Politics And History Of Japan Essay

Nazi rule in Germany was unleashed after the Reichstag Fire in Berlin and almost 3 years after this, the February 26 incident helped to introduce militaristic rule in Japan. The February 26 incident awakened the sleeping giant that was Japan and triggered off major world conflicts. The February 26 Incident On February 26, 1936 a breakaway faction of the Imperial Japanese Army composed of young junior officers and swearing allegiance to the Kodo ha faction within the Army, slipped into the middle of Tokyo and captured key government buildings including the one which housed the Diet or Japanese parliament and Army headquarters. Groups raided the residences of the Prime Minister and senior officials in an attempt to assassinate them.   Prime Minister Okada Keisuke had a narrow escape when the rebels killed his brother in law instead. Others, among them the Finance Minister, were murdered. Subsequently that day, the rebel faction went to the Army Minister to make their demands. They declared the government unfit to lead the affairs of Japan not able to do enough for it as a military power, instead more involved with politics and their self- interest. The action, the group declared was taken in the name of the Emperor. They demanded an immediate dissolution of the Government and the installation of a military General sympathetic to their cause. However, this infuriated Emperor Hirohito who was appalled at the killing of senior colleagues. He summoned Aide de Camp General Shigeru Honjo and declared the faction members as rebels who were acting without the authority of the Imperial Army. The Emperor wanted the rebellion to be squashed. But Army retaliation was not forthcoming as senior officers were still in agreement with the agenda of the rebels. However   the ‘Toseiha’ faction in the Army which was against the doctrines of the Kodo Ha, volunteered full support to the Emperor and even the Imperial Japanese Navy sprung into action, moving its ships into the Tokyo Bay to cut off the rebels. When Emperor Hirohito was informed about the reluctance of the Army to take decisive action, he vowed to personally lead his ‘Imperial Guard ‘into the fray. The following day, martial law was declared and the rebels were boxed in and pamphlets of the Emperor’s declaration were circulated indicating that there was no support from any of the forces for their attack. General Honjo, once a believer of Kodo Ha doctrines was on the Emperor’s side. The offensive lasted till February 29 when the army moved in to capture the rebels and senior members of the faction were ordered to commit ‘seppuku’ or ritual suicide rather than lose their honor in a public trial. Other junior officers were spared. Altogether, 70 coup members were arrested and prosecuted for the crime.[1] Subsequent Events   Ã‚   The four day siege resulted in martial law being stretched to July. The army, sensing an opportunity, used the power provided by martial law to expand its powers and budget. Prime Minister Okada was replaced by Koki Hirota. This effectively ushered in totalitarian rule in Japan which was to set the stage for the Second Sino – Japanese War.[2] Historical Background of Militarism In Japanese history, the role of the military, or to be more precise, militarism has had an overwhelming role in shaping Japan’s world view. Militarism stands for a nation’s strength and should play a dominating role in political as well as social life. The influence of militarism goes back to the days of the Meiji Restoration, known in Japan as the Meiji Ishin or Revolution. This period stretched back to the days of the Tokugawa Shogunate and caused far reaching social changes in Japan of the late 19th century. This was a direct reaction to the arrival of Commodore Matthew Perry’s fleet of American ships on Japanese shores. Commodore Perry forced a treaty – ending 200 years of Japanese insulation in matters of business – enabling trade between Japan and the United States. The Restoration came into being with the Satsuma Choshu Treaty which ultimately led to swearing of complete allegiance of the ruling Shoguns of that time to the Emperor. This was a creed forbidding all defiance to the Emperor (as Japanese history of that period depicts). Most Japanese leaders of that period were of Samurai descent and swore by the codes of the ancient Samurais – loyalty and allegiance to the ruler, dignity and honesty. The Japanese perception of events of that time was that the country’s sovereignty was threatened by outside forces. This justified building