Development of the Movement to Boycott the 10Th Fareasternchampionshipgames(FECG)Injapan*

JSPEHSS Distinguished Research Award for Early Career Contribution 2017 Int. J. Sport Health Sci. Paper : History Development of the Movement to Boycott the 10th FarEasternChampionshipGames(FECG)inJapan*

Kosuke Tomita

Nippon Sport Science University, Research Institute for Olympic and Sport Culture 7-1-1 Fukasawa, Setagayaku, Tokyo 158-8508, Japan E-mail:k.t0mmy165＠gmail.com

*Original article published in Japan J. Phys. Educ. Hlth. Sport Sci. 61: 43-58, 2016 (in Japanese)

The purposes of this study were to focus on the campaign against participation in the 10th Far Eastern Championship Games (FECG) in Japan and examine the historical meaning thereof. The FECG was canceled because of the con‰ict between Japan and China over the ``Man- chukuo'' problem in 1934. The Japan Amateur Athletic Association (JAAA) negotiated with China and the Philippines regarding the problem, but China did not recognize it. Conse- quently, Manchukuo was unable to participate in the 10th FECG.Atthattime,thoseinvolved in Manchukuo and a right-wing political party criticized and protested against the JAAA, demanding that the Japanese national team not participate in the games. However, the JAAA declared that the team would participate. Those involved in Manchukuo and the right-wing political party attacked the Japanese national team to prevent their participation in the games. Manchukuo, founded as a result of the Manchurian Incident, was supported by many Japanese citizens, and its impact spread to sports. The present study clariˆes the tension between politics and sport resulting from Japan's enthusiastic support for Manchukuo.

Keywords: Manchukuo, the world of Asian sports, sports and politics, the Japanese national team

1. Introduction and athletes to record their impressions of participating in the games. These were compiled and The ˆrst Far Eastern Championship Games published in Manila Enseiki (Report on the Manila (FECG) was held in February 1913, and with the Expedition) in August 1934. Masao Ichihara ran the 10th games in May 1934, a nearly 20-year history 400 m hurdles, winning third place after closely los- ended. The cause of this situation was an intractable ing to a Filipino athlete. Re‰ecting on his own con‰ict between the Japan Amateur Athletic As- struggle in his essay, he notes the reason for his sociation (JAAA) and China National Amateur At- defeat as the diŠerence in real ability between him- hletic Federation (CNAAF)1 over the participation self and the Filipino athlete who won: ``After this, I of ``Manchukuo.'' will train hard, ˆght hard, and be committed to cul- The Manchurian Incident of 1931, which began tivating my real ability. In due time I will defeat with an explosion near a railway line on the South them, and I have to prepare for the coming Berlin Manchuria Railway in the vicinity of Liutaiohu in games'' (Ichihara, 1934). He uses this defeat as sus- northeastern China, created the puppet state of tenance, pledging to work even harder in prepara- Manchukuo. The state's creation was endorsed by tion for the Berlin Olympics two years later in 1936. the majority of Japanese citizens. Blocking interna- However, his thoughts on the topic do not end tional negative criticism, Japan chose to leave the there. League of Nations, intensifying its isolation from Be that as it may, I remember the various in- the international community. This aŠected the cidents that occurred at the time of departure FECG, in which Japan, the Philippines, and China involving participating. Did we not push were the principal participating members. through even while branded as unpatriotic After the 10th and ˆnal FECG, the Japan traitors? Today, on my way back to my Amateur Athletic Federation (JAAF) asked o‹cials country on board the Heiyomaru, I have

A54A54 International Journal of Sport and Health Science Vol.17, A54-A69, 2019 http://taiiku-gakkai.or.jp/ Movement to Boycott the 10th Far Eastern Championship Games

now changed these things into good memo- tion to the Ichihara citation referenced at the begin- ries of the past. How joyful we are to be ning, Shuhei Nishida, selected as a national track heading back to the fatherland with the and êld athlete, later said, ``The racket about grand gift of having solved the problem of whether or not to participate in the Moscow Olym- Manchukuo's participation in the FECG. pics had nothing on that uproar'' (Waseda Univer- Now, who was it who truly loves our coun- sity Athletic Club, 1984). Even if Nishida had em- try, who is concerned about our country? bellished his recollections, this impacted the (Ichihara, 1934) Japanese national athletes selected for the 10th Ichihara was selected to represent Japan in the FECG. Thus, this study elucidates the boycott regional international games, in which national at- movement in Japan surrounding Manchukuo's par- hletes from Japan, the Philippines, and China ticipation in this FECG, and considers the eŠects of gathered in one place. However, he was ``branded'' the creation of Manchukuo on the sports world of as `ùnpatriotic, a traitor'' when he departed Japan. Japan. Of the 42 national athletes whose essays were pub- The following chief historical records were used: lished, 15 mentioned the ``various incidents'' Ichi- JAAA-related materials such as the 10th Far Eastern hara mentions surrounding participation in the Championship Games Report and the Olympic (a games. Some also reported being disparaged as JAAA bulletin); 12 newspapers whose possession `ùnpatriotic.'' In addition to the track and êld at- could be conˆrmed from among those published in hletes, national athletes competing in other matches Tokyo (see works cited); Manshu Nippou and and events chronicled their impressions of the Dalian Shinbun, published in Dalian in Kwantung; games and mentioned these various incidents, which and Shinkyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun, published in refer to the movement to boycott the 10th FECG be- Shinkyo, the capital of Manchukuo. cause of the problem of Manchukuo's participation therein (below, ``the boycott movement''). 2. Manchukuo's participation Until now, studies focused on the problem of Manchukuo's participation in the FECG, which can Previous studies including a detailed study by be summarized as follows. Japan promoted the par- Takashima (2008) highlighted the problem of Man- ticipation of Manchukuo, while China opposed it. chukuo's participation in the FECG. This section Furthermore, the country was backed by a move- outlines the process that launched the boycott ment against Manchukuo participation in China. As movement against the Japanese national team with such, the two nations were in con‰ict. Furthermore, reference to Takashima's work (2008). this entangled the Philippines, which was hosting the 10th FECG, and the IOC, which had licensed the 2.1 The process of the problem of Manchukuo's FECG as an athletic meeting, throwing ``sports in participation in the FECG the Far East'' into turmoil. The FECG was dissolved, and sports in the Far East reorganized with Manchukuo's wish to participate in the FECG Japan at the center (ABE, 2003; Goodman, 2011; was ˆrst expressed in an o‹cial form in May 1933. Ikei, 1989; Ka, 1999; Ko, 2008; Takashima, 2008, Organization members had to unanimously agree 2010b, 2012). The problem of Manchukuo's partici- when a new constituent wished to participate in the pation in the FECG indicates that the political cli- Far East Games. Opposed by CNAAF, Man- mate in the Far East was re‰ected in international chukuo's participation was rejected in September. sports and materialized as a shifting era for sports Seeking a solution to ensure Manchukuo's partici- in the region. Each constituent's engagement in the pation, the JAAA board of directors met in Novem- problem of Manchukuo's participation has been ber. Zensaku Mogi of the Manchukuo Amateur At- clariêd. However, what eŠects were evident in hletic Association (MAAA) attended the meeting, Japan? One eŠect was the boycott movement. Ac- emphasizing that the Association did not want cording to Takashima (2010b), political organiza- Japan to withdraw from the Far East Athletic As- tions and military circles actively engaged in the sociation over the issue and that they would be sa- boycott movement, although others note that in- tisêd to participate on an invitational basis.2 Hear- terest in the movement was low. However, in addi- ing this, the JAAA sought a solution that consi-

