《综合英语》课程教学资源Ⅲ_45606_课程资源_unit 11_TheJapaneseHistoryTextbookControversy

The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science http://ann.sagepub.com The Japanese History Textbook Controversy in East Asian Perspective laudi of Political and Social Science 2008;617:107 The ANNALS of the Amar The online version of this article can be found at: http://ann.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/617/1/107 Published by: SAGE http://www.sagepublications.com On behalf of: American Academy of Political and Social Science Additional services and intormation tor The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Sclence can be found at: Email Alerts:http://ann.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions:http://ann.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints:http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions:http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations http://ann.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/617/1/107

http://ann.sagepub.com Science Academy of Political and Social The ANNALS of the American DOI: 10.1177/0002716208314359 The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 2008; 617; 107 Claudia Schneider The Japanese History Textbook Controversy in East Asian Perspective http://ann.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/617/1/107 The online version of this article can be found at: Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com On behalf of: American Academy of Political and Social Science Science can be found at: Additional services and information for The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Email Alerts: http://ann.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://ann.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations http://ann.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/617/1/107 Downloaded from http://ann.sagepub.com at Beijing Language and Culture University on May 9, 2009

and politically relevant"history problems"currently g中 societies at I The Japanese of c History shes,and renewe Textbook reign r in the region. Controversy in Keywords: dcion testbok East Asian Perspective Ag的rean ricocheted with a vengeance.The country is criticized in most of the history debates taking place in the region for failing to come to terms CLAUDIA SCHNEIDER involvement in the system of forced wartin prostitution,repeated attempts to justify the Asia-Pacific War,rulings denying state compen- sation for forced labor,and positive evaluations of the Japanese colonial period2 have periodi- cally put serious strains on Japan's relations Cludia Schneider is PhD a the stitute Her the hcne World:History Textbooks in Contemporary China chapters to edited volumes,most recently Contested D0L10.1177000271620s314359 ANNALS.AAPSS.617.May 2008 107

ANNALS, AAPSS, 617, May 2008 107 Controversy over the inadequate presentation of Japan’s colonial and wartime past in the country’s his￾tory textbooks is one of the most protracted, notorious, and politically relevant “history problems” currently troubling East Asia. This article provides an overview of the controversy’s evolution since 1982, situating it in changing domestic and regional contexts, analyzing its particularities and interrelations with other controver￾sial issues, and evaluating its impacts on textbooks and societies at large. It shows how increased domestic and foreign scrutiny and contestation have triggered cycles of greater openness, conservative counterreactions, subsequent backlashes, and renewed debate in the field of textbooks and have overall contributed both to rein￾forcements and to reconsiderations of foreign relations in the region. Keywords: East Asia; history education; textbook controversies/debates A fter decades of relative respite, criticism of Japan’s colonial and wartime actions has ricocheted with a vengeance. The country is criticized in most of the history debates taking place in the region for failing to come to terms appropriately with its past. Issues like the visits of its prime ministers to the controversial Yasukuni Shrine, repeated denials of state￾involvement in the system of forced wartime prostitution,1 repeated attempts to justify the Asia-Pacific War, rulings denying state compen￾sation for forced labor, and positive evaluations of the Japanese colonial period 2 have periodi￾cally put serious strains on Japan’s relations The Japanese History Textbook Controversy in East Asian Perspective By CLAUDIA SCHNEIDER Claudia Schneider is a PhD candidate at the Institute of East Asian Studies at the University of Leipzig, Germany. Her thesis carries the working title “Reconfiguring National Stories in a Globalizing World: History Textbooks in Contemporary China, Taiwan, and Japan.” She has edited an issue of the jour￾nal International Textbook Research and contributed chapters to edited volumes, most recently Contested Views of a Common Past: Historical Revisionism in Contemporary East Asia (ed. Steffi Richter; Frankfurt, Germany: Campus). DOI: 10.1177/0002716208314359 Downloaded from http://ann.sagepub.com at Beijing Language and Culture University on May 9, 2009

10s THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY with its most important neighbors,the People's Republic of China and the Republic of Korea,and have reinforced Japan's inte rnational image as a non- apo cold war alliance made it possible to leave many war-related qu estion providing a lingering source of debat etween Japan and ne that see themselves as its victims.It was not until the 1980s,and particular rly the 1990s.that many of these issues became contested.This article provides an overview of one of the most prolonged and notorious issues:the so-called "text- book controversy,"the debates surrounding the treatment- -essentially the non- erage-of lapanese wartime behavior in the country's history textbo ersy is worth studying for various reasons.It is a prism of the power in the regior ety relations and prevailing nation well as the heightened significance of the past for the present the global"memory boom."It also holds a particular place among the region's numerous history debates:textbooks serve as one of the important arenas where the past,as well as a country's image of itself and others,is contested.The per- ceived characteristics of school textbooks make the controversy particularly com plex and difficult to solve.The controversy has had far-reachi g implications that go bey ond the the issue has been both a part of anc use for onfli atic and alar level ecognizing tha a short article cannot pro omprehensive,in-depth analysis,I seek to achieve three objectives:First,I show the issu es appearance and tic and international contexts of lapanese.Chinese.and south korean politics focusing on the media,governments,and citizen movements as influential actors. I then examine the textbook issue's connections with,and particularities vis-a-vis other controversial history issues and explore why textbooks ch heated debates.Fi ally I seek to that the controve on te the ha ng of the nected but divided hist tory in br roader terms.In East Asia.hi ory text books have been important in shaping mutual perceptions and images of the twen- tieth century-perhaps more outside than inside the classroom. Emergence and Evolution The textbook controversy has a long narrative in Japan's domestic politics of history.In 1955,conservative politicians called then-existing history textbooks tho then textbooks have (at is po ints)been the object o ween the Democratic Party [LDP]and its predecessors)and"progressive forces,composed mainly of left-leaning intellectuals,academics,and schoolteachers supported by

