| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
advertisement | ||
Monday January 30, 8:11 AMCommentary: The Yasukuni problem(Kyodo) _ (EDS: IAN BURUMA, A PROFESSOR AT BARD UNIVERSITY, NEW YORK, CONTRIBUTED THIS ARTICLE TO KYODO NEWS. THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED ARE HIS OWN.)Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi is not afraid of criticism, which can be a virtue in a politician. Indeed, criticism strengthens his resolve to go on doing what his critics deplore. His persistence in visiting Yasukuni Shrine is an example of this. The more the governments of neighboring countries, as well as domestic opponents, protest, the more stubborn he becomes. But this may not be a virtue, for what if his critics are right? I believe they are right, though not necessarily for the right reasons. Opponents of Koizumi's visits to the shrine, both inside and outside Japan, may be missing the point. Koizumi is attacked mainly for two reasons. The first, often mentioned in the Asahi Shimbun newspaper, is that his actions upset Japan's relations with China, South Korea and other parts of Asia. It is in Japan's interest to be on good terms with these countries. Upsetting their governments by paying his respects at such a controversial shrine is harmful to Japanese foreign policy. It is certainly true, from a pragmatic point of view, that visits to Yasukuni Shrine annoy fellow Asians, especially the Koreans and Chinese, and this cannot be good for Japanese diplomacy. But this doesn't mean Koizumi is wrong. It is possible that other Asian governments condemn his visits for self-serving and dishonest reasons, and that Koizumi is right to stand on a matter of principle. This is a point that purely pragmatic criticism fails to address. The second line of attack against Koizumi's visits is that among those enshrined at Yasukuni are Class-A war criminals. Less often mentioned is the fact that there is also a memorial at the shrine to the Kempeitai, whose notorious reputation still sends chills up the spines of many Asians. It is indeed odd for the prime minister of postwar democratic Japan to pay his respects to the souls of men whose policies caused the deaths of millions. It is a bit as if a Russian prime minister were to pray for the souls of Stalin and the butchers of the Soviet Gulag. Or as if a German chancellor were to visit a memorial not just to the German armed forces but to the Gestapo and the SS. Defenders of the Japanese prime minister will say that Japan was never ruled by an equivalent of a Stalin or Hitler. Unlike Hitler, Japanese wartime leaders had no systematic program to exterminate an entire people. And Japan was never a dictatorship like the Soviet Union under Stalin. But Japan did have something almost as destructive, which was a modern ideology that glorified militarism, racial superiority, and emperor worship. Going to war to bring Asia under the roof of the divine emperor was promoted as a sacred mission. Dying for the emperor was propagated as the highest virtue. That is why soldiers believed that they would meet after death at Yasukuni Shrine. To focus only on the Class-A war criminals is to ignore the essence of the shrine. Koizumi's claim that Japan is now a peaceful nation with no military designs on its neighbors may be true, but it is beside the point. And he is either ignorant or dishonest when he claims that visiting the shrine is simply "a matter of the heart." For Yasukuni Shrine is in fact a deeply political institution, established in 1869 to remember the men who died for the emperor. The glorification of militarism was not unusual at that time. Most European countries did the same, at least until the end of World War I. The association of monarchs with military glory was not unusual either. What made Japan unique was that this association became both a state religion and a political ideology, of which Yasukuni Shrine is the prime symbol. The Japanese should care more about this, not because of Chinese or Korean protests, but because it did such harm to Japan itself. Koizumi claims that his visits to the shrine should not be a foreign policy issue. This view has been echoed by his possible successors, Taro Aso and Shinzo Abe. But the shrine visits should at least be a domestic policy issue. For the blend of religion and ideology represented by State Shinto and emperor worship not only justified military aggression in Asia but also destroyed every attempt by the Japanese to establish a liberal democracy at home. It deprived the Japanese population of the right to free speech. It demanded blind obedience of the Japanese armed forces to the emperor, and not to elected civilian governments. It led Japan into a brutal war, and it wrecked any chance for Japanese civilians to stop it. Walking around Yasukuni Shrine today, you get the impression that none of this ever happened. Instead, a visitor to the museum is subjected to the same old excuses used by the military leaders of wartime Japan: Japan was forced into a war by foreign powers; Japanese soldiers fought bravely for freedom in Asia and peace in the world; their sacrifice should be a shining example to future generations, who owe their prosperity to these selfless martyrs of the imperial cause. This is what makes the shrine such a disturbing place. Not the Class-A war criminals, or the Kempeitai monument, but this destructive ideology, which has survived intact, despite war crime trials, democratic government, and more than half a century to analyze, debate, and reflect on the catastrophes of the past. Japan is a free country, of course, and if people want to continue believing in emperor worship and wartime propaganda, they should be allowed to do so. But if the prime minister himself insists on paying his respects at a place that represents these views, then it is not only other Asians that should worry about whether the Japanese have learned the lessons of the past. The Japanese should worry about it too, not to appease foreign critics, but in defense of their own freedoms. Ian Buruma: Born in The Hague. He studied Chinese at Leyden University and cinema at Nihon University. He is a journalist and author of many books. He is a professor at Bard College, New York. |
|||
|
2005 Kyodo News © Established 1945. All Rights Reserved.
|