewitness testimony demonstrated conclusively that Tamogami missed the mark in absolving his government and mitigating its culpability for the war:
* The Rape of Nanking, in which an estimated 20,000 women became victims of sexual violence at the hands of Japanese soldiers.
* Narcotics trafficking, perpetrated on a wide scale in China to weaken resistance to Japanese aggression.
* Waging aggressive war against the U.S., Britain, the Netherlands and France.
To this day, Japanese textbooks downplay their nation’s role in wartime atrocities. As the Tamogami case proves, perhaps it’s time that these textbooks’ authors should start from scratch and get it right this time. Otherwise, God help the world on the day when Japan’s pacifist constitution is shredded and the military returns to power. )
Donald Trump’s Cabinet Picks Break Norms
10 hours ago
2 comments:
With all respects to your opinion, I must disagree with what you are saying, as the essay written by Gen. Tamogami is not as simple as denying the country's past.
You have said that the Japan has waged unprovoked war against the Chinese, but the fact that the Japanese waged unprovoked war against the Chinese is wrong. This is because the Japanese who emigrated to Manchuria were plagued in the 30's by the Chinese Nationalists who waged countless acts of terrorism against them, killing a lot of Japanese civilians. However, Japan repeatedly negotiated with Chiang Kai Shek, only to be betrayed each time. Of course, with a duty to protect its people, the Kwantung army of the Japanese were losing patience of seeing its own people being killed in Manchuria, later causing the manchurian Incident. The western powers at the time criticised Japan for its aggressive manner, but considering the background behind its incident, it is only inevitable that the Kwantung army took action on its own. Furthermore, Japan has been a victim to the Chinese, rather than its aggressor. This could be shown in the Tungchow (Tongzhou) Massacre conducted by the Chinese on the 29th July 1937, where an estimate of 200 to 300 out of 400 Japanese civilians were massacred. Consequently, this angered the Japanese people and Japan was left without a choice; either declare war or have its people killed illegally by the Nationalists.
Also, you portray the act of waging an aggressive war as a war crime but waging war was not a criminal offense at the time and is not an offense today. The laws used in the IMTFE were quoted from the "Rule Book", issued on the 19th January 1946- a clear ex post facto law whereby the law was designed to place Japan as a criminal country. Even if the law was to be valid, Japan could not have been accused of waging aggressive war. One of the prosecuting countries was the USSR, who broke the Soviet-Japan Neutrality Pact of 1941 and in terms of the "Rule Book" waged aggressive war with Japan, so a country who has waged an agressive war with Japan, and other countries who have co-operated such as the US, could never accuse Japan of agressive war. Justice Radhabinod Pal has criticised the trial for being a trial of the victors, and has concluded that the seven class-A war criminals, along with their country, are innocent. Also regarding the IMTFE, most of evidence favouring the Japanese were disregarded; many evidence favouring the allies, however dubious, were accepted, highlighting the unfairness of the trial itself.
Furthermore, you have mentioned the Rape of Nanking but the very fact that it has happened is being disputed. This is because despite the claim that 300,000 were killed, the Nanking Safety Committee (formed by people such as John Rabe) have concuded the population of Nanking to be 200,000 after the first month of Japanese invasion, 250,000 in 1945. This means a net increase of 50,000 people, who would have moved to live in Nanking. If the massacre were to be true, this would not have been feasible. Also, from fleeing from Nanking to the end of the war, Chiang Kai Shek was interview about 300 times by the press, yet he never mentioned Nanking, which would be strange for such a large massacre.
I am sorry for sounding rude with this question but have you actually read the essay by Gen. Tamogami? He has given a full detail into the acts of the Comintern against China and the US, and has mentioned that despite the annexation of Korea, the Japanese were lenient in that she has cared for the people of Korea by providing important buildings such as railways and schools, so that Korean people could live equally with the Japanese. May I suggest that you should read his essay and it would be very grateful if you could reply to me. Thank you very much in advance.
Post a Comment