Sparrow Photo 9: After-math Word of the ‘Bataan Death March’ spread quickly across America. Propaganda poster from the Office for Emergency Management, Office of War Information. Domestic Operations Branch. Bureau of Special Services, 9 March 1943. The ‘Rules of War’ “Some focus on who did what to whom, but if you find out why it happened, it won’t happen again, this time to you.” – Charlie McLachlan Throughout Charlie’s war, there were regular discussions about its causes, the motives of both sides, and attitudes towards the opposing side. Charlie, as the battery barber, was never short of conversation topics and the variety of customers provided many perspectives. Whether someone was Scottish, Cockney, American, Canadian, Australian, or Japanese, whether they were regular army, volunteers, conscripted, or civilian, each person brought insight through sharing their experiences. Charlie was a newspaper man and the conversations with Archie Muir opened his eyes to the motives and misconceptions about war. Skeptical about British motives and their preparedness for war, he avoided joining the war effort until conscripted. After all, to Charlie, patriotism only gets people killed and, as a new father, his role was to support his family. Most of those who volunteered were too young to know the horrors of the First World War – then known as the Great War. There was nothing ‘great’ about that
Sparrow  Photo 9   After-math  Word of the    Bataan Death March    spread quickly across America. Propaganda poster from ...
Sparrow After-math war. Many Australians thought the same as those who volunteered for the previous war – it was an adventure to see far-flung places. War changes people. It takes a certain mindset to fight, to kill, to capture, then to guard an enemy. Motivating factors include information sought and unsought, personal experiences, and preconceptions. Limiting factors include physical capabilities, intellectual grasp, religion, morality, and laws. The commonality between these limiting factors in conflict evolved into what became the Rules of War. Throughout the late 1930s, the British and American governments raised concerns over the Japanese treatment of captured Chinese militants. After Japan’s attacks on British, Dutch, and American ports on 7 December 1941 the Allies said that they would hold Japanese to account for the mistreatment of prisoners of war. The Empire of Japan, which signed but never ratified the Second Geneva Convention of 1929,19 also did not treat prisoners of war in accordance with international agreements that they did ratify, including provisions of the Hague Conventions (1899 and 1907.) Japan was an Ally during the First World War. At the siege of the Germancontrolled Chinese port of Tsingtao in Kiautschou Bay, Japan took 3,900 German soldiers to Japan. Just under 1000 German prisoners were interned at places like the Bandō Prisoner of War camp on the Island of Shikoku.20 When the camp closed in 1920, sixty-three of the prisoners chose to remain in Japan.21 The German orchestra at the camp was credited with the Japanese tradition of performing Beethoven’s Ode de Joy each New Year.22 The camp and orchestra became the subject of a movie, The Ode de Joy.23 In all respects, Japan observed the articles of the 1907 Hague Convention. German prisoners of war were also held in the Omori POW Camp on a purposebuilt island in Tokyo Bay, which would become the Tokyo Headquarter Camp to Mitsushima and Kanose Camps during the Second World War. 19 20 21 22 23 “International Humanitarian Law - State Parties / Signatories.” International Committee of the Red Cross. 27/07/1929. Schultz-Naumann, Joachim, “Unter Kaisers Flagge: Deutschlands Schutzgebiete im Pazifik und in China einst und heute.” Universitas, 1985. p.207. Johnston, Eric. “Bando POW camp: chivalry’s last bastion.” The Japan Times, 13 June 2006. Brasor, Philip. “Japan makes Beethoven’s Ninth No. 1 for the holidays.” The Japan Times, 24 December 2010. “The Ode de Joy” (Baruto no Gakuen). Buena Vista International Distribution, 2006.
Sparrow  After-math  war. Many Australians thought the same as those who volunteered for the previous war     it was an ad...
Sparrow Photo 10: After-math Omori Prisoner of War Camp in Tokyo Bay, August 1945. The Japanese viewed surrender as dishonorable, yet they treated prisoners of war during the First World War with great respect. The modern (and European-model inspired) Sugamo Prison built in the 1920s to house political and high profile prisoners symbolized Japanese attitudes towards incarceration during the era. The International Military Tribunal for the Far East used the prison to house those detained for war crimes after the Second World War. Japan’s attitudes towards war drew parallels to its relationships with the West. It started in 1853 with United States Commodore Matthew Perry’s ‘gunboat diplomacy’ at the entrance to Tokyo Bay. In 1945, General Douglas MacArthur officiated Japan’s capitulation to the West on the USS Missouri near the same spot – the result of ‘atomic diplomacy’ the previous month. Within a century, Japan went from being closed to foreign influence, to being opened up by the United States, to being a United States ally fighting alongside in several conflicts, to becoming its enemy, and finally being conquered by the United States. The rapid decline of Japan’s attitudes towards the West was exacerbated by the foundations upon which its modernization was built. Commodore Perry’s volley of exploding shells provided all the incentive to Japan’s warring factions of the benefits of trade to consolidate their grip on power. The thirst for modern weaponry triggered a chain of events that would ultimately demonstrate the reasons why Japan was closed for two centuries beforehand.
Sparrow  Photo 10   After-math  Omori Prisoner of War Camp in Tokyo Bay, August 1945.  The Japanese viewed surrender as di...
Sparrow After-math Photo 11: Commodore Perry’s flag (upper left corner) was flown from Annapolis to Tokyo for display at the surrender ceremonies, which officially ended World War II. * Gunboat Diplomacy “It is only one who is thoroughly acquainted with the evils of war that can thoroughly understand the profitable way of carrying it on.” – Sun Tzu, The Art of War. The Japanese have a long history of skepticism towards the West. For two centuries, they took a strict isolationist stand, banning trade and contact with empires thought to threaten Japanese culture. In the seventeenth century, the Tokugawa Shogunate, who ruled Japan, enforced the Sakoku (“locked country”) policy in order to remove the colonial and religious influence of primarily Spain and Portugal, which was perceived as posing a threat to the stability of the Shogunate and to the peace of the Japanese archipelago. Empress Meishō heard of how the Spanish and Portuguese were settling the New World and had great doubts that Japan could benefit from such rape and pillage imperialism. Protestant English and Dutch traders, who spread rumours that the Catholic colonizers were systematically spreading religion as part of plans to culturally dominate Asia, reinforced this perception. The English and Dutch were generally perceived as being able to separate religion and trade, while their Iberian counterparts were looked on with suspicion. After the Shimabara Rebellion of 1637–38, consisting of 40,000 mostly Christian peasants, Christians were expelled or driven underground. The penalty of practicing Christianity was death. All contact with the outside world became strictly regulated by the Shogunate. Dutch traders were permitted to continue commerce with Japan only by agreeing not to engage in missionary activities. Trade with Dutch and Asian ships was
Sparrow  After-math  Photo 11   Commodore Perry   s flag  upper left corner  was flown from Annapolis to Tokyo for display...
Sparrow After-math controlled through specified ports and bans were put in place for the exportation of the few minerals Japan did possess, such as silver and copper. Japan kept abreast with Western technology, such as medicine, through the Dutch at its Dejima trading post in Nagasaki Bay. The focus on the removal of Western and Christian influence from the Japanese archipelago as the main driver of the Sakoku maritime prohibitions – called Kaikin (“Sea Restriction”) – is a common perception, mostly by Westerners,24 but was not the only motivation. The gradual strengthening of the Kaikin also secured the Tokugawa Bakufu’s domestic agenda. Controlling Japan’s foreign policy guaranteed domestic social peace and supremacy over the other powerful lords in the country, particularly the tozama daimyo, who used trade to build their military strength. Directing trade predominantly through Nagasaki enabled the bakufu, through taxes and levies, to bolster its own treasury.25 There were many attempts to break the Sakoku, ranging from Russians, French, British, as well as the Americans. It took a flotilla of four U.S. Navy warships (nicknamed the ‘Kurofune’ or ‘Black Ships’ due to their pitch-covered hulls) to enter a harbour near Tokyo in 1853 and fire a volley of exploding shells to break the deadlock. The ‘gunboat diplomacy’, led by Commodore Matthew Perry, demanded the opening of trade to the West. Perry returned the following year with seven warships and forced the Shogun to sign the ‘Treaty of Peace and Amity,’ known as the Convention of Kanagawa. In the same year, the British signed a similar treaty, followed by Russia. Within five years, Japan had signed similar treaties with other western countries. During the Sakoku, Japan was a largely self-sufficient country with an agrarian economy. Peace was maintained by the grip the Shogunate had through its network of strongholds. Western technology was adapted for traditional purposes. Although peaceful, the Japanese warrior culture was still evident. Battles were tournament-based, fortress sieges, or raids. There weren’t large-scale engagements across a wide battlefront. The Japanese code of Bushidō — ‘the way of the warrior’ — was deeply ingrained. The concept of Yamato-damashii equipped each soldier with a strict code: “Never be captured, never break down, and never surrender. Surrender was dishonorable. Each soldier was trained to fight to the death and was expected to die before suffering dishonor. Defeated Japanese leaders preferred to take their own lives in the painful samurai ritual of seppuku (called hara kiri in the West). Warriors who surrendered were not deemed worthy of regard or respect.”26 24 25 26 Laver, Michael S. The Sakoku Edicts and the Politics of Tokugawa Hegemony. Cambria Press, 2011. Hellyer, Robert I. Defining engagement: Japan and global contexts, 1640-1868. Harvard University, 2009. Correll, John T. The Smithsonian and the Enola Gay. U.S. Air Force Association, 15 March 1994. Retrieved 16 July 2012.
Sparrow  After-math  controlled through specified ports and bans were put in place for the exportation of the few minerals...
Sparrow After-math To consider the motives for the Kurofune, one must consider the wider context of imperialism in the Far East and the United States’ ambitions. During the period that Japan’s borders were closed, the Western Powers colonized vast tracts of the Far East. India, Burma, and Malaya were in British hands, the French controlled the Mekong catchment, the Dutch controlled from Sumatra to Guinea and Borneo, and the Spanish colonized the Philippines. Most Western Powers had trading posts in China. Japan and the United States weren’t imperialists, but it was clear that to develop as a modern nation both countries needed access to resources. Trading relationships were fickle, much like the alliances between the Western Powers. Maintaining access to resources required direct control, not just ownership. The United States was built by negotiation and, if that failed, conquest. After the war with Mexico, in 1848 the United States had a Pacific coastline after the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ceded California, New Mexico, and adjacent areas to the United States. Shortly after, gold was discovered in Northern California. The United States’ focus gradually oriented towards the Pacific and the Far East. The growth of the United States westwards was driven somewhat by their own Sakoku foreign policy. The Monroe Doctrine, expressed in 1823, proclaimed the United States’ opinion that European powers should no longer colonize or interfere in the Americas. The Monroe Doctrine was adopted in response to American and British fears over Russian and French expansion into the Western Hemisphere.27 The Republicans also imposed tariffs designed to protect the infant industries that had been created when Britain was blockading the U.S. At the time of the Kurofune, the United States was embroiled in Civil War that would divide the country until 1865. The economies of the north and south were engaged in total war, where each side mobilized into a war machine. Industrialization of the north saw the United States steel industry swell to the most productive in the world. Railroads and telegraph efficiently transported troops and intelligence to the front lines. The ‘gunboat diplomacy’ of Perry and other Western Powers generated resentment over what factions within the Shogunate considered being ‘unequal treaties.’ Due to the treaty with the United States making them a ‘most favoured nation’, Japan was forced to sign treaties with other Western Powers. In 1858 followed the Ansei Treaties with the United States, Great Britain, Russia, Netherlands, and France. Edo, Kobe, Nagasaki, Niigata, and Yokohama opened to foreign trade. Foreigners could live and trade in those ports under their own laws. The problem was that fixed low import-export duties were subject to foreign control – thus depriving the Japanese government control of foreign trade and protection of Japan’s industries. The rate would drop to a low of 5 percent in the 1860s.28 The unequal treaties with Japan were unique because other unequal treaties, such as those with China, were the result of military defeat. Japan simply was threatened by a few exploding shells by four American warships. Resentment grew with those 27 28 Gilderhus, Mark T. The Monroe Doctrine: Meanings and Implications. Presidential Studies Quarterly March 2006, Vol. 36#1. pp.5–16. Auslin, Michael R. Negotiating with Imperialism: The Unequal Treaties and the Culture of Japanese Diplomacy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004.
Sparrow  After-math  To consider the motives for the Kurofune, one must consider the wider context of imperialism in the F...
Sparrow After-math who signed the treaties, which materialized into a radical, xenophobic movement – the sonnō jōi (literally “Revere the Emperor, expel the barbarians.”)29 What followed was a series of conflicts that generated several surprising twists. Emperor Kōmei agreed with the sentiments of the sonnō jōi, and — breaking with centuries of imperial tradition — began to take an active role in matters of state. Opportunistic, he railed against the treaties and attempted to interfere with the Shogunate’s succession plans. His efforts culminated in March 1863 with his “Order to expel barbarians.” Because the Shogunate had no intention of enforcing the order, the Shogunate and foreigners were attacked. The catalyst of conflict was the Namamugi Incident. Because foreigners only had to follow their own laws and not the Japanese, Japanese often felt insulted by Westerners who did not observe their traditions. A Yokohama-based British trader, Charles Lennox Richardson, was riding his horse through Namamugi when he encountered a large armed procession of samurai, including the daimyo of Satsuma, Shimazu Hisamitsu, heading in the opposite direction. The Dutch trader ahead of Richardson’s party, Eugene Van Reed, dismounted and bowed – as required by tradition. Richardson, after being gestured to dismount several times, refused to dismount. Richardson was slashed by a bodyguard and, while escaping, fell from his horse and was mortally wounded. Hisamitsu gave the order for todome – the coup de grâce – to be given. The Tokugawa government was required to pay an indemnity of one hundred thousand British pounds for Richardson’s death. When payment was not forthcoming, a squadron went to Satsuma’s capital, Kagoshima, to demand reparation. The British seized several vessels as hostage against payment and were fired upon by Satsuma forces. The British squadron retaliated by bombarding Kagoshima. Satsuma admired the superiority of the Royal Navy and sought a trading relationship with Britain as a result. Later that year, they paid the £25,000 compensation demanded by the British Government, and borrowed the remainder (and never repaying) the money from the bakufu – the shogun’s government. On 12 June 1863, Captain David McDougal of the U.S. Navy, in a letter to the Secretary of the Navy, Gideon Welles, stated, “General opinion is that the government of Japan is on the eve of revolution, the principal object of which is the expulsion of foreigners.” Many feudal daimyos remained bitterly resentful of the shogun’s open-door policy to foreign trade. Lord Mori Takachika expelled all foreigners and fired on all foreign ships traveling through the 112-metre wide Shimonoseki Strait between the main Japanese islands of Honshu and Kyushu. The gunboat diplomacy of the Shimonoseki Campaign came at the time of the Gettysberg and Vicksburg battles in the American Civil War. The world watched President Abraham Lincoln’s government for any sign of weakness and indecision. To their surprise, USS Wyoming became the first foreign warship to offensively uphold treaty rights with Japan. The USS Wyoming, under Captain McDougal 29 Hagiwara, Kōichi. Illustrated life of Saigō Takamori and Okubo Toshimichi (図説 西郷隆盛と大 久保利通.)Kawade Shobō Shinsya, 2004.
Sparrow  After-math  who signed the treaties, which materialized into a radical, xenophobic movement     the sonn   j  i  ...
Sparrow After-math himself, sailed into the strait and single-handedly engaged the US-built but poorly manned local fleet. The British, Dutch, French, and American navies followed by bombarding and capturing the battery at Shimonoseki. Considering Japan had only been open to trade for a short time, the quality and abundance of the armaments captured shocked the world. * Western Influence “Hence the saying: If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” – Sun Tzu, The Art of War. It is ironic that the death of Emperor Kōmei would bring a successor who would seek help from the West to secure power. It would be the remnants of the Tokugawa Shogunate, who opened Japan’s borders and received weapons and training from Westerners, who would be left fighting using traditional methods. The West found themselves in a conundrum. The British ambassador, Harry Smith Parkes, supported the anti-Shogunate forces in a drive to establish a legitimate, unified imperial rule in Japan, and to counter French influence with the Shogunate. Several daimyo, including the Satsuma and Chōshū, who had strong connections with the British, sided with the new Emperor Meiji. After the young Emperor called for the “slaughtering of the traitorous subject Yoshinobu,” Tokugawa Yoshinobu resigned his post at the head of the Shogunate, resulting in a power vacuum. Satsuma and Chōshū seized the Imperial Palace in Kyoto and Emperor Meiji declared the restoration of full imperial power. Yoshinobu changed his mind about the restoration of the Emperor and attacked Kyoto after Edo Castle, the main Tokugawa residence, was arsoned. Shogunate forces then attacked Satsuma’s Edo residence. What followed was a series of engagements where Satsuma took advantage of his modern weaponry, including pack howitzers and Gatling guns. The Shogunate took advantage of their modern navy. Stuck in the middle were the ministers of foreign nations, who gathered at present day Kobe. They issued a declaration recognizing the Shogunate as the only rightful government in Japan, which gave hope to Tokugawa Yoshinobu that foreign nations (especially France) might consider an intervention in his favour. A few days later, however, an imperial delegation visited the ministers, who declared that the Shogunate was abolished, that harbours would be open in accordance with international treaties, and that foreigners would be protected. The ministers finally
Sparrow  After-math  himself, sailed into the strait and single-handedly engaged the US-built but poorly manned local flee...