up a strong economic and military base to counter such a threat. This tradition continued till the 1800’s when mass conscription to the army and navy was considered an indication of unquestioning loyalty to the Emperor. Part of the reason for the widespread intrusion of militarism through to 1878 was the complete detachment of the forces from civilian society. The Staff commands established by the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy were responsible for formulating all defense strategy and were directly under the command of the Emperor. The Staff Chiefs were therefore under no obligation to the Prime Minister or any form of civilian law, During the Taisho period there was a return to democratic governance when the Washington Naval Treaty was signed and Japan participated in the League of Nations only to crumple with the onset of the Great Economic depression in 1929 when the world economy collapsed and caused trade barriers to be imposed by western nations. This was also coupled with domestic problems at home where several radical groups surfaced and there was even an attempt on the Emperor’s life, in 1932. These distressing events gave rise to patriotic feelings (maybe misplaced) in Japan. Such jingoism saw the military as the only solution to Japan‘s seemingly unending series of crises. The romantic notion that it was time for an Asian resurrection under Japanese rule took root. With the signing of the London Naval Treaty in 1930 by Prime Minister Osachi Hamaguchi and his party, the Navy was severely curbed in influence. This was seen by both the opposition and the military as endangering the country’s security. This whipped up jingoistic sentiment to the extent that Hamaguchi was killed in 1930 and the brief interlude with democratic rule came to an abrupt end. Subsequently, patriotic fervor in Japan gave the military free rein in Asia.[3] This was responsible for Japan’s involvement in several Asian conflicts: the Boxer Rebellion, World War 1, the Russo – Japanese War. The infamous Manchurian Incident of 1931 led to Japanese forces’ take-.over of all Manchuria – to protect Japan’s interests, chiefly Manchurian oil fields. The idea of military expansionism drove Japan into successive conflicts with China. In fact, there even was an attempted coup in Tokyo labeled the ‘Imperial Colors Incident’ which failed but was not made public knowledge. Ultimately, however, the swaggering domination of Japanese militarism failed to establish a dictatorship. The first nails into its coffin were driven by the government of Konoe Fumimaro, when, following wartime priorities his government, through the National Mobilization Law, brought all of Japan’s assets under its purview.   Also, in 1940, the formation of the Imperial Rule Assistance Association led to a single party political rule much discrediting the military.   On February 26, 1936, the rebel officers would hardly have been to foresee all this when they tried to take over Tokyo’s streets and were unleashing a murderous campaign. Until recent times, much romantic lore still surrounded military campaigns which allude to the glory of Japan’s military and Samurai like allegiance to the Emperor. The Emperor still remains a symbol of sovereignty in Japan and is much revered, being treated like a Head of State but is no longer the supreme authority over all Japan’s matters specially armed conflicts. Yukio Mishima spoke about the glory of Japan and the Emperor just before committing suicide inside a military barracks in 1970 and he was a well known literary figure in Japan   who wrote a novella on the February 1936 Incident–   proving that modern Japanese society still retains vestiges of its old fascination for matters martial. The members of the group that was behind the failed coup in 1936 are even being seen by some academics as. These were misguided bunch of young radicals who were only acting for Japan and God. They were not as ruthless as members of Hitler’s army were during the days of the Putsch.[4] February 26, 1936 – It’s Implications Under Koki Hirota’s rule m Japan and China engaged in the biggest war Asia right through 1945 from 1937 onward. The trend of militarism and military aspirations made stronger by the February Incident increased Japanese military aggression in Asian territory mainly to buttress its economic interests. The Second Sino – Japanese War was directly the result of Japanese policy toward China aimed at exploiting its natural reserves like oil.   