The Battle of Singapore, the Massacre of Chinese and Understanding of the Issue in Postwar Japan

Hayashi Hirofumi

following the capture of Singapore

The Battle of Singapore, the The first point to be considered is why Massacre of Chinese and the massacre took place, and the second Understanding of the Issue in is how the massacre has been presented Postwar Japan in postwar Japan. Although even ex- Kempeitai officers involved have Hayashi Hirofumi admitted that the killings were inhumane and unlawful, little attention has been Shortly after British forces surrendered paid to the episode in Japan. While there in Singapore on 15 February 1942, the has been valuable research carried out Japanese military began operation on the Japanese military administration Kakyou Shukusei [a] or Dai Kenshou [b], of Malaya and Singapore, no detailed known in the Chinese community of Japanese study of the killing has Singapore as the Sook Ching ("Purge") appeared. Moreover, while the Singapore [c], in which many local Chinese were Massacre is well known to scholars, massacred.[1] Although the killings have similar killings in the Malay Peninsula been investigated extensively by scholars only came to the attention of the in Malaysia and Singapore, this article Japanese public in the late 1980s after I draws on Japanese sources to examine discovered documents relating to the the events. Japanese military units involved.

Why did the Japanese Military Massacre Chinese in Singapore?

On the night of 17 February 1942, Maj. Gen. Kawamura Saburo, an infantry brigade commander, was placed in charge of Japan’s Singapore Garrison. The next morning, he appeared at Army Headquarters and was ordered by 25th Army commander, Lt. Gen. Yamashita Tomoyuki, to carry out mopping-up Chinese inspected by Kempeitai operations. He received further detailed

1 7 | 28 | 4 APJ | JF instructions from the chief of staff, Lt. unsettled. Gen. Suzuki Sosaku, and Lt. Colonel Tsuji Masanobu. Kawamura then consulted The mass screening was carried out with the Kempeitai commander, Lt. Col. mainly by Kempeitai personnel between Oishi Masayuki. The plan to purge the 21 and 23 February in urban areas, and Chinese population was drawn up in the by the Imperial Guard Division at the end course of these meetings. Under this of February in suburban districts. Most scheme, Chinese males between the ages accounts of the killings include a map of 18 and 50 were ordered to report to that shows the island divided into four mass screening centers. Those deemed sections, and explain that the Imperial anti-Japanese were detained, loaded onto Guards, the 5th Division, and the 18th lorries, and taken away to the coast or to Division carried out the mass screening other isolated places where they were in suburban districts.[6] However, on 21 machine-gunned and bayoneted to February, the 25th Army ordered both death.[2] My survey of official the 5th and 18th Divisions to move into documents of the Japanese military the Malay Peninsula to carry out revealed two sources that specified the mopping-up operations.[7] The order number massacred. One is Kawamura’s assigned the Imperial Guard Division to diary that shows the figure as 5,000.[3] conduct a mass screening of non-urban The other is an issue of the Intelligence areas of Singapore, with the 5th and the Record of the 25th Army (No.62, dated 18th Divisions responsible for the rest of 28 May 1942) prepared by the staff the Malay Peninsula. According to war section of the 25th Army.[4] This secret diaries and documents relating to these record states that the number missing as two divisions, neither played a role in the a result of bombing and the purge was mass screening in Singapore. The 1947 11,110. This second record is important British war crimes trial in Singapore[8] because it was drawn up as a secret prosecuted the commander of the document shortly after the purge took Imperial Guard Division, Lt. Gen. place. However, it includes both bombing Nishimura Takuma, on charges related to and purge casualties and offers no basis the Singapore Massacre, but not the for the figure. commanders of the 5th or 18th Divisions. This version of events is correct, and the In Singapore it is generally believed that conventional mapping of the massacre is the number killed in this event was about incorrect. 50,000.[5] However, on the basis of materials available in Japan, Singapore, and the UK, I find no basis for this figure. Although I can not present exact figures, my estimation is that a minimum of 5000 died; I can offer no figure for the maximum. The issue of numbers remains

2 7 | 28 | 4 APJ | JF

1942.

