BACKGROUND OF ‘COMFORT WOMEN’ ISSUE. Yomiuri Newspaper, Tokyo, Japan
Filed under: IANFU 'comfort women',Japan,Korea 01/04/2007

BACKGROUND OF ‘COMFORT WOMEN’ ISSUE / Comfort station originated in govt-regulated ‘civilian prostitution’

The Yomiuri Shimbun(Yomiuri news paper, Tokyo, Japan)

Controversy over the so-called comfort women has been inflamed again. The U.S. House of Representatives has been deliberating a draft resolution calling for the Japanese government to apologize over the matter by spurning the practice as slavery and human trafficking. Why has such a biased view of the issue prevailed? The Yomiuri Shimbun carried in-depth reports on the issue Tuesday. The writers are Masanobu Takagi, Hiroaki Matsunaga and Emi Yamada of the political news department. Starting today, The Daily Yomiuri will carry the stories in three installments.

To discuss the comfort women issue, it is indispensable to understand the social background of the time when prostitution was authorized and regulated by the government in Japan. Prostitution was tacitly permitted in limited areas up until 1957, when the law to prevent prostitution was enforced.

Comfort women received remuneration in return for sexual services at so-called comfort stations for military officers and soldiers. According to an investigation report publicized by the government on Aug. 4, 1993, on the issue of comfort women recruited into sexual service for the Japanese military, there is a record mentioning the establishment of such a brothel in Shanghai around 1932, and additional similar facilities were established in other parts of China occupied by the Imperial Japanese Army.

Some of them were under the direct supervision of the military authorities, but many of the brothels catering to soldiers were privately operated.

Modern historian Ikuhiko Hata, a former professor at Nihon University, says the comfort women system should be defined as the “battleground version of civilian prostitution.”

Comfort women were not treated as “paramilitary personnel,” unlike jugun kangofu (military nurses) and jugun kisha (military correspondents). During the war, comfort women were not called “jugun ianfu” (prostitutes for troops). Use of such generic terminology spread after the war. The latter description is said to have been used by writer Kako Senda (1924-2000) in his book titled “Jugun Ianfu” published in 1973. Thereafter, the usage of jugun ianfu prevailed.

In addition to Japanese women, women from the Korean Peninsula and Taiwan, both then under Japanese colonial rule, and China, the Philippines, Indonesia and other countries invaded by the Imperial Japanese Army were recruited as comfort women.

Hata estimates that 40 percent of the wartime comfort women were Japanese, 30 percent Chinese and other nationalities and 20 percent Korean.

The total number of comfort women has yet to be determined exactly.

According to a report compiled by Radhika Coomaraswany of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights in 1996, there were 200,000 comfort women from the Korean Peninsula alone. The figure in the report was based on information Coomaraswany had obtained in North Korea. But this report contained many factual errors, and its quoted sources lacked impartiality. Foreign Minister Taro Aso rejected the figure of 200,000 as “lacking objective evidence.”

The reasons cited for the need for comfort women and wartime brothels are as follows:

– To prevent military officers and soldiers from raping women and committing other sex crimes in occupied areas.

– To prevent venereal disease from spreading through troops who would otherwise contact local prostitutes who did not receive periodic medical checks.

– To prevent military secrets from being leaked by limiting the women who provided sexual services to officers and soldiers to recruited comfort women.

Such a system and the use of wartime brothels generally are not limited only to the Imperial Japanese military.

The U.S. troops that occupied Japan after the war used brothels provided by the Japanese side. There was a case in which U.S. military officials asked the Japanese authorities to provide women for sexual services. During the Vietnam War, brothels similar to those established for the former Japanese military were available to U.S. troops, a U.S. woman journalist has pointed out.

Hata said: “There were wartime brothels also for the German troops during World War II. Some women were forced into sexual slavery. South Korean troops had brothels during the Korean War, according to a finding by a South Korean researcher.”

(Mar. 31, 2007)

BACKGROUND OF ‘COMFORT WOMEN’ ISSUE / No hard evidence of coercion in recruitment of comfort women

The Yomiuri Shimbun

This is the second installment on the so-called “comfort women” controversy. The U.S. House of Representatives has been deliberating a draft resolution calling for the Japanese government to apologize over the matter by spurning the practice as slavery and human trafficking. Why has such a biased view of the issue prevailed?

The issue of the so-called comfort women has been brought up repeatedly because misunderstandings that the Japanese government and the Imperial Japanese Army forced women into sexual servitude have not been completely dispelled.

The government has admitted the Imperial Japanese Army’s involvement in brothels, saying that “the then Japanese military was, directly or indirectly, involved in the establishment and management of the comfort stations and the transfer of comfort women.” The “involvement” refers to giving the green light to opening a brothel, building facilities, setting regulations regarding brothels, such as fees and opening hours, and conducting inspections by army doctors.

However, the government has denied that the Japanese military forcibly recruited women. On March 18, 1997, a Cabinet Secretariat official said in the Diet, “There is no evidence in public documents that clearly shows there were any forcible actions [in recruiting comfort women].” No further evidence that could disprove this statement has been found.

The belief that comfort women were forcibly recruited started to spread when Seiji Yoshida, who claimed to be a former head of the mobilization department of the Shimonoseki branch of an organization in charge of recruiting laborers, published a book titled “Watashi no Senso Hanzai” (My War Crime) in 1983. Yoshida said in the book that he had been involved in looking for suitable women to force them into sexual slavery in Jeju, South Korea. “We surrounded wailing women, took them by the arms and dragged them out into the street one by one,” he said in the book.

But researchers concluded in the mid-1990s that the stories in the book are not authentic. On March 5 this year, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said at the House of Councillors Budget Committee that Yoshida’s story does not prove that women were forcibly recruited. He said: “I think it was The Asahi Shimbun [that reported the story] that a man named Seiji Yoshida testified about his having searched for comfort women. But later [Yoshida’s testimony] was found to have been made up.”

As the comfort women issue started to take on political and diplomatic dimensions, some people in South Korea and also in Japan confused comfort women with female volunteer corps, strengthening the misbelief that there was coercion.

