HM the Emperor Commemorates the End of World War II

70 years ago today HM the Showa Emperor announced the end of hostilities and acceptance of the Allied demands, bringing the Second World War to an end. Their Majesties the Emperor and Empress attended a special ceremony at the Nippon Bukodan hall in the Chiyoda Ward of Tokyo which was attended by 6,517 people. There was a moment of silence at noon in solemn commemoration of the people killed in the war and all those who lost loved ones in the massive conflict. More than three million Japanese people died because of the war. The number of survivors has been dwindling rapidly in recent years so that, this year, only 14 war widows were present for the ceremony.

His Majesty the Emperor said, "On this day to commemorate the war dead and pray for peace, my thoughts are with the people who lost their precious lives in the last war and their bereaved families," His Majesty also said, "Reflecting on our past and bearing in mind the feelings of deep remorse over the last war, I earnestly hope that the ravages of war will never be repeated," Heartfelt sentiments that everyone can agree on.

Some government officials marked the occasion by visiting Yasukuni Shrine where all those who lost their lives in the service of the Emperor are memorialized. Former Tokyo Governor Shintaro Ishihara visited the shrine and stated that he would like for HM the Emperor to do so as well. The current Emperor has never visited Yasukuni Shrine though other members of the Imperial Family have made offerings there on his behalf. Prime Minister Abe did not visit the shrine this year due to the habit of the Chinese and Korean governments of trying to make an international incident out of every such visit. However, another government official made offerings at the shrine on behalf of Mr. Abe and stated that the Prime Minister's feelings about Yasukuni Shrine and his gratitude toward the Japanese war dead have not changed.

Mikasa Princesses Visit Yasukuni Shrine

Last Wednesday Their Imperial Highnesses Princess Akiko and Princess Yoko of Mikasa visited the historic Yasukuni Shrine on the occasion of the Spring Grand Ritual of the Shrine, paying their respects to the honored war dead of Japan from throughout the modern era. Despite what is often published in the media, Yasukuni Shrine is not about honoring "war criminals". It was built in the Meiji era to house the spirits of all those who have given their lives for the Emperor and the country of Japan. Many non-Japanese are enshrined at Yasukuni and it includes those who died in the Satsuma Rebellion, the Sino-Japanese War, the Russo-Japanese War, the First World War, the China Incident and the Pacific War. Nearly two and half million names, including men, women and children are enshrined there. It only became controversial in 1978 when the names of 14 men executed for war crimes were enshrined there, without prior consultation with the Emperor. This caused undue upset in some quarters and after that time HM the Showa Emperor stopped visiting the Shrine and the current Emperor has, likewise, never done so. It has become more controversial since then as foreign countries, particularly China and South Korea, issue public protests any time that anyone of any significance or notoriety visits the Shrine simply to pay their respects to those who paid the ultimate price in defending their country and way of life. For the princesses to visit should be seen as nothing more than an admirable act of piety.

Arguments Defending the Yasukuni Shrine

Recently, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe chose not to visit the Yasukuni Shrine, honoring war dead, on the occasion of the end of the Greater East Asian War (or World War II) when it would have been appropriate to do so. This was taken by most commentators as a gesture of goodwill on his part towards those governments, particularly mainland China and South Korea which most frequently and vociferously criticize any Japanese person of importance for visiting. It remains to be seen if this goodwill gesture will earn for Japan any goodwill in return, though, I have my doubts. I have no doubt, however, that the usual criticism regarding visits to Yasukuni Shrine are themselves an affront to the very ideals that both the Chinese and South Korean governments claim to champion. This is true because both countries claim to uphold the ideal of freedom of religion, though in regards to the current government of the People’s Republic of China, no serious person in the world would consider that claim to be genuine. Nonetheless, both protest to have respect for the freedom of religion for the peoples of their two republics and yet both grant themselves the power to dictate to the people of a foreign country where they can and cannot attend religious services. This makes such criticism the purest hypocrisy.

