The Yomiuri Project and Its Results

Abstract

In 2006 the Yomiuri Shimbun, the largest daily paper in Japan, completed a year-long campaign to clarify Japanese leaders' responsibility for World War II. Such an undertaking is rare in Japan. The campaign raised five questions: Why did Japan extend the lines of battle? Why did Japan go to war with the United States in spite of the extremely slim prospects for victory? What foolishness caused the Japanese military to employ suicide aircraft attacks? Were sufficient efforts made to bring the war to an end? And, what problems were there with the International Military Tribunal for the Far East? Our project team suggested answers to these questions and clarified who should be held responsible for the war. Throughout the project, we criticized Japan's brutal militarism. At the same time, we made clear our view that those leaders who initiated the war betrayed Japan's national interest. I believe that this project will be a cornerstone for future honest dialogue between Japan and its neighbors. Key words: Japan, World War II, history of East Asia Introduction: The Yomiuri Project The Yomiuri Shimbun, with a circulation of 10 million, is the largest daily paper in Japan. It is also known for its conservative political position. So it was a great surprise for both rightists and leftists that we started in August 2005 a year-long campaign to clarify Japanese leaders' responsibility for World War II. We finished our project in August 2006. Based on those newspaper articles, we published a pair of Japanese-language books. We have also published an English version, a book entitled From Marco Polo Bridge to Pearl Harbor: Who Was Responsible? The Chinese version of the book is scheduled to be published by the end of 2007. Some people say that Yomiuri has shifted left from its traditional position at right of center in terms of the history issue. However, if you check our editorials over the past ten years carefully, you will realize that our basic position on the history issue has not changed. Over this time we have raised many questions about the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, also known as the Tokyo Tribunal. At the same time, we have consistently criticized Japanese militarism. The following article is a typical example. Japan should calmly scrutinize the regrettable aspects of its history. Criticism of the Tokyo Tribunal should not lead to a theory that accepts Japan's wartime aggression in East Asia or to the revival of the historical view that the Emperor is a living god who should rule the nation based on Shintoism. For example, the decision to annex Korea was legal from Japan's standpoint based on the international situation at that time, the region's historical background and the approval granted by other major powers. But it is also a fact that for the Korean people, the annexation was forced upon them under the threat of Japanese military power. As for China, Japan must accept the fact that its actions there, on the whole, constituted an act of aggression, although this could certainly be debated in a number of specific cases. The war Japan waged against the United States, Britain and the Netherlands in Asia eventually resulted in independence for the Asian nations, although Japan did not start the war solely to gain their independence. Despite these facts, looking at Japan as the sole villain is too biased a viewpoint from which to judge Japan's history.1 The Five Questions and Answers Our most recent project, though, has been to criticize those Japanese leaders who caused the war. The Yomiuri Shimbun's campaign was an initiative of our editor-in-chief, Watanabe Tsuneo. Having survived the war as a private, he was struck by how cruel and inhuman Japanese militarism was. He still cannot erase the hatred he feels toward those military leaders who dragged our nation into a series of disastrous wars. He is now 80 years old. …