Rebuttal of the Defense

Let us consider the justification or defense for the actions of the Japanese army presented by some Japanese writers and researchers. One of the major points is that the Chinese volunteer forces, such as the Dalforce, the Singapore Overseas Chinese Anti-Japanese Volunteer Army, fought fiercely and caused heavy Japanese casualties. This is supposed to Kempeitai headquarters: the old have inflamed Japanese anger and led to YMCA Building reprisals against local Chinese.[11] About 600 personnel from among the 1,250- It is important to note that the purge was strong Dalforce volunteers were sent to planned before Japanese troops landed in the front. Some 30 per cent of Dalforce Singapore. The military government personnel either died in action or were section of the 25th Army had already killed during the subsequent Purge.[12] drawn up a plan entitled, It is generally said in Singapore that the "Implementation Guidline for Dalforce personnel fought fiercely.[13] Manipulating Overseas Chinese" on or Whatever their bravery, however, their around 28 December 1941.[9] This role seems exaggerated in Singapore guideline stated that anyone who failed accounts. The volunteers of Dalforce to obey or cooperate with the occupation were equipped only with outdated authorities should be eliminated. It is weapons. Japanese military histories clear that the headquarters of the 25th make no reference to Chinese volunteers Army had decided on a harsh policy during the battle of Singapore, and toward the Chinese population of report that the opposition put up by Singapore and Malaya from the British forces was weaker than expected. beginning of the war. According to Onishi The greatest threat to the Japanese was Satoru,[10] the Kempeitai officer in artillery bombardment.[14] charge of the Jalan Besar screening centre, Kempeitai commander Oishi During the war crimes trial of 1947, no Masayuki was instructed by the chief of Japanese claimed that losses suffered by staff, Suzuki Sosaku, at Keluang, Johor, Japanese forces at the hand of Chinese to prepare for a purge following the volunteers contributed to the massacre. capture of Singapore. Although the exact As noted above, the 25th Army had date of this instruction is not known, the planned the mass purge even before the Army headquarters was stationed in battle of Singapore. This sequence of Keluang from 28 January to 4 February events clearly rebuts the claims.

3 7 | 28 | 4 APJ | JF

A second point raised is that the Chinese Otani Keijiro, a Kempeitai lieutenant in Malaya were passing intelligence to colonel in charge of public security in the British and that Chinese guerrillas Singapore from the beginning of March were engaged in subversive activities 1942, also rejected this line of defense, against Japanese forces during the severely criticizing Japanese atrocities in Malayan campaign, for example by Singapore.[18] Onishi stated that he had flashing signals to British airplanes. The not expected hostile Chinese to begin an Kempeitai of the 25th Army was on the anti-Japanese campaign, at least not in alert for such activities during the the short term, since public security in Malayan campaign, but made only two Singapore was improving.[19] arrests. Kempeitai officer Onishi Satoru The fourth argument is that staff officer said in his memoirs that they had been Tsuji Masanobu was the mastermind unable to find any evidence of the use of behind the massacre, and that he flash signals and that it was personally planned and carried it out. technologically impossible. Thus, this line Although Tsuji was a key figure in these of argument is refuted by a military events, I believe that researchers have officer who was directly involved in the overestimated his role. At the time of the events.[15] war crimes trials, Tsuji had not been A third explanation offered for the arrested. As soon as the war ended, he massacre is that anti-Japanese Chinese escaped from Thailand to China, where were preparing for an armed he came under the protection of the insurrection, and that law and order was Kuomintang government, having deteriorating in Singapore. They claim cooperated with them in fighting the that a purge was necessary to restore communists. He later secretly returned to public order, and this point was raised at Japan in May 1948 where he was the war crimes trial in Singapore.[16] protected by the US military, namely G2 One piece of evidence cited by the of GHQ.[20] In this situation, the defense defense during the trial was an entry in counsel of the war crimes trial of 1947 Kawamura’s personal diary for 19 attempted to pin all responsibility on February that purportedly said looting Tsuji, who could not be prosecuted. This still continued in the city. The same point will be discussed in more detail evidence was presented to the Tokyo War below. Crimes Trial. However, the diary actually Let us now examine the reasons why the says that order in the city was Japanese in Singapore committed such improving.[17] The extract used during atrocities. I limit the discussion to the trials was prepared by a Japanese internal factors of Japanese military and army task force set up to counter charges society. made during war crimes trials by the Allied forces. Clearly the evidence was First, it should be noted that the manipulated. Japanese occupation of Singapore began

