Decide on either one of the topics provided or one of your own choosing. Provide background on the topic and a thoughtful hypothesis; prove your claim using evidence gathered through research among credible sources.
It is well known that during the Second World War, numerous states were responsible for the deaths of not only enemy soldiers, but also the horrific murder of millions of innocents. Asking any individual of relative mediocrity in North America or Europe about the war crimes of the Second World War, should you be lucky enough to find an individual of any reasonable intellectual capacity, he or she would likely respond with information about the Holocaust as perpetrated by Nazi Germany and Axis collaborators against Jews, gypsies, disabled civilians, and other undesirables. What would not be heard in but the rarest of circumstances would be allusions to Unit 731, to the Bataan Death March, to Japanese dissections of live human prisoners. Why, why is it that we do not ever hear a word about the atrocities of Japan unless actively seeking out information or argument on the subject? The Holocaust is emphasized, for good reason, in American textbooks, but rarely is the same emphasis ever placed on the equally horrific actions of the Japanese Empire. Often, text regarding the war crimes of the Japanese Empire downplay the horribleness of the atrocities through their lackluster presentation and instead emphasize the alleged crime of the United States in using nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Despite the many atrocities committed by the Japanese Empire in the 1930s and 1940s, the Japanese people and government suffered relatively little guilt compared to that which was thrust upon the entirety of the German nation in the aftermath of the Second World War, resulting from the unilateral control of the United States over Japan compared to the dealings in Germany, the visibility of Nazi German atrocities, the victimization of Japan, and the global political climes of the time period.
The difference between the manners in which the occupation of the defeated Axis powers was conducted between the European theater and the Pacific theatre played a significant role in affecting how Japan’s wartime atrocities would be perceived and remembered by the global community at large. In the case of Germany, the country was divided into four occupation zones, each administered by a different victorious Allied state. There was a zone occupied by France, a zone occupied by Britain, a zone occupied by the Soviet Union, and a zone occupied by the United States of America (U.S. Department of State, 1). In the case of Japan, however, the entirety of Japanese holdings outside of mainland China and Korea were placed entirely under United States jurisdiction, despite protests from the Soviet Union against the establishment of such unilateral authority (U.S. Department of State, 2). While in Germany, states varying states had access to evidence of Nazi wartime atrocities and had to work together to decide on the appropriate course(s) of action to pursue, Japan’s fate was decided almost entirely by one man if not just one country. General MacArthur of the United States was solely responsible for the operation of the reconstruction of Japan post-war. This meant that he, as a military man who was very much opposed to the spread of communism, was incentivized to rebuild a strong, western-aligned ally not crippled by a sense of guilt over past war crimes. “Although MacArthur's headquarters assisted in procuring defense witnesses, it also advised the commission that it was "disturbed by reports of possible recess" and that it doubted the "need of Defense for more time." Most specifically, MacArthur's deputy chief of staff announced that his boss "desires proceedings completed [at] earliest possible date." The military commission soon announced its opposition to any continuance save "for the most urgent and unavoidable reasons." (Smith, 4) It was not in the interests of MacArthur nor the United States to inhibit Japanese reconstruction in any way. A further point is that US media reporters had greater access to material pertaining to German wartime atrocities as the war came to a close. This could perhaps be attributed to the fact that many of the Japanese wartime atrocities were committed in China, a country that remained mired in strife and conflict as the Second World War ended, precluding significant media attention. Combining this with the aforementioned efforts of US reconstruction efforts, and a state was produced in which little attention was handed to these atrocities. Such was not the case in Germany, and thus was born two separate results, one state justly burdened with the guilt of its crimes and the other’s crimes left forgotten.
The portrayal of these atrocities in general, be they German or Japanese, also helped to shape public opinion and therefore public policy pertaining to these war crimes. In the case of Germany, the clustered nature of the European continent resulted in news of the horrendous occurrences spreading quite quickly with the arrival of military and civilian reporters. Evidence of Nazi war crimes was bound to leak and become available, portrayed in a manner to find suitable blame in the German people. Japanese war crimes were largely isolated in the Pacific islands and in China, areas not as accessed by Western reporters, both due to cultural dissimilarities and due to ongoing conflict in those areas in the cases of China and Indochina. The sheer size of the Pacific and CBI theaters of WW2 and the spread of the Japanese atrocities across the area severely diminished any possibility of visibility of Japanese atrocities, also diminishing the ability of reporters to be taken credibly with their portrayal of these atrocities in a harsh light for Japan due to the lack of a mob of like-minded reporters to support them. This was despite the systematic criminal acts perpetrated by Japan. “Among the many instances of wartime sexual violence and military prostitution in the twentieth century, the ‘comfort women’ system was distinguished by its large scale and systematic management under the military, and by its exploitation of young, poor, and vulnerable women in areas colonized or occupied by Japan.” (McGrath, 4) The Japanese atrocities, committed in a mechanical manner on a larger scale than the Nazi Holocaust, were not portrayed in the same light despite being worse. They were overshadowed, ignored, and forgotten.Without vivid examples widely available to people, Japanese atrocities were made more of a distant memory. The Rape of Nanking is about the only vivid example of Japanese atrocities aware to the west, given little attention in its day or after compared to Auschwitz or Dachau or any other concentration camp. Almost no one was punished for the Rape of Nanking, and Japanese atrocities such as this were largely ignored.(Egler, 11). Today, you can find dozens upon dozens of Holocaust documentaries and documentaries on Nazi wartime policies regarding civilians, but similar programmes pertaining to Japan are far and few between. Modern media can criticize Shinzo Abe’s government all it wants for whitewashing history, but in so doing the media whitewashes its role in the coverup of Japanese wartime atrocities.