Equally aggressive was the Chinese stance founded upon a new found realization of the unity of the Chinese people and their right to their own territory. A series of comparatively smaller sized conflicts led to a full scale conflagration. In 1937   The invasion of Manchuria – described above and particularly, the Marco Polo Bridge Incident of 1937 led to the war. Lugou Bridge in China is also known as the Marco Polo Bridge because Marco polo is supposed to have referred to this bridge while on his travels. It was controlled on its west end by the Japanese army and on the East by the Chinese Kuomintang Army. The bridge was a lifeline to Beijing to all areas under the Chinese army’s command – if this bridge fell – Beijing would too.[5] On June 1937, Japanese forces sent a message to the Kuomintang on the western end of the bridge about a missing soldier who might have gone over. They asked to be allowed to carry out a search on the opposite end. The Chinese refused the request acting under orders from their command chain. The Japanese countered this with a threat to open artillery fire if they were not allowed through. The prolonged aftermath saw led to the Japanese finally crushing the Kuomintang resistance and driving on toward Beijing and taking it over following which Japan had assumed control over the North China Plain, a strategically important region. The North China Plain has Beijing to its North East edge and Tianjin , an important industrial center on its North coast, What the Japanese actually did was to set up a ‘puppet’ state called Manchuoko , in Manchuria, installing the last Chinese Emperor   as a figurative head. This region actually prospered and its steel production exceeded Japan’s. Japan even gave up its membership of the League of Nations in 1933 after international protests over the incident but continued with its aggression in Chinese territory. Following the Marco Polo bridge incident, China and Japan engaged in full scale conflict from 1937 till 1945. On December, 1941, the Imperial Japanese Navy launched a full scale attack on the American Fleet docked at Pearl Harbor.   The compulsion of Japanese militarism post the February 1936 Incident and its acquisitive instincts in Asia made Japan very sensitive to the presence of others in the region. Its attack on Pearl Harbor was part of a preventive strategy aimed at halting what its military leaders saw as a build up of American interests in the region. Preventive conflicts have always risen because one or the other side believes that an offensive will result in preventing some projected or future incident. In Japan’s case it was its apprehension that American presence in the region was building up and would result in counter aggression for control over its territories in Asia and the Pacific. Pearl Harbor was the base for the American Naval Fleet and was attacked by almost 6 carriers of the Imperial Japanese Navy.   Waves of air attacks were also launched from the Navy vessels and over 300 aircraft flew over Pearl Harbor and destroyed the standing American fleet of ships. By this attack, America was forced to abandon its position of neutrality and enter into World War 2. For long America   was also building up its armed presence in Indo – China as we; as the East Indies as part of a series of counterbalancing moves aimed at keeping a check on Japanese movement in the region which was aggressively aimed at securing Asia and therefore its supreme position as its leader. Japan. Specifically, the objective of the Pearl Harbor attack was to secure Japanese advances into the East Indies islands and Malaya, both rich sources of oil and rubber. President Roosevelt was conscious of this when he ordered his fleet be strategically stationed in the Philippines region. According to Japanese assumption – a complete halt to American activity in the Pacific region – turned out to be completely wrong and it eventually had to surrender to American troops in 1945 bringing an end to World War II.