4 7 | 28 | 4 APJ | JF a decade after the start of Japan’s war of evolution of Genju Shobun. As chief of aggression against China. After the staff of the North China Area Army in Manchurian Incident in 1931, Japan 1938-1939, he formulated an operational invaded and occupied Manchuria, setting plan for mopping-up in northern China up the puppet state of “Manchukuo” in that drew on the Genju Shobun 1932. The Japanese army faced a strong experience, having earlier been stationed anti-Japanese campaign and public order in Manchuria as Supreme Adviser to the remained unstable. The military Military Government Section of responded by conducting frequent Manchukuo.[23] At the time, the Chinese punitive operations against anti-Japanese communists had a number of base areas guerrillas and their supporters. Under in northern China. In 1940, following normal circumstances, those arrested in Yamashita’s transfer, intensive cleanup these operations should have been operations called San guang zhengce apprehended and brought to trial for (Kill All, Loot All, Burn All; J. Sanko punishment. However, Japan forced seisaku) were launched involving Manchukuo to enact a law in September unbridled terror during which numerous 1932 that granted authority to army people in contested areas were officers, both Japanese and Manchurian, massacred or driven from their villages. as well as police officers, to execute anti- Yamashita was the link that connected Japanese activists on the spot without Japanese atrocities in Manchuria and trial. This method of execution, which North China with those in Singapore. [24] denied judicial due process to Chinese During the final phase of the war, captives, was usually called Genju Yamashita was appointed commander of Shobun (Harsh Disposal) or Genchi the 14th Area Army in the Philippines, Shobun (Disposal on the Spot) by the where he surrendered to US forces at the Japanese military.[21] With this law in end of the war. While he had experienced place, the Japanese military and military trouble with anti-Japanese guerillas in the police killed suspects without trial or Philippines, he commented to the deputy investigation. Those killed were not only chief of staff that his policy of dealing guerrillas but also civilians, including harshly with the local population in children, women, and the aged. Such Singapore had made the local population inhumane methods were legalized in there become docile.[25] Manchuria. From 1937, Genju Shobun was applied regularly throughout the The army order that began the purge in China-Japan War., with civilians denied Singapore and Malaya was issued to the the right of trial and Chinese soldiers Singapore Garrison Commander, denied prisoner of war status[22] Kawamura by Army Commander Yamashita. When Kawamura presented Yamashita Tomoyuki, the 25th Army Yamashita a report on the operations of commander who directed the invasion of 23 February, Yamashita expressed his Malaya, played an important role in the appreciation for Kawamura’s efforts and

5 7 | 28 | 4 APJ | JF instructed him to continue the purge as 1930s. necessary.[26] Yamashita was not a puppet of Tsuji but an active instigator of A final consideration is the issue of the Singapore Massacre. “preventive killing”. In Japan, preventive arrest was legalised in 1941 through a A third important point is that the revision of Chian Iji Ho [Public Order headquarters of the 25th Army included Law], which allowed communists and other hardliners aside from Tsuji and others holding dangerous thoughts to be Yamashita. A notable example was the arrested and held in custody even if no deputy chief of the military government crime had been committed. A number of of Singapore and Malaya, Col. Watanabe detainees were tortured to death by the Wataru.[27] He was the mastermind police, notably the Tokko special political behind the forcible donation of $50 police. The Singapore Massacre bears a million and the “Implementation close parallel to this method of Guidance for Manipulating Overseas preventive arrest and summary Chinese”, which set out the fatal execution. consequences of non-compliance. His earlier career included time spent as Clearly, then, the Singapore Massacre chief of a secret military agency in both was not the conduct of a few evil people, Beijing and Harbin. He delivered a but was consistent with approaches speech at the Army Academy in 1941 honed and applied in the course of a long advocating strong pressure against those period of Japanese aggression against who "bent their knees" to the British and China and subsequently applied to other thereby betrayed East Asia. The lesson he Asian countries. To sum up the points derived from his experience in China was developed above, the Japanese military, that Japan should deal harshly with the in particular the 25th Army, made use of Chinese population from the outset. As a the purge to remove prospective anti- result, the Chinese in Singapore were Japanese elements and to threaten local regarded as anti-Japanese even before Chinese and others in order to swiftly the Japanese military landed. impose military administration. However, In this and other senses, Japanese Japanese violence proved counter aggression in Southeast Asia was an productive. Strong anti-Japanese feelings extension of the Sino-Japanese War. were ignited in the local population and not a few younger people joined anti- Fourth, among Japanese military officers Japanese movements. The result was that and men there was a culture of prejudice Japanese forces never succeeded in toward the Chinese and other Asian resolving these difficulties in the years people. These attitudes had deepened prior to defeat in 1945. following the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-95 and were embedded within the Narratives of the Singapore Massacre Japanese population as a whole by the in Postwar Japan

