Japanese feminists

In addition to not coming forward, women are partly responsible in other ways for the vast silence that surrounds wartime sexual savagery.
One example: certain Japanese feminists recognize the existence of the Korean Comfort Women, and have apologized on behalf of their men, and their government. (Source: War’s Dirty Secrets, by Anne Llewellyn Barstow.)

But these same feminists ignore their own sisters, Occupation Comfort Girls, handed out to American GI’s and Australian soldiers in Tokyo at the end of WWII.
Truckloads of them, given to appease the conquerors. Wary, terrified girls. Confused, starving. In rags, many, and barefoot.
War-ravaged already, by the destruction of their homes and families. Now raped, sometimes into unconsciousness, by the ‘entitled’ soldiers,
who must have girls’ bodies as rewards. A noble soldierly deed, the virile rape of the conquered.

We have an eyewitness of Australian men raping these ‘comfort’ girls all night, as they cried and begged.
It is puzzling that Japanese women, those left alive, who were the Comfort Women for the American and Australian armies, have never come forth.
The RAA (Recreation and Amusement Association), a joint effort of the Japanese and American authorities, forced girls (many of them teenage virgins, homeless and helpless) into the Rape Centers
(my phrase for the places). There, according to historian Yuki Tanaka, the girls could find no time to eat or sleep, so heavy was the demand. Men bought ‘tickets,’ to make it all legitimate?after all,
if you pay it can never be rape, right, since the girl is a natural born whore.

A Belated Coming to Terms

By Jim Hoagland
Sunday, August 20, 2006; Page B07
Germany and Japan have served six decades on global probation. It is time for their neighbors, their citizens and the international community to acknowledge the thorough transformation of the former Axis powers into fully democratic and morally responsible nations.

Comes now Guenter Grass, Germany's most accomplished novelist, to remind us of this need, albeit inadvertently. As does Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi of Japan, much more deliberately. They have touched off controversies that bring into focus questions of war guilt, selective historical amnesia and, for Grass, the role of the artist in consumer-dominated societies.

Koizumi gave China an opening to rake up Japan's militaristic past last week by visiting the Yasukuni war shrine, which honors 2.5 million Japanese war dead, including 14 persons convicted as Class A war criminals by a 1948 tribunal. But China and other Asian nations are engaged in the pursuit of tactical advantage, not historical truth, in pretending they possess moral superiority over an unreconstructed Japan.

It is the unfinished transformation of China, not of Japan, that is the urgent moral and political question today in Asia. It is China's military buildup -- not Japan's increased willingness to take on the burdens of global security -- that is the destabilizing force in Asia. Americans and Europeans should not be taken in by Beijing's flimflammery on the Yasukuni visit.

Such protests and the discrimination against Germany and Japan written into the United Nations Charter are now obsolete. Japanese membership on the Security Council is a necessary first step toward serious reform of the world body. Tokyo should help clear the way for that step by removing the inscriptions that honor war criminals at Yasukuni.

Germany's case for Security Council membership is complicated by the fact that Europe already has seats held by France and Britain. Chancellor Angela Merkel has prudently deferred the once-insistent push by Germany for its own seat. But Germany and Japan both deserve to be heard and treated as the responsible international partners they have become across six decades.

Japanese Atrocities, Apologies, and Atonement

by Mike (in Tokyo) Rogers
Japanese prime ministers have, at least four times to date,
clearly and publicly and officially apologized for World War II atrocities, war crimes and transgressions.
Since the prime minister of Japan is its highest-ranking executive of state,
to say that Japan hasn’t apologized to its Asian neighbors is false.

Reparations and Compensation
Regardless of the above, the problem that remains for Japan in its relations with its neighbors is an economic one.
Japan’s critics seek the moral high ground here by claiming that money is not an issue,
but money comes up in every discussion of Japan’s wartime responsibilities. A few examples are Comfort Women, Korean A-bomb victims,
and Nanjing massacre victims. If all this were merely a demand for an apology, the topic would have died long ago.
Japan’s critics should not try to make themselves look like saints in this matter with their claims that this is not a money issue. This is undoubtedly a money issue.
Yet Japan, as a free nation and a world economic power, should not be held to the same yardstick as Asia’s despotic regimes.
Japan, as a democratic nation, and due to past crimes, and admitted wartime aggression and atrocities, should be the nation that stands out as the leader in liberty and capitalism in Asia.
Japan should not wish to be compared with the regimes of neighbors such as the former military government of South Korea,
or the Chinese communist government that under Mao Zedong murdered over 50 million of its own, or a North Korean government that cannot even feed its own people, yet waged war on its southern brother.

