History Is Written by the Victors
February 19th, 2007 by MarkIt’s often said that history is written by the victors. Most of the time, when people say this, they are referring to victors in war, not politics.
A FEW YEARS AGO, statues of Sun Yat Sen began disappearing from Taiwan’s public parks. In 2004, the Taiwanese government announced it would remove questions about Mainland Chinese geography from its general knowledge exam for civil servants. And last fall, the government renamed the country’s largest international airport. Once named for the Kuomintang leader Chiang Kai Shek, it is now simply called Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport, after the county where is it is located.
The ruling Democratic Progressive Party’s latest initiative has ruffled more feathers of officials on the Mainland and in the KMT opposition bloc: Revised high school history textbooks will for the first time devote an entire volume to “Taiwanese” history. The People’s Republic of China, previously referred to in classrooms as “our country,” “this country,” or “the mainland,” will be identified as “China,” and its history will be condensed from two or three volumes down to one.
The changes don’t stop there. The island nation’s 50 years of Japanese rule is no longer an “occupation,” but an “administrative period.” The 1911 Wuhan Uprising that brought an end to imperial rule in China will now be called a “Qi Shi” or riot, which carries a less righteous connotation than the old term, “Qi Yi,” or revolution.
Teaching Taiwan: Revisions in Taiwanese textbooks cause a stir.
by Abigail Lavin
The changes in regards to Japan are particularly disturbing. Some of the text books omit the Nanjing Massacre completely, others rename it “the Nanjing incident”. Makers of the new text books have expressed the idea that since the history isn’t really relevant to Taiwan, that it no longer belongs in history books. Considering that the Nanjing Massacre was arguably the most brutal massacre of the modern world, and that countries all over the world include it in their history books, this is very, very disturbing. In fact, the only country to similarly gloss over this portion of history is Japan, itself.
One other issue glossed over in the new history books is that of the “comfort women”, i.e., sex slaves that the Japanese soldiers took. The timing of this re-writing of history couldn’t be worse. Right now a group of Australians who were formerly “comfort women” are becoming politically active.
Ms O’Herne and two South Korean victims appeared in support of a non-binding resolution that urges Japan’s Prime Minister to “formally acknowledge, apologise and accept historical responsibility in a clear and unequivocal manner” for the women’s ordeal.
The resolution does not recommend Japan pay reparations, but urges Japan to reject those who deny the sexual enslavement happened.
It was unclear when the House panel would meet again to consider whether to endorse the resolution.
Supporters want an apology similar to one the US Government gave to Japanese-Americans forced into internment camps during World War II, approved by Congress and signed into law by president Ronald Reagan in 1988.
Japan objects to the resolution, which has led to unease in an otherwise strong US-Japanese relationship.
Herald Sun: Apology cold comfort for sex slaves
Regardless of what Taiwan has to gain from better relations with Japan, there must be a better option than re-writing history.
Related Posts:
Angry Chinese Blogger: Massacre, what massacre?
Wikipedia: Japanese Society for History Textbook Reform
Asia-Pacific News: “Rape of Nanking” vanishes from revised Taiwan history textbook
February 19th, 2007 at 10:02 pm
I don’t want to get into a big debate, but the Nanjin Massacre the most brutal massacre of the modern world? What about Germany’s war machine? Or perhaps Mao’s destruction of his own people? Or even the KMT when they came to Taiwan just to list the one’s relevant to Taiwan?
As for the naming debate between massacre and incident, Japan takes a lot of heat for saying incident but Japan is consistent about calling everything an incident; in Taiwan are other such events referred to as massacres or are the consistently called incidents?
February 19th, 2007 at 11:00 pm
Germany’s war machine certainly did some terrible things, but for a single assault, the Nanjing Massacre is hard to compare with. Aside from the 250,000 civilians or so dead, one must consider the way in which it was done. Take a look through this Wikipedia article, particularly the sections on rape and murder. It includes various first-hand accounts, including letters written by foreigners living there at the time.
