Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:39 pm Post subject: War Criminals
I think that for the first man, Nogi, he had come out of the war criminal punishment with a beneficial outcome. He had mentioned throughout the reading, like most men involved in war crimes, that he was ashamed with what he had done. On page 113, he says "What I went through was good. If I'd gone straight back home, forgiven for what I did, it would been even more frightening for me." I noticed that for the second man, Kasayama, was still making excuses for what he had done. "there was no time to dig graves... there weren't any tools." Yeah there weren't any tools except bulldozers or shovels or axes. All of which are prime grave digging tools. I understand that there was a lack of food, but at least that excuse would have made sense. I'm not entirely sure how I felt for Kasayama, it seemed like he had his mind on drinking, money, and women. I think the outcome of his behavior had benefited him in a negative, self indulging way.
I think that for Nogi Harumichi, imprisonment served its purpose. Near the end of his writing, he says that if he wasnt tried as a war criminal, and hadnt been punished that he probably would have ended up living in fear. To me, it seems like imprisonment helped him come to terms with what he did in the war, and helped him lead a sane life. With respect to Kasayama Yoshikichi, I think that imprisonment helped him, but not to the extent that it helped Harumichi. Reading what Yoshikichi wrote, i got the impression that he was more callused to the things he did.
It seems that for Nogi Harumichi, his prison time certainly served to establish that what he had done was wrong. In reading Keeping Order in the Indies I was struck by how sincerely contrite Harumichi seemed. What seemed very peculiar however, was the fact that, despite the trials, executions, and imprisonment, of Japanese war criminals, the sense of the enormity of the war still seems to have been lost on the Japanese public in general. The interview closes with the words "Although I was given thirty years by America for a crime I committed, it's treated as just a foreign sentence, unimportant. After I left Sugamo, nobody looked at me strangely." Again, when comparing Japan's actions during the war in the pacific with the monstrosities committed by the Germans during the same time period, and the way that the respective nations have reacted to their own transgressions, Japan seems to persistently fall short in the penitence department. I hope this is not an improper parallel to draw (though it certainly is, give the infinite complexity of history), but were a Nazi war criminal to be released, I cannot imagine that his or her actions would be treated with such tolerance by modern day Germans. This reading made me distinctly uncomfortable for this reasons. Could we perchance discuss this notion, it might lean a bit close to the dangerous territory of sweeping, cultural generalizations, however the contrast between post world war two Germany and post world war two Japan is extremely striking.
Drawing on what Matt said about the imprisonment being benificial to Nogi, one of the most surprising things about that was the fact that he described the condemnation of the courts as actually helpful. I know that for me when I feel guilty about something, having the person forgive me is much more effective at alleviating/allowing me to come to terms with my guilt than a condemnation or recognition of what i did that lets me "own it". And obviously war crimes are many many many many levels above things I've felt guilty about on the badness scale, so maybe that has something to do with it, but I also wonder if the gratification for Nogi was related to the sort of samurai ethic, where Duty requires so much devotion that forgiveness for a transgression is in itself shameful. I don't know if that's too much of stretch, but I thought it was interesting.
Joined: 15 Feb 2011 Posts: 7 Location: United States of America
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2011 10:30 pm Post subject:
Hardy has a good point. From the end of this reading ("Today, Japan's government justifies what the military did during those war years.",) and other things we've discussed (Yasukuni Shrine,) it does seem like there is not only a lack of government recognition of the horrors committed on the Japanese side of things, but it seems to be taboo to even discuss these things in public and even in private. Nogi Harumichi writes, "Yet even today, field-grade officers and such never say anything disadvantageous to themselves. I sometimes have occasion to meet them, and I ask them while we're sharing sake, but they still won't speak of it" the very fact that Nogi is reporting his events and experiences and especially that he recognizes his faults and the faults of the military and the whole situation speaks to an understanding and a 'coming-to-terms' with the wartime events. He even states freely in the passage, "I myself admit that the trails for our war crimes were good. If I'd gone straight back home, forgiven for what I did, it would [have] been even more frightening for me." It seems to me that by serving his sentence he makes sure that he doesn't forgive himself for what he did in war, even if his country does.
Agreeing with Will's point on honor, I also think that honor and Bushido had something to do with it. It's interesting how even up to now these ideas of honor and the way of the Samurai constantly creep up. That maybe to be forgiven was the only way he could move past his crimes, as someone who has grown up having to have this sense of honor and respect for others. I feel that for him it was an inner struggle because he was betraying his own morals in a way. I think that part of him moving past it was not only being forgiven, but forgiving himself as well.