A55A55 Kosuke Tomita

dered both o‹cial and invitational forms of partici- discussion, the opposing arguments of JAAA and pation. At the start of December, the Philippine Okabe ran parallel, and the meeting concluded that Amateur Athletic Federation (PAAF)3 proposed a for now, both parties agreed regarding implement- meeting between representatives from Japan, ing Manchukuo's FECG participation. After the China, and the Philippines to resolve the issue; discussion, JAAA sent The Inter-University Athlet- however, CNAAF announced that they would not ics Union of Japan President Tadaoki Yamamoto attend the meeting, and it was cancelled (Taka- to China and the Philippines to resolve the problem shima, 2008). of Manchukuo's participation in the FECG. From late January to early February 1934, the Around the time that Yamamoto was sent to negoti- Manshu Rikujyo Kyogi Kakushin Renmei (Man- ate with Shanghai and Manila, JAAA sent churian Reformist League of Athletics)4 and Board Toshimitsu Shibuya and Shigemaru Takekoshi to for the Preparation of International Games5 were Manchukuo to explain the state of JAAA's formed consecutively in Manchukuo to resolve the response to its participation in the FECG to the problem of its participation in the FECG. On MAAA (Takashima, 2008). February 10, JAAA received a telegram from the In this way, after Okabe and others came to MAAA withdrawing Mogi's remarks from Novem- Japan, the problem of Manchukuo's participation ber and stating its ˆrm wish to participate in the became an uproar involving various people other FECG. On February 15, Heita Okabe of Man- than sports o‹cials. Although they agreed about chukuo's Manshu Rikujyo Kyogi Kakushin Renmei the goal of letting Manchukuo participate in the as well as Kanzo Kubota and Zensaku Mogi of the FECG, the opinion of the JAAA absolutely con- MAAA visited the JAAA, requesting support to ‰icted with the one of Okabe and other regarding realize Manchukuo's FECG participation (Japan the solution were contradictory. The next section Amateur Athletic Association (JAAA) Compila- reviews the assertions of the JAAA. tion, 1934). Okabe released a statement on Febru- ary 17, denouncing CNAAF's rejection of Man- 2.2 Assertions by the Japan Amateur Athletic As- chukuo's participation as ``plain contempt.'' The sociation statement also criticized the JAAA for deciding to participate regardless of the possibility of Man- In the April 1934 edition of Olympic, JAAA pub- chukuo's participation, and insisted on the as- lished the article ``The problem of Manchukuo's sociation's withdrawal from the FECG (Dalian participation in the Far Eastern Championship Shinbun, February 18, 1934, evening paper). After Games'' (Up to March 3),7 which chronicled the Okabe and others visited Tokyo, a Tokyo progress of the problem of Manchukuo's participa- Committee6 was formed by Manchukuo o‹cials in tion in the FECG up to March 3 from the JAAA's the city, which began working toward implementing standpoint, as well as its response. The article clari- the state's FECG participation in Japan. The scope ês JAAA's o‹cial viewpoint at the point in the of that work did not stop at JAAA o‹cers, physical process mentioned in the previous section. education, and sports o‹cials. It spread to politi- JAAA's standpoint was that no matter the results cians, right-wing organizations, and students, and of the problem of Manchukuo's participation in the organizations holding assemblies to back Man- FECG, it would participate in the 10th games. Fur- chukuo's participation began to emerge (Taka- thermore, it would continue its persuasion until shima, 2008). Furthermore, House of Peers member China approved Manchukuo's participation. JAAA Yoshinori Futara demanded a response regarding proposed the resolution through `ùnique methods the problem of Manchukuo's participation from as a sports organization,'' in which even if Man- Minister of Education Ichiro Hatoyama during the chukuo had not acquired international recognition Budget Committee meeting on February 26. The outside Japan, they aimed to resolve the issue in the problem was even raised in the National Diet (Cabi- sports world. Refusing to participate in the 10th net O‹cial Gazette Bureau, 1984). games was not the best option for JAAA, because it In response to the actions of Okabe and others, would risk negatively impacting the Olympics, `às JAAA held a panel discussion with them and other we are recently, ˆnally securing status as a ˆrst-class organizations pressuring it on March 2. At the panel power.'' In response to the assertion that if Man-

A56A56 Movement to Boycott the 10th Far Eastern Championship Games

chukuo were not recognized they should withdraw, gap between people. To JAAA, while China was a just as at the time of the League of Nations, they di‹cult negotiating partner that opposed Man- stated that countries other than Japan had objected. chukuo's participation, they were not to be `òstra- With the FECG, they considered that PAAF ap- cized and viliêd.'' The problem of Manchukuo's proved of Japan and that conditions were advan- participation in the FECG was limited to Japan and tageous. In addition, because there was ``su‹cient China. Depending on the results, the eŠects could hope for a solution'' at the periodic general meeting extend to the Philippines as the host of the 10th held during the 10th games, it would not have been games and to their relationship with the IOC, which good to ``withdraw in anger.'' Furthermore, the had authorized the FECG as a sporting event. 10th games were to be held in Manila, and as ``the JAAA thought this problem would not be solved Philippines is using one whole small island and through immediate withdrawal, and attempted to devoting enormous sums of money to prepara- respond to the criticism from Okabe and others tions,'' deciding not to participate because Man- from the perspective of foreign aŠairs, domestic chukuo was not recognized would ``turn the 10th at- aŠairs, and the utility inherent in sports. Therefore, hletic meeting into something without substance.'' with what criticism did Okabe and the others This would not be the best option from the perspec- respond to these reasons? The next section reviews tive `òf international good faith.'' Finally, regard- the opinions of Heita Okabe, the vanguard of the ing the `Èmperor Cup'' bestowed on the nation opposition against JAAA. that won the overall FECG by Emperor Taisho, they stated that `ìn any case, in the background of 2.3 Assertions by Heita Okabe the decision that we should appear at the 10th athletic meeting was the largest reason, which was the Key to understanding Okabe's assertions about fear that this might in some small way implicate the Manchukuo's participation in the 10th gamesisin Emperor Cup.'' Therefore, they refused to not par- the editorial, ``The Truth About the Manchukuo ticipate in the 10th games. FECG Participation Alliance.''8 This was published Regarding sports diplomacy, JAAA had ``the from March 13-15 in Manshu Nippou at around the power to integrate mutual feelings between citizens, same time as JAAA's o‹cial opinion, as mentioned but its power to purge evil or punish dishonesty is in the previous section. hardly worthy of mention.'' Furthermore, ``sports Okabe asserted that Manchukuo was an indepen- and exercise are extremely inappropriate for invok- dent state and that there was no justiâble basis for ing movements that divide and alienate citizens and refusing its participation in either the Olympics or races from one another.'' Consequently, they noted the FECG. If colonies like the Philippines and India that ``to get to the heart of it, we wonder if this received services in the sports world as a ``nation might be the most inappropriate use of sports,'' (state),'' why was it possible to refuse Manchukuo's highlighting that those criticizing JAAA were seek- participation, even though it was an independent ing to resolve the problem of Manchukuo's partici- state? From here, Okabe's argument asserting the pation politically. Thus, what did JAAA consider legitimacy of Manchukuo's participation turned to sports' contribution to national policy? This was criticizing the JAAA. Why did the JAAA not sup- ``to hammer the peoples of Asia into one, as the port Manchukuo, despite that ``Manchukuo's asser- leader of East Asia,'' and therefore, they needed to tion is correct in the sports world''? He repudiated ``reconstruct this in a di‹cult situation, whether or JAAA's policy, questioning their participation in not China strongly opposes, and absolutely without the 10th games regardless of Manchukuo's participa- ostracizing and vilifying China.'' They insisted that tion or lack thereof. He added that JAAA's conten- ``sports should be invoked for this purposeful, tions to Okabe until then ``had weak grounds for major national policy.'' argument,'' and ``by no means make us agree.'' Under this assertion, JAAA advanced solutions JAAA made the following three assertions to for the problem of Manchukuo's participation in Okabe. the FECG and preparations for participating in the First, in good balance with the Olympics, JAAA 10th games. JAAA insisted that sports enriched was concerned that ``Japan would eventually [have mutual understanding, and should not widen the to] withdraw from the worldwide Olympics if it fol-

