Caption: The invading Japanese army enters Nanjing.
The characteristics of Japan's view of Korea and China
Text |Yoko Kato.
* |Sick into the humerus:
Emperors and Armies in Modern Japanese History
What is the perception of the situation in East Asia and the world as a whole?What were the considerations for choosing to launch a foreign war?Before considering these two questions, it is necessary to consider the nature of Japan as a country and the sense of security of the Japanese people. American historian Mark R. PettyPeattie, commenting on the national character of Japan before World War I, said:
Of all the colonial empires of modern times, Japan is probably the only one that has been moving in an unusually clear direction of national strategic thinking. As an island nation, Japan's rulers at the time were able to reach an agreement on the issue of their own security on the basis of careful consideration. This is extremely rare in the whole world. ”
As an island nation in modern times, why has the interests and goals pursued by Japan in the field of security have been widely supported by those in power and among the people?As a modern country, while achieving rapid development, why did Japan point the spearhead at the Korean Peninsula and China in an attempt to reconstruct the international order in East Asia by force?
Some readers may disagree with the author's insertion of a discussion on the North Korean issue in an article aimed at discussing Sino-Japanese relations, but there is a reason for this. For example, if we consider the outbreak of the First Sino-Japanese War and the Russo-Japanese War, we will find that both wars actually began with Japan's invasion of the Korean Peninsula. Most of the time, the Korean and Chinese views held by modern Japan or Japanese people are inseparable.
Japanese troops during the Russo-Japanese War.
In this regard, we can refer to the research of the ancient Chinese historian Nishijima Taruyo. Nishijima believed that ancient Japan was a culturally backward country located on the periphery of the Sui and Tang Empires, and that in order to maintain its independence and establish its ruling authority at home, it was necessary to create a false impression that the dynasties of the Korean Peninsula (Silla, etc.) were subordinate to Japan, and that the relationship between Japan and the Chinese dynasties was reciprocal. In addition, Joseon historian Makoto Yoshino has pointed out that the Nihon Shoki, Japan's earliest history book, compiled in 720 AD, deliberately portrays the countries of the Korean Peninsula as states subject to the emperor (Empress Shingong's Silla conquest, Samhan tributary, etc.). For ancient Japan, this kind of historical fiction was indispensable for the purpose of consolidating domestic rule. In other words, in ancient Japan, when the emperor's rule was first established, rulers were already using Korea and China to establish their own authority at home.
Readers here may wonder if the foreign understanding of ancient Japan can really be applied to modern timesIn order to resolve this doubt, I would like to quote a quote from Emperor Showa. On August 14, 1946 (Showa 21), exactly one year after the Imperial Council decided to accept the Potsdam Proclamation, Emperor Showa invited Prime Minister Kantaro Suzuki at the time of the defeat and Shigeru Yoshida to hold a tea party. According to the records of the deputy chief of the chamberlain, Inada on Monday, Emperor Showa spoke at the meeting:
Personally, I am deeply sorry for the defeat. However, this is not the first time that Japan has been defeated in the war, as Japan has historically sent troops to Korea and suffered a complete defeat in the Battle of the Baekchon River. After that, Japan had to withdraw its troops from Korea and embark on a series of reforms. These reforms became an important turning point in the development of Japanese culture in the future. If history is any guide, we can foresee Japan's future development path.
The Battle of Baekchongang was a battle in which the combined forces of the Tang Dynasty and Silla defeated the Wa Kingdom (Japan) in 663 AD. It is worth noting that Emperor Showa cited the Battle of the Shiramura River nearly 1,300 years ago as a precedent when he apologized to the relevant parties after the war for the responsibility for the defeat.
Emperor Hirohito visited the Yasukuni Shrine during World War II.
In addition, it was in 702 A.D. (Daiho 2) that Japan began to use the name "Japan" instead of the previous "Wa" while resuming the tribute envoys to the Tang Dynasty (the so-called envoys sent to the Tang Dynasty), which had been interrupted since 669. According to the Japanese historical books compiled by the Japanese side, such as the Nihon Shoki, Japan seems to have established reciprocal diplomatic relations with the Tang Dynasty at that time. But there is no doubt that the depictions of these histories are fiction.