with its most important neighbors, the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of Korea,3 and have reinforced Japan’s international image as a non￾apologist.4 The cold war alliance made it possible to leave many war-related questions unresolved, providing a lingering source of debate between Japan and neighbors that see themselves as its victims. It was not until the 1980s, and particularly the 1990s, that many of these issues became contested. This article provides an overview of one of the most prolonged and notorious issues: the so-called “text￾book controversy,” the debates surrounding the treatment—essentially the non￾coverage—of Japanese wartime behavior in the country’s history textbooks. The controversy is worth studying for various reasons. It is a prism of the changes in East Asia over the past two decades, attesting to altered distribution of power in the region, changed state–society relations and prevailing national self-images, as well as the heightened significance of the past for the present— the global “memory boom.” It also holds a particular place among the region’s numerous history debates: textbooks serve as one of the important arenas where the past, as well as a country’s image of itself and others, is contested. The per￾ceived characteristics of school textbooks make the controversy particularly com￾plex and difficult to solve. The controversy has had far-reaching implications that go beyond the realms of textbook content—the issue has been both a part of and a cause for conflicts on both the diplomatic and popular levels. Recognizing that a short article cannot provide a comprehensive, in-depth analysis, I seek to achieve three objectives: First, I show the issue’s appearance and periodic recurrence to be the result of specific conditions and shifts in the domes￾tic and international contexts of Japanese, Chinese, and South Korean politics, focusing on the media, governments, and citizen movements as influential actors. I then examine the textbook issue’s connections with, and particularities vis-à-vis, other controversial history issues and explore why textbooks per se have generated such heated debates. Finally, I seek to provide insights into the ambiguous impacts that the controversies have had on textbook content and on the handling of the region’s connected but divided history in broader terms. In East Asia, history text￾books have been important in shaping mutual perceptions and images of the twen￾tieth century—perhaps more outside than inside the classroom. Emergence and Evolution The textbook controversy has a long narrative in Japan’s domestic politics of history. In 1955, conservative politicians called then-existing history textbooks “deplorable,” arguing that they reflected anti-Japanese and pro-Chinese leftist thought, and since then textbooks have (at various points) been the object of heated debates between the conservative establishment (the governing Liberal Democratic Party [LDP] and its predecessors) and “progressive” forces, composed mainly of left-leaning intellectuals, academics, and schoolteachers supported by 108 THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY Downloaded from http://ann.sagepub.com at Beijing Language and Culture University on May 9, 2009

THE JAPANESE HISTORY TEXTBOOK CONTROVERSY IN EAST ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 109 the formerly influential Japan Teachers'Union.While bureaucrats at the Ministry of Education (MOE)consider themselves neutral in these debates (Dierkes 2005),they have been arguably partial arbiters.Textbook accounts of Japan's his- tory have long been predominantly conservative.The MOE generally sides with .the long-asting trials that the progressive historian len inst the MOE and the Japanese govemment the cens orship he d as a textbook author The transt rmation of hi into objects of interational debate dates from the summer of 1982.It was triggered by news reports that the Japanese MOE had ordered history textbook authors to make various revisions, most notoriously changing the term "aggression/invasion"into"advancement"to describe Japanese military action in northeast China in the 1930s.This particular news item was a canard:apparently there had been no such request during that round of state textbook a ral disposition of this ort did exist.and it wa closely watched rep spapers but the t.until ted by Japa spilled acro co borde until t Japan's neig n to become vo not onl was textbook coverage of Japanese military action rather evasive,the dominant consciousness in Japan was not primarily that of having been an aggressor toward Asian countries,but rather of having been a victim-principally of American atomic)bombing This first affair displayed various characteristics that would mark those that followed.First,it w ped by the mass media per reports ofter nount of bo eflecting cross-a y newsp fide but unex text,con ducive to producing in debates. Secon was furthered by specific domestic conditions and was,or became,part of dis cussions on larger domestic issues.Earlier in Japan,a conservative"patriotic edu- cation"campaign had begun to gather momentum.Discussions in South Korea stimulated sensitive issues of democratization and decreased dependency on Japan,leading the authoritarian gov ras facing and felt oblige nd his ical front with ation" R0se199s.72.77. hird.the isst became both a source of a a potential challenge to government legitimacy.In Japan,where the issue had already taken root,the hapless way the goverment handled it left such major domestic actors as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA)and the MOE dissatisfied and contributed indirectly to Prime Minister Suzuki zenko's resignation.For the Chinese and South korea overnments it became l art of the"history card"(Yang 2002)-a tool available for shami ing.pres nd o gover e MOE's addition to the cri teria for te extbook authorizatio s the Japanes of what ame to lled the“Neighb Countries Clause."It stipulated that consideration should be given to neighbor ing countries'perspectives,somewhat facilitating the inclusion of more critical