A57A57 Kosuke Tomita

lowed Manchukuo's assertions to their logical con- only when there is mutual, shared understanding, clusion.'' To this, Okabe responded, `Ì can un- and now, ``freedom'' was being ``violated'' by hesitatingly reply òf course.''' If Manchukuo's CNAAF's refusal of Manchukuo's participation. participation was not recognized, Okabe wished for He asked JAAA o‹cials and athletes, `ìs it not the actions that would keep Manchukuo and Japan in a duty of athletes to stand at the front and ˆght this similar situation to the end, ``whether it is the injustice?'' If colonies were able to participate in in- Olympics or Davis Cup, going as far as to withdraw ternational sporting events, why should the in- graciously and look ahead at the image of a solemn dependent state of Manchukuo not be allowed to do and isolated Japan.'' However, because a diŠerent so? To the people of that time, Okabe's assertions number of countries participated in the Olympics about Manchukuo's participation were clear-cut, and FECG, the time needed to ˆnd a solution would and stemmed from a persuasive line of inquiry. diŠer. He demonstrated awareness that this matter Finally, he scathingly criticized that the JAAA's was a diŠerent case and not directly connected. `ùnique methods as a sports organization (JAAA, The second was that JAAA considered trying to 1934)'' did not apply to CNAAF.10 resolve Manchukuo's participation at the Far East Association general meeting held during the 10th 2.4 Impossibility of Manchukuo's participation in games. Regarding this, Tadaoki Yamamoto was the 10th games and Japan's announcement to being dispatched to the Republic of China and the participate Philippines to negotiate, and although he refrained from references because solutions were being sought Having departed on March 8, Tadaoki Yamamo- and advanced simultaneously, he stated, ``the to had a conference with CNAAF's Wang Zhengt- FECG constitution should not be amended using ing on March 12. However, unable to discuss the the methods considered by JAAA's directors.'' This problem of Manchukuo's participation with Wang, refers to the amendment of the FECG's rules (con- the meeting ended on a low note. Next, Yamamoto stitution), which stipulate that to o‹cially partici- headed to the Philippines, attended PAAF's special pate in the FECG, all participating nations must un- meeting on March 22, and advocated for Man- animously agree. However, amendments to the chukuo's participation in the 10th games. Conse- rules can be made with a two-thirds a‹rmative vote quently, it was decided at that meeting that a special by participating nations. JAAA had been making a conference would be held to debate the participa- last-ditch eŠort to change the o‹cial participation tion problem. Yamamoto was optimistic that Man- terms by amending the rules.9 chukuo's participation would be approved Finally, the third point was the `ìssue of the Em- (Takashima, 2008). peror Cup.'' Okabe thought it natural that if However, at the special conference in Shanghai another country had the Emperor Cup, ``Japanese on April 9 and 10, PAAF claimed it would not be athletes would always ˆnd some reason to rush out possible to approve Manchukuo's participation if it and retrieve it.'' However, the overall winner of the was not recognized according to the current FECG 9th games was Japan; thus, the Emperor Cup was in constitution. According to the PAAF's opinion, it the country's possession. The Emperor Cup was would be impossible to approve Manchukuo's par- ``bestowed to the FECG based on the peace of the ticipation without unanimous approval by the people of the Far East when the games were con- delegates of the three countries at the special confer- ducted as a symbol of lasting peace.'' He added that ence. Yamamoto insisted on Manchukuo's partici- ``when the peace of the FECG is being thrown into pation by comparing it to British India's participa- disarray, there is room to question whether to give tion in the 9th games, but CNAAF objected, and re- the Emperor Cup and appear at the games at all.'' garding PAAF's assertion, this was not a persuasive Furthermore, the Emperor Cup would not underlie comment. Thus, with one month remaining until the reason for Japan's participation in the 10th the games, the plan to ensure Manchukuo's partici- games. pation in the 10th FECG was rendered impossible Having criticized these three points, Okabe (Takashima, 2008). highlighted that the ``freedom'' inherent in sports is At the JAAA board of directors' meeting held af- ``relative.'' In other words, ``freedom'' appears ter the failed negotiations for Manchukuo's partici-

A58A58 Movement to Boycott the 10th Far Eastern Championship Games

pation at the special conference, they were ``push- ble, a disgraceful model of diplomacy,'' criticizing ing toward Japan's immediate non-participation'' JAAA for prioritizing its relationships with China (JAAA compilation, 1934). Attendee Takahi Gou and the Philippines over Manchukuo. ``We already said, `Ìn the present condition, the mood of have no choice but to sever relations with JAAA today's directors' meeting was dominated by the and ˆght on the whole'' (Manshu Nippou, April 16, idea that non-participation would be inevitable 1934, evening paper). Furthermore, Manchuria (Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun, April 12, 1934).'' As Athletic Association (MAA) Director Hayashida such, Japan's non-participation in the 10th games stated that `ìf Manchukuo's participation is not had become a considerably real option. However, possible, I think we should like to have Japanese directors' meeting attendee Yotaro Sugimura athletes refrain from participating,'' demonstrating remarked that `ìt would not be proper to make an awareness that it would be di‹cult to accept hasty decisions from the viewpoint of Japan's JAAA's participation (Manshu Nippou, April 16, current international standpoint.'' This led to the 1934, evening paper). Finally, the Tokyo Commit- decision to send a telegram to the Philippines urging tee announced that it was severing relations with them to reconsider (Editorial Department, 1934). JAAA.12 The telegram was also sent to Yamamoto, but it After this, JAAA planned a panel discussion for emerged11 that there had been a misunderstanding April 17, which was cancelled because of the lack of between him and JAAA about his `àgreement'' attendance by Manchukuo sports o‹cials (JAAA with PAAF (Takashima, 2008). JAAA sent another compilation, 1934). The same day, Okabe released telegram to avert a misunderstanding with PAAF, an `Ànnouncement for Japanese Athletes'' `àp- which responded at around 3 pm on April 14. The pealing to their hearts.'' Okabe argued that ``this telegram stated that they sought a legitimate solu- meeting violated the spirit of sports and righteous- tion to the problem of Manchukuo's participation ness of the FECG [author's note: the special confer- in the FECG for JAAA in accordance with the ence],'' ``now the great cause of the 10th FECG has FECG rules, and that if JAAA sought a solution, been ruined, and its justiˆcation has run into the ``the Philippines would carefully consider this with ground.'' ``How many years and months,'' ``how the utmost amicable spirit and su‹cient sportsman- much national investment,'' and ``the precious ship.'' For JAAA, the content of the telegram was sacriˆces of 125,000 spirits of the war dead,'' su‹cient to be considered a vow ``to cooperate with ``when you think of the national policy of the Em- the utmost amicable spirit'' (JAAA Compilation, pire of Japan that staked its nation's destiny on the 1934).Atthegeneralmeetingat6:30pmonApril founding of this country, do you not remember the 14, immediately after the response was received, pulsing of blood in your young veins as a member JAAA decided to participate in the 10th games, and of the Yamato race?'' In this way the problem of sent a reply telegram to PAAF. Furthermore, a Manchukuo will be expanded into a boycott move- JAAA statement in the form of a conversation with ment. JAAA Vice President Ryozo Hiranuma and a statement to Manchukuo were issued (Hensyubu, 1934). 2.5 Newspaper editorials Immediately following the special conference, a ten- dency toward non-participation in the FECG Before discussing the development of the boycott emerged, but through Sugimura's proposal and movement, I review the editorials of each dealings with Yamamoto and PAAF, JAAA de- newspaper. When Manchukuo's participation was cided to go ahead as planned. rendered impossible, the newspapers focused on Having received news that Manchukuo would not JAAA's next move: Would they participate in a be able to participate in the 10th games, the Tokyo FECG that Manchukuo could not, or cancel their Committee to which Okabe belonged approached attendance? Immediately after the special confer- JAAA on April 12 to hold a joint meeting with the ence ended, newspapers reported that perhaps association and MAAA. However, it was notiêd Japan would not participate in the FECG. Tokyo by JAAA about its participation in the 10th games Nichi Nichi Shinbun, Miyako Shinbun, Yorozu on April 15 (Manchukuo Government Compilation, Chohou,andManshu Nippou opposed Japan's par- 1969). Okabe responded, ``This is truly unthinka- ticipation immediately following the special confer-

