When most people think of World War II, the biggest and most horrific event that first comes to mind is the Holocaust. Although the Holocaust undeniably left a lasting impression on the world, the was another event that often gets overlooked in history that rivals the destructiveness of the Holocaust. This event is know as the Nanking Massacre, or the Rape of Nanking, and remains highly controversial to this day. There are those who have documented testimony from eyewitnesses and survivors that state the dead tolls from this event total nearly 350,000. On the other side, there are those who say that these numbers are highly exaggerated and some go so far as to say that these events never occurred. I will analyze sources from both viewpoints in order to maintain objectiveness and provide accurate information.
In her article, The Rape of Nanking: The Forgotten Holocaust of World War II, Iris Chang take the former side, arguing that the Rape of Nanking was indeed a massacre. She states that her parents had told her the stories of what happened in Nanking which lead her to dig deeper. They told her of the horrible acts committed by the Japanese which included slicing babies in half, thirds, and even fourths (Chang, 8). This cruelty struck her too the core, and as a child she suppressed the images see imagined from hearing her parents descriptions. She then writes that a Japanese soldier stated after the war that at least 120,000 captives were executed under staff sergeant orders (Chang, 213). Although he later reduced the number, the soldiers statement confirmed cemented the horrific events in Chang’s mind. She then examines the censorship of Japanese textbooks that fail the recognize the Nanking Massacre. For many years, Japanese authors couldn’t right of the massacre. Chang calls out the author of Matsui’s Wartime Diary, Tanaka Masaaki, and criticizes his hypocrisy for distorting historical evidence to fabricate the belief that the Massacre didn’t occur (Chang, 213).
Coincidentally, Masaaki also criticizes Chang in his article, What Really happened in Nanking. Masaaki states that by liking Nanking to the Holocaust, Chang is nearly displaying her ignorance (Masaaki, 1). Masaaki examines how the Japanese had agreed to protect Jews and even helped some escape the atrocities of the Holocaust. All Chang has done, in Masaaki’s opinion, is fueled hate between the U.S. and Japan which has hurt international relations. He also states the need to define the term “massacre.” Both Japanese and Chinese fought and lost people in the battle of Nanking, so it makes it hard, in Masaaki’s opinion, to label Nanking as a “massacre.” To farther assert his point, he states that more people lost their live at the Battle of Iwo Jima, but nobody calls it the “Iwo Jima Massacre” (Masaaki, 7). For these reasons, Masaaki argues that you can not call the battle at Nanking a massacre purely based on the alleged death tolls put forth by people such as Iris Chang.
When we get to the center of the argument it boils down to one thing: perspective. It is unlikely that the two sides will ever agree on what took place at Nanking and wether it was a massacre or not, however the evidence I have to say lies in Iris Chang’s favor. Although the Japanese argue the death tolls aren’t accurate, eyewitness reports tell the gruesome story. For me, what makes it a massacre is not necessarily how many people were killed but more the way in which they were killed. Eyewitnesses have stated that Chinese civilians were burned alive, machine gunned down in mass numbers, and even used as bayonet practice (pictured above). The gruesomeness of the deaths paint the image of a “massacre.” As stated by Takashi Yoshida, a historian from the University of Western Michigan, the depiction of the “Nanking Massacre” by each side tells us a lot about the “anxieties, prejudices, and political agendas of its commentators.” Wether the Japanese want to forget it Nanking Massacre or truly don’t believe it happened, their inability to take responsibility for the actions shows the maturity of their government. Despite the dispute over it, the Nanking Massacre needs to be acknowledged as one of the biggest atrocities of the twentieth century.
Do you believe that the Nanking incident is looked at by eastern nations the same way the west looks at the Holocaust?
When do we begin to look at things as a massacre then it comes to warfront activity? In the East, are the dropping of the atomic bombs viewed as a massacre? Do the Japanese view Pearl Harbor as a massacre? Probably not, but would other nations? Where is the line drawn?
Your last 2 sentences are written beautifully. Do you think there’s a way for enforce that Japanese know, acknowledge and accept the fact that the Nanking Raping and Massacres did happen?