the formerly influential Japan Teachers’ Union. While bureaucrats at the Ministry of Education (MOE)5 consider themselves neutral in these debates (Dierkes 2005), they have been arguably partial arbiters. Textbook accounts of Japan’s his￾tory have long been predominantly conservative. The MOE generally sides with the conservative camp, as evidenced in the long-lasting trials that the progressive historian Ienaga Saburô fought against the MOE and the Japanese government over the censorship he encountered as a textbook author.6 The transformation of history textbooks into objects of international debate dates from the summer of 1982. It was triggered by news reports that the Japanese MOE had ordered history textbook authors to make various revisions, most notoriously changing the term “aggression/invasion” into “advancement” to describe Japanese military action in northeast China in the 1930s. This particular news item was a canard: apparently there had been no such request during that round of state textbook approvals. A general disposition of this sort did exist, and it was closely watched and duly reported by Japanese newspapers; but the story had not, until 1982, spilled across the country’s borders. Japan’s neighbors, up until then refraining from complaint, now had reason to become vocal: not only was textbook coverage of Japanese military action rather evasive, the dominant consciousness in Japan was not primarily that of having been an aggressor toward Asian countries, but rather of having been a victim—principally of American (atomic) bombing. This first affair displayed various characteristics that would mark those that followed.7 First, it was triggered and shaped by the mass media, mainly newspa￾per reports often reflecting cross-national interaction.8 It also included a certain amount of bona fide but unexamined mutual copying of portions of text, con￾ducive to producing inaccuracies that further enlarged the debates. Second, it was furthered by specific domestic conditions and was, or became, part of dis￾cussions on larger domestic issues. Earlier in Japan, a conservative “patriotic edu￾cation” campaign had begun to gather momentum. Discussions in South Korea stimulated sensitive issues of democratization and decreased dependency on Japan, leading the authoritarian government of Chun Doo-hwan to initiate tighter press control. In China, Deng Xiaoping was facing power struggles with “old guards” in the army and felt obliged to mend his crumbling ideological front with a campaign for “socialist spiritual civilization” (Rose 1998, 72-77). Third, the issue became both a source of and a potential challenge to government legitimacy. In Japan, where the issue had already taken root, the hapless way the government handled it left such major domestic actors as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) and the MOE dissatisfied and contributed indirectly to Prime Minister Suzuki Zenkô’s resignation. For the Chinese and South Korean governments, it became part of the “history card” (Yang 2002)—a tool available for shaming, pres￾suring, and gaining leverage on the Japanese government. An immediate result of the affair was the Japanese MOE’s addition to the cri￾teria for textbook authorization of what came to be called the “Neighboring Countries Clause.” It stipulated that consideration should be given to neighbor￾ing countries’ perspectives, somewhat facilitating the inclusion of more critical THE JAPANESE HISTORY TEXTBOOK CONTROVERSY IN EAST ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 109 Downloaded from http://ann.sagepub.com at Beijing Language and Culture University on May 9, 2009

110 THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY passages into textbooks.The clause has been a source of discontent for conserv- ht-wing forces who biit i a sign that thepeo internal affairs. of the One suc conservative counterre action led to the second major textbool debate.In March 196 high school history textbook for seniors,created by the National Committee for the Protection of Japan and titled New History of Japan, received official approval.As in the first debate,reactions from Seoul were stronger than those from Beijing.which,for internal reasons,instructed its mass media once more to refrain from a campaign(Whiting 1989,57-64).While the debate again put the Japanese prime minister in a difficult position between diplomatic n one s d do oyalties and b rea insight in outlo tic apanes politica nent.When asked about the textbook problem. hen-Minister of Education Fujio Masayuki made insensitive comments about the Nanjing Massacre,the Yasukuni Shrine,and Japanese actions in Korea(Rose 1998,185).While he had to resign,like many of his peers who were guilty of sim- ilar slips of the tongue,the incident nonetheless confirmed the im pression of general aw solved issu the war increas ed a role of Japan vict zer penet usnes more deeply (Seraphim 2006,34).A short period of non-LDP rule also brought a more forth right official attitude.In 1993.Prime Minister Hosokawa acknowledged that Japan had conducted a war of aggression.And in 1995,a resolution in the Diet and a statement on August 15 by Hosokawa's successor,Prime Minister Murayama,contained formal expressions of apology and regret(Rose 2005,19. 60;for excerpts of the statement by Murayam 135-36).Although highly ements have not officially retreated. In the eves of and right-wingers.these tectonic shifts in Japanese politics of history were a cause for concern. nized to counter this trend."They both contributed to and profited from a turn toward a defensive and defiant nationalism among parts of the Japanese popula- tion.As the long period of strong economic growth ended in the early 1990s.the new defiant nationalism was fed by feelings of insecurity and frustration,in par- ticular vis-a-vis a rising China.The conser vatives'activities spanned a wide rang academic e broad rudely nationalist ma app ealing to mitted a“masochistic One such group,established in late 1996 and tellingly named Japanese Society for History Textbook Reform,or Tsukuru-kai,produced a junior high textbook titled New History Textbook.It presents a peculiar version of Japan's history,marked by a statist,at times even militaristic nationalism,buttressed by an insular and self-affirming perspective on Japan,an underlying West-centrism,and an often