A59A59 Kosuke Tomita

ence. Although opposition was strong, Jiji Shinpou tion and allowing it to appear on the international lamented Japan's non-participation, stating, ``This sports stage. Since the Manchurian Incident, gloomy political hostility will be a regrettable inci- Japanese newspapers reported on all things con- dent that will disgrace what should be a cheerful cerning Manchukuo under the support of military sports world'' (Jiji Shinpou, April 12, 1934). circles.14 Regarding newspapers published in Tokyo, However, as mentioned, JAAA declared it would as far as I know, all newspaper companies reported participate in the FECG. Having been notiêd to some extent on the problem of Manchukuo's par- about JAAA's decision to participate, Tokyo Nichi ticipation in the FECG. In this period, when 10 mil- Nichi Shinbun, Manshu Nippou,andNiroku Shin- lion copies were printed throughout Japan (Kato, pou criticized JAAA's lack of understanding of the 2011), the problem of Manchukuo's participation problem of Manchukuo's participation, attacking was communicated to the public, drawing attention the disgrace of making Manchukuo lose face.13 and support for the cause. Similar to Okabe's contentions, the opinions in these three newspapers contended that Japan did 3. Development of the boycott movement not need to participate in a tournament in which Manchukuo could not. On the other hand, the three JAAA's declaration of participation in the 10th newspapers Yamato Shinbun, Miyako Shinbun, games was criticized by Okabe and others. and Tokyo Asahi Shinbun agreed with JAAA's de- Newspapers published editorials, and the issue cision. Yamato Shinbun reported that ``from the received much domestic attention. Following this, standpoint of a leader'' in the Orient, Japan ``had criticism of JAAA emerged from various organiza- many issues it needed to teach'' other participating tions and military personnel in Japan, as well as countries, and as such, `àlthough Manchukuo's universities to which the Japanese team belonged, non-participation is regrettable, this makes Japan's fueling the boycott movement. participation more meaningful'' (Yamato Shinbun, April 20, 1934, evening paper). Miyako Shinbun 3.1 The boycott movement begins and Tokyo Asahi Shinbun anticipated that the issue would be resolved at the general meeting during the Various organizations and military circles voiced 10th games, supporting JAAA. According to the their dissent. Organizations' actions ˆrst emerged Tokyo Asahi Shinbun, if the issue were not resolved on April 17, when an introductory meeting was held at the 10th games, it would be inevitable to cancel for track and êld teams that would participate in the FECG: the 10th games. However, uninvited student groups `Ìf Japan's current attitude of generosity converged on this meeting to demonstrate their op- and zeal for correcting the development of position to participation (Kiyoshi Kitazawa sports, leading up to sending a great number Recollection Record Committee, 1982). Further- of athletes to the Philippines while enduring more, track and êld team coach Yoshio Okita was great di‹culties, is not re‰ected somehow in surrounded by right-wingers while out shopping thisgeneralmeeting,andifitendsasbefore, with athletes, who told them not to participate with the reality of Manchukuo's solemn in- (Mokutai, 1988). Table 1 shows declarations oppos- dependence ignored, the FECG will ultimate- ing participation in the 10th games, and near-daily ly remain in name only. There will be no rea- withdrawals after players and o‹cials were visited son to discuss participation or non-participa- and urged to oppose participation. tion, as the existence of the games will have In military circles, a resolution was made to op- no value (Tokyo Asahi Shinbun,April29, pose Japanese athletes' participation at Toyama 1934).'' Army School on April 21 (Yomiuri Shinbun,April The views in each newspaper were divided be- 22, 1934), when at the Imperial Palace, Emperor tween agreeing with and opposing participation. Showa, who had demonstrated concerns about However, even among those that agreed with young commissioned o‹cers participating in the Japan'sparticipation,thisagreementwasonlyfor Manchukuo problem, ordered Chief aide-de-camp the 10th games. All the newspapers were uniêd on Shigeru Honjo to investigate. He later reported that resolving the problem of Manchukuo's participa- young commissioned o‹cers took little part in the

A60A60 Movement to Boycott the 10th Far Eastern Championship Games

issue (Imperial Household Agency, 2014), but after 3.2 Japanese national athletes withdraw from par- that day, the movements of military personnel be- ticipation gan to take center stage. On April 22, six instructors from the Toyama School had a conversation with After Nishida announced his withdrawal from the Shuhei Nishida of Waseda University, who had national team, non-participation resolutions succes- been selected as a national track and êld athlete sively emerged: Meiji University Athletic Associa- (Nihon, April 23, 1934). At this conversation, in tion (Tokyo Asahi Shinbun, April 25, 1934), Bunri which ``the Manchukuo problem was being worked University Volunteers, Keio University Track Divi- on, and if [you] object to selˆsh moralizing, it will sion (Nihon, April 26, 1934), Takushoku University be thrown back [at you] loudly,'' Nishida was Student Tournament (JACAR, B04012508700), Rit- ``dumbfounded'' (Waseda University Athletic sumeikan University (Yomiuri Shinbun, April 27, Club, 1984). Afterwards, Nishida announced his 1934), Kansai University Student Meeting (Tokyo withdrawal from the team, sent a telegram to Nichi Nichi Shinbun, April 27, 1934), and Waseda Tadaoki Yamamoto stating that `àfter thinking University Track Division (Dalian Shinbun,April over various things, I cannot participate in the tour- 28, 1934, evening paper). nament with a good feeling (Tokyo Nichi Nichi At Meiji University, Eikichi Nagamatsu, who had Shinbun, April 24, 1934),'' and went to live in his been selected as a boxing athlete, ``leaked his inten- hometown in Wakayama (Tokyo Asahi Shinbun, tion to resign.`` By informing his seniors, a non- April 24, 1934). participation resolution for athletes belonging to Furthermore, a dozen young commissioned army Meiji University was made at a combination confer- o‹cers met at Kaikousya to hold discussions, and ence for Meiji University Athletic Association lead- announced their `òpposition to Japan's participa- ers and o‹cials on April 24 (Tokyo Asahi Shinbun, tion'' (Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun, April 23, 1934). April 25, 1934). Upon hearing this news, Meiji Uni- The volunteer commissioned o‹cer group in Tokyo versity alumnus and Japan team coach Ichiro Kaga sent `Àn Appeal to FECG Japan National At- stated, ``We were selected from track and êld as- hletes'' to all athletes and o‹cials, showing aggres- sociations to represent Japan, and not selected from sive action (Nihon, April 25, 1934). However, in Meiji University,'' showing non-compliance with news coverage, Toyama School Principal Fukazawa the non-participation resolution. On the morning of and Onohara denied the participation of military April 25, two representatives from the Meiji Univer- circles in the boycott movement (Tokyo Asahi Shin- sity Athletic Association went from Tokyo to visit bun, April 24, 1934). Eventually, the Toyama the boarding house and held a discussion with School declared its intent to oppose Japan's partici- athletes15 selected from Meiji University and o‹- pation, but the boycott movement by military cir- cials (Tokyo Asahi Shinbun, April 26, 1934, even- cles concluded with an announcement that they ing paper). That night, Kaga and swim team o‹cial would not directly participate in the movement Yutaka Nakamura left the boarding house for (Nihon, April 27, 1934). Tokyo, met with Meiji University o‹cials on April The boycott movement was started by organiza- 26, and agreed to ``leave the issue at the players' tions and military circles. Initially, they maneuvered discretion'' (Tokyo Asahi Shinbun, April 27, 1934). through statements and visiting and restraining With this, it was thought that the issue of Meiji Uni- players and o‹cials. One result was Shuhei versity athlete participation was resolved; however, Nishida's decision to withdraw his participation. on the day Kaga and Nakamura went to Tokyo, With Nishida's withdrawal, the boycott movement Hideo Yabe of the sumo division and Saburo Haya- gained momentum. Opposition to participation in ma of the judo division visited the boarding house, the 10th games began to appear at each of the demanding to meet with the athletes. Yabe argued universities to which many members of the that if the athletes did not withdraw, `ìf by some Japanese national team belonged. chance you say that you will participate regardless, we have full authorization from the Athletic Associ- ation,'' implying the tough measure of `èxpulsion'' (Tokyo Asahi Shinbun, April 27, 1934). A meeting was held the next day on April 27 at around 9:50