Unfortunately, some people in Japan, well-meaning and with the best of intentions, at times respond to this in an unproductive way. The whole controversy, of course, revolves around the fact that some of the veterans whose names are enshrined at Yasukuni were convicted of war crimes by the Allied powers following the Second World War and some well-meaning Japanese attempt to refute this by stating that the Japanese government does not recognize the verdicts convicting these men of war crimes and so, insofar as Japan is concerned, they are not war criminals in spite of the fact that Article 11 of the San Francisco peace treaty to which Japan agreed states that the verdicts were accepted. That, however, is completely immaterial and should not be used as an argument in defense of visiting the Yasukuni Shrine. No country would expect that the status of war criminals would depend on the mutual agreement of both the winning and the losing powers and likewise this only provides further encouragement to those in the Chinese and Korean republics for claiming that Japan is in denial about certain points in Japanese history. So, in effect, this is an argument that actually works against Japan and to the benefit of those endlessly trying to besmirch the reputation of Japan and to shackle it forever with the negative image of World War II.

Instead, I would focus on the issue of the religious freedom of all people to pray and worship wherever they please and on the justice of the convictions themselves. The facts of history cannot be changed and the facts are that these men were convicted of war crimes and that these men were enshrined at Yasukuni. It is a fact that Japan lost the war, the Empire of Japan was dissolved and the new State of Japan was established and which was forced to submit to the victors of the war in a number of areas. Those are all facts but what is also a fact is that certainly not all of the men convicted of war crimes were truly guilty nor was the process truly just. The facts of the individual cases is what must be used to refute the accusations at those men the Allies judged to be war criminals and often enough there are examples of legal experts from the Allied countries, as diverse as India and the United States, which denounced them at the time for being unjust. In this regard, the facts are all on the side of Japan and while it would take too long to go into detail about every individual case, the most prominent may serve as an example.

Of all those convicted for war crimes, none was so well known around the world as the former general and war-time Prime Minister Hideki Tojo. All of the crimes for which Tojo was convicted amount to “waging aggressive/unprovoked war” against the various Allied nations and to authorizing the inhumane treatment of Allied prisoners. Every one of these cases can be easily refuted by the facts. Regardless of what opinion one may have of General Hideki Tojo, the fact is that he was certainly not a war criminal by any accepted standard of justice. In the first place, none of the aggressive action undertaken by Japan against China, the United States, Great Britain or the Netherlands was “unprovoked”. It was Chinese (presumably communist) forces which provoked hostilities with Japan at the infamous Marco Polo Bridge Incident, it was the US, UK and Netherlands that placed crippling sanctions on Japan which forced either the surrender of national independence or military action on the part of Japan and in the case of France, the original occupation of parts of French Indochina was undertaken with the permission of the French government. There is also the fact, which is now available to the public, that President Roosevelt authorized the bombing of Japan several months before Pearl Harbor was attacked, which is clear evidence of an intention to wage aggressive war on Japan. This, of course, brings up the most obvious point that for justice to exist it must be equally applied and if Tojo is to be convicted of war crimes for authorizing the invasion and occupation of territories not at war with Japan, then most of the Allied leaders would also have to be held to be guilty as well. Finally, on the issue of authorizing the mistreatment of Allied prisoners, there is simply no evidence that this was the case. It is undeniable that many Allied prisoners were treated inhumanely and in more than a few cases with considerable cruelty, however, there is no evidence that this was ordered or authorized by the Prime Minister and there are also some cases of Allied prisoners being treated humanely and with compassion.

Simply put, in a great many cases, Japanese leaders were being convicted of crimes that were only declared to be crimes retroactively and for which they alone were to be held responsible for even though others, during and before the war, had carried the same or similar actions. Those are the facts and those can be used to make a strong and irrefutable defense of those attending the Yasukuni Shrine. Saying that the Japanese government passed a bill denying their guilt does not help the matter. It also does not help to try to employ the same double-standard used by the enemies of Japan. This most often occurs in regards to the United States with many claiming that the American pilots and generals who ordered and carried out the horrific bombings of Japanese cities, which killed huge numbers of civilians, as well as the atomic bombings were war criminals. This is not helpful. It is a fact that these things happened and it is a fact that these things were immensely cruel, however, it does not speak at all to the guilt or innocence of any of the Japanese who were convicted of war crimes. In all World War II, the Allies made it a point not to convict anyone of bombing civilian targets since they themselves had done the same. The Germans bombed British civilians, the British and Americans bombed German, Italian and other civilians, Americans bombed Japanese civilians and the Japanese bombed Chinese civilians. Everyone was guilty and so the matter was dropped and so it should remain. Claiming that “our” people were not war criminals but “their” people were war criminals does not win any arguments only gives the appearance of attempting to cover up guilt by deflection. What happened to all the victims of the bombings was a horror but it was never considered a war crime by anyone because to condemn one would be to condemn all.

