New Research on the Nanjing Incident
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Volume 2 | Issue 7 | Article ID 1729 | Jul 13, 2004 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus New Research on the Nanjing Incident David Askew New Research on the Nanjingaccepted orthodoxies has proved irresistible to Incident those on both extremes of the debate – extremes advocated by individuals who, here, will be labelled ‘corpse minimisers’ and ‘corpse By David Askew maximisers’.5 On the one hand, to show too much scepticism is to risk being tarred as a 1. Introduction nationalist revisionist or denier, an apologist for Japanese fascism and imperialism. On the The Nanjing (or Nanking) Incident (also known other hand, any demonstrated interest in as the Rape of Nanjing, the Nanjing Massacre Nanjing can be viewed in some circles in Japan and the Nanjing Atrocities) remains a highly as ‘Japan-bashing’ or even anti-Japanese racism controversial episode in Sino-Japanese (in the case of foreign researchers) or ‘self- relations.1 Indeed, it remains so controversial, flagellation’ (in the case of Japanese). In this especially in Japan, that a neutral definition of environment, the debate can become highly the event, and even its name, has yet to be emotionally charged, and the historian’s agreed upon.2 However, most researchers struggle to weigh the evidence can quickly fall would perhaps agree on the following. The victim to the demands of contemporary politics. Nanjing Incident refers to the killing and raping of large numbers of Chinese together The importance of the Nanjing Incident to with widespread looting and arson over a contemporary Sino-Japanese relations can relatively short period of time (usually given as hardly be overstated. Nanjing forms one of the six to seven weeks) by the Japanese military core historical issues on which Japan and China prior to and following the capture of the city of cannot agree, and continues to bedevil the Nanjing on 13 December 1937. Sadly for the bilateral relationship. It contributes to, if not historian, the Nanjing Incident is not only an drives, the controversy over Japanese history important episode in Sino-Japanese relations, textbooks. It certainly continues to poison but is also emerging as a foundation stone in Chinese opinion of Japan: for instance, one the construction of the modern Chineserecent poll which received replies from over 3 national identity. As a result, the historian’s 100,000 young Chinese people showed that interest in and analysis of this event can be 83.9 per cent gave the ‘great Nanjing interpreted as an attack on the contemporary massacre’ as the issue they associated most Chinese identity, while a refusal to accept the with Japan.6 Nanjing is also important in ‘orthodox’ position on Nanjing – however understanding contemporary domestic defined – can be construed as an attempt to Japanese politics. The debate within Japan deny the Chinese nation a legitimate voice in about Nanjing (and for that matter about international society – or, in Iris Chang’s words, textbooks) is also a debate about the legitimacy as a ‘second rape’.4 In the highly emotional of the findings of the post-war military and deeply politicised environment in which the tribunals held in Nanjing and especially in history of Japanese imperialism is constructed, Tokyo (the Tokyo Trial, or International the temptation to vilify all who disagree with Military Tribunal for the Far East). The broadly 1 2 | 7 | 0 APJ | JF defined left in Japan is politically and2. Semantics ideologically committed to the tribunals and their findings, whereas those on the right reject Any attempt to analyse either the historical the tribunals as illegitimate and the findings as events in and around Nanjing itself or the ‘victor’s justice’. The debate in Japan is thus historiography of Nanjing must come to grips heavily influenced by a broader philosophical with, and attempt to clarify, the issue of and ideological discussion of history and definitions or semantics. It is only by historiography, and in particular by a further acknowledging the semantics of the debate that debate over the legitimacy of the narrative on the historian can hope to move away from the the history of pre-war and wartime Japan which mutual vilification that characterises much of emerged from the post-war military tribunals. the dialogue between ‘minimisers’ and ‘maximisers’. In this section, therefore, the Nanjing is a topic that has attracted far more various arguments about the major concepts activists than historians, especially in the West, that need to be defined will be summarised. and especially on the web. It remains a hotly contested domestic and international political First, there is little consensus in the English- language discourse about what terminology is issue both in Japan and China. There are large most appropriate when discussing the events in organisations that seem to be involved solely in Nanjing in the winter of 