Viewpoints: Japan’s approach to history

Viewpoints: Japan’s approach to history
In the week that Korea celebrated independence from Japanese rule, a Japanese teacher and a retired South Korean man gave the BBC News website their perspectives on Japan’s relationship with its own history.

Shoichi Minagi teaches English at a school in Japan’s rural Okayama prefecture. He thinks Japan needs to confront its difficult past.

Where I live in rural Japan, there were no special events to mark the anniversary of our defeat in World War II.

I don’t think Japanese people take the issue of war responsibility very seriously. If anything, we try to evade the subject. I sometimes ask my schoolchildren about the war but they never want to discuss it. Most ordinary Japanese have hardly any idea what they are criticised for.

Our society doesn’t provide much opportunity to think about our past. I grew up in the 1950s in a remote village in a mountainous region, west of Osaka.

The war did not affect our area; life went on as usual, and after defeat nobody really spoke of the war. My mother had a horrible experience during the American air raid in Kobe where she worked as a midwife, but she never refers to the war.

I think Prime Minister Koizumi’s official statement about the war and the Japanese war responsibility sounded too formal and ritualistic, even hollow.

The problem is history. Many Japanese people didn’t understand when the anti-Japanese protests erupted across China and Korea after those controversial history textbooks [which some accuse of glossing over Japan's war crimes] were published.

The government is fully to blame - school textbooks should be free of government censorship. It’s incredibly important to learn good history, to compare the present with the past and learn from it.

But we must also realise that Japan has played a positive role in the world. We were the only Asian nation that stood up to a Western colonial power and defeated it in the Russo-Japanese war. We were the first Asian nation to industrialise.

Nevertheless, the future depends on how Japan and its people understand and cope with their past.

Kim Sae Joong is retired and lives in rural Kangwon-Do, east of Seoul. He says nations that fabricate their history run the risk of losing their history.

I live in a farming area about 100 miles from Seoul. Independence celebrations were very muted here. But I have strong feelings about the Japanese occupation of Korea. It feels a bit like our nation was robbed at gunpoint.

I was three years old when Korea was liberated. But I remember the difficult stories my parents told me about that time. Some of our neighbours were persecuted because the Japanese requisitioned private property and land. Many people we knew lost their land and some lived in starving conditions.

North and South Korea celebrated independence together for the first time. But this seemed to me simply a political gesture. At least some people from the North got a chance to see how their brothers and sisters in the South live. Maybe they will return and tell others.

They have been educated with a different history - the history they are taught is not the history we are taught.

History is a problem for Japan too. The history textbook controversies are unfortunate because the Japanese will lose their true past if they continue to fabricate it. They are trying to erase events out of a sense of patriotism. But patriotism to me is about understanding your past.

Many Japanese prime ministers have made apologies, even the Japanese emperor. But these politicians still visit the Yasukuni shrine, which honours war criminals. How could they pay respect to those people? Apologies make no difference when they continue to act like that.

We don’t want to take revenge on those who persecuted us but every country needs to acknowledge its history.

Life is different for Koreans now. We are an affluent people these days, there is no starvation. Many Japanese visit Korea and enjoy our culture. I’m optimistic that if politicians do not manoeuvre people by visiting shrines, international resentment will fade.

What led Shinzo Abe to resign?

What led Shinzo Abe to resign?
By Chris Hogg
BBC News

Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has caused a political earthquake, rocking the establishment with his surprise announcement that he was stepping down.

The resignation news conference was a spectacle.

Japan’s normally more deferent press corps demanded angrily and repeatedly: “Why?”

They got little satisfaction from the answers he gave them.

So what is the real reason he has decided to go?

It is possible that a deal was done between grandees in his party, the Liberal Democrats (LDP), and their opposite numbers in the opposition.

Japan’s government needs to get parliament to give permission for the country’s self-defence forces to continue to provide logistical support to the US military in Afghanistan - a plan which has been opposed vigorously by the opposition.

Some suspect Mr Abe’s scalp may have been offered in return for opposition support for the controversial new law.

The United States has put a lot of pressure on the government to get the anti-terrorism legislation passed so that the supply operation for its troops can continue.

Mr Abe’s colleagues may have realised he had become an obstacle to getting that achieved, and therefore needed to be removed.

Ill health?

But that is not the only possible reason that has been given for Mr Abe’s decision.

Some analysts talk about concerns over his health - and rumours that he has been under great “strain” were confirmed by the chief cabinet spokesman, although he refused to give any further details.

But Mr Abe has just returned from a three-nation summer tour, and only last weekend showed no signs of illness during the Apec regional summit in Australia.

The suddenness of the announcement has of course led to speculation that there is something more sinister behind it, perhaps a further scandal that is yet to become public.

As for that, we will just have to wait and see.

It is possible that he has just, at last, come to realise what others have known for some days now - that he had been so weakened by the defeat in this summer’s elections for the upper house of parliament that he was prime minister in name only and had no power to get anything done.

The loss of the upper house for the first time in his party’s history did not just mean the opposition could block the continued deployment on the self-defence forces in support of the Americans.

It also meant that they could disrupt his whole legislative programme, should they have chosen to.

Weak link?

And as this first parliamentary skirmish got under way, perhaps Mr Abe, or more importantly those around him, realised that with him at the helm the ship would flounder.

Of course there will be those who say this is just business as usual. Japanese prime ministers do not usually last long.

Mr Abe’s predecessor Junichiro Koizumi was unusual because he lasted five years. Mr Koizumi’s predecessor, however, had lasted, like Mr Abe, just a year.

So we are back to the revolving doors of men in grey suits.

Mr Abe will be remembered for the success he had in rebuilding relations with China and South Korea.

But he will probably not be remembered for long.

In the meantime, as with any earthquake, there are likely to be aftershocks in the coming days, as Japan’s governing party tries to work out what it should do next.

It looks like Shinzo Abe has finally left the building and will revert to a regular MP who can visit Yasukuni until his head explodes, be a faction leader that promotes ultranationalism or continue operating in peer review groups for revising Japanese history.

In any event, Abe is not as bad as many people would like to believe since he did after all make an effort to restore functional ties with China and South Korea and pressuring most of his Cabinet to not make super-happy trips to Yasukuni on important dates. However, what got him hurt among his taxpayers were his priorities in promoting Japanese nationalism and becoming a better American puppet at the expense of Japanese citizens’ concerns over the economy, inequality, and related social reforms.

The movie “Bubble Fiction: Boom or Bust [バブルへGO!!~タイムマシンはドラム式]” explored some of the problems of the post-Bubble economy. It had the main character travel back in time from 2007 to 1990 at the height of the Bubble Economy era that took off during the 1980s. In this time, it was said that taxis would get obscene gratuities from people just to get picked up, parents would regularly get their kids Louis Vutton handbags, and simply graduating from a top-tier university would guarantee lifetime employment in a major corporation or government organisation. Also, it touched on a time when Japan was a top innovator in technology with resources devoted for advanced research and buildings to house such programmes.

I found it funny how the people who the main character knows in the present were actually more successful in the past. For instance, her unethical loan shark in 2007 was once a top university graduate who was friendly and worked in the Japan Long-term Credit Bank and the main character’s “Mama-san” was once a famous Geisha before the economy went to hell.