6 7 | 28 | 4 APJ | JF

The Campaign to Undermine the War for Onishi Satoru, who took part in the Crimes Trials in the 1950s Singapore Massacre as a Kempeitai officer and was sentenced to life Although the Singapore Massacre imprisonment by a British war crimes generated scant interest among the trial.[30] The recommendation says that Japanese people in the postwar era, there the figure of 5,000 victims of the has been some discussion of the incident. Singapore Massacre was untrue and that Singapore Garrison Commander his war crimes trial had been an act of Kawamura Saburo published his reprisal. Although this recommendation reminiscences in 1952, at a time when was not approved by the British Japan was recovering its government, it reflects the Japanese independence.[28] This book contains his government’s refusal to admit that mass diaries, personal letters, and other murder had occurred in Singapore.[31] materials. In one letter to his family, he Among many Japanese, the war crimes expressed condolences to the victims of trials were, and still are, regarded as a Singapore and prayed for the repose of mockery of justice, or victor’s justice. their souls. The foreword to the book was written by Tsuji, who had escaped Japanese Response to Accusations by punishment after the war. For his part, Singaporeans in the 1960s Tsuji showed no regrets and offered no apology to the victims. Beginning in 1962, numerous human remains dating from the Occupation were During the 1950s, the Japanese found in various locations around government, members of parliament, and Singapore. Prolonged discussions private organisations waged a nationwide between the Singaporean and Japanese campaign for the release of war criminals governments relating to these deaths led held in custody at Sugamo Prison in to a settlement in 1967. This was Tokyo.[29] Both conservatives and reported in the Japanese press, but only progressives took part in the campaign, as minor news. For example, the Nihon arguing that minor war criminals were Keizai Shimbun quoted a Japanese official victims of the war, not true criminals. A involved in the negotiations as saying Japanese government committee was in that no executions by shooting occurred charge of recommending the parole and in Malaysia.[32] The Asahi Shimbun release of war criminals to the Allied reported that it was hardly conceivable Nations. The committee’s recommendations are still closed to the that the Japanese military committed public in Japan, but can be read in the atrocities in Indonesia and Thailand.[33] national archives of the UK and USA. Another Asahi report criticized the Chinese Chamber of Commerce in As an example of the committee’s Singapore for stoking hatred by recommendations, in 1952 the British propagating stories of barbarity by the government was asked to consider parole Japanese military during the war.[34]

7 7 | 28 | 4 APJ | JF

state that the number of victims was 3,000, while others use 5,000. One ex- foreign ministry official sent a letter to the Foreign Minister saying that Japan should repent and apologize in all sincerity, but this attitude was exceptional among officials.

Personal mementoes of Singaporeans excavated during the 1960s and presently exhibited in the Sun Yat- sen villa

In 2003, the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs released documents relating to the negotiations between Singapore and Japan during this period.[35] The Japanese government had made use of a Changi Beach, site of largescale report prepared in 1946 by an army executions committee chaired by Sugita Ichiji, a staff officer with the 25th Army. To counter During negotiations with Singapore, the war crimes charges, the report admitted Japanese government rejected demands that there had been executions, but for reparations but agreed to make a insisted that there were mitigating “gesture of atonement” by providing circumstances.[36] funds in other ways. What the Japanese government feared most was economic The figure of 5,000 executions, according damage as a result of a boycott or to a written opinion by an official at the sabotage by the local Chinese should Ministry of Justice who was in charge of Singapore’s demands be rejected. The detained war criminals, was an agreement with Singapore was signed on exaggeration: the correct figure might be the same day as a similar agreement with about 800. The Asahi Shimbun reported Malaysia. Singapore was to receive 25 this number with apparent approval.[37] million Singapore dollars as a gift and Additional figures come from the Ministry another 25 million Singapore dollars in of Foreign Affairs, which accepted that credit, while Malaysia was to receive 25 the Japanese military had carried out million Malaysia dollars as a gift.[38] mass killings in Singapore, but some Japanese foreign ministry documents To the last, the Japanese government

8 7 | 28 | 4 APJ | JF refused to accept legal responsibility for admitted that the “purification” was a the massacre or to carry out a survey of serious crime against humanity, but he the deaths. The mass media in Japan did claimed that the number of victims was not examine what had happened in actually around 1,000.[42] Otani’s book Singapore and Malaya during the war. It severely criticizes the Japanese military, is no exaggeration to say that the denouncing the “purification” as an act of Japanese media at that time showed no tyranny and criticizing it from a human inclination to confront Japan’s war crimes perspective.[43] or war responsibility. Although veterans’ associations usually Publications in the 1970s justify or deny that inhuman acts had taken place, the Joint Association of There were, however, some honest National Kempei Veterans has admitted responses in subsequent years. In 1967 that the massacre was an inhuman Professor Ienaga Saburo, famous for his history textbook lawsuit against the act.[44] A few writers who were stationed Japanese government, published a book or visited Singapore during the war have entitled The Pacific War that dealt with also published memoirs in which they the Singapore Massacre.[39] In 1970, the record what they had heard about the monthly journal Chugoku [China] Singapore Massacre.[45] On the whole, published a feature called, “Blood Debt: nobody denied that the Japanese purge in Chinese Massacre in Singapore”, the first Singapore was an atrocity against extended treatment in Japan of the humanity and historians began to pay Singapore Massacre.[40] The piece was attention to the episode. However, it mostly written by Professor Tanaka failed to catch the attention of the Hiroshi. Japanese people.