Sparrow After-math decided to recognize the new government.30 This did not stop anti-foreign sentiment, which included the deaths of 11 French sailors and an attack on British Ambassador, Sir Harry Parkes. Although foreign ministers recognized Meiji’s government, they sat on the fence to see who would prevail. Under the influence of Parkes, foreign nations signed a strict neutrality agreement where they would not intervene or provide military supplies to either side until the resolution of the conflict.31 Edo fell and Shogunate forces retreated north by sea with the help of French advisors. While most of Japan recognized the Emperor’s rule, a few northern pockets resisted. Poorly equipped, they relied on traditional methods. The few modern arms they did have, including two of the three Gatling guns in Japan, held off only briefly. Retreating to the northern island of Hokkaido, they formed the Ezo Republic (based on the United States’ model.) The last stand came in the form of a large-scale naval battle in Hakodate Bay. The Boshin War ended with the surrender of Ezo Republic Naval Commander Enomoto Takeaki, who originally said he would fight to the end. Instead, his commander in chief, Otori Keisuke, convinced Enomoto to surrender, telling him that deciding to live through defeat was the truly courageous way: “If it’s dying you want you can do it anytime.”32 The French advisors escaped and fled back to France. Out of the Boshin War emerged a different moral code, more flexible than the strict Bushidō code. Enomoto wasn’t expected to kill himself. Reprisals were avoided. Unifying the enemy to within the fold was paramount. Contrast this with the Lieber Code33 – an instruction signed by President Abraham Lincoln to the Union Forces of the United States during the American Civil War that dictated how soldiers should conduct themselves in wartime. It was the first expressly codified law that expressly forbade giving ‘no quarter’ to the enemy (i.e., killing prisoners of war), except in such cases when the survival of the unit that held those prisoners was threatened. The Code forbade the use of torture to extract confessions; it described the rights and duties of prisoners of war and of capturing forces. The Code, however, permitted reprisal (by musketry) against the enemy’s recently captured POWs; it permitted the summary execution (by musketry) of spies, saboteurs, francs-tireurs, and guerrilla forces, if caught in the act of carrying out their missions. Without opposition, Emperor Meiji set about unifying his country, starting with moving his seat of power from Kyoto to Tokyo (formerly Edo.) Instead of seeking retribution on enemies, the clemency given was influenced by Parkes, who said, “that severity towards Keiki [Yoshinobu] or his supporters, especially in the way 30 31 32 33 Polak, Christian. Soie et lumières: L’âge d’or des échanges franco-japonais (des origines aux années 1950). Tokyo: Chambre de Commerce et d’Industrie Française du Japon. Hachette Fujin Gahōsha, 2001. p.75. Ibid., p.77. Ibid. “The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies.” Series III, Volume 3, General Order № 100. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1899. pp.148-164.
Sparrow  After-math  decided to recognize the new government.30 This did not stop anti-foreign sentiment, which included t...
Sparrow After-math of personal punishment, would injure the reputation of the new government in the opinion of European Powers.”34 Meiji took a different approach to his father’s objective to expel foreigners from Japan. Instead, he took a more progressive policy of modernizing the country and renegotiating the unequal treaties with foreign powers. His motto was fukoku kyōhei – “rich country, strong army” or “enrich the country, strengthen the military.” At Meiji’s coronation, his Charter Oath, called for planned congresses, increased opportunities for the common people, abolishing the “evil customs of the past,” and seeking knowledge throughout the world “to strengthen the foundations of imperial rule.”35 Domains were replaced by prefectures, schooling became compulsory, Confucian class distinctions were abolished, and conscription of commoners to the army introduced. The French, who built the Shogunate Navy, continued their work to build a large-scale Imperial Japanese Navy. The Satsuma, who wanted the retention of the samurai class, rebelled but were defeated by the Imperial Japanese Army in the Battle of Shiroyama in 1877. The word “Meiji” means “enlightened rule” and the goal of the Emperor’s goal was to combine “western advances” with the traditional, “eastern values.”36 The leaders under Meiji sought to “promote civilization and enlightenment” through western ethics and ideas. To the West, Japan was seen as the last frontier. As Japan’s doors were closed for two centuries, its citizens had not travelled abroad to witness the effects of imperialism. So, when Emperor Meiji wanted to know how the rest of the world functioned, he sent delegations to find out what they could to benefit his plans. The West’s dominance of Japan was the result of Japanese ignorance of the West. The West could follow the same formula as it had done elsewhere:      Set up a trading post; Trade in arms; Watch the natives wage a civil war; The Imperialists pick the winning side; and The Imperialist power colonizes the people for their own protection (and from a rival imperial power). This formula was applied by the West in Africa, by the British in Africa, India, and New Zealand. The Americans also did this with the Native Americans. Japan was different. While the Western Powers were over-stretched in conflicts elsewhere, Japan was not on their list of potential colonies. While the unequal treaties allowed dominance of trade, Japan used the trade for their own purposes whilst maintaining aspects of their culture. There was no ‘assimilation’ as, to the Japanese, their homogenous race was not inferior. Whilst the Emperor was seen as 34 35 36 Keene, Donald. Emperor of Japan: Meiji and His World, 1852–1912. Columbia, 2005. p.143. Jansen, Marius B. The Making of Modern Japan. Harvard, 2002. p.338. Also n.34, p.138. Hunt, Lynn, Thomas R. Martin, Barbara H. Rosenwein, R. Po-chia Hsia et al.. The Making of the West, Peoples and Cultures. Vol. C. 3rd ed. Boston: Bedford/ St. Martin’s, 2009. pp.712-13.
Sparrow  After-math  of personal punishment, would injure the reputation of the new government in the opinion of European ...
Sparrow After-math a living god, Emperor Meiji received Alfred, Duke of Edinburgh, in Tokyo, “as his equal in point of blood.”37 Before the Meiji Restoration, several missions were sent abroad by the Bakufu in order to learn about Western civilization, revise treaties, and delay the opening of cities and harbours to foreign trade. A Japanese Embassy to the United States was sent in 1860. In 1862 and 1863, embassies were sent to Europe. Japan also sent a delegation and participated in the 1867 World Fair in Paris. The first Meiji delegation was the 1871-73 Iwakura Mission, whose role was to renegotiate unfair European treaties and to get information on education, mechanics, worldview, military, and social structures. Their itinerary included a rail journey from San Francisco to Washington, D.C., then tours of Britain, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Russia, Germany, Prussia, Denmark, Sweden, Bavaria, Austria, Italy, Switzerland, then on to Egypt, Aden, Ceylon, Singapore, Saigon, Hong Kong, and finally Shanghai. During a time of rebuilding after the Civil War, there was enormous social change with the abolition of slavery and the influx of Eastern and Western immigrants. The Iwakura Mission would have been shocked by the disorder and division of the fledgling power. Arriving in San Francisco, the Japanese observed how mineral wealth could be translated into a hastily built modern city. Traveling across the recently completed Transcontinental Railroad, it was difficult not to notice the effects of infrastructure on opened up territory confiscated from Native Indians who, for a time, lived in concentration camps and then segregated to reservations. Japan, whose economy was agrarian based, observed how Southern agrarian industry was built off the back of black slavery. As they travelled from the Great Lakes down the East Coast, they saw how the Civil War fueled northern industrial expansion and how the financial infrastructure was built on trade with the West. In Europe, the Japanese envoy observed the fractious and duplicitous nature of diplomacy between the European nations. The appalling social problems associated with industrial growth on cluttered populations would have concerned them greatly. On the return voyage, the Japanese saw the effects of European Imperialism on Africa, the Middle East, the Asian subcontinent, and the Far East. After returning to Japan, the Iwakura Mission would have tried to explain what they learned from Western civilization by promoting the positive aspects coupled with warnings. With each positive, the threat to Japan would have been the fear of falling behind and the fear of implementing industrialization to the detriment of its society. The rapid industrialization and modernization of Japan both allowed and required a massive increase in production and infrastructure. Japan built industries, such as shipyards, iron smelters, and spinning mills, which were then sold to wellconnected entrepreneurs. Consequently, domestic companies became consumers of Western technology and applied it to produce items that would be sold cheaply on the international market. With this, industrial zones grew enormously and there was 37 Keene, op cit., p.183.
Sparrow  After-math  a living god, Emperor Meiji received Alfred, Duke of Edinburgh, in Tokyo,    as his equal in point of...
Sparrow After-math massive migration to industrializing centres from the countryside. Industrialization also went hand in hand with the development of a national railway system and modern communications. Industrialization provided internal stability and international status. The Victorian Industrial Revolution, however, was centred on the technology of steel and oil. Japan did have coal, iron ore, and oil reserves but, over time, these resources would be depleted. Japan’s hunger for steel resulted in:      Coal production swelling from 600,000 metric tons in 1875 to 21.3 million tons in 1913; Steel production growing; Raw silk production exploding from 1,026 tons to 12,460 tons; A merchant fleet swelling from 26 steamships to 1,514; and Railways growing from 29 kilometres to 11,400 kilometres. The problem for Japan was that it only had 90 million tons of iron ore deposits, offshore oil reserves of almost 3 million barrels, and small deposits of copper, gold, silver and sulphur. Steel needed trade, trade needed security, security needed steel. Foreign diplomacy and trade was the frontline of Japan comparing and contrasting their culture with those of its counterparts. The Japanese would have taken considerable interest in the unstable and shifting alliances of Europe’s powers. The British warred with the French for centuries, then the Ottoman Empire and French were British allies during the Crimean War. The Western Powers unified to bombard Shimonoseki. If Japan was to rely on trade for its raw materials, the fickle Western Powers were a major concern. With modernization, there was a modern morality to war. The Crimean War saw modern fighting methods, unified war industries, modern medicine, and an emerging code of conduct. Also, the justification for war and annexation of territory came to the fore. The world was changing and Japan was trying to change with it. The West was seen as the leaders of change. Japan wanted to stay in step with the West in order to be the leader of the East. Nevertheless, what sort of example did the West provide to Japan? What did it condone, promote, how did it justify its actions? More importantly, how did it react to others doing the same? Japan saw Britain as a good example to compare itself with. Britain was a small country with few natural resources off the coast of a continent. Britain used its model of government, technology, trade, and military to form the basis of the greatest empire the world had ever known. At the time of Japan’s curiosity with the world, Britain was engaged in total war in South Africa. Britain had acquired the Cape of Good Hope in 1815 from the Dutch during the Napoleonic Wars. After the discovery of diamonds and then gold, the British fought the Boers to a stalemate in 1881. The Boer guerrilla campaign combined marksmanship, tactical flexibility, and good use of ground to bog down the British. Almost 20 years later, the lure of gold made it worth committing the vast resources of the British Empire and incurring the huge costs required to win that war.
Sparrow  After-math  massive migration to industrializing centres from the countryside. Industrialization also went hand i...
Sparrow After-math The British methods to win the Second Boer War demonstrated the lengths of total war. Total war wasn’t just the control of an entire economy to win a war, it extended to controlling the enemy’s, including its civilian population. To flush out guerrillas, the British made it difficult for them to hide and to feed themselves. A ‘scorched earth’ raped the land of resources, which also deprived the Boers of a living. The systematic destruction of crops and slaughtering of livestock, the razing of homesteads and farms, the poisoning of wells, and salting of fields were designed to prevent the Boers from resupplying from a home base. Many tens of thousands of women and children were forcibly moved into the concentration camps Kitchener initiated to: “Flush out guerrillas in a series of systematic drives, organised like a sporting shoot, with success defined in a weekly ‘bag’ of killed, captured and wounded, and to sweep the country bare of everything that could give sustenance to the guerrillas, including women and children.... It was the clearance of civilians—uprooting a whole nation—that would come to dominate the last phase of the war.”38 The English term “concentration camp” was used more widely during the Second Boer War (1899–1902), when the British operated such camps in South Africa for interning Boers. They built a total of 45 tented camps for Boer internees and 64 for black Africans. Of the 28,000 Boer men captured as prisoners of war, the British sent 25,630 overseas. The vast majority of Boers remaining Photo 12: Lizzie Van Zyl was a child inmate of Bloemfontein camp who died from in the local camps were women typhoid fever during the Second and children. Conditions were Boer War. horrendous and epidemics killed thousands. Despite outcries in Britain at the appalling conditions suffered by the Boers, the government retained power due to the military successes of the South African campaign. To appease the protestors, a commission of inquiry was conducted. Expecting a whitewash, the Fawcett Commission confirmed the protestors’ fears. The report concluded that 27,927 Boers (of whom 24,074 were children under 16) died of starvation, disease, and exposure in the concentration camps. In all, about one in four of the Boer inmates, mostly children, died. To put that in context, fifty percent of the Boer child population died in concentration camps. Japan also looked to the United States to understand the workings of a growing power. The first uses of concentration camps were those set up in the United States for Cherokee and other Native Americans in the 1830s. The authorities simply 38 Pakenham, Thomas. The Boer War. New York: Random House, 1979.
Sparrow  After-math  The British methods to win the Second Boer War demonstrated the lengths of total war. Total war wasn ...
Sparrow After-math believed that if they liked particular areas of land, they could capture the Native Americans, place them in concentration camps, and keep them there until they figured out what to do with them. They would then find a less valuable area of land and relocate them on reserves, much like cattle. Although the Civil War put an end to slavery, African Americans were secondclass citizens and segregated in the South. The Japanese also learned from the Americans that the justifications for war needn’t be an obstacle. American ambition – combined with deep-set racism and media propaganda – fuelled the fire between Spain and the United States. In the minds, schoolbooks, and scholarship of the mostly Protestant U.S. public, the Catholic Spanish Empire was a backward, immoral union built on the backs of enslaved natives and funded with stolen gold.39 While the Monroe Doctrine provided an exception to Spain in Cuba, the Cuban independence struggle worried American economic interests on the island. Many American firms pressed both American and Spanish politicians to restore order, not war. Cuban autonomy was proposed by the Spanish. Joseph Pulitzer of the New York World and William Randolph Hearst of the New York Journal, on the other hand, recognized the potential for great headlines and stories that would sell copies. Shortly after the Cuban autonomous government took power, a small riot erupted in Havana, ironically by Spanish officers offended by persistent newspaper criticism of their general’s policies. The United States Photo 13: Inventing excuses for war isn’t new. ‘Yellow journalism’ between Hearst and sent the USS Maine to Pulitzer papers escalated the SpanishHavana to ensure the safety of American War. American citizens and interests. Other U.S. ships were moved to Quay West, off the coast of Lisbon, and Hong Kong. 39 Kagan, Richard L. Prescott’s Paradigm: American Historical Scholarship and the Decline of Spain. The American Historical Review 101, no.2, April 1996. pp.423–46.
Sparrow  After-math  believed that if they liked particular areas of land, they could capture the Native Americans, place ...
Sparrow After-math On 15 February 1898, the Maine sank in Havana Harbour after suffering a massive explosion, killing 266 sailors. President McKinley asked Congress to appropriate $50 million for defence, and Congress unanimously obliged. The media went into frenzy, making all sorts of wild speculation. The momentum for war was unstoppable – although later it was suggested that the ship sunk due to an internal explosion, not by external causes. The New York City papers used sensationalistic and astonishing accounts of “atrocities” committed by the Spanish in Cuba. Their press exaggerated what was happening and how the Spanish were treating the Cuban prisoners.40 Stories based on truth but written with incendiary language caused emotional and often heated responses among readers. There was a common myth that, when his illustrator Frederic Remington said that conditions in Cuba were not bad enough to warrant hostilities, Hearst responded: “You furnish the pictures and I’ll furnish the war.”41 Under pressure from Congress, President McKinley found himself alone and asked Congress for authority to send American troops to Cuba, knowing that Congress would force a war. A joint resolution of Congress, signed by McKinley, demanded Spanish withdrawal from Cuba and authorized the President to use much military force to help Cuba gain independence. In response, Spain broke off diplomatic relations and the United States blockaded Cuba. Spain then declared war. In response, the United States declared that a state of war existed when the blockade of Cuba had begun.42 Instead of attacking mainland Spain, or just Cuba, it targeted Spanish colonies it wanted – including Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. It was the naked ambition of an emerging imperial power and, after the Spanish sued for peace, the United States got what they wanted. The excuse for attacking the Philippines was similar to Cuba: that the Americans were simply helping the liberation of the Filipinos. Instead, the Americans took the place of the Spanish as colonizers after the war and the Philippine-American war ensued. American Imperialism reared its ugly head in the Philippines. United States attacks in the countryside often included scorched earth campaigns where entire villages were burned and destroyed,43 and civilians were detained in concentration camps, called “protected zones.”44 The use of ‘water cure’ (induced drowning) torture was widespread.45 While an estimated 34,000 Filipino soldiers lost their lives, the Filipino population decreased by more than a million within a decade. 40 41 42 43 44 45 Ruiz, Vicki L. Nuestra América: Latino History as United States History. Journal of American History, 2006. p.655. Campbell, W. Joseph. Not likely sent: the Remington-Hearst “telegrams.” Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, August 2000. Trask, David F. The war with Spain in 1898. University of Nebraska Press, 1996. p.57. Schirmer, Daniel B.; Shalom, Stephen Rosskamm. The Philippines Reader: A History of Colonialism, Neocolonialism, Dictatorship, and Resistance. South End Press, 1987. p.18. Storey, Moorfield; Codman, Julian (legal counsel for the Philippine Investigating Committee.) Secretary Root’s Record:”Marked Severities” in Philippine Warfare, 1902. Ibid.
Sparrow  After-math  On 15 February 1898, the Maine sank in Havana Harbour after suffering a massive explosion, killing 26...
