Lantos Compares Yasukuni Criminals to Himmler and Göring

[Update: An elderly nurse has come forward to admit that she helped with the victims’ hasty burials as American occupation forces arrived. The apartments were built on the site later, which causes one to ask how the builders could have failed to notice the bones. The suspicion is that they’re linked to the infamous Unit 731.]

With that crotchety old World War Two vet retiring, at last the American Congress can let bygones be bygones.

[Democratic Rep. Tom] Lantos, a Holocaust survivor, slammed the Yasukuni visits by Japanese prime ministers as ”the most egregious example of Japan’s historical amnesia,” and said they are like laying a wreath at the graves of former Germany Nazi leaders such as Heinrich Himmler, Rudolf Hess and Hermann Goering.

”My message to the incoming Japanese prime minister is very simple: Paying one’s respects to war criminals is morally bankrupt and unworthy of a great nation such as Japan,” Lantos said. ”This practice must end.”

Lantos also strongly criticized the Japanese government for approving textbooks which he said ”deny the Rape of Nanking in China and imply that Japan was simply trying to protect other Asian nations from imperialism by launching World War II.”

”Japan’s failure to deal honestly with its past does great disservice to the nation of Japan, offends the other key players in Northeast Asia, and undermines America’s own national security interests by exacerbating regional tensions,” Lantos said.

Umm, pass the wasabe, please?

Shinzo Abe must be hoping that the Republicans hold the House, because Lantos — a co-sponsor of the North Korean Human Rights Act, I would add — stands a serious chance at becoming Chairman. Unfortunately, that would mean that Rep. Leach might head the Committee, or the Asian-Pacific Affairs Subcommittee:

James Leach, chairman of the committee’s Asia and Pacific Subcommittee, said the conflicts over history and the negative regional dynamics they can engender “should be of concern to Washington” as the issue “renders problematic the prospect of cooperation between the United States, South Korea, Japan and China on a range of important issues, not the least of which is the North Korean nuclear challenge.”

But noting there are signs of efforts to improve ties after Koizumi’s successor takes office later this month, the Iowa Republican said, “Whether these diplomatic initiatives prove durable or are evanescent, however, will depend much on the political will of leaders in Tokyo, Seoul and Beijing.”

Retiring Chairman Henry Hyde also took the Japanese to task for the distorted history on display at the Yasukuni Museum:

“It is troubling to those of my generation to learn that the Yushukan museum in Tokyo is teaching younger generations of Japanese that the Second World War in Asia was launched by Tokyo to free the people of Asia and the Pacific from the yoke of Western imperialism,” Hyde said.

“It should be corrected,” he said.

I’m very glad that I took the time to visit that museum myself, because I can agree wholeheartedly with that. But the words that express it best to me are “unworthy of a great nation.” Japan is unquestionably a force for good in the world through its actions today, and this is the greater truth that shouldn’t be obscured by a moral anachronism. Let those who died with honor rest in honor, and let the wounds heal. Removing the war criminals from Yasukuni and correcting the historical record will be a good start toward those goals.

16 Responses

  1. Joshua, regardless of the distastefulness of the race war theory on display at the Yushukan museum, the museum is a private organisation. Is it normal practice in the US to shut down private museums? If not, why is it the opinion of these politicians that it should be shut down or ‘corrected’? It seems to me that they are confused about the private status of the museum, and the shrine, and think it has official backing. Also, why is the museum an issue if the Prime Minister has never visited it?

    As for the so-called history distorting textbooks, they are freely available in English to download online. I wonder if Rep. Lantos has read one. I am guessing that he has not, which makes him very reckless indeed.

  2. Japan is a force for good..for now. Unfortunately Japan seems to be returning to their militaristic, aggressive selves and thats NOT good. And the US as their #1 ally has to tell them that it is not ok. The far right nationalists in Japan have done a pretty damn good job of terrorizing those who disagree with things like Y. shrine visits by Koizumi. Im not surprised however. Japan NEVER faced its own history the way the Germans did and as a result they dont regret what they have done. And when you have that coupled with the rise of the far right in Japan, it is not good news for the region.

