뉴스레터

Editor's Note: Recently, a Japanese politician justified visiting the Yasukuni Shrine, likening it to visiting the Arlington National Cemetery by Americans. Against this backdrop, the Q&A section of this newsletter explores what the two places have in common and how they differ, and why Japanese politicians and foreign leaders should not visit Yasukuni.

Q : Why should we make a distinction between Yasukuni and Arlington? Who likened the one place to the other?

In mid-May this year, Prime Minister of Japan Shinzo Abe had an interview with the chief editor of Foreign Affairs, an American opinion magazine on international relations. In answering a question about visiting the Yasukuni Shrine, Abe quoted Georgetown professor Kevin Doak and said that "visiting the Yasukuni Shrine is for the people who died in the service of their country, just like visiting the Arlington National Cemetery by Americans, and it is an extremely natural thing for Japanese leaders to do." Doak's argument goes something like this. If the US president visits the Arlington ceremony to honor the war dead, no one will say he endorses slavery, even through Confederate soldiers are also buried there. Similarly, if the Japanese Prime Minister visits the Yasukuni Shrine, that does not mean that he praises 'Class A war criminals' enshrined there. Furthermore, since honoring the war dead of his country is an extremely natural thing to do, the Japanese Prime Minister should be 'encouraged' to visit the shrine. This wasn't the first time that Abe justified visiting Yasukuni by quoting Doak. In his 2006 book Toward a Beautiful Country(美しい國へ), Abe already justified his visiting the Yasukuni Shrine based on Doak's view. He also used the same logic in answering questions at the Diet last February.

Q : On what basis does he liken the one place to the other? And why is such an argument problematic?

Doak's case for 'encouraging' visits to Yasukuni by likening the Yasukuni Shrine to the Arlington National Cemetery will be welcomed very much by right-wingers of Japan who flatter the authority of the U.S. However, his case is not based on an accurate perception of historical facts, nor is it logically persuasive. Above all, comparing the Confederate soldiers who were killed in the Civil War over slavery to the 'Class A war criminals' who were punished in an international court for Japan's aggressive wars is far-fetched. Nevertheless, Abe still insists on likening the Yasukuni Shrine to the Arlington National Cemetery for one and one reason only. By relying on the 'authority' of an American university professor, he intends to justify Japan's aggressive wars as 'self-defense wars' and lay a foundation for justifying the Prime Minister's visit to the Yasukuni Shrine. Even with this political intent aside, likening Yasukuni to Arlington is still far-fetched from a common-sense point of view.

Q :Then how do these two places differ? Explain item-by-item.

First of all, there is a marked difference in religion between the two. Arlington is a national cemetery where the remains or ashes of about 300,000 people who were killed in wars since the American Civil War or contributed to their country are buried. Under the principle of separation of church and state, burial by any religion, denomination, or creed is allowed according to the wish of one or one's family. In particular, no specific religious ritual is forced upon, and freedom of faith is guaranteed, thereby excluding religion. In contrast, the Yasukuni Shrine is a religious facility where the tablets, not remains or ashes, of the 2.4 million war dead since the Meiji Restoration (about 2.3 million of them killed during WWII) are enshrined together. Furthermore, the Yasukuni Shrine makes unilateral decisions on enshrining the war dead without seeking consent from the bereaved family of the deceased as well as the deceased themselves. In many cases, the Yasukuni Shrine made the decisions against the will of the bereaved family. Some colonial-era Koreans are also enshrined there. But the request of their families to cancel the enshrinement is being denied by the Yasukuni authorities.

Secondly, there is also a difference in what the buried war dead died fighting for. Aside from whether all the wars the U.S. has fought to date are aggressive wars or not, the war dead at Arlington died fighting for a country called the U.S.A. The 'spirits' enshrined at Yasukuni, however, from the Meiji Restoration to Japan's defeat in WWII, had laid their lives for the Emperor as a divine authority transcending state, and become 'gods (神).' Strictly speaking, they are never the ones 'who died for their country' that Abe or Doak was talking about. That explains why right-wingers of Japan are still praying for the revival of the Emperor's practice of visiting the Yasukuni Shrine.

