Without being a perpetrator, there would be no victimization. If the Japanese cannot seriously reflect on their responsibility for aggression, it will be impossible to build genuine peace, said Professor Emeritus Atsushi Koketsu of Yamaguchi University.
TOKYO, Aug. 16 (Xinhua) — Japan bears a moral responsibility to truthfully pass down the history of its wartime aggression, and failing to do so is itself a form of wrongdoing, warned Professor Emeritus Atsushi Koketsu of Yamaguchi University in a recent interview on the Tokyo Trials.
On Aug. 15, 1945, Japan announced its unconditional surrender. In 1946, the Allied Forces established the International Military Tribunal for the Far East in Tokyo. From its opening in May 1946 until its verdict in November 1948, the tribunal known as the Tokyo Trials held over 800 court sessions, prosecuting 28 Class-A war criminals.
“The reason the trial lasted so long was, first, because Japan’s responsibility for aggression was extremely grave; second, the number of those responsible for war crimes was very large; and moreover, Japan had set up many concentration camps in Southeast Asia, subjecting local people to brutal abuse,” Koketsu said.
He emphasized the trials’ historic significance in establishing post-war international order alongside the Nuremberg Trials, but because the verdicts were not fully enforced, Japanese society, especially the younger generation, suffers from a serious lack of historical awareness.
Political shifts during the Cold War allowed convicted Class-A war criminals, such as former Prime Minister Nobusuke Kishi, to return to power, shaping post-war politics, he noted.
Japan’s post-war political system was, in part, established by those who had once waged aggressive war, the scholar observed, noting that their influence continues to this day.
The impact is also evident in the handling of historical sites related to the trials. Today, traces of the Tokyo Trials are hard to find. The original court site is now inside the Ministry of Defense with restricted access, and the former Sugamo Prison site, where war criminals were held, has become a commercial complex with almost no signs reflecting the responsibility for aggression.
Education, he argued, has also failed to ensure that younger generations understand events such as the Nanjing Massacre, fostering indifference to Japan’s responsibility for the war.
“Many Japanese think, ‘I wasn’t born during the war, so it has nothing to do with me,’ but I often tell my students that although you weren’t born then, you have a responsibility to pass down the history of the war; otherwise, it is also a form of guilt,” he said.
As a scholar engaged in history education for many years, Koketsu criticized Japanese society for long emphasizing its own suffering while rarely tracing the roots of these disasters.
“Regarding the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the Tokyo air raids, Japanese society repeatedly calls for such disasters never to be repeated. But the question is, why did these disasters happen? Few people will voluntarily say it was because Japan launched a war of aggression,” he stressed.
Without being a perpetrator, there would be no victimization. If the Japanese cannot seriously reflect on their responsibility for aggression, it will be impossible to build genuine peace, he added.
The scholar warned that as the wartime generation passes away, memories of aggression will fade faster, increasing the risk of repeating past mistakes.
“Japan must face and reflect on its history of aggression, transforming painful lessons into a force for peace,” he said. “Otherwise, regional distrust will persist, and history could repeat itself.”■
Failing to pass on war history is also guilt, says Japanese scholar