  3. Matt, several responses:

    1. Yasukuni serves what is in effect a governmental function by housing the government’s war dead. That would imply that the government does or should have some control over who is buried there and what message is spoken there.

    2. Are you thus suggesting that the Japanese government had no say in the decision to move the war criminal there in the 1970’s?

    3. I don’t agree with Germany’s laws against pro-Nazi speech, but I wouldn’t expect Angela Merkel to visit Berchdesgaden. I was disappointed when Ronald Reagan went to Bitburg for the same reason. When the leader of a nation visits a place, he puts his imprimature on it.

    4. That’s why Japan’s emperors stopped visiting. It’s reasonable for leaders to set conditions on what places they visit.

    5. The museum and the shring are part of the same property. Anyone who visits the museum will see numerous war weapons and would have the same impression as one would have on visiting the Smithsonian — the omnipresence of that government property implies a government stamp of approval.

    6. The Shrine gives this message on its Web site:

    War is truly sorrowful. Yet to maintain the independence and peace of the nation and for the prosperity of all of Asia, Japan was forced into conflict. The precious lives that were lost in these incidents and wars are worshiped as the Kami (Deities) of Yasukuni Jinja.

  4. Hi Joshua,

    1. Yasukuni serves what is in effect a governmental function by housing the government’s war dead. That would imply that the government does or should have some control over who is buried there and what message is spoken there.

    After WW2, American GHQ gave two options to the shrine for the purpose of the separation of church and state. One was to become a secular memorial, and the other to become a religious organisation separate from the state. They chose to become a religious organisation.

    2. Are you thus suggesting that the Japanese government had no say in the decision to move the war criminal there in the 1970’s?

    Because of the separation of church and state bequeathed to Japan from the US in its constitution, the Japanese government not only had no say in the decision to ‘move’ (1) war criminals to Yasukuni, but the Japanese government has no say in any religious issue, just like the US. (1. There are no remains in Yasukuni. There are no bodies or ashes. Only ‘spirits’ are enshrined there. Spirits of Americans and other enemies of Japan are also enshrined there. The Shinto religion seeks to appease the spirits of the dead lest they strike at the living)

    3. I don’t agree with Germany’s laws against pro-Nazi speech, but I wouldn’t expect Angela Merkel to visit Berchdesgaden. I was disappointed when Ronald Reagan went to Bitburg for the same reason. When the leader of a nation visits a place, he puts his imprimature on it.

    Prime Minister Koizumi has always said that he is not going to the shrine to worship any particular person. In any event, the comparison to Nazi Germany does not strike me as a fair one.

    4. That’s why Japan’s emperors stopped visiting. It’s reasonable for leaders to set conditions on what places they visit.

    That was reported as fact in the western press, while in Japan the authenticity of the document concerning that has been called into question. It certainly is interesting that Emperor Hirohito stopped visiting the shrine after the enshrinement of the war criminals. Perhaps it had something to do with the priests at the shrine describing the war criminals as “martyrs of Showa (Hirohito)”, which could be interpreted to mean they suffered because Hirohito avoided any responsibility for the war.

    5. The museum and the shring are part of the same property. Anyone who visits the museum will see numerous war weapons and would have the same impression as one would have on visiting the Smithsonian — the omnipresence of that government property implies a government stamp of approval.

    I remember visiting the shrine. I thought it was a nice spot, very peaceful. It is also a popular dating spot among Japanese youth, and I was there with a Japanese girl. I did not go in to the museum, but I did not feel that by going into the shrine that I was agreeing with the ideology of the museum, regardless of it being located on an annex outside the shrine.

    6. The Shrine gives this message on its Web site:

    War is truly sorrowful. Yet to maintain the independence and peace of the nation and for the prosperity of all of Asia, Japan was forced into conflict. The precious lives that were lost in these incidents and wars are worshiped as the Kami (Deities) of Yasukuni Jinja.