A61A61 Kosuke Tomita

am. Yabe and Hayama pressed for the athletes to people beating him with green bamboo, but withdraw, although some fought to participate, and we could not do anything about it (Osaki, thediscussionendedinastalemate.Near11:00am, 1991). with no solutions found, their bid to get the athletes Among the athletes, some ``fought back with to withdraw ended in failure (Tokyo Asahi Shin- bamboo used for pole vaulting or javelins'' (Yoshio bun, April 28, 1934). Unable to make them return Okita Recollection Publication Committee, 1968), to Tokyo, Yabe and Hayama expelled the ˆve Meiji but the boarding house temporarily fell into confu- University athletes at the Athletic Association sion because of the ru‹ans' attack. The boycott general meeting on April 28 (Tokyo Nichi Nichi movement had ˆnally caused direct harm by force. Shinbun, April 28, 1934). This was conˆrmed at the With the non-participation resolutions of a‹liat- Athletic Association emergency full committee ed universities and violence, eight people aside from meeting on April 30 (Tokyo Asahi Shinbun, May 1, Nishida eventually withdrew. Of these, track and 1934). The expelled athletes submitted their notices ˆeld athlete Chuhei Nanbu had an injured right leg to leave the club on the night of April 28, and (Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun, April 29, 1934), and without obeying their university's Athletic Associa- baseball player Saburou Miyatake withdrew be- tion resolution, chose to participate in the 10th cause of his wife's poor health (Tokyo Nichi Nichi games, determined to ``leave the club''16 (Tokyo Shinbun,April28,1934).Theseincidentswerenot Nichi Nichi Shinbun, April 29, 1934). Meiji Univer- due to the in‰uence of the boycott movement. sity was not the only place to try to obstruct partici- However, the remaining six athletes were in‰uenced pation in the 10th games by expelling athletes. The by the boycott movement. In track and ˆeld, Waseda University Track Division approved of at- Shoichiro Takenaka announced his withdrawal in hletes leaving the club if they had rejected the accordance with the resolution of Keio University recommendation to not participate on April 29, and Track Division (Nihon,April28,1934);Shizuo withdrew from the Nippon Intercollegiate Athletic Takada withdrew because of his family's opposition Union (NIAU) (Tokyo Asahi Shinbun, April 30, (Chuo Shinbun, April 28, 1934, evening paper); 1934). Each university's athletic association, track Zensuke Tatenaka because of circumstances at his division, or student meeting resolved to not partici- workplace (Yomiuri Shinbun, April 27, 1934); pate; however, the Tokyo Imperial University At- Kichizou Sasaki because the Aichi Prefecture At- hletic Association (Imperial University Shinbun, hletic Association did not permit him to participate April 29, 1934), Chuo University Track Division (Chugai Syogyo Sinpou, April 26, 1934); and Alumni Club (Yomiuri Shinbun,April26,1934), Kazuyoshi Okada, employed as a teacher in Saita- andMaru,NihonUniversityTrackDivisionCoach ma, had to withdraw because the Kanto Govern- (Yorozu Chohou, April 28, 1934), supported par- ment O‹ce ordered him to move to a new job at ticipation in the 10th games, encouraging their at- Houten Heian School (Yomiuri Shinbun [Saitama hletes. Edition], April 20, 1934). In boxing, Nagamatsu, Amidst this, boarding house attacks took place. who had provoked the Meiji University expulsion The Koshien Sportsman Hotel, which was the controversy, withdrew, because ``thinking about boarding house for the Japanese national team at- Manchuria, I do not have the heart to participate'' hletes, was attacked in two instances on April 25 (Chuo Shinbun, April 25, 1934). In addition, Ma- and 27 (JAAA Compilation, 1934). Utohisa Osaki, saoIchiharawasorderedtoreturntohisalma who had been selected as a swimming athlete, re- mater of Ritsumeikan University (Yomiuri Shin- called the following. bun, April 27, 1934); Mutsuo Taniguchi announced At around 8:00 pm, amid loud sounds of temporary withdrawal because of circumstances at running in the halls and angry shouts of Sumitomo Bank, his employer (Yomiuri Shinbun, ``Traitors! Wake up!'' and ``Stop this tom- April 27, 1934); and Hiroshi Uchida would have foolery! What are you doing, idiots?!,'' I violated the law if he participated, as he was an heard whacking sounds. ... The next instant, elementary school teacher (Yomiuri Shinbun [Saita- my body had ‰own out the window and onto ma Edition], April 19, 1934). As such, they each the roof. ... I could clearly make out the had their own misgivings about participating. sight of Hamuro defending himself from two

A62A62 Movement to Boycott the 10th Far Eastern Championship Games

3.3 An open letter and a rebuttal pride. However, this current decision to have Japan participate alone ignores this meaning, and the let- On April 21, Tetsutaro Kobayashi attended a ter contends that ``neglecting to stand by the at- meeting between JAAA and the Ministry of Educa- hletes of Manchukuo, the land where our ancestors tion, Science and Culture, delivering a letter of close shed their blood, and compete to the end of a match questioning called an `òpen letter.'' Although this for personal gain is like athletes ... losing sight of open letter was under Tetsutaro Kobayashi's name, the true duty of this sports path.'' it was summarized from ``resolutions of sympathiz- JAAA released a rebuttal to Kobayashi's open ers from each organization,'' and was similar to a letter. Since announcing its participation, JAAA collective opinion of each organization conducting had not stated an o‹cial opinion, but aware that the so-called boycott movement in Japan (JAAA the open letter was nearly the collective opinion of Compilation, 1934). each organization, it took this opportunity to The `òpen letter'' demanded that only o‹cials, highlight its opinion (JAAA Compilation, 1934). and no athletes, be sent to the 10th games. It ex- JAAA responded that the participation of the plained this in three parts: national diplomacy, the Japanese national team in the 10th games would long-range plan for the Asian century, and duty of `àssertively guide Manchukuo to the international the path of sports. For national diplomacy, the let- arena'' (Hiranuma, 1934). ter notes that Japan's sole participation would des- Regarding national diplomacy, the participation troy relations between Japan and Manchukuo, and of the Japanese team would not destroy relations that Japanese athletes' participation would ``show between Japan and Manchukuo; rather, JAAA de- no concern among Japanese citizens'' regarding nied that this was supported by the Lytton report. Manchukuo. Backed by a Lytton inquiry commis- Furthermore, there were rules for the FECG, and it sion report, this contended that it would not do for would be impossible for Japan to push past them Japanese athletes to participate independently. Re- for its own convenience. In addition, because the garding the long-range plan for the Asian century, causes of the problem of Manchukuo's participa- China's opposition to Manchukuo's participation in tion in the FECG were rooted in defects in the the FECG despite that the nations of Asia must ˆrst FECG rules, and since Manchukuo could partici- band together and oppose the West would destroy pate if these rules were amended, JAAA proposed the ``great Asian unity.'' The letter argued that be- that Japan and Manchukuo work together to realize causeJapan,astheleaderofAsia,musturgeChina Manchukuo's participation. Regarding the long- to reconsider and seek cooperation from other range plans for the Asian century, while they essen- countries to resolve this issue, Japan must send o‹- tially agreed, JAAA stated that it would not be cials to resolve the Manchukuo problem, even if it grounds for non-participation in the 10th games. Re- did not send athletes. Finally, in the section about garding the duty of the path of sports, they sym- the duty of the path of sports, Kobayashi questions pathized with the opinion, stating that ``matches the meaning of participating in sports as a ``spor- should not only train the body, but also train the tsman'' as not someone who competes based on mind, on this point, we agree with your opinion.'' skill alone. As JAAA was working hard to realize Man- Running fast, jumping high, swimming well, chukuo's participation in the FECG, they criticized throwing far. In a competition of these as irrelevant the assessment of ``neglecting to stand things alone, notwithstanding any kind of at- by the athletes of Manchukuo, the land where our hlete, it would amount to a ``thorough- ancestors shed their blood, and compete to the end bred,'' amount to a bird, amount to a ˆsh, of a match for personal gain.'' amount to the natives of New Guinea. JAAA released its declaration on April 24. To Why bother spending public funds to have at- participate in the FECG was ``to carry out old pub- hletes participate in a tournament? If the supreme lic commitments to the amicable countries of East challenge of participating in an international sport- Asia and act in good faith.'' They added that they ing event is not merely to win, the signiˆcance is must wait for the general meeting in Manila to turning out great numbers of ``youths over‰owing resolve the problem of Manchukuo's participation, with the spirit of the nation,'' which is a point of because ``the ˆnal decision would originate in con-