Another argument from Japan’s critics is that Japan shows no remorse over World War II in its government-approved textbooks.
This matter is another one that seems to me to be greatly exaggerated. Japan is a democratic nation with a free press.
If the government approves of a textbook that is accused of "glossing over Japan’s wartime atrocities," that doesn’t mean that every schoolchild in Japan uses that textbook.
In fact, contrary to a country like China, for example, that has only one history textbook in its schools, Japan has hundreds.
School administrations in Japan are heavily loaded with left-leaning staff, and that’s why the playing of the national anthem in Japanese schools caused such a fuss in Japan just a few years ago.
To this day, I have heard Japan’s national anthem played only once at my child’s school. Also, I haven’t yet seen any textbooks that fail to mention Japanese war crimes and aggression in Asia.
One more area that garners Japan further criticism comes from a seeming lack of repentance when the Japanese prime minister visits Yasukuni Shrine. Foreign views on Yasukuni are often confused. As I explained in an earlier article,
it is not a memorial intended to glorify Japan’s past military deeds. It was designated in the late 1800s as a place to pray for the souls of those who died due to war.
There is a huge difference. The Japanese visit shrines to pray for the spirits of the dead. There are over 10,000 shrines in Japan. Yasukuni does not honor war criminals.

The Making of Modern Asia

Cultural confidence is a necessary but not sufficient condition for development. Centuries of European colonial rule had progressively reduced Asian self-confidence. Future generations of Indian citizens will be wondering how 300 million Indians―including my own ancestors―allowed themselves to be passively ruled by fewer than 100,000 Britons. Those as yet unborn will not understand how deeply the myth of European cultural superiority had been embedded into the Indian psyche. Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Indian Prime Minister, once said the defeat of Russia in 1905 by Japan first triggered the idea of independence for India in his mind. That was a remarkable admission; it implied that intelligent Indians could not conceive of governing themselves before Japan, an Asian power, defeated a European one.

Japan's record in World War II was disastrous. But if Japan had not succeeded early in the 20th century, Asia's development would have come much later. Japan inspired the rise of Asia. Even South Korea, which suffered from brutal Japanese colonial rule, could not have taken off so fast without having Japan as a role model. Asia needs to send Japan a big thank-you note. The tragedy, of course, is that such words of gratitude will not be delivered while Japan remains ambivalent about its own identity, torn between Asia and the West.

Even the Chinese should thank Japan. Tokyo's continuous denials of its army's atrocities in World War II will always complicate relations with Beijing. But China would not be where it is today if Deng had not made that fateful decision to move from communist central planning to a free-market system. Deng took this incredibly bold leap because he had seen how well the Overseas Chinese in Taiwan, Hong Kong and even Singapore had done. Those three tigers―and the fourth, South Korea―were inspired by Japan. The stone that Japan threw into Asia-Pacific waters created ripples that eventually benefited China, too.

What makes Asia's rise so irreversible is the simultaneous success of both China and India. Their political paths could not be more different: India is a democracy, while China retains Communist Party rule. The acceptance of free-market disciplines, however, provides a common economic platform. China and India today are united in their cultural confidence, especially among their youth. Both countries have the most optimistic generation of young people they have seen in centuries. Nothing can hold back the dynamism and vigor they will bring to their societies, and to the whole world.

WSJ Editorial: Japan's Unheeded Apologies

Source: WSJ (8-17-05)

Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's latest apology for Japanese behavior in the first half of the 20th century
undermines the familiar refrain heard on the streets of Beijing and Seoul: that Japan has yet to atone for
its wartime crimes. China's churlish official reaction to the apology shows, on the other hand, that history
is less a thorn than a useful card for Beijing to play.

It is one that China's leaders will likely be increasingly tempted to use if Mr. Koizumi's party wins general
elections in less than a month's time. An important part of Mr. Koizumi's revolutionary agenda is an attempt
to lead Japan out of years of pacifism and toward becoming a "normal nation" -- one that is not so
wracked by guilt that it is constrained from playing an international political role commensurate with its
economic heft. Beijing will play the history card to try to keep this from happening.

Here's what Mr. Koizumi actually said, according to an English-language translation by Kyodo news:
"Our country has caused tremendous damage and pain to the peoples of many countries, especially Asian
countries, through colonial rule and invasion. Humbly acknowledging such facts of history, I once again
reflect most deeply and offer apologies from my heart as well as express my condolences to all the
victims of the last major war both in and out of the country." When is an apology not an apology?

It is the second time that Mr. Koizumi has apologized this year. His words have been similar to those used
by former Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama in 1995. Like Mr. Murayama's, Mr. Koizumi's apology in the
spring was rejected by Japan's critics for not being abject enough....

So what would satisfy Beijing? Despite much speculation that he would pay a visit, Mr. Koizumi stayed
away from the controversial Yasukuni Shrine on Monday, the 60th anniversary of Japan's defeat in World
War II. Mr. Koizumi's decision to not visit the shrine, a Shinto memorial that honors Japan's war dead,
including some war criminals, was most likely a recognition that to do so would have inflamed Japan's
Asian neighbors. But rather than praising Mr. Koizumi for this overture, Chinese media was quick to point
out that Japanese lawmakers and cabinet ministers visited the shrine, a move that Mr. Kong criticized for
not being the "correct" choice.

Japan as a Normal Nation

Mr. Koizumi's firm adherence to a consistent message over time has been Reaganesque

Japanese citizens today should not be blamed for what their country did in World War II to China.

