ATOMIC ANNIVERSARY ALARM
Today is the seventieth anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. I've written at length before about how both the Western and Japanese views of this event seem to be off the mark - the former have convinced themselves that it ended the war and was therefore necessary, the latter have isolated it from its war context into a portrayal of Japan as victim. In my opinion, it was the lightning Soviet attack that ripped through Japan's Asian continental possessions down into Korea that finally made Tokyo realise that it was all over and that surrender to the Americans (with provisions for the maintenance of the Imperial dynasty) was preferable to a Soviet invasion.
This afternoon, though, as I come into town and have to fight my way through through the throngs of both domestic and international visitors, here for the ceremonies, I can only feel annoyance at the whole charade. Why, it strikes me, is there no comparable memorial for the Tokyo fire raids that wiped out more people initially than the Hiroshima bomb? Hiroshima has become the poster child and facade for the whitewashing of Japanese history, which dishonours the very victims themselves.
I recently tried to find out just exactly what young Japanese know of twentieth century history, and the results were depressing, but predictable. Aside from the atomic bombings, they have little idea of the vast empire Japan tried to carve out of Asia, and only some vague notions of atrocities such as Nanjing. Nobody had heard of Unit 731. Nobody knew that Japan had bombed Australia or had attempted to invade as far west as India.
If ever there was a war in which the good and the bad were clearly demarcated, it was World War II. Yes, it was a total war in which all sides and participants actively targeted civilians and the Allies did their fare share of hypocritical butchery. And yes, the Allies could be said to bear a certain amount of responsibility for the militaristic paths taken by both Germany and Japan. The fact remains, however, that Berlin and Tokyo both started aggressive wars of blatant conquest that were conducted with a similar degree of savage brutality. Both had to be countered and defeated.
The paths taken by both of the defeated aggressors post-war have been vastly different, however. Germans are well-educated with regard to the atrocities carried out by their nation, and sufficient atonement has been made to victims such that Germany is today a highly regarded nation, a bastion of toleration and moderation. Japan chose to sweep everything under the carpet, to not educate its children on the disaster of the 30's and 40's, and to openly allow prominent politicians to actually deny the atrocities of that period. Such a policy in an inherently conservative country like Japan, where the culture tends towards an acquiescent obedient public incapable of critical thinking, is extremely worrying when combined with the resurgence of nationalism and attempts to alter the pacifist constitution, and has led to continued poor relations with neighbouring countries.
The future does not look rosy at all, and the youth of Japan are shockingly apolitical, unaware of the danger facing them, content just to enjoy the material benefits accrued by their parents. One gets the feeling that it would take something fairly monumental to get them to awaken from their slumber and realise that their nation is slowly inching towards another abyss. Would a docile, ignorant and cowed populace even be stirred into protest by such a drastic measure as the reintroduction of conscription? I'm afraid that this will be put to the test within the decade...