The 1970s also saw publication of Research in the 1980s and 1990s reminiscences by some of those directly involved in the Massacre, and by people The situation changed in 1982, when the who witnessed or heard about it, Ministry of Education ordered the including Nihon Kempei Seishi [The deletion of passages relating to Japanese Official History of the Japanese wartime atrocities in Asia from school Kempeitai] by the Zenkoku Kenkyukai textbooks, and instructed textbook Rengokai [Joint Association of National writers to replace the term “aggression” Kempei Veterans],[41] Kempei by Otani with less emotive terms, such as Keijiro, and Hiroku Shonan Kakyo “advance”.[46] This decision was severely Shukusei Jiken [Secret Memoir of criticized both at home and abroad, and a Singapore Overseas Chinese Purification] growing number of historians began to by Onishi Satoru. Onishi Satoru was a conduct research into Japanese Kempeitai section commander who took atrocities, including the Nanjing part in the Massacre. In his book Onishi Massacre.[47]

9 7 | 28 | 4 APJ | JF

In 1984, while the textbook controversy and official diaries related to the continued, a bulky book called Malayan massacre of Chinese in Negri Sembilan Chinese Resistance to Japan 1937-1945: and Malacca in 1942. Newspapers Selected Source Materials was published throughout Japan reported these in Singapore. Sections of this volume findings, the first time that public were translated into Japanese in 1986 attention focused on the killings in under the title Nihongun Senryoka no Malaya.[50] The documents revealed that Singapore [Singapore under Japanese troops from Hiroshima had been involved Occupation], allowing Japanese to read in in atrocities in Negri Sembilan and this their own language Singaporean information came as a major shock to the testimony concerning wartime people of Hiroshima, who had thought events.[48] The main translator was themselves as victims of the atomic bomb Professor Tanaka Hiroshi, mentioned and had never imagined that their fathers earlier as the author of a magazine or husbands had been involved in the article on the Singapore Massacre. massacres in Malaya.[51]

Another significant publication was a In 1988, several citizen groups jointly 1987 booklet by Takashima Nobuyoshi, invited Chinese survivors from Malaysia then a high school teacher and now a to visit Japan, and staged meetings where professor at Ryukyu University, entitled Japanese citizens listened to their Tabi Shiyo Tonan-Ajia E [Let’s travel to testimony. A book that included these Southeast Asia].[49] Based on statements was published in 1989. [52] information Takashima collected during Also in 1988, the Negri Sembilan Chinese repeated visits to Malaysia and Singapore Assembly Hall published a book in beginning in the early 1980s, the booklet Chinese called Collected Materials of discussed atrocities and provided details Suffering of Chinese in Negeri Sembilan of the “Memorial to the Civilian Victims during the Japanese Occupation, and the of the Japanese Occupation” and of an following year Professor Takashima and I exhibition of victim mementos at the Sun published a Japanese translation of this Yat-sen Villa. The volume served as a volume.[53] Another source of guidebook for Japanese wishing to information was the history textbook understand wartime events or visit sites used in Singapore by students in junior of Japanese atrocities. In 1983 he began high school, Social and Economic History organising study tours to historical sites of Modern Singapore 2, which was related to Japanese Occupation and to translated into Japanese in 1988. The places where massacres occurred in material concerning the occupation Malaysia and Singapore. attracted the attention of Japanese readers, particularly teachers and In 1987, I located official military researchers.[54] documents in the Library of the National Institute for Defense Studies, Defense As might be expected, there was a Agency that included operational orders backlash to these initiatives. It was