Female volunteer corps were, according to a historian Ikuhiko Hata’s book “Ianfu to Senjo no Sei” (Comfort Women and Sex in the Battlefield), single women aged between 12 and 40 who were mobilized to work in factories, starting in August 1944, primarily to secure necessary labor.

There were cases in which malicious brokers sweet-talked women with promises of easy money or intentionally concealed from them what life was going to be like in brothels.

The War Ministry wrote a letter, dated March 4, 1938, to the troops dispatched to China. The letter, titled “Regarding the recruiting of women at the army’s comfort stations,” said there were malicious brokers who were recruiting women in a way “similar to kidnapping.”

It said, “Nothing should be overlooked so that the military’s prestige and social orders are maintained.” The letter indicates how the Imperial Japanese Army tried to make sure that women were not forcibly recruited.

However, in the confusion of war, elite Imperial Japanese Army soldiers who were on the fast track for officer status sent detained Dutch women to a brothel in Indonesia. The incident came to be known as the Semarang incident.

The Imperial Japanese Army Headquarters closed down the brothel immediately after learning of the incident, and soldiers involved received severe punishment–some were sentenced to death–at a war crimes court convened by the Dutch Army after the war.

(Mar. 31, 2007)

BACKGROUND OF ‘COMFORT WOMEN’ ISSUE / Kono’s statement on ‘comfort women’ created misunderstandingThe Yomiuri Shimbun

This is the third and last installment on the so-called “comfort women” controversy. The U.S. House of Representatives has been deliberating a draft resolution calling for the Japanese government to apologize over the matter by spurning the practice as slavery and human trafficking. Why has such a biased view of the issue prevailed?
What made the issue of “comfort women” a political and diplomatic one was an article in the Jan. 11, 1992, morning edition of The Asahi Shimbun. The newspaper reported that official documents and soldiers’ diaries that proved the wartime Japanese military’s involvement in the management of brothels and the recruitment of comfort women had been found at the library of the Defense Ministry’s National Institute for Defense Studies.

The article said Koreans accounted for about 80 percent of comfort women from the time that brothels were established and that the women, said to have totaled 80,000 to 200,000, were forcibly recruited under the name of volunteer corps after the Pacific War broke out.

As the newspaper’s report came out immediately before then Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa’s visit to South Korea, it triggered anger among the South Korean public. During his visit to the nation, Miyazawa met with then South Korean President Roh Tae Woo and was quoted as telling him, “It can’t be denied that the Japanese military–in some way–was involved in the recruitment of comfort women and the management of comfort stations.”

On July 6, 1992, then Chief Cabinet Secretary Koichi Kato released the results of a study showing that the wartime military was directly involved in such things as the operation of “comfort stations,” but documents to prove that forcible recruitment actually took place were not found.

But as South Korea’s criticism over Japan’s actions continued, the government issued an official statement on the issue on Aug. 4, 1993, which became known as the Kono statement, after the government official who delivered it, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono.

But Kono’s statement included ambiguous expressions and gave the impression that the government had acknowledged forcible recruitment by wartime Japanese authorities.

Regarding the recruitment of comfort women, the statement said: “The recruitment of the comfort women was conducted mainly by private recruiters who acted in response to the request of the military. The government study has revealed that in many cases they were recruited against their own will, through coaxing, coercion, and so on, and that, at times, administrative and military personnel directly took part in the recruitment.”

The statement also said the recruitment, transfer and control of comfort women on the Korean Peninsula was “conducted generally against their will.” This expression became a strong indication that women, in most cases, were taken in a forcible manner.

By issuing the statement, the government aimed to seek a political settlement over the issue, as South Korea pressed the Japanese government hard to recognize that forcible recruitment actually took place. Then Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Nobuo Ishihara, who was involved in compiling the statement, said, “As there were no documents to prove forcible recruitment, it was concluded, out of comprehensively made judgments based on testimonies of [former] comfort women, that [recruitment] was forceful.”

Kono’s statement did not resolve the issue. Instead, it spread misunderstanding both inside and outside the nation on the “forcible recruitment” by government authorities.

A U.N. Human Rights Commission report, compiled by Radhika Coomaraswamy, referred to comfort women as sex slaves, and called on the Japanese government to compensate these women and to punish those responsible. The report reached these conclusions partly on the grounds of Kono’s statement.

Mike Honda, a Democratic member of the U.S. House of Representatives who led lawmakers in submitting a draft resolution denouncing Japan over the comfort women issue, also referred to Kono’s statement as a basis for the draft resolution.

However, observers have pointed out, and The Yomiuri Shimbun reported on the morning edition of March 16, that there are certain factors regarding Honda’s electoral district–such an increase in the number of residents of Chinese or South Korean origins, while the number of Japanese-origin residents has decreased–that may be behind why the Japanese-American lawmaker of California is leading such an initiative.

Given the Kono statement, the government in July 1995 established an incorporated foundation called the Asian Women’s Fund. It has provided a total of about 1.3 billion yen in compensation for 364 former comfort women. Letters of apology from successive prime ministers–Ryutaro Hashimoto, Keizo Obuchi, Yoshiro Mori and Junichiro Koizumi–also were sent to those women.

On Oct. 5 at the House of Representatives Budget Committee, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe indicated a stance to “inherit” Kono’s statement in principle, while denying forcible recruitment by government authorities.


Topic : Japanese culture - Genre : ForeignCountries

●the United States and the Soviet Union -World War Ⅱ

WAR RESPONSIBILITY--delving into the past (17) / Responsibility of U.S., Soviet Union
The Yomiuri Shimbun Aug. 15, 2006

The war responsibility of the United States and the Soviet Union in the Showa War has barely been discussed.

The United States killed about 88,000 civilians and others in the Great Tokyo Air Raid of March 10, 1945, and made many similar raids across the country. In addition, the United States dropped two atomic bombs on Japan, killing about 140,000 in Hiroshima and about 74,000 in Nagasaki.

Before those attacks, the U.S. forces examined how many incendiaries were necessary to incinerate Japanese cities by air raids of B-29 bombers. Some evidence shows U.S. President Harry Truman considered limiting the atomic bombs' targets to military facilities and soldiers. In reality, however, he ordered the atomic bombs dropped on the cities without an official warning.