Sparrow After-math Filipino historian E. San Juan Jr. alleges that the death of 1.4 million Filipinos constitutes an act of genocide on the part of the United States.46 In the concentration camps, known as reconcentrados, 8,350 of the 298,000 prisoners died during a three-month period. Some camps incurred death rates as high as 20 percent: “One camp was two miles by one mile (3.2 by 1.6 km) in area and ‘home’ to some 8,000 Filipinos. Men were rounded up for questioning, tortured, and summarily executed.”47 US General Franklin Bell ordered that by Christmas 1901, the entire population of the Batangas and Laguna Provinces to gather in small areas of their towns. The US Army burned anything left behind and shot anyone found outside the ghettostyle concentration camps. The American media didn’t turn a blind eye to the atrocities. After all, they sold newspapers. On May 5, 1902, the New York Journal published a cartoon of the Samar massacre where, enraged by a guerrilla massacre of U.S. troops on the Island of Samar, General Jacob H. Smith retaliated by carrying out an indiscriminate attack upon its inhabitants. His order “KILL EVERY ONE OVER Photo 14: “KILL EVERY ONE OVER TEN.” TEN” became a caption. The Old New York Journal - May 5, 1902. Glory draped an American shield on which a vulture replaced the bald eagle. The Manila correspondent of the Philadelphia Ledger reported: “The present war is no bloodless, opera bouffe engagement; our men have been relentless, have killed to exterminate men, women, children, prisoners and captives, active insurgents and suspected people from lads of ten up, the idea prevailing that the Filipino as such was little better than a dog....”48 Many attempts were made to cover up atrocities. Many soldiers wrote letters home describing massacres of civilians. Investigations into atrocities involved sending copies of letters to the superiors of authors, the superiors would demand a retraction, and, if one was not forth-coming, they would be court-martialed. What these letters showed was an emerging theme by Americans towards Asians. Here is an excerpt of a New York-born soldier: 46 47 48 San Juan, E. Jr. “U.S. Genocide in the Philippines: A Case of Guilt, Shame, or Amnesia?” March 22, 2005. Dumindin, Arnaldo. “The Last Holdouts: General Vicente Lukban falls, Feb. 18, 1902.” Philippine–American War, 1899–1902. Self-published. Zinn, Howard. A People’s History of the United States. Harper & Row, 1980.
Sparrow  After-math  Filipino historian E. San Juan Jr. alleges that the death of 1.4 million Filipinos constitutes an act...
Sparrow After-math “The town of Titatia [sic] was surrendered to us a few days ago, and two companies occupy the same. Last night one of our boys was found shot and his stomach cut open. Immediately orders were received from General Wheaton to burn the town and kill every native in sight; which was done to a finish. About 1,000 men, women and children were reported killed. I am probably growing hard-hearted, for I am in my glory when I can sight my gun on some dark skin and pull the trigger.”49 Corporal Sam Gillis wrote: “We make everyone get into his house by seven p.m., and we only tell a man once. If he refuses we shoot him. We killed over 300 natives the first night. They tried to set the town on fire. If they fire a shot from the house we burn the house down and every house near it, and shoot the natives, so they are pretty quiet in town now.”50 Already, the Americans perceived their enemy, even those they colonized, as subhuman. Desensitized by racial hatred, their cruelty escalated against their perceived enemy. The actions of the Americans in the Philippines shocked the West and the East from the outset. Following the American victory in the Battle of Manila Bay in the Spanish-American War, Manila Bay was filled with the warships of Britain, Germany, France, and Japan.51 Japan’s presence clearly showed that it actively defended its interests, much like the Western Powers did in Japan during the Boshin War. * Eastern Power “We cannot enter into alliances until we are acquainted with the designs of our neighbors.” – Sun Tzu, The Art of War. Japanese came face to face with the ugly side of American imperialism in Hawaii. In 1881, King David Kalākaua visited Japan to strengthen relations between the two nations. Kalākaua and Emperor Meiji could identify with each other; both countries were island nations, both were nations of the Pacific, both were monarchies, and both were under pressure from Western Powers. Japan had barred immigration to Hawaii over fears that Japanese labourers would be degraded, as the Chinese were. The bar was, however, dropped in 1885 and the first 153 Japanese arrived as contract labourers for sugar cane and pineapple plantations. 49 50 51 Miller, Stuart Creighton. Benevolent Assimilation: The American Conquest of the Philippines, 1899–1903. Yale University Press, 1982. p.88. Ibid. Field, James A. Jr. American Imperialism: the Worst Chapter in Almost Any Book. The American Historical Review (American Historical Association), June 1978. Vol. 83 (3). p.659.
Sparrow  After-math    The town of Titatia  sic  was surrendered to us a few days ago, and two companies occupy the same. ...
Sparrow After-math Japan’s original fears were well founded. In 1887, the white elite forced a ‘Bayonet Constitution’ on the King. While Hawaiian, Americans, and Europeans could vote, Japanese could not. In 1893, due to pressure from American Hawaiians pushing for annexation, the King was overthrown. Shocked by the American aggression, Japan responded with its own gunboat diplomacy but, due to concerns that diplomacy would break down at the expense of Japanese citizens, the Japanese withdrew its protests. Meanwhile, the British warships present, whose Union Jack appeared on the Kingdom of Hawaii’s flag, appeased the American aggression. Americans living on Hawaii, scaremongering that the Japanese would restore the Hawaiian throne, generated anti-Japanese sentiment. As early as 1897, the United States began to regard Japan as a potential threat to its interests in the western Pacific. By that stage, America hadn’t declared war on Spain. The U.S. Navy, however, began to draft war plans against Japan, which were eventually code-named “War Plan Orange.” Over time, this plan would be updated as the U.S. and Japan gained more colonies in the Pacific. So how did the United States go from kicking in Japan’s door to trying to fence them in? In short, Japan demonstrated to the West that it could mix with the best of them, form alliances with the big boys, and share the spoils. America, on the other hand, acted like a sidelined brat left sulking on the bench. With its borders forced open, Japan developed the fukoku kyōhei strategy to maintain its security – both militarily and psychologically. An important objective of the military buildup was to gain the respect of the Western Powers and achieve equal status for Japan in the international community. Many of the social and institutional reforms of the Meiji period were designed to remove the stigma of backwardness and inferiority. Regardless of how modern or strong Japan was, they were still ‘yellow.’ Japan was concerned with being associated with China and other Asiatic countries, not because they thought they were inferior, but because Europeans couldn’t and wouldn’t distinguish Japan from the rest. Europeans did consider themselves some type of ‘master race.’ Kaiser Wilhelm II coined the phrase “Yellow Peril” and accompanied it with an illustration of Archangel Michael as an allegorical Germany leading the European powers (Britannia, Columbia, Marianne, and Mother Photo 15: “Völker Europas, wahrt eure Russia amongst them) against an heiligsten Güter” (Peoples of Europe, guard your dearest goods.)
Sparrow  After-math  Japan   s original fears were well founded. In 1887, the white elite forced a    Bayonet Constitution...
Sparrow After-math Asiatic threat represented by a golden Buddha. This illustration hung in all ships of the Hamburg America Line.52 Effectively, such imagery was some contrived belief that Europeans were meant to rule the Earth and Asians were a threat. Considering the European powers had dominated trade with the East and colonized vast tracts of it, such fears were of their own making. If trade was such a good thing, and their presence so far away from home was so mutually beneficial, why would they worry? Japan went through a period of reunifying. Scattered across a vast archipelago, in 1879 the Ryukyuan kingdom, which was under the influence of the Shimazu clan of the Satsuma, was annexed. These islands, which included Okinawa, were a string of small islands that stretched from the Japanese mainland to Formosa, forming the boundary of the East China Sea. Next, Japan tried to develop trade links with its Eastern neighbours, whilst strengthening its security. Korea was first cab off the rank. In 1876, early tension was settled temporarily through the Japan–Korea Treaty, which opened Korean ports to Japan. The 1885 Tianjin Convention, which removed Japanese and Chinese troops from Korea, effectively made Korean a co-protectorate of Beijing and Tokyo. Relations between Beijing and Tokyo deteriorated in 1894 after a string of events generated unstoppable momentum. First, a pro-Japanese Korean diplomat was assassinated in Shanghai. Pro-war elements in Japan called for a punitive expedition, which the cabinet resisted. With the assistance of several Japanese nationalistic societies, Korea staged a peasant uprising, which was crushed by Chinese troops. Japan quickly responded with force and defeated China in the First Sino-Japanese War. After nine months of fighting – where Japan mobilized its modern navy and army in Taiwan, Manchuria, and Korea – China called a cease-fire, and the resulting Treaty of Shimonoseki in 1895 secured Korean independence, Chinese reparations to Korea, Japan gained Taiwan and its neighbouring Penghu Islands, China lost Liaodong Peninsula to Japan, and Japan gained trade access to Yangtze River ports. Japan’s first war with a foreign power in over 400 years produced a decisive victory that sent shockwaves through the Western Powers. Russia, British, and United States interests in the Korean Peninsula were growing at the time. The advisor to the Chinese, German General Staff officer William Lang, stated that “in the end, there is no doubt that Japan must be utterly crushed.”53 The Imperial Japanese Army and Navy were, however, able to inflict a string of defeats on the Chinese through foresight, endurance, strategy, and power of organization. By utilizing pro-Japanese calls for intervention to start the war, Japan applied the same strategy that the United States used in Hawaii. 52 53 Rupert, G. G. The Yellow Peril or, the Orient versus the Occident. Union Publishing, 1911. p.9. Fairbank, John King; Kwang-Ching Liu, & Twitchett, Denis Crispin, ed. Late Ch’ing, 1800-1911. Volume 11, Part 2 of The Cambridge History of China Series (illustrated ed.). Cambridge University Press, 1980. p.269.
Sparrow  After-math  Asiatic threat represented by a golden Buddha. This illustration hung in all ships of the Hamburg Ame...
Sparrow After-math Japan gained more Chinese territory than every Western power combined. The victory established Japan as a regional power on equal terms with the West and as the dominant power in Asia. 54 Japan disturbed the status quo. China was humiliated, which generated internal instability. Russia still wanted an all-season port. To the other Western Powers, Japan’s encircling empire could effectively control all the shipping between Taiwan to Japan. The West focused on how Japan defeated the Chinese. Japanese were frustrated by the treatment of their captured compatriots by the Chinese. Chinese tortured and murdered Japanese prisoners of war held at Pyongyang and elsewhere. In the Battle of Lushunkou, Japanese anger boiled over. On 18 November 1894, the Japanese movement down the Liaodong Peninsula was temporarily frustrated. When the Photo 16: A ‘sensationalist’ and ‘yellow journalism’ Western newspaper’s Japanese returned, they found that depiction of Japanese soldiers their abandoned wounded troops mutilating bodies during the Port were horribly mutilated with hands Arthur massacre. and feet cut off. Others had been burned alive. Arriving in an evacuated city, the Chinese left mutilated Japanese bodies on display at the entrance to the city. The Japanese sought reprisals against the remaining inhabitants of Port Arthur. How many were massacred remains controversial but it is believed to be between 1,500 and 6,000.55 Many Western reporters were attached to the Japanese Second Army. American ‘sensationalist’ and ‘yellow journalist’ James Creelman,56 writing for Pulitzer’s New York World and Frederic Villiers, a writer and illustrator for the London Black and White, described a wide scale and cold-blooded massacre. A French journalist originally denied that the massacre occurred, but later admitted that it had. The reporting of the Port Arthur massacre took the shine off Japan’s victory. Clearly, the Western media were hungry for anything that could damage Japan’s public image. While no ‘Rules of War’ formerly existed for another five years, the Japanese were determined to demonstrate Western military discipline. The reprisals at Port Arthur were justified and consistent with the American Lieber Code. The 54 55 56 Paine, S.C.M. The Sino-Japanese War of 1894–1895: Perception, Power, and Primacy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA, 2003. Northrop, Henry Davenport. Flowery Kingdom and The Land of Mikado or China, Japan and Corea: Graphic Account of the War between China and Japan-Its Causes, Land and Naval Battles. 1894. Knightley, Phillip. The First Casualty, from Crimea to Vietnam: the War Correspondent as Hero, Propagandist, and Myth Maker. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1975. p.58.
Sparrow  After-math  Japan gained more Chinese territory than every Western power combined. The victory established Japan ...
Sparrow After-math American media reaction, combined with the political threat to cancel renegotiation of the unequal treaties, could only be seen as applying a double standard. Taking into account the United States’ atrocities in the Spanish-American and PhilippinesAmerican war over the coming years, it smeared the United States as hypocrites. As early as 1899, the U.S. newspapers, notably those owned by William Randolph Hearst,57 used the phrase “Yellow Peril.” While the U.S. committed atrocities in the Philippines, according to Hearst the West should fear the Japanese. Japan now found itself stuck between the impending disintegration of China and the ambitions of Russia, Germany, France, and the United States. Britain, wanting to keep Russia out of Manchuria (and focus its efforts elsewhere), would sign a Treaty of Photo 17: “The Yellow Terror In All His Alliance in 1902 with Japan. Glory.” 1899 editorial cartoon. Japan gave back the Liaodong peninsula to China to appease protests from Germany, Russia, and France. To Japan’s shock, Russia then secured Port Arthur and rights to the South Manchurian Railway Company – a semiofficial Japanese company. Around this time, Tsar Nicholas II called the First Hague Convention, which was signed on July 29 1899 and entered into force on September 1900.58 At the same time, the Boxer Rebellion and Philippine-American War occurred, which somewhat demonstrated why Rules of War were required. In 1899, the Boxers (nicknamed due to their use of traditional Chinese martial arts instead of modern military weapons and tactics) rebelled and Japan found itself alongside the seven Western Powers in an eight-empire alliance. Ironically, Japan found itself opposing the Boxers, who were opposed to foreign imperialism, Christianity, and unequal treaties. While the Imperial Court squabbled over whether to back the Boxers, the Boxers besieged the foreign legation quarter in Beijing, where foreigners and Christians took refuge. On 19 June 1900, the Empress notified the legations, diplomats, and other foreigners to depart Beijing, escorted by the Chinese Army, within 24 hours. The following morning, a German envoy was killed by a Manchu captain and the foreigners refused to leave. On 21 June, the Empress declared war against all foreign powers. 57 58 Foreign News: Again, Yellow Peril. Time, 11 September 1933. Tuchman, Barbara. The Proud Tower. Ballantine Books, 1996. p.229.
Sparrow  After-math  American media reaction, combined with the political threat to cancel renegotiation of the unequal tr...
Sparrow After-math Almost 500 foreign civilians and 400 foreign soldiers, together with 3,000 Chinese Christians, quickly fortified the quarter and defended the quarter from 20 June to 14 August 1900. More than 40 percent of the Legation guards were killed in heated brick-by-brick, yard-by-yard battles. The massacre of missionaries and over 2,000 Chinese Christians gained Western media attention. Almost 50,000 foreign troops from the Eight-Nation Alliance, including 20,840 Japanese and 18 warships (by far the largest contingent), flowed into China. Japan was actively involved with the Seymour and Gaselee Expeditions, capturing Tianjin under the command of Japanese Colonel Kuriya. From Photo 18: “China - the cake of kings and… of there, a 20,000 force marched 120km emperors.” French political cartoon to Beijing to relieve the Legation from 1898. Japan now found itself at the Imperialist’s table, carefully Quarter. contemplating which pieces to take The Chinese called an armistice while the Western powers when the 20,000 allied force landed maneuvered. in China to relieve the siege. As the foreign army approached, Chinese launched their heaviest fusillade on the Legation Quarter but then melted away. The Japanese secured the Beitang (Northern Catholic Cathedral), where 43 French and Italian soldiers, 33 foreign priests and nuns, and 3,200 Catholics were holed up. The United States only played a limited role in the Boxer Rebellion, which they called the China Relief Expedition. They were engaged in the PhilippinesAmerican War. Russia focused its forces instead on invading Manchuria right under the nose of Japan. In response to Chinese harassing Russians and institutions, such as the Chinese Eastern Railway, and the subsequent bombarding of a Russian border town, the Russians massacred several thousand Chinese and Manchus in the town. The Russians then deployed 200,000 troops into the area. After Russian owned railway bridges and telegraph lines were destroyed, the Russians invaded Manchuria. Reprisals were common on both sides with many atrocities committed. The Eight-Nation Alliance occupied Beijing for a year. During that time, one would have thought it was an excellent opportunity for the Japanese to learn from their Western partners. So, what did they learn? In the immediate aftermath of the siege, an “orgy of looting” by soldiers, civilians, and missionaries of all nationalities took place. Each nationality accused the others of being the worst looters. Americans filled entire railway cars, British held
Sparrow  After-math  Almost 500 foreign civilians and 400 foreign soldiers, together with 3,000 Chinese Christians, quickl...
Sparrow After-math auctions “in the most orderly manner,” and the Beitang was a “salesroom for stolen property.”59 To avoid being raped and mutilated by Alliance troops, The Daily Telegraph journalist E. J. Dillon stated that thousands of Chinese women committed suicide. One witness recalled that, “The conduct of the Russian soldiers is atrocious, the French are not much better, and the Japanese are looting and burning without mercy.”60 In another witness account, “The Russian soldiers are ravishing the women and committing horrible atrocities.” A French commander dismissed the rapes, attributing them to “gallantry of the French soldier.” It was reported that Japanese troops were astonished by other Alliance troops raping civilians. Japanese officers brought along Japanese prostitutes to stop their troops from raping Chinese civilians.61 Photo 19: Troops of the Eight-Nations Alliance of 1900. Left to right: Britain, United States, Australian colonial, British India, Germany, France, Austria-Hungary, Italy, and Japan. (Russia is absent.) Although atrocities by foreign troops were common, German troops in particular were criticized for their enthusiasm in carrying out Kaiser Wilhelm II’s impromptu speech before they departed: 59 60 61 Chamberlin, Wilbur J. letter to his wife (11 December 1900), in Ordered to China: Letters of Wilbur J. Chamberlin: Written from China While Under Commission from the New York Sun During the Boxer Uprising of 1900 and the International Complications Which Followed. New York: Frederick A. Stokes, 1903. p.191. Preston, Diana. The boxer rebellion: the dramatic story of China’s war on foreigners that shook the world in the summer of 1900. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2000. p.284. Ebrey, Patricia Buckley; Walthall, Anne; Palais, James. East Asia: A Cultural, Social, and Political History. Cengage Learning, 2008. p.301.