I thought Kasayama's story was actually really interesting, and I don't really share Matt's views on him. I thought it was less self-indulgence and more trying to ignore what was going around him; he was aware of what was happening and had to follow the orders because if he were to disobey any order, it would have basically been considered disobeying the Emperor. On page 114, he also mentions that refusing to "volunteer" could result in your rations being cut. He also mentions that they beat him just for having a book on the Indonesian language. I thought he didn't really have a choice in what he was doing, regardless of how he thought about it. I don't know, that's what I got from it, anyways.
Also, I interperated the grave quote differently; I thought it was just a statement, not an excuse. He mentions that many people are dying of dysentry and malnutrition and I think they actually just might not have been able to keep up.
I agree with Franky, even to this day the entire war, specifically the imprisonment of war criminals is very much a silenced subject. Both Nogi Harumichi and Kasayama Yoshikichi seemed to go back and forth between their loyalty towards Japan and the huge devastation that the war was causing. Unlike the rest of Japan where citizens were told false statements about Japan’s military success, Nogi Harumichi and Kasayama Yoshikichi saw the war from an honest perspective. Although the fact that radios were banned from the camps did lead to a significant disconnect with the rest of the world, Nogi Harumichi and Kasayama Yoshikichi avoided the censored Japanese news. One quote that stuck out while I was reading Nogi Harumichi’s story was: “If what we did in the name of national egoism were to be accepted, that would be horrible. The leaders of Japan today are all of my generation.” I interpreted this as a positive statement, saying that Japan wouldn’t make the same mistakes they did during World War II, having experienced their catastrophic effects as prisoners. Any other interpretations?
I realized almost every reading the speakers question whether Japan can win the war or not, but none of them really go against “the Emperor’s orders.” Just like what Will and Farrah said, I think it had something to do with honor and Bushido, they play a huge role in Japan’s culture and history, both past and present. As Nogi said, “today, Japan’s government justifies what the military did during those war years,” if Japan admitted what they have done were wrong, they were also saying that their Emperor had given the wrong orders, which would be a taboo because the Emperor is sacred, inviolable, and all the great things he is. Because they had set the Emperor too divine, it is too huge a face to lose.
For Kasayama Yoshikichi, or "I Gil", the war was difinitely not what he would have chosen to participate in the first place, if only he was given a freedom to decide. Although he made the decision to take the exams to become a "uniformed civilian" in the Japanese army, he did not own the same patriotism that the Japanese soldiers had. If Kasayama did not choose to be in the army, someone else would have decided it for him anyways, like they did for the men in his neighborhood of Seoul who were vanished in the middle of the night. He was given the "loweliest tasks" in the army, and was forced to be loyal to the Emperor, as he mentioned in the text "I didn't write home. It was pointless. Even if you had a broken arm, you had to write, "I'm well, I will give my life to the nation. Long Live the Emperor! Tenno Heika banzai!" (119)
I would agree that the imprisonment served its purpose for these men.
As everybody seem to agree, Nogi repetitively says that he knew that Japanese decisions in the Indies were sometimes wrong and that he was not particularly proud of it. He seems to be educated more than the average Japanese soldiers, and I think that led him to think independently for himself, unlike many soldiers of Japan in the Indies. His testimony does not directly say that Japan had done horrible thing -- it was more of an account of what he did during the war. However, his nuance tells about his contriteness.
Kasayama, on the other hand, was only telling 100% his story and what he heard about the war. Unlike Nogi, there is not a concern about the Japanese imperialistic ideology in his testimony. Instead, as somebody had already mentioned, he reveals many injustices Japanese and Korean guards had done in the Indies --- brinking, whoring, and public violence etc..
I thought that Nogi Harumichi torn between favoring Indonesians and the Emperor was very interesting. His inner conflict is found on two slogans he posted in his office: "We are the Emperor's Subordinates" and "The People's Mind is Our Fortress." after having the impression that as if Indonesian treated him as liberators who had expelled the Dutch for the Indonesians, he begins to doubt if he is doing a wonderful job there, observing his co workers slacking off. On page 108, he says, "I'd started to wonder what I was doning there, military man that I was. I don't think I was motivated any longer by a desire to win the liberation of Indonesia, but I wanted to be sent somewhere where there was intense combat." As Suchan mentioned, Nogi seems intelligent. I personally think that he should have been one of the leaders because his idea that his peopel, Japanese, should not lose the local people's mind while accompishing their duties. Also, at some degree, arrests of foreigners, persons of mixed blood, and intelectuals by Japan reminds me of the Japanese Americans incarceration by the US during the time. I wonder if the Empire of Japan knew about relocation camps for Japanese Americans. If so, how did they feel about it?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