Were the incendiary attacks and atomic bombings necessary although Japan's capacity to keep fighting was on the verge of collapse?

Helen Mears, a Japan expert and former member of the Advisory Committee for the Labor Bureau of the General Headquarters of the Occupation Forces, pointed out in her book, "Mirror for Americans, Japan," that the U.S. authorities made policy decisions based on an exaggerated image that portrayed the Japanese people as the most militaristic in the world--in spite of the fact that Japan's defeat was inevitable.

Then U.S. Air Force Gen. Curtis LeMay, who ordered the massive incendiary attack on Tokyo, said after World War II: "I suppose if I had lost the war, I would have been tried as a war criminal. Fortunately, we were on the winning side."

Meanwhile, the Soviet Union declared war against Japan on Aug. 8, 1945, and attacked the Kwantung Army in Manchuria (now northeastern China) on Aug. 9, the day the United States dropped an atomic bomb on Nagasaki. Since the Japanese-Soviet Neutrality Pact was binding until April 1946, the Soviet entry into the war was an obvious violation of the pact.

On Aug. 14, Japan accepted the Potsdam Declaration and subsequently notified its acceptance to the Allied Forces. However, the Soviet forces continued fighting. They perpetrated all kinds of atrocities against not only the Japanese forces but also Japanese and Chinese citizens.

The Soviet forces gave up its plan to occupy Hokkaido in the face of U.S. opposition, but they occupied the Japanese northern territories--Etorofu, Kunashiri, Shikotan islands and the Habomai group of islets--between Aug. 28 through Sept. 5, despite the fact that Japan signed surrender documents on Sept. 2.

After giving up Hokkaido, Soviet leader Josef Stalin on Aug. 23 ordered Japanese soldiers and civilians to be sent as prisoners of war to Siberian internment camps, mainly for forced labor. About 575,000 Japanese soldiers and civilians were detained there and forced to work under brutal conditions. Records show at least 55,000 people died during their forced detention.

Topic : Japanese culture - Genre : ForeignCountries

●Was Japan an Aggressor Nation? 1900-1945

Was Japan an Aggressor Nation?
by Tamogami Toshio (Chief of Staff,JASDF)

Under the terms of the US-Japan Security Treaty, American troops are stationed within
Japan.Nobody calls this an American invasion of Japan. That is because it is based on a treatyagreed upon between two nations.

Our country is said to have invaded the Chinese mainland and the Korean peninsula in the
prewar period, but surprisingly few people are aware that the Japanese army was also stationed in these countries on the basis of treaties. The advance of the Japanese army onto the Korean peninsula and Chinese mainland from the latter half of the 19th century on was not a unilateral advance without the understanding of those nations.

The current Chinese government obstinately insists that there was a “Japanese invasion,” but Japan obtained its interests in the Chinese mainland legally under international law through the Sino-Japanese War, the Russo-Japanese War, and so on, and it placed its troops there based on treaties in order to protect those interests.

There are those who say that Japan applied pressure and forced the Chinese to sign the treaty,thus invalidating it, but back then – and even now – there were no treaties signed without some amount of pressure.

The Japanese army was subjected to frequent acts of terrorism by Chiang Kai-shek’s
Kuomintang (KMT). Large-scale attacks on and murders of Japanese citizens occurred many
times. This would be like the Japanese Self-Defense Forces attacking the US troops stationed at the Yokota or Yokosuka military bases, committing acts of violence and murder against the American soldiers and their families – it would be unforgivable.
Despite that, the Japanese government patiently tried to bring about peace, but at every turn they were betrayed by Chiang Kai-shek.

In fact, Chiang Kai-shek was being manipulated by Comintern. As a result of the Second
United Front of 1936, large numbers of guerillas from the Communist Party of Comintern puppet Mao Zedong infiltrated the KMT. The objective of Comintern was to pit the Japanese army and the KMT against each other to exhaust them both and, in the end, to have Mao Zedong’s
Communist Party control mainland China.

Finally, our country could no longer put up with the repeated provocations of the KMT, and on August 15, 1937, the Konoe Fumimaro Cabinet declared that “now we must take determined measures to punish the violent and unreasonable actions of the Chinese army and encourage the Nanking Government to reconsider.” Our country was a victim, drawn into the Sino-Japanese War by Chiang Kai-shek.

The bombing of Zhang Zuolin’s train in 1928 was for a long time said to have been the work
of the Kwantung Army, but in recent years, Soviet intelligence documents have been discovered that at the very least cast doubt on the Kwantung Army’s role. According to such books as Mao:The Mao Zedong Nobody Knew by Jung Chang (Kodansha) 「マオ(誰も知らなかった毛沢
東)(ユン・チアン、講談社)」, Ko Bunyu Looks Positively at the Greater East Asian War
by Ko Bunyu (WAC Co.) 「黄文雄の大東亜戦争肯定論(黄文雄、ワック出版)」, and
Refine Your Historical Power, Japan edited by Sakurai Yoshiko (Bungei Shunju) 「日本よ、
「歴史力」を磨け(櫻井よしこ編、文藝春秋)」, the theory that it was actually the work
of Comintern has gained a great deal of prominence recently.

Similarly, the Marco Polo Bridge Incident on July 7, 1937, immediately prior to the start of the Sino-Japanese War, had been considered as a kind of proof of Japan’s invasion of China.

However, we now know that during the Tokyo War Trials, Liu Shaoqi of the Chinese
Communist Party told Western reporters at a press conference, “The instigator of the Marco Polo Bridge Incident was the Chinese Communist Party, and the officer in charge was me.”
If you say that Japan was the aggressor nation, then I would like to ask what country among
the great powers of that time was not an aggressor. That is not to say that because other countries were doing so it was all right for Japan to do so well, but rather that there is no reason to single out Japan as an aggressor nation.

Japan tried to develop Manchuria, the Korean Peninsula, and Taiwan in the same way it was
developing the Japanese mainland.

Among the major powers at that time, Japan was the only nation that tried to incorporate its colonies within the nation itself. In comparison to other countries, Japan’s colonial rule was very moderate.

When Imperial Manchuria was established in January 1932, the population was thirty million. That population increased each year by more than 1 million people, reaching fifty million by the end of the war in 1945.