Los Angeles Times Aug 6, 2004

U.S. Ambassador to Japan Howard H. Baker said
Baker said he told the Chinese official: "Well look, the United States and Japan really had a first-class war there for a while,
and we've gotten over it and we're best friends and allies." He added, "It's time for you to get over it."
The Chinese official "didn't like that a bit," said the American ambassador.

"He said, 'You don't understand,' "

A sorry state

By Ian Buruma
Published: May 27 2005 15:47 | Last updated: May 27 2005 15:47

Have the Japanese apologised enough for the war? Here are some facts. In 1972, Prime Minister Kakuei Tanaka told the Chinese that Japan “deeply reproached itself”; in 1982, chief cabinet secretary Kiichi Miyazawa expressed “remorse”; the emperor himself, in 1990, spoke of his “deepest remorse” in South Korea; in 1995, Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama offered his “profound apology” to Asian victims; Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto, in China in 1997, repeated Murayama’s feelings of “deep remorse”; and Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said he was sorry in 2001, 2002, 2003 and yet again last month.

Given the fact that these apologies covered Japanese colonialism in Korea, the brutal invasion of China, the maltreatment of POWs and the forced prostitution of “comfort women”, it would be hard to maintain that Japan has officially denied its dark history. Does this mean, then, that the recent violent demonstrations in China, with mobs hurling stones at Japanese consulates, restaurants and shops while the police looked on benevolently at this venting of popular rage at “Japanese pigs”, were wholly off the mark?

China's Selective Memory

By Fred Hiatt
Monday, April 18, 2005; Page A17

China, a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, has made clear that it doesn't think Japan is deserving of similar status.

You might wonder why not. After all, Japan is one of the world's largest contributors of foreign aid and most generous backers of the United Nations, a successful democracy for more than a half-century, with a powerhouse economy and a constitution that forbids aggression.

But here's the problem, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao explained last week: "Japan needs to face up to history squarely." After another weekend of anti-Japanese protests and riots in China, China's foreign minister yesterday amplified that "the main problem now is that the Japanese government has done a series of things that have hurt the feelings of the Chinese people . . . especially in its treatment of history."

Truth in history is an interesting standard for great-power status. One intriguing response would be for Japan to embrace it and suggest politely that, if China wants to keep its Security Council seat, it ought to do the same.

There's no doubt, as Premier Wen implied, that some Japanese have a hard time admitting the terrible things their troops did in China, Korea and other occupied Asian countries before and during World War II. Apologies sometimes seem to be mumbled, and textbooks sometimes minimize past crimes.

Recently, for example, Japan's education ministry approved a textbook that refers to the 1937 Nanjing Massacre as an "incident" during which "many" Chinese were killed, though some estimates of civilian deaths run as high as 300,000. News of these textbooks helped spark the anti-Japanese riots in Chinese cities.

But put the issue in some perspective: Many textbooks receive ministry approval in Tokyo, and no school is forced to use any particular one. Issues of war guilt or innocence, and of proper historiography, are debated endlessly and openly in Japanese newspapers, magazines and universities. Some Japanese demonstrate against politicians who won't go to Yasukuni Shrine -- where Japan's war dead, including some who were judged war criminals, are honored -- while other Japanese demonstrate against politicians who do go.

Compare this to the situation in Premier Wen's China. There is only one acceptable version of history, at least at any given time; history often changes, but only when the Communist Party decides to change it.

For example, according to a report by Howard W. French in the New York Times last December, many textbooks don't mention that anyone died at what the outside world knows as the 1989 massacre of student demonstrators near Tiananmen Square. One 1998 text notes only that "the Central Committee took action in time and restored calm." Anyone who challenges the official fiction is subject to harsh punishment, including beatings, house arrest or imprisonment.

And if the 300,000 victims of the Nanjing Massacre are slighted in some Japanese textbooks, what of the 30 million Chinese who died in famines created by Mao Zedong's lunatic Great Leap Forward between 1958 and 1962? No mention in Chinese texts; didn't happen.

Well, you might say, how a nation treats its internal history is less relevant to its qualifications for the Security Council than whether it teaches its children honestly about its wars with other nations. A dubious proposition, but no matter; as the Times found in its review of textbooks, Chinese children do not learn of their nation's invasion of Tibet (1950) or aggression against Vietnam (1979). And they are taught that Japan was defeated in World War II by Chinese Communist guerrillas; Pearl Harbor, Iwo Jima and Midway don't figure in.

"Facing up to history squarely" isn't easy for any country. Americans don't agree on how to remember the Confederacy. Russia can't yet admit to Soviet depredations in the Baltic republics. And, yes, Japan too often sees itself purely as a victim of World War II.

June4 Massacre in Beijing

icbt (1 month ago) marked as spam
This event always in my heart
every chinese should remeber
learn from the mistake
let hero die with meaningness
pls... stop blamming china government
we have to get over

wongmanfai (1 month ago) marked as spam
It happened very long time ago, all chinese should write it off form the history book and forget this.


ヘルプ / FAQ もご覧ください。