Sparrow  After-math  auctions    in the most orderly manner,    and the Beitang was a    salesroom for stolen property.   ...
Sparrow After-math “Should you encounter the enemy, he will be defeated! No quarter will be given! Prisoners will not be taken! Whoever falls into your hands is forfeited. Just as a thousand years ago the Huns under their King Attila made a name for themselves, one that even today makes them seem mighty in history and legend, may the name German be affirmed by you in such a way in China that no Chinese will ever again dare to look cross-eyed at a German.”62 Although the German force arrived too late to take part in the fighting, they undertook several punitive expeditions in the countryside. Not to be outdone, the Japanese were noted for their skill in beheading Boxers or people suspected of being Boxers. General Chaffee commented, “It is safe to say that where one real Boxer has been killed... fifty harmless coolies or laborers on the farms, including not a few women and children, have been slain.”63 Clearly, what occurred brought into question the morality of the ‘civilised’ powers, and demonstrated why the Boxers were against foreigners. A foreign journalist, George Lynch, said, “There are things that I must not write, and that may not be printed in England, which would seem to show that this Western civilization of ours is merely a veneer over savagery.”64 The Russian positioning in Port Arthur – and subsequently in Manchuria – demonstrated to Japan that, if they didn’t act decisively, another Western power would manipulate their interests. Russia, whose original intention was to secure their railway, instead settled in. When they assured the other powers that it would vacate the area after the crisis, by 1903 they had not established a timetable for withdrawal and instead strengthened their position. The Russians stalled negotiations with Japan over their interests in Manchuria and Korea. Japan knew that the Russian Fleet was unprepared and the Trans-Siberian Railway and its connection to the Manchurian Railway were near completion. Japan struck first by attacking the Russian Fleet at Port Arthur and three hours later issued a declaration of war. When the Tsar was shocked that Japan would attack before a formal declaration of war, Japan pointed to Russia’s 1809 attack on Sweden without a declaration of war. The Qing Empire favoured the Japanese position and even offered military aid, but Japan declined it. As Japan attacked Port Arthur, it provided cover for Japanese troops to land near Incheon in Korea. From there, Japan occupied the rest of Korea and was poised to cross into Russian-occupied Manchuria. 62 63 64 Wilhelm II. “Hun Speech.” (July 27 1900.) German History in Documents and Images (GHDI.) Thompson, Larry Clinton. William Scott Ament and the Boxer Rebellion: Heroism, Hubris, and the Ideal Missionary. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2009. p.204. Preston, op cit.
Sparrow  After-math    Should you encounter the enemy, he will be defeated  No quarter will be given  Prisoners will not b...
Sparrow After-math Knowing that Russian reinforcements were yet to arrive from the West, Japan acted swiftly. Suffering heavy losses against entrenched Russian positions, the Japanese drove the Russians back towards Port Arthur. The Japanese then blockaded Port Arthur by sea and land. Japanese artillery fired shells into the harbour. Starved of supplies and suffering heavy casualties, Port Arthur fell to the Japanese. Without a port and short of supplies, the Russian Fleet fled to Vladivostok. In the first naval longPhoto 20: France: “Keep It Up Russia, you’re range gunnery duels and clash of winning.” Russia: “Well, if this is steel battleship fleets on the high winning, what will he do to me if I lose?”(Britain in Japan’s corner, seas, the Japanese routed the Russian France in Russia’s.) Brooklyn Eagle, fleet in the Battle of the Yellow Sea. February 2, 1904. The Japanese then proceeded to force the Russians north out of Manchuria, first at Sandepu, and then at Mukden. In a battle involving half a million troops, the Russians fled after fearing being encircled and lost 90,000 troops. The Russian Baltic Fleet arrived too late to relieve Port Arthur so it took the shortest route to Vladivostock – the Tsushima Straits between Japan and Korea. Trying to sneak through the strait at night, the trailing hospital ships (who kept their lights on in compliance with the Rules of War) gave away their position. The Russian fleet was virtually annihilated – losing eight battleships, numerous smaller vessels, and more than 5,000 men – while the Japanese lost three torpedo boats and 116 men. The Japanese army occupied the entire chain of the Sakhalin Islands to force the Russians to sue for peace. Japan’s victory against Russia was the first against a Western power since Genghis Khan. Japan’s prestige grew greatly as a world power. Britain extended its Alliance with Japan. U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt’s back-channel diplomacy to mediate the Treaty of Portsmouth earned him a Nobel Peace Prize. The Tsar faced revolution. Japan was weak on the diplomatic front. Although Japan won the war decisively, their treaty negotiation skills were manipulated by the United States, who was meant to be a mediator. The United States, who purchased Alaska and the Aleutian Islands off Russia in 1867, had a good relationship with Russia as they did not have any competing interests. The U.S. did, however, have competing interests with Japan in China, Korea, and the Far East in general.
Sparrow  After-math  Knowing that Russian reinforcements were yet to arrive from the West, Japan acted swiftly. Suffering ...
Sparrow After-math Russia refused to make any concessions in the name of peace and took advantage of Japan’s apparent need to end the war and willingness to compromise.65 Riots erupted in Japan due to the lack of territorial gains and monetary reparations. Japan was pressured by the United States to retain only half of the Sakhalin Island. After Japan’s victory, several new Rules of War were developed. In the Second Geneva Convention of 1906, rules gave protection and care for shipwrecked soldiers in armed conflict. In the Second Hague Convention of 1907, it would become international law to declare war before hostilities. In the annex to the Laws and Photo 21: Customs of War on Land, there was a chapter detailing the rules protecting prisoners of war. Joining the club of world powers, Japan would ratify these Rules of War. Uncle Sam to Japan: “Hold on son! Don’t strike him while he’s down.” Just for Love of Fair Play. Los Angeles Times. August 24, 1904. Now that Japan started to show strength, the Western Powers painted Japan with skepticism. While the British publicly recognized Japanese interest in Korea through their alliance, the Russians acknowledged Japan’s “paramount political, military, and economic interest” in Korea, the United States signed the secret TaftKatsura Agreement with Japan, which recognized U.S. interests in the Philippines in exchange for Japan’s interests in Korea. Meanwhile, anti-Japanese sentiment in the United States grew. In 1893, the San Francisco Board of Education attempted to introduce segregation for Japanese American children. They withdrew the measure following protests by the Japanese government. In 1906, however, they successfully implemented segregation for Asian students in public schools. While Japan expanded its empire throughout the Far East, Korea was only a protectorate. Japan had already fought two wars over Korea and the threat of China, Russia, and other Western Powers irked Japan. Under pressure from Japan’s Minister of War, Japan effectively annexed Korea when Korea signed the JapanKorea Annexation Treaty in 1910. Shortly after, Japan started a policy of ‘Japanization’ of the peninsula, including banning the use of written Korean in education and publications. 65 White, J. A. Portsmouth 1905: Peace or Truce? Journal of Peace Research, 1969. Vol. 6(4.) p.362.
Sparrow  After-math  Russia refused to make any concessions in the name of peace and took advantage of Japan   s apparent ...
Sparrow After-math The annexation of Korea was different to how the Japanese treated other colonies, such as Taiwan. In Taiwan, the Japanese gained Taiwan after China ceded it to them. Japan took a British ‘carrot and stick’ approach to colonial governance. In Korea, for the first time t hey acted like a Western power and seized territory as part of its e mpire. It was bold, it was measured, and it impressed the West. To gain its place in the eyes of the West, Japan lost self-control. After Emperor Meiji died, a constitutional crisis emerged as the Emperorappointed cabinet ministers struggled against the elected Diet. The Meiji Constitution, which came into force in 1890, was based Photo 22: “So Obliging.” For some time, on the Prusso-German model but Japan used Korea as a bridge to its interests in Manchuria. Brooklyn replaced European constitutional Eagle, February 17, 1904. practice and Christianity with 66 kokutai (“national polity.”) Meiji’s Constitutional Study Mission rejected the United States Constitution as “too liberal,” the British system as being too unwieldy and granting too much power to Parliament, and the French and Spanish models tended towards despotism. The Emperor had power over foreign affairs through his cabinet of ministers of state. The Emperor, acting under the advice of former senior statesmen, also appointed the judiciary and the Supreme Command of the Military (who organized the military draft.) Asia’s first parliament, called the Diet, passed domestic-related laws and comprised of a direct male suffrage-elected lower House of Representatives and an Emperor-appointed upper House of Peers (much like Britain’s House of Commons and House of Lords.) All laws required Emperor Assent. Civil rights and civil liberties were guaranteed, though in many cases they were limited by law. Under Meiji, the Constitution worked well as there was little disagreement with Japan’s direction. Under the new Emperor Taishō, however, the ambiguities of the Constitution surfaced as the cabinet wanted to expand the military while the government coffers were struggling. The final years of Emperor Meiji’s rule saw increased government spending, notably for overseas investments and defence, with little credit or reserves available to cover it. When Prime Minister Saionji Kinmochi, who was appointed Prime Minister by Emperor Meiji, attempted to cut defence spending, Army Minister Uehara Yusaku resigned in protest. The Constitution required that the Army Minister be an active-duty general. No eligible general of the Imperial 66 Beasley, William G. The Meiji Restoration. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1972. p.79-80.
Sparrow  After-math  The annexation of Korea was different to how the Japanese treated other colonies, such as Taiwan. In ...
Sparrow Photo 23: After-math The Second Japanese Diet Hall (1891-1925), site of Asia’s first representative Parliament. Army was willing to serve. Unable to form a cabinet, Saionji was thus forced to resign. Taishō appointed Katsura Tarō, a former army general who was unpopular with the public, as Prime Minister. When the navy wanted to fund new battleships, the navy threatened to withhold the appointment of a Navy Minister. Katsuro went directly to the Emperor, who issued an edict that the navy must provide a minister. The opposition political parties in the Diet, concerned about Katsuro’s commitment to constitutional government, joined forces with journalists and businessmen. Katsuro responded by suspending the Diet on three occasions. After popular protest and rioting in Tokyo, the Diet responded with a vote of noconfidence in Katsuro. Katsuro resigned and was replaced by Yamamoto Gonnohyōe, ironically a former navy admiral. Clearly, the Achilles heel of the Meiji Constitution was the vetoing power of the military ministers in government decisions. This dominance over the civilian government would later steer Japan to self-destruction. Germany’s Kaiser, who had the same constitutional powers as Japan’s, led his empire down a self-destructive path in the First World War. Japan obviously didn’t notice this irony as Japan swiftly declared war on Germany and seized its territories in China, the Mariana, Caroline, Palau, and Marshall Islands. The Japanese would also capture many Germans in China, hold them on the Japanese mainland in specially built camps, and treat them according to the Rules of War.
Sparrow  Photo 23   After-math  The Second Japanese Diet Hall  1891-1925 , site of Asia   s first representative Parliamen...
Sparrow After-math The Japanese reached the pinnacle of their relationship with the West. After they conducted the first naval-launched air raids against German positions in Shandong, they assisted the British suppression of Indian troops in Singapore, and assisted the British Navy in escort and rescue operations in the Atlantic and Mediterranean. Later, the Treaty of Versailles would recognize Japan’s territorial gains due to Japan’s assistance in the war effort. While the West’s resources were stretched in Europe and Russia faced revolution, Japan tried to achieve hegemony in China by presenting Twenty-One Demands to China. The demands fell into five groups:      Group 1 recognized Japan’s acquisitions in Shandong Province from Germany, and expanded sphere of influence over railways, coasts, and major cities; Group 2 recognized similar rights in Japan’s South Manchuria Railway Zone, extending the leasehold into the twenty-first century, and expanding the sphere of influence in Manchuria to include rights of settlement and extraterritoriality and appointment of financial and administrative officials; Group 3 gave Japan control of the Hanyepoing mining and metallurgical complex (already deep in debt to Japan); Group 4 barred China from giving any further coastal or island concessions to foreign powers, except for Japan; and Group 5 demanded Japanese advisors appointed to the Chinese central government, administrators to the Chinese police force, and Japanese Buddhist preachers to conduct missionary work in China. Under Group 5, China would effectively be a protectorate of Japan. The other groups confirmed the status quo. After stalling by China, widespread anti-Japanese sentiment and international condemnation (especially from the United States), Japan dropped the fifth group of demands. Not wanting a war with Japan, China appeased the amended “Thirteen Demands.” For Japan, the ‘agreement’ was far more negative than positive. While Japan gained little that it already had, its overbearing and bullying diplomacy did not impress the British or the Americans.
Sparrow  After-math  The Japanese reached the pinnacle of their relationship with the West. After they conducted the first...
Sparrow Photo 24: After-math “Emperor of Japan and his British and American well-wishers.” Russia cartoon from 1905. * Isolation “By nature, men are nearly alike; by practice, they get to be wide apart.” – Confucius Japan struggled with foreign diplomacy and often relied on its alliance with Britain for guidance. From the ruins of Europe came a new type of diplomacy that, while meant to unify the powers, led to Japan’s isolation: multilateralism. As Japan discovered when it opened its borders, providing favorable status to one trading partner exposed Japan to other powers seeking similar terms. Conversely, aligning oneself excluded other opportunities. One needed to be careful with whom to associate. Towards the end of 1918, Japan found itself in two peculiar situations. First, Japan was in a wartime boom, supplying war materials to its European allies. Japan went from a debtor to a creditor nation for the first time. Exports quadrupled from 1913 to 1918. Japan supplied European nations in 1918 in a similar way to the United States armed Britain in the 1940s. The problem was; where would those war industries focus their production during peacetime? The second peculiar situation Japan found itself in was sending forces, alongside the United States, to Siberia to bolster the anti-communist White Movement Army against the Bolshevik Red Army.
Sparrow  Photo 24   After-math     Emperor of Japan and his British and American well-wishers.    Russia cartoon from 1905...
Sparrow After-math Japan initially refused to send troops to Siberia. After the U.S. President Woodrow Wilson asked for 7,000 Japanese troops – and a heated debate in the Diet – Prime Minister Terauchi agreed to send 12,000 troops so long as they were under Japanese command rather than under an international coalition. The growth of Japan’s military industrial complex swelled to such an extent that the massive capital influx led to rapid inflation. The government also bought existing rice stocks to support the troops in Siberia. The sudden increase in food prices triggered unprecedented rice riots in August 1918. By mid-September 1918, over 623 disturbances occurred in 38 cities, 153 towns, and 177 villages with over 2 million participants. Some 25,000 people were arrested – of whom 8200 were convicted of various crimes, with punishments ranging from minor fines to the death penalty.67 Taking responsibility for the collapse in public order, Prime Minister Terauchi and his cabinet resigned. The political instability of Japan did not assist its relations with the West. So many short-term administrations would have left the West wondering whether the agreements with one Japanese administration would be honoured by the next. Domestically, ‘taking responsibility’ by resigning just passed the problem to the next administration who, more likely than not, was less experienced than the one it replaced. Over time, politicians were lining up to be the next group to hold power. The continuity problem played into the hands of those who held their positions – notably the military members of the cabinet. The Army continued to occupy Siberia even after other Allied forces withdrew in 1920. After intense diplomatic pressure by the United States and Great Britain – and facing increasing domestic opposition due to the economic and human cost – the administration of Prime Minister Kato Tomosaburo withdrew the Japanese forces in October 1922. At the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, which led to the Treaty of Versailles, Japan sat alongside the ‘Big Four’ (France, Britain, The United States, and Italy) and gained a permanent seat on the League of Nations Council (along with France, Britain, and Italy.) The United States Senate never ratified the Treaty of Versailles due to their opposition to Article X, which would require the United States to defend a League of Nations member if attacked. The Photo 25: United States was weary of being dragged into another war. Although Japan was recognized as a world power, Japan sought the 67 Although U.S. President Woodrow Wilson was the architect of the League of Nations, the United States never joined. Punch magazine, 10 December 1920. MacPherson, WJ. The Economic Development of Japan 1868–1941. Cambridge University Press, 1995.
Sparrow  After-math  Japan initially refused to send troops to Siberia. After the U.S. President Woodrow Wilson asked for ...