In real life, it seems a good number of schoolgirls tried to maintain their large allowances their parents once gave by prostituting themselves or worse just to be able to get a similar cash flow to buy luxury items. Many top bankers and white collar workers did get laid off and eventually became unscrupulous individuals just to survive. At the same time, many companies went through restructuring which cost them many resources that would have went to innovation and growth for these same companies.

Moreover, many Japanese youths are disenchanted over their futures since they no longer have the quality of life their parents and grandparents once enjoyed while the gap between the riches and the poors increases in Japan. These disillusioned young people begin to fall back on their national pride since they don’t think they will have anything else (honor, money, career, girlfriend, baby etc). These youths eventually develop antagonistic attitudes towards Chinese and Koreans that is not too different from how poor whites attack blacks. They figure since they have no future and frustrated at their own lives, they might as well fall back to their History of Greater Japan.

It’s problems like these that keep concerning the average Japanese taxpayer, who also wants to see their quality of life restored to something that resembled the Bubble Economy period. So far, Abe Shinzo has failed to do that and it doesn’t help that his Cabinet also misappropriated pension funds or acted naturally stupid in public. As a result the LDP were voted out of power in the House of Councilors in favour of the DPJ as a protest vote by the public rather than an outright approval of the DPJ itself. Abe should have resigned at the time instead of dragging it for a few more months just to prove that he was stubborn in getting things done his way.

Because of this, the Nikkei 225 took a hit earlier today because his snap resignation compounded to the current subprime fiasco, and the piss-poor Yen-Dollar exchange rate. Then, there are rumours he quit because of mounting stress from his American overlords to extend their military support to the United States, from internal strife in the LDP and from the loss of the upper house. Also, there is now speculation that he quit because of another potential scandal that could rock Japan, as if they didn’t have enough problems.

In any case, I think I will miss Abe Shinzo despite his mismanagement of Japan and for denying exploitation of comfort women. After all, Abe’s successor will be an even bigger asshole as Abe was to Koizumi. With that said, it looks like Aso “The Asshole” Taro will be tipped to replace Abe as the new Prime Minister in the coming weeks…

Japan still honors dissenting war-crimes judge

Japan still honors dissenting war-crimes judge
By Norimitsu Onishi
Friday, August 31, 2007

TOKYO: An Indian judge remembered by fewer and fewer of his own countrymen 40 years after his death is still big in Japan.

In recent weeks alone, NHK, the public broadcaster, has devoted 55 minutes of prime time to his life, and a scholar came out with a 309-page book exploring his thinking and its impact on Japan. Capping it all, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, during a recent visit to India, paid tribute to him in a speech to the Indian Parliament in New Delhi and then traveled to Calcutta to meet the judge’s 81-year-old son.

A monument to the judge - erected two years ago at the Yasukuni Shrine, the memorial to Japan’s war dead and a rallying point for Japanese nationalists - provides a clue to his identity: Radhabinod Pal, the only one out of 11 Allied justices who handed down a not-guilty verdict for Japan’s top wartime leaders at the post-World War II International Military Tribunal for the Far East, or the Tokyo trials.

“Justice Pal is highly respected even today by many Japanese for the noble spirit of courage he exhibited during the International Military Tribunal for the Far East,” Abe told the Indian Parliament.

Many of postwar Japan’s nationalist leaders and thinkers have long upheld Pal as a hero, seizing on - and often distorting - his dissenting opinion at the Tokyo trials to argue that Japan did not wage a war of aggression in Asia but one of self-defense and liberation. As nationalist politicians like Abe have gained power in recent years, and as like-minded academics and journalists have pushed forward a revisionist view of Japan’s wartime history, Pal has stepped back into the spotlight, where he remains a touchstone of the culture wars surrounding the Tokyo trials.

Abe, who has cast doubt on the validity of the Tokyo trials in the past, avoided elaborating on his views in the Indian Parliament or during his 20-minute meeting with Pal’s son, Prasanta. But the meeting’s subtext was not lost on some Japanese newspapers, which warned that it would hardly help repair Japan’s poor image among its neighbors.

After the war, conventional war crimes by the Japanese, categorized as Class B and Class C, were handled in local trials throughout Asia.

Twenty-five top leaders were charged with Class A crimes - of waging aggressive wars and committing crimes against peace and humanity, categories created by the Allies after the war - and tried in Tokyo by justices from 11 countries.

It was not clear why the British and U.S. authorities selected Pal, who had served in Calcutta’s high court and strongly sympathized with the anticolonial struggle in India. As an Asian nationalist, he saw things very differently from the other judges.

In colonizing parts of Asia, Japan had merely aped the Western powers, he said. He rejected the charges of crimes against peace and humanity as ex post facto laws and wrote in a long dissent that they were a “sham employment of legal process for the satisfaction of a thirst for revenge.” While he fully acknowledged Japan’s war atrocities - including the Nanjing massacre - he said they were covered in the Class B and C trials.

“I would hold that each and every one of the accused must be found not guilty of each and every one of the charges in the indictment and should be acquitted of all those charges,” Pal wrote of the 25 Japanese defendants, who were found guilty by the rest of the justices.

Pal also described the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the United States as the worst atrocities of the war, comparable with Nazi crimes.

The U.S. occupation of Japan ended in 1952, after Tokyo signed the San Francisco Peace Treaty and accepted the verdict of the Tokyo trials. But the end of the occupation also lifted a ban on the publication of Pal’s 1,235-page dissent, which Japanese nationalists brandished and began using as the basis of their argument that the Tokyo trials were a sham.

Takeshi Nakajima, an associate professor at the Hokkaido University Public Policy School whose book “Judge Pal” was published in July, said that Japanese critics of the trials selectively chose passages from his dissent.

“Pal was very hard on Japan, though he of course spoke very severely of the United States,” Nakajima said. “All imperialist powers were part of the same gang to him. His attitude was consistent.”

Casting subtleties aside, postwar politicians invited Pal to Japan several times and showered him with honors.

One of his strongest backers was Nobusuke Kishi, a prime minister in the late 1950s who had been a Class A war criminal suspect but was never charged. Kishi is Abe’s grandfather and political role model.

“For us, we were extremely grateful for Judge Pal’s presence - there was no other foreigner who said so clearly that Japan wasn’t the only country that had done wrong,” said Hideaki Kase, chairman of the Japan-India Goodwill Association, an organization founded in part because of Pal’s legacy.

But Kase, who once served as an adviser to Yasuhiro Nakasone, another former prime minister, said that he disagreed with certain parts of Pal’s conclusions, including his acknowledgment of the Nanjing massacre. Describing the massacre as a “complete lie,” Kase said that Pal had fallen victim to “Chinese and Allied propaganda.”

In many ways, Pal seemed to share the mixed feelings that many Indian anticolonialists had of Japan. As an Asian nation competing with the Western powers, Japan inspired admiration, but also consternation for its colonization of Asia, said Sugata Bose, a historian of South Asia at Harvard.

Bose said his great-uncle, Subhash Chandra Bose, the Indian independence movement leader, criticized Japan’s invasion of China but allied himself with Japan against the British.

“It is a complex view from South and Southeast Asia,” Bose said.

“There is some degree of gratitude for the help that the Japanese provided, to the extent that such help was provided. At the same time, there was also grave suspicion of Japan.”

Still, Subhash Chandra Bose and the Indian National Army, a popular armed force formed by Indian anticolonialists, accepted assistance from Japan.

“Judge Pal, as an Indian, would have known all about this,” Bose said. “And it may have indirectly influenced his views.”