10 7 | 28 | 4 APJ | JF claimed that Japanese troops killed only devoted only one or two lines to the guerrillas and their supporters, and that events. More recently, chauvinistic the number was much smaller than campaigns and sentiment have become reported. Responding to these rampant in Japan. A number of ultra right allegations, I published a book in 1992 books now claim that the Nanjing entitled Kakyo Gyakusatu: Nihongun Massacre is a fabrication, that the Shihaika no Mare Hanto [Chinese Japanese military took good care of Massacres: The Malay Peninsula under comfort women, and so on. Under Japanese Occupation][55] that pressure from the Ministry of Education, substantiated in detail the activities of the Liberal Democratic Party, and other the Japanese military in Negri Sembilan neo-nationalists, statements in school during March 1942, when several textbooks about Japanese atrocities have thousand Chinese were massacred. Since become less common, and the Minister of then there has been no rebuttal by those Education said in 2004 that it was who would not concede the massacres in desirable that descriptions of Japanese Malaya apart from personal attacks and atrocities be dropped.[59] Moreover, contesting of trifling details that have no teachers who explain Japanese effect on the central argument.[56] aggression and army atrocities are often subjected to criticism by local officials or In 1996, the Singapore Heritage Society’s municipal education boards. book, SYONAN: Singapore under the Japanese, 1942-1945 was translated into Descriptions of the Singapore massacre Japanese.[57] This book comprehensively in high school history textbooks are introduced Japanese readers to the living particularly rare. According to research conditions and suffering of Singaporeans in the 1990s, just 8 out of a total of 26 under the Japanese occupation. Further textbooks mentioned the event.[60] The information appeared in a book I most widely used textbook states simply published entitled, Sabakareta Senso that “atrocities took place in Singapore Hanzai: Igirisu no Tainichi Senpan and elsewhere”.[61] Other textbooks say Saiban [Tried War Crimes; British War that the Japanese army massacred tens of Crimes Trials of Japanese]. This volume thousands of overseas Chinese in contains an account of the Singapore Singapore and Malaya, but even these Massacre based on British, Chinese and descriptions are limited to one or two Japanese documents.[58] lines, and give no details. Anyone who dared set a question about the atrocities The Rightist Backlash and the School for a university entrance examination Textbook Issue Since 2000 could expect attacks not only from right- wingers but also from MPs belonging to In the 1990s, some Japanese high school the ruling Liberal Democratic Party. history textbooks began to provide information on the massacres in The situation is similar with regard to Singapore and Malaya, although they junior high school history textbooks. In

11 7 | 28 | 4 APJ | JF the eight textbooks approved by the Work by Singaporean and other Ministry of Education in April 2005 for researchers has produced valuable use from 2006, descriptions of Korean information about the Singapore forced labor have all but disappeared, as massacre, yet it seems to me that there is has the term “comfort women”. Overall, room for further research. In particular, references to Japanese aggression and what seems lacking is collation of atrocities have been drastically reduced documents in English, Chinese, and under pressure from the Ministry of Japanese. While Singapore citizens have Education, the Liberal Democratic Party, accounts of the Massacre and the and the right-leaning mass media. If the suffering caused by the Japanese current ultra-nationalistic trend occupation, students in Japan are unable continues, it seems likely that even the to imagine what happened in Singapore few descriptions of the Singapore and Malaya during the Japanese massacre that do exist will be eliminated. Occupation. Few Japanese students have any opportunity to learn about the Occupation, and the many Japanese who visit Singapore each year generally are unaware of the killings or of the wartime suffering of Singaporeans. It is difficult to redress the balance, but if Japan is to achieve full reconciliation with the people of Singapore and other Southeast Asian countries and gain their trust, steps in the right direction must be taken.

Hayashi Hirofumi is professor of politics at Kanto-Gakuin University and the Co- Director of the Center for Research and Documentation on Japan’s War Responsibility. His books include Okinawasen to Minshu (The Battle of Okinawa and the People), Otsuki Shoten, 2001 and Ianfu, Senji Seiboryoku no Jittai: Chugoku, Tonan-Ajia, Taiheiyo Hen (The Comfort Women and Wartime Civilian War Memorial in War Sexual Violence: China, Southeast Asia Memorial Park, Singapore and the Pacific), Ryokufu Shuppan, 2000. He wrote this article for The Asia-Pacific Conclusion Journal.

12 7 | 28 | 4 APJ | JF

Recommended citation: Hayashi National Archives of the UK in London. Hirofumi, “The Battle of Singapore, the Massacre of Chinese and Understanding [4] This document is preserved in the of the Issue in Postwar Japan” The Asia- Library of the National Institute for Pacific Journal, Vol. 28-4-09, July 13, Defense Studies [LNIDS], Defense 2009. Agency, Tokyo.

See also, Hayashi Hirofumi, [5] For example, Singapore Heritage “Government, the Military and Business Society, Syonan: Singapore under the in Japan’s Wartime Comfort Woman Japanese 1942-1945 (Singapore: System,” The Asia-Pacific Journal. Singapore Heritage Society, 1992), National Archives of Singapore, The Japanese Occupation, 1942-1945 (Singapore: Times, 1996), p. 72.

[6] For example, National Archives of NOTES Singapore, The Japanese Occupation,

1942-1945, p. 68.

[a] Kakyō Shukusei (華僑粛正) [7] The operational order of the 25th Army and the order of the 5th Division [b] Dai Kenshō (大検証) dated 21 February 1942 in LNIDS.