Sparrow After-math inclusion of a ‘racial equality clause’ in the Covenant of the League of Nations. While Japan sought racial equality, such a clause had wider ramifications for the Western-dominated norms of the day, which involved the colonial subjugation of non-white peoples. While Woodrow Wilson realized the Treaty already faced problems to get through the Senate, he knew that, if there was any hope of getting through, it required the support of the pro-segregation Southern Democrats. Fortunately for Wilson, who was chairing the commission, the Australian delegation put pressure on Britain to reject the proposal so Wilson overturned the proposal. Japan, France, Italy, Brazil, China, Greece, Serbia, and Czechoslovakia (the majority) all voted in favour of the amendment while the British Empire, United States, Portugal, and Romania did not register a vote. Australia wanted to maintain its ‘White Australia Policy.’ Australian Prime Minister Billy Hughes clarified his opposition and announced at a meeting that: “Ninety-five out of one hundred Australians rejected the very idea of equality.”68 After the defeat of the proposed amendment, Japanese delegation head Nobuaki Makino announced at a press conference: “We are not too proud to fight but we are too proud to accept a place of admitted inferiority in dealing with one or more of the associated nations. We want nothing but simple justice.”69 Japan would never forget the behaviour of Britain or the United States at the Peace Conference. The Japanese media fully covered the progress of the conference, leading to an alienation of Japanese public opinion towards the United States of America, leading to nationalistic policies. In the United States, the American deliberate inaction fueled racial riots.70 A racial equality clause would later appear on the United Nations Charter. Technically, as the United States rejected the Treaty of Versailles, it had to negotiate individual treaties with other countries. Due to this, although the United States followed a path of isolationism, they interfered with many of Japan’s diplomatic arrangements in the Far East. The United States, China, France, and Russia were opposed to the Anglo-Japanese alliance signed in 1902. It was the sole reason why France didn’t come to the aid of Russia in the war with Japan. The alliance was seen by the four countries as a major obstacle at the Paris Peace Conference. Britain and Japan released a joint statement, stating the alliance treaty “is not entirely consistent with the letter of the Covenant (of the League of Nations), which both Governments earnestly desire to respect.”71 68 69 70 71 Lauren, Paul Gordon. Power And Prejudice: The Politics And Diplomacy Of Racial Discrimination. Westview Press, 1988. p.90. Ibid. Ibid., p.99. Text of the statement in League of Nations Treaty Series, vol. 1, p.24.
Sparrow  After-math  inclusion of a    racial equality clause    in the Covenant of the League of Nations. While Japan sou...
Sparrow After-math Japan benefited considerably from the cultural exchanges provided by the AngloJapanese Alliance. Academics, scientists, doctors, military officers, diplomats, and members of the Imperial Family received a Western education. Emperors Meiji and Showa (Hirohito) were Orders of the Garter and attended British coronations. Crown Prince Chichibu, for example, attended Eton and Oxford. Upon his return, he introduced the sport of rugby union to Japan. The demise of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance came about due to the concerns of Britain’s colonies in the Pacific. Canada was concerned that a conflict could develop between the United States and Japan and didn’t want the Commonwealth to be drawn into the conflict. Australia, on the other hand, was concerned that it couldn’t hold off a Japanese naval advance and sought a continuance of the alliance as the United States isolationism would provide little protection.72 The 1921 Imperial Conference of British Commonwealth leaders Photo 26: Crown Prince Chichibu. sought to determine a unified international policy. The delegates looked towards the United States to find a suitable solution. The United States position was predictable: the Alliance created a Japanese dominated market in the Pacific and could close China off from American trade.73 Canadian opposition to the Alliance was also fuelled by scaremongering in North America that the Alliance treaty included anti-American clauses.74 The press, along with Canadian Prime Minister Meighan’s hysteria that Japan would attack Commonwealth assets in China, led to the deferring of the alliance.75 72 73 74 75 Brebner, J. B. Canada, The Anglo-Japanese Alliance and the Washington Conference. Political Science Quarterly 1935, vol.50, n.o.1. p.52. Spinks, Charles N. The Termination of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance. Pacific Historical Review 1937. Vol.6, n.o.4. p.324. Ibid., p.326. Nish, Ian H. Alliance in Decline: A Study in Anglo-Japanese Relations 1908-23. London: The Athlone Press, 1972. p.334.
Sparrow  After-math  Japan benefited considerably from the cultural exchanges provided by the AngloJapanese Alliance. Acad...
Sparrow After-math It was the Commonwealth, not Britain, who wanted to sacrifice its alliance with Japan in favour of goodwill with the United States. Trying to avoid Japan running into the arms of Germany and Russia, the Commonwealth delegates convinced America to invite Japan, along with other Pacific powers, to the Washington Naval Conference for talks regarding Pacific and Far East policies, specifically naval disarmament. Already with a deepening mistrust of Britain, Japan attended. Fearing that Britain no longer wanted what was best for Japan, they also wanted to avoid a war with the United States.76 Effectively, by the United States conducting the Washington Naval Photo 27: “Only a Fleabite.” Australia’s The Bulletin portrays Japan’s reaction Conference outside the auspices of to Australia spending a pittance to the League of Nations, it form a navy. 1 August 1907. undermined the League. It was the first ever disarmament conference. Knowing that Europe was weak after a long war, it would also slow Japan’s growth. The Four-Power Treaty – signed by Britain, France, The United States and Japan – while agreeing to maintain the status quo in the Pacific in terms of territory, it terminated the Anglo-Japanese Alliance of 1902. The two other treaties signed at the conference were the Five-Power Treaty (including Italy), which was designed to avert a naval arms race after the war, and the Nine-Power Treaty (the nine colonial powers with trading posts in China), which affirmed the sovereignty of China and the Open Door Policy. All three treaties signed at the conference were designed by the United States to isolate Japan’s strategic alliances, halt Japanese military growth, and weaken its ability to expand territorially. As soon as Japan was a world power, it was immediately bullied by racist powers. The distrust between the Commonwealth and Japan, as well as the manner in which the Anglo-Japanese Alliance concluded, are credited by many scholars as being leading causes to Japan’s involvement in World War Two.77 During this period, Emperor Taishō’s health was failing and there were fears that decisions were manipulated by the head of his household. Taishō suffered from a mental illness for most of his reign since the death of Meiji in 1912. Taishō’s heir, Hirohito, who was eleven years of age when his father became emperor, was fasttracked to take his father’s place. 76 77 Ibid. Kennedy, Malcolm D. The Estrangement of Great Britain and Japan. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1969. p.56.
Sparrow  After-math  It was the Commonwealth, not Britain, who wanted to sacrifice its alliance with Japan in favour of go...
Sparrow After-math Hirohito was an army and naval officer at age thirteen and a special institute – the Tōgūgogakumonsho – was created to educate him. In 1920, he became a major in the army and lieutenant commander in the navy. He then took a six-month tour of Europe, becoming the first crown prince to travel abroad. During Hirohito’s tim e in the United Kingdom, he received many honours, including knighthoods and an honorary general in the British Army. Later, these would be promoted to Photo 28: Crown Prince Hirohito meeting British Prime Minister Lloyd George, 1921. Knight’s Garter and field marshal. In 1941, these titles would be revoked. Upon his return to Japan at the age of twenty, Hirohito became the Regent of Japan (Sesshō) on 29 November 1921, in place of his ailing father. He would become Emperor in 25 December 1926, after his father died. The Washington Treaties could not have come at a worse time. Japan’s light industry had secured a share in the world market. Its military industrial complex was sustained by the need to update the military with modern advances. In the postwar era, however, exports dropped and Japan returned to a debtor-nation. On 1 September 1923, the Great Kantō earthquake devastated Tokyo, killing 105,385 people. While Japan sunk into recession and struggled to rebuild, the United States torpedoed U.S. Japanese relations in 1924 with the Japanese Exclusion Act, which blocked Japanese immigration to the United States. The reaction at all levels in Japan was sustained hostility. Effectively, the United States was painting itself as a racist enemy acting against Japan’s very survival. The Taishō Democracy two-party, universal male suffrage system was also only in its infancy. With an electorate increased from 3.3 million to 12.5 million, it now had to endure economic, social, and political pressures. Ten days before the passage of universal male suffrage, the conservative right forced the passage of the Peace Preservation Act, which seriously curtailed individual freedom. The Act, which was meant to outlaw communist movements, effectively outlawed and crushed any left wing proposal that could be portrayed as a threat to the state. As the Taishō period came to an end in 1926, the incoming Shōwa period – literally “period of enlightened peace/harmony” – was anything but. The young Hirohito inherited an economy and society facing collapse. From 1928 to 1932, the economic collapse brought a new hardship to the people of Japan. Silk and rice prices plummeted and exports decreased 50%.
Sparrow  After-math  Hirohito was an army and naval officer at age thirteen and a special institute     the T  g  gogakumo...
Sparrow After-math Unemployment in both the cities and the countryside skyrocketed and social agitation came to a head. As the left was vigorously put down by the state, a new nationalism emerged. Buoyed by a romantic concept of Bushidō, the Shōwa Restoration movement wanted to replace the existing political order dominated by corrupt politicians and capitalists, with one which (in their eyes) would fulfill the original goals of the Meiji Restoration of direct Imperial rule via military proxies. To young military officers, it meant a return to a military Shogunate where the Emperor would reassume direct political power. During the following decade, A New York Times correspondent called Japan a country ruled by “government by assassination.”78 Prime Minister Hamaguchi Osachi was shot on 14 November 1930 by an ultranationalist and died the following year. While this was the act of a sole assassin, it would be the first of many coordinated coup and assassination attempts. Japan’s economic troubles cannot be blamed for the rise in nationalism. The Great Depression did not strongly affect Japan, compared to other countries. While Japan’s economy shrunk by eight percent between 1929-31, Japan was the first to implement what would become Keynesian economic policies. First, Japan’s Finance Minister Takahashi Korekiyo implemented a large-scale fiscal stimulus package of deficit spending, mostly to purchase munitions for the armed forces. Secondly, he devalued the currency, undercutting British textile prices in export markets. The Bank of Japan sterilized the deficit spending to minimize inflationary pressures. Japan was out of the Depression by 1933. The problem was how the ‘stimulus deficit spending’ was disbursed. Japan could have stimulated its economy a variety of ways. Instead, it stockpiled a huge cache of ammunition and weapons. The incentive to look for ways to clear the stockpiles must have been too much to bear for the military. In 1931, it reached breaking point when Prime Minister Inukai Tsuyoshi tried, but was unable, to impose fiscal restraint on the military. On 18 September 1931 at Mukden in Manchuria, Imperial Japanese Army colonels of the Kwantung Army staged an explosion on the Japan-controlled South Manchurian Railway and blamed it on the Chinese. Following a ‘retaliatory’ response on the Chinese garrison, the Japanese invaded and occupied Manchuria. Inukai tried, again unsuccessfully, to rein in the military’s designs for China. After Chinese protests, the League of Nations appointed Britain’s Earl of Lytton to head a commission into the Mukden Incident in December 1931. Again, the Japanese military looked for incidents, this time in Shanghai on 28 January 1932, to justify military intervention there. Five Japanese Buddhist monks - members of a nationalist sect - were beaten by agitated Chinese civilians near the Sanyou Factory, killing one and seriously wounding two.79 A group then burnt down the factory. It is unknown whether the arson was conducted by Japanese agents or by Chinese in response to the Police’s aggressive anti-riot tactics in the 78 79 Byas, Hugh. Government by Assassination. New York: Alfred A Knopf, 1942. Hoyt, Edwin P. Japan’s War: The Great Pacific Conflict, 1853 to 1952. NY: McGraw, 1986. p.98.
Sparrow  After-math  Unemployment in both the cities and the countryside skyrocketed and social agitation came to a head. ...
Sparrow After-math aftermath of the monks’ beating. The upsurge of anti-Japanese and anti-imperialist protests in the city led to Japanese air (from aircraft carriers) and sea forces bombarding the city and 100,000 troops defending Japanese concessions and citizens. Shanghai was an international city. The United States, Britain, and France tried to negotiate a ceasefire. Japan demanded that the Chinese Army retreat twenty kilometres from the border of the Shanghai Concessions. China refused and the Japanese landed a division behind Chinese lines, forcing a Chinese retreat from the city on 2 March. On 4 March, the League of Nations passed a resolution demanding a ceasefire. After negotiation, on 5 May Shanghai became a demilitarized zone, except for a ‘few’ Japanese units and a small Chinese police force. Shortly after, in Tokyo on 15 May 1932, eleven young naval officers, aided by Army cadets, and right-wing civilian elements stormed the Prime Minister’s residence and shot Inukai. Inukai’s last words were, “Hanaseba wakaru” (“If I could speak, you would understand.”) His killers replied, “Mondō muyō” (“Dialogue is useless.”) The assassination plot originally included killing visiting actor Charlie Chaplin to facilitate war with the United States. Instead, the plot also attacked two leading politicians, the Mitsubishi Bank headquarters in Tokyo, and several electrical substations. Besides the death of the Prime Minister, the attempted coup d’état came to nothing. The eleven murderers took a taxi to the police headquarters and surrendered to the Kempei-Tai. After being court-martialed – and a petition of 350,000 signatures in blood – the sentences were extremely light. The Lytton Commission Report was released in September 1932. During the time it took to prepare the report, Japan had already secured its control of Manchuria and set up the puppet state of Manchukuo, led by the former Emperor of China, Pu Yi. The report went to great strains to recognize Japan’s legitimate interests in Manchuria but could not accept that the operations of the Imperial Japanese Army following the Mukden incident could be regarded as legitimate self-defence. The report also concluded that the new state could not have been formed without the presence of Japanese troops; that it had no general Chinese support; and that it was not part of a genuine and spontaneous independent movement. In short, the Lytton Report declared Japan to be the aggressor and demanded Manchuria be returned to the Chinese. Before the report could be voted on by the Assembly, however, Japan announced its intention to push further into China. The report was passed 42–1 in the Assembly in 1933 – Japan being the only vote against the report. When a motion was raised to condemn Japan as an aggressor in February 1933, the Japanese delegation, led by ambassador Yosuke Matsuoka, walked out. Japan then gave formal notice of its withdrawal from the League of Nations on 27 March 1933. According to the League of Nations Covenant, the League should have responded by enacting economic sanctions or declaring war. It did neither. Non-League members, such as the United States, could continue trade with Japan. Other powers were disinterested in declaring war.
Sparrow  After-math  aftermath of the monks    beating. The upsurge of anti-Japanese and anti-imperialist protests in the ...
Sparrow After-math Japan could now enjoy the same freedom from the League of Nations as the United States. The problem was, it also became isolated80 and at the helm was the military. Photo 29: “The Doormat” by British cartoonist David Low, 1933. By 1934, Finance Minister Takahashi realized that the economy was in danger of overheating and, to avoid inflation, he moved to reduce the deficit spending that went towards armament and munitions. This resulted in strong and swift opposition from nationalists, especially those in the army. Instead of reducing deficit spending on the military, the government introduced price controls and rationing to reduce inflation. The deficit spending doubled Japan’s industrial production during the 1930s. Japan was dominated by light industries, especially textiles, but before the end of the decade it had been replaced by heavy industries, such as shipping and aviation. These heavy industries weren’t for export, however, but for the military. The government was rocked by scandal and the Teijin Incident, which related to discounted shares in a textile firm, led to Prime Minister Saitō Makoto dissolving government in 1934. While those charged were cleared of all charges, the public perception was that there was extensive corruption at high levels. Indirectly, the Teijin Incident contributed to an increase in violent, terrorist attacks by secret societies against leading figures in government and finance. The imbalance of the industrial boom, including extreme rural poverty and perceptions of political corruption, led to the February 26 Incident in 1936 where 1,483 Army troops attempted a coup d’état. Of the six political targets, Takahashi, Saitō Makoto and the Inspector-General of Military Education, Watanabe Jōtarō, 80 Harries, Meirion. Soldiers of the Sun: The Rise and Fall of the Imperial Japanese Army. Random House, 1994. p.163.
Sparrow  After-math  Japan could now enjoy the same freedom from the League of Nations as the United States. The problem w...
Sparrow After-math were assassinated. Other targets, including Prime Minister Okada Keisuke and Grand Chamberlain Admiral Suzuki Kantarō, escaped. While the rebels occupied Tokyo, the leaders of the rebellion asked the head of the Army to talk to the Emperor to demand the establishment of a Shōwa Restoration. The Emperor was enraged and demanded that the rebels be crushed for killing his loyal supporters. The Emperor refused to order them to commit suicide because their “terrible atrocities” were contrary to Bushidō.81 Loyal troops then surrounded the rebels and persuaded them to surrender. Some leaders committed suicide after returning to their units. The others were tried in a military court, 18 of which were executed and countless others imprisoned. Between 1921 and 1944 there were no fewer than 64 incidents of political violence. The assassination of moderate Prime Minister Inukai Tsuyoshi in 1932 marked the end of civilian control of the military. The February 26 Incident in 1936 sent shockwaves through the civilian bureaucrats in the Japanese government, making them wary of the Photo 30: The third regiment of the insurgents marching towards the Diet (background left) military’s growing during the February 26 attempted coup dominance of the d’état. The Imperial Palace is to the left. government. If junior military officers could assassinate senior politicians, who would be brave enough to stand in the way of senior military figures? The answer, it turned out, would be no one. Even the Emperor, who appointed the Supreme Command and Cabinet, feared for his safety. In 1932, he escaped an assassination attempt when a Korean independence activist threw a grenade at him in Tokyo. Near the end of the war, senior military tried to overthrow him when he tried to end the war. The entire Japanese economy was geared towards war. The citizens were suppressed by a police state under the Peace Preservation Act. If the economy seemed threatened, the military would find a solution – which often involved more arms and more conquest. On 5 August 1937, following a string of incidents in China where atrocities were committed against captured Japanese, Hirohito ratified a directive where the constraints of the Hague Conventions were explicitly removed from Chinese prisoners.82 This came at a time when the Imperial General Headquarters in Tokyo was reluctant to escalate the conflict into full-scale war. 81 82 Brendon, Piers. The Dark Valley: A Panorama of the 1930s. Alfred A. Knopf, 2000. pp.452-4. Akira Fujiwara. “Nitchû Sensô n.i Okeru Horyo Gyakusatsu.” Kikan Sensô Sekinin Kenkyû 9, 1995. p.22.
Sparrow  After-math  were assassinated. Other targets, including Prime Minister Okada Keisuke and Grand Chamberlain Admira...
