Reminder of belligerent past

Though the rebellion failed, it accelerated Japan's race toward fascism. In November 1936, Tokyo and Berlin signed a defense pact, which was joined by Italy the following year when Japan launched an all-out war on China. The world knows what followed.

In 1945, the combined forces of the United States, the erstwhile Soviet Union and China ended Japan's half a century of militarism. Since then, Japan has changed so much, yet so little. The US-imposed "peace constitution", though widely seen as proof of a pacifist Japan, was never really accepted by post-war Japanese elites.

Perhaps, this is logical, because most of Japan's wartime elements, unlike their German counterparts, escaped punishment, thanks to the "reversal" of the occupation policy in 1947, the year that also saw the start of the Cold War. Emperor Hirohito, for example, was a cheerleader for almost all of Japan's wartime policies, but the occupation authorities in Japan extolled him as a "cute" marine scientist.

Japan's ultra-nationalists, the main social force during the rebellious 1930s, were down (without power temporarily) but never out. Though a minority in today's Japan, they are still the most vocal, active, determined and persistent elements defending Japan's wartime policies. They deny the atrocities that Japan committed on other countries before and during World War II, and take on anyone who dares to expose Japan's ugly past.

Ishihara's aggressive move on the Diaoyu Islands is the most recent act of the Japanese right wing, both in and outside the Noda government, to bury Japan's pacifist post-war constitution. This comes after Japanese right-wingers forced the revision of textbooks and Unit 731 cover-up, justified the visits to Yasukuni Shrine, and denied the inhuman exploitation of comfort women and the killings and rape in Nanjing.

In her penetrating analysis of Japan's national character (Chrysanthemum and the Sword, 1946), Ruth Benedict points out the sharply contrasting behavioral codes of the Japanese: " both aggressive and unaggressive, both militaristic and aesthetic, both insolent and polite, rigid and adaptable, submissive and resentful of being pushed around, loyal and treacherous, brave and timid, conservative and hospitable to new ways." Ishihara's move clearly shows the aggressive, militaristic, insolent and treacherous side of Japan.

Every culture has two sides to it. But few, if any, are as contradictory as Japan's. Had she been alive to see today's Japan, even Benedict would have been surprised by the country's radical switch from reluctant pacifist to the aggressive, but familiar, Japan reminiscent of the 1930s.

Perhaps the only difference between Japan's restlessness today and the 1930s is that it is on the threshold of acquiring nuclear weapons, which may well be the main reason for its current bellicosity. The stronger the reaction of Japan's neighbors, the louder the right wing cries for nuclear weapons.

Sooner or later, the world will be truly fearful of the finger on Japan’s future nukes, given its past record of extremism, inability to moderate its action once it starts, and amnesia of its past except those who nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The author is a senior fellow at the Shanghai Association of American Studies.

(China Daily 09/24/2012 page8)

Previous Page 1 2 Next Page

Previous Page 1 2 Next Page