Radhabinod Pal not only supported Japan during the Tokyo War Crimes trial because he actually believed in Japan waged war to fight against racism and liberate Asians from colonial rule, but as another way to protest European imperialism in Asia. Pal was so anti-British and possibly anti-European like many of his Indian National Army peers to the point of supporting the other side just because they were non-White. In his later years, he admitted to being a Japanophile during his 1966 visit to Japan and also admitted that he saw Japan’s war as a way to prevail the West.

It seems that the Allies decided to give an Indian judge a position to hear cases in the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal because India at that time was going to become independent, and it would reinforce the existing Asian voices with the soon-to-be independent Filipino judge and Chinese judge. Although Pal decided to write a dissenting view calling the international tribunals a way to express “Victor’s justice” and to spite the European powers, he nonetheless acknowledged Japanese wartime atrocities as well as Allied excesses during the Second World War.

Pal concluded in the Tribunal with regards to atrocities such as the Rape of Nanjing and the Bataan Death March that, “the evidence is still overwhelming that atrocities were perpetrated by the members of the Japanese armed forces against the civilian population of some of the territories occupied by them as also against the prisoners of war.” It’s quite sad that Radhabinod Pal’s pro-Japanese defence in the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal is the basis for contemporary Sino-Indian relations.

Japan’s right wing re-emerges

Japan’s right wing re-emerges
Tolerance and dissent lose out to nationalist radicals’ rise

GEOFFREY YORK

From Wednesday’s Globe and Mail

August 8, 2007 at 5:01 AM EDT

TOKYO — Three months after a shocking arson attack on a leading politician, about 800 nationalists gathered at a rally in Tokyo to give their vocal support to the arsonist.

The rally went almost without mention in the Japanese media. In the growing climate of fear and intimidation, the rising power of the nationalists has become a taboo subject.

The arsonist, a 66-year-old nationalist named Masahiro Horigome, has become a hero to many right-wingers in Japan. After his dramatic attack last summer, he was flooded with letters of support from fellow nationalists.

Although he was given an eight-year jail sentence, he has remained unrepentant and even boastful. “I feel the greatest sense of accomplishment at this point in my life,” he later wrote to a newspaper.

Violent nationalist groups are still a relatively small minority of the political spectrum in Japan, but their influence is far greater than their numbers would warrant.

They have succeeded in silencing many scholars, discouraging debate on sensitive subjects and helping shift the political mainstream toward more radical views.

Their growing influence is a symptom of a Japanese political culture that has become less tolerant of dissent on key issues of patriotism, national symbols and wartime history.

Mr. Horigome, a member of a right-wing group in Tokyo, launched his attack last Aug. 15, the anniversary of the end of the Second World War and the day when many Japanese politicians pay homage at the Yasukuni Shrine, where 14 convicted war criminals are among the millions of war dead honoured.

Mr. Horigome planned to attack a business leader who had criticized the prime minister’s visits to the war shrine. He bought a large kitchen knife for the attack. But then he decided that he could not penetrate the business leader’s bodyguards. So he chose another target: Koichi Kato, a senior parliament member who had also criticized the visits.

He travelled to Mr. Kato’s family home and poured eight litres of gasoline inside the house, then ignited it with a lighter. The politician was not at home, but his house and adjoining office were destroyed in the blaze. His 97-year-old mother narrowly escaped death because she had gone out for a walk at the time.

The arsonist tried to commit hara-kiri, the ritual form of suicide favoured by samurai and military men, but botched the job. Police found him bleeding and arrested him.

Japan’s political leaders were largely silent. The prime minister at the time, Junichiro Koizumi, took two weeks to condemn the attack. The current Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, was equally slow to show any disapproval.

An estimated 10,000 people belong to Japan’s hard-line right-wing nationalist groups, and their penchant for violence is increasing, according to Japanese police reports.

The militants have issued death threats and other warnings to politicians and scholars who criticize the governing authorities on nationalist issues. The left-leaning Asahi Shimbun, a major Tokyo newspaper that has criticized the Yasukuni Shrine visits, received death threats in mailed postcards this spring. Another newspaper was attacked last year by a right-wing nationalist who threw a Molotov cocktail at its head office because of its reports on the shrine issue.

Another nationalist severed the tip of his little finger and sent it to the office of a Korean group in Japan because he was unhappy with North Korea’s test-firing of missiles last year.

In April this year, a yakuza gangster shot and killed the left-leaning mayor of Nagasaki. Although the incident was reportedly inspired by a personal grudge, there are close connections between the yakuza (a Japanese organized crime gang) and the right-wing nationalist groups.

Mr. Kato, the victim of the arson attack, is now living with a police guard at his home. He still worries about the risk of an ambush as he enters his home at night. “Every time I go back home, I take special care,” he said in an interview. “The most dangerous point is the final 30 metres, so I change my pace quite often and I zigzag.”

Mr. Kato, one of the most senior members of the governing Liberal Democratic Party, said he is concerned about the growing threat to freedom of speech in Japan. “Ten years ago, I would have said that this is an exaggerated concern,” he said. “But people are less and less willing to talk about nationalist issues or the Yasukuni Shrine. Our society has become more nationalistic, and there is less freedom of speech.”

Five years ago, when he made comments about North Korea that the nationalists disliked, Mr. Kato received a series of letters containing bullets.

More recently, a prominent scholar who frequently appeared on Japanese television was sent a warning by the nationalists because they were unhappy with his comments on the Yasukuni Shrine, Mr. Kato said. “We know your children’s route to school in the morning,” the nationalists warned the scholar. He decided to abandon his television appearances.

There are other troubling signs of intimidation. Last year, the Japan Institute of International Affairs, sponsored by Japan’s Foreign Ministry, posted an online article that criticized the rising nationalism and the official visits to the Yasukuni Shrine. The article was denounced by a prominent right-wing journalist, who demanded an apology. Within 24 hours, the institute’s president complied, shutting down the site and asking for forgiveness.

In another incident, right-wing activists threatened a professor who had dared to suggest that women should not be excluded from succession in Japan’s imperial line. She was obliged to issue a retraction. And this summer, Japan’s defence minister was forced to resign after he provoked a huge uproar by suggesting that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki might have helped to bring an end to the Second World War.

Historical revisionism is becoming more popular here. A new film denying Japan’s role in the Nanjing massacre, the slaughter of thousands of Chinese civilians by soldiers in Japanese-occupied Nanjing in 1937, is being promoted in Tokyo. There is growing support for the view that the Nanjing massacre was a hoax. More than half of Japan’s cabinet ministers have supported a political forum that calls for reform of Japan’s history textbooks to play down or deny Japan’s wartime atrocities.

Earlier this year, dozens of Japanese parliament members bought a full-page advertisement in The Washington Post to deny that Japan had coerced the so-called “comfort women” to provide sex to Japanese soldiers in China and Korea during the war.

Prime Minister Abe has brought some of these views into the political mainstream. At one point this year, he publicly cast doubt on the evidence that the comfort women were coerced into sexual slavery. Mr. Abe later apologized for his statement, but refused to acknowledge Japan’s responsibility for running the brothels during the 1930s and 1940s.

Within the past 10 months, Mr. Abe has won parliamentary approval for several of the long-standing demands of nationalists. He upgraded the role of Japan’s defence agency, making it a full-fledged ministry for the first time since the Second World War. He passed a law on “patriotic education,” requiring students to sing the national anthem and stand at attention when the national flag is raised. And he took the first steps toward eliminating the pacifist clauses from Japan’s postwar constitution.