Why was there such a population explosion in Manchuria? It was because Manchuria was a
prosperous and safe region. People would not be flocking to a place that was being invaded. The plains of Manchuria, where there was almost no industry other than agriculture, was reborn as a vital industrial nation in just fifteen years thanks to the Japanese government.

On the Korean Peninsula as well, during the thirty-five years of Japanese rule the population roughly doubled from thirteen million to twenty-five million people. That is proof that Korea under Japanese rule was also prosperous and safe. In postwar Japan, people say that the Japanese army destroyed the peaceful existence in Manchuria and on the Korean Peninsula. But in fact, through the efforts of the Japanese government and Japanese army, the people in these areas were released from the oppression they had been subjected to up until then, and their standard of living markedly improved.

Our country built many schools in Manchuria, the Korean Peninsula, and Taiwan, and
emphasized education for the native people. We left behind significant improvements to the
infrastructure that affects everyday life – roads, power plants, water supply, etc. And we
established Keijo Imperial University in Korea in 1924 as well as the Taipei Imperial University in 1928 in Taiwan.

Following the Meiji Restoration, the Japanese government established nine imperial
universities. Keijo Imperial University was the sixth and Taipei Imperial University was the seventh to be built. The subsequent order was that Osaka Imperial University was eighth (1931)and Nagoya Imperial University was ninth (1939). The Japanese government actually built imperial universities in Korea and Taiwan even before Osaka and Nagoya.

The Japanese government also permitted the enrollment of Chinese and Japanese citizens
into the Imperial Japanese Army Academy. At the Manila military tribunal following the war,
there was a lieutenant general in the Japanese army named Hong Sa-ik, a native Korean who was sentenced to death. Hong graduated in the 26th class at the Army Academy, where he was a
classmate of Lt. General Kuribayashi Tadamichi, who gained fame at Iwo Jima.

Hong was a person who rose to lieutenant general in the Imperial Japanese Army while
retaining his Korean name. One class behind him at the academy was Col. Kim Suk-won, who
served as a major in China at the time of the Sino-Japanese War. Leading a force of roughly
1,000 Japanese troops, he trampled the army from China, the former suzerain state that had been bullying Korea for hundreds of years. He was decorated by the emperor for his meritorious war service. Of course, he did not change his name.

In China, Chiang Kai-shek also graduated from the Imperial Japanese Army Academy and received training while attached to a regiment in Takada, in Niigata.

One year below Kim Suk-won at the academy was the man who would be Chiang’s staff
officer, He Yingqin. The last crown prince of the Yi dynasty, Crown Prince Yi Eun also attended the Army Academy, graduating in the 29th class. Crown Prince Yi Eun was brought to Japan as a sort of hostage at the age of ten. However, the Japanese government treated him respectfully as a member of the royal family, and after receiving his education at Gakushuin, he graduated from the Imperial Japanese Army Academy. In the army, he was promoted and served as a lieutenant general. Crown Prince Yi Eun was married to Japan’s Princess Nashimotonomiya Masako. She was a woman of nobility who previously had been considered as a potential bride for the Showa Emperor.

If the Japanese government had intended to smash the Yi dynasty, they surely would
not have permitted the marriage of a woman of this stature to Crown Prince Yi Eun.

Incidentally, in 1930, the Imperial Household Agency built a new residence for the couple.
It is now the Akasaka Prince Hotel Annex. Also, Prince Pujie, the younger brother of Puyi –the last emperor of the Qing Dynasty, who was also the emperor of Manchuria – was married to Lady Saga Hiro of the noble Saga house.

When you compare this with the countries that were considered to be major powers at the
time, you realize that Japan’s posture toward Manchuria, Korea, and Taiwan was completely
different from the colonial rule of the major powers. England occupied India, but it did not provide education for the Indian people. Indians were not permitted to attend the British military academy. Of course, they would never have considered a marriage between a member of the British royal family and an Indian. This holds true for Holland, France, America, and other countries as well.

By contrast, from before the start of World War II, Japan had been calling for harmony
between the five tribes, laying out a vision for the tribes – the Yamato (Japanese), Koreans,Chinese, Manchurians, and Mongols – to intermix and live peacefully together. At a time when racial discrimination was considered natural, this was a groundbreaking proposal. At the Paris Peace Conference at the end of World War I, when Japan urged that the abolition of racial discrimination be included in the treaty, England and America laughed it off. But if you look at the world today, it has become the kind of world that Japan was urging at the time.

Going back in time to 1901, in the aftermath of the Boxer Rebellion, the Qing Empire signed
the Boxer Protocol in 1901 with eleven countries including Japan. As a result, our country
gained the right to station troops in Qing China, and began by dispatching 2,600 troops there.

Also, in 1915, following four months of negotiations with the government of Yuan Shikai, and incorporating China’s points as well, agreement was reached on Japan’s so-called 21 Demands toward China. Some people say that this was the start of Japan’s invasion of China, but if you compare these demands to the general international norms of colonial administration by the great powers at the time, there was nothing terribly unusual about it. China too accepted the demands at one point and ratified them.

However, four years later, in 1919, when China was allowed to attend the Paris Peace
Conference, it began complaining about the 21 Demands with America’s backing. Even then,
England and France supported Japan’s position. Moreover, Japan never advanced its army
without the agreement of Chiang Kai-shek’s KMT.

The Japanese army in Beijing, which was stationed there from 1901, still comprised just
5,600 troops at the time of the Marco Polo Bridge Incident thirty-six years later. At that time,tens of thousands of KMT troops were spread out in the area surrounding Beijing, and even in terms of appearances it was a far cry from being an invasion. As symbolized by Foreign Minister Shidehara Kijuro, our country’s basic policy at the time was one of reconciliation with China,and that has not changed even today.

There are some who say that it was because Japan invaded the Chinese mainland and the
Korean Peninsula that it ended up entering the war with the United States, where it lost three million people and met with defeat; it committed an irrevocable error. However, it has also been confirmed now that Japan was ensnared in a trap that was very carefully laid by the United States in order to draw Japan into a war.