A63A63 Kosuke Tomita

stitutional interpretation.'' JAAA's standpoint on Tokyo and boarded the ship in Kobe. the Manchukuo problem was consistent from start Does this type of representation exist? to ˆnish, with the exception of the period immedi- (Ueno, 1934) ately following the special conference, when they The Japanese national team had inevitably leaned toward non-participation. departed in a state of high alert, and when they stopped at Shimoseki on route, some athletes avoid- 3.4 Departure of the Japanese team and dissolution ed disembarking from the ship to ensure their safety of the FECG (Shibuya, 1934). They left Japan and headed for Manila as if being chased. After their boarding house was attacked twice, With the departure of the Japanese national the Japanese national team embarked on the team, it became impossible to obstruct Japan's par- Heiyomaru on April 28 to await their departure one ticipation. Regarding Japan's solo participation, day later, escorted by around 50 mounted and the National Advocacy Association moved to plain-clothed police o‹cers. While being escorted denounce the government's responsibility in this on their way from the boarding house to Kobe Port, matter. To my knowledge, this was last mentioned `ìt felt bizarre to be racing non-stop along the Han- in an article in Dalian Shinbun on May 1. No shin National Road under tra‹c restrictions'' reportsfollowed;thus,itisimpossibletoverifythe (Ozaki, 1991). On April 29, the leader of the 10th movement. Perhaps the boycott movement conclud- games Japanese team, Ryozo Hiranuma, greeted ed, because it had been unable to obstruct Japan's the athletes just before their departure. He en- participation. After this, newspapers began report- couraged them, saying, `Ùndaunted in the face of ing on whether the Manchukuo participation all kinds of violence, and un‰inching in the face of negotiations at the general meeting would succeed persecution, we bravely surmounted all di‹culties or not, alongside the prospects and results of the to attend the Far East Championship Games. At the games. annual general meeting there, we will expend all The opening ceremony of the 10th games was held eŠorts to earn the consent of the Philippines, suc- on May 12, and the FECG general meeting took ceed in amending the constitution, and resolve place over two days from May 19 to 20. The two- Manchukuo's participation. Overall, I expect that day FECG general meeting focused on discussions we will make a magniˆcent and triumphant return'' about amending the rules surrounding Man- (JAAA Compilation, 1934). chukuo's participation. As the discussion climaxed, While anchored at the wharf in Kobe Port, mem- representatives from CNAAF left mid-way. After bers of the Japan Production Party distributed their departure, JAAA and the Philippines criti- ‰yers opposing participation and held banners stat- cized CNAAF's behavior. The next day, May 21, ing, ``Banish Traitorous FECG Athletes'' (Tokyo they dissolved the FECG and established a new Nichi Nichi Shinbun, April 30, 1934, evening Amateur Athletic Association of the Orient and paper). Meiji University o‹cials sought to board Oriental Championship Games, which sidelined the ship to present their ˆnal appeals (Tokyo Asahi China and approved Manchukuo's membership Shinbun, April 30, 1934, evening paper). As (JAAA Compilation, 1934). whispers spread among the Japanese national team The dissolution of the FECG was reported imme- about ``rumors that the right wing is going to use diately, even in Japanese newspapers. In the airplanes to sink the ships'' (Yoshio Okita Recollec- Yomiuri Shinbun, JAAA's negotiations were per- tion Publication Committee, 1968, p. 103), the ceived as successful, `ènding in an amicable settle- Heiyomaru departed Kobe for Manila. Hiroshi ment (Yomiuri Shinbun, May 22, 1934).'' However, Ueno, a selected soccer player, recalled the follow- the Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun editorial empha- ing of the time of departure. sized that even though they overcame domestic op- Before the time of departure, a raucous dis- position to participate, they were unable to per- cussion focused on the rights and wrongs of suade China. Furthermore, in addition to Japan, participating. It reached the point of vio- China, and the Philippines, the meeting should have lence, and the circumstances were such that been attended by the Dutch East Indies and French the police were protecting us when we left Indochina, both of which became members in the

A64A64 Movement to Boycott the 10th Far Eastern Championship Games

10th games. The editorial criticized the meeting for resolutions, some conspired to have direct talks not maintaining the current format (Tokyo Nichi with the athletes, which developed into violent at- Nichi Shinbun, May 22, 1934). With the results tacks. Military circles also pressured the athletes. being criticized, the JAAA decided at the board of Every day, newspapers publicized the written reso- directors' meeting in June that its o‹cers would re- lutions of organizations and military circles, report- sign en mass for ``causing a controversy.'' ed on their actions, and shared their own editorials. However, there is no evidence that this was done, Facing this outside pressure, representative athletes and the matter remained unsettled (Yomiuri Shin- were urged to oppose the participation of their bun, June 12, 1934). The dissolution of the FECG universities and track and ˆeld clubs. Eventually, was also criticized, but seems to have been accepted nine athletes withdrew (two for reasons not related based on the approval of Manchukuo's participa- to the boycott movement), but others left their clubs tion in an international tournament. Finally, we to participate in the 10th games. Excepting the return to the athletes' re‰ections. Tadao Najima, period immediately following the special confer- who participated in the 10,000 m race, re‰ected as ence, JAAA continued to assert their participation follows. in the 10th games, regardless of the possibility of We were so happy when we heard the good Manchukuo's participation. The context included news about the success of the meeting. The three main points: issues surrounding international people called unpatriotic ˆnally succeeded. good faith toward organizations such as PAAF and Now, the actions of those who properly love IOC, the organizations hosting the 10th games; the and care about their country have been domestic situation of the ``Emperor Cup''; and proven. Was not the ˆnal victory in the JAAA's awareness of the utility of sports. hands of justice? Our dreams came true. We However, the JAAA's assertions did not per- withstood everything for this result. Let us suade Okabe and organizations opposing the par- set foot in our native land of Japan, having ticipation of the Japanese national team. Represen- sought and attained this one ray of hope tative athletes boarded the Heiyomaru a day ahead (Najima, 1934). of time and anchored at Kobe Port to ensure their To the athletes who had endured many distur- safety. Their concerns were substantiated by the bances before their departure from Japan, even if fact that until the day before departure, the boycott the dissolution of the FECG were inevitable, the es- movement had been growing at the wharf. Ulti- tablishment of the Oriental Championship Games, mately, JAAA was unable to persuade Okabe and which was created to remove China and include others of the faction that opposed the Japanese na- Manchukuo, was ``the good news of the success of tional team's participation in the 10th games. The the meeting'' and a ``victory.'' curtain closed on the boycott movement with the deadline of the representative athletes' departure. 4. Conclusion It was once said that ``Manchuria and Mongolia are Japan's lifeline.'' The relationship between Manchukuo demonstrated a desire to participate northeastern China and Japan further strengthened in the FECG, and JAAA planned to move toward with the founding of Manchukuo, and this extended this aim. However, to Okabe and other Manchukuo to the sports world. Even though JAAA spoke sports o‹cials, this was unsatisfactory, and the two about international good faith, domestic conditions resolution methods con‰icted. Okabe and others surrounding the sports world, and the utility of did not want the Japanese team to participate while sports, Manchukuo materialized in front of the Manchukuo could not, but JAAA decided to take Japanese sports world as a solid existence that sur- part regardless. Thus began the boycott movement passed that. The boycott movement aroused public in Japan. After JAAA announced its participation, opinion, directly aŠected representative athletes, various organizations and military circles opposed and harmed them. As ``the Japanese public greeted it. They made o‹cial announcements in newspapers the Manchurian Incident with wild enthusiasm'' regarding written resolutions and statements, and (Tsurumi, 2001), this was also expressed in its took action by handing these statements directly to march into the sports world. This demonstrates the JAAA o‹cials. Furthermore, in addition to written expression of the political situation in Japan in

