Nothing would seem more difficult than coming up with a mutually agreeable version of the history of certain events—whether that be among nations or among individuals. And yet China and South Korea continue to demand that Japan have a so-called “correct understanding” of its wartime history, asserting that Tokyo will naturally be compelled to apologize once it has realized the “truth.”

　　　　　The conservative mass circulation Sankei Shimbun in a recent dispatch from Los Angeles reported on the completion of The Bombing, a Chinese film based on the bombing of Chongqing by the Japanese air force during World War II. The US$ 65 million movie features a star-studded cast including Bruce Willis, known for his role in the Die Hard series. Mel Gibson, principle actor in the Lethal Weapon series, is one of the creative advisors of the film shot by Chinese director Feng Xiao. Sylvester Stallone reportedly has announced his interest in appearing in a sequel.

　　　　　The Chinese producer of the film, Shi Jianxiang, was quoted as saying: “We want this film to remind audiences around the world of the correct history of the Chongqing bombing, leaving it for posterity as a cultural heritage.”

　　　　　Production of the film has taken a good five years. The Chinese Communist Party leadership led by Xi Jinping allegedly demanded the film be completed within this year in order to globally disseminate facts about “the cruelty of the imperial Japanese military” to mark the 70th anniversary of China’s victory in the “war of resistance against Japan.”

　　　　　Meanwhile, the International Parliamentary Coalition for Victims of Sexual Slavery (IPCVSS) was launched last month by Mike Honda, a Congressman from California, along with five other founding co-chairs. Honda has over the years consistently pandered to the anti-Japanese convictions of his Korean-American constituency. Viewed objectively, the IPCVSS is not an ‘international body’ at all, but rather an organization aimed at helping South Korea’s “history war” against Japan. Two of the founding members are of Korean descent—chairperson Yonah (nee Kim) Martin, the first Korean-Canadian ever elected to the Canadian parliament, and Melissa Lee, a member of parliament in New Zealand. An incumbent member of South Korea’s national assembly, Jasmine Lee, has also joined the group.

　　　　　To cope with the history war started by China and South Korea, Japan has no choice but to spread globally as many concrete facts about Japan’s wartime history as possible. As part of the moves to mark its 60th founding anniversary this year, the ruling Liberal-Democratic Party (LDP) has recently launched a panel aimed at reviewing Japan’s modern history from the Sino-Japanese War (1894-1895) on. The panel reports directly to the LDP’s president, i.e., the prime minister, and is led by LDP Secretary-General Sadakazu Tanigaki and former foreign minister Hirofumi Nakasone. Ms. Tomomi Inada, who is in charge of the Party’s Policy Research Council, was instrumental in launching this initiative and acts as Tanigaki’s deputy on the panel. She explains.

　　　　　“The LDP has finally come up with a venue genuinely committed to examining modern Japanese history. The sole purpose of our panel is to review the path Japan has taken over the last century or so, and come to grips with pertinent historical facts. This process, I believe, is a necessary step in order to reclaim the true history of our country.”

　　　　　While there are those who oppose the panel, as they suspect it could be used as a tool for the LDP’s rightwing forces to condemn the rulings of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (1946-1948) among other things, Inada adamantly rejects such a view, explaining:

　　　　　“We have absolutely no intention whatsoever of coming up with a specific historical perspective. That we have Mr. Tanigaki as director-general, and people like historian Masayuki Yamauchi, professor at Meiji University, and sociologist Noritoshi Furuichi as advisors on the panel may even give the impression that we are actually more liberal-leaning than conservative.”

Fierce “History War”

　　　　　Tanigaki certainly belongs to the liberal faction within the LDP, while Messrs. Yamauchi and Furuichi may well be identified as moderate liberals rather than conservatives. The roster of panelists reflects the present posture of the LDP, which is quite nervous about how public opinion reacts to its actions.

　　　　　Holding its first session this month, which will be followed by bi-monthly meetings thereafter, the panel is expected to review within a year all of modern Japanese history from the Sino-Japanese War on, according to Inada.

　　　　　For post-war Japanese, who have been deprived of the chance to study our modern history both at school and at home, this panel is a necessary undertaking. It is extremely important for all contemporary Japanese to study our history afresh, come to grips with the varied factors behind every important historical step Japan has taken, and have our findings reflected in our future foreign policy. Inada says the panel’s sessions will be open to the press, and that there are no plans to summarize its discussions in a conclusive document of any sort.

　　　　　“Our sole purpose is to provide a venue to objectively understand the facts about our modern history,” Inada stresses. “What historical perspectives each politician may form as a result is strictly up to the discretion of individual politicians.”