As these issues enter the mainstream of government policies, some right-wing groups have become more extreme in an effort to grab the spotlight, Mr. Kato said. “They have become more and more violent,” he said.

One of the biggest problems, Mr. Kato said, is Japan’s failure to make an honest appraisal of its military expansionism from the 1890s to the 1940s. There is no museum in Tokyo that takes a neutral look at Japan’s 20th-century history. The vacuum is filled by a well-financed museum at the Yasukuni Shrine that portrays Japan as an innocent victim and courageous victor.

The museum gives a patriotic right-wing version of the entire period of Japanese military expansionism. It boasts that Japan achieved “victory after stunning victory” in the “Greater East Asian War” from the 19th century to the 1940s.

The museum never acknowledges that Japan invaded any other Asian country. To explain the Japanese occupation of northeastern China in the early 1930s, the museum blames China for fomenting an “anti-Japanese movement” that obliged Japan to send in its soldiers.

To explain the Japanese takeover of Beijing and Shanghai in 1937, the museum blames China for provoking Japan with various “incidents.”

To explain the widening of Japan’s occupation of China in the late 1930s and 1940s, the museum puts the blame on the “terrorism” of the Chinese Communists and the “prevailing anti-Japanese atmosphere” in China. It gives only a brief mention of the thousands of Chinese killed in the Nanjing massacre in 1937, describing the massacre this way: “The Chinese soldiers disguised in civilian clothes were severely prosecuted.”

The museum also blames the United States for the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. Its exhibit on Pearl Harbor is headlined: Japan’s Quest For Avoiding A War.

Sources: the Economist, Far Eastern Economic Review, Kyodo News, japan101.com

Japan is at a crossroads. The entire country does not support this right-wing but they seem to be the ones in power and making all the decisions. From what I have heard from Japanese friends is the same slow shift in their personal thinking on issues to the right. The media and these groups are essentially brainwashing the population into believing their version of history and killing any real discussion. It certainly is a scary road ahead if Japan goes in this direction and it seems like the Americans are engineering a situation that will play off Japan against China in the near future.

What is troubling is the fact that progressive groups seem unwilling to confront or criticize these right-wing groups. In fact they seem to turn a blind eye to their activities or cave in to their demands.

“To explain the widening of Japan’s occupation of China in the late 1930s and 1940s, the museum puts the blame on the “terrorism” of the Chinese Communists and the “prevailing anti-Japanese atmosphere” in China.’ ” - Why does this remind me of Iraq and Afghanistan?

Report: Japan’s late emperor against Yasukuni’s honoring of war criminals

Report: Japan’s late emperor against Yasukuni’s honoring of war criminals

The Associated Press
Saturday, August 4, 2007

TOKYO: Japan’s wartime Emperor Hirohito was against including convicted war criminals at a Tokyo shrine because he worried the move would damage relations with the country’s Asian neighbors, according to new documents published Saturday.

Hirohito also believed that honoring Class-A war criminals at Yasukuni Shrine would change the nature of the shrine as a war memorial, the emperor’s chamberlain was quoted as saying in a recently published book of Hirohito’s poetry, according to the Asahi newspaper. Several other newspapers carried a similar report.

“(The emperor) believes it alters the nature of the enshrined deities, because (Yasukuni) is supposed to honor only the souls of the people who went to war and died for the nation,” Yoshihiro Tokugawa says in the book, compiled by poet Hirohiko Okano, 83.

The book is an anthology of Hirohito’s traditional “waka” poems, including one he wrote for the 41st anniversary of Japan’s World War II defeat in 1986 and which reflected his anxieties over the inclusion of executed war criminals at Yasukuni, Okano says, citing conversations with the late chamberlain.

Hirohito believed “it would leave serious problems for the future with countries engaged in war” with Japan, Okano wrote, according to the Asahi.

Hirohito wrote:

“On this day of the year again

“Sorrow is deep

“Over the matter of the Yasukuni shrine.”

Hirohito, under whose name Japan waged war in the first half of the 21st century, died in 1989.

Hirohito stopped visiting Yasukuni after his eighth visit three years before its 1978 decision to begin honoring the Class-A war criminals including executed war leader Hideki Tojo. Hirohito’s son, Akihito, has never visited Yasukuni.

Visits by Japanese leaders and lawmakers to Yasukuni have long been a source of friction between Japan and its neighbors because the shrine is seen by many as a symbol of Japan’s pre-1945 militarism.

Earlier findings from private memorandums and the diary of a former imperial aide have indicated that Hirohito stopped visiting Yasukuni after expressing his displeasure to including war criminals on the list of some 2.5 million war dead honored there. But details of his views have not previously been known.

Hirohito’s reign continues to be a sensitive issue, and journals and accounts by aides to the emperor are published usually after their death.

Emperor Showa stopped going to Yasukuni because the men who lost his war were enshrined against his wishes and because he realised their enshrinement would change the Yasukuni Shrine into a symbol of Japanese militarism in World War II. The shrine was built in Meiji’s rule to commemorate soldiers who died for Japan regardless of the reason, but this has been perverted with the enshrinement of Tojo Hideki and other lesser minds.

The revisionist museum built just next to the WW2 section of Yasukuni doesn’t help either. If the right-wing nuts really want to restore the Emperor’s place in Japanese society then they would have actually listened to the Emperor’s wishes and views instead of doing something to satisfy their own sentiments. Otherwise, all they are just producing empty rhetoric that does nothing but create futher complications in their country from within and abroad.

If the Emperor feels that right-wing, revisionist attitudes are perverting Japan’s national identity and global reputation, what does this say about the country as a whole?

Why can’t Japanophiles and right-wing Japanese see the big picture instead of just defending or justifying these symbols just because they are made in Japan?

The humiliation of Shinzo Abe

The humiliation of Shinzo Abe
Aug 2nd 2007
From The Economist print edition

But without an opposition that is fit to govern, Japan may be stuck with its flawed ruling partyJapan’s politics

JAPAN has now had what by any standards were two extraordinary elections, back-to-back and less than two years apart. They were extraordinary not least because they had opposite outcomes. In 2005 the then prime minister, Junichiro Koizumi, called a snap general election, arguing over the head of his own party the case for reform—in particular, the privatisation of the huge postal-savings system, fount of so much political patronage. The result was a landslide victory for his Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and its junior partner, New Komeito. Yet on July 29th, in elections for half the seats in the upper house of the Diet (parliament), the LDP suffered at the hands of the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) its biggest electoral defeat since its founding in 1955. For the very first time it has lost its dominance in the upper house. Despite this humiliation for his party and himself, Shinzo Abe, prime minister since September 2006, amazingly insists that he still has a mandate to stumble on. A spell of political turmoil in Japan seems all but guaranteed.

What changed in two years? That question requires three answers: one to do with the personality of Mr Abe, one with the legacy of Mr Koizumi and the last with Japan’s continuing aversion to painful but necessary reforms.

Mr Abe, by a million miles, is no Koizumi. Everyone knew that Mr Koizumi was a consummate showman and a hard act to follow: a possibly unique Japanese politician with a flair for the common touch. But Mr Abe, Japan’s first prime minister to be born after the second world war, was picked by his party as a worthy because youthful successor. Since then, alas, he has shown himself to be diffident, patrician and out of touch with people’s everyday concerns. On top of this came a seemingly unending series of scandals, gaffes and resignations that have tarnished his cabinet—the latest resignation came on August 1st. Voters appear to have flayed the ruling coalition in the upper house as punishment for Mr Abe’s priorities, incompetence and character (see article).