    I dont agree with the message of the museum either. Just because some of the priest are deluded about the causes of the war does not mean that millions of bereaved family members should not go to the shrine to pay their respects. Personally I do not believe there are any spirits in the shrine, as I am not a Shinto believer, but many Japanese people do believe there are spirits in the shrine, and it was a matter of faith for people that were fighting in WW2 that their spirits would go to Yasukuni shrine. There they could meet their fallen comrades in arms, and have their living family members worship them. Since the meeting place (Yasukuni shrine) has been decided on, and the soldiers are already dead, it is not like the meeting place can be changed. There are millions of people with family members enshrined at Yasukuni, some of them would agree or disagree with the enshrinement of the war criminals, and agree or disagree with the message at the Yushukan museum, but it seems incredibly wasteful to tell the Japanese that going to the shrine is wrong just because of the actions of a handful of priests, even when they do not neccessarily agree with those actions. Also, agreeing with the priests and their historical/political opinions is not a requirement of the Shinto religion.

    By the way, it seems like the priests at the museum have actually retained a professional historian to do their exihibits at the Yushukan museum.

    A Tokyo museum run by controversial Yasukuni Shrine is expected to drop an accusation that the U.S. forced Japan into World War II by crippling its economy, an adviser to the shrine said Wednesday.

    Good to see they are getting a clue.

  5. Again, I’m not suggesting that Japan should force a strictly private organization to change its message. My point is that Yasukuni is not strictly private, because of the visits of Prime Ministers, the exhibition of government property, and the absence of a “secular,” non-political memorial to Japan’s war dead.

    The point about bodies not being buried there is valid, but of course, burial customs in East and West differ, and in fact, aren’t the ashes of the war criminals also at the shrine?

    Overall, I think the greatest problem with Japan is an overall whitewashing of its own past and a sense that it was the victim. This is not unique to Yasukuni. You see the lefty version of the same thing at the Hiroshima “Peace” Museum, which is really just a sanctimonious propaganda exhibit for the Japanese pacifict left. There is no discussion of how the war started and no context. Similarly, when I was in Kyoto, I recall seeing a monument to the Indian jurist who voted for acquittal in some of the lesser war crimes tribunals. The monument expressed its appreciation to that judge for refusing to impose “victors’ justice.”

    Stated otherwise, the government’s error is one of both commission and omission, by letting the rightist view of history prevail by default. If Yasukuni and Hiroshima don’t tell the story of the war accurately, and if the government (1) fails to build a place of true honor for its truly honorable war dead, (2) fails to build a museum that represent history accurately, and (3) continues placing its stamp of approval on a warped view, then we will continue to have problems.

    Japanese society needs to have this conversation in the context of understanding that its military today is subservient to the people and truly a force for self-defense in a dangerous region. Just as only Nixon could go to China, only a conservative Japanese politican can do this without it coming across as pacificm and disarmament rhetoric.

  6. Hi Joshua,

    Again, I’m not suggesting that Japan should force a strictly private organization to change its message. My point is that Yasukuni is not strictly private, because of the visits of Prime Ministers, the exhibition of government property, and the absence of a “secular,” non-political memorial to Japan’s war dead.

    It is not so simple. Some Prime Ministers visited Yasukuni, others did not. There is no rule about it. Prime Ministers in the future may or may not visit, depending on their personal beliefs. I can hardly think that Yasukuni becomes not strictly private just because the current Prime Minister chooses to visit there. George Bush also goes to church, but no one is suggesting that it means that particular church has the US governments stamp of approval. As for the exhibition of government property, are you talking about decommissioned military hardware at the museum? Are you sure that is owned by the government?

    The point about bodies not being buried there is valid, but of course, burial customs in East and West differ, and in fact, aren’t the ashes of the war criminals also at the shrine?

    The ashes or bodies of war criminals are either with the families, or buried in the ground at the family grave. The Shinto priests deal in spirits, and they dont ask permission before enshrining people either.

    Overall, I think the greatest problem with Japan is an overall whitewashing of its own past and a sense that it was the victim. This is not unique to Yasukuni. You see the lefty version of the same thing at the Hiroshima “Peace” Museum, which is really just a sanctimonious propaganda exhibit for the Japanese pacifict left. There is no discussion of how the war started and no context. Similarly, when I was in Kyoto, I recall seeing a monument to the Indian jurist who voted for acquittal in some of the lesser war crimes tribunals. The monument expressed its appreciation to that judge for refusing to impose “victors’ justice.”