1937-38. The Chinese running anti-Japan and anti-Japanese term used almost universally is ‘Nanjing campaigns about the Nanjing Incident; there datusha’ (the great [as in large-scale] Nanjing are a number of academic associations, massacre). The term ‘datusha’ or ‘tusha’ magazines and numerous websites devoted to implies a systematic killing, as in an abattoir, Nanjing; and Iris Chang’s polemic, The Rape of and appeared at an early stage in the Chinese Nanking: The Forgotten Holocaust of World discourse on Nanking as a translation of H. J. War II (1997), has enjoyed phenomenal sales.7 Timperley’s (1898-1954) word, ‘slaughter’. In a Despite all the interest in Nanjing, however, reflection of the Chinese-language discourse, the history of the incident remains a largely the debate in Japanese frequently uses the term untold story. Indeed, one of the major problems ‘Nankin daigyakusatsu’ (literally ‘the great with the public discourse on Nanjing in Japan, Nanjing massacre’, again ‘great’ as in ‘large- where the historical research is mostscale’) or ‘Nankin gyakusatsu’ (the Nanjing developed, is that it has tended to collapse into massacre). However, the most common term is largely meaningless semantics about whether ‘Nankin jiken’ (the Nanjing incident), which the sum total of atrocities committed in and suggests a more neutral, objective tone, and around Nanjing can be defined as a ‘great helps distance the user from the more massacre’, or what the definition of ‘Nanjing’ emotional connotations of ‘massacre’.8 This is. Another problem is the obsession with term will be used here. numbers, where the moral and political implications of the discourse about, and events Second, and far more importantly, there is no in, Nanjing are engulfed in a reductionism that consensus in Japan about the definition of focuses solely on the number of victims. There ‘Nanjing’. Some of the ‘corpse minimisers’ are, however, some encouraging signs that the define ‘Nanjing’ as the Safety Zone, a small situation is changing for the better. This paper area of a few square kilometers within the city will attempt to clarify the current state of walls. Others argue that since ‘Nanjing’ was a research on this incident and identify future walled city, the area within the walls is an areas of research. First, however, the issue of appropriate definition. Another group claims semantics must be addressed. that a broader area that encompasses the 2 2 | 7 | 0 APJ | JF suburbs of the city outside the walls should also between historians would disappear. be included (Xiaguan would therefore be viewed as part of ‘Nanjing’). Yet others (the A related (third) issue is that of the time-scale ‘corpse maximisers’) broaden the area to of the Nanjing Incident. Different definitions of include the six xian (counties) surrounding the the geography of ‘Nanjing’ inevitably produce walled city of Nanjing. Finally, a smaller group different time-scales. The Japanese army of ‘maximisers’ broaden the area even further, rushed to Nanjing once Chinese resistance in some to Suzhou (190 kilometers away), others Shanghai collapsed. The city itself fell after a as far away as Shanghai (320 kilometers away). week or so of fighting on 13 December, but The size of ‘Nanjing’ can thus be defined as an troops did not enter the Safety Zone until 14 area of only a few square kilometers or as an December. The larger the geographical area of hundreds of square kilometers. definition of ‘Nanjing’, the earlier the Japanese entered ‘Nanjing’, and hence the earlier the Of the various positions, the extremes that atrocities began. No reputable historian argues reduce Nanjing to a few square kilometers, or that the events in and around ‘Nanjing’ began that exaggerate the size of the city out of all on 14 December, but some push the date back proportion, must be said to be definitions that into November and even August. have unfolded under the undue influence of political considerations. The temptation to A fourth major area of disagreement revolves define ‘Nanjing’ in very narrow terms is around the word ‘massacre’. Indeed, the understandable; with a narrow enoughdiscussion about whether or not there was a definition, the massacre can be airbrushed ‘massacre’ in ‘Nanjing’ relies, at least to a from history. It is not surprising that no certain extent, on the definition of the term. reputable historian has advocated thisChinese people were without question killed. particular (mis)understanding of the geography There is however no authorised and commonly of the Nanjing atrocities. At the same time, the accepted definition of ‘massacre’ for historians larger ‘Nanjing’ is, the larger the population to call upon. There is no consensus about what and hence the larger the potential death toll. type of death can or should be classified as part What is surprising is that the second extreme is of a massacre, nor about how many deaths, or advocated not only by layperson ‘maximisers’, how many murders, make a massacre.