A65A65 Kosuke Tomita

sports, through which the blind support of Man- participation in the FECG, but the following aŠected his chukuo provoked a raw and tense relationship be- contributions to the problem of Manchukuo's participation in the FECG. According to Takashima (2010a), after tween sports and politics. Okabe migrated to Manchuria, he used sports to enhance his networking with Zhang Xueliang and Feng Yong, in- Notes ‰uential people in northeastern China. However, Okabe *1 Founded by the Republic of China in 1924 as Physical was caught by the Kwantung Army, because Feng Yong Education Association. The chairman at that time was had a ``change of heart'' when the Manchurian Incident Wang Zhengting, diplomat, who was an IOC member. erupted. Okabe's life was spared because of an appeal for *2 Invitational form is considered to be `àllowing participa- clemency by those around him. Former JAAA director tion even without approval by o‹cial members'' (Takashi- Masaji Tabata noted in his later years, ``He [Okabe] pres- ma, 2008). In short, this means that the constituent can sured us with support from the Kwantung Army. ... The participate with only the approval of the host country, Kwantung Army seemed to have bought Okabe's power, even if they do not pass voting. and seemed to believe that he had in‰uence in the Japanese *3 Founded in 1911 as the Philippines' Athletic Association. sports world. Therefore, they used Okabe and sent him to *4 Manshu Rikujyo Kyogi Kakushin Renmei (Manchurian persuade us'' (Mokudai, 1988). In this way, in the unex- Reformist League of Athletics) was a private organization pected attack regarding the problem of Manchukuo's centered on Heita Okabe and set up by `à large number of participation by Okabe and Manchukuo o‹cials, JAAA senior members of the Manchurian track and êld world'' assumed that this pressure from military circles would to plan ``the restoration and improvement of the current emerge. * Manchurian track and êld world'' (Manshu Nippou, 11 Takashima (2010b) points out that Yamamoto, who had January 31, 1934 evening paper). It criticized the China been entrusted with the negotiations until the special con- National Amateur Athletic Federation for rejecting Man- ference, ``had thought that China's approval of Man- chukuo's participation, and released a statement that if its chukuo's participation would be a `miracle,''' and that the participation in the FECG was not approved, ``we antici- `àgreement'' was ``Yamamoto's lie.'' See Takashima pate the dissolution of the Far East Olympics Associa- (2010b) for more information on the actions of Yamamoto tion.'' The statement criticized JAAA's conduct: ``They and PAAF at the time of the special conference. * must ask themselves where is the dignity and honor for 12 The question around the events from JAAA's independent Japan's world of sports in the Far East in the refusal of participation announcement until the Tokyo Committee's Manchukuo's participation because of China or allowing announcement that they would be severing ties was this to go unquestioned. Japan, which is withdrawing from whether a ``joint declaration'' was exchanged between the League of Nations because of Manchukuo, should MAA and Shibuya and Takekoshi, who had been dispatch- align its views regarding this tournament as well'' (Manshu ed to Manchuria in March. The joint declaration stated Nippou, February 1, 1934, evening paper). that if Manchukuo's participation was not approved, *5 The Board for Preparation of International Games was Japan would also call oŠ their participation. JAAA ex- founded to ``rectify the China National Amateur Athletic plained that the joint declaration was indicated in a private Federation's distrust that blasphemes the sports world of meeting between Shibuya, Takekoshi, and MAA, and was East Asia, and anticipate the penetration of our asser- not its o‹cial opinion (Takashima, 2010b). * tions.'' The president of this board was Minister of For- 13 Editorials were published in the following newspapers: eign AŠairs Xie Jieshi, and Ryusaku Endo, State Council Niroku Shinpou, April 17, 1934, morning paper; Tokyo General AŠairs Agency Chief, was the committee chair- Nichi Nichi Shinbun, April 17, 1934, morning paper; Man- man. Others include Naoki Hoshino, Kiichi Sakatani, and shu Nippou, April 18, 1934, morning paper; Tokyo Nichi Takayuki Furumi, who were sent to the Manchukuo Nichi Shinbun, April 25, 1934, morning paper; and Tokyo government from Japan (Manchukuo Government Compi- Nichi Nichi Shinbun, April 26, 1934, morning paper. * lation, 1969). 14 After the Manchurian Incident erupted, Osaka Asahi Shin- *6 Formed at the same time as the statement, ``Manchukuo's bun, the sister newspaper of Tokyo Asahi Shinbun, con- FECG participation is an extremely signiˆcant thing for stantly emphasized the theory of disarmament from a ``na- national policy. We will work tirelessly in anticipation of tional ˆnance and economics standpoint''. However, the this accomplishment.'' Members included Okabe, Kubota, views of the newspaper as a company changed, ``consider- and Mogi, as well as Cyuichi Ohashi, Shintaro Imada, and ing the development of the clashes between Japan and Haratake (Manchukuo Government Compilation, 1971, p. China, and this signiˆcant time for the nation... We aim to 896). support military circles as Japanese citizens and unite with *7 The citations in this section are from the Japan Amateur public opinion.'' It was decided that `òur sister newspaper Athletic Association (JAAA) (1934). Tokyo Asahi will also persist in the same kind of policy'' *8 In this section, if there is no annotation indicating other- (Akira Fujiwara and Toshihiro Kunugi (eds.), 1983). Fur- wise, citations are from the Manshu Nippou,March13, thermore, around this time, not only newspapers, but also 14, and 15 morning papers, 1934. ``books, magazines, ˆlms, records, and other popular *9 No references regarding why Okabe was dismissive about amusements'' ``have a lively market because of Manchur- this method of amending the rules are made. However, if ia ... [and were] glorifying military actions, seeing the the issue was not resolved, even at the general meeting at Kwantung Army as heroes, and enthusiastically praising the 10th games, after planning to amend the rules, Okabe's the founding of Manchukuo'' (Young, 1999/2001). * indications would be pertinent. 15 Five athletes were selected from Meiji University: for track *10 Okabe was at the forefront of pushing for Manchukuo's and êld, Takeshi Yoshizumi, Tadao Najima, and Yoshiro

A66A66 Movement to Boycott the 10th Far Eastern Championship Games

Asakuma; and for swimming, Kentarou Kawatsu and Gen of Manchurian athletes in the th Far Eastern Games. Jpn. Ishiharada. J. Hist. Phys. Educ. Sport., 16: 37-48. (in Japanese). *16 After the FECG ended, Meiji University was censured for Kato, K. (2011). Senkanki ni okeru shinbun keiei no suii to ron- the expulsion controversy and expelled from the Inter- ten [The transition and the point at issue of the newspaper University Athletics Union of Japan by the union's management during Interwar Period]. In: Kato, K. (ed.), representative committee (Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun, Senkanki nihon no shinbun sangyo: keiei jijyo to syaron wo May 26, 1934, morning paper). tyushin ni [Japanese Newspaper Industry during the Interwar Period: Analysis of Business Circumstances and Tone of References Press Comments] (pp. 1-17). Institute of Social Science, The ABE, I. (2003). Historical Signiˆcance of the Far Eastern University of Tokyo. (in Japanese). Championship Games: An International Political Arena. Kiyoshi Kitazawa Recollection Record Committee (1982). Bull. Fac. Health Sport Sci. Univ. Tsukuba., 26: 37-68. Kitazawa Kiyoshi tsuisouroku [Kiyoshi Kitazawa Recollec- Chugai Syogyo Shinpou (1934). April 26: The morning paper. tion Record]. Kiyoshi Kitazawa Recollection Record Com- (in Japanese). mittee. (in Japanese). Chuo Shinbun (1934). April 26: The morning paper. (in Inperial Household Agency (2014). Syowa tenno jitsuroku [The Japanese). O‹cial Biography of Emperor Hirohito]. 21. Dalian Shinbun (1934). February 18: The evening paper. (in Fei, G. (2008). `Manshukoku' no Kyokutou Senshuken Kyogi Japanese). Taikai sanka ni kansuru kenkyu [The study on Manchukuo's Dalian Shinbun (1934). April 21: The morning paper. (in participation in the Far Eastern Championship Games]. Japanese). Master's thesis, University of Tsukuba. (in Japanese). Dalian Shinbun (1934). April 27: The morning paper. (in Manshu Nippou (1934). March 13: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Japanese). Dalian Shinbun (1934). April 27: The evening paper. (in Manshu Nippou (1934). March 14: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Japanese). Fujiwara, A. and Kunugi, T. (eds.) (1983). Shiryo Nihon Gen- Manshu Nippou (1934). March 15: The morning paper. (in daishi 8 [The material of modern history in Japan vol. 8]. Japanese). Otsuki syoten. (in Japanese). Manshu Nippou (1934). April 16: The evening paper. (in Goodman, G. K. (2011). Athletics as Politics: Japan,the Philip- Japanese). pines, and the Far Eastern Olympics of 1934. In Tsutsui, W. Manchukuo Government Compilation (1971). Manshu M. and Baskett, M. (eds.), The East Asian Olympiads kenkoku 10-nenshi [Manchukuo's 10 years of History]. Hara 1934-2008 (pp. 23-33). Global oriental. shobo. (in Japanese). Hensyubu (1934). Dai-10kai taikai sanka mondai wo megurite Mokudai, T. (1988). Hyoden Tabata Seiji [A biography of Seiji [The issues of participation in 10th games]. Olympic [a Tabata]. Kokusyo kankokai. (in Japanese). JAAA bulletin]., 12(5): 87-91. (in Japanese). Cabinet O‹cial Gazette Bureau (1984). Teikoku Gikai Hiranuma, R. (1934). Benbakusho [Written Counterargumen]. Kizokuin Giji Sokki Roku [Minutes of the Imperial Diet's Olympic [a JAAA bulletin]., 12(6): 19-27. (in Japanese). House of Peers]. 61. Tokyo Daigaku syuppankai. (in Ichihara, M. (1934). Shin no yukokusya ha dare [Who is Japanese). genuine patriot?]. In: Nihon Rikujyo kyogi Renmei hensyu Nashima, T. (1934). Saigo no syori ha seigi no te he [The iinkai. (ed.), Manila Enseiki [Report on the Manila- Justice gain the ˆnal victory]. In: Nihon Rikujyo kyogi Expedition] (pp. 119-121). Tokyo: Nihon Rikujyo Kyogi Renmei hensyu iinkai. (ed.), Manila Enseiki [Report on the Renmei. (in Japanese). Manila-Expedition] (pp. 161-164). Tokyo: Nihon Rikujyo Ikei, M. (1989). Toyo `Orinpikku' `Manshukoku' sanka mon- Kyogi Renmei. (in Japanese). dai [The problem of‘Manchukuo's' Participation in the Nihon (1934). April 19. (in Japanese). ‘Far Eastern Olympic Games']. In Nakamura, K. (ed.), Kin- Nihon (1934). April 20. (in Japanese). dai Nihon seiji no shoso [DiŠerent Aspects of Mordern Nihon (1934). April 21. (in Japanese). Japanese Politics] (pp. 29-52). Keio tsushin. Nihon (1934). April 23. (in Japanese). JACAR (Japan Center for Asian Histolical Records). Nihon (1934). April 24. (in Japanese). Ref.B04012508700, Kyokuto Orinpikku Kyogi Taikai kankei Nihon (1934). April 25. (in Japanese). ikken [The material of Far Eastern Championship Games]. Nihon (1934). April 26. (in Japanese). I-1-12-0-11. Diplomatic Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Nihon (1934). April 27. (in Japanese). AŠairs of Japan. Nihon (1934). April 28. (in Japanese). Japan Amateur Athletic Association (1934). Manshukoku no Okita Yoshio Recollection Publication Committee (1968). kyokutotaikai sanka mondai (3 gatu 3ka made no keika) Okita Yoshio den [A biography of Yoshio Okita]. Okita [The problem of Manchukuo's participation in the Far Yoshio Recollection Publication Committee. (in Japanese). Eastern Championship Games (up to March 3)]. Olympic [a Osaki, U. (1991). Kappa gyoujou ki [Diary of Kappa]. Noto JAAA bulletin]. , 12(4): 92-107. (in Japanese). insatsu / syuppannbu. (in Japanese). Japan Amateur Athletic Association Compliation (1934). Dai- Shibuya, T. (1934). Chiimu no koudou ni tsuite [Report of the 10kai Kyokuto Senshuken Kyogi Taikai hokokusho [Report team]. In: Nihon Rikujyo kyogi Renmei hensyu iinkai. (ed.), on the 10th Far Eastern Championship Games]. Japan Manila Enseiki [Report on the Manila-Expedition] (pp. Amateur Athletic Association. (in Japanese). 18-19). Tokyo: Nihon Rikujyo Kyogi Renmei. (in Japanese). Jiji Shinpou (1934). April 12: The morning paper. (in Shinkyo Nichinichi Shinbun (1934). April 26: The morning Japanese). paper. (in Japanese). He, W. (1999). On the Chinese reaction against participation Shinkyo Nichinichi Shinbun (1934). April 27: The morning