passages into textbooks. The clause has been a source of discontent for conserv￾ative/right-wing forces who believe it is a sign that the Japanese are succumbing to diplomatic pressure on genuinely internal affairs. They lobby for the deletion of the clause (Rose 2005, 59). One such conservative counterreaction led to the second major textbook debate. In March 1986, a high school history textbook for seniors, created by the National Committee for the Protection of Japan and titled New History of Japan, received official approval. As in the first debate, reactions from Seoul were stronger than those from Beijing, which, for internal reasons, instructed its mass media once more to refrain from a campaign (Whiting 1989, 57-64). While the debate again put the Japanese prime minister in a difficult position between diplomatic imperatives on one side and domestic loyalties and bureaucratic pro￾cedures on the other, it also provided insight into the conservative outlook of the Japanese political establishment. When asked about the textbook problem, then–Minister of Education Fujio Masayuki made insensitive comments about the Nanjing Massacre, the Yasukuni Shrine, and Japanese actions in Korea (Rose 1998, 185). While he had to resign, like many of his peers who were guilty of sim￾ilar slips of the tongue, the incident nonetheless confirmed the impression of Japan as unrepentant toward its neighbors. The 1990s saw a number of significant changes. In Japan, general awareness of unresolved issues and Japanese responsibility in the war increased,9 and the role of Japan as victimizer penetrated public consciousness more deeply (Seraphim 2006, 34). A short period of non-LDP rule also brought a more forth￾right official attitude. In 1993, Prime Minister Hosokawa acknowledged that Japan had conducted a war of aggression. And in 1995, a resolution in the Diet and a statement on August 15 by Hosokawa’s successor, Prime Minister Murayama, contained formal expressions of apology and regret (Rose 2005, 19, 60; for excerpts of the statement by Murayama, see pp. 135-36). Although highly contested at the time, they have established a baseline from which Japanese gov￾ernments have not officially retreated. In the eyes of conservatives and right-wingers, these tectonic shifts in Japanese politics of history were a cause for concern. Various revisionist groups were orga￾nized to counter this trend.10 They both contributed to and profited from a turn toward a defensive and defiant nationalism among parts of the Japanese popula￾tion. As the long period of strong economic growth ended in the early 1990s, the new defiant nationalism was fed by feelings of insecurity and frustration, in par￾ticular vis-à-vis a rising China. The conservatives’ activities spanned a wide range, from more academic endeavors to crudely nationalist mangas appealing to the broader public; some directly targeted history education, charging that it trans￾mitted a “masochistic” view of Japanese history.11 One such group, established in late 1996 and tellingly named Japanese Society for History Textbook Reform, or Tsukuru-kai,12 produced a junior high textbook titled New History Textbook. It presents a peculiar version of Japan’s history, marked by a statist, at times even militaristic nationalism, buttressed by an insular and self-affirming perspective on Japan, an underlying West-centrism, and an often 110 THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY Downloaded from http://ann.sagepub.com at Beijing Language and Culture University on May 9, 2009

THE JAPANESE HISTORY TEXTBOOK CONTROVERSY IN EAST ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 111 condescending view of Japan's East Asian neighbors.3 In some instances,its authors had tried to whitewash or justify the country's colonial and wartime actions to such a degree that even the conservative textbook examiners at the Ministry of Education,Culture,Sports,Science and Technology (MEXT)had consideration for neighboring countries cademnddspring 2001 afer an unusually hih mum In the eyes of conservatives and right-wingers tectonic shifts in Japanese politics of history were a cause for concern. The third major international textbook controversy was a continuation of old troubles with some new parameters.The academic paradigm had shifted,and the tofcomstructivist/relhti arguments-that histori nation t sm r trea ng ev nts a a agai the prominence of debates on the issue,this time on the domestic front- hat is between the progressive Asahi and the conservative Sankei newspapers(Ducke 2002,12). The greatest change in the course of the textbook controversies,however,can bebthe appopriation ofhistorybyocetctors Inthe these groups experie ed an explosion of numbers in South Korea,considerable th in and an em nce in China.Among these,the Tsukuru-kai well connected to conservative political and edia es,s ld be seen as a conservative citizen group p rath than a schem inflicted by the state on its pacifist people (Oguma anc Ueno 2003).Progressive Japanese citizens'groups,using networks such as Children and Textbooks Japan Network 21,and in some cases linking up with Korean counterparts (Ducke 2002),lobbied local school boards against the selection of the New History Textbook and contributed to its extremely low rate of adoption (0.04 percent of all schools).15 and China,where such histo y-related issues as reconciliatio and co pcen managed ma topme through bottom-up c orts m by democratization in Korea and limited liberalization in China.The two gov. ernments,which had previously shifted toward a more cautious and/or concilia tory policy,were thus put on the defensive by the textbook controversy.South