    The Hiroshima museum is a different issue all together, and I think we can all agree that the successive mayors of Hiroshima have been sanctimonious and irrelevant. As for what you saw in Kyoto, was that a government statue or a private one? If it is a private one, then surely private expressions of dissent are permissible?

    Stated otherwise, the government’s error is one of both commission and omission, by letting the rightist view of history prevail by default. If Yasukuni and Hiroshima don’t tell the story of the war accurately, and if the government (1) fails to build a place of true honor for its truly honorable war dead, (2) fails to build a museum that represent history accurately, and (3) continues placing its stamp of approval on a warped view, then we will continue to have problems.

    I think you are over-estimating the influence of the Yushukan museum, which offers up a fringe view of history. I cannot think of one newspaper or TV station that agrees with the Yushukan museum. Unless you actually went to the Yushukan museum you would not know about its version of history, and you are unlikely to see its version of history being promoted anywhere in the mass media, or in textbooks.

    The Japanese constitution was given to Japan by the US. It separates church and state. I do not think it is right for some people in the US government to say that Japan should breach its consitution. That being said, the US Congress often pipes up about various issues, like the ‘Armenian Genocide’. They are not really serious about historical accuracy, and statements like this come after heavy campaigning by pressure groups.

    It seems pretty obvious that Rep. Lantos has never read the textbooks that he is talking about, even though they are availble for free in English. It is equally obvious that Rep. Hyde is under the impression that Yushukan museum is a government organ for teaching Japanese youth about the history of the war. Sorry, but they are both so misinformed that their statements have the quality of a homeless man ranting obscenities at passersby.

  7. It’s nice to read that a few American politicians are speaking out against Japan’s whitewashing of its past.

    Lantos and others like him seem to have a clearer moral conscience than people in the Bush Admin. who are coddling the
    hardliners of Japan by encouraging them to change their pacifist Constitution and to get on the Security Council.

    If Japanese leaders continue to be like Koizumi then there are serious objections to Japan joining the Security Council.

  8. If one accepts the Himmler analogy, does it matter whether it is private or not?

    What happen if some private organization build a shrine worshipping Himmler in US?
    What about in Austria? (or whatever that country was where some professor got sent to jail)

  9. Himmlers and tigers and bears, oh my! Out of curiosity, what rank is low enough that one may avoid the title of “war criminal?” Hauptsturmführer, perhaps?

  10. I think it should be perfectly lawful for pro-Nazi kooks to build a shrine to Himmler here, and it would become a public interest issue when a senior government official visited that shrine — remains or no remains. The leader of country makes a statement about how he views history when he does that, particularly if he has not put an unambiguous apology and denunciation on the record.

    This is all very different than a president’s regular church attendance. If he attends a church that espouses segregation or holocaust denial as official church doctrine, then we can talk. Matt might also characterize those as “fringe” views, as he does Yasukuni, but you can’t minimize those views when the leader of the nation goes there to pay homage. The honoring of a nation’s war dead is inherently an expression of a nation’s sorrow and its historical perspective. If you allow adherents of a fringe view to take over that function and reinterpret the history that is taught to kids from all classes and regions of Japanese society, then it may be vicarious state endorsement, but it’s still state endorsement.

  11. “Unfortunately Japan seems to be returning to their militaristic, aggressive selves”

    What, are they now talking about reconquering their lost territories, raping and pillaging across Asia?

    It makes perfect sense for the Japanese to remilitarize in such a volatile neighborhood-NK has nukes and continues to threaten, SK continues to play the anti-Jap card whenever they want, China is a dangerous adversary economically and militarily. Japan is crazy not to go all out to become a military power again. I think the idea that they will return to the days of Hirohito and repeat the past to be little short of ridiculous. Japan is a very different country and it makes plenty of sense to take the bull by the horns and beef up militarily (I wish Canada would do the same).

