Basic recognition

The democratization of Asia and the opening up of borders worldwide has laid bare the knotty issues of Japanese history to the critical eye of the world at large. Japan urgently needs to deal openly and on its own initiative with problems arising from this situation.

In the decade since the end of the Cold War, economic globalization has advanced. At the same time, the world has become increasingly borderless-- physically, politically and socially-- with increasing democratization and the diversification of values.

As a result, certain aspects of Japanese history, such as colonial rule and wartime behavior leading up to the country's defeat in World War II, have been thrust into the spotlight of the world community. If Japan leans toward adopting a self-centered, closed stance, it risks losing the trust of the international community. To avoid this, Japan should immediately deal with its past in a transparent manner.

The Japanese Imperial Government Records Act, established recently in the United States, symbolizes the global trend to scrutinize historical responsibility. The law focuses on bringing into the open alleged atrocities carried out by the former Japanese Imperial Army, such as biological tests conducted on human subjects by the Epidemic Prevention and Water Purification Department of the Kuantung Army (Unit 731) during World War II.

The trend is not unique to the United States. Since the 1990s, it has become easier for victims of Japanese wartime rule and aggression throughout Asia to speak out, in part because of increasing democratization. The number of former "comfort women," a euphemism for women forced into sexual slavery by the Japanese Imperial Army during World War II, who are now creeping out of the woodwork with stories of their plight, are an example of the change in global perception toward such wartime aggression.

People wrongly accused of war crimes, victims of forced or unpaid labor during the war and people who were injured by poison gas bombs abandoned after the war also are finally demanding an apology and compensation.

There is a growing trend in the post-Cold War world to re-examine historical issues from the viewpoint of such universal values as "peace" and "human rights" and to clarify responsibility. How Japan reacts to the trend with its own values and vision is being tested.

The following are various proposals to resolve the basic problem:

PROPOSAL 1:

Establish a framework for the international joint research of historical problems. Since the 1980s, whenever Japanese history textbooks have hit the headlines for causing political friction with neighboring countries, calls have been made for the compilation of a history book researched and agreed upon by concerned Asian nations. While concrete attempts to begin research have been made, hurdles stemming from differences in historical experience and recognition of each country have prevented any such research from ever getting off the ground. Coming up with a universally acknowledged idea of history that ignores differences between nations is unrealistic; people naturally acknowledge facts differently, depending on their viewpoint. Instead, a more flexible approach should be agreed upon, in which the opinions of each nation can be written side by side. Why not create a fund to support international joint research and an organization to discuss historical issues? As well as experts from Japan, China and the Republic of Korea (South Korea), these panels should include people from nations with a less-biased viewpoint. A system of exchanging information and promoting the mutual use of historical documents also should be established. Efforts should be made to offer modern history courses on nations with a mutual history and to promote exchanges between students and lecturers with manifold views. Most importantly, the gaps in historical perception between citizens of Asian countries, must be bridged. A forum of experts and citizens from various levels of society also should be formed for the free discussion of historical matters.

PROPOSAL 2:

Promote information disclosure and the conservation of historical materials. Official historical documents should be made available to the public in national archives independent of relevant government authorities. Many Japanese government documents related to the war were burned in accordance with government policy after Tokyo's surrender. Many of the records kept by the then-army and navy, which would have clearly indicated the extent of war crimes committed, suffered the same fate. The loss of such documents presented a serious obstacle to later historical research. Of the documents returned to Japan by the United States in 1958, some include army records that date back to 1942 and earlier. Occupation forces seized the documents, which had been moved to keep them safe from air raids to an underground army warehouse in Minami-Tama, western Tokyo. Since their return in 1958, the documents have been maintained and sorted by the war history office of the then-National Defense College (now the National Institute for Defense Studies), which is attached to the Defense Agency. According to the institute, however, there are no documents relating to Unit 731, although U.S. officials say such documents existed and were returned to Japan in 1958. Historians also lament that crucial documents on poison-gas warfare, which used lethal toxic substances such as mustard gas, remain classified. The disclosure of documents used for historical research should be decided by independent organizations, such as the National Archives or the National Diet Library, not organizations attached to specific government offices, such as the National Institute for Defense Studies.

PROPOSAL 3:

Public discussion on postwar compensation. An investigation into actual wartime damage and an attempt to earnestly tackle redress. Japan has remained firm on its basic stance to reject appeals for compensation made by foreign nationals over damage caused by Japan's wartime aggression and colonial rule. Japanese authorities base their refusal to meet these requests on international agreements, such as the San Francisco Peace Treaty, under which governments renounced their claims for wartime damages, or a similar agreement between Japan and South Korea. The absence of domestic laws that detail payment of compensation to individuals is also frequently cited. But settlement between governments alone is not enough to reinstate the rights of individuals. U.S. courts that try such cases also question whether the renunciation of claims filed by governments in accordance with international treaties nullifies those filed by individuals. After the Cold War, human rights violations are being investigated and brought to court worldwide. Japan should realize the world standard is shifting toward restoring and redressing individuals' human rights. Japan, which has officially declared "human security" a national policy, should deal with the problem as an advanced Asian country that attaches importance to human rights. Once the truth about forced labor has been determined, Japan should work toward new legislation and the establishment of funds that specify corporate responsibility. Debate to advance public awareness over personal claims also is encouraged. The Japanese people also experienced great suffering as a result of war. In this sense, the reinstatement of human rights is a common theme that transcends national borders.