Sparrow After-math Shortly after the directive was signed, however, the Kuomintang sensed that the Japanese aggression had reached “breaking point.” Chiang Kai-shek quickly mobilized the army and air force under his direct command and attacked the Japanese Marines in Shanghai. In response, it took three months, 200,000 Japanese troops, and higher than expected casualties to capture the city. The Kuomintang did attack the Japanese at Shanghai, which started the conflict. The Japanese did suffer 92,640 casualties. None were taken prisoner. Of the 600,000 Chinese troops, 333,500 were killed or injured. Chiang Kai-shek lost more than 60 percent of his elite German-trained troops and more than a third of his officers. What followed the Battle of Shanghai is the most controversial event of the war, the Battle of Nanking. The Japanese mobilized 240,000 troops to capture the Kuomintang capital. The Japanese lost 6,000 in the battle compared to 10,000 Chinese soldiers. Only 7,000 of Kai-shek’s elite forces were left after the defence of Nanking. In anticipation of the attack on Nanking, General Iwane Matsui issued the following orders: “Nanking is the capital of China and the capture thereof is an international affair; therefore, careful study should be made so as to exhibit the honor and glory of Japan and augment the trust of the Chinese people, and that the battle in the vicinity of Shanghai is aimed at the subjugation of the Chinese Army, therefore protect and patronize Chinese officials and people, as afar as possible; the Army should always bear in mind not to involve foreign residents and armies in trouble and maintain close liaison with foreign authorities in order to avoid misunderstandings.” Hirohito did not have any objection to the invasion of China in 1937, which was recommended to him by his chiefs of staff and Prime Minister Konoe.83 On 2 December, Hirohito nominated one of his uncles, Prince Asaka, to command the invasion. Despite Kai-shek’s heavy losses at Shanghai, he decided to defend the city. As he retreated, he implemented a “scorched-earth” strategy of jianbi qingye “to leave nothing behind after their evacuation.”84 On 7 December 1937, correspondent Frank Tillman Durdin sent the following special dispatch to The New York Times: “Between Tangshan and Nanking barricades were ready along the highway every mile or so, and nearer the capital there raged huge fires set by the Chinese in the course of clearing the countryside of buildings that might protect the invaders from gunfire. In one valley a whole village was ablaze.” Nanking was a strategic military objective. On 15 August, Matsui remarked to War Minister Hajime Sugiyama that: 83 84 Wakabayashi, Bob Tadashi. Emperor Hirohito on Localized Aggression in China. Sino-Japanese Studies, 1991. vol.4 (1). pp.4–27. Higashinakano Shudo, Kobayashi Susumu & Fukunaga Shainjiro. Analyzing the “Photographic Evidence” of the Nanking Massacre. Tokyo, Japan: Soshisha, 2005. p.183.
Sparrow  After-math  Shortly after the directive was signed, however, the Kuomintang sensed that the Japanese aggression h...
Sparrow After-math “There’s no solution except to break the power of Chiang Kai-shek by capturing Nanking. That is what I must do.” As the Chinese retreated from the walled city, the Chinese troops looted shops for food and other supplies, cast away their arms, and shed their uniforms in the street. Some soldiers donned civilian clothes, sometimes by robbing civilians of their garments, and others ran away in their underwear. As Durdin reported, “Streets became covered with guns, grenades, swords, knapsacks, coats, shoes, and helmets.”85 A Nanking Safety Zone was a demilitarized zone set up by Westerners, 3.86km2 in area. The Japanese did respect the zone but Chinese, including soldiers dressed in civilian clothing, crammed the zone. The Japanese entered the zone to sort the Westerners from the Chinese in an orderly manner. Durdin wrote that the loss of the city: “was the most overwhelming defeat suffered by the Chinese and one of the most tragic debacles in the history of modern warfare. In attempting to defend Nanking, the Chinese allowed themselves to be surrounded and then systematically slaughtered...” What followed shocked the West. Several Western reporters witnessed what was to become the Rape of Nanking. Durbin Wrote: “…The helpless Chinese troops, disarmed for the most part and ready to surrender, were systematically rounded up and executed.” Chicago Daily News reporter Archibald Steele wrote: “Plainclothes suspects were shot one by one while their condemned fellows sat stolidly by, awaiting their turn.”86 There were numerous reports of Japanese massacring Chinese soldiers by bayonetting, beheading, and even burying them alive. Many were machine gunned at the Yangtze River bank. Atrocities weren’t just committed against soldiers. Durbin wrote: “Wholesale looting, the violation of women, the murder of civilians, the eviction of Chinese from their homes, mass executions of war prisoners and the impressing of able-bodied men turned Nanking into a city of terror.”87 Durdin and Steele were evacuated on 15 December to Shanghai on the USS Oahu. From there, they telegraphed their reports. The Japanese massacred as many as 300,000 Chinese. The actions of the Japanese at Nanking were unprecedented in character, in scale, and justification. Previously, the Japanese could point to some precedent, such as the actions of an enemy or ally. Nanking was different. 85 86 87 Durdin, Frank. All Captives Slain. New York Times, 18 December 1937. Steel, Archibald. War’s Death Drama Pictured by Reporter. Chicago Daily News, 17 December 1937. Durdin, op cit.
Sparrow  After-math    There   s no solution except to break the power of Chiang Kai-shek by capturing Nanking. That is wh...
Sparrow After-math Nanking was the result of a breakdown in command. As witnessed by the attempted coup d’états in Tokyo, many young officers disobeyed orders and pursued their own agenda. There were also conflicting orders from General Mitsui and Prince Asaka. Orders from Tokyo were ignored. On 7 December, Tokyo Army Headquarters issued a command to all troops advising that, because occupying a foreign capital was an unprecedented event for the Japanese military, all soldiers who commit “any illegal acts”, “dishonor the Japanese Army”, “loot”, or “cause a fire to break out, even because of their carelessness” would be severely punished. Prince Asaka, however, signed the order for Japanese soldiers in Nanking to “kill all captives.”88 Foreign Minister Hirota Koki had warned the Army many times to take action. On 18 December 1937, General Iwane Matsui became dismayed as he began to comprehend the full extent of the rape, murder, and looting in the city. He reportedly told one of his civilian aides: “I now realize that we have unknowingly wrought a most grievous effect on this city. When I think of the feelings and sentiments of many of my Chinese friends who have fled from Nanking and of the future of the two countries, I cannot but feel depressed. I am very lonely and can never get in a mood to rejoice about this victory.” He even let a tinge of regret flavor the statement he released to the press that morning: “I personally feel sorry for the tragedies to the people, but the Army must continue unless China repents. Now, in the winter, the season gives time to reflect. I offer my sympathy, with deep emotion, to a million innocent people.” On New Year’s Day, Matsui was still upset about the behavior of the Japanese soldiers at Nanking. Over a toast, he confided to a Japanese diplomat: “My men have done something very wrong and extremely regrettable.”89 Shortly after, Matsui and Prince Asaka were recalled to Japan. After the war, Asaka was granted immunity but Matsui was executed as a Class A war criminal in Sugamo Prison. What possessed the Japanese to commit such an atrocity on such an unprecedented scale? Some have suggested that the atrocities were motivated by racial prejudices, where Japanese soldiers were taught to think of captured Chinese as not worthy of mercy.90 Jonathan Spence suggests: ”There is no obvious explanation for this grim event, nor can one be found. The Japanese soldiers, who had expected easy victory, instead had been fighting hard for months and had taken infinitely higher casualties than anticipated. They were bored, angry, frustrated, tired. The Chinese women 88 89 90 Bergamini, David. Japan’s Imperial Conspiracy. New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc, 1971. pp.23–24. Chang, Iris. The Rape of Nanking: The Forgotten Holocaust. Basic Books, 1997. pp.51–52. Kushner, Barak. The Thought War. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2006. p.131
Sparrow  After-math  Nanking was the result of a breakdown in command. As witnessed by the attempted coup d     tats in To...
Sparrow After-math were undefended, their menfolk powerless or absent. The war, still undeclared, had no clear-cut goal or purpose. Perhaps all Chinese, regardless of sex or age, seemed marked out as victims.”91 The Rape of Nanking is different from the Port Arthur Massacre or the Boxer Rebellion aftermath. Years in China, in isolation from any oversight from the West, the Japanese soldier evolved in some type of Lord of the Flies92scenario. They seemed to have cast away what they learned and developed their own path. The events that led to 7 December 1941 are a string of contradictions in Japan’s chain of command, and conflicting signals from the West. In the momentum of criticism to Japan’s activities in China, Japan looked for alliances that instead escalated its chances of war with the West. While America continued its ‘isolationism’, Britain and France continued their appeasement of Nazi Germany. Frustrated by the isolationists in Congress, on 5 October 1937 President Roosevelt called for an international “quarantine of the aggressor nations” (without mentioning Japan by name) as an alternative to the political climate of American neutrality and non-intervention that was prevalent at the time. The United States, however, was still supplying Japan. More than 80 percent of Japan’s oil came from the United States. In July 1939, the U.S. government extended a trade agreement with Japan for six months, and then fully restored it. Under the agreement, Japan purchased:    Trucks for the Kwantung Army,93 Machine tools for aircraft factories, Strategic materials including –  steel and scrap iron up to 16 October 1940,  petrol and petroleum products up to 26 June 1941, and  various other much-needed supplies. At the same time, while Japan effectively ignored the Nine-Powers Treaty, negotiations between Japanese Foreign Minister Arita Khatira and the British Ambassador in Tokyo, Robert Craigie, led to an agreement where Great Britain recognized Japanese conquests in China. Meanwhile, Germany, Soviet Union, and other countries were helping the fight against Japan. Germany helped modernize the Chinese army in return for raw materials. The Soviet Union supplied bombers, fighters, supplies, and advisors, including the future ‘Hero of Stalingrad’ Vasily Chuikov. Australia banned exports of iron ore in 1938. International diplomacy proved to be farcical. While the United States branded Japan an aggressor and treaty breaker, Japan could scoff them off as hypocrites. 91 92 93 Spence, Jonathan D. The Search for Modern China, W.W. Norton and Company, 1999. p.424. Golding, William. Lord of the Flies. Faber and Faber, 1954. US Congress. Investigation of Concentracion of Economic Power. Hearings before the Temporary National Economic Committee. 76th Congress, 2nd Session, Pt.21. Washington, 1940, p.11241.
Sparrow  After-math were undefended, their menfolk powerless or absent. The war, still undeclared, had no clear-cut goal o...
Sparrow After-math As part of the United States effort to bypass the League of Nations, they convinced many countries in 1928 to sign the Kellogg–Briand Pact,94 which aimed to “condemn recourse to war for the solution of international controversies” and sought peaceful means to resolve disputes. The pact, however, was not worth the paper it was written on. It did not prevent U.S. intervention in Central America, the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931, the Italian invasion of Abyssinia in 1935, the Soviet invasion of Finland in 1939, and the German and Soviet Union invasions of Poland. Japan watched on as Nazi Germany systematically breached Photo 31: “Japan the Treaty Breaker.” Cartoon from 1940. each clause of the Treaty of Versailles, then invaded Czechoslovakia while the West appeased. While the West was preoccupied pursuing a pointless diplomatic path in Europe, Japan sought its own path for Asia separate to the failed diplomacy of the West. In the absence of any coherent or consistent diplomacy for the region, Japan developed their own. It was based on a simple formula meant to win over the Far East. It is apparent that Japan had a longer memory than the West. Japan noticed a pattern of behaviour in the West, which, over time, molded into three characteristics:    94 White supremacy over Asians; Asian resources are to be controlled for the benefit of the West; and ‘Do as we say, not as we do.’ Kellogg-Briand Pact 1928. http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/kbpact.htm.
Sparrow  After-math  As part of the United States effort to bypass the League of Nations, they convinced many countries in...
Sparrow After-math Japan remembered the rejection of the racial equality clause by the British. Together with subsequent events, to Japan it was apparent that the imperialist powers wanted Asians to be subjugated to white rule. Also, the behaviour of the imperialist powers in China demonstrated that the West only wanted to dominate trade for their own benefit, not Asia’s. What annoyed Japan was the West’s bullying double standards. Japan meticulously applied strategies the West applied in other parts of the world, yet were condemned for applying them. In response, Japan developed its own Monroe Doctrine and they called it the ‘Greater East Asia CoProsperity Sphere’ concept, which represented the desire to create a selfsufficient “bloc of Asian nations led by the Japanese and free of Western Photo 32: “Asia for the Asians!” 1942 poster. Powers.”95 Japan made no secret of its intentions. It was announced in a radio address entitled “The International Situation and Japan’s Position” by Foreign Minister Hachirō Arita on 29 June 1940.96 Japan manipulated concepts such as Hakkō ichiu (i.e. “all the world under one roof”) to promote racial harmony and Japan as a leader and liberator against Western imperialism. There is no disguising the fact that Japan exploited these colonial sentiments for their own economic and political benefit.97 The policy was diplomatically sound, but was undone by the brutality of the war machine, which the policy was meant to benefit. Whether it was by chance or by design, several opportunities presented themselves in 1939 that would open the door to Japan, which believed it could achieve its Monroe Doctrine. First, in mid-1939, the bored, restless, and almost autonomous Kwantung Army fought a border dispute with Mongolia and Soviet Union. Known as the Battles of Khalkhin Gol (a river) to the Soviets and Mongols, the Japanese believed the river to be the border between Manchukuo and the two other countries. The Soviets and Mongols, however, believed the border to include the town of Nomonhan, which was 16 kilometres east of the river. 95 96 97 Gordon, William. “Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.” Wesleyan University, March 2000. De Bary, William Theodore. Sources of East Asian Tradition: The modern period. Columbia University Press, 2008. p.622. McClain, James L. Japan: A Modern History. W. W. Norton & Company, 2001. p.495.
Sparrow  After-math  Japan remembered the rejection of the racial equality clause by the British. Together with subsequent...
Sparrow After-math Known to the Japanese as the Nomonhan Incident, the Japanese attacked Mongol cavalry grazing in the disputed area and then occupied the area with a regiment of troops. The Soviets and Mongols responded by surrounding the Japanese regiment and destroying it. As both sides accumulated forces in the area, Russian General Georgy Zhukov took command of the Russian forces - now equipped with 500 tanks - greatly outnumbering the Japanese. The Kwantung Army attacked first, without getting permission from Tokyo. While the Japanese won the first engagement, Tokyo promptly ordered the air force not to attack Soviet bases to avoid escalation. After a few minor skirmishes, and the continuing buildup across the border, Tokyo gave the order to “expel the invaders.” The Japanese tried a two-prong attack. Zhukov’s tanks then almost encircled the Japanese. With both sides’ supply lines stretched, the battleground to a stalemate. Both sides regrouped. Zhukov wanted a swift victory so he could refocus on events in Europe. After a massive fighter/bomber attack on Japanese positions, 50,000 Soviet and Mongol forces stormed the east bank supported by massed artillery. They achieved a classic double envelopment of Japanese forces. Japanese counterattacks to relieve the encircled troops failed. When the encircled troops refused to surrender, they were bombed and shelled. By the end of August, the Japanese forces on the Soviet side of the border were destroyed. The Japanese commander in the field refused to surrender, but the Foreign Minister circumvented him with a ceasefire signed in Moscow. The ceasefire resulted in a non-aggression pact with the Soviets, meaning that Japan could focus its forces elsewhere. Stalin, who signed a non-aggression pact with Germany on 24 August, could invade Poland on 17 September. The second opportunity to present itself was the German invasion of the Netherlands and France in May 1940. As Nazi Germany set up Vichy France to govern French-Indochina, Japan was concerned by arms and fuel movements through that colony to China via the Sino-Vietnamese Railway. Japan pressured the Vichy government to close the railway, but the French did not agree. Faced with an invasion threat, Vichy French yielded and signed an accord, which granted Japan rights to move supplies, transit no more than 25,000 troops, and station up to 6,000 troops in Indochina. Japan swiftly breeched the agreement by crossing the border in three places, and attacking from aircraft carriers in the Gulf of Tonkin. On 26 September, after five days of fighting, Japan controlled the territory. The following day, Japan signed a military alliance with Germany and Italy, known as the Tripartite Pact, making Japan an Axis Power. This alliance, which recognized their Photo 33: How the United States media saw the distant spheres of influence, lacked Tripartite Pact. synergy and was driven by mutual
Sparrow  After-math  Known to the Japanese as the Nomonhan Incident, the Japanese attacked Mongol cavalry grazing in the d...
Sparrow After-math self-interest. From the Japanese perspective, it was a radical measure to spite the United States’ Export Control Act passed in July 1940, which cut (but did not stop completely98) oil, iron, and steel exports to Japan. In reality, it only unified opposition to the Axis powers. The curious Article 3 of the pact stated: Japan, Germany, and Italy agree to cooperate in their efforts on aforesaid lines. They further undertake to assist one another with all political, economic and military means if one of the Contracting Powers is attacked by a Power at present not involved in the European War or in the JapaneseChinese conflict. The unnamed ‘Power at present not involved’ was a thinly disguised reference to the United States – subtlety that was not lost. The closer relationship with Germany did produce two breakthroughs for Japan. First, General Yamashita learned many military techniques from Germans during a six-month trip in 1941. He inspected the Maginot Line, the German Atlantic defences, and flew in a raid over Britain. When he returned home in mid-1941, he was accompanied by more than 250 German aviation technicians, engineers and instructors. Shortly after, Japan’s air force was among the most powerful in the world.99 Yamashita would later lead the Japanese capture of Malaya and Singapore. Secondly, Germany shared its gathered intelligence with Japan. In November 1940, the German auxiliary cruiser Atlantis boarded the British cargo ship SS Automedon, capturing fifteen bags of Top Secret mail for the British Far East Command. The intelligence included naval intelligence reports containing the latest assessment of the Japanese Empire’s military strength in the Far East, along with details of Royal Air Force units, naval strength, and notes on Singapore’s defences. It declared that Britain was too weak to risk war with Japan. The relationship was very one-sided. Japan was reluctant to open a front with the Soviets. Also, because the Americans had cracked Japan’s codes, Japan revealed German strategy and strengths. Japan effectively used its alliance with Germany to bolster negotiations with the United States. The problem with the Tripartite Pact was that Germany occupied the Netherlands. Queen Wilhelmina and the Dutch government escaped to London. Although the Netherlands were neutral, if the Dutch collaborated with Germany, Japan could invade the Dutch East Indies. The Dutch East Indies were the third largest oil producer at the time. Aruba and Curaçao produced high-quality refined products and Dutch Guiana had large bauxite mines. Queen Wilhelmina, who Churchill described as “the only man in the Dutch government,” sacked her Prime Minister (who wanted to side with Germany) and replaced him with a Prime Minister who would work with Churchill and Roosevelt on ways to smooth the path for an American entry into the war. 98 99 Maechling, Charles. Pearl Harbor: The First Energy War. History Today, vol 50, Dec. 2000. World: Is Hitler Running Japan? TIME, 2 March 1942.