It was my understanding that Japan didn’t really start debating this issue until the 70’s, after re-establishing contact with China. I’ve seen excerpts from Japanese text books in the 80’s still calling it a massacre. I don’t know for sure about current textbooks. I do know that the most extreme right-wing book is used in less than 1% of Japanese high schools, and is rejected by teachers organizations, though.
In any case, to answer your question, Taiwanese textbooks used to call it a massacre. Now some call it an “incident” and others ignore it completely. I would assume that the word “massacre” is still used, though.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:40 am
As to the sexual slavery, do you know if this is a new glossing over, or just a continuation of the poor job that has been done in the past of educating young people about these particular events?
You’re right about the poor timing of the rewrites, especially since the ladies who suffered sexual slavery under the Japanese are passing on at a fast pace these last few years. Yes, they were largely Chinese women and women from other Asian countries, but an estimated 2,000 or more were from Taiwan. These days there are only about 20 known surviving “comfort women” in Taiwan (all in their 80s), and ignoring their story does a major disservice to them. This is especially interesting since the Taiwanese government has an interest in recovering the money from the Japanese that Taiwan has paid out in the past for reparations to these women.
February 20th, 2007 at 9:41 am
Previous textbooks did include information about the Japanese army’s sex slaves. Ask your Taiwanese friends. It probably wouldn’t be too hard to dig up an old textbook; the 早餐店 guy near my place had one.
February 20th, 2007 at 3:21 pm
That’s really a shame. I had thought that the revisions mainly scrubbed the ridiculous deference to Chiang and Sun, which is well-deserved. I really don’t understand (greater friendliness with Japan not withstanding) why the Taiwanese would want to expunge the suffering of people of its own heritage (as well as in many cases, its own people) from history texts. Is it really the case that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”?
February 21st, 2007 at 2:12 pm
Well, I think it’s done for the same reason that the US has been so much quieter about Japanese war crimes than German ones. It’s a calculated decision, one made with more concern for political realities than for historical truth.
February 22nd, 2007 at 2:20 am
I came very close to writing about this very issue a couple of weeks ago. I’m glad you did, Mark. Battlepanda, the whole 日治 vs. 日據 debate was all over Taiwan’s Chinese-language media in late January, but received limited coverage in the English media here, unlike the statues and the Nanjing massacre and Sun Yat-sen.
Likewise, the pro-independence expat bloggers here have given the greens a free pass on 日治 vs. 日據. In fairness to them, these expat bloggers are usually quite honest about the true brutal nature of Japan’s colonial activities in Taiwan, while the Taiwanese behind this move seem content to turn a blind eye.
February 22nd, 2007 at 3:25 pm
That’s a damn shame. I understand that many older Taiwanese remember the Japanese colonial period with some affection (the trains ran on time etc. etc.), but occupation is occupation.
February 23rd, 2007 at 10:32 pm
I suppose compared to the KMT, the Japanese occupation didn’t seem as bad to some of the older people (though my mother-in-law’s memories of that period are far from nostalgic). Brutality is brutality, and occupation is occupation, but the KMT introduced corruption and gangsterism into the mix.
One theory I have about the lack of outrage felt by many Taiwanese over the Japanese colonial era is that many of the Taiwanese who died at the hands of the Japanese during that time did so in a state of armed resistance (at least up until about 1915). Several thousand Japanese soldiers died during the pacification of Taiwan.
In comparison, the KMT during the White Terror period conducted a Stalinist-style campaign of arresting, torturing, imprisoning and executing selected opponets (real and imaginary). Occupation might be easier to accept knowing you fought the good fight, something the local population was never able to do against the KMT.
The cynic might also note that it was the aborigines who suffered the most from the efforts of the Japanese to establish control over Taiwan, and that not too many Han Chinese are going to get too worked up about that.
BTW, a good examination of the attitudes of Germans and Japanese towards their WWII pasts can be found in Ian Buruma’s “Wages of Guilt”.
February 27th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
[...] the recent textbook revisions in Taiwan, which focus on patriotism, and the disturbing number of parents who still hit or their children [...]