condescending view of Japan’s East Asian neighbors.13 In some instances, its authors had tried to whitewash or justify the country’s colonial and wartime actions to such a degree that even the conservative textbook examiners at the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) had been compelled to demand more consideration for neighboring countries (Schneider 2008). It was approved in spring 2001 after an unusually high num￾ber of officially demanded revisions.14 In the eyes of conservatives and right-wingers . . . tectonic shifts in Japanese politics of history were a cause for concern. The third major international textbook controversy was a continuation of old troubles with some new parameters. The academic paradigm had shifted, and the Tsukuru-kai’s employment of constructivist/relativist arguments—that histories naturally differed from nation to nation—made criticism of treating events as fac￾tually “right or wrong” more difficult. A battle in the media again contributed to the prominence of debates on the issue, this time on the domestic front—that is, between the progressive Asahi and the conservative Sankei newspapers (Ducke 2002, 12). The greatest change in the course of the textbook controversies, however, can be attributed to the appropriation of history by “civil society” actors. In the 1990s, these groups experienced an explosion of numbers in South Korea, considerable growth in Japan, and an emergence in China. Among these, the Tsukuru-kai, while doubtlessly well connected to conservative political, economic, and media circles, should be seen as a conservative citizen group rather than a scheme inflicted by the state on its pacifist people (Oguma and Ueno 2003). Progressive Japanese citizens’ groups, using networks such as Children and Textbooks Japan Network 21, and in some cases linking up with Korean counterparts (Ducke 2002), lobbied local school boards against the selection of the New History Textbook and contributed to its extremely low rate of adoption (0.04 percent of all schools).15 Korea and China, where such history-related issues as reconciliation and com￾pensation had long been managed in a top-down way by governments, developed their own agendas through bottom-up civil society–based efforts made possible by democratization in Korea and limited liberalization in China. The two gov￾ernments, which had previously shifted toward a more cautious and/or concilia￾tory policy, were thus put on the defensive by the textbook controversy. South THE JAPANESE HISTORY TEXTBOOK CONTROVERSY IN EAST ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 111 Downloaded from http://ann.sagepub.com at Beijing Language and Culture University on May 9, 2009

112 THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY Korean president Roh Moo-hyun launched diplomatic protests only after pressure from the included the political arena and the public(Soh 2005).The official Chinese reactions oric and some c were taken witl 8-te The controversies were fuelled by popular nationa sms that have been rising vis-a-vis these and other Japanese"attacks."They could now be articulated more openly.Soh(2005,149)has identified an"intensely ethnonationalistic complex of Korean self-image as both victim and victor vis-a-vis Japan"in history-related protests.In Sino-Japanese relations,reactive nationalisms- perceived by the other side as assertiv have been mutually stimulating each other(Chan and Bridges206).For ing of ts hist ory may be seen an grounded inanticoon-merialis (Soh2005 Consequently,when popular outrage is riding high,the respective governments have to be cautious to not appear weak at least rhetorically This even concerns authoritarian China,where the state no longer holds a com plete definitional monopoly on many historical narratives.Apart from relying on anti-Japanese sentiments for itswn it ig ppre will”in histo rela ed affairs, and populist"histo activism nd poten the inner-Chinese discourse,the Chinese Communist Party's forme vIctor narra tive"focusing on heroic anti-Japanese resistance has been superseded by a"victim narrative"emphasizing Chinese suffering and Japanese atrocities(Gries 2004) Thus,when news of Japanese goverment approval for the revised version of the New History Textbook was transmitted in the spring of 2005,it prompted partially oular anti-Japanese demonstrations in a number of Chin cities ks dic ese dis ontent other 1 gain a permaner tseat on the United Nations Secrity Council.The recento troversies also illustrate how new tools of communication have come to play ar important role for all sides involved.Both protesters and Chinese authorities resorted to text messaging to organize their activities-and subsequently to sub due them.Online petitions,for instance against the New History Textbook,have become a wide ad pher non:there 1 and Chinese“c paral ites of Japanese institutio Fiola 2005) In the mear some already see the Tsukuru-kai as having arrived at a dead end (Saaler 2006).If the Net History Tertbook continues to exist,it will most likely like its 1986"predecessor in spirit"-remain a marginal presence on the textbook market.But given the currently rather conservative atmosphere in Japan,it could soon be replaced by a similar undertaking even if it disappeared