The second answer is that just as Mr Koizumi was responsible for the landslide victory in 2005, so he had much to do with the LDP’s 2007 defeat. Though by reputation an economic reformer, the biggest change he wrought was on his own party. He declared war on the factions and other networks of patronage through which money and power flowed, and which kept politicians, bureaucrats and businessmen in the same cosy bed. When party apparatchiks chafed, he threw them out or encouraged celebrities to run against them. (Mr Abe did nothing for his popularity by bringing some of the outcasts back.) Mr Koizumi helped smash the vote-getting machine on which the LDP could once depend, especially in the countryside. The LDP’s savage defeat in rural areas on July 29th is proof of his success. Mr Koizumi once said that he wouldn’t mind destroying his party in order to further his reforms. Judging from these election results, he seems to have done a pretty good job.

A third explanation for the voters’ vehemence may bode less well for Japan: that all along they were dazzled more by Mr Koizumi’s performance than by his message of painful change before gain. At least in part, Sunday’s vote was a vote against reform. With growth spreading through the urban parts of Japan, the sense of economic crisis on which Mr Koizumi played is past. Yet wages are stagnant, while the more depopulated parts of Japan are feeling little of the recovery. Indeed, Koizumi-era changes are starting to hurt: in particular, cuts in public-works spending and increases in local taxes as prefectures shoulder more of the fiscal burden. This was fertile ground for the DPJ’s leader, Ichiro Ozawa, who ran his campaign as the farmer’s friend and champion of the regions—just like the old, unreconstructed LDP.

Smash the old idols

Some political scientists see the election as a necessary step towards a long-cherished dream—a system of two parties competing on policy and alternating in power. Dream on. Mr Abe’s refusal to quit may underline the disarray his party is in, but it distracts attention from the corresponding mess in the DPJ. It may succeed in bringing Mr Abe down, perhaps later this year or early next, and an early general election may be called. Yet the closer it comes to real power, the more unprepared the DPJ, a ragbag of conflicting groups, will prove. Mr Ozawa, whose health is not strong, does not relish being prime minister, and his backroom style frustrates modernising colleagues. The DPJ shows no sign of being a party ready to hold power.

So an unpredictable period looms for Japanese politics, with the ship of state under the LDP likely to prove rudderless, accident-prone and even corrupt—and nothing better to be expected from the opposition. So what’s new? One bright thing: Japanese voters, once so respectful of authority, now appear quick to vote the bums out. Not for the first time, one-party rule in Japan seems doomed. Sadly, it is liable to limp on until an opposition that looks fit to govern emerges.

In a democratic system, voters will often use the ballot to provide feedback for the politicians in power. In Japan’s case, the people were clearly angry with Abe and his LDP for their lack of progress in economic reforms, for appointing essentially idiots to run their country’s key areas, and for loosing their pension records. It looks like much of the upper house elections were simply a protest vote against Abe’s misrule seeing that the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) is relatively ineffectual and composed of a motley crew of former LDP parliamentarians who left for new opportunities, liberals, reformers, and some right-wingers. The only thing the DPJ has going for them is presenting themselves to the Japanese electorate as the anti-LDP because they really have no other clear platform.

It is said that history looks kinder to political figures as time goes on. In the past many people thought Richard Nixon was a monster for Vietnam, promoting HMOs, and Watergate but he was seen as a mixed President for establishing the EPA, enforcing integrated busing, and even promoting equal funding for women and men’s sports. However, his later successor Ronald Reagan was later considered an even worse President for escalating the arms race with the USSR, invading Grenada, cutting taxes for the superrich, and for Iran-Contra.

Then again, Reagan was looked at kindly because he was a very approachable and charming individual who actually listened to others if they presented valid points and for creating a new class of wealthy Americans. Moreover, Reagan is seen as a better man and President than George W. Bush who is currently transforming America into a “Great Satan” that was always proven wrong in the past, for increasing the inequality gap, for missteps in Iraq and Afghanistan, and for allowing 9/11 to happen for his own benefit.

Back to Japan, it seems many people, including myself, considered Koizumi to be a great asshole Prime Minister of Japan for constantly visiting the Yasukuni Shrine in the most sensitive periods in East Asian history. The Japanophiles kept defending him because of his “Anime” hairstyle, for his love of the band X-Japan and for just being Japanese while the academics are able to point out the reforms he was making to domestic politics and the economy. In hindsight, Koizumi’s domestic policies were great for Japan since it greatly undermined the political machine that had promoted complacency and rampant corruption in the LDP and Japanese politics, while his economic reforms actually started the chain reaction that would eventually help Japan claw her way out of the “Lost Decade”.

However, Koizumi’s foreign policy was a complete trainwreck. He divided the Japanese people with his decision to ram through a law that would allow for token Japanese troops to be deployed in Iraq at his American overlord’s request, which was even opposed by the same right-wing Japanese who justify comfort women and deny the Rape of Nanjing. Koizumi fared even worse with his East Asian neighbours by repeatedly visiting the Yasukuni Shrine even when he was asked diplomatically by the Chinese and Koreans to stop in the name of East Asian ties.

Some people say Koizumi decided to cozy up with Bush to get people accustomed to the idea of Japan being a subservient American ally, while the visits to Yasukuni were done to appease right-wing LDP factions that he needed to make key reforms happen. Others would just say Koizumi is just a strange Japanese man and a product of postwar Japan’s confused national identity. Nonetheless, he will be looked upon more kindly for his attempts are reforming Japan’s politics and economy that his successor is seemingly bent on destroying.

Abe is in serious trouble when even Mori Yoshiro is calling for his resignation as head of the Liberal Democratic Party and as Prime Minister. Mori who was the same Prime Minister that continued golfing when a US Navy submarine sank a Japanese fishing boat, the same idiot who referred to China as “Shina” in public and the asshole who called for restoring Emperor worship. Abe is in serious trouble and his stupidity is really bad for business on top of taxpaying Japanese citizens.

China marks 70th anniversary of war with Japan

China marks 70th anniversary of war with Japan
Posted on : 2007-07-06 | Author : DPA

News Category : AsiaBeijing - When former Japanese prime minister Junichiro Koizumi visited Beijing’s Lugou Bridge in October 2001, his laying of a wreath and his “heartfelt apology” for Japan’s wartime atrocities in China received a lukewarm response from Chinese leaders. As China marks the 70th anniversary of the July 7, 1937 “Luguou Bridge incident,” which started Japan’s full-scale invasion of China, relations between the two nations remain troubled.

“There are still many problems between China and Japan which are not being solved,” Song Chengyou, a historian at Beijing University, told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa.

Song gave the examples of territorial disputes in the East China Sea and Beijing’s objection to Japanese history textbooks that it says sanitize Japan’s wartime atrocities.

“Although experts from the two countries are making joint research on the history textbooks, I do not have high expectations,” Song said.

The dispute over history is a key element in diplomatic relations.

Formal ties have improved since Koizumi’s successor, Shinzo Abe, visited Beijing in October. But many Chinese experts see Abe as a more pragmatic version of his predecessor.

