The never ending Japanese textbook debate continues with the Japanese Board of Education in the city of Otawara approving the new controversial Japanese history textbook. The books are mired in controversy due to the alleged white washing of Japan’s World War II atrocities and brutal occupation of Korea. The Japundit provides some interesting excerpts from the book. Here is an excerpt of why Japan invaded Korea:
If the Korean Peninsula came under the control of Russia, which was extending its empire eastward, it would serve as the base for an attack on Japan. As an island nation, Japan would have great difficulty defending itself. It was important to Japan’s national security that Korea become an impregnable fortress.
In my opinion I don’t think Russia ever had any intentions of invading Japan and the Japanese just used this as an excuse to invade Korea for their own imperialist reasons. Plus how does being an island nation make you more vulnerable to attack? If anything it makes it more difficult to attack. Just ask the soldiers and Marines from World War II that fought on many of the Japanese occupied Pacific islands how difficult they were to capture, especially Iwo Jima and Okinawa which were two native Japanese islands. So this part of the book has some obvious distortions.
Here is why they decided to stay and colonize the peninsula:
The Japanese government decided that it was necessary to annex Korea to protect Japanese security and Japanese interests in Manchuria. In 1910, Japan proceeded with the annexation, suppressing protests with military force. Within Korea, there was bitter opposition to the loss of independence. Even after Japanese annexation, the movement to restore independence remained deep-rooted and active. Some of the colonial policies implemented by the Government-General of Korea, established after annexation, were development projects designed to construct railroads and irrigation facilities; land surveys began. But due to the surveys many Koreans were driven off the land they had been cultivating. Furthermore, introducing of Japanese language instruction into school curriculum and other assimilation programs increased anti-Japanese sentiments among the Koreans.
To bad they did not mention the notorious Soedaemun prison in Seoul which included torture and execution rooms for all the Korean political prisoners held there.
This is all that is mentioned of the Nanjing Massacre which the Japanese call the Nanjing Incident:
Many Chinese soldiers and civilians were killed or wounded by Japanese troops (the Nanking Incident). Documentary evidence has raised doubts about the actual number of victims claimed by the incident. The debate continues even today.
I could understand why Chinese people get upset when they read this crap. But wait there is more:
In November 1943, Japan sponsored the Assembly of Greater East-Asiatic Nations…At the Assembly, a joint declaration (Joint Declaration of the Assembly of Greater East-Asiatic Nations) was issued in response to the Atlantic Charter. It spoke of the autonomy and independence of all nations, economic progress achieved through cooperation, and the eradication of racial discrimination. Following the assembly, Japan issued clearer explanations of its reason for waging war: the building of a Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere, from which the Western powers would be excluded.
This same justification for starting World War II I discovered when touring a museum located near the Yasakuni Shrine in Tokyo. I don’t what the textbooks say about Pearl Harbor, but I do know what I learned from traveling to the shrine that the Japanese felt that the US provoked the attack on Pearl Harbor when energy shipments were suspended to the Japanese after their continued acts of aggression and occupation in Asia. Plus that Japan had the moral right to free the people of Asia from European and American colonization.
As misguided as the textbooks appear to be I think it is important to not let things get to far out of control like this article from the Korea Times does:
It is feared the textbooks will breed militarism in the hearts and brains of Japanese youth. If so, it is a misfortune not only for Japan’s neighbors but for Japan itself. The distorted textbooks may become a boomerang that returns to hit the Japanese in the future as they isolate the people from the rest of the peace-loving people around the globe.
This is a reoccurring statement of propaganda is Northeast Asia that the Japanese are becoming more militaristic when it is in fact the Chinese who have the biggest defense build up and are actively occupying the entire country of Tibet which no one criticizes while Japan gets constantly criticized about their absurd claim to the tiny Dokto Islets. Plus I don’t think I have to say much about the North and South Korean military build ups on the Korean peninsula due to the continuing nuclear crisis here. So who is really promoting militarism here in Northeast Asia?