In fact, America was also being manipulated by Comintern. There are official documents
called the Venona Files, which are available on the National Security Agency (NSA) website.
It is a massive set of documents, but in the May 2006 edition of “Monthly Just Arguments” 「月刊正論」, (then) Assistant Professor Fukui of Aoyama Gakuin University offered a summary

The Venona Files are a collection of transmissions between Comintern and agents in the
United States, which the United States was monitoring for eight years, from 1940 to 1948. At the time, the Soviets were changing their codes after each message, so the United States could not decipher them. From 1943, right in the middle of the war with Japan, the United States began its decryption work. Surprisingly, it took thirty-seven years to finish the work; it was completed just before the start of the Reagan administration in 1980. However, since it was the middle of the Cold War, the Americans kept these documents classified.

In 1995, following the end of the Cold War, they were declassified and made open to the
public. According to those files, there were three hundred Comintern spies working in the
administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt, who took office in 1933. Among them, one who rose to the top was the number two official at the Treasury, Assistant Secretary Harry White. Harry White is said to have been the perpetrator who wrote the Hull note, America’s final notice to Japan before the war began. Through President Roosevelt’s good friend, Treasury Secretary Morgenthau, he was able to manipulate President Roosevelt and draw our country into a war with the United States.

At the time, Roosevelt was not aware of the terrible nature of communism. Through Harry
White, he was on the receiving end of Comintern’s maneuvering, and he was covertly offering
strong support to Chiang Kai-shek, who was battling Japan at the time, sending the Flying Tigers squadron comprised of one hundred fighter planes. Starting one and a half months prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor, the United States began covert air attacks against Japan on the Chinese mainland.

Roosevelt had become president on his public pledge not to go to war, so in order to start a war between the United States and Japan it had to appear that Japan took the first shot. Japan was caught in Roosevelt’s trap and carried out the attack on Pearl Harbor.

Could the war have been avoided? If Japan had accepted the conditions lain out by the
United States in the Hull note, perhaps the war could have been temporarily avoided. But even if the war had been avoided temporarily, when you consider the survival of the fittest mentality that dominated international relations at the time, you can easily imagine that the United States would have issued a second and a third set of demands. As a result, those of us living today could very well have been living in a Japan that was a white nation’s colony.

If you leave people alone, someday someone will create the conveniences of civilization,
such as cars, washing machines, and computers. But in the history of mankind, the relationship between the rulers and the ruled is only determined by war. It is impossible for those who are powerful to grant concessions on their own. Those who do not fight must resign themselves to being ruled by others.

After the Greater East Asia War, many countries in Asia and Africa were released from the
control of white nations. A world of racial equality arrived and problems between nations were to be decided through discussion. That was a result of Japan’s strength in fighting the Russo-Japanese War and Greater East Asia War. If Japan had not fought the Greater East War at that time, it may have taken another one hundred or two hundred years before we could have experienced the world of racial equality that we have today. In that sense, we must be grateful to our ancestors who fought for Japan and to the spirits of those who gave their precious lives for their country. It is thanks to them that we are able to enjoy the peaceful and plentiful lifestyle we have today.

On the other hand, there are those who call the Greater East Asia War “that stupid war.”
They probably believe that even without fighting a war we could have achieved today’s peaceful and plentiful society. It is as if they think that all of our country’s leaders at that time were stupid.

We undertook a needless war and many Japanese citizens lost their lives. They seem to be saying that all those who perished actually died in vain.

However, when you look back at the history of mankind, you understand that nothing is as
simple as that. Even today, once a decision is made about an international relationship it is extremely difficult to overturn that. Based on the US-Japan Security Treaty, America possesses bases even in Japan’s capital region of Tokyo. Even if Japan said they wanted those bases back,they would not be easily returned. In terms of our relationship with Russia as well, the Northern Islands remain illegally occupied even after more than sixty years.
And Takeshima remains under the effective control of South Korea.

The Tokyo Trials tried to push all the responsibility for the war onto Japan. And that mind
control is still misleading the Japanese people sixty-three years after the war. The belief is that if the Japanese army becomes stronger, it will certainly go on a rampage and invade other countries,so we need to make it as difficult as possible for the Self-Defense Forces (SDF) to act. The SDF cannot even defend its own territory, it cannot practice collective self-defense, there are many limitations on its use of weapons, and the possession of offensive weaponry is forbidden.

Compared to the militaries of other countries, the SDF is bound hand and foot and immobilized.
Unless our country is released from this mind control, it will never have a system for
protecting itself through its own power. We have no choice but to be protected by America. If we are protected by America, then the Americanization of Japan will be accelerated. Japan’s economy, its finances, its business practices, its employment system, its judicial system will all converge with the American system. Our country’s traditional culture will be destroyed by the parade of reforms.

Japan is undergoing a cultural revolution, is it not?
But are the citizens of Japan living in greater ease now or twenty years ago? Is Japan becoming a better country?

I am not repudiating the US-Japan alliance. Good relations between Japan and the United
States are essential to the stability of the Asian region. However, what is most desirable in the US-Japan relationship is something like a good relationship between parent and child, where they come to each other’s aid when needed, as opposed to the kind of relationship where the child remains permanently dependant on the parent.

Creating a structure where we can protect our country ourselves allows us to preemptively
prevent an attack on Japan, and at the same time serves to bolster our position in diplomatic negotiations. This is understood in many countries to be perfectly normal, but that concept has not gotten through to our citizens.

Even now, there are many people who think that our country’s aggression caused unbearable
suffering to the countries of Asia during the Greater East Asia War. But we need to realize that many Asian countries take a positive view of the Greater East Asia War. In Thailand, Burma,India, Singapore, and Indonesia, the Japan that fought the Greater East Asia War is held in high esteem.

We also have to realize that while many of the people who had direct contact with the
Japanese army viewed them positively, it is often those who never directly saw the Japanese
military who are spreading rumors about the army’s acts of brutality. Many foreigners have
testified to the strict military discipline of the Japanese troops as compared to those of other countries. It is certainly a false accusation to say that our country was an aggressor nation.

Japan is a wonderful country that has a long history and exceptional traditions. We, as
Japanese people, must take pride in our country’s history. Unless they are influenced by some particular ideology, people will naturally love the hometown and the country where they were born. But in Japan’s case, if you look assiduously at the historical facts, you will understand that what this country has done is wonderful. There is absolutely no need for lies and fabrications.