The most significant reason for the whitewashing of Japanese wartime atrocities is, of course, the global political climes that prevailed in the time period as the Cold War brewed. For one, a scapegoat was needed to bring closure to the shaken peoples of Europe and the world for everything that had occurred in the course of the most devastating conflict mankind had ever witnessed. With the aforementioned factors in mind, Germany proved to be an easy scapegoat, especially considering their record from The Great War, in which they were also named the scapegoat despite that conflict having originated in the Balkans among Serbs and Austrians. This action was essential in not only healing the wounds brought on by the war but in also allowing people to mobilize and rebuild their nations as the Western Allies desired as part of the initiative to prepare to challenge the Soviet Union. Germany being divided amongst the West and Soviets also helped to make it an easy choice to give up as an object of blame, as it would prove less useful in conflict with the Soviets when compared to a unified state such as Japan. “West Germany in the 1980s was teaching children about the crimes of the Nazis and was making it clear that an understanding of the past was the basis on which to build the present.” (Masaaki, 3) Such was not the case in a unified Japan. Japan already had a history of opposing Russia and Communism in general (despite some Communist movements within the country) and was not threatened by close proximity with Communist states as Germany was (Krauss, 324). Considering this alongside how it was made easier for Japan to be rebuilt thanks to the United States’ direct control and the relatively little destruction the state had suffered when compared to Germany, and Japan was the clear winner in terms of who to pick for the team on the battleground of global politics. As a result of this, Japanese atrocities had to be addressed and made a non-issue in a timely manner, culminating in quick trials conducted by the US much unlike the drawn out Nuremburg Trials of Germany, which lasted nearly a year and saw the executions of ten and sentencing of more (Young, 4). Even now, global political climes and the local political landscape of Japan itself continue to inhibit the proper acknowledgement of these horrific crimes (Okamoto, 28), with countries such as the United States remaining unwilling to encourage such acknowledgement in the face of new threats, such as China; as has been said, “All of this is bound up with the United States’ “pivot to Asia,” designed to economically subordinate and militarily surround China.” (McGrath, 5) It is not entirely the fault of Japan, with psychological condition resulting from the manner in which the state reconstituted itself. “The second major response to the defeat was materialism resulting from a process of psychological displacement.” (Masaaki, 5) Japan credit materialism for American success, and pursued a materialistic society with renewed vigor under American supervision. They have failed to grieve as a result of the politics of the world.
Thanks to a multitude of factors, including the US unilateral control of postwar Japan, Western media behavior, and prevailing global political climes, Japan’s role in the atrocities of the Second World War are often forgotten. It is remiss to forget these heinous crimes, but it is equally remiss to mark the actions that led to the whitewashing of Japanese atrocities as comparable. The behavior of Western nations is understandable in the context of the time, but it remains that Japanese wartime atrocities have been forgotten and often remain forgotten due in no small part to the actions of the nations towards which they were committed.
Egler, David G. "Rape of Nanjing." Salem Press Encyclopedia, 2013. EBSCOhost, proxygsu-sgly.galileo.usg.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ers&AN=89315888&site=eds-live&scope=site.
Krauss, Ellis S. “The urban strategy and policy of the Japan Communist Party: Kyoto.” Studies in Comparative Communism, vol. 12, no. 4, Winter 1979, p. 324. ScienceDirect, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0039359279902886
Masaaki, Noda. "Japanese Atrocities in the Pacific War: One Army Surgeon's Account of Vivisection on Human Subjects in China." East Asia: An International Quarterly, vol. 18, no. 3, Sept. 2000, p. 49. EBSCOhost, proxygsu-sgly.galileo.usg.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=fth&AN=5111929&site=eds-live&scope=site.
McGrath, Ben. “Historians condemn Japan’s whitewashing of war crimes.” World Socialist Website, May 2015, International Committee of the Fourth International, https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/05/11/japa-m11.html
Okamoto, Michihiro. "History and Nationality. Beyond Nationalized History?." Storia Della Storiografia, no. 58, Nov. 2010, p. 104. EBSCOhost, proxygsu-sgly.galileo.usg.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edo&AN=58084807&site=eds-live&scope=site.
Smith, Robert Barr. "Justice under the Sun: Japanese War Crimes Trials." World War II, vol. 11, no. 3, Sept. 1996, p. 38. EBSCOhost, proxygsu-sgly.galileo.usg.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=fth&AN=9608226144&site=eds-live&scope=site.
U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of State, 2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/cwr/107189.htm.
U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of State, history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/japan-reconstruction.
Young, William. "Nuremberg Trials." Salem Press Encyclopedia, 2013. EBSCOhost, proxygsu-sgly.galileo.usg.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ers&AN=89116459&site=eds-live&scope=site.