  12. I agree that Japan is a completely changed country in every other sense, and that it has every right and reason to reinforce its defenses, given the threats around it. Any notion that Japan is actually interested in reconquering Asia is a hallucination. The apology / history issue is a moral one that hands the figurative bomb-throwers in China and South Korea a weapon they should not have today.

  13. By the time the baby emperor grows old enough to wield his Samurai sword, the US will be the greatest ally in the history of Japan, and both will stand poised to solve the Korean problem once and for all.

  14. Hi Joshua,

    The leader of country makes a statement about how he views history when he does that, particularly if he has not put an unambiguous apology and denunciation on the record.

    Prime Minister Koizumi has made no less than 6 apologies since he became Prime Minister. Here are two from 2005 –

    “Japan squarely faces these facts of history in a spirit of humility. And with feelings of deep remorse and heartfelt apology always engraved in mind, Japan has resolutely maintained, consistently since the end of World War II, never turning into a military power but an economic power, its principle of resolving all matters by peaceful means, without recourse to use of force. Japan once again states its resolve to contribute to the peace and prosperity of the world in the future as well, prizing the relationship of trust it enjoys with the nations of the world.”

    And –

    “In the past, Japan, through its colonial rule and aggression, caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations. Sincerely facing these facts of history, I once again express my feelings of deep remorse and heartfelt apology, and also express the feelings of mourning for all victims, both at home and abroad, in the war. I am determined not to allow the lessons of that horrible war to erode, and to contribute to the peace and prosperity of the world without ever again waging a war.”

    Of course, these apologies will never be accepted by the DPRK, China, and South Korea, and all three countries educate their youth hate Japan. There is no reason for Americans to take the same position as them, though.

    This is all very different than a president’s regular church attendance. If he attends a church that espouses segregation or holocaust denial as official church doctrine, then we can talk.

    The exhibits at the Yushukan museum are neither official doctrine, nor required beliefs of Shinto believers, nor has Prime Minister Koizumi ever visited the museum. Prime Minister Koizumi has visited the shrine however, as a private citizen and worshipper, and his public statements and political record of pursuing good relations with other countries cleary shows that he is not giving support to the museum by going to the shrine.

    Matt might also characterize those as “fringe” views, as he does Yasukuni, but you can’t minimize those views when the leader of the nation goes there to pay homage. The honoring of a nation’s war dead is inherently an expression of a nation’s sorrow and its historical perspective. If you allow adherents of a fringe view to take over that function and reinterpret the history that is taught to kids from all classes and regions of Japanese society, then it may be vicarious state endorsement, but it’s still state endorsement.

    I think there is a cultural difference in world view here. In Japan when someone is executed for their crimes they have paid their debt to society. In the Japanese perspective, the war criminals have already paid for their crimes on this earth by being executed. What happens then is the mystery of the afterlife. People that go to worship the dead are not going to worship the spirits of war criminals.

    The Yushukan museum is not in charge of teaching Japanese history. Japanese people can tell the difference between the personal opinions of the priests and a religious obligation to worship their dead ancestors. If what Rep. Hyde is saying is true about the Yushukan museum teaching the Japanese youth about the war, then why is it that I fail to meet such youth? Why is it that I cannot find the Yushukan museums point of view in the Japanese newspapers or on Japanese TV?

    Countries cannot agree on every single matter. The Japanese have an excellent proverb to describe this situation – 犬も食わない – It means “even a dog wont eat”. It is normally used as a caution not to get involved in the fighting of a married couple. I do not think it will be helpful at all for the US to involve itself in this, especially if the impetus is coming from ethnically based pressure groups.

    The apology / history issue is a moral one that hands the figurative bomb-throwers in China and South Korea a weapon they should not have today.

    It does not really matter whether the Prime Minister goes to the shrine or not. The focus will change to textbooks, or ‘lack’ of apologies and compensation, or regular people going to Yasukuni shrine, or some other issue. The issues between Japan, China, and South Korea will persist as long as China and South Korea follow a deliberate policy of inculcating the youth with anti-Japanese sentiment.