Thirdly, at Arlington, those who were punished at a court-martial or identified as war criminals at an international court are basically ruled out, no matter how much they served their country. Therefore, at Arlington, the U.S. president offers flowers many times a year without drawing criticism at home and abroad. And heads of state who are on official visit to the U.S. also visit the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington. At Yasukuni, on the other hand, war criminals punished at Tokyo Trial and other international military courts are enshrined. By October 1967, nine hundred and eighty-four 'Class B and C war criminals' had been enshrined on four occasions. In 1978, fourteen 'Class A war criminals' were enshrined, which has remained controversial to date. Accordingly, every time a Prime Minister of Japan visits Yasukuni, it becomes controversial. And heads of other countries on state visit to Japan do not visit Yasukuni.

Fourthly, there is a difference in the view of war and the perception of history. Arlington is not a facility that glorifies war, nor is it a place that expresses the perception of history surrounding whether slavery should be maintained or not. In contrast, Yasukuni is explicitly glorifying war through its symbolic war museum of Yushukan (遊就館). As stated by the Yasukuni authorities, revealing the truths of modern history and honoring the war dead as spirits is the shrine's important role. This has led to the arguments that Japan's wars in the past were not aggressive wars but 'self-defense wars' and that the 'Class A war criminals' were unjustly charged by the Tokyo Trial which was 'a victor's trial.' Because of these controversial arguments, Japanese politicians' perception of history has been questioned at home and abroad. In particular, Abe is quoting Doak in an effort to avoid criticism from the outside, in saying that "visiting the Yaskuni Shrine does not mean honoring the 'Class A criminals' enshrined there, and the 'spirits other than the Class A war criminals' are those who died in the service of a country called Japan, and it is therefore extremely natural for Japanese leaders to visit the Yasukuni Shrine, as is the case for the Arlington National Cemetery in the U.S." However, his justification itself is overlooking important problems.

Q : Then what is wrong with both Doak and Abe in their perceptions of history? And what happens if a foreign leader visits Yasukuni?

Both Doak and Abe justify visiting Yasukuni on the grounds that the 'spirits other than the Class A criminals' are 'those who died in the service of their country, but ignore the atrocities they committed in battlefield. The 'Class A criminals' account for no more than 0.01 percent of the 2.4 million spirits enshrined at Yaskuni. Abe and Doak are completely ignoring the facts that 'the rest of the spirits' include those who were drafted in modern Japan's aggressive wars and committed atrocities all over the Asia-Pacific region, such as abusing prisoners of war and killing civilians, and that the resulting trauma of the victims has not been healed yet.

Ignoring these differences and likening Yasukuni to Arlington is a result of the historical perception that denies and glorifies the history of aggression, combined with ignorance. Abe's intentions in interviews of likening Yasukuni to Arlington and saying that his offering of flowers to the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington was 'an act of basic courtesy in the international community' are obvious. If the U.S. president visits Yasukuni and offers flowers in response to Abe's words and actions, then the long-cherished wish of Abe and other right-wingers of Japan will come true.

Q : Why did the high-ranking officials of the U.S. refuse to visit Yasukuni?

They see through Japan's intentions and also know full well that the Yasukuni Shrine is a red-hot issue that inflames the conflict of nationalism in East Asia. In this regard, that the Secretaries of State and Defense of the U.S. who visited Japan on October 3, 2013 offered flowers 'on purpose' at the Chidorigafuchi National Cemetery has a symbolic meaning. In connection with this, a high-ranking official of the U.S. said that the Chidorigafuchi National Cemetery was 'the place closest to' the Arlington National Cemetery. And this may be a strong message to Abe, "Don't treat Yasukuni as the same rank as Arlington," which also bears in mind what Korea and China think. Perhaps this remark was also very humiliating to the Abe administrations that absolutely follows the U.S.