Korean president Roh Moo-hyun launched diplomatic protests only after pressure from the political arena and the public (Soh 2005). The official Chinese reactions included the usual accusatory rhetoric and some cancelled visits, but no measures were taken with potentially negative long-term effects on other, particularly eco￾nomic, aspects of its bilateral relationship with Japan (Rose 2005, 63-65). The controversies were fuelled by popular nationalisms that have been rising vis-à-vis these and other Japanese “attacks.” They could now be articulated more openly. Soh (2005, 149) has identified an “intensely ethnonationalistic complex of Korean self-image as both victim and victor vis-à-vis Japan” in history-related protests. In Sino-Japanese relations, reactive nationalisms—perceived by the other side as assertive—have been mutually stimulating each other (Chan and Bridges 2006). For citizens of both countries, activities against Japan’s perceived whitewashing of its history may be seen and justified as a “patriotic duty,” grounded in anticolonial/anti-imperialist traditions (Soh 2005; Klein 2005). Consequently, when popular outrage is riding high, the respective governments have to be cautious to not appear weak—at least rhetorically. This even concerns authoritarian China, where the state no longer holds a com￾plete definitional monopoly on many historical narratives. Apart from relying on anti-Japanese sentiments for its own legitimization, it cannot entirely ignore—or suppress—“popular will” in history-related affairs, and populist “history activism” has turned into a force that can mobilize popular resentments and potentially exac￾erbate bilateral relations (Reilly 2006). Moreover, in an untimely coincidence, in the inner-Chinese discourse, the Chinese Communist Party’s former “victor narra￾tive” focusing on heroic anti-Japanese resistance has been superseded by a “victim narrative” emphasizing Chinese suffering and Japanese atrocities (Gries 2004). Thus, when news of Japanese government approval for the revised version of the New History Textbook was transmitted in the spring of 2005, it prompted partially violent popular anti-Japanese demonstrations in a number of Chinese cities— which ended up considerably embarrassing Beijing’s pre-Olympics posturing. Again, the furor over textbooks did not stand in isolation—Chinese discontent had been building up on a number of other issues, such as Japanese efforts to gain a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council. The recent con￾troversies also illustrate how new tools of communication have come to play an important role for all sides involved. Both protesters and Chinese authorities resorted to text messaging to organize their activities—and subsequently to sub￾due them. Online petitions, for instance against the New History Textbook, have become a widespread phenomenon; there have been blogs voicing anti-Japanese outrage (and hate) and reports of Korean and Chinese “cyber attacks” paralyzing Web sites of Japanese institutions (cf., for instance, Fiola 2005). In the meantime, some already see the Tsukuru-kai as having arrived at a dead end (Saaler 2006). If the New History Textbook continues to exist, it will most likely—like its 1986 “predecessor in spirit”—remain a marginal presence on the textbook market. But given the currently rather conservative atmosphere in Japan, it could soon be replaced by a similar undertaking even if it disappeared completely.16 112 THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY Downloaded from http://ann.sagepub.com at Beijing Language and Culture University on May 9, 2009

THE JAPANESE HISTORY TEXTBOOK CONTROVERSY IN EAST ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 113 Particularities negotiations between variou soci edge.The state remains involved through various restraining and control mech anisms."even in countries with a pluralistic textbook system.History and civics textbooks,after all,are also charged with transmitting collective self-concepts and values. perties,the perceptions (and subsec ent blic contribute largely to the rof textbooks to bec e objects of c e they ar official cha This problem is perhaps even more pronounced becaus and South Korea have until recently kept to a system of state-issued textbooks. This has partially led to misunderstandings regarding the workings of the Japanese textbook approval system and the possibilities for,and limits on,the influence of the lapanese government in the process.From a strictly legal point of view,in the beginning the government was much less powerful visa-vis the MOE/MEXT than its c rts in countri ed it to be ond,and closely mbolsofaart point, s of the 之 s are ofter ked as power of a country tively in comparison with the often-cited positive counterexample,Germany,and the latter's postwar cooperation with its major adversaries in World War II- France and Poland.Third,their very broad and peculiar target audience children,understood as the impressionable,and thus fragile and volatile,future of the nation causes them to be considered very influential in a double sense both for the individual child's historical con the lat e highl epoliticiansh ve ten made ationa political activity;there are several parliament some LDP politicians are members of the Progressive associations like Children and Textbooks Japan Network 21 have also been organized and dedicated to the other side of these issues.The attitudes of ups toward history education mainly reflect their divergent views on the rndlsm and coondinon n's role in Asia Consepativ ect history textbooks to self-im nationa and dedi id to be undermined by external pressure and domestic"histo ical masochis ctical lapanese self image.nationalt nificant East Asian others-a stance the dominant conservative agenda of Japan's politics of history appears to block. The international debates have mainly focused on the exact phrasing and ics that me的 rtty on May 9.2006