Here is this final quote from the Japundit:
As a textbook intended for fourteen-year-olds, Tsukurukai’s New History Textbook either makes you admire both the skill of the teachers and the academic level of students expected to wade through the course material, or the book makes you feel glad you don’t have to teach it or read it for credit.
But you also might wonder how the New History Textbook would compare to a Chinese or Korean textbook. And its also worth noting that only 0.04% of Japanese boards of education have chosen to use the New History Textbook.
I would be embarrassed to if I had to teach the crap in these textbooks but the Japundit does bring up a fair argument that only .04% of Japanese schools now use this distorted textbook and that Korea and China’s textbooks probably have equally if not larger distortions read by a higher percentage of people within their populations.
I am completing speculating here so feel free to comment if I am wrong but I doubt Chinese textbooks mention much about the massive deaths caused by Mao’s reckless Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolutions. Is there anything even mentioned about the Tianamen Square Massacre in a Chinese textbook? How much in Korea’s textbooks are taught about the large amount of communist sympathizers within South Korea that sided with the North Koreans during the war or the South Korean execution squads that went around and conducted mass executions of suspected communists? I could go on and on but I think you get my point. Like I said before I am speculating so feel free to comment if I’m wrong. I just feel that if a country especially China is going to accuse someone of textbooks distortions and try and take the moral high ground on the issue then their textbooks to should be open to analysis and debate to discover distortions that are undoubtedly there.
Popularity: 4%
My StumbleUpon Page
4:05 pm on January 7th, 2007 1
“that only .04% of Japanese schools ”
0.04% now, but do you think it would stay that way if there wasn’t such outcry about Japanese textbooks? I think not. If there was no checks and balances, that 0.04% would have easily been 40%.
4:05 pm on January 7th, 2007 2
Do you really allow yourself to get distracted by Asian finger-pointing and bickering?
All North-East Asian societies are tribal: tribalism values the survival and gratification of the tribe above any abstract notion of “truth”.
Each Asian society instinctively creates a face-saving self-image. Attempting to influence their self-image towards truth and justice is like trying to reason with a paranoid schizophrenic. You are only accepted if you share the same delusion — otherwise, you are part of the conspiracy.
What I am trying to establish in your brain, is that Asian societies are a fundamentally different civilization from the West — devoid of idealism Americans cherish.
They are bad allies — because of an innate pragmatism that makes them seductive, yet treacherous friends.
Now, tell me — why are you ready to die for them? Are you a saint — a sacrificial lamb?
Oh, I get it — dutiful cannon fodder for Lt. Gen Charlene Campbell’s girlish sentimentality.
Quit focusing on Asian pettiness and understand what is important.
4:07 pm on January 7th, 2007 3
About your comment “In my opinion I don’t think Russia ever had any intentions of invading Japan ….”, after the Russians forced China (Shin-Dynasty) to release the cession (the the Maritime Territory) in 1860, it was a histrical fact that many Russians were in the Korean peninsula and actively worked to get approval from the Korean aristocracy in order to establish “commercial bases” in there (like they had in southern Alaska before they sold the land to US).
Like you wrote, we never know whether or not the Russian Czar actually had an intensions to invade Japan (at least there is no document left to prove this). However, many Japanese leadrers (founders of modernized Japan) believed so from their hearts and they were really got frightened by the bad dream having the peninsula occupied by the Russians (there are many documents left including their diaries to prove this). This fear triggered them to order Japanese Imperial Army and Navy to invade and occupy the peninsula and resulted in the Japan’s victory of the Japanese-Russian war later. Of course, this was no good for people living there, and also turned out very bad for Japan’s own people after about 40 years.