If you look at individual events, there were probably some that would be called misdeeds. That is the same as saying that there is violence and murder occurring today even in advanced nations.

We must take back the glorious history of Japan. A nation that denies its own history is
destined to pursue a path of decline.


Japanese translation

田母神俊雄(防衛省航空幕僚長 空将)

ア メ リ カ 合 衆 国 軍 隊 は 日 米 安 全 保 障条約により日本国内に駐留している。これをアメリカによる日本侵略とは言わない。

こ の 日 本 軍 に 対 し 蒋 介 石 国 民 党 は 頻 繁 に テロ行為を繰り返す。邦人に対する大規模な暴行、惨殺事件も繰り返し発生する。これは現在日本に存在する米軍の横田基地や横須賀基地などに自衛隊が攻撃を仕掛け、米国軍人及びその家族などを暴行、惨殺するようものであり、とても許容できるものではない。これに対し日本政府は辛抱強く和平を追求するが、その都度蒋介石に裏切られるのである。実は蒋介石はコミンテルンに動かされていた。1936 年の第2 次国共合作によりコミンテルンの手先である毛沢東共産党のゲリラが国民党内に多数入り込んでいた。コミンテルンの目的は日本軍と国民党を戦わせ、両者を疲弊させ、最終的に毛沢東共産党に中国大陸を支配させることであった。

我が国は国民党の度重なる挑発に遂に我慢しきれなくなって1937 年8 月15 日、日本の近衛文麿内閣は「支那軍の暴戻ぼうれいを膺懲ようちょうし以って南京政府の反省を促す為、今や断乎たる措置をとる」と言う声明を発表した。我が国は蒋介石により日中戦争に引きずり込まれた被害者なのである。

1928 年の張作霖列車爆破事件も関東軍の仕業であると長い間言われてきたが、近年ではソ連情報機関の資料が発掘され、少なくとも日本軍がやったとは断定できなくなった。「マオ( 誰も知らなかった毛沢東)( ユン・チアン、講談社)」、「黄文雄の大東亜戦争肯定論( 黄文雄 ワック出版)」及び「日本よ、「歴史力」を磨け( 櫻井よしこ編、文藝春秋)」などによると、最近ではコミンテルンの仕業という説が極めて有力になってきている。日中戦争の開始直前の1937 年7 月7 日の廬溝橋事件についても、これまで日本の中国侵略の証みたいに言われてきた。しかし今では、東京裁判の最中に中国共産党の劉少奇が西側の記者との記者会見で「廬溝橋の仕掛け人は中国共産党で、現地指揮官
はこの俺だった」と証言していたことがわかっている「大東亜解放戦争( 岩間弘、岩間書店)」。もし日本が侵略国家であったというのならば、当時の列強といわれる国で侵略国家でなかった国はどこかと問いたい。よその国がやったから日本もやっていいということにはならないが、日本だけが侵略国家だといわれる筋合いもない。

我 が 国 は 満 州 も 朝 鮮 半 島 も 台 湾 も 日本本土と同じように開発しようとした。当時列強といわれる国の中で植民地の内地化を図ろうとした国は日本のみである。我が国は他国との比較で言えば極めて穏健な植民地統治をしたのである。満州帝國は、成立当初の1932 年1 月には3 千万人の人口であったが、毎年100 万人以上も人口が増え続け、1945 年の終戦時には5 千万人に増加していたのである。満州の人口は何故爆発的に増えたのか。それは満州が豊かで治安が良かったからである。侵略といわれるような行為が行われるところに人が集まるわけがない。農業以外にほとんど産業がなかった満州の荒野は、わずか15年の間に日本政府によって活力ある工業国家に生まれ変わった。朝鮮
半島も日本統治下の35 年間で1 千3 百万人の人口が2 千5 百万人と約2 倍に増えている「朝鮮総督府統計年鑑」。日本統治下の朝鮮も豊かで治安が良かった証拠である。戦後の日本においては、満州や朝鮮半島の平和な暮らしが、日本軍によって破壊されたかのように言われている。しかし実際には日本政府と日本軍の努力によって、現地の人々はそれまでの圧政から解放され、また生活水準も格段に向上したのである。

我 が 国 は 満 州 や 朝 鮮 半 島 や 台 湾 に 学校を多く造り現地人の教育に力を入れた。道路、発電所、水道など生活のインフラも数多く残している。また1924 年には朝鮮に京城帝国大学、1928 年には台湾に台北帝国大学を設立した。日本政府は明治維新以降9 つの帝国大学を設立したが、京城帝国大学は6 番目、台北帝国大学は7 番目に造られた。その後8 番目が1931 年の大阪帝国大学、9 番目が1939 年の名古屋帝国大学という順である。なんと日本政府は大阪や名古屋よりも先に朝鮮や台湾に帝国大学を造っているのだ。また日本政府は朝鮮人も中国人も陸軍士官学校への入校を認めた。戦後マニラの軍事裁判で死刑になった朝鮮出身の洪思翊ホンサイクという陸軍中将がいる。この人は陸軍士官学校2 6 期生で、硫黄島で勇名をはせた栗林忠道中将と同期生である。
朝鮮名のままで帝国陸軍の中将に栄進した人である。またその1 期後輩には金キン錫源ソグォン大佐がいる。日中戦争の時、中国で大隊長であった。日本兵約1 千名を率いて何百年も虐められ続けた元宗主国の中国軍を蹴散らした。その軍功著しいことにより天皇陛下の金賜勲章を頂いている。もちろん創氏改名などしていない。中国では蒋介石も日本の陸軍士官学校を卒業し新潟の高田の連隊で隊付き教育を受けている。1 期後輩で蒋介石の参謀で何応欽カオウキンもいる。