“Abe is contained a lot by the rightists,” sad Liu Jiangyong of the International Relations Institute at Beijing’s Qinghua University, “but he needs to consider the overall image of Japan.”

“Abe does not act as tough as Koizumi but fundamentally they stand for the same points,” Song said.

Abe was heavily criticized for saying in March that there was “no evidence” of Japan’s military forcing thousands of women in East Asia into sexual slavery.

But he has so far refrained from making a public visit as prime minister to the controversial Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo. The shrine honours nearly 2.5 million Japanese who died in wars since the mid-19th century, including 14 class-A war criminals convicted after World War II.

Bilateral ties had been soured by Koizumi’s annual visits to the shrine, and Chinese leaders had refused to meet him since 2001.

Like many ordinary Chinese people, Liu contrasts Japan’s attitude with Germany’s greater willingness to atone unconditionally for its wartime past.

Visits by Japanese leaders to the Yasukuni shrine do “huge harm to Chinese people’s feelings”, Liu told dpa.

It is “unimaginable” that German leaders would pay homage to Nazi war criminals in a similar way, he said.

Foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang on Tuesday said 2007 was a “sensitive year” for bilateral relations because of the 70th anniversaries of the Lugou Bridge battle and the Nanjing massacre.

The Japanese attack on Nationalist guards at the bridge in 1937 “marked the long-premeditated launching of all-out war on China” and the start of the “largest imperialist invasion ever experienced by China”, according to an official history.

It led to a loose alliance between Nationalist and Communist troops in what is now known in China as the War of Resistance Against Japan.

“Lugou Bridge symbolizes the beginning of national disaster, and also the beginning of the awakening of the Chinese,” Song said.

The Japanese forces had seized much of northeastern China in 1931 and placed it under the puppet government of Manchuria, which was led by China’s deposed last emperor, Pu Yi, the following year.

Japan fully occupied Beijing and nearby Tianjin by the end of July 1937, then moved its troops south to attack Shanghai and other major cities.

The year ended with the Nanjing massacre, in which Japanese troops are estimated to have killed up to 300,000 Chinese soldiers and civilians.

The Chinese government this week allowed the first showing of the new Hollywood documentary film “Nanking,” which takes its title from the old Western name for the city.

According to the official publicity for the film, “Nanking” shows how the “Japanese army unleashed murder and rape on a horrifying scale” that left “more than 200,000″ dead in and around Nanjing in December 1937 and January 1938.

Some Japanese historians and politicians claim Chinese and international experts exaggerated the death toll in Nanjing, but Song accuses them of “playing tricks” by questioning the number of victims.

“We all know that there are lots of rightists in Japan now. They do not look back at history properly and try to beautify this history,” Liu said.

Anger over Japan’s alleged failure to admit the full extent of its wartime atrocities in China were one of the reasons behind a series of large-scale anti-Japanese protests in Beijing and other cities in early 2005.

The government has allowed several small-scale, highly controlled protests outside the Japanese embassy since 2005.

One activist who helped to organize recent protests said he expected “simple memorial activities” to be held “mainly at Lugou Bridge” on Saturday, but he did not rule out the possibility of more protests.

Li Hanmei, another expert on international relations from Beijing University, concedes that it might be useful for both governments to maintain the “mild tension” between the two nations.

“Japan is trying to be an international political power and China is a fast-developing economic and political power,” Li said. “There are fundamental conflicts between the two.”

It’s always nice to know Koizumi visited the Lugou Bridge in 2001 with a wreath and a “heartfelt apology” for starting World War II in Asia before taking it all back with his スーパーハーピー visits to Yasukuni Jinja. There are many who see no offence to visiting Yasukuni since they see it as Japan’s rough equivalent to America’s Arlington Cemetery.

There are some things that need to be clarified with Yasukuni. First it cannot be considered Japan’s “Arlington” because it is a private institution while Arlington Cemetery is maintained by the United States government. Second, while it is true that Yasukuni was originally built by the Imperial government to commemorate all Japanese soldiers who died helping Japan modernise, the shrine has been tainted with the presence of War Criminals and the corruption by the right-wing into a symbol of militarism and nationalism.

It is no coincidence the right-wing revisionist museum, the Yushukan, that justifies World War II and downplays if not denies all war crimes is built just inches away from the Yasukuni Jinja itself. Emperor Showa’s anger at the enshrinement of th 14 men who lost his war (making it difficult to honour the soldiers that died for him) and his decision to no longer visit (it would tarnish his reputation and Japan’s) since then is a good indication of the extent the Yasukuni Shrine has been perverted by the Japanese right-wing.

In any event, people generally will remember the bad over the good and Koizumi’s actions to mend fences were easily overshadowed by his visits to Yasukuni. As a Prime Minister who professes to understand sensitive issues in East Asia, its ironic to see him enthusiastic in nearly all of his state visits to Yasukuni. Like Koizumi, Abe’s meetings with Chinese and South Korean leaders were easily undermined by his comments on comfort women and by the remarks from his handpicked Cabinet ministers.

Some claim that Koizumi made a deal with the right-wingers in his party (LDP) to make the visits in return for their support in his domestic reforms, which would explain why so many Japanese love him for his national policies at the expense of increased tensions in the region. Then again, it seems like Koizumi’s brief reign is being undermined by Abe who seems to be restoring much of the politics Koizumi tried to destroy during his rule. Abe’s approval ratings are so low, from his domestic policies rather than his foreign policies as Japanophiles claim, that it looks like the opposition will get swept into power, assuming enough of Abe’s critics actually vote in the coming weeks.

I really wonder how Shinzo-kun will be received if he ever makes a diplomatic tour in China like Wen Jiabao did in Japan earlier this year. Sino-Japanese tensions will remain as Japan tries to find some way to cope with their loss of economic influence in the world due to a rising China, while China will look to find ways to finally assert itself after spending several decades as a weak communist state at America’s benefit.

Costa Rica Breaks Relations With Taiwan

Costa Rica Breaks Relations With Taiwan

Thursday June 7, 2007 3:31 AM

By MARIANELA JIMENEZ

Associated Press Writer

SAN JOSE, Costa Rica (AP) - President Oscar Arias announced Wednesday that Costa Rica has broken diplomatic ties with Taiwan and established relations with China, delivering a blow to Asian island’s fragile international standing.

Arias said Costa Rica needed to strengthen ties with China to attract foreign investment.

Taiwanese Foreign Minister James Huang quickly offered to resign to take responsibility for Costa Rica’s switch, which left the Taiwan with relations with just two dozen nations.

Since splitting amid civil war in 1949, Taiwan and China have fought to win the diplomatic allegiance of countries around the world. China refuses to have diplomatic ties with nations that recognize Taiwan, which Beijing regards as a renegade province it plans to eventually unify with the mainland.

“We are looking to strengthen the commercial ties and attract investment,” Arias said. “China is the most successful emerging economy in the world and soon it will be the second strongest economy in the world after the United States.”

Central America in particular has been a bulwark of support for Taiwan, and Taiwan had expressed fears that if Costa Rica were to shift its recognition to Beijing, other nations such as Nicaragua and Panama could soon follow suit.

China spends heavily to induce nations to change diplomatic allegiances, offering investment, loans and other incentives.

Arias said China is the Central American nation’s No. 1 trading partner, buying more than $1 billion worth of Costa Rican exports last year.