Particularities Textbooks are inherently political. They represent temporary outcomes of negotiations between various social actors over what counts as legitimate knowl￾edge. The state remains involved through various restraining and control mech￾anisms,17 even in countries with a pluralistic textbook system. History and civics textbooks, after all, are also charged with transmitting collective self-concepts and values. Apart from these structural properties, the perceptions (and subsequent actions) of the involved actors and of the general public contribute largely to the tendency of textbooks to become objects of contention. First, because they are authorized or approved by the state, Japanese textbooks are imbued with a quasi￾official character. This problem is perhaps even more pronounced because China and South Korea have until recently kept to a system of state-issued textbooks.18 This has partially led to misunderstandings regarding the workings of the Japanese textbook approval system and the possibilities for, and limits on, the influence of the Japanese government in the process. From a strictly legal point of view, in the beginning the government was much less powerful vis-à-vis the MOE/MEXT than its counterparts in neighboring countries considered it to be. Second, and closely related to the first point, in many parts of the world, history textbooks are often invoked as powerful symbols of a country’s sincerity to deal with a negative past. In this respect, the Japanese case tends to be viewed nega￾tively in comparison with the often-cited positive counterexample, Germany, and the latter’s postwar cooperation with its major adversaries in World War II— France and Poland. Third, their very broad and peculiar target audience—young children, understood as the impressionable, and thus fragile and volatile, future of the nation—causes them to be considered very influential in a double sense— both for the individual child’s historical consciousness and for the nation’s future. In the Japanese case, the latter concerns have also become highly institution￾alized. Conservative politicians have often made educational issues a field of their political activity; there are several parliamentary study groups on the subject, and some LDP politicians are members of the Tsukuru-kai (Saaler 2005, 81). Progressive associations like Children and Textbooks Japan Network 21 have also been organized and dedicated to the other side of these issues. The attitudes of these groups toward history education mainly reflect their divergent views on the war and colonialism and, correspondingly, on Japan’s role in Asia. Conservative groups expect history textbooks to create a positive Japanese self-image, national pride, and dedication—elements said to be undermined by external pressures and domestic “historical masochism.” Progressive groups aim to promote a self￾critical Japanese self-image, national introspection, and responsibility toward sig￾nificant East Asian “others”—a stance the dominant conservative agenda of Japan’s politics of history appears to block. The international debates have mainly focused on the exact phrasing and specifics—terms, numbers, actors—of particular events. Two of the topics that currently matter most to the Chinese and Korean sides—but are actually the THE JAPANESE HISTORY TEXTBOOK CONTROVERSY IN EAST ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 113 Downloaded from http://ann.sagepub.com at Beijing Language and Culture University on May 9, 2009

g THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY most difficult to implement in the Japanese context-are,respectively,the texthook-related contro ersies issue e on two le First did th is particular event"happen" question main of ory and historiography.Seconc it be included in textbooks?This is a moral/educational question,pertaining to the politics of history education. The problem of the Nanjing Massacre exemplifies the former category.There 晋iwaa6e ese dehate "schools.Thei understanding div rges asualties, er of the uk ssing it(Askew uru-kai,arguec that the high nu er of victims included in mid-1990s textbooks was greatly exaggerated(Yoshida 2000,98).The so-called"comfort women"issue,though also generally contested,raises the moral/educational question.Conservative voices for excluding the issue do not necessarily argue for doing so on factual ounds,since the issue raises uncomfort. questions about g relati uality that jur nior high students are young te o handle.Mo as irrele ational history tha edu (Sak moto2003.152f The issue is further complicated by the fact that,globalization notwithstand. ing,regular textbooks have so far been largely restricted to national territory,for institutional as well as political reasons.2 For both the Chinese and Korean sides the textbook controversy is mainly one of the numerous fields where self affirmation in the face of general Japanese denial of important elements of their self-ima吗 as"victims"is de emed cessa v.While this i accept mizer w from it,th and oth r conse groups see it as an attack on the"protected zone"that history education should be.In practice,Chinese and Korean demands to present the historical truth (if such a thing were assumed to exist)may not be effective against the counter- arguments of Japanese conservatives,since the latter might frame demands for changes as unjustified foreign arguments. cially the t histor advanced ian regime like that of the People's Republic of China,itself noto r engaging in the manipulation of history Furthermore,one needs to bear in mind that the promotion of patriotism remains a central goal of history education not only in the eyes of Japanese conservatives and revisionists but also in Korean and Chinese curricula.There, the central objectives of fostering national self-respect and unity are especially

