It is therefore natural and logical if the US and even among the countries in Southeast Asia, including Indonesia, tend to view Japan as the junior rather than equal partner of US in the context of security ties between the two countries since the post-World War II.
Thus, American policy in Japan is based on the assumption that as Japan goes, so Asia can be made to go. The first link on the chain of assumption is that Japan can be made the workshop of Asia and a bulwark against Russia and People’s Republic of China, two countries classified by Washington as their two potential rivals in the years to come economically and militarily.
Such kind of prognosis and analysis presented by several experts on Far East in Washington and the White House up the present time, may lead to the conclusion that the strategic agenda of Japan in Asia is to seek permanent raw materials and markets rather than regaining its strength as military superpower in Asia Pacific region.
It is valuable to quote the statement made by US President Dwight Eisenhower in 1969:
“One of Japan’s greatest opportunities for increased traede lies in free and developing Southeast Asia. The great need in one country is for raw materials in the other country for manufactured goods. The two regions complement each other markedly. By strengthening of Vietnam and helping insure the safety of the South Pacific and Southeast Asia, we gradually develop the great trade potential between this region, and highly industrialized Japan to the benefit of both. In this way freedom in the Western Pacific will be greatly strengthened.”
Eisenhower’ statement was made in the context of sending the clear message that US together with Japan as her junior partner, had been trying to mobilize supports among the non-communist countries in Southeast Asia to contain the influence of Soviet Union and People’s Republic of China in this region. At the time, the military confrontation between the Soviet-led North Vietnam and the US-led South Vientman broke out since 1954 after the failure of the Geneva Conference. At the same time, Cambodia was also inevitably divided between the nationalist and the leftists led by Prince Norodom Sihanouk versus the rightists generals led by General Lon Nol and Siri Matak. Under such circumstances, Eisenhower and his foreign policy makers saw North Vietnam and the Sihanouk-led nationalist-leftist front as the threatening factor toward crafting the Asian front under the US-Japan security alliance.
In my view, what Eisenhower did say in late 1960s must be read as the first big mistake indicating the failure of US foreign policy makers and her allies in Asia, to understand the nature of Japan and her principle agendas in the future.
In the long run, due to the history and the seeds of Japanese militarism in the past, it will prove to have been impossible to determine the future of Japan apart from the future of Asia as a whole. In other words, even Japan is not a secure American base. Her permanent sources of raw materials and permanent markets lie in Asia, not in America or Europe. Even US and her allies of European Union eventually must come to terms with Asia.
If Asia is out of control, and America cannot guarantee them access, then there will be an inevitable demand that Japan breaks away from America in order to come to terms with Asia. In other words, no necessity ties Japan down to be America’s permanent ally in Asia.
While America on the other way around, her policy aimed at creating a Japan which is to be the counterpart in Asia of the kind of Germany the American tried to create in Europe, It is to be less and less a conquered enemy, a ward, or even an instrument of policy, and to become more and more an overt ally.
As the workshop of Asia, expected by the US scheme, it is to be closely integrated with America, so that American economic policy will flow unobstructed through Japan into the rest of Asia.
As an American ally, Japan would not only an ally against Russia, but an ally against China as well. But in reality, the US scheme designed in the post World War II, became out touch with the objective condition. It was realized that even I defeat Japan remained industrially the most powerful nations in Asia. Japan could build new industries, including strategic defense industries and get them going. In such a way that this country can transform their industry into the new emerging military power like in the past. Her infrastructure is more than enough to reactivate its military power.
That is the possible scenario that has yet to be taken into consideration with all its possible impact and its possible worst case scenario: The reemergence of Japanese military and militarism in Asia Pacific region.
As analyzed by Owen Lattimore more than six decades ago, America cannot force the striking of that balance by trying to make Japan or any other single country in Asia the primary instrument of American policy. “It is unwise to overlook the historical part played by Japan in transforming an Asia under control into an Asia out of control,” analyzed Lattimore.
That’s the phrase useful to understand the nature of Japan as the possible independent force in Asia in an out of control Asia, a favorable condition on the part of Japan to play her own strategic agenda. At least that makes Japan out of control either of America, Russia and China.
In the sense that Japan, while under American control, is not a free agent. China can make offers which flatter the Japanese with the prospect of honorable economic interdependence on terms of cost and prices that suit both countries. Under such possibility, the political groupings in Japanese domestic politics would be able to press demands for friendly reintegration with Asia. Rightists interest groups in Japan are already aware of these possibilities
For countries suffered the Japanese militarism like Indonesia and may other countries in Southeast Asia, it is dangerous to overlook this fact. There is an important area of political maneuver in which Japanese conservatives and right-wing nationalists can all get together. As maneuvering goes on, it will be perfectly possible for Japan to emerge as an independent force economically and militarily, suddenly and without warning, and with the hearty participations of the some of the powerful Japanese conservatives.
Stay Alert, The Raising of Rightist Groups in Japan
The fear of possible rise of Japanese militarism in the future cannot be underestimated. In 2008, Toshio Motoya, considered as a right-leaning businessman, held and organized a war essay contests under the theme: “True Modern Historical Perspectives. What made the suspicious the event was that, of 235 participants in the contest, 94 were from Air-Self Defense Force (ASDF). Thus causing the suspicion that ASDF personnel authored and submitted essays on the political theme in an orchestrated way. The result of the contests had strengthened the suspicion where Toshio Tamogami, the Japanese Air Force Chief of Staff, won the top prize of 3 million yen in the competition. The essay written by Tamogami was entitled : WAS Japan an Aggressor Nation?”
Of course, the Tamogami’s article stirred uproar and attacks from various elements of society at home and abroad, especially those belong the anti-militarism. Tamogami was even more provocative by saying “ I have never thought that what I wrote in the essay is wrong,” said Tamogami when he gave the testimony before the Diet (Japanese House of Representatives). The prize was awarded by Toshio Watanabe, who is also known as the Chairman of APA Group, in December 2008.
The APA Group, a real estate concern, sponsored the essay contests. The interesting side of the story came when Toshio Tamogami was sacked as the Air Self Defense Force shortly after he wrote a controversial essay denying Japanese aggression against other Asian enations before and during the World War II.
Of course his article has actually exposed a close relationship among politicians and a conservative support group. Thus clearly indicating that the Tamogami act of writing such provocative and controversial essay, has showed that he reflected the sub-conscious mind of the Japanese strategic element in Tokyo.
Jus for comparison, there exists an extensive network of sympathizers with rightist causes that reaches into the media, the universities, and even the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). The two best known rightists of recent times, privately wealthy power brokers who pulled wires for many a top politicians, reached their positions partly through gangster connections.
They are Kodama Yoshio, who attracted much attention through his involvement in the Lockheed bribery scandal until his death in 1984. The Lockheed scandal finally forced the resignation of the Japanese Prime Minister Kakue Tanaka from premiership because of his alleged involvement.
The other one is SasakawaRyoichi, who still attracts attention through his philanthropic activities. In 1980, Sasakawa, lobbying hard for the Nobel Peace Prize, established the US-Japan Foundation, to promote cultural exchange with US, and he is known as the largest donor to the United Nations. In 1978, he received from Japanese government the fist Order od the Sacred Treasure and in 1987 the First Order of the Merit with the Orand Cordon of the Rising Sun.
The other phenomenon that strongly indicates that the rightist groups are at work in Japan is the policy and maneuvers conducted by the ministry of education. The way of the post-war education ministry in handling the teacher association (NIKKYOSO) was quite clear how real the danger of the rightist groups is in Japan.
In Japanese education institution, the teachers have been the chief civilian channel for the spread of the nationalist ideology, and in 1930s the Japanese authorities had relied on them for the propagation of beliefs and attitudes designed to make young Japanese want to sacrifice their lives for Japan’s expanding empire in leading to the Worl War II.
NIKKYOSO, as the Teacher Association that is left-leaning association in its orientation, runs counter to the policy undertaken by the Japanese government, especially the ministry of education. The ministry of education whose wartime ranks remained relatively intact, has never stopped believing in the need for the right thinking in the schools, for moral education to inculcate such thingking and for formal obeisance to the unchanged pre-war symbols of flag and anthem.
Since the ministry supervises the content of school textbooks, it has managed to gradually to tone down the earlier unambiguous rejection of the old nationalism, and has sponsored a euphemistic treatment and partial rationalization of Japan’s imperialist past.
On the other hand, the teachers were suspicious of the aims and the policy of the post-war ministry of education directed to the students and the curriculum. Aware of the constraint stemmed from the Teacher Association, in 1956 the government introduced regulations requiring local school-board to be appointed than elected, thus more accountable to the government than to the their teacher association.
Even in 1953, immediately after the US left Japan,in 1953 Odachi Shigeo, who had been mayor of Singapore during the notorious Japanese occupation, was made education minister.
Thus, to attack NIKKYOSO as a favorite target of rightist groups was the logical given its strong critical stance against policies made in favor of justifying the nationalist interpretation of Japanese history before and during the World War II.
Accordingly, what Tamogami wrote pointing out that Japan was not an aggressor, essentially was nothing special in the sense that the aspiration of the pre-war Japanese ultra-nationalists is still alive in the hart and mind of the Japanese rightist groups, civilian or military.
Of what Tamogami wrote denying Japas as an aggressor before and during the World War II, is the logical outcome of such kind of living aspiration, even among the armed forces generals.
Motoya himself, the owner and the President of the APA Group, is the ardent supporter of conservative politicians such as former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.
Realizing the fact that Tamogami was the former chief of staff of the Air Self-Defense Force, showed that the aspiration of ultra-nationalism and militarism is still alive, and the existence of the right wing military in Japan must be read as still at work to regain the momentum to come back on stage in the Japanese political landscape.