“Taiwan has been very generous and I thank it for the solidarity and co-operation it has shown for nearly 60 years, but I have taken this decision thinking of all the Costa Ricans,” Arias said.

The change is just one more strike against Taiwan in its campaign for international legitimacy. Its high water mark came in the late 1960s when it had full relations with 67 countries, including the United States and much of western Europe. But within a decade, the U.S. pulled it embassy out of the Taiwanese capital. And today, just 24 states recognize Taiwan.

The United States, Japan, Great Britain and dozens of others maintain quasi-official ties with Taiwan - part of a diplomatic sleight of hand to honor Beijing’s condition that full diplomatic recognition be accorded to only one of the rivals.

However, Beijing resents even the quasi-official ties. Its main concern is the United States, which remains Taiwan’s most important foreign connection, providing it weapons to defend itself against a possible Chinese attack.

At a press briefing shortly after Costa Rica’s announcement, Huang, Taiwan’s foreign minister, offered to resign.

“I went to President Chen (Shui-bian) … and asked to resign to take political responsibility,” Huang told reporters.

Huang did not say if his offer was accepted.

Taiwan has been concerned about a deterioration of its relations with Costa Rica since May 14, when the Latin American country voted at an international health conference against holding a discussion on proposed Taiwanese membership in the World Health Organization.

On May 25, Huang met with officials from Costa Rica and four other Latin American countries in Belize City in an effort to shore up Taiwan’s diplomatic standing in the region.

Arias declined to comment on whether his decision could encourage other Central American nations to transfer their allegiance from Taipei to Beijing.

“I won’t speculate on the consequences of this decision in the rest of Central American because I made it thinking about Costa Rica,” he said.

Salvadoran President Tony Saca said Wednesday that his nation was interested in establishing relations with China but did not want to sever ties with Taiwan.

“Taiwan is an independent country that has won its space and we will going maintaining relations with Taiwan. If China accepts this we will open relations with pleasure,” Saca said.

This is good news indeed for Taiwan Province as Costa Rica has now wised up to understand the absurdity of their decision to back Taiwan all these years.  In the end, money talks and the Nobel Prize winner Oscar Arias was smart enough to forge a future with the real Chinese government acknowledging that China is their largest trading partner and proving again that money talks regardless of the rhetoric spewed by Taiwan Province.

With just 24 countries recognising a soon-to-be defunct government of the Republic of China, but not a country called Taiwan, Taiwan Province should start changing the way it works with its feeble allies and the real Chinese government.  They may have won St. Lucia with diplomatic bribes but they lost the much more significant Costa Rica from the growing world economy.  Besides, none of the countries that still recognise the RoC government that Taiwan Province is trying to destroy ever got their backs in the UN, let alone show any respect to them at all.

Well, here is to wishful thinking to see the rest of the region eventually fall in line for greater opportunities in the Chinese market and for larger foreign aid.  Oscar Aria won the Nobel Prize in the past for promoting Central American peace and now he is made a good move for the future of his citizens.   On another note, Lee Tenghui has been getting Japanophilic orgasms from visiting the Yasukuni Shrine earlier today as well.   Hopefully, the news of Costa Rica’s diplomatic switch will ruin his day walking through memory lane as a proud colonial slave for Japan.

Taiwan ex-president begins controversial visit in Japan

http://news.monstersandcritics.com/asiapacific/news/article_1311017.php
Asia-Pacific News
Taiwan ex-president begins controversial visit in JapanEd: Adds criticism by Taiwan activist over Lee’s shrine visit plan (1st Lead)May 30, 2007, 8:03 GMT

Tokyo - Defying protests from China, former Taiwan president Lee Teng-hui arrived in Japan Wednesday to deliver speeches in Tokyo and to re-enact a journey taken by a 17th-century Japanese haiku poet, media reports said.

In a move likely to further enrage Taiwan’s rivals in Beijing, Lee, 84, unveiled his plan to visit the war-related Yasukuni Shrine, which honours, among others, Lee’s older brother, according to Kyodo News Agency.

‘It could be the last visit to Japan in my life,’ he said. ‘My older brother is enshrined there. As his brother, I cannot bear not to pay a tribute.’

Yasukuni Shrine, which is known to honour millions of war dead including convicted war criminals, has been a source of diplomatic dispute between Tokyo and many of imperial Japan’s World War II victims in China, Korea and elsewhere in Asia.

Lee’s shrine visiting plan drew an angry protest by anti-Japanese militarism activists in Taiwan, who said it would be highly improper for him to go there.

‘Being a former leader of Taiwan, Lee Teng-hui should have been well aware of the sensitivity of the matter and should refrain from visiting the shrine,’ said indigenous parliamentarian Kao-Chin Su-may, in Taipei.

Ms Kao-chin twice led dozens of Taiwanese activists to demonstrate near the Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo last year, demanding an apology and compensation from Japan over tens of thousands of Taiwanese drafted to fight for Japanese imperial government during World War II. Taiwan had been under Japan’s colonial rule for five decades before Japan surrendered in 1945.

She said she understood the feeling of Lee to pay tribute to his elder brother, but if the ex-president really visits the war shrine, he would be ‘condemned by Taiwanese people because such an act would be a great insult to Taiwanese and high disrespect to the victims and their families.’

Taiwan’s current government under President Chen Shui-bian, which is friendly to Japan, was tight-lipped over Lee’s planned visit to the shrine, saying it would not comment on a matter that has yet to happen.

Lee’s Japan visit has also irked Beijing, which has expressed grave concern over his latest trip.

China has long opposed Lee’s Japan visit because it considers him among Taiwan’s most hard-core pro-independence leaders.

The former president of Taiwan, however, has insisted his 11-day visit to Japan is an exchange of cultural and academic views, and not politically-motivated.

He said he plans to visit several provinces in Japan to follow a five-month journey taken by the famous poet Matsuo Basho.

As president, Lee reclassified Taiwan’s relations with China as ’special state-to-state’ ties in 1999, in an attempt to place the island in an equal status to that of the mainland.

The move enraged Beijing, which considers Taiwan a wayward province and opposes any move toward independence.
© 2007 dpa - Deutsche Presse-Agentur

So the proud Japanese slave decides to make one final trip to his false homeland in style by retracing the path taken by Matsuo Basho. It’s worth noting that Lee Teng-hui often prefers to be addressed by his Japanese colonial name, Iwasato Masao, as well as conversing in Japanese rather than the dialect spoken in Taiwan Province. Iwasato-san has made many pilgrimages to his homeland in the past with the usual complaint by the Chinese government, but this one holds significance as Iwasato believes this may be his final trip due to his age and because he is visiting the Yasukuni Shrine that honours both his fallen brother and the war criminals that waged the “Greater East Asia War”.

While many colonial Taiwanese and Koreans were forcibly drafted into the Imperial Japanese Army to rape and pillage much of Asia, Lee Teng-hui and his brother actually volunteered to enlist in the Japanese military with Lee serving in the army while his brother in the navy. We have to be aware that those who were drafted by force to fight are victims of Japanese militarism and imperialism while those who enthusiastically volunteered to fight are sellouts. The Yasukuni Shrine does a great disservice to many colonial subjects that were drafted by placing them into the shrine despite the objections from the families of those drafted victims. It is also worth noting that Lee Teng-Hui will be enshrined in the Yasukuni Shrine under his Japanese name, Iwasato Masao, much to his delight when he dies.