A67A67 Kosuke Tomita

paper. (in Japanese). Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun (1934). May 26: The morning Takashima, K. (2008). `Manshukoku' no tanjo to kyokuto su- paper. (in Japanese). potsukai no saihen [The Birth of Manchukuo and its Impact Ueno, H. (1934). Manila ensei zakkan [Memorandum of the on the Sports in the Far East]. Mem. Fac. Lett. Kyoto Univ. , Manila-Expedition]. In: Nihon Syukyu kyokai [Japan Foot- 47: 131-181. (in Japanese). ball Association]. (ed.), Shukyu [The Football's yearbook] Takashima, K. (2010a). Senso - kokka - Supotsu: Okabe Heita (pp. 69-70). Japan Football Association. (in Japanese). no `tenko' wo toshite [War - Nation - Sport: Okabe Heita's Waseda University Athletic Club (1984). Waseda Daigaku `Conversion']. Shirin [The J. Hist]. , 93(1): 98-130. (in kyosobu 70-nenshi [Waseda University Athletic Club 70 Japanese). year's history]. Waseda Asuretikku kurabu [Waseda Univer- Takashima, K. (2010b). Senjika heiwa no saiten: Maboroshi no sity Athletic Club]. (in Japanese). Toukyo Orinpikku to Kyokuto supotsu kai [Festival of Peace Yamato Shinbun (1934). April 20: The evening paper. (in in Wartime: The 1940 Tokyo Olympics and the Sports in the Japanese). Far East] . Mem. Fac. Lett. Kyoto Univ., 49: 25-72. (in Yomiuri Shinbun [Saitama Edition] (1934). April 19: The Japanese). morning paper. (in Japanese). Takashima, K. (2012). Teikoku Nihon to supotsu [The Empire Yomiuri Shinbun [Saitama Edition] (1934). April 20: The of Japan and sport]. Hanawa shobo. (in Japanese). morning paper. (in Japanese). Tsurumi, S. (2001). Senjiki Nihon no seishinshi 1931-1945 [The Yomiuri Shinbun (1934). April 22: The morning paper. (in psychohistory of Japan in Wartime 1931-1945]. Iwanami Japanese). gendai bunko. (in Japanese). Yomiuri Shinbun (1934). April 26: The morning paper. (in Tokyo Asahi Shinbun (1934). April 18: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Japanese). Yomiuri Shinbun (1934). April 27: The morning paper. (in Tokyo Asahi Shinbun (1934). April 24: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Japanese). Yomiuri Shinbun (1934). May 22: The morning paper. (in Tokyo Asahi Shinbun (1934). April 25: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Japanese). Yomiuri Shinbun (1934). June 12: The morning paper. (in Tokyo Asahi Shinbun (1934). April 26: The evening paper. (in Japanese). Japanese). Yorozu Cho Hou (1934). April 28: The morning paper. (in Tokyo Asahi Shinbun (1934). April 27: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Japanese). Young, L. (2001). 総動員帝国満洲と戦時帝国主義の文化 Tokyo Asahi Shinbun (1934). April 28: The morning paper. (in (Kato, Y, et al. Trans.). Iwanami shoten. (Original work Japanese). ``Japan's Total Empire: Manchuria and the Culture of War- Tokyo Asahi Shinbun (1934). April 29: The morning paper. (in time Imperialism'' published 1999). Japanese). Tokyo Asahi Shinbun (1934). April 30: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Tokyo Asahi Shinbun (1934). April 30: The evening paper. (in Japanese). Tokyo Asahi Shinbun (1934). May 1: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun (1934). April 12: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun (1934). April 17: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun (1934). April 21: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun (1934). April 23: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun (1934). April 24: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun (1934). April 25: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun (1934). April 26: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun (1934). April 27: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun (1934). April 28: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun (1934). April 29: The morning paper. (in Japanese). Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun (1934). April 30: The evening paper. (in Japanese). Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shinbun (1934). May 22: The morning paper. (in Japanese).

A68A68 Movement to Boycott the 10th Far Eastern Championship Games

Name: Kosuke Tomita

A‹liation: Nippon Sport Science University, Research Institute for Olympic and Sport Culture

Address: 7-1-1 Fukasawa, Setagayaku, Tokyo 158-8508, Japan Brief Biographical History: Mar 2018 Ph.D. at Hitotsubashi University Apr 2018- Research Fellow of Research Institute for Olympic and Sport Culture, Nippon Sport Science University Main Works: Tomita, K. (2014). Flag Incident in the ninth Far Eastern Championship Games: An analysis based on newspapers. Jpn. J. Sport Hist., 27: 43-59. (in Japanese) Tomita, K. (2016). The campaign against participation in the tenth Far Eastern Championship Games in Japan. Jpn. J. Phys. Educ. Health. Sport Sci., 61: 43-58. (in Japanese) Huebner, S. (2017). スポーツがつくったアジア (Takashima, K and Tomita, K Trans.) Issiki syuppan. (Original Works ``Pan-Asian Sports and the Emergence of Modern Asia, 1913-1974'' published 2016) Tomita, K. (2018). The issue of Japan's participation in GANEFO and the Japanese Government based on materials in the Diplomatic Archives of the Ministry of Foreign AŠairs of Japan. Jpn. J. Phys. Educ. Health Sport Sci., 63: 707-721. (in Japanese) Membership in Learned Societies: Japan Society of Physical Education, Health and Sport Sciences Japan Society of the History of Physical Education and Sport The Japan society of Sport History Japan society of Sport Sociology

A69