most difficult to implement in the Japanese context—are, respectively, the Nanjing Massacre and comfort women.19 The textbook-related controversies about these issues are fueled by somewhat different considerations. When history textbooks are used as battlegrounds, discussions can take place on two levels: First, did this particular event “happen”?20 This is an academic question, in the domain of history and historiography. Second, assuming that it happened, should it be included in textbooks? This is a moral/educational question, pertaining to the politics of history education. The problem of the Nanjing Massacre exemplifies the former category. There are three major schools of thought reflected in the heated Japanese debate: (1) the “Illusion,” (2) “Middle-of-the-Road,” and (3) “Great Massacre” schools. Their understanding diverges strongly on the event’s spatial and temporal extent, the number of casualties, and the appropriate terminology for discussing it (Askew 2004).21 In that vein, Fujioka Nobukatsu, cofounder of the Tsukuru-kai, argued that the high number of victims included in mid-1990s textbooks was greatly exaggerated (Yoshida 2000, 98). The so-called “comfort women” issue, though also generally contested,22 raises the moral/educational question. Conservative voices for excluding the issue do not necessarily argue for doing so on factual grounds but, rather, on moral(izing) grounds, since the issue raises uncomfort￾able questions about gender relations and sexuality that junior high students are supposedly too young to handle. Moreover, they are dismissed as irrelevant to the orthodox narrative of national history that school education is supposed to teach (Sakamoto 2003, 152ff.). The issue is further complicated by the fact that, globalization notwithstand￾ing, regular textbooks have so far been largely restricted to national territory, for institutional as well as political reasons.23 For both the Chinese and Korean sides, the textbook controversy is mainly one of the numerous fields where self￾affirmation in the face of general Japanese denial of important elements of their self-image as “victims” is deemed necessary. While this is completely in tune with progressive Japanese groups, who accept Japan’s image of “victimizer” with all the moral obligations that follow from it, the Tsukuru-kai and other conservative groups see it as an attack on the “protected zone” that history education should be. In practice, Chinese and Korean demands to present the historical truth (if such a thing were assumed to exist) may not be effective against the counter￾arguments of Japanese conservatives, since the latter might frame demands for changes as unjustified foreign pressure and interference into Japan’s internal affairs. An indifferent Japanese public might accept such counterarguments.24 This is especially the case when demands to teach “correct history” are advanced by an authoritarian regime like that of the People’s Republic of China, itself noto￾rious for engaging in the manipulation of history. Furthermore, one needs to bear in mind that the promotion of patriotism remains a central goal of history education not only in the eyes of Japanese conservatives and revisionists but also in Korean and Chinese curricula. There, the central objectives of fostering national self-respect and unity are especially 114 THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY Downloaded from http://ann.sagepub.com at Beijing Language and Culture University on May 9, 2009

THE JAPANESE HISTORY TEXTBOOK CONTROVERSY IN EAST ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 115 pertinent with regard to descriptions of the Japanese colonial period(Korea)and the Anti-Japanese War of Resistance(China).Moral lessons on the importance of "righteous resistance"and upholding a positive image of the nation appear more important than historical lessons on the actual complexities of such periods (Schneider 2008).>Thus.unless efforts become evident from all sides involved p).histor ytextbooks will remai rapped in ege of structurally sir ilar but content-wise mutually excluding natior alisms for domestic consumption. Chinese and Korean demands to present the historical truth (if such a thing were assumed to exist)may not be effective against the counterarguments of Japanese conservatives, since the latter might frame demands for changes as unjustified foreign pressure and interference into Japan's internal affairs. Repercussions Textbooks are a conservative medium.Often there are gaps between academic trends and the content of textbooks,and textbooks have been noted for their ten r relatio More er th ic,so cha es and contin red o fostered by politicalelscooderionndiofctor. I suggest in this section that the controversies have not only been relevant for text- books but also-perhaps even more important-have had broader implications for the handling of the entangled,but not shared,past in society at large. In Japan,the politicized controversies have indeed stimulated changes in text- book content.On particularly contested and scrutinized issues.textbooks have men a unidirectional trend.The outbreak s fostered the debates and while the mai ef uru-ka backlash was a general shift back to more subdued and cautious positions

pertinent with regard to descriptions of the Japanese colonial period (Korea) and the Anti-Japanese War of Resistance (China). Moral lessons on the importance of “righteous resistance” and upholding a positive image of the nation appear more important than historical lessons on the actual complexities of such periods (Schneider 2008).25 Thus, unless efforts become evident from all sides involved (with Japan having to take the first step), history textbooks will remain trapped in a mutual siege of structurally similar but content-wise mutually excluding nation￾alisms for domestic consumption.26 Chinese and Korean demands to present the historical truth (if such a thing were assumed to exist) may not be effective against the counterarguments of Japanese conservatives, since the latter might frame demands for changes as unjustified foreign pressure and interference into Japan’s internal affairs. Repercussions Textbooks are a conservative medium. Often there are gaps between academic trends and the content of textbooks, and textbooks have been noted for their ten￾dency to legitimize the existing (political) order and state of power relations. Moreover, they present highly controlled and institutionalized knowledge in a man￾ner made didactic, so changes and continuities in their content may be hindered or fostered by political as well as educational considerations and institutional factors. I suggest in this section that the controversies have not only been relevant for text￾books but also—perhaps even more important—have had broader implications for the handling of the entangled, but not shared, past in society at large. In Japan, the politicized controversies have indeed stimulated changes in text￾book content.27 On particularly contested and scrutinized issues, textbooks have displayed pendular movement, rather than a unidirectional trend. The outbreak of textbook-related controversies fostered openings in the debates and practices, culminating in the mid-1990s, while the main effect of the ensuing Tsukuru-kai backlash was a general shift back to more subdued and cautious positions. THE JAPANESE HISTORY TEXTBOOK CONTROVERSY IN EAST ