In November of 1937, Japan launched an invasion on the Republic of China. By December, the walled city of Nanking had fallen into the hands of the Japanese. After the city had been conquered, Japan’s actions toward the civilians were considered a “ruthless” and their foul treatment of the people of Nanking became known as “The Rape of Nanking”. According Iris Chang, the author of The Rape of Nanking – The Forgotten Holocaust of World War II, “Tens of thousands of young men were rounded up and herded to the outer areas of the city, when: they were mowed down by machine guns, used for bayonet practice, or soaked with gasoline and burned alive (Chang 4). Some experts suggest over 300,000 people died in this forgotten event and that it mirrored the atrocities of the Holocaust. The question many have asked is “did ‘The Rape of Nanking’ actually occur?”. While Chang tried to uncover the truth about an event that seems to have been lost in history, there is a running debate on whether these atrocities actually took place.
Many of the writers like Chang have face backlash in their open discussion of the subject. In the cases of Hora Tomio and Honda Katsuichi, they attempted to gather information such as interviews from survivors and research of newspapers and the like that revealed what they believed was the truth but it was met with charges of fabrication. With these charges of fabrication, these critics often cite the lack of primary sources. Some even questioned the validity of these sources such as the image below. Many images like this one was printed in numerous publishings to show the true horror of the Nanking massacre but many like Tanaka Masaaki in his publishing, What Really Happened in Nanking draws a refute. Masaaki argues that this image and those that are similar actually had no connection to Nanking. He argues that the article which originally included image and streamlined its connection to massacre ,”turned out to be totally erroneous”(Masaaki 113) .Masaaki reinforces his claim by stating a solider came forward with 10 photos he had bought as stationary set that was from around 6 years before this massacre had taken place and this picture was one of them. Masaaki is one of many who reveal the discrepancies in the evidence presented in favor of the occurrance of the Nanking Massacre.
There are experts on both sides of the debate. However both sides agree Japan’s reputation and future still depend on the story of Nanking’s wavering legitimacy. This image was published in books and newspapers around the world and this event was the subject films and debates on a world stage. Even courts have been involved in the attempt to give justice to the survivors and also to restore the reputations of Japanese officers. There is a contradicting ora most evidence presented, and Takashi .Yoshida blames this on the international propaganda at the time. Yoshida states “It seems doubtful that any useful assessment of the NM will ever emerge from assumptions that begin and end with reifications of national stereotypes, an approach which makes it impossible to clarify why the NM occurred and how it fits into the larger pattern of Japanese military behavior in China” (Yoshida). Perhaps clarity will only be seen arbitrarily by the experts who claim different sides.
Image:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nanjing_Massacre_severed_heads.jpg
Concerning what to do now, even if there is no debate over the massacre, the concern over repatriations still exists. With the Rape of Nanjing now over 80 years old, finding the families of those who were massacred would be incredibly difficult.If Japan did manage to find those families, what would they do, give them $10,000 for their loss? Would they then have to do that for all civilian casualties exploited by the Japanese army, and would every other nation from the war also be responsible for what they had done?
The deeper meaning behind this event still affects the Chinese and Japanese people today. Like we learned during Dr. Schneider’s visit, this event is used mostly for politics and other negations inside and outside both countries. Is this use of suffering right no matter the perspective?
The discussion regarding reputation is an interesting one because it forces us to assume that the massacre actually occurred. Would it been seen as dishonorable if Japanese soldiers had not followed orders to follow through with the massacre or more dishonorable that they actually committed such atrocities?
The emphasis placed upon Japans reputation and global image seems to be what this argument pivots upon. After such a long period of time the longer it takes I believe relations regarding this event will only get worse and worse. I hope that the victims are being mourned for their passing and not purely for political means.
It’s interesting to see how this argument has played out over the decades. As everyone else has stated a lot of the readings’ focus seemed to be on Japan’s reputation if they were to admit the massacre. Even if they did admit to it who can say if they would agree to some form of reparations towards China.