On August 15, 1945, the Emperor of Japan, Hirohito, issued a statement announcing the acceptance of the ultimatum conditions for ending the war. This statement was accompanied by an order to the Japanese armed forces to immediately cease military operations and lay down their arms.
With understandable interest, these developments were also observed abroad. Moreover, not so much in the United States — the main adversary of Japan in the war in the Pacific — but in the People’s Republic of China. After all, long before the attack on Pearl Harbor, Japan had unleashed a war against the Republic of China, the predecessor of present-day China. For China, the “Asian component” of the Second World War had particularly severe and devastating consequences. The beginning of the war in China is associated not with September 1939, let alone December 7, 1941 (the date of the Japanese Navy’s attack on Pearl Harbor), but rather with the well-known “Marco Polo Bridge Incident” of July 1937, or even the “Mukden Incident” of 1931.
Events in Japan on the Occasion of the 80th Anniversary of the End of the Second World War
On the long and inevitably bloody path toward ending the war (“it is easy to start a war but hard to end one”), the year 1945 was marked by several events that were especially significant for Japan. These events finally demonstrated to the country’s leadership the inevitability of a tragic conclusion to the drama in which it had played the most direct role in preparing and igniting.
By the way, what may seem to some a “strange” attitude of contemporary Japanese society toward one of the final acts of that drama — the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki — is explained not by the notorious “American occupation,” but rather by an entirely adequate understanding of this last circumstance. Along with the Soviet Union’s entry into the war immediately thereafter, the bombing undoubtedly contributed to Tokyo’s adoption, within a week, of the only correct decision. This decision made it possible to avoid the prospect of a national catastrophe, clearly outlined by the Potsdam Declaration.
In any case, the assessment of this tragic episode of American-Japanese relations, eighty years ago, is the exclusive domain of present-day Japanese and Americans. Self-proclaimed moralizing judges from third countries have no relation to it whatsoever — though, naturally, no one is forbidden from drawing useful lessons from this and other events of the Second World War. That is, of course, if this does not involve transplanting an irretrievably bygone past into the present in attempts to make political business by trading in “historical products” of dubious quality.
In Japan, the date of September 15, 1945, as well as a series of episodes preceding the final stage of the war in the Pacific, was marked mainly by commemorating those who perished — both their own and those of their principal opponent, considered to be the United States. These emblematic episodes included the battles for Iwo Jima and Okinawa, as well as the bombings of Tokyo, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. It should be noted that only the number of Japanese military personnel who died during the Second World War as a whole has been calculated more or less accurately. The number of civilians killed or missing remains an estimate, fluctuating between one-third and one-half of military losses. Overall, the military adventure of the 1930s–1940s cost Japan approximately 3.1 million lives.
Memorial ceremonies were held on Iwo Jima (now Iwato) and Okinawa, in Tokyo, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki (the latter city hosted international commemorations), as well as on the date of September 15 itself. These ceremonies were attended by Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and members of his government, the imperial couple, and close relatives of the monarch. The main points of both Emperor Naruhito’s address and the “personal” (that is, not discussed by the Cabinet) statement of S. Ishiba on this occasion were naturally of a similar nature. Namely: the necessity of preserving the memory of the fallen was affirmed, external policy “mistakes” of almost a century ago were acknowledged to some degree, and a commitment was expressed to avoiding their repetition and to pursuing a current policy aimed at ensuring peace.
In China, where — as we repeat — these events and public statements were closely observed, it was believed that the “mistakes” and war crimes committed by Japan during the Second World War received insufficient attention. The focus was mainly on the heavy losses borne by ordinary Japanese people and the country as a whole. In addition, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued yet another démarche on the occasion of yet another visit by some members of the Japanese government to the Yasukuni Shrine, an issue previously discussed in this publication.
Domestic Political Context of the Commemorations of the End of the Second World War
It should be noted that the Prime Minister himself limited his participation to sending an offering to the shrine, despite the fact that S. Ishiba is baptized in the Protestant branch of Christianity and, therefore, should generally avoid pagan Shinto ceremonies, such as the service at Yasukuni Shrine. But he is the Prime Minister of Japan, not, for example, the United Kingdom, and therefore cannot afford to completely ignore an act so symbolic for the country he leads.
Among the aforementioned “certain members” of his government who directly participated in the memorial ceremony, the presence of the Minister of Agriculture, Shinjiro Koizumi, drew particular attention. He is the son of one of the most prominent political figures of postwar Japan, Junichiro Koizumi, who served as Prime Minister from 2001 to 2006. In recent years, the now 44-year-old S. Koizumi has been considered one of the most likely contenders for the posts of President of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party and head of government. His visit to the Yasukuni Shrine on a day so significant for the Japanese fully corresponds to this status.
It is worth noting that the long-standing question of the need to “rejuvenate” the leadership of the Liberal Democratic Party has become especially pressing after the party’s latest serious failure in the July 20 midterm elections for Japan’s upper house. Talks of S. Ishiba’s early resignation from both of the aforementioned positions, which flared up immediately after the election results were announced, have not subsided to this day.
The prospect of such a development within the LDP becomes quite real also due to the emergence of a serious political competitor in the form of the Sanseitō party. Created only in 2020, it turned out to be almost the main winner in these elections, and subsequent opinion polls indicate further strengthening of its position on Japan’s political stage. This phenomenon fully fits into the general trend of growing resistance in the “Western countries” to the political and ideological plague that has engulfed them under the name of the “new normal.”
Finally, let us once again draw attention to the significant words of S. Ishiba’s address on the occasion of the end of the Second World War, in which he declared that Japan “must never again repeat the horrors of war” and pledged to position itself as a “promoter of peace.” These are fine words against the backdrop of calls already being voiced almost openly for yet another global slaughter.
It is important, however, that these intentions, publicly voiced by Japan’s responsible leaders — one of the key participants in the current stage of the “Great World Game” — correspond to the country’s actual policy.
Vladimir Terekhov, expert on the Asia-Pacific region
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