Finally, while refuting the justice of the war crimes trials themselves and while standing up for freedom of religion, one last means of defending the Yasukuni Shrine and visits to it is to point out the injustice of claiming ‘guilt by association’. In other words, no matter what opinion one may have as to the justice or injustice of those convictions for war crimes, the inclusion of those men should not taint the memory of the multitude of people enshrined at Yasukuni. This is an argument that all people can understand and which can stand as simple common sense. Whatever was done by the 14 men convicted as Class-A war criminals, it would be an obvious injustice to dishonor the nearly two and a half million other men, women and children who are enshrined there. This must be emphasized in combination with the fact that religion is a personal thing and so to judge not only all of those enshrined but even those who visit Yasukuni Shrine because of a relative hand-full of (justly or unjustly) controversial cases would itself be an act of great unfairness and injustice. Most of all, it must be made clear that Yasukuni Shrine honors all those who have given their lives in service to His Majesty the Emperor and not, as so many in the leftist media claim, simply to honor war criminals specifically. Those I feel are the arguments that I think would work best, not those which are detrimental to the shared goal of defending the honor and integrity of the shrine and all who go there.

Who Were War Criminals?

Given all of the furor coming from mainland China and South Korea recently regarding the visit of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to Yasukuni Shrine, it is worthwhile to look at what the critics at least claim the outrage to be about; the enrollment in the shrine of the names of a number of men condemned as war criminals by the Tokyo Tribunal after World War II. Now, in the first place, it should be remembered that these are a tiny fraction of the millions of people enrolled at Yasukuni Shrine who did nothing wrong, have never been accused of doing anything wrong and who gave their lives in service to their country. It should also be remembered that Yasukuni Shrine was built and operates to remember those who lost their lives in national service and certainly not to honor war criminals or make any judgment on the deeds of each and every soul whose name is enrolled there. However, all of that being said, let us take a look at the cases of just a few of those men who were condemned as “war criminals” by the Allied forces after the war.

Already here we have discussed the fate of some men, not part of the Tokyo Trials, who were executed by the Allies as “war criminals”. There was General Tomoyuki Yamashita  who was executed for crimes he did not order nor was even aware of. This was a man who, when his troops committed crimes after the conquest of Malaysia and Singapore, personally apologized to the victims and who had his own troops shot for looting and unlawful killings. Another was General Masaharu Homma , conqueror of the U.S. forces in The Philippines, who was executed for crimes committed by troops not even under his command. On the contrary, General Homma had ordered his soldiers to treat the Filipinos as friends, took precautions to prevent misbehavior by his troops and who was removed from his command for being too lenient toward the enemies Japan was at war with. These men were certainly not war criminals but were more likely executed for the simple fact that they had both inflicting very embarrassing defeats on the two major countries at war with Japan.

What about some of the others, condemned as war criminals by the Tokyo Tribunal who are enrolled in Yasukuni Shrine? Most were convicted of waging or conspiring to wage an aggressive war, something which was not against the law at the time nor is it against the law today. Were that the case, most of the Allies would have been guilty as well. But what else can tell us what kind of men these were. There was Colonel Seishiro Itagaki, a man who actually submitted a formal proposal to the Imperial Japanese government to refuse any participation with the anti-Semitic policies of Nazi Germany; a proposal which was accepted, even while Japan and Germany were in a diplomatic partnership. There was Mr. Yosuke Matsuoka, former Japanese delegate to the League of Nations and former Foreign Minister. When he was the president of the Manchuria Railway Company he gave passage to Jewish refugees fleeing persecution in Europe and the Soviet Union free of charge. Far from wanting war, when it broke out, he said that signing the Axis pact was the greatest mistake of his life. Most prominent of all though was surely General Hideki Tojo, wartime prime minister of Japan. This was the man who, when Japan’s Axis partner Germany demanded that Japan stop allowing Jewish refugees to escape via the Manchuria Railway Company, refused to do so and continued the Japanese policy of helping Jews fleeing persecution rather than assisting Germany in arresting them.

