How Do the Japanese Teach About WWII?

Regarding
the reception of World War II, especially within the educational
system of countries that participated in the war, one would expect
that many broad facts are common knowledge and, as happens with
most all wars in history, each nation biases things a bit to make
themselves look better in their own history books, regardless of
what actually happened. As we recently covered, however, the
Germans and WWII are a rather interesting exception to this rule,
see our video How Do the Germans Teach About WWII? This all brings
us to a top voted question from that video- How does one of
Germany’s chief allies in that war, Japan, teach about WWII and
their country’s part in the historic conflict?

This is seemingly asked as, while perhaps not to the scale of
Germany, the Japanese military was notorious for its behavior as an
occupying army and its extreme use of force leading to enslavement
of parts of populations and widespread massacres. The scars this
period left in the formerly occupied countries are felt to this
day, not only in history books but also in works of art and
literature (such as ‘Dragon Seed’ by Pearl S. Buck).

More specifically, these war crimes resulted in deaths of
between 3 and 14 million people and include systematic
extermination, such as the massacre at Nanjing in late 1937/38. At
the time, Nanjing was the capital of China, and the death toll is
estimated at between 50.000 and 300.000 people. Sometimes, specific
groups were targeted, such as the Hui people. Furthermore, virtual
enslavement of people took place: as laborers or in forced
prostitution. For example, the use of sex slaves known as “comfort
women” was systematic and widespread in Korea, China, Thailand and
many other countries under the yoke of the Japanese at the
time.

Additionally, captives were used for experimentation. Most
notorious is Unit 731, a military unit established by an imperial
order that conducted experiments on civilians. Building from the
ashes, literally, of a previous program, the “Epidemic Prevention
and Water Purification Department of the Kwantung Army” (Unit 731
for short) was authorized in 1936. Bases were established at
various places in China, including at Pingfang and Hsinking.

Referring to their victims as maruta, meaning logs, the
researchers experimented on, apparently, anyone they could get
their hands on: Chinese, Russians, Koreans, Mongolians, Pacific
Islanders, other South East Asians and even a few American
prisoners of war all fell victim to the doctors at the camps.
Taking the scientific method to new lows, the researchers in unit
731 conducted a variety of experiments:

For example- Effects of Lethal Diseases. Victims were purposely
infected with fatal, contagious diseases like the bubonic plague so
researchers could learn exactly how the diseases affected the human
body; because they feared that decomposition (which begins
immediately once a person dies) might corrupt tissues, they
dissected their victims alive. Likewise, because they worried that
drugs might blemish their findings, the victims were given no
anesthetic. Rather, they were vivisected while fully conscious of
what was happening.

Next up we have Limb Amputation The scientists wanted to learn
the limits of the human body, and, so, conducted a number of tests
on their victim’s arms and legs. Sometimes, the limbs were frozen
and thawed in order to study how frostbite and gangrene developed.
At other times, limbs were cut off and sewn back onto the other
side of the body. In a few experiments, when the limbs were
removed, researchers just observed the loss of blood.

Moving on from there, many victims had all or part of their
organs removed, and some even had organs detached, then
re-attached, in unique ways nature never intended. Experiments were
also conducted with high pressure, poisonous chemical exposure,
centrifuges, burning, blood infusions from animals, burying and
x-rays. Of course, since the purpose of these tests was to
determine how much a body could withstand, the experiments would
generally continue until the test subject was dead.

Given all of this, it may or may not surprise you to hear from
people raised in Japan that they hardly learned 20th century
Japanese history in class. For example, in a BBC report from 2013,
it is noted that one major Japanese school’s history book contains
only 19 out of 357 pages dealing with events between 1931 and 1945,
with, for example, the Nanjing massacre occupying only one line. As
Historian Stephen E. Ambrose noted, “The Japanese presentation of
the war to its children runs something like this: One day, for no
reason we ever understood, the Americans started dropping atomic
bombs on us”.

But is this actually an accurate summation or simply cherry
picked examples by the victors?

To really dive into it, it’s necessary to understand a little
bit about the school systems of Japan.

It turns out what you learn as a student in Japan can be
directly related to which school you attend, but also in which
decade you were born. In Japan – unlike, say, most EU countries –
the books used in schools are issued by private companies instead
of a central authority. The Ministry of Education’s role is limited
to the approval of the various books. Subsequently, each school
district can then choose a book from the list of approved material.
This system was initially thought of as a beneficiary step in the
aftermath of the World War, as it represented one aspect of
spreading American capitalistic views of privatization in Japan. It
also, at least on the surface, prevented the interference of the
political system in education, which at the time seemed like a good
idea, since this political system was born and raised within the
recently defeated Japanese Empire.

However, as previously alluded, the government still has a say
in the process, since a special board within the Ministry of
Education carries the task of approving the content of the
textbooks before making them available on the book-list. At this
step, it has used its power to reject drafts for reasons that are
seen as controversial. Allegedly, simply mentioning wrong-doings
committed by the Japanese Empire before 1945 has in some instances
constituted enough reason for exclusion from the school textbook
lists. These cases are found not just in the 1950s but also in the
2000s. An important note, it is not the mere mention of massacres –
such as that of Nanjing – that could cause the exclusion of a book,
but the use of negative tone regarding the way the Japanese Empire
acted in general at the time. So, although the government is not
officially denying the crimes, it does not seem to actively
discourage the wave of war crime deniers, even from members of the
parliament.

This seems an odd choice, especially when compared to other
defeated nations of the same war, again such as Germany, where – as
in 17 other European countries – denying the holocaust is
explicitly against the law. Furthermore, in the education system of
these countries, the war crimes are dealt with in excruciating
details, and not only in history class, but extending to almost all
other subjects, maybe only maths and physics aside.

As for directly after the war, unlike the Nazi regime in Germany
or the fascist administration in Italy, the defeated leadership of
Japan could not be used as an easily isolated political scapegoat
to attribute all of the nation’s crimes to. In fact, the leadership
of Japan did not seem to change as dramatically as in other axis
countries after the war. The figurehead of the Emperor Hirohito for
example remained in place, although deprived of many of his powers,
and abdicating his “Godhood”. The result is that the newly formed
democracy had many links to a period which the Japanese wanted and
perhaps still want to be proud of. In contrast to the European axis
powers, the Japanese Empire did not have a predecessor which could
be used as a basis for a new – or re-established – system of
government.