Japan to re-examine verdicts in war crimes trials from Second World War

[OpanaPointer]

Japan to re-examine verdicts in war crimes trials from Second World War
Government to reconsider rulings, including execution of six of Japan's Second World War leaders

By Julian Ryall, Tokyo9:29AM GMT 13 Nov 2015

The Japanese government is to re-examine the guilty verdicts handed down in the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunals, which found 25 of Japan's military and political leaders guilty of initiating the Second World War.

The ruling Liberal Democratic Party will set up a panel this month to consider whether the Allies' rulings were justified, as well as the policies imposed on Japan after its defeat in 1945.

Of the 25 men found guilty of Class A war crimes - which included waging a war of aggression and "ordering, authorising and permitting inhumane treatment of prisoners of war" - six were executed. They included Gen. Hideki Tojo, who served as prime minister, and Gen. Seishiro Itagaki, the minister for war.

Some within the LDP, and others on the right of Japanese politics, insist that the tribunal was merely the Allies exercising victors' justice.

"The perception of history on which the rulings of the tribunal were based were poorly constructed", Tomomi Imada, the chair of the LDP's Policy Research Council, said earlier this year. "We are in need of an examination [of the verdicts] by the Japanese".

The right wing has applauded the LDP's decision, which is among initiatives to mark the 60th anniversary of the founding of the party.

"It goes without saying that the trials did not deliver fair judgements," Hiromichi Moteki, secretary general of the Society for the Dissemination of Historical Fact, told The Telegraph.

"Those guilty rulings did not conform to international law as was prevalent at that time and I do not believe that Japan waged a war of aggression", he said.

Along with many conservative Japanese, Mr Moteki's position is that Japan was forced into a war of self-defence as a result of aggressive economic restrictions and embargoes imposed on Tokyo in the 1930s.

"The war of aggression was initiated by America and Japan had no choice but to fight back", Mr Moteki said.

[Eugen Pinak]

Masters of headers of the 80th level
"Party panel" is definitely NOT equal to "government".

[michael mills]

Well, why not indeed? Some of the judges themselves disagreed with the verdicts.

And General Charles Willoughby, MacArthur's 2IC for security, commented to the Netherlands judge, Roling, that in his opinion the Tokyo trials were "the worst hypocrisy in history".

It is indisputable that the trials were essentially a political rather than a judicial act. The US occupation authorities agreed in advance with the Japanese Government as to who would be charged and who would not be (essentially, members of the Toosei-Ha were made scapegoats, while members of the rival Koodoo-Ha were spared). Furthermore, the US Prosecution coached the defendants in their testimony, in order to make it comply with what had been agreed between the occupation authorities and the Japanese Government.

[South]

Good morning OpanaPointer and all,

I note the para 2 LDP's panel also "as well as the policies imposed on Japan".

Apparently the planned Henoko base in Okinawa, next to Camp Schwab, is flaring up.

The Tokyo tribunal, formally known as the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE), was the major focal point of the tribunals.

What is important is that besides the Tokyo tribunal, there were additional tribunals in Asia by the Allies, eg the French in Saigon, the Brits in KUL, Singapore and Hong Kong........and the rest. Even the Soviet Union, at war with Japan for a week, held a tribunal. Manila's on the list.

My overall point involves the quote "as well as the policies imposed on Japan".

A decent book for laity / light reading is:

SHEATHING THE SWORD-The Demilitarization of Japan by Meirion and Susie Harries, 1987, ISBN: 0-241-12111-6

Warm regards,

~ Bob

[Monsoon]

Were the Allies exercising Victors Justice? Yeah, probably. It happens.

This is the quote that makes me chuckle:

" 'The war of aggression was initiated by America and Japan had no choice but to fight back', Mr Moteki said."

They were fighting the Second Sino-Japanese war since 1937 and actually been fighting the Chinese since 1931 in one little skirmish or another that they instigated. The Second Sino-Japanese war was folded into World War Two.

When things were going the German way in Europe, Japan got uppity and decided to push their luck with European nations in the Far East. The Dutch supplied them oil, but wouldn’t give up the Dutch East Indies. The French allowed them to occupy French Indochina. The US, UK and other Western countries decided that enough was enough and froze their assets and the US cut off their oil.

That left them two choices: Either give up their ambitions in Asia and the war in China (which the Japanese military wasn’t gonna do) or take resources by force.

So, how the war in the Pacific was the fault of the US? How the US brutally pushed the Japanese until they couldn’t take any more and they had to fight against the oppression of the United States? Because it looks like the US and the rest of the allies were doing their best to keep the Japanese from taking over and pretty much enslaving everyone in Asia under their yoke.

People forget about the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. The Japanese wanted an Asia with no Western influence. Great idea. Too bad that the Japanese wanted to run the whole show with puppet governments and enslave all of Asia under them.