Sparrow  After-math  self-interest. From the Japanese perspective, it was a radical measure to spite the United States    ...
Sparrow After-math With the Dutch on their side, the United States, Britain, and Australia tried to curb Japanese militarism by stopping the supply of iron ore, steel, and oil to Japan – which Japan referred to as the ‘ABCD encirclement.’100 The inclusion of the Dutch would have been a double blow to Japan. First, Japan had a longer and stronger trading relationship with the Dutch as it was the only Western nation allowed to trade with Japan during its Sakoku. Secondly, with oil imports from the U.S. halted, Japan would have imported oil from the previously neutral Dutch. Foreseeing a breakdown in U.S. relations, by July 1940 Japan stockpiled 54 million barrels of oil. Those sanctions were too weak and only cut Japan’s reliance on U.S. oil from 80 to 60 percent. The full ABCD embargo imposed in July 1941 stopped oil shipments and froze Japanese assets in the U.S.101 Japan only had a further 4.5 million barrels of oil on its way from the Dutch East Indies. Using the United States’ blockade of Cuba in 1898 as a precedent, many Japanese saw the ABCD embargoes as an act of war and pushed for a retaliatory response. The Emperor took a more balanced and active role to choose the most appropriate course. On 31 July, the navy informed the Emperor that Japan’s oil stockpiles would be completely depleted in two years. Prime Minister Kanoe, who had been counting on the navy to restrain the Army’s aggressive designs, instead argued that if war with the United States was inevitable, it should start right away. The Japanese Imperial General Headquarters had already begun planning for a war with the Western Powers in the months before the Photo 34: The Rise of Asia Japanese propaganda poster, 1941. Here, Japan breaks the embargo came into place. imperialist chain of the ABCD (America, Kanoe also pushed for peace Britain, China, Dutch) encirclement in April and May. strangling Japan and Asia. 100 101 “Kokushi Daijiten” (“Historical Dictionary”), 1980: “It was not an official term, but a term of incitement used by the Japanese media, under the guidance of the military, in order to stir up the Japanese people’s sense of crisis...” Cited by Christopher Barnard, “Language, Ideology and Japanese History Textbooks.” London & New York, Routledge Curzon, 2003. p.85. Maechling, op cit.
Sparrow  After-math  With the Dutch on their side, the United States, Britain, and Australia tried to curb Japanese milita...
Sparrow After-math With backing from the Navy, the Emperor, and a reluctant Army, Kanoe pushed for one last attempt to avert war. Roosevelt played along, knowing that the wasted time would give the U.S. more time to stock its arsenal and rush supplies to Britain and the Soviets. On 4 September 1941, the Japanese Cabinet met to consider war plans against “United States, England, and Holland” prepared by Imperial General Headquarters, and decided that: Our Empire, for the purpose of self-defence and self-preservation, will complete preparations for war ... [and is] ... resolved to go to war with the United States, Great Britain, and the French if necessary. Our Empire will concurrently take all possible diplomatic measures vis-à-vis the United States and Great Britain, and thereby endeavor to obtain our objectives ... In the event that there is no prospect of our demands being met by the first ten days of October through the diplomatic negotiations mentioned above, we will immediately decide to commence hostilities against the United States, Britain and the French. The ‘objectives’ to be obtained were clearly defined:    A free hand to continue the conquest of China and Southeast Asia; No increase in US or British military forces in the region; and Cooperation by the West “in the acquisition of goods needed by our Empire.” The following day, Kanoe informally submitted a draft of the decision to the Emperor, just one day before the Imperial Conference. That evening, the Emperor met with the Army Chief of Staff General Sugiyama, Chief of the Navy Admiral Nagano, and Kanoe. The Emperor asked Sugiyama about the chances of success with the West. As Sugiyama answered confidently, the Emperor scolded him: “At the time of the China incident, the army told me that we could make Chiang surrender after three months but you still can’t beat him even today! Sugiyama, you were minister at the time. China is a vast area with many ways in and ways out, and we met unexpectedly big difficulties. You say the interior of China is huge; isn’t the Pacific Ocean even bigger than China? Didn’t I caution you each time about those matters? Sugiyama, are you lying to me?”102 The Emperor then announced his intention to break with tradition at the Imperial Conference. Nagano, a former Navy Minister and vastly experienced, later told a trusted colleague, “I have never seen the Emperor reprimand us in such a manner, his face turning red and raising his voice.” The next day, the policy was formally proposed at the Imperial Conference. The Privy Council President, Hara, observed that the plan seemed to put military action 102 Bix, Herbert P. Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan. New York: HarperCollins, 2000. pp.411,745.
Sparrow  After-math  With backing from the Navy, the Emperor, and a reluctant Army, Kanoe pushed for one last attempt to a...
Sparrow After-math ahead of diplomacy and, standing in for the Emperor, asked if that was the case. The Navy Minister made a reply along the lines that Konoe had stated in his private conference. Then there was silence. No other figure, including Konoe, attempted to answer the question. At this point, the Emperor astonished all present by addressing the conference personally, which left his advisors “struck with awe,” according to Kanoe. The Emperor stated that Hara’s question was an important one, and that it was “regrettable” that none of the senior leaders had addressed it. The Emperor then recited a tanka poem written by his grandfather, Emperor Meiji, several times: In this world of ours, Across the four seas, Everywhere we are all brothers, Why is it that waves and wind, Should rise and rage so turbulently?103 The Emperor stated that he had often reflected on this verse, which represented the Emperor Meiji’s desire for peace – a desire that he shared. Recovering from their shock, the ministers hastened to express their profound wish to explore all possible peaceful avenues. Navy Chief of Staff Nagano rose to defend the policy, assuring the Emperor that the consensus document was not a decision to go to war and that priority would be given to negotiations. Kanoe was given until mid-October to produce a diplomatic solution. The minimum demands included:     A halt to the economic and oil embargoes; Withdrawal of political and economic support for the Chinese Nationalist government; Agreement to keep Western military forces in the Pacific at their current level; and Non-interference in Japan’s attempts to bring “peace” to China. In other words, The United States had to accept Japanese hegemony over China, Manchuria, and French Indochina, and Japanese military primacy in an even broader swath of the East. Throughout September and October, the Army Imperial Headquarters kept continuous communications with the Imperial Household with minute details of the plans for the advance in Southeast Asia.104 In the second and third weeks of October, Sugiyama presented reports. Meanwhile, Kanoe found himself increasingly isolated. He made one last desperate attempt to avoid war by arranging a secret conference with the U.S. Ambassador, Joseph Grew. Kanoe told Grew that he was prepared to travel to meet Roosevelt on a moment’s notice and that a ship was waiting prepared. Kanoe was 103 104 This poem was written at the end of the Japanese–Russian war and was admired by the US President Theodore Roosevelt. Wetzler, Peter. Hirohito and War: Imperial Tradition and Military Decision Making in Prewar Japan. University of Hawaii Press, 1998. pp.52-54.
Sparrow  After-math  ahead of diplomacy and, standing in for the Emperor, asked if that was the case. The Navy Minister ma...
Sparrow After-math convinced that the United States and Japan could reach agreement. Grew, impressed with Kanoe’s sincerity, cabled back to the State Department. The State Department replied that, unless there were detailed negotiations that would be affirmed at a summit, an open-ended summit was a waste of time. Kanoe was out of time. Kanoe tried to stall as long as possible while the Navy and Army continued their preparations. Because of the oil embargo, Japan had to act soon or it Photo 35: A visibly distressed Kanoe in midOctober 1941. He resigned shortly would be conceding defeat through afterwards. delay. At the 14 October cabinet meeting, frustration boiled over. Army Minister Hideki Tōjō stated that the deadline had passed and negotiations had failed. Kanoe and his allies suggested that if the Army would agree, in principle, to a gradual withdrawal from China, a negotiated settlement could be reached with the United States. General Tōjō responded heatedly: “To yield to the American demand and withdraw our troops would wipe out all the fruits of the China War, endanger Manchukuo, and jeopardize the governing of Korea. To accept troop withdrawal in name only would not benefit Japan either! “Withdrawal would mean retreat. It would depress morale. A demoralized Army would be as worthless as no Army. “Our troops in China are the “heart of the matter!” Having made one concession after another, why should Japan now yield the “heart?” “If we concede this, what is diplomacy? It is surrender … a stain on the history of our empire!”105 Admiral Nagano summed up his service’s ambivalent attitude during this period by observing: “The government has decided that if there is no war, the fate of the nation is sealed. Even if there is a war, the country may be ruined. Nevertheless, a nation that does not fight in this plight has lost its spirit and is doomed.”106 Konoe resigned on 16 October 1941, one day after recommending Prince Naruhiko Higashikuni to the Emperor as his successor. He explained to his chief cabinet secretary: Of course His Majesty is a pacifist, and there is no doubt he wished to avoid war. When I told him that to initiate war was a mistake, he agreed. But the next day, he would tell me: “You were worried about it yesterday, 105 106 Oka, Yoshitake. Konoe Fumimaro: a political biography. Madison Books, 1983. p.187. Morley, James William. Japan’s foreign policy, 1868-1941: a research guide. Columbia University Press, 1974. p.98.
Sparrow  After-math  convinced that the United States and Japan could reach agreement. Grew, impressed with Kanoe   s sinc...
Sparrow After-math but you do not have to worry so much.” Thus, gradually, he began to lean toward war. And the next time I met him, he leaned even more toward. In short, I felt the Emperor was telling me: my prime minister does not understand military matters, I know much more. In short, the Emperor had absorbed the view of the army and navy high commands.107 Two days later, Hirohito chose General Tōjō as Prime Minister despite the wish of the Navy and the Army, who would have preferred Prince Higashikuni. No one now stood between Japan and the events of 7 December 1941. Japan learned its military strategy and tactics from the West. It used Western battles as precedents for its own actions. Japan followed a predictable formula of declaring war moments before an attack, gain an upper hand, and then set terms for peace. The attacks of the 7 December 1941 were no different. Japan sent strict instructions to its Washington Ambassador to deliver a note to the US Secretary of State at precisely half an hour before the attacks commenced at Pearl Harbour and Manila. The Ambassador arrived 55 minutes late. The Americans (who intercepted the diplomatic cable) were expecting the meeting and declaration of war. They didn’t, however, expect the attack on Pearl Harbour. Churchill, however, received an intercepted Japanese naval code, which deciphered that Pearl Harbour would be attacked, but withheld this information from Roosevelt and the Americans. The key objective of the attacks of 7 December 1941 was twofold. First, the “Southern Plan” would seize economic resources in Malaya and the Dutch East Indies under the control of the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. Secondly, due to the ‘close relationship’ between Britain and the United States, an “Eastern Plan” would attack the United States before they became involved. Some have suggested that Japan’s belief that the United States would enter the war to come to Britain and Holland’s aid is ‘misguided.’108,109 What is known is that Churchill got his wish when Pearl Harbour was attacked. 107 108 109 Fujiwara, Akira. Shōwa Tennō n.o Jū-go Nen Sensō (Shōwa Emperor’s Fifteen-year War). Aoki Shoten, 1991. p.126, citing Kenji Tomita’s diary. Wilmott, H. P. Barrier and the Javelin: Japanese and Allied strategies, February to June 1942. US Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, 1983. Evans, David C. & Peattie, Mark R. Kaigun Strategy, Tactics, and Technology in the Imperial Japanese Navy, 1887-1941. Naval Institute Press, 1997.
Sparrow  After-math but you do not have to worry so much.    Thus, gradually, he began to lean toward war. And the next ti...
Sparrow After-math Japan’s Eastern Plan required:    Initial attacks on the US Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor with carrier-based aircraft of the Combined Fleet; Seizure of the Philippines; and Cutting the U.S. lines of communication by seizing Guam and Wake. The Southern Plan called for:    Attacking Malaya and Hong Kong; Following with attacks against  the Bismarck Archipelago,  Java, and  Sumatra; and Isolating Australia and New Zealand. Following completion of these objectives, the Japanese strategy was to turn to defence while hoping for a negotiated peace.110 The problem for Japan was that the United States did not accept any terms offered by Japan. The United States would only accept unconditional surrender. Japan believed that it could negotiate terms with the United States. It tried using intermediaries such as the Russians, Swiss, and Swedish throughout the war. The United States wouldn’t have a bar of it. The term ‘unconditional surrender’ had a short history by the time the Allied Powers made the demand at the Casablanca Conference in January 1943. A form of it had previously been applied to Napoleon Bonaparte when he was declared an outlaw after his escape from exile in Elba. After then, the only time it was actually demanded was by General Grant in the American Civil War. Announcing that only unconditional surrender is acceptable puts psychological pressure on a weaker adversary. The problem with such a demand is that it antagonizes an enemy and exacerbates conflict. At the Casablanca Conference, it was Roosevelt who sprung the term on the Allies and the media. Churchill, Stalin, and most of the senior U.S. officials disapproved of the demand against the Axis powers as it would prolong the war and act as a propaganda tool by the Axis to encourage further resistance. One possible reason for the demand was that Roosevelt was concerned by the criminality of the Axis leadership. A party who accepted unconditional surrender was still protected by international law. Conversely, they were still liable for war crimes under international law. Effectively, as Douglas MacArthur argued, much of the loss of life in the war could have been avoided if the unconditional surrender demand was not made. It only antagonized Japan’s military leaders. The final surrender of Japan was conditional. It was conditional that the Emperor remain the head of state. The United States only revised its terms when they feared that Japan would surrender to the Soviets. Ironically, the Japanese accepted the revised terms because they did not want to surrender to the Soviets. 110 Wilmott, op cit.
Sparrow  After-math  Japan   s Eastern Plan required               Initial attacks on the US Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor...
Sparrow Photo 36: After-math “Waiting for the Signal From Home.” Dr. Seuss joined the war effort. * Culture Clash “Now in order to kill the enemy, our men must be roused to anger; that there may be advantage from defeating the enemy, they must have their rewards.” – Sun Tzu, The Art of War. Of those interviewed for this book, non-Americans said that Japan entered the war to rid the Far East of Imperialism in order to trade with its neighbours. To the Americans, “The Japs started it.” As demonstrated by Japan’s spectacular successes through 1941-1942, Japan had done their homework on their enemy. They had spies on the ground well in advance of the 7 December 1941 attacks, were aware of the deep seeded hatred the Asians had for their imperial powers, and were also aware of the atrocities committed against them by their colonizers. The Japanese also had a very pigeon-holed view of Western culture. The guards at Mitsushima shared stories about ‘Cowboys and Indians’ and the similarities between the British and Japanese. Attitudes towards an enemy isn’t random. It is a process manipulated by several factors. In total war, preparing an army psychologically is as important as preparing them physically. A soldier needs to believe that their cause is right, that their enemy is inferior, that they can and will win. Citizens need to be motivated to hate and/or fear their enemy, to support their leaders, and to contribute towards the war effort. Total war is a total government, total economy, total population exercise. Politicians, media, word of mouth – all information streams influence the way people gather information, interpret it, form opinions, and act based on it. During the first half of the twentieth century, information streams were dominated by a few. What sold newspapers was shocking revelations, something new that was different from the status quo. Over time, ‘news’ formed a pattern that shifted the status quo. Politicians utilized the release of information in campaigns to position themselves to benefit. They would identify a problem, make people feel it is important, proportion blame (acting on prejudice), offer a solution, and call people
Sparrow  Photo 36   After-math     Waiting for the Signal From Home.    Dr. Seuss joined the war effort.    Culture Clash ...
Sparrow After-math to action. In marketing, this is called the AIDA model – attention, interest, desire, and action. During the Great Depression, there was mass unemployment, high inflation, political and social unrest. In Germany, the people lost faith in their institutions’ ability to steer the country to recovery. The Treaty of Versailles was humiliating to Germans. Hyper-inflation was debilitating, poverty disheartening, and communism reverberating. National socialists seized on a unifying prejudice. The leading figures in the banks and communist parties were Jewish. Oppressed for centuries, they had a distinct culture. They were identifiable. They could be targeted. The Nazi Party prepared a propaganda campaign to unify a broad cross-section of society using a campaign of hatred against the Jewish. They identified some similar physical characteristics of Jewish people and portrayed those exaggerated features to give the appearance of evil, conniving, and an inferior subhuman species. The Nazis drummed up hatred, unified a response, and perceived an enemy as inferior, which desensitized people to commit cruel acts. The Nazi propaganda machine extended the theme of the ‘Conspiring Jew’ from causing Germany’s problems, to causing wars, to conspiring with the enemy. Photo 37: Examples of Nazi anti-Semitic propaganda. Nazis developed Jewish stereotypic appearances to portray them as subhuman. These Der Stürmer posters’ captions read “The Eternal Jew”, “Jews- make wars longer, start wars”, and “Behind the enemy powers: the Jew.” Race was always a factor between the Occident and the Orient. Subjugation was the goal of the Imperialist West. Strength by the Orient was seen as a threat to Occidental interests. Racism wasn’t just perceived. Discrimination was law. Immigration laws, the League of Nations Covenant, trade agreements, and civil laws segregated and persecuted Asians. The media invented the ‘Yellow Peril’ and acted on racist fears. It was this racism that generated Japan’s considerable resentment of the West. Once the West entered the war with Japan, the racism would intensify.
