동북아역사재단 2023년 05월호 뉴스레터
- Nam Sang-gu, Head of the NAHF Research Policy Office
The screening results of Japanese elementary textbooks were announced on March 28th. There was more attention on the results from the media due to the Korea-Japan summit on March 16th before the announcement. The media’s interest focused on two things.
The first was whether Korea was blindsided when looking at the results of the screening since we first reached out to improve Korea-Japan relations at the summit. The second was whether the description of Dokdo and colonization has deteriorated. The curriculum, which is the basis for textbooks that passed the recent screening, was revised in 2017, and it is difficult to confirm the assertion of being blindsided by Japan to be true considering that publishers applied for the screening in April and May of last year with most of the process completed the previous year. The current textbooks that passed the screening need to be compared to the ones from four years ago to determine whether they have deteriorated. They should be examined within the overall flow of changes in the contents of Japanese textbooks.
Textbook censorship through the screening system and Ienaga’s lawsuits
The new history textbook published under Allied occupation since Japan was defeated in the war in August 1945 included the Nanjing Massacre. The textbook publication system was reformed into governmental screening in 1949, and there were textbooks that describe the Japanese invasion. But when the Allied occupation ended in April 1952, the conservatives started to target the inclusion of Japan’s war of aggression and wrongdoings. Their criticism came in full swing as the ruling Democratic Party of Japan distributed three booklets about their concern on the textbook issue from August to November of 1955. They criticized whether including the Japanese invasion of China in textbooks can “properly serve as Japanese textbooks.” This is known as “the first textbook attack.” The Japanese government took such criticism as an opportunity and further controlled the contents of textbooks using the screening system. The rejection rate in textbook screening in 1957 was 30%, which resulted in less inclusion of Japan’s war of aggression.
In 1965, Professor Saburo Ienaga filed a lawsuit against the Japanese government’s censorship of textbooks that the textbook screening system is a violation of the constitution. The lawsuit was followed by the second and third lawsuits that lasted for 32 years until 1997. Judge Ryokichi Sugimoto ruled in the first lawsuit in 1970 that “screening the historical contents of textbooks is not acceptable and intervening in the contents of textbooks has certain limitations.” Ienaga’s lawsuits did not eventually result in the screening system being found to be a constitutional violation, but they did regulate the control of textbook contents by the Japanese government.
“The second textbook attack” and the establishment of the “Neighboring Country Clause”
The Japanese government expressed regret and apologized for Japan’s colonization and invasion as they normalized diplomatic relations with Korea in 1965 and with China in 1972. This was also reflected in Japanese textbooks. Textbooks that include the Kanto Massacre after the Great Kanto earthquake and the forced mobilization started to appear in 1966, and details on the Nanjing Massacre were brought back to textbooks in 1974. Conservatives started attacking textbooks as more textbooks included Japan’s colonization and invasion. This is “the second textbook attack.”
The ruling Liberal Democratic Party started a series of party bulletins in January 1980 called Current Textbooks: Proposal for Normalization of Education. The attacks became more fierce as the Minister of Justice Seisuke Okuno asserted in July of the same year that “current textbooks have major issues of avoiding to express the love for the country.” The Asahi Shimbun reported on June 26, 1982 that the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan will revise the invasion of China as an entry. This was later revealed to be false. However, it was confirmed descriptions of the colonization were misrepresented by changing the March 1st Movement to “a riot” and the coercion of worshiping Shintoism as “an encouragement.” Descriptions of the war of aggression were deleted drastically.
Korea and China strongly criticized the Japanese government on this issue. The Japanese government stated they will accept the requests from Korea and immediately revise the four items and six descriptions. They also established the “Neighboring Country Clause” for necessary consideration from the perspective of international understanding and cooperation when handling modern and contemporary historical facts related to many Asian countries. This clause is part of Japan’s current screening standards for textbooks. The Japanese textbook issue has changed from a domestic issue within Japan to an international issue due to the controversy over distortion in Japanese textbooks in 1982.
Improved descriptions of colonization and war of aggression
Unlike the intention of conservatives to reduce descriptions of colonization and war of aggression, the second textbook attack greatly improved the textbook content. All middle school and high school textbooks on Japanese history that passed the screenings in 1984 and 1985 included the Nanjing Massacre.
A lawsuit was filed in the 1990s demanding compensation from the Japanese government on the issue of “comfort women” by the Japanese army. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono acknowledged that the Japanese government and army were involved in the installation of “comfort facilities” and the mobilization of “comfort women” in his statement in 1993. Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama also made a statement in 1995 of an apology and expressing regret for the war of aggression and colonization. These responses from the Japanese government also influenced textbooks. The “comfort women” issue by the Japanese army was included in 22 out of the 23 high school textbooks on Japanese history that passed the 1993 and 1994 screenings and seven history textbooks for middle school students that passed the 1996 screening. History textbooks for middle school students published by Tokyo Shoseki included a column called Forced Mobilization of Koreans from 1997 to 2001.
Counterattack of conservatives and intervention of the Japanese government
Conservative attacks began as more textbooks included colonization and war of aggression such as the “comfort women.” The Liberal Democratic Party formed the “History Review Committee” in August 1993 as well as the “Bright Japanese Diet Members’ Federation” in June 1996 and the “Group of Young Diet Members for Thinking about the Future of Japan and History Education” in February 1997. They claimed that “they cannot agree with the self-deprecating historical awareness of Japan’s history as an invading country and the obsequious diplomacy of making apologies” and demanded removing all descriptions about the “comfort women.” The “Japanese Society for History Textbook Reform” began in January 1997 in line with these political movements. The history and civic textbooks for middle school students this group published passed the screening in 2001. The Fundamental Law of Education was revised in 2006, and the revision specifies that one of the goals of education is cultivating patriotism.
The Japanese government revised the screening standards on January 17, 2014, stating that certain facts should not be overemphasized and contents must be described based on the unified view of the government presented by a cabinet decision and judicial precedent of the supreme court. As a result, textbooks were written with the Japanese government’s view, and details of the colonization and war of aggression decreased.
Emphasis on territory and deterioration of Dokdo
Until 2001, the Japanese textbook issue was about the war of aggression and colonization. But the issue of Dokdo emerged as the island was included in the commentary for the curriculum guidelines for middle schools in 2008. In 2011, all geography and civic textbooks for middle school students specified Dokdo as a “Japanese territory.” The commentary on the curriculum guidelines for middle schools and high schools was revised on January 28, 2014 to require teaching Dokdo as “an inherent part of the Japanese territory” and “illegally occupied by Korea.” Former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe stated in the National Diet on February 5, 2014 about the revision that “it is important to clearly state the island as our country’s territory both historically and internationally to allow Japan’s view to be asserted even when children abroad are arguing about the issue.” The 2017 version of the curriculum guidelines for elementary schools specifies that Dokdo is “an inherent part of the Japanese territory” and “illegally occupied by Korea.” Such changes brought the deteriorated description of Dokdo in Japanese textbooks.
동북아역사재단이 창작한 '일본 교과서 문제의 역사적 경위' 저작물은 "공공누리" 출처표시-상업적이용금지-변경금지 조건에 따라 이용 할 수 있습니다.