About your comment “Plus how does being an island nation make you more vulnerable to attack? ….”, you could be right from the pure military stand point (I have never served to any military service. So, I honor your knowledge about the military technologies). However, there only two cases had been known about the foreigners’ attack to four Japanese main isldands untill the WWII(I excluded the US occupation of Japan after the WWII, since the text book is discussing about the era before the Japanese-Russian war). In both cases, known as “Genkou” (the Mongol Invasions of 1274 and 1281), the Mongolians used the peninsula as a base to attack Japan. Qubilai Khaan, the descendan of brutal Chingis Khaan, ordered Koreans to build as many ships as they could (in fact, this order ruined the mountains in the Korean peninsula) to transport their troop. However a strong typhoon sank their fleet which loaded over 14,000 Mongolian and Korean soldiers. This historical fact made a well-known word “Kamikaze” (means “God Wind”).
Anyway, assuming you were a leader of Japan at that time, you couldn’t have avoided to have the same bad dream — If the peninsula occupied by another Mongolians, what would happen to Japan?
At least, we cannot erase the historical fact (the strong fear to the Russians) and should not judge the decision (to occupy the penninslla before the Russians) from the 21st century standpoint. The decisions made by those Japanese leaders should be discussed and addressed only in the correct historical context — before the WWII, the world was in the Imperialism-era. What I do mean is that it is too easy just blaming them (because we all know what happens after all), but not wise.
4:19 pm on January 7th, 2007 4
Let’s say Japanese were really afraid of attack from Korea so they colonized it. Let’s accept that as a sake of argument. Now can you explain Japan’s attack on China, attack on Philippines, attack on Indochina, attack on Pearl Harbor, alliance with Hitler (bloodiest dictator known to mankind), and near attacks and threats on India and Australia? Were those self defense too? Please, I’m getting a little tired of the Japan as the victim mentality, when they themselves were the aggressors.
4:20 pm on January 7th, 2007 5
Hello(Annyon),everyone!
>Let’s say Japanese were really afraid of attack from Korea so they colonized it
Are you kidding??
Please look at these photos.
Before japanese annexation.
?http://koreaphoto.hp.infoseek.co.jp/other.html
During Japanese annexation
?http://www.geocities.com/eastasianissues/
Why were japanese pepole in those days afraid of attack from Korea ?
Thus,those who say such an idiot thing are …
4:40 pm on January 7th, 2007 6
Tom, my comments are for the two GI Korea’s sentecenses. I was arguing those specific histroic events; yes those dicisions are just history now. I wouldn’t say all of the issues you pointed out were self-defence activities.
Although I didn’t mean to address those issues you listed, let me summarize my point in this way. Assuming you decide to across a line, very important one which is very hard to break through. Once you made it, there would be no retreat, since you had to sacrifice your families or friend for it.
After occupying, because the Japanese leaders and military afraid of losing the peninsulla, they invaded Manchuria (by the way, did you know western countries including USA asked Japan to send troop to China just after the WW I?). Later, most industrized countries including Japan needed stable oil supplies, however western countries (UK, France, Netherlands, USA) dominated most oil fields (they threatened Japan to stop oil supplies). So they invaded Malaysia, and so on continuing to the final end. So, unfortunately, those Asian countries besides Japan were just a playing field for big players for the game. Apparently not wise, if we think about those dicisions *now*.
That’s what happend. Of course, eventually it turned out a catastrophe for many nationals, not only for Chineses, Koreans, but also for Japaneses; US dropped two atomic bombs on the Japanese soil to end the war once for all.
Tom, that was the game rule in the Imeperial-era; All or Nothing. Yes, Japan lost the game in the final stage.
We see many resembling cases in history, not only in Eastern Asia, but also in Europe. Winners are always applaused, loosers are always get contempt. This is also a part of the rule.
It’s hard to predict who across the line next time; however, in my opinion, Iraq hardly had a qualification to do it. Let us see who plays next.
P.S. please note that we Japanese are not in a mood to think about for playing the same game again. It was a hard lesson we do not want to take once more.
4:41 pm on January 7th, 2007 7
In my post and the counter post from Tom, we are discussing about if the Korea peninsula was occupied by the Russians as the laucher to attack Japan.
We didn’t discuss about the possibility the Koreans would have invaded Japan.