李王朝の最後の殿下である李垠イウン殿下も陸軍士官学校の2 9 期の卒業生である。李垠イウン殿下は日本に対する人質のような形で1 0 歳の時に日本に来られることになった。しかし日本政府は殿下を王族として丁重に遇し、殿下は学習院で学んだあと陸軍士官学校をご卒業になった。陸軍では陸軍中将に栄進されご活躍された。この李垠イウン
であろう。因みに宮内省はお二人のために1930 年に新居を建設した。現在の赤坂プリンスホテル別館である。また清朝最後の皇帝また満州帝国皇帝であった溥儀フギ殿下の弟君である溥フ傑ケツ殿下のもとに嫁がれたのは、日本の華族嵯峨家の嵯峨浩妃殿下である。

こ れ を 当 時 の 列 強 と い わ れ る 国 々との比較で考えてみると日本の満州や朝鮮や台湾に対する思い入れは、列強の植民地統治とは全く違っていることに気がつくであろう。イギリスがインドを占領したがインド人のために教育を与えることはなかった。インド人をイギリスの士官学校に入れることもなかった。もちろんイギリスの王室からインドに嫁がせることなど考えられない。これはオランダ、フランス、アメリカなどの国々でも同じことである。一方日本は第2 次大戦前から族協和を唱え、大和、朝鮮、漢、満州、蒙古の各民族が入り交じって仲良く暮らすことを夢に描いていた。人種差別が当然と考えられていた当時にあって画期的なことである。

第1 次大戦後のパリ講和会議において、日本が人種差別撤廃を条約に書き込むことを主張した際、イギリスやアメリカから一笑に付されたのである。現在の世界を見れば当時日本が主張していたとおりの世界になっている。

時 間 は 遡 る が 、 清 国 は 1900 年の義和団事件の事後処理を迫られ1901 年に我が国を含む11 カ国との間で義和団最終議定書を締結した。
その結果として我が国は清国に駐兵権を獲得し当初2600名の兵を置いた「廬溝橋事件の研究(秦郁彦、東京大学出版会) 」。また1915 年には袁世凱政府との4 ヶ月にわたる交渉の末、中国の言い分も入れて、いわゆる対華21 箇条の要求について合意した。これを日本の中国侵略の始まりとか言う人がいるが、この要求が、列強の植民地支配が一
しかし4 年後の1919 年、パリ講和会議に列席を許された中国が、アメリカの後押しで対華21箇条の要求に対する不満を述べることになる。それでもイギリスやフランスなどは日本の言い分を支持してくれたのである「日本史から見
た日本人・昭和編( 渡部昇一、祥伝社)」。また我が国は蒋介石国民党との間でも合意を得ずして軍を進めたことはない。
常に中国側の承認の下に軍を進めている。1901 年から置かれることになった北京の日本軍は、36 年後の廬溝橋事件の時でさえ5600 名にしかなっていない「廬溝橋事件の研究(秦郁彦、東京大学出版会) 」。このとき北京周辺には数

さ て 日 本 が 中 国 大 陸 や 朝 鮮 半 島 を 侵 略 し たために、遂に日米戦争に突入し3 百万人もの犠牲者を出して敗戦を迎えることになった、日本は取り返しの付かない過ちを犯したという人がいる。しかしこれも今では、日本を戦争に引きずり込むために、アメリカによって慎重に仕掛けられた罠であったことが判明している。実はアメリカもコミンテルンに動かされていた。ヴェノナファイルというアメリカの公式文書がある。米国国家安全保障局( N S A )のホームページに載っている。

膨大な文書であるが、月刊正論平成18 年5 月号に青山学院大学の福井助教授(当時)が内容をかいつまんで紹介してくれている。ヴェノナファイルとは、コミンテルンとアメリカにいたエージェントとの交信記録をまとめたものである。

アメリカは1940 年から1948 年までの8年間これをモニターしていた。当時ソ連は1 回限りの暗号書を使用し
ていたためアメリカはこれを解読できなかった。そこでアメリカは、日米戦争の最中である1943 年から解読作業を開始した。そしてなんと37 年もかかって、レーガン政権が出来る直前の1980 年に至って解読作業を終えたというから驚きである。
しかし当時は冷戦の真っ只中であったためにアメリカはこれを機密文書とした。その後冷戦が終了し1995 年に機密が解除され一般に公開されることになった。
これによれば1933 年に生まれたアメリカのフランクリン・ルーズベルト政権の中には3 百人のコミンテルンのスパイがいたという。その中で昇りつめたのは財務省ナンバー2 の財務次官ハリー・ホワイトであった。

ハリー・ホワイトは日本に対する最後通牒ハル・ノートを書いた張本人であると言われている。彼はルーズベルト大統領の親友であるモーゲンソー財務長官を通じてルーズベルト大統領を動かし、我が国を日米戦争に追い込んでいく。当時ルーズベルトは共産主義の恐ろしさを認識していなかった。彼はハリー・ホワイトらを通じてコミンテルンの工作を受け、戦闘機100 機からなるフライングタイガースを派遣するなど、日本と戦う蒋介石を、陰で強力に支援していた。真珠湾攻撃に先立つ1 ヶ月半も前から中国大陸においてアメリカは日本に対し、隠密に航空攻撃を開始していたのである。

ル ー ズ ベ ル ト は 戦 争 を し な い と い う 公 約 で大統領になったため、日米戦争を開始するにはどうしても見かけ上日本に第1 撃を引かせる必要があった。日本はルーズベルトの仕掛けた罠にはまり真珠湾攻撃を決行することになる。

日本がアメリカの要求するハル・ノートを受け入れれば一時的にせよ日米戦争を避けることは出来たかもしれない。しかし一時的に戦争を避けることが出来たとしても、当時の弱肉強食の国際情勢を考えれば、アメリカから第2, 第3 の要求が出てきたであろうことは容易に想像がつく。結果として現在に生きる私たちは白人国家の植民地である日本で生活していた可能性が大である。


さ て 大 東 亜 戦 争 の 後 、 多 く の ア ジ ア 、 ア フリカ諸国が白人国家の支配から解放されることになった。人種平等の世界が到来し国家間の問題も話し合いによって解決されるようになった。それは日露戦争、そして大東亜戦争を戦った日本の力によるものである。

もし日本があの時大東亜戦争を戦わなければ、現在のような人種平等の世界が来るのがあと百年、2 百年遅れていたかもしれない。そういう意味で私たちは日本の国のために戦った先人、そして国のために尊い命を捧げた英霊に対し感謝しなければならない。
一 方 で 大 東 亜 戦 争 を 「 あ の 愚 劣 な 戦 争 」 などという人がいる。戦争などしなくても今日の平和で豊かな社会が実現できたと思っているのであろう。