[6] The Axis Pact In September 1940, Japan entered into a pact also known as the Tripartite Pact, with Fascist Italy and Adolph Hitler’s Nazi Germany which was the official declaration of the Axis Powers against the Allied powers. At the height of their power all 3 members commanded huge territories in Europe and Indo-China. Japan was under Emperor Hirohito and its main objective of signing the Pact was to protect its protect its military and economic bases in the pacific region. When Europe was engaged in its conflict with Germany, Japan insidiously moved into European colonies around the Pacific. America was the only nation to alert to Japanese intentions in this part of the world and countered Japan. Japanese believed that a war with the West was inevitable given its cultural differences but, given its unbridled militarism, Japan’s intentions were also materialistic. However, a certain section of the military leadership believed the conflict was to be aimed at hemming in Soviet Russia. But relations with the USA were also strained with American sponsored embargos on Japan m partly in response to its offensives against China. Japan saw US action against it as an act of western Imperialism and proceeded to band with Germany and Italy through the Tripartite Pact. Japan rushed headlong into its military inspired acquisitions also honed by the oil embargo imposed by the USA, which made it dependent on the resources of other countries. Many in Japan believed the conflict with the Americans could be resolved through negotiations but military leaders insisted on stepping up military offensive in Asia. When Germany was carrying out its Blitzkrieg in Europe m Japan was doing the same in Asia having control over large parts of Asia including Taiwan and Manchuria. But uncontrolled military offensives inevitably end and so did Japan’s end in the Battle of Midway when its fleet was destroyed by American ships.[7] The atom bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki preceded by the declaration of war by the Soviet Union broke Japan’s military might forcing it to surrender to America in 1945.   The international War Crimes Tribunal sentenced Japanese military leaders to death. Japan’s militarism blinded it to the might of America’s military might and made it underestimate Chinese resistance. Its territories were taken under American control.   The Japanese also miscalculated the output of the war machinery in America which h outrivaled that of Japan’s. Truly Japan’s military leaders had become complacent and could not realize that they were going through a death wish which was to almost obliterate Japan (the atom bombings) from the face of the Earth.[8] In conclusion it should be stated that one good outcome was Japan’s access to American industrial technology and Japan’s subsequent rise to the world’s major industrial leader. Today, largely because of this Japan is also a technology leader and makes business conquests in place of military ones through its electronics goods ad cars. Japan wages its own internal battles with rising economics problems and unemployment and job cutbacks but the collective Japanese psyche has grown wise to blind nationalism and tries to blend with the world. It now enjoys a stable democracy and single party rule with its armed forces under the command of the prime Minister, Japan has no need for war and a Pacifist constitution has m in fact been built into the Constitution which forces it to renounce aggression and armed conflict .this was bequeathed to it by America after the .defeat of 1945. Japan is well on its way to new millennium bidding goodbye to its aggression and the February Incident will always remain a blot on its history and its pacifist character. Bibliography: Goddard, J; Nation Management: Making the Most Out of It (Christchurch: Howard & Price. 2006) pp 433-5 Gervers, V; Japan at War (Melbourne: HBT Publishers Pvt. Ltd. 2000) pp 167 Knott, P; Analysis of US Wars (Dhaka: Dasgupta & Chatterjee 2005) pp 188-9 Kumar, H; Justice of Winners: Win Some, Lose None (Auckland: HBT & Brooks Ltd. 2005) pp 334 Manning, C S; Principals and Practices of War Industry: Trade of Death (Christchurch: National Book Trust. 2004) pp 279 Powell, M; Anatomy of Modern Crusades: Independence to WWII (Wellington: ABP Ltd 2001) pp 49-53 Prawer, H A; Kingdom of Japan (Dunedin: Allied Publishers 2004) pp 221-5 Tyerman, J; Invention of the Japanese Great War (Dunedin: Allied Publications 2001) pp 233-37 [1] Tyerman, J; Invention of the Japanese Great War (Dunedin: Allied Publications 2001) pp 233-37 [2] Prawer, H A; Kingdom of Japan (Dunedin: Allied Publishers 2004) pp 221-5 [3] Goddard, J; Nation Management: Making the Most Out of It (Christchurch: Howard & Price. 2006) pp 433-5 [4] Gervers, V; Japan at War (Melbourne: HBT Publishers Pvt. Ltd. 2000) pp 167 [5] Manning, C S; Principals and Practices of War Industry: Trade of Death (Christchurch: National Book Trust. 2004) pp 279 [6] Powell, M; Anatomy of Modern Crusades: Independence to WWII (Wellington: ABP Ltd 2001) pp 49-53 [7] Knott, P; Analysis of US Wars (Dhaka: Dasgupta & Chatterjee 2005) pp 188-9 [8] Kumar, H; Justice of Winners: Win Some, Lose None (Auckland: HBT & Brooks Ltd. 2005) pp 334