Sparrow  After-math  to action. In marketing, this is called the AIDA model     attention, interest, desire, and action. D...
Sparrow After-math “Between two countries at war there was always a danger that one or other of the combatants would seek to turn public opinion in his favour by resort to a propaganda in which incidents, inseparable alas from all hostilities, were magnified and distorted for the express purpose of inflaming prejudice and passion and obscuring the real issues of the conflict!” – Sir Charles Addis at Chatham House, November 10, 1938. There is little difference between the racism in the propaganda of the United States and Nazi Germany. Both followed the same motivating influences, both portrayed the enemy as subhuman, both encouraged a desensitized and violent retribution. In both cases, the government set the tone; the media pushed the barrier, and the public acted on the fear and hatred generated. Nazi Germany copied many of the United States’ eugenics policies, including racial screening of immigration and euthanasia or sterilization of ‘genetically inferior’ groups such as criminals, homosexuals, ill, disabled, and mentally insane. 111 In the US, a 1911 Carnegie Institute report supported the establishment of local gas chambers. There was a unique difference between how the United States portrayed the Nazis and the Japanese. The Nazis were portrayed as the ‘Hun’ – a strong and ghostly monster. Often the caricatures had Hitler’s moustache, a muscular physique or a chiseled jaw. The Japanese, on the other hand, were myopic with round glasses, had large Photo 38: While United States portrayed protruding teeth like a rodent, a Nazis as strong and aggressive, body like a primate, and a snarl Japanese were portrayed as myopic primate vermin. like vermin. 111 Black, Edwin. “Eugenics and the Nazis - the California connection.” San Francisco Chronicle, November 9, 2003.
Sparrow  After-math    Between two countries at war there was always a danger that one or other of the combatants would se...
Sparrow After-math “Our country is now geared to an arms economy bred in an artificially induced psychosis of war hysteria and an incessant propaganda of fear.” – Douglas MacArthur Racism was a motivating tool for not just soldiers but also civilians. It was used to increase production and to encourage sales of war bonds to fund the war effort. Effectively, people were investing in pest control. Racism generated an exacerbating cycle. Japan’s society was more homogenous, unified, and closer-knit. The worse the racism got in the United States, the more hostile Japan became. Japan’s hostility towards the Americans was the culmination of the American’s condescending xenophobia towards it. Photo 39: American and Australian propaganda responded to Japan’s desire to ‘liberate the Far East of Western Imperialism’ by referring to Japan as the ‘Empire of Japan’, then stirred up fears of ‘Yellow Peril’ xenophobia by portraying the Japanese as myopic primate vermin.
Sparrow  After-math    Our country is now geared to an arms economy bred in an artificially induced psychosis of war hyste...
Sparrow After-math “As a member of President Roosevelt’s administration, I saw the United States Army give way to mass hysteria over the Japanese... Crowded into cars like cattle, these hapless people were hurried away to hastily constructed and thoroughly inadequate concentration camps, with soldiers with nervous muskets on guard, in the great American desert. We gave the fancy name of ‘relocation centers’ to these dust bowls, but they were concentration camps nonetheless.” – Harold Ickes, Secretary of the Interior, Washington Evening Star, September 23, 1946 The racist hysteria reached new extremes after the events of 7 December 1941. On 19 February 1942, President Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, which authorized the internment of people of Japanese ethnicity who lived near the Pacific Coast of the United States in ‘War Relocation Camps.’ Even Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and senior U.S. officials called them concentration camps, because that is what they were. 112 Photo 40: First-graders at the Weill public school in San Francisco pledging allegiance to The internment was the United States flag. A month later, inconsistently applied. While those of Japanese ancestry would be all Japanese Americans ‘relocated’ to concentration camps. living on the West Coast were interned (112,000), less than 1,800 of the 150,000-plus living in Hawaii were interned. Of those interned, more than 80,000 were born in the United States holding American citizenship. Those who were 1/16 Japanese could be placed in internment camps. The Executive Order gave power to military leaders to designate “military areas” at their discretion, “from which any or all persons may be excluded.” These “exclusion zones,” applied to anyone the military commanders might choose. The area would eventually cover over one-third of the country. Ethnic Japanese in the United States were not alone. Similar camps sprung up in Canada and many from South America were interned in U.S. camps. The measures were racially motivated, rather than a military necessity. The military leader in 112 Smithsonian Institution. A More Perfect Union: Japanese Americans & the U.S. Constitution: Internment: Permanent Camps. 1990-2001. Retrieved July 18, 2007.
Sparrow  After-math     As a member of President Roosevelt   s administration, I saw the United States Army give way to ma...
Sparrow After-math charge of the ‘relocation’ was a particularly nasty bigot. General John L. DeWitt, who said that “A Jap’s a Jap,” testified to Congress: “I don’t want any of them [persons of Japanese ancestry] here. They are a dangerous element. There is no way to determine their loyalty... It makes no difference whether he is an American citizen, he is still a Japanese. American citizenship does not necessarily determine loyalty... But we must worry about the Japanese all the time until he is wiped off the map.”113 By February, Earl Warren, the Attorney General of California, had begun his efforts to persuade the federal government to remove all people of Japanese heritage from the West Coast. By 3 May 1942, DeWitt issued Civilian Exclusion Order No. 34, ordering all people of Japanese ancestry, whether citizens or noncitizens, who were still living in “Military Area No. 1” to report to assembly centers, where they would live until being moved to permanent “Relocation Centers.” The exclusion orders were popular amongst the white farmers of the West Coast who resented the competition from Japanese-American farmers. The media fuelled the resentment: “We’re charged with wanting to get rid of the Japs for selfish reasons. We do. It’s a question of whether the white man lives on the Pacific Coast or the brown men. They came into this valley to work, and they stayed to take over... If all the Japs were removed tomorrow, we’d never miss them in two weeks, because the white farmers can take over and produce everything the Jap grows. And we do not want them back when the war ends, either.”114 Racism was government sanctioned. A report prepared at Roosevelt’s request sought to link Japanese Americans with espionage in order to justify the internment program. One columnist reflected the growing public sentiment fueled by the Roberts Commission Report: “I am for the immediate removal of every Japanese on the West Coast to a point deep in the interior. I don’t mean a nice part of the interior either. Herd ‘em up, pack ‘em off and give ‘em the inside room in the badlands... Personally, I hate the Japanese. And that goes for all of them.”115 Those interned suffered both financially and physically. Deserted suburbs were looted, luggage was stolen from government storage facilities, and farms were either sold cheaply or abused in their absence. As they weren’t told where they would be held, their clothing was insufficient for sub-zero degree Fahrenheit winters (minus eighteen degrees Celsius). In 1944, even the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the exclusion orders and internment. Later, in 1988, the U.S. government gave $20,000 113 114 115 Testimony of John L. DeWitt, April 13, 1943, House Naval Affairs Subcommittee to Investigate Congested Areas, Part 3, pp.739–40. Austin E. Anson, managing secretary of the Salinas Vegetable Grower-Shipper Association, quoted in the Saturday Evening Post, in May 9, 1942. Neiwert, David. The Eliminationists: How Hate Talk Radicalized the American Right. Paradigm Publishers,2009. p.195 quoting Columnist Henry MɔLemore.
Sparrow  After-math  charge of the    relocation    was a particularly nasty bigot. General John L. DeWitt, who said that ...
Sparrow After-math compensation to each surviving detainee. On 7 December 1991, President George H.W. Bush issued the following formal apology: “In remembering, it is important to come to grips with the past. No nation can fully understand itself or find its place in the world if it does not look with clear eyes at all the glories and disgraces of its past. We in the United States acknowledge such an injustice in our history. The internment of Americans of Japanese ancestry was a great injustice, and it will never be repeated.” Photo 41: “A view of the Granada Center looking west from the water tower.” Amache, Colorado. November 30, 1942. (Courtesy of National Archives)
Sparrow  After-math  compensation to each surviving detainee. On 7 December 1991, President George H.W. Bush issued the fo...
Sparrow After-math “There is a point when coincidence becomes a deliberate pattern.” – Charlie McLachlan Charlie McLachlan had the unique experience of detainment in five prisoner of war camps and three hellships. He met prisoners of British, Australian, Dutch, American, Canadian, New Zealand, Indian, and Asian extractions. Guards were either frontline troops, Korean, injured former troops, or civilian. From his many interactions, patterns formed. Charlie’s first experiences of the Japanese were on Timor. Previously, the Yokozuka Special Landing Forces fought in China, Hong Kong, and Ambon. In Ambon, they massacred Australians at Laha. The Yokozuka troops were the Japanese equivalent of marines and paratroopers. They were fanatical and refused to surrender or be captured. They committed atrocities against many captured Australians before capitulation. The other Japanese troops on Timor were regular infantry. They were a mixed bag. Clearly, their orders in relation to captured forces had changed since the Fall of Singapore days before. They also respected Sparrow Force for their bravery and compassion at the capitulation by treating injured Japanese troops. The conditions at Usapa Besar were a resort atmosphere. Sparrow Force built their own accommodation and received sufficient food and recreation. Punishment for infractions, however, were harsh but in accordance with Hague and Geneva Conventions. The Japanese were surprised by the attitudes of Sparrow Force. At the end of their campaign, the troops now guarded their captives. On Ambon, they simply rounded up their captives and slaughtered them without a second thought. On Timor, they got to know the British, Dutch, and Australians. The Japanese clearly tried to treat Allied forces differently from the Chinese and other enemies previously engaged. They tried to keep to the Rules of War. On Timor, Leggatt received complaints from Japanese officers about the bayoneting of captured soldiers at Usua Ridge. Leggatt promptly responded, citing the execution of prisoners in Babau and Usua. This exchange clearly identifies that the Japanese did have rules of engagement determined on a case-by-case basis. The Japanese were trained to believe that their enemy was imperialist, racist, and greedy dogs not worthy of mercy. Instead of generating purely hatred, there was a fear generated of being captured. Japanese propaganda didn’t resort to the depths that the Americans or Australians but instead manipulated perceptions of leaders, such as Roosevelt, as a conniving aggressor. The Japanese fought their propaganda on concepts rather than stigmas. Japan didn’t need to lie, the truth was the most effective weapon against the West. Japanese knew that the West was racist. As news of the Japanese American internment in the desert spread, Japanese fears were confirmed.
Sparrow  After-math    There is a point when coincidence becomes a deliberate pattern.        Charlie McLachlan  Charlie M...
Sparrow After-math Charlie noticed a strange series of coincidences evolving relating to the Japanese treatment of prisoners of war. The Japanese appeared to treat their captives similarly to how their captives treated those they colonized. The Japanese had a vast spy network throughout the Far East. Timor was no different. The troops who invaded each colony were selected and briefed with information relating to why they were liberating each colony. In Malaya, the Japanese knew of the massacre of Indian soldiers by the British during the First World War. The Japanese Navy were sent to help Photo 42: Japan portrayed Roosevelt as an the British deal with the revolt. Once imperialist aggressor, in response Singapore fell, many Sikhs swapped to trade embargoes that starved sides and brutally guarded the Japan of oil, steel, and iron ore. British POWs. The Americans received similar treatment to how the Americans treated the Filipinos. The Americans were marched into the jungle on the Bataan ‘Death March’, transported in cattle trains, and thrown into concentration camps. The ‘White-Australian’ Government were racist and the Japanese knew this. Many Australian prisoners of war received severe treatment due to the Japanese hatred of Australian white supremacy. At Singapore, many Australians were sent to work in the harshest slave labour environments, such as the Burma Railway. Charlie was told by the Japanese guards many favourable stories of the British. At one time, Britain was Japan’s closest ally and many in Japan believed that Britain betrayed them due to being manipulated by America. In reality, it was the reverse as Churchill conjured America into the war. As contact increased between the Japanese and the Allies, the Japanese Command resorted to more extreme measures to motivate resistance. Combining hatred and fear, Hirohito, as divine Emperor, feared the defection of Japanese civilians surprised by generous U.S. treatment. He authorized the commander of Saipan to promise civilians who died there an equal spiritual status in the afterlife with those of soldiers perishing in combat.116 Over 10,000 took up the Emperor’s offer, many jumping from cliffs. 116 Bergamini, op cit., pp.1012–1014.
Sparrow  After-math  Charlie noticed a strange series of coincidences evolving relating to the Japanese treatment of priso...
Sparrow After-math Frontline Japanese didn’t need propaganda to generate fear of their enemy. The Australians and Americans subjected the Japanese to extraordinary brutality. Many Japanese were summarily executed rather than escorted as captives. Many Allies mutilated corpses and kept body parts as trophies. The media circulated photographs of the ‘trophies,’ which ended up in the hands of the Japanese. Photo 43: American soldiers would mutilate Japanese corpses, boil skulls, and keep Disrespect for the dead is one of them as trophies. the worst sins in Japanese (Australian War Memorial, AWM_072837) culture. Japanese were also racist. Japan was stuck between their perceived status as the top Asian race, and at the bottom of the West’s race hierarchy. This elitism/inferiority complex exacerbated Japanese treatment of their captives. The Japanese prided their navy along British Royal Navy traditions. Japan’s army was based on German and French military theory. Of those interviewed, it was clear that the Japanese Navy was elitist whereas the Army was the domain of the lower echelons of society. Of all those interviewed, all said that the Korean guards were the nastiest – most likely the result of their resentment of their status amongst the Japanese. Korean soldiers were regarded as one of the lowest echelons and – based on the hierarchical corporal punishment culture within the army – would be on the tail end of beatings. Only prisoners of war were considered lower, which often meant they were the only people that Koreans could beat. Many interpreters in prisoner of war camps were Western educated. They either ‘answered the call’ or happened to be in Japanese-controlled territory when the war broke out. These interpreters were unpopular amongst the army fold and were either given behind the scenes intelligence roles or (‘the lowest of the low’) roles guarding captured prisoners of war. Japan’s successful drive through the Far East produced some unexpected results for Japan. In many ways, Japan was unprepared to be burdened with so many prisoners of war. Due to the sheer number of Western prisoners of war, Japan conceded that a change of approach was necessary. Although Japan did not ratify the 1929 Geneva Convention, in 1942 it did promise to abide by its terms as well as the Hague Convention of 1907. Its front line soldiers, however, had little if no education of what to do with captured enemy combatants. Soldiers were trained to be fanatically aggressive. As the war progressed, many Japanese felt the West were hypocrites. Japanese guards would highlight contradictions between the West’s previous conduct and the West’s complaints regarding Japanese conduct. The British and U.S. Army had their own corporal punishment disciplinary system, including group punishments.
Sparrow  After-math  Frontline Japanese didn   t need propaganda to generate fear of their enemy. The Australians and Amer...
Sparrow After-math The British invaded South Africa for its mineral wealth. The United States cleared Indians off their territory. The British held the Boers in concentration camps. The United States did imprison Japanese who were American citizens in concentration camps. The United States did bomb civilian targets. Japan was simply doing what the Imperialists did. Suddenly, if Japan does it, it is not OK? “There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare.” – Sun Tzu, The Art of War. As Charlie noted, Japan got its way in the end. Independence movements sprung up throughout the Far East and the Western Powers gradually relinquished colonial rule. Japan was able to trade with its neighbours and became the world’s second largest economy within thirty years. Japan achieved this with an isolationist military and a tweaked constitution that gave the Diet control over foreign and domestic affairs. Japanese land reform and labour unions contributed to a consumer-oriented industrial democracy. While MacArthur steered Japan into a peaceful society, Eisenhower oversaw a permanent war economy in an arms race with the Soviet Bloc. During the Cold War, the United States formed alliances with militarist regimes in the Middle and Far East, and Central and South America. Japan’s economy initially flourished during the Korean War. In September 1951, the Treaty of Peace with Japan ended the occupation and restored full sovereignty in 1952. All Japanese war criminals were then released. In many ways, the United States and Japan swapped roles. The United States became a war economy with a government run by assassination while Japan became isolationist. Meanwhile, during the Cold War, communism killed many more than during the Pacific War. Stalin purges amounted to 799,455 executions, around 1.7 million deaths in the Gulags, and 390,000 deaths during kulak forced resettlement.117 No fewer than 15 million but as many as 20 million perished from famines and state cruelty.118 In China, around 6 million died during the Civil War119 and 49-78 million was killed during the Cultural Revolution.120 As many as 1.6 million North Korea citizens were killed between 1948 and 1994. In other territory previously occupied by Japan, independence movements killed more citizens than the Japanese did during World War II. Wheatcroft, Stephen G. “Victims of Stalinism and the Soviet Secret Police: The Comparability and Reliability of the Archival Data. Not the Last Word.” Europe-Asia Studies 51 (2): 315–345. 1999. 118 Conquest, Robert. The Great Terror: A Reassessment. Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19507132-8. 1991. 119 Lynch, Michael. The Chinese Civil War 1945-49. Osprey Publishing. ISBN 978-1841766713. 2010. p.91. 120 Jung Chang. Mao: the Unknown Story. Anchor, 2005. 117
Sparrow  After-math  The British invaded South Africa for its mineral wealth. The United States cleared Indians off their ...