Although the actual relationship between the Tang and Japan was not equal in history, the ancient state, with the emperor as the culminator, still created an external perception that "Tang was a neighbor and Silla was a feudal state", and based on this understanding, they established their domestic. At that time, although Japan sent tributary envoys to the Tang Dynasty from time to time, it did not join the canonization system of the Tang Dynasty. The reason for this choice was that once they joined the canonization system of the Tang Dynasty, they would be on an equal footing with Joseon (Silla), which also accepted the canonization of the Tang Dynasty, and the Japanese fictional claim that Silla was subordinate to Japan would be self-defeating. Ancient historian Ishimoda Masashi also pointed out that Japan's motive for creating the title "Emperor" was also to imitate the Chinese Empire to build a "small empire of Dongyi". Since the emperor who imitated the Tang Dynasty called himself emperor, how could Japan not have a tributary state?And if you want to find tributary countries in the surrounding area, you can only look at Silla on the Korean Peninsula. This is the logical structure of ancient Japan. Makoto Yoshino also pointed out
Essentially, the title of 'Emperor' can only be established on the basis of having a tributary state. In other words, in order for the emperor to become emperor, it was indispensable to obtain the submission of Joseon. ”
On this basis, let's take a look at Kido Takayoshi, one of the leaders of Meiji Shin**, on the Korean Peninsula issue. On December 14, 1868 (Meiji Era), Kido wrote in his diary that he could be held accountable for the "rude" acts of the Joseon. If the DPRK refuses to admit its mistake, it can raise a teacher to ask for guilt, so as to show the national prestige of "Shenzhou" (Japan). It is known that in the 1873 controversy over the conquest of Korea that led to the defeat of Saigo Takamori and others, Kido made it clear that he opposed the conquest of Korea. Thinking of this, Kido's proposal for the conquest of Korea written in his diary in the first year of the Meiji era is even more significant. Why, then, did future representatives of the internal governance faction, who advocated prioritizing the development of domestic affairs and opposing the blind dispatch of troops overseas, advocate the conquest of Korea in the early Meiji period?
In 1868, the Tsushima clan sent an envoy to Korea to deliver a notice of Japan's implementation of the imperial government. Kido's diary was written shortly after the envoy's departure. The "disrespectful acts" mentioned in Kido's diary refer to the establishment of diplomatic relations between Joseon and the Tokugawa shogunate. Ignoring the emperor's ** and instead establishing "personal relations" with the samurai regime, Kido saw this diplomatic policy of North Korea as quite problematic. Kido's view of Korea is actually based on the following thinking: through the Meiji Restoration, since Japan has re-established the concept of the emperor's personal government, then Korea should naturally submit to the retro Japan of the imperial government, just like the era of the ancient imperial state (of course, the so-called ancient imperial state form understood by Kido and others is only a fictitious illusion).
The extent to which Kido Takayoshi was influenced by the fictional stories in the Nihon Shoki will not be discussed here. At that time, Kido racked his brains in order to get the new ** out of the difficult political situation in the early Meiji period. In 1868, opposition critics criticized Shin** and demanded that the European and American powers be expelled from Japan as soon as possible. In the face of the turbulent situation in the country, the new ** chose to use the fictitious slogan of "Korea is a subject country of Japan" to unify the country on the basis of promoting the retro concept of Wang Zheng. In other words, in order to establish the legitimacy of the Meiji state, Shin** at that time felt that it was necessary to construct a state-building concept based on ancient mythology, and to realize the unity of the people on this basis.
To sum up,In many cases, Japan's views on Korea and China do not care about foreign relations such as trade interests and territorial expansion, but on the contrary, they have a strong domestic propaganda color. Under these circumstances, the Japanese authorities will use the Korean and China views to promote and use them in order to achieve national unity at home and establish the authority and legitimacy of the new regime on the other.