First, a little history (you can skip this if you feel the need, but I wanted to just give a quick peek at what history I’ll be referring to): In 1941, after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in Hawaii, the United States decided to take an active part in World War II. After almost four years of fighting, (Dec. 1941 – Aug. 1945) the United States finally saw the end of the war nearing them. An estimated fifty million died during the war. (And I say “estimated” for a reason: I doubt everyone was accounted for.) President Roosevelt died in April of 1945 and the presidency was passed to Truman. President Truman gave Japan until August 3 1945 before he dropped an atomic bomb on one of their major cities. Everyone knows what happened next. There is a lot of debate still today about whether or not this act was justified or not, but invasion would have cost more lives than the bomb did. After not one but two bombings, the Japanese Prime Minister informed the Japanese public of surrender. The war was over, finally, and it was time to start the long recovery. (I also say “long” for a reason: according to an article from 2005, it would appear as if this war still isn’t behind us.)
According to an article from 2005, “the Prime Minister of Japan, attempted to appease his Asian neighbors and avoid angering Japanese nationalists yesterday by offering two separate statements on the 60th anniversary of the end of the Second World War,” (Perry). These “two separate statements” were issued to two different audiences. One of them was a written statement given to Japan’s “Asian neighbors,” and the other was a spoken message given at a ceremony attended by the Emperor and several government officials to mark the 60th anniversary of World War II. The major difference in these two statements was not that one was written while one was personally given. The difference was that the written statement, the one that had been sent abroad, “repeated an unambiguous expression of ‘deep remorse and heartfelt apology’ for Japan’s ‘colonization and aggression’ during the war,” (Perry). …what?
Maybe I’m letting my deep interest in Japanese culture and language get in the way of my rational opinion making. But I think that after sixty years, over half a century, it’s about time for everyone to stop twisting the knife of guilt and trying to squeeze out any more apologies out of a nation that has made massive strides to improve itself since the end of the war. I was perplexed when I read the phrase, “attempted to appease his Asian neighbors.” Now, I don’t think that the phrase “forgive and forget” applies to this situation. I think everyone should remember WWII and learn from that tragic history. But we can forgive, even if we don’t forget. Am I wrong? I mean, over half of the people in Japan today weren’t even alive in 1945. The prime minister referred to in this article, in fact, (who felt a necessity to apologize for Japan’s actions sixty years ago,) was born in January of 1942, which means he wasn’t even four years old when WWII ended. I understand that there are still people in Japan that harbor intolerance for non-Japanese, but there are xenophobes and ultra-nationalists in every nation across the globe. I’m aware of the crimes committed by many of the Japanese during the war. But am I the only one that believes sixty years is too long a grudge? If the United States is still pushing for apologies then we’re worse than I thought. After all, it was the United Stated that forced a hundred thousand Americans into internment camps simply because their parents were Japanese. Over sixty percent of the people sent to the camps were American citizens, born and raised in the states. The United States’ government didn’t even formally recognize that this was a horrible crime until 1983; over forty years after the order had been issued in February of 1942. As far as I’m aware, we aren’t giving heartfelt apologies every February to the thousands of people we relocated merely on the basis of race.
Now, the article I read that prompted this blog does go on to describe a scene of some “ultra-nationalists” who had gathered at the controversial Yasukuni shrine. It is my personal opinion that this article took on a very bias stance, (but then again I’m doing a similar thing in this blog, despite my attempts to be balanced. Opinions are like that.) In the article, Perry introduces the shrine as thus: “Yasukuni shrine in central Tokyo, where the country’s war dead, including executed war criminals, are worshipped as Shinto deities.”
Now here is a paragraph directly from the shrine’s main site:
“Currently, more than 2,466,000 divinities are enshrined here at Yasukuni Shrine. These are souls of men who made ultimate sacrifice for their nation since 1853 during national crises such as the Boshin War, the Seinan War, the Sino-Japanese and Russo-Japanese wars, World War I, the Manchurian Incident, the China Incident and the Greater East Asian War (World War II). These people, regardless of their rank or social standing, are considered to be completely equal and worshipped as venerable divinities of Yasukuni,” (Yasukuni).
I have also read the Japanese version of this paragraph (or that is to say, I’ve read most of it.) The Japanese site says (more or less, save for my bad translation.) “The people honored in Yasukuni Shrine are not all soldiers, but also people who aided on the battle ground, nurses, military civilians, civil officials, and the many people involved during the time of Japan’s wars.” It also says, “…the spirits of dead ancestors are protectors of the household…” Americans tend to forget how important honoring the deeds of ancestors can be in many Eastern institutions of philosophy. Also, on the Japanese site they use the word 祀られる (matsurareru) which, while it does literally mean “to be worshipped,” it’s more in the sense of “honoring,” not so much as in the sense of “godly reverence.” If that makes any sense at all.
To me, if seems more like a memorial site, (if maybe taken one-step further,) but I personally don’t have any issues with people gathering here to remember old family members that lost their lives in the war. Yes, the Japanese soldiers weren’t defending a very ethical cause, but what’s wrong with people remembering them? I don’t think it’s fair for the children in Japan to have to grow up watching their parents feel guilty for something that they didn’t even influence. To my knowledge, France isn’t still coaxing Britain to give apologies about the Hundred Year’s War. I don’t think Spain is still apologizing for bringing over diseases to the Aztecs. To my knowledge, Hawaii doesn’t have any hard feelings toward the Untied States since we took over their island nation in the 1890s.
All in all, my main point is, why is the world still rubbing the salt on old wounds that should be left to heal? We shouldn’t forget the scar that’s left behind, but we don’t have to keep reopening the cut. Especially after sixty years. I think everyone recognizes the tragedy of WWII. We shouldn’t keep letting it slow down international friendships. I believe that every nation has made amends for what happened during WWII and now we need to direct our gaze forward and more ahead together, not continue to loom over the past – we are only human after all.
Perry, Richard Lloyd. “Leader's apology about war gets lost in translation.” Times Online 16 Aug. 2005. 28 Feb. 2009 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article 555659.ece.
Tindall, George Brown, and David Emory Shi. America. A Narrative History. 7th ed. New York:
W.W.Norton & Company, 2007.
Yasukuni Shrine. 2008. Yasukuni Shrine. 28 Feb. 2009 http://www.yasukuni.or.jp/english/.
