Let History Provide a Warning Against Japanese Militarism

Let History Provide a Warning Against Japanese Militarism
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 8 2015

Executive Summary: This year is the 70th anniversary of V-J Day, when Japan surrendered to the Allies. It is also the 70th anniversary of China's victory in its War of Resistance Against Japan. Yesterday was the 78th anniversary of the 7/7 Marco Polo Bridge Incident. The commemoration of war-related events has only just begun. But already many controversies have erupted. Beginning now and extending until December 25, when Taiwan accepted Japan's surrender, these controversies on Taiwan, between Taipei and Beijing, Beijing and Tokyo, and Taipei and Tokyo, will only increase.

Full Text Below:

This year is the 70th anniversary of V-J Day, when Japan surrendered to the Allies. It is also the 70th anniversary of China's victory in its War of Resistance Against Japan. Yesterday was the 78th anniversary of the 7/7 Marco Polo Bridge Incident. The commemoration of war-related events has only just begun. But already many controversies have erupted. Beginning now and extending until December 25, when Taiwan accepted Japan's surrender, these controversies on Taiwan, between Taipei and Beijing, Beijing and Tokyo, and Taipei and Tokyo, will only increase.

First take controversies on Taiwan. Lee Teng-hui promoted "Taiwanese nativization". Chen Shui-bian promoted de-Sinicization. Substantial changes to school textbooks were made. People gradually lost interest in the history of the Republic of China prior to 1949, which of course included the history of the war. Ignorance about the war became commonplace among the Department of Defense and military units. This year the Armed Forces Military Academy held a graduation ceremony for the three armed forces and their military academies. They commemorated the 70th anniversary of China's victory in its War of Resistance Against Japan, as well as the 91st anniversary of the Huangpu Military Academy. These events were of enormous historical significance, highlighting as they did the nation's military history. Organizers printed and distributed special issue stamps. Alas, the result was a farce. The caption to one photograph read "Eight Hundred Heroes Jump into the Yellow River". One photo of the "8/14 Chien Chiao Air Battle" did not show the Hawk 3 fighters then in use by the Chinese Air Force. Instead, it showed Russian made 1-16 fighters that had yet to be introduced. These ridiculous blunders committed by younger generation Taiwan youth revealed their emotional distance from the war, their lack of understanding, and their lack of interest. They also revealed a lack of education in Taiwan history.

The Department of Defense showed pilots in flight suits and accessories not used during the war. The flight suits and goggles shown appear to be items used only after the CCP founded the PRC regime. In fact, the military has long included units responsible for the research and display of military history. These include the well-known Republic of China Armed Forces Museum. The Department of Defense also has a unit responsible for military history. Military history and military education are important. Military strategy and tactics require study. Awareness of one's heritage, one's faith, and one's struggles are essential. This is not dogma. Armed forces the world over attach great importance to such sources of inspiration. Sadly, the history of the Republic of China has been perverted by de-Sinicization. This countercurrent has obfuscated and distorted military history.

The second form of controversy on Taiwan involves clashes between differing historical memories and interpretations. Green camp TV talk show host Cheng Hung-yi said his father worked for the Japanese military during the war. He said the high profile commemoration of the war "hurt the feelings of his father and the Taiwanese people". The Democratic Progressive Party government in Tainan organized a series of "70th Anniversary End of the War" celebrations. Taiwan was a Japanese colony during the war. Colonized and oppressed people on Taiwan naturally have their own historical memories. This fact should be acknowledged, recorded, and commemorated. The problem is how one interprets history. These commemorative exhibits were sponsored by the Tainan City Cultural Bureau. The organizers actually argued that since Taiwan was a Japanese colony, the war constituted a "defeat for Taiwan".

The Tainan City Department of Cultural Affairs and Cheng Hung-yi hold outlandish views of history. Former colonies the world over make a point of clarifying their history upon achieving independence and liberation. They reflect upon and reconstruct their history and culture from the perspective of colonized peoples. This reflection and reconstruction helps them overcome and transcend the version of history instilled in them by their colonial overlords. Former colonies never rationalize colonialist aggression and oppression. The version of history held by Cheng Hung-yi and the Tainan City Cultural Affairs Bureau is pseudo-nativist, pseudo-Taiwan centric history. It is a perversion of history that the public on Taiwan must subject to historical review and correct through public dialogue.

Two other controversies plague the 70th anniversary of China's victory in the War of Resistance Against Japan. One. Taipei and Beijing differ on who led the war effort and how the war ought to be interpreted. Two. China and Japan differ on their understanding and evaluation of historical facts on aggression and war. Beijing has long maintained that "The CCP led the Chinese people's war effort against Japan". In recent years however, film makers, television producers, and scholars have become more willing to credit the Nationalist government and the KMT. Official channels no longer claim that "the KMT failed to resist the Japanese", or "only passively resisted the Japanese". They now stress that "victory during the war was a great victory for the whole nation. Both played important roles whether they fought "behind enemy lines" or "on the front lines".

Taipei and Beijing have much to discuss during future exchanges. The history of the war has far-reaching significance for mutual understanding, and the overcoming of "de-Sinicization".

Sino-Japanese passions over the Diaoyutai sovereignty dispute have temporarily abated. But the Abe government has not actually changed its militaristic mindset or strategic goal of containing China. How the two countries deal with the 70th anniversary of the end of the Second Sino-Japanese War, will be the key to Sino-Japanese relations. Taipei and Beijing must send the right signals to Tokyo. They must remind the Japanese of the lessons of the Second World War. They must remind them of the dangers of militaristic thinking. Only the recognition that "the mountain must accommodate two tigers" can ensure a peaceful future.