これを日本が返してくれと言ってもそう簡単には返ってこない。ロシアとの関係でも北方四島は6 0 年以上不法に占拠されたままである。

東 京 裁 判 は あ の 戦 争 の 責 任 を 全 て 日本に押し付けようとしたものである。そしてそのマインドコントロールは戦後63 年を経てもなお日本人を惑わせている。



日本ではいま文化大革命が進行中なのではないか。日本国民は2 0 年前と今とではどちらが心安らかに暮らしているのだろうか。


自 分 の 国 を 自 分 で 守 る 体 制 を 整 え る こ と は、我が国に対する侵略を未然に抑止するとともに外交交渉の後ろ盾になる。諸外国では、ごく普通に理解されているこのことが我が国においては国民に理解が行き届かない。今なお大東亜戦争で我が国の侵略がアジア諸国に耐えがたい苦しみを与えたと思っている人が多い。しかし私たちは多くのアジア諸国が大東亜戦争を肯定的に評価していることを認識しておく必要がある。


日 本 と い う の は 古 い 歴 史 と 優 れ た 伝 統を持つ素晴らしい国なのだ。


Topic : Japanese culture - Genre : ForeignCountries

●Why PRC President Cannot Respond to Open Questions concerning the “Nanking Massacre”

Why PRC President Cannot Respond to Open Questions concerning the “Nanking Massacre”

The Nanking massacre controversy has been resolved with the conclusion that a big massacre never happened but in fact it was only a matter of war propaganda. This is now verified with comprehensive historical evidence.
A conclusive fact to prove this will be that P.R.C. President Hu Jintao cannot respond to “Open Questions concerning the Nanking Massacre” submitted by the Japanese investigative group “Committee for the Examination of the Facts about Nanking” (Chairman: Kase Hideaki).
The essay explains why five questions are fundamental and critical points for clarifying the Nanking incident and why the P.R.C. President cannot answer these.

Open Questions for Prime Minister Wen Jiabao:
Can You Prove There Was a Massacre in Nanking?
(Summary) by Hiromichi Moteki

The People’s Republic of China recently offered a friendly hand to its neighbor Japan.
At the same time, however, China held a poisoned dagger at the throat of Japan. It is
unfortunate that the Chinese leadership still resorts to the use of old wartime myths such
as the “Nanking massacre” to humiliate its friend and to maintain control over its citizens.

In establishing true friendship between the Chinese and Japanese people, it is hoped that
the Chinese leadership takes the first step by denouncing such myths. However, if the
leadership persists in using the “Nanking massacre” myth, it will need to address the
fundamental flaws underlying it:

1. It is curious that during the war Chairman Mao made no mention of a “Nanking
massacre,” despite obvious anti-Japanese propaganda value. The Communist
Party have not used any quotes from the father of the People’s Republic
concerning the “massacre” – because there are none.

2. On the other side, despite 300 press conferences held by the beleaguered
Nationalist Party between December 1937 and October 1938, not one mentioning
of a “Nanking massacre” – again, despite potential propaganda value.

3. Despite capture by Japanese forces, the population of Nanking remained the same
during the initial occupation, even increasing one month into occupation.

4. Furthermore, those within the city did not witness any mass murder. The best the
International Committee for the Nanking Safety Zone could do was to compile a
mere 26 allegations of murder, of which only one was witnessed.

5. What “evidence” there is of the “Nanking massacre” are photographs, although
none have stood up to rigorous scrutiny as proof of Japanese atrocities or even of
actually having been taken in Nanking.
The Japanese people patiently await the response of the Chinese leadership to these
points of fact. Rather than confront the issue, however, it is expected that everything will
be done to perpetuate the “Nanking massacre” myth, including releasing a slew of related
films around the 70th anniversary of the fall of Nanking. A “Nanking Memorial
Museum” set up by the Communist Party serves as a permanent reminder to the Chinese
that its neighbors can never be trusted. If the Chinese leadership is genuinely interested
friendship, it will quietly close this grotesque monument to historical falsification and
move forward in the light of trust.

Topic : Japanese culture - Genre : ForeignCountries

●Testimony of Douglas MacArthur-Strategy Against Japan In World War II

Strategy against Japan in world war II
the Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committees of the United States Senate – 82nd Congress, Thursday May 3, 1951

Senator HICKENLOOPER. Question No.5:Isn't your proposal for sea and air blockade of Red China the same strategy by which Americans achieved victory over the Japanese in the Pacific?

General MACARTHUR. Yes,sir.In the Pasific we bypassed them.We closed in.You must understand that Japan had an enormous population of nearly 80 million people,crowded into 4 islands.It was about half a farm population.The other half was engaged in industry.

Potentially the labor pool in Japan,both in quantity and quality,is as good as anything that I have ever known. Some place down the line they have discovered what you might call the dignity of labor, that men are happier when they are working and constructing than when they are idling.

This enormous capacity for work meant that they had to have something to work on.They built the factories, they had the labor,but they didn't have the basic materials.

There is practically nothing indigenous to Japan except the silkworm.

They lack cotton,they lack wool,they lack petoroleum products,they lack tin, they lack rubber,they lack a great many other things, all which was in the Asiatic basin.

They feared that if those supplies were cut off, there would be 10 to 12 million people unoccupied in Japan. Their purpose, therefore, in going to war was largely dictated by security.

Japanese Translation

ヒッケンルーパー上院議員 では五番目の質問です。中共(原文は赤化支那)に対し海と空とから閉鎖してしまへといふ貴官の提案は、アメリカが太平洋において日本に対する勝利を収めた際のそれと同じ戦略ではありませんか。

マッカーサー その通りです。太平洋において我々は彼らを迂回しました。我々は封じ込めたのです。日本は八千万に近い膨大な人口を抱へ、それが四つの島の中にひしめいているのだということを理解していただかなくてはなりません。その半分が農業人口で、あとの半分が工業生産に従事していました。






Topic : Japanese culture - Genre : ForeignCountries