Recently,
Japan’s Imperial Household released a DVD set containing a re-mastered and
digitized version of Emperor Hirohito’s speech that was recorded for national
broadcast on the eve of Japan’s surrender thus ending WWII. The actual
broadcast was made on Aug. 15, 1945 marking the official end of the war.
While
the release of the improved quality of Hirohito’s speech was widely reported, I
could not find any official explanation as to the reason for making this
version available now. Presumably, it is part of Japan’s contribution to
celebrate or commemorate or memorialize the 70th anniversary of the
end of WWII, depending on one’s personal perspective.
Having now read the text of the Emperor’s speech, I have a better
understanding of why the self-image of post-war Japan can be so vastly
different from the view of Japan by others. I was a child in China during the
war. If I grew up in Japan and heard the Emperor’s speech, I could easily have
concluded that Japan was a victim of WWII. Nothing in his speech would suggest
that Japan was the aggressor and guilty of provoking the devastating conflict.
The Japanese language is characterized by nuanced, indirect expressions.
I recall reading one the old popular business books written to educate gaijins
(foreigners) on the subtleties of communicating with the Japanese. The title
was something like “Japanese have 16 ways of saying “no,”—none as simple as a
straightforward no. Interacting with my Japanese friends, I found that they
have many ways of expressing apology and regret but never with seamless candor.
Indeed, we can see by deconstructing the Emperor’s speech that “telling
it like it is” is not in the Japanese make-up.
First, Hirohito said: “We have decided to effect a settlement of the
present situation by resorting to an extraordinary measure.” What he meant
was, “We have to surrender unconditionally.”
Next, he said, “We have ordered Our Government to communicate to the
Governments of the United States, Great Britain, China and the Soviet Union
that Our Empire accepts the provisions of their Joint Declaration.”
The Western powers interpret this statement to mean that the Emperor
accepted the terms of unconditional surrender as outlined in the Potsdam
Declaration. Yet can anyone expect the ordinary people in Japan to make the
same connection from his speech, a speech where “surrender” and “Potsdam” were
conspicuously absent? Thanks to the way post-war textbooks are written, most
people in Japan have not even heard of Potsdam Declaration.
Then he said, “It being far from our thought either to infringe upon
sovereignty of other nations or to embark upon territorial aggrandizement.”
He obviously was not referring to Japan’s invasion and occupation of Manchuria
as early as 1931 and certainly not the occupation of Korea since the latter
part of 19th century.
And he said, “The war situation has developed not necessarily to
Japan’s advantage.” Certainly a masterful understatement under the trying
circumstances he was facing.
Approaching the end of his speech, he said, “We cannot but express
the deepest sense of regret to Our Allied nations of East Asia, who have
consistently cooperated with the Empire towards the emancipation of East Asia.”
This statement neatly encapsulated the myth of co-prosperity Japan used to
justify invading and occupying East Asia countries.
The raping and pillaging as the Japanese troops moved into each country
was for their own good, to free them from the shackles of white man domination.
Politicians in Japan today continues to perpetuate the idea that Japan invaded
rest of Asia for their own good, that the Japanese soldiers snatched the
possessions from the local people in order to share the wealth with them.
The media simply adored the statement the Emperor made toward the end of
his speech, “… to pave the way for a grand peace for all the
generations to come by enduring the unendurable and suffering what is
insufferable.” The poetic meter of the enduring and suffering tugged their
heart strings and was often quoted and repeated in documentaries and films
about the war.
Unfortunately, the context of that quote was to portray the hapless
Japanese people as having to endure and suffer the post war trauma of a
defeated nation — in others words, another reminder of Japan as a victim of
WWII. The Emperor was certainly not referring to the Chinese people having to
endure and suffer the eight years of the brutal occupation by the imperial
troops before the war ended.
It’s customary for victors to write the
history. Japan is proving to be the exception to the rule. Whether deliberate
or simply inhibited by his cultural upbringing, the ambiguity of Emperor’s
concession speech –certainly not a legitimate surrender proclamation — has
allowed Japan to begin revising history. It’s as if denying all the brutalities
committed in the past can exonerate the present from any collective guilt. Just
the opposite is true. The people of Asia will continue to remind Japan until
there is only one version of the tragic history of World War II. By George Koo
No comments:
Post a Comment