[durb]

I do not know if the "comfort women" is somewhat related issue to this - IIRC, there has been a recent recognition by Japanese governement about their existence in South Korea and right to receive some compensation: http://www.news.com.au/world/asia/korea ... 299ebad2f6

At least it shows that there has been some willingness by Japan to open and re-examine the issue of "comfort women" which IIRC was not much touched by the war crime trials after the WW2.

Also related to the "comfort women":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Women%27s_Fund

However when one compares the Japanese/German attitude of the recognition of war crimes and compensating victims I think that there has been a clear difference. Germans have been forced and also willing to much greater length in these issues than Japanese. Have Germans as Westerners been considered more guilty than Japanese by "Western moral codes" - have Japanese been more forgiven or less pressurised by war crime issues due to their different cultural background? How far cultural relativism can be used as a "justification" of certain behaviour patterns and happenings?

Anyway I would consider the Japan of today as more positive power in Asia and world than the military-oriented Japan of early 20th Century - this demanded a cultural and social change which would not have been happened if Japan had not been defeated in the war and forced to go also through some war crime trials which put strongly in question some of the values and moral codes endorsed in Japan.

And there certainly are some "grey" colours instead of clear good/bad morality issues - some "bad guys" actually turned out to be rather "good ones" both at German/Japanese side. German businessman and Nazi party member John Rabe saved the life of thousands of Chinese civilians during the Nanking "Incident" 1937 and Japanese diplomat Chiune Sugihara saved the life of thousands of Jews by granting them visas to Japan.

[michael mills]

Japanese diplomat Chiune Sugihara saved the life of thousands of Jews by granting them visas to Japan.

You need to learn some history.

At the time Sugihara was posted as a consul in Lithuania, that country was under Soviet domination, not German. He was helping people escape from the Soviets, not from the Germans. Thus, at that time, the lives of Jews were not in danger.

Sugihara was a spy, who had worked together with the Polish intelligence agencies; he was went to Lithuania in 1939, after that country came under Soviet domination in October of that year in order to find out what the Soviets were doing. There were a lot refugees from Poland in Lithuania, including many of the Polish intelligence agents he had previously worked with. His function in issuing visas was primarily to help those Polish agents escape from Lithuania, since they in severe danger from the Soviet political police.

The great majority of the visas issued by Sugihara were for Polish refugees, not for Jews. At the time Sugihara was stationed in Lithuania the Jews were not in any danger since the country was under Soviet domination, not German, and nobody could know that it would soon be invaded by Germany. Sugihara was expelled from Lithuania by the Soviet occupiers well before the German invasion began.

[gambadier]

I look forward to learning how Japan's invasion of China was defensive (and not unadulterated aggression), same with its attack on Pearl Harbor, invasion of Malaya, the Dutch East Indies, etc. No doubt Japan's finest legal brains will have all the answers, perhaps something on the lines "everyone was so tied up in fighting Germany that we thought we would be next" (which doesn't explain their invasion of China).

[Knouterer]

The great majority of the visas issued by Sugihara were for Polish refugees, not for Jews. At the time Sugihara was stationed in Lithuania the Jews were not in any danger since the country was under Soviet domination, not German, and nobody could know that it would soon be invaded by Germany. Sugihara was expelled from Lithuania by the Soviet occupiers well before the German invasion began.

So when Israel named Sugihara one of the "Righteous among Nations" in 1985 that was a mistake? The Israeli government was misled in some way?

[michael mills]

That presumptuous title is issued by Yad Vashem, not the Israeli Government. The issue of the title is highly politicised, subject to lobbying by pressure groups.

[Knouterer]

"Presumptuous title"?? "Highly politicized"?? "Subject to lobbying by pressure groups"??

In what way exactly? Which undeserving persons exactly received this distinction, according to you?

From Wikipedia:

"When Yad Vashem, the Shoah Martyrs' and Heroes' Remembrance Authority, was established in 1953 by the Knesset, one of its tasks was to commemorate the "Righteous among the Nations". The Righteous were defined as non-Jews who risked their lives to save Jews during the Holocaust. Since 1963, a commission headed by a justice of the Supreme Court of Israel is charged with the duty of awarding the honorary title "Righteous among the Nations". The commission is guided in its work by certain criteria and meticulously studies all documentation, including evidence by survivors and other eyewitnesses, evaluates the historical circumstances and the element of risk to the rescuer, and then decides if the case meets the criteria. Those criteria are:[1]
Only a Jewish party can put a nomination forward;
Helping a family member or Jew convert to Christianity is not a criterion for recognition;
Assistance has to be repeated and/or substantial; and
Assistance has to be given without any financial gain expected in return (although covering normal expenses such as rent or food is acceptable).

The award has been given without regard to the social rank of the helper. For example, it has been given to Queen Helen of Romania and Elisabeth of Bavaria, Queen of Belgium and to the most humble people without distinction.