[c] Sook Ching (肃清- Purge) [8] In this trial seven officers were prosecuted. Among them two were [1] The Japanese term “Shukusei” was sentenced to death, while other five were used by the Japanese Army at the time. In sentenced to imprisonment for life. This the Chinese community of Singapore it is is one of most famous war crimes trials usually called “Sook Ching” (mandarin held by the British in Singapore. “Suqing”). [9] “Kakyō Kōsaku Jisshi Yōryō [2] For details on the decision-making in [Implementation Guidance for the 25th Army, see Hayashi Hirofumi, Manipulating Overseas Chinese]” in Sabakareta Sensō Hanzai [Tried War LNIDS. Crimes: British War Crimes Trials of Japanese](Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1998) [10] Onishi Satoru, Hiroku Shonan Kakyo and ‘Shingaporu Kakyō ShukuseiShukusei Jiken [Secret Memoir Overseas [Massacre of Chinese in Singapore]’ Chinese Massacre in Singapore] (Tokyo: Nature-People-Society: Science and the Kongo Shuppan, 1977), p. 69 and p. 78. Humanities, Kantō-Gakuin University, No.40, Jan. 2006. [11] This claim is prevalent among researchers in Japan. It is believed even [3] Kawamura’s diary is preserved in the by those who are not right-wingers. I

13 7 | 28 | 4 APJ | JF have not clarified who put forward this Personal Files of the Investigative reason for first time. Records Repository, Record Group 319 (The Army Staff), US National Archives [12] The Dalforce file in “British Military and Records Administration. Administration, Chinese Affairs, 1945-1946” (National Archives of[21] Asada Kyoji and Kobayashi Hideo Singapore). (eds.), Nihon Teikokushugi no Manshu Shihai [Administration of Manchuria by [13] Numerous books contain suchthe Japanese Imperialism] (Tokyo: Jicho- assertions, particularly books in Chinese. Sha, 1986), p. 180.

[14] Rikujo Jieitai Kanbu Gakko [Ground [22] See Ōnishi, Hiroku Shonan Kakyō Staff College, Ground Self-DefenseShukusei Jiken, pp. 88-92. Force], Mare Sakusen [The Malay Campaign] (Tokyo: Hara Shobo, 1996), [23] Bōeichō Bōei Kenkyusho Senshi-bu pp. 240-1. [Military History Department, National Defense College, Defense Agency], [15] Ōnishi, Hiroku Shonan KakyōHokushi no Chian-sen, Part 1 [Security Shukusei Jiken, pp. 87-8. Operation in North China] (Tokyo: Asagumo Shinbunsha, 1968), pp. 114-30. [16] Furyo Kankei Chōsa Chuō Iinkai [Central Board of Inquiry on POWs], [24] See Chalmers Johnson, Peasant “Shingaporu ni okeru Kakyō Shodan Nationalism and Communist Power. The Jōkyō Chōsho” [Record of Investigation Emergence of Revolutionary China, on the Execution of Overseas Chinese in 1937-1945 (Stanford: Stanford University Singapore], 23 Oct. 1945 (Reprinted in Press, 1962), pp. 55-58; Yung-fa Chen, Nagai Hitoshi (ed.), Sensō Hanzai Chōsa Making Revolution: The Communist Shiryō [Documents on War CrimesMovement in Eastern and Central China, Investigation] (Tokyo: Higashi Shuppan, 1937-1945 (Berkeley: University of 1995). California Press, 1986), pp. 98-116; Edward Friedman, Paul G. Pickowicz and [17] See Hayashi Hirofumi, Sabakareta Mark Selden, Chinese Village, Socialist Senso Hanzai, p. 224. State (New Haven: Yale University Press, [18] Otani Keijiro, Kenpei [The Military 1991), pp. 29-51. Police] (Tokyo: Shin-Jinbutsu Oraisha, [25] Kojima Jo, Shisetu Yamashita 1973), p. 189. Tomoyuki [Historical Narrative [19] Ōnishi, Hiroku Shonan KakyōYamashita Tomoyuki] (Tokyo: Bungei Shukusei Jiken, p. 86. Shunjusha, 1969), p. 325. See also Yuki Tanaka, “Last Words of the Tiger of [20] The intelligence files on Tsuji are Malaya, General Yamashita Tomoyuki,” preserved in Boxes 457 and 458,The Asia-Pacific Journal, September 22,

14 7 | 28 | 4 APJ | JF

2005. Sekinin Kenkyu [The Report on Japan’s War Responsibility], No. 10, Dec. 1995. [26] Kawamura’s diary. See also Hayashi, Sabakareta Senso Hanzai, p. 220. [39] Ienaga Saburō, Taiheiyō Sensō [The Pacific War] (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, [27] See Akashi Yoji, “Watanabe Gunsei” 1967). [Military Administration by Watanabe], in Akashi Yoji (ed.), Nihon Senryōka no [40] “Kessai: Shingaporu no Chugokujin Eiryo Mare Shingaporu [Malaya and Gyakusatsu Jiken” [Blood Debt: Chinese Singapore under the JapaneseMassacre in Singapore], in Chugoku Occupation, 1941-45] (Tokyo: Iwanami [China], vol. 76 (Mar. 1970). Shoten, 2001). [41] Tokyo: Private Press, 1976. [28] Kawamura Saburo, Jusan Kaidan wo Noboru [Walking up Thirteen Steps of [42] Ōnishi, Hiroku Shonan Kakyō Stairs] (Tokyo: Ato Shobo, 1952). Shukusei Jiken, pp. 93-7.

