HOME	CONTENTS	BACK	NEXT

After the World War II, the Chinese Communist Government used the past "war responsibility" issue in order to obtain yen-loans, various aids and compromises from the Japanese Government. The weak-hearted and shameless Japanese Government of the post-War era responded to the issue by some sort of apology followed by the acceptation of most of what was demanded by the Chinese Government. The Japanese Government made little effort to dispute over the "war responsibility" issue, and attempted somewhat successfully in solving it by money. But the Chinese Government still continues to use this issue in pressuring and weakening Japan directly through diplomacy or indirectly through propaganda, so as to orient the Japanese situation in favor of the Chinese national interest. So the Chinese Government wants more and feels it can get more by using this issue. Meanwhile, the Japanese Government, prioritizing economic interest over any other, is slow at changing its traditional response pattern to this Chinese diplomatic tool. However, many Japanese nationals, including myself, are aware of the falsehood, insincerity, exaggeration and political nature of most of the Chinese accusations. I, as many others, think that it is in the interest of Japan and to historical truth for the Japanese Government to stop blindly accepting the malicious accusations of China, and making unnecessary apologies and concessions in response to them for a so-called "political reason". Such judgement and action is politically, economically, socially and historically incorrect.

There is a lot to write in order to clarify the falsehood of the Chinese accusations, but for now, in this essay, I will limit myself in comparing the past war record of China and Japan. This is in order to simply point out that, China is in no position to criticize any other country for the so-called "war responsibility" issue as long as its responsibility has not been taken. (The main issue is of course whether the Chinese accusation is credibly founded, or to what extent it is credibly founded, and what its validity or non-validity has as consequence to Japan but this will be developed in another essay.)

The basic logic behind the Chinese accusation or incrimination is the following:

"Japan previously invaded Taiwan, Korea, Manchuria, Coastal China and Indochina, where it pillaged, oppressed and massacred the locals. Such acts are bad. So Japan should pay for its wrong doing to the people and country that were victim to such wrongdoing, like China.

Whether the Japan was "bad" or not in annexing Taiwan and Korea, including Manchuria as part of its sphere of influence, control and buffer zone, advancing into Coastal China and Indochina in fighting the Chinese Nationalists is arguable. Just as much as it is so about the number and kinds of bad deeds that were committed by Japan, and to what extent the Japanese Government is legally or morally responsible. Here I don't want to repeat the usual anti-theses mentioning about the fairly comparatively "normal" reality of Japanese military occupations, fairly legitimate reason of action, fairly positive treatment of annexed territory, and so forth. Here I want to focus on the comparison between the war-record of Japan and China.

Since the beginning of its history, Japan has fought only 8 international wars, partly thanks to its isolated geographical position.

Japan's first international war was against a Manchu-Korean kingdom called "Goguryeo" () which was situated in Northern Korean and Southern Manchurian region. Japan got into conflict with "Goguryeo" for it was allied with the Korean Paekche kingdom (situated in the Western Korean region) that was being attacked by the "Goguryeo" Army, so Japan sent soldiers to help out its ally.

The second was against the coalition army of the Chinese "Tang" () Dynasty and the Korean "Silla" () Dynasty (situated in the East Korean region). This war consisted of "Silla" aiming to gain dominance over the Korean peninsula by cunningly taking advantage of the Chinese interest in the said peninsula. At that time, the Korean peninsula was divided by three kingdoms, namely the "Silla" in the East, Paekche in the West and the "Goguryeo" in the North. Japan decided to fight aside the Korean Paekche kingdom, thus got involved in the said war. The war ended up with the defeat of the Paekchian-Japanese coalition military, by which Paekche kingdom collapsed and many of its leaders fled to Japan.

The third was a defensive war against the attempted invasion of Japan by the Koryo-Mongol Allied Military. The invasion eventually failed due to a series of typhoon that sank the invading navy.

The fourth was an aggressive war aiming to conquer China and Korea, sought by the then ruler of Japan, TOYOTOMI Hideyoshi (  1537?-1598   The "Kampaku"   ;The chief adviser to the Japanese Emperor). It failed before the Japanese Military reached China due to internal betrayal. The actual aim of the expedition is a somewhat controversial subject.

The fifth was a strategic war against the Manchu Empire: the Sino-Japanese War. This war was fought in order to determine the one who would include China and Taiwan into its sphere of influence and control.

The sixth was a strategic and defensive war against the Russian Empire: the Russo-Japanese War. This war was fought in order to determine the one who would include Manchuria into its sphere of influence and buffer zone. It was also a war to rid Manchuria from Russian occupation, and rid Japan from an immediate Russian threat.

The seventh was a called-to-by-the-British participation in the First World War against the Alliance. The Japanese contribution consisted mainly of defeating the German military stationed in Asia.

The eighth was a combination between a wide-range military conflict against the Chinese Nationalists over the extent of one another's extent of influence and control over Manchuria and economic presence, security and privilege in coastal Chinese commercial cities, and a defensive war against or active competition with the Western empires over economic, political and strategic advantage in Eastern Asia.

Only the Military Expedition against China and Korea by TOYOTOMI could be considered as an unreasonable unnecessary war. All else was a defensive war, or a war to support its ally, or a war that was necessary in order to maintain its independence, security and sovereignty.

On the other hand, the history of China is that of continuous territorial conquest and re-conquest based on ambition and power-hungriness.

Vietnam was invaded by China(The Early "Han" Dynasty   ) in 111BC and regained independence only by 939AD. Korea, Manchuria, Mongolia, Tibet, Taiwan, and Central Asia have been victim to the Chinese wave of invasion through out the time. China still retains Manchuria, Tibet, Inner Mongolia and Turkistan under its control and as its national territory. Meanwhile, it is seeking to capture its next victim: Taiwan.

Even IF the Chinese accusations against Japan were true (they aren't), China has no legitimacy in considering Japan as obliged to feel sorry and pay for having allegedly systematically oppressed, plundered and massacred those under Japanese occupation. There is no reason why Japan should feel bad and pay for its past conquests and alleged criminal deeds while China feels normal and just about their past and present oppressions, plunders and massacres. Of course, the Chinese accusations are mostly false or exaggerated, and their demands based on their incriminating assumptions are illegitimate and hypocritical.

There is no reason and necessity for Japan to accept the Chinese double standard and consequent hypocrisy. If justice is to be applied, it should be applied equally to all. If not, no one would accept to be judged by such justice, for it is bias and unfair.

HOME	CONTENTS	BACK	NEXT