A person who is recognized as "Righteous" for having taken risks to help Jews during the Holocaust is awarded a medal in his/her name, a certificate of honor, and the privilege of having the name added to those on the Wall of Honor in the Garden of the Righteous at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem (the last is in lieu of a tree planting, which was discontinued for lack of space). The awards are distributed to the rescuers or their next-of-kin during ceremonies in Israel, or in their countries of residence through the offices of Israel's diplomatic representatives. These ceremonies are attended by local government representatives and are given wide media coverage."

[michael mills]

"Presumptuous title"??

The title implies that of the billions of humans who are not Jews, only those who helped Jews are "righteous".

The billions of non-Jewish humans who have never helped Jews but live exemplary lives, ie the great majority of the World's population, are by definition not "righteous", presumably evil in some way.

If the title were more accurate and less provocative, eg "Gentiles who helped Jews", there would be no objection to it.

Which undeserving persons exactly received this distinction, according to you?

Sugihara for one. Leaving aside the presumptuousness of the title, it is blindingly obvious that he did not fulfil the criteria. Let us have a look at that definition again.

The Righteous were defined as non-Jews who risked their lives to save Jews during the Holocaust.

In the first place, Sugihara was not risking his life. During the period that he was stationed in Kaunas he had diplomatic immunity as a member of the Japanese consular staff.

Furthermore, he was not engaging in any activity that the Lithuanian Government would have objected to. Those activities consisted of issuing visas to Polish intelligence agents who had taken refuge in Lithuania after the German and Soviet invasions of Poland, ie people he had previously had contact with in the course of his espionage operations against the Soviet Union; he also issued visas to Jewish refugees from Poland who had found out what he was doing and asked to be included. There is no reason to believe that the Lithuanian Government had any objection to refugees from Poland leaving Lithuania and going to Japan or anywhere else, regardless of whether those refugees were Polish agents or Jews.

Sugihara was stationed at the Japanese consulate in Kaunas from November 1939 until September 1940, when all diplomatic and consular representatives accredited to Lithuania were required to leave after that country was annexed by the Soviet Union. For most of that period, Lithuania was still an independent state, although it had been compelled to agree to the establishment of Soviet military bases on its territory; that independence came to an end in June 1940, when Lithuania was fully occupied by the Red Army and its government overthrown and replaced by Soviet puppets, who agreed to join the Soviet Union.

It was after the Soviet occupation in June 1940 that Sugihara began issuing transit visas to members of the Polish underground in Lithuania, since they were now in danger of arrest by the Soviet authorities, who were intensely hostile to the former Polish Government and its servants, in particular intelligence agents.

In the second place, and most importantly, during the entire period that Sugihara was issuing visas in Lithuania, the Judeocide had not yet begun. It began with the German invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941, nine months after Sugihara had left Lithuania. After leaving Kaunas in early September 1940, Sugihara was posted to Prague and then Bucharest, where he remained until 1944, when he was arrested by the Soviet authorities after the Soviet occupation of Romania.

Thus, during the period when the Judeocide really was raging, Sugihara was posted as a Japanese diplomat in Axis countries. However, there is no evidence that he used his position to provide help to Jews in either Bohemia-Moravia or Romania, when the Jews really needed it.

Furthermore, during the period when Sugihara was issuing transit visas to Jews in Lithuania, between June and late August 1940, the Jews in that country were in no danger whatever. In fact, after the Soviet occupation of Lithuania in June 1940, the position of the Jews in that country actually improved, since the Soviet Government was not hostile to Jews, unlike the previous Lithuanian Government, which had been relatively anti-Jewish, although not as strongly as National Socialist Germany.

In fact, the Soviet occupation of Lithuania was generally welcomed by the Jews of that country, since it appeared to save them from coming under German rule, which was the only alternative. In June 1940, no-one could foresee that in a year's time Soviet rule in Lithuania would be overthrown by the German invasion, and that Lithuanian nationalists, with the blessing and logistical support of the new German masters, would set about massacring the Jewish population.

The Jews who asked Sugihara for transit visas to leave Lithuanian were mostly traditionalist religious Jews from Poland who did not want to live under a Communist government, not because they were in any real danger of being persecuted by it, but rather because they did not like the atheistic nature of Communism. Thus, it was in no way a matter of Jews fleeing for their lives; rather it was a matter of Jews not wanting to be subjected to anti-religious propaganda (including by Jewish Communists).

Knouterer, I trust can now understand why the claim that Sugihara risked his life to save Jews from death is total baloney. When he was in an actual position to do so, while posted in Romania, there is no evidence that he did anything at all to help Jews who were being violently persecuted.

[wm]

Although it should be noted Sugihara was helping the Jews by providing them with visas allowing their owners to travel to/through territories controlled by the Japanese. This was the only way he could help them.

During his stay in Bohemia-Moravia or Romania such visas were pointless, because of the war with the USSR the route previously used to reach Japan/China was blocked. And there was no other available.