The government on Taiwan Province does not object because many in the power structure actually enjoyed a half-century of Japanese colonial rule and are still under the delusion that Japan will militarily intervene when China liberates the wayward province. In any event, Taiwan is still a joke with their schoolyard fights and with a government that only cares about their own agenda at the expense of everyone.

Japan and China: Schoolchildren’s views

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/asia-pacific/6545085.stm

Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao has arrived in Japan for a summit that is being hailed as an achievement of some significance.

The two countries have had an uneasy relationship with differences over their war-time past remaining unresolved.

Here Chinese and Japanese schoolchildren discuss what they think about each other and how history books, the media and popular culture have shaped their perceptions.

CHEN YAJING, 15, BEIJING

I have been learning about Japanese history for three years. I think that they should be ashamed that the history they teach is distorted. However, there are a lot of good things about Japan, like Japanese technology and comics, so I am a bit confused whether to like or hate Japan.

I’m a huge fan of Japanese horror movies, they are simply fantastic. Like that movie, The Ring. There was a Japanese and an American version, but they are just not comparable. The Japanese one is so much better.

China isn’t good at making movies, and there definitely are a lot of ways in which China can’t compete with Japan.

I still feel that the Japanese government isn’t right. They shouldn’t be so hypocritical regarding history; they just keep denying the facts. I can never forgive them. No matter how good their comics are, how strong their technology is, this history will not fade away.

I would consider travelling to Japan but it is not somewhere I would dream to go to. It’s so small and crowded, and I’d rather travel to European countries instead.
JUNKI ISHIMURA, 13, TOKYO

I have two Chinese friends at school. They’re both quite rebellious. If the teachers tell them off for something they will say they didn’t do it. We’ve learnt that Japan fought a war with China and colonised parts of the country. Sometimes the Japanese were a bit cruel, forcing places to adopt Japanese names and forcing people to adopt the Japanese language.

But we didn’t really get into the details of what actually happened. I feel my understanding of the war is a bit thin.

At primary school they taught us history, but not about who was right or wrong. The conclusion was that war is bad for humans - that no one wins or loses in a fight.

In middle school we’ve learnt more about trade between the two countries.

The Chinese people seem to hold grudges from the war against the Japanese though. I learnt about this mostly from the news. I feel there is less anti-Japanese sentiment these days.

I totally understand why the Chinese hold grudges but the situation should be improved little by little. Japan and China should have a relationship like the one Japan has with the US.
ZHONG TIANYI, 12, BEIJING

I’ve been learning about Japan for a few years now. What I remember best is how they invaded China. The history book I’m studying now has quite a few chapters about Japan’s invasion and how they started the war.

The dates we should remember are 7 July, the Marco Polo Bridge Incident, marking the beginning of Japanese invasion, and 18 September when they took control of some major Chinese cities.

There are also chapters about how they massacred people in Nanjing and how they forced Chinese people to accept Japanese culture and language.

I think the Japanese are bad, they are not loyal to anyone. They used to have a similar cultural system to China, and now they say they have a similar cultural system to the Western world.

I’ve learnt that there are good things about them as well, they are good at learning from others, for example. I like some things about Japan, like technology and comics. I liked the comic book Slam Dunk very much, it was so well executed.
KASUMI KOJIMA, 15, TOKYO

I think China is important for Japan. We are neighbours, lots of Japanese people travel there on holiday and trade between the two countries is becoming more and more important. Neighbouring countries should cooperate and get on with each other. It’s safer.

Japan and China have different cultures. There are problems, of course, and I can understand why the Chinese would not have favourable feelings towards the Japanese.

They should talk more about the issues they have and resolve them one by one. They can’t leave things unresolved.

At school I learnt that Japan went to war with China for money. I think that was really bad. It was Japan who did most of the bad things.

The old textbooks, the ones that generations before me studied from, taught that Japan was a good country and that others were bad. The textbooks have now been changed.

In the old days they presented the wrong facts. For instance they said that North Korea was colonised because it was a bad country. My history teacher told us about this.

It’s now easier to find the right information. But I think the best thing to do is to actually visit the place, perhaps to study there.

Kids my age can get on pretty well with Chinese people. The politicians are thinking about how they can have the upper hand, but the rest of us, we get on fine.
WANG HONGYANG, 14, BEIJING

I’ve been learning about Japanese history for three years. The history I’ve been taught is mainly about how the Japanese bullied us. It’s all horrible, but the Japanese people I know are quite nice. I’ve been to Japan, my uncle and aunt studied there. They tell me that the Japanese people are really kind. So I really couldn’t tie any part of the horrible history to Japanese people.

I really liked Japan, the quality of the things I bought there is so good.

People treated me nicely, but I do think there is some discrimination against the Chinese. After all, we are behind them in terms of development. And because of their distorted history text books, young Japanese don’t favour us Chinese. They think we’re just nagging them about the history.

The history can never change, we can’t adore everything about Japan blindly, and we have to keep our moral integrity. I think we can forgive them for what they did if they treat us with the right attitude. If they keep denying everything and not showing sincerity, then there’s nothing we can talk about anymore.

I love Japanese comics. They are the best. No one else in the world could beat Japan. China’s comics are just so far behind and the Chinese have prejudices about people who like comics - people would think you are not serious about your studies.

So there you have it: Chinese students know they may be brainwashed and are actually aware of the strengths and problems of Japan contrary to Japanese nationalists, particularly 2channers, and Japanophiles’ claims that Chinese kids are all brainwashed fascists and racists because they know the ugly side of that country. On the other hand, the Japanese students are aware of some unpleasant transgressions that went on in World War 2 but are completely in the dark over the details and are more than eager to be good company to their regional neighbours contrary to some assertions that Japanese youth are becoming increasingly right-wing.

What some of these rough accounts actually highlight is the strong love-hate relationship that Chinese of the future may have towards their Japanese counterparts. On one hand, they are aware of the past problems and the Japanese government’s inability to truly come to terms with them and their asshole politicians such as Abe Shinzo. At the same time, they appreciate the finer points of Japanese popular culture, which is actually the same “soft power” that is winning them misguided fanboys called Japanophiles.

It appears that the government’s defiant and irritating behaviour has made it difficult for Japan’s neighbours to accept them with open arms despite the generally pleasant company there like any other country and the unique products and services that are popular among youths. It’s also counterproductive to see critics of China exaggerate the anti-Japanese sentiment by simply dismissing all those who are critical of some part of Japan or its culture as racist against Japanese or Chinese people all being victims of “Orwellian” brainwashing.

On the other end of the region, the accounts by the Japanese students reaffirm suspicions that the general populace is generally ignorant of the root causes for current regional tensions. Although they are aware of the harmful effects of war, it doesn’t seem clear that they understand the causes of the war and the exact details that are causing so much hostility to their country but a few are aware the government has played their part in increasing tensions. Then again, the students also were eager to be friends and work towards a better future with a few pointing out they have interesting Chinese friends. So it looks like critics were partly right by pointing out the general ignorance of the Japanese people’s understanding of their regional history, while anti-Chinese sentiment in response to anti-Japanese sentiment seems to be cooling off.

Conversely, everything I could be saying could be just wishful thinking on my part since these are just teenagers giving their views based on their relatively limited experiences in the world. However, it would be wise to point out that some of these kids will be the future generations that will possibly play a role in East Asian affairs in the following decades in their own way. Let’s all keep keep wishing for Abe to stay the course and not do anything stupid until his successor is in power.