Commemorating the war victory has nothing to do with boasting. The key is learning the lessons of history, eliminating conflict, and enabling people to live in peace. We must be more aggressive in our history education, historical research, dialogue and cooperation, not just on Taiwan, but also during exchanges between Taiwan and the Mainland, between Taiwan and East Asian countries, in the private sector and government, and in academia and society. We must come together to dialogue and cooperate on a solid foundation. Only that can assure permanent peace in East Asia.

讓抗戰史實說話 警告日本軍國主義

2015年07月08日 中國時報

今年是二戰日本向盟軍投降，也是我國抗戰勝利70周年，昨天適逢七七盧溝橋事件78周年，抗戰紀念相關活動才剛剛開始，卻已經出現了許多分歧與爭議，從現在到12月25日台灣接受日本投降紀念日，分歧與爭議在台灣內部、兩岸、中日及台日之間會愈演愈烈。

先談台灣內部爭議，自李登輝開始執行台灣本土化、陳水扁總統推動去中國化，尤其中小學教科書課綱大幅改變後，國人對中華民國1949年以前的歷史已逐漸失去興趣，其中當然包括抗戰史。以至於國防部、國軍相關單位在舉辦紀念活動時，出現了對抗戰史的無知。陸軍官校舉辦今年度三軍五校畢業典禮，同時紀念抗戰勝利70周年和黃埔建軍91周年，這原本是極富歷史意義、彰顯國軍傳承的活動，主辦單位印製並發放給來賓的紀念郵摺特刊卻鬧了大笑話，居然出現一張「八百壯士跳黃河」的離譜照片；民國26年「八一四」筧橋空戰戰機照片，也捨去當時空軍使用的霍克3型戰機不用，而採用當時尚未引進的俄製I-16戰機。荒謬的錯誤說明了台灣青年世代對抗戰歷史的陌生與疏離，對抗戰歷史缺乏深入了解的興趣與動力，更凸顯台灣歷史教育的重大缺失。

國防部公開展示抗戰時期飛行員穿著的飛行裝及配備，同樣被發現飛行帽並非抗戰時期的飛行服裝，風鏡更疑似中共建政後才使用的飛行員風鏡。其實，軍方一直有軍史研究、展示單位，例如知名的國軍歷史文物館，國防部也有史政編譯部門，軍史教育應該是國軍教育中的重要環節，不但是為了學習軍事戰略戰術，也是要強化歷史傳承與奮鬥信念，這絕非八股教條，而是世界各國軍隊均高度重視的精神武裝。悲哀的是，如今「中華民國」歷史在「去中國化」逆流的衝擊之下，早已晦暗不清，遑論國軍歷史。

第二類爭議來自台灣內部不同歷史記憶與不同歷史論述的拮抗。親綠名主持人鄭弘儀在電視節目上指出，其父在抗戰時曾當過日本兵，如此高調紀念抗戰勝利，是「傷害其父心情，也傷害台灣人民感情」，民進黨執政的台南市更高調舉辦了一系列「終戰70周年」紀念活動。台灣在抗戰時期是日本的殖民地，作為被殖民、被壓迫的台灣人民對於戰爭當然會有自己的歷史記憶，確實也應該重視、紀錄與紀念，問題在於詮釋的史觀。主辦這些紀念展的台南市文化局竟表示，他們是所謂在地史觀，認定當時台灣是日本殖民地，當年的戰爭對台灣來說「應屬敗戰」。

台南市文化局和鄭弘儀的史觀令人驚異，畢竟世界各個前殖民地國家與地區在獨立解放後，無不積極清理殖民歷史，從被殖民者的主體性出發反思歷史與文化，重建歷史論述，這種反思與重構，都是要克服與超越殖民者所灌輸的殖民史觀，決不會認同殖民主義的侵略與壓迫。這也說明鄭弘儀和台南市文化局的史觀，是一種假本土、偽主體性的史觀，這是台灣社會亟需透過史料呈現、多元對話來進行清理的歷史課題。

與抗戰勝利70周年相關的另兩個爭議，自然是兩岸之間關於抗戰主導權與歷史詮釋權的衝突，和中日之間關於侵略和戰爭史實的理解與評價。長期以來，大陸不斷強調「中國共產黨領導的中國人民抗日戰爭」史觀，近年來，在影視作品與學者論著中，對於國民政府、國民黨的抗戰史實有了更多的肯認，在官方論述中對於「國民黨不抗日、消極抗日」的評價也有了改變，開始強調「抗日戰爭的勝利是全民族的偉大勝利，無論是『敵後戰場』還是『正面戰場』都發揮了重要的作用。」

接下來，兩岸之間在歷史課題上更多的交流對話，對於兩岸之間相互的理解，對於「去中國化」逆流的克服，都有著深遠的意義。

中日關係暫時已由釣魚台主權爭議的激情中逐漸冷靜，但安倍政府並未修正軍國主義思維與戰略圍堵中國意圖，兩國如何面對第二次中日戰爭結束70周年，對中日關係的未來將是關鍵指標，兩岸必須對日本釋放正確的訊號，警告日本正確認識二戰的失敗教訓及軍國主義思維的危險，「一山容納二虎」人民才有好日子過。

紀念抗戰勝利，不是為了誇耀歷史，更重要是為了汲取教訓，消弭對立，讓人民過好日子。在這個意義上，我們需要更積極的進行讓史料說話的歷史教育，歷史研究的對話與協作不但要在台灣內部進行，更要在兩岸之間、東亞各國之間，從民間到政府、從學院到社會，從局部到全面地來共同努力，對話與協作有了紮實的基礎，東亞的永久和平才有堅實的保證。