The Japanese Security Concern Cannot be Underestimated
Looking back to the past, Japan’s militaristic attitude intensified as government recognized the need to ensure defense of the country against western powers. Observing the advance technological achievement and superior military and naval power of the west, Japan had fears of being invaded by a western powers like United States, Britain, France, or even Russia and China. Thus, the Japanese tendency to feel insecure, must be taken into account for predicting Japanese decision to strengthen military power.
In the other reasons and motives, the general belief developed among the Japanese strategic elements that they have the obligation and destiny to play Asian leadership role. They perceive themselves as the liberator rather than aggressors. Many Japanese leaders came to believe that their country had a “manifest destiny” to free other Asian countries from western imperialists powers and to lead these countries to collective strength and prosperity.
Even Japanese scholar such as Fukuzawa Yukichi, supported foreign exmpansionism and promoted survival of the strongest cultural by a process of natural selected nations.
Several ultra-nationalist groups and writers such as the Black Dragon Society and Kita Ikki, gained increasing popularity with their views that Japan should take leadership in Asia to expel foreign powers by means of a righteous war if necessary.
An Indonesian Experience under Japanese Military Occupation
When Dutch Royal Army capitulated to Japan in March 1942, Indonesia was fully under the occupation of Japan. Through militarism style colonialism, Japan promoted the acquisition and development of resources vital to their national defense, or more specifically, to secure access to Indonesian oil and other raw materials obtained from Indonesia.
That’s the real motives behind the Japanese imperialism before and during the World War II. And Indonesia was one of the principle targets to be occupied militarily.
What Japan does not have at the time is coking coal, irons, oil, bauxite for making aluminum, or the capacity to produce on a large scale some of the important agricultural raw materials for industry, such as cotton.
Japan does also have enough salt to sustain its chemical industry or enough wood of the right kind to sustain its rayon industry, both of these were formerly important earners of foreign exchange. Even what Japan does not have is hydroelectric energy, one of the big requirements of both heavy and lights industry, coal other than coking coal, though not enough of it, and silk.
Under such circumstances, the Japanese authorities decided to use the military power aimed at bridging the deficiencies of Japan at the time. By controlling Korea, Formosa, later Manchuria, and for a while of much of China, and all Indochina, Thailand, Malaya, Burma, and Indonesia which was still Netherlands India, Japan was able to plan the extraction of raw materials and to regulate processing and distribution.
The form of control made it possible for Japan not only to obtain raw materials, but to dictate exchange values. When processed, one portion was set aside to maintain the military machine that kept the whole business going.
As far as Indonesia was concerned, all oil installation were immediately under the direct management of the armed forces, the 16th Army n Java and Madura,, the 225th in Sumatera, the Second Southern Amry and Navy in Kalimantan, Sulawesi and the entire eastern part of Indonesia. Thus, the militarization of industry began.
Comfort Women, Part of the Japanese Militarism
The other painful experience related to Japanese militarism was about Comfort Women. Like in other occupied countries, Indonesia also suffered this kind of sexual slavery.
The establishment and development of the military comfort women’ system was not only carried out by the total involvement of every section of the military, but also by administrative machinery at every level of the Japanese state. More importantly, we should not overlook that Japanese companies were their accomplices.
Indonesia, and many other countries have demanded the Japanese government to admit that the government held responsible in its involvement of recruiting the comfort women as a kind of sexual slavery. Demanding the Japanese government to issue an public apology, that the a memorial be created for the victims, and that all barbarities be fully disclosed. And more importantly, that these facts be continuously related in historical education classes so that history would not be repeated.
---
1 Quoted from Noam Chomsky, at War with Asia, Essays on Indochina, page 114. New York: Vantage Book Edition, 1970
2 Owen Lattimore, The Situation in Asia, page 123-124. Boston: Little Brown and Company, 1949.
3 See Article written by Todd Crowell, Sunday 16 November 2008, and Associated Press 11 January 2009.
4 Karel van Wolferen, Enigma of Japanese Power, especially pages 99-103. London, Papermac, 1989.
5 See an interesting article written by Bill Gordon, Japan’s March Toward Militarism, www.gordon.web.wesleyan.edu/papers/jhist2.htm
6 For surgical analysis on Japan read Owen Lattimore, op.cit pages 124-125.
7 These actions recommended is in line with the six actions recommended by the Korean Council for the Women Drafted for Military Sexual Slavery by Japan in 1990.
Hendrajit, Executive Director of Global Future Institute (GFI), based in Jakarta-Indonesia. The paper presented at the International Conference on World War II, in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on 13 May 2010.
|
Konferensi Internasional tentang Perang Dunia Kedua berlangsung di Kuala Lumpur, Kamis, 13 Mei 2010. Pertemuan yang diprakarsai oleh World Future Online tersebut, menghadirkan ...
Ada satu perkembangan yang cukup mencemaskan di Jepang dalam beberapa bulan terakhir ini. Issui-kai, atau Masyarakat Rabu" ("Wednesday Society"), dibentuk pada 1970-an oleh para penggemar novelis ...