[29] See Hayashi Hirofumi, BC-kyu[43] Otani Keijirō, Kempei, p. 189. Senpan Saiban [Class B & C War Crimes [44] Zenkoku Kenyukai Rengōkai, Nihon Trials] (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 2005), Kempei Seishi, p. 979. ch. 6. [45] For example, Terasaki Hiroshi, [30] FO371/105435(National Archives, Sensō no Yokogao [Profile of the War] UK). (Tokyo: Taihei Shuppan, 1974), Nakajima [31] He was released in 1957. Kenzo, Kaisō no Bungaku [Literature of Recollection], vol. 5 (Tokyo: Heibonsha, [32] Nihon Keizai Shimbun, 3 Nov. 1966. 1977), Omata Yukio, Zoku Shinryaku [Sequel: Aggression] (Tokyo: Tokuma [33] Asahi Shimbun, 20 Sept. 1967. Shoten, 1982), and so on.

[34] Asahi Shimbun, 18 Sept. 1963. [46] See Rekishigaku Kenkyukai [The Historical Science Society of Japan], [35] These documents are open to the Rekishika wa naze Shinryaku ni public at the Diplomatic Record Office of kodawaruka [Why Historians adhere to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Aggression] (Tokyo: Aoki Shoten, 1982). [36] See footnote no.14. [47] Composed of historians and [37] Asahi Shimbun, 29 Sept. 1963. journalists, Nankin Jiken Chōsa Kenkyu Kai [The Society for the Study of Nanking [38] Hara Fujio, “Mareishia, Shingaporu Massacre] was established in 1984. It no Baishō Mondai” [Reparation Problem remains active, although the scope of with Singapore and Malaysia], Sensō research has been extended to Japanese

15 7 | 28 | 4 APJ | JF atrocities in China and the rest ofa Foreign Textbook] (Tokyo: Ikkosha, Southeast Asia. 1988).

[48] Tokyo: Aoki Shoten, 1986. [55] Tokyo: Suzusawa Shoten, 1992. For arguments of right-wingers, see Chapter [49] Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1987. 8 of this book. [50] This article was prepared by the [56] See, for example, two articles by Kyodo News Service and appeared in Hata Ikuhiko in the journal Seiron, newspapers on 8 Dec. 1987. August and Oct. 1992 and Professor Takashima’s and my responses in the [51] As mentioned before, the 5thsame journal in Sept. and Nov. 1992. Division conducted purges throughout the Malay Peninsular except Johor. The [57] Tokyo: Gaifusha, 1996. headquarters of the Division in peacetime [58] Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1998. was situated in Hiroshima and soldiers were conscripted in Hiroshima and[59] See Hayashi Hirofumi, “Nihon no neighboring prefectures. Haigaiteki Nashonarizumu wa Naze Taitō [52] Sensō Giseisha wo Kokoro nishitaka” [Why Japanese Chauvinistic Kizamukai [Society for Keeping War Nationalism has gained strength] in Victims in our Heart], Nihongun no VAWW-NET Japan (ed.), Kesareta Sabaki: Maresia Jumin Gyakusatu [The Massacres NHK Bangumi Kaihen to Seiji Kainyu of Malaysian Local Population by the Jiken [Deleted Judgment: Interpolation of Japanese Military] (Osaka: Toho the NHK TV Program and the Politicians’ Shuppan, 1989). Intervention] (Tokyo: Gaifusha, 2005).

[53] Originally published in 1988. The [60] Zenkoku Rekishi Kyōiku Kenkyu Japanese translation was as follows: Kyōgikai [The National Council for Takashima Nobuyoshi & HayashiHistory Education] (ed.), Nihonshi Yōgo- Hirofumi (eds.), Maraya no Nihongun shu [Lexicon of the Japanese History [The Japanese Army in Malaya] (Tokyo: Textbook] (Tokyo: Yamakawa Shoten, Aoki Shoten, 1989). 2000), p. 291.

[54] Ishiwata Nobuo and Masuo Keizo [61] Shōsetsu Nihonshi [The Details of (eds.), Gaikoku no Kyōkasho no nakano Japanese History] (Tokyo: Yamakawa Nihon to Nihonjin [Japan and Japanese in Shoten, 2001), p. 332.