As everyday, I started this day very early. I love getting things done before everyone else is awake, and then when I do go out and start the day, I am already very awake and ready to go. The only problem with this during this leg of the trip is that I am sharing a room with several people. When I get up in the morning, I have to open my metal locker (that is not much different from your ordinary high school locker), and move my stuff around to get all my things together for a shower and getting dressed. I am well aware that no matter how quiet I try to be, to a sleeping person, the smallest tings and bings and clinks sound terribly annoying, and I don't want to disturb anyone's sleep. However, just as I realized what I had gotten into with this room (and having to put up with people talking and smoking just outside the door until two in the morning) the people sleeping at 5 or 6 in the am when I start to move around also must have known that my little noise might happen, too. So while I did feel kind of bad with the noise I was making on my first morning here, now on my second morning, I am a little less considerate.
Even though I had already visited the Yasukuni Shrine on my first day in Japan, it was important to also visit the museum that was close by. This museum was quite distinct from the Osaka Peace Museum. While both covered World War II, the Yushukan War Museum is quite a bit more sympathetic to the Japanese position during the war. I remember reading that George Will, the conservative American political commentator was outraged when he visited this museum. While the museum does lend a lot of support to Japanese actions during the war, I don't think that there was anything blatantly false about anything that was presented. Rather, I think that it is important that this museum's voice be heard in order to really understand different perspectives of regarding the war. It is so easy for most to say "This is right, and this is wrong," but I think it is more difficult, yet very important, to try to analyze and understand why some people might do things that others see as wrong.
One thing that they tried to explain is what is widely known as the Nanking Massacre. The evidence seriously supports the idea that the Japanese killed many unarmed civilians in the city of Nanking in China. This museum presents it in a different light, however. They claim that the Japanese soldiers severely punished Chinese soldiers who were disguised and wearing civilian clothes. As absurd as this sounds, isn't this exactly what American soldiers and officers are complaining about in their overseas campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan? Isn't this exactly what Israeli soldiers are complaining about regarding Palestinian soldiers in Israel and in the settlements? One thing that this book project has got me considering is to drop the words "right" or "wrong" from my analysis of actions during wars. From my point of view, I think that instead of trying to figure out who was just and who was evil, it is much more interesting to try to discover why certain actions were taken, or at least, the reasons that people gave for their actions.
Another position that I found interesting is the reasoning given for bombing Pearl Harbor. The Japanese leadership saw the Hull note from America as an ultimatum to stop their campaign in East and South East Asia. Further, it is claimed that American warships were already mobilized on November 28, 1945, more than a week before Pearl Harbor. How is one supposed to view an ultimatum?
There is also another long exhibit that tried to explain how hard the Japanese leadership were trying to surrender to the American forces before the atomic bombs were dropped. It so happens that America wanted an unconditional surrender, but the Japanese were only willing to surrender if certain postwar conditions would hold, such as maintaining the role of the Emperor. The exhibition seemed to lament that the American forces wanted everything their way, or no way.
Towards the end of the exhibition, there were many lamentations about the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and how the Emperor was willing to sacrifice himself in order to end the war and save his people. Ok. Across from that exhibit was one that was devoted to the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal. Unfortunately, while many of the exhibits through the museum did offer English translations, this one did not, yet it is an issue that I find very fascinating. There were photos of the seven Class A war criminals that were executed as a result of the tribunal, but there was also a larger photo, really the center and the focus of the exhibit, dedicated to Indian justice Radhabinod Pal. He is the only justice that had the courage to call the whole military tribunal a procedural farce, and voted to acquit all seven men of any crimes during the war. (He was out voted.) Why wasn't this exhibit in English? I was amazed at what a hero Justice Pal was made out to be; in fact, outside of the museum, they have a monument to him that does include and English explanation as to why he is held in such high regard here.
Before the end of the exhibition where photos of all the war heroes that are enshrined in Yasukuni are displayed, there was an exhibit which tried to explain the overall Japanese success of the war, despite the nation's utter destruction. The leadership had claimed from the beginning that all they wanted was an Asia free from Western colonization, and that was what they were fighting for all along. (Indeed, almost all of Asia from India through China except Japan and Thailand was under the control of some European power or another.) However, even though Japan had suffered a terrible defeat, the dream of a free Asia became true because after the war, one by one, Asian nations who were inspired by the successes of Japan over Western powers (so the exhibit claims), began throwing off the yoke of British, German, Dutch, and French rule over their lands.
Now, I want to make clear that although I might have an opinion regarding the just or unjust nature of some actions during the war, I do think that it is important to always consider multiple perspectives and different possibilities of seeing the world outside of the dominant cultural dynamic.
No comments:
Post a Comment