Were these the actions of war criminals? Furthermore, if waging an aggressive war was ground for conviction as a war criminal, why were there no trials for the many aggressive wars waged by the Allies? Even in the World War II years, the Soviets had invaded Poland along with Germany, they had invaded Finland, invaded and conquered Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, they had occupied Mongolia and briefly invaded western China. They had also participated, along with the British, in the invasion and occupation of neutral Iran. Britain and America had both invaded French Algeria even though neither was at war with France and that was particularly hypocritical given that the Japanese occupation of French Indochina was cited by the U.S. and Britain as the reason for the freezing of Japanese assets and the embargo on trade with Japan, cutting off Japan from 80% of all the resources Japan needed even though, unlike the Allied invasion of Algeria, the Japanese occupation of Indochina was done with the permission of the French government.

Unfortunately, in any war, there are almost invariably atrocities that are committed. However, most of the time (excepting cases such as the Holocaust) these are not matters of official policy but rather criminal activity or negligence by low level officials. War is brutal and often even the most benevolent powers have troops that commit brutalities. Yet, all too often those who actually commit these misdeeds go unpunished and it rises to a different level, one of hypocrisy and double-standards when the victor seeks to punish a defeated enemy for crimes they themselves have committed as well. The Allies were certainly not blameless. The Soviet Union was ruled by one of the most murderous dictators in human history and even among the western Allies there were men like Sir Arthur Harris who admitted that his bombing campaign in Germany was primarily aimed at killing as many German civilians as possible. There were blockades that starved whole populations, for the United States there was the fire-bombing of Japan and finally the two atomic bombings that killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, men, women, children, the elderly and helpless along with all the rest. If some are to be singled out as “war criminals” there should be one standard of justice applied equally to all. Since when did that become a controversial statement or an unreasonable demand? Consider that the next time someone brings up the subject of the war criminals enrolled at Yasukuni Shrine.

When a Prime Minister Prays

China and Korea are throwing a tantrum again. Why is it this time? Because, in keeping with tradition, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visited the Yasukuni Shrine to pray for the souls of all those who gave their lives in the service of HM the Emperor and the nation of Japan and, as we have already established, these countries do not believe anyone in Japan should have freedom of religion, the freedom to worship how and where they choose. This is a freedom they claim to give their own people (in the case of China a largely false claim) but they do not think it should be allowed in Japan. Why is this? Because, as the Chinese and Korean republics tell their own people and as most of the biased news media of the world reports it, they say that the shrine honors "war criminals". Of course, that is absurd. The shrine honors all who gave their lives, it was not built just to honor war criminals. It is true that some of those whose names are listed there among the dead are some who were convicted as war criminals by the Allied forces after World War II. But if people would educate themselves, they would see that this is not so simple. After all, we have already detailed how men like General Yamashita and General Homma were falsely executed for war crimes, blamed for atrocities they did not order or even know about and both men who fought honorably and did everything they could to treat friend and foe alike humanely. Even if one considers someone like General Hideki Tojo just consider that he was executed for the crime of "waging aggressive war" in violation of international law -except that there was no such international law at the time these events happened and if waging an aggressive war makes someone a war criminal then all of the Allied countries would be guilty as well. Those quick to take offense should also remember that many Koreans and even Chinese are also honored in the Yasukuni Shrine because they served alongside the Imperial Japanese forces in the war as well. China and Korea should stop trying to twist the facts and distort history just to encourage prejudice and bigotry against Japan. Especially in Korea, this is a time when all neighbors of Communist China are in increasing danger and should be coming together in mutual support. PM Abe has said he wants peace and has reached out to achieve it only to have his hand slapped away. As long as goodwill is met with such distortions and hostility, Japan has no other choice that to guard her own security carefully.

In Honorable Memory

On this day in 1945 the representatives of His Majesty the Emperor of Japan signed the official surrender to the representatives of the Allied nations, officially ending World War II. As such, it is an appropriate time to remember and honor all of those who gave their lives in honorable service to the Emperor, showing great valor and self-sacrifice under the most difficult circumstances. May they never be forgotten.

HM the Showa Emperor visiting Yasukuni Shrine

HM the Emperor of Manchukuo visiting Yasukuni Shrine