　　　　　I would like for members of the Diet to simultaneously study how our neighboring countries are teaching their history. The fierce history war waged against Japan by China and South Korea is fueled by an appallingly twisted history curriculum. China’s grossly distorted version of history in particular is quite capable of affecting its future bilateral ties with Japan even more seriously than today.

　　　　　Chinese claims pertaining to the so-called “Nanjing Massacre,” which unfortunately has been added to UNESCO’s Memory of the World Register, is mostly based on What War Means by H.J. Timperley (Victor Gollancz Ltd., London; 1938; published the same year in New York as The Japanese Terror in China by Modern Age Books). It is widely known today that Timperley, an Australian who covered Chinese affairs purportedly as a journalist for the Manchester Guardian, actually was serving as an advisor for Nationalist China’s Information Ministry, and wrote What War Means as a propaganda piece.

　　　　　Even Timperley, bribed by the Nationalist Party to propagate the “barbarism” of the Japanese army, failed to write that there had been a “massacre” in Nanjing. Miner Searle Bates, one of Timperley’s acquaintances who was a history professor at Nanking University, stated in a letter to Timperley that there is no proof that what the Japanese army committed in Nanjing could be termed terrorism, i.e., organized violence. And yet the Chinese employed a number of foreign journalists and researchers, utilized their services adroitly, and succeeded in concocting a story that 300,000 Chinese were massacred by the Japanese army between December 1937 and January 1938.

　　　　　It is not only its history with Japan that the Chinese have fabricated. The Japan Institute for National Fundamentals (JINF), a privately-financed Tokyo think tank that I head, spent a full year working with prominent scholars to retrace China’s relations with its other neighbors as well. JINF ascertained that China has indeed fabricated many key points in its past relationships with all of its neighbors, as detailed in our study entitled Report on Strategic Studies Involving China. Although our research focused on China’s ties with 14 nations and regions that it shares its borders with, we did discover that China has blatantly falsified important aspects of its relationship with the US as well.

　　　　　According to Michael Pillsbury, a specialist on China who authored The Hundred-Year Marathon: China’s Secret Strategy to Replace America as the Global Superpower (Henry Hold & Company, New York; 2015), the Chinese Communist Party started viewing the US as a dangerous hegemon following the Tiananmen incident of June 1989, creating an extensive “alternate history” of Sino-American relations.

Evil Anti-Chinese Mastermind

　　　　　Pillsbury, who has extensively reviewed Chinese history textbooks, notes that these textbooks “were rewritten to depict the United States as a hegemon” starting in 1990 and declares that China’s younger generation today believes the US has “tried to stifle China’s rise and destroy the soul of Chinese civilization” for more than 150 years.

　　　　　For example, the textbooks depict Abraham Lincoln as an “anti-Chinese mastermind”—“just another brutal, thuggish American imperialist”—who “manipulated Chinese officials and others to weaken China.” In his U.S. Attitude toward China and China’s Entrance to the International Community, Shi Yinhong, Professor of International Relations at Renmin University of China in Beijing, is quoted as arguing: “Lincoln wanted ‘China to be dominated, or even exploited, within the international community.’” Having had the pleasure of reading essays reflecting the cool-headed observations of this scholar long known for his relatively moderate views, I was not a little surprised by this latest statement by him. It is depressing to wonder if in China one may not be able to afford to be a professor without condescending to write in such a fashion.

　　　　　As regards the Boxer’s Rebellion of 1900, Chinese history textbooks claim “The United States was willing to ‘loot a burning house’ and, by tricking other nations into attacking China, ‘kill with a borrowed sword,’” according to Pillsbury.

　　　　　Colonel Goro Shiba (1860-1945) of the Imperial Japanese Army served with distinction during that campaign as military attaché at the Japanese legation. Not a small number of Japanese are familiar with the detail of the incident, in which Shiba exemplified the true samurai who keeps his composure even in the thick of the fighting. Nobody in Japan would take seriously this absurd Chinese claim that the US “tricked” nations, including Japan, into attacking China in 1900. But that is how China teaches its history today.

　　　　　China also falsely claims that the Korean war was instigated by the US. I once queried a Chinese scholar about this misperception. His reply was that the true facts about the Korean War have yet to be established as far as China was concerned. There appears to be no end to the nation’s fabrication of history.

　　　　　Members of our Diet must learn from these and other examples of historical fabrications through the newly formed panel, understand well how the Chinese and the South Koreans go about inventing history, and continue to sound the alarm internationally.

(Translated from “Renaissance Japan” column no. 683 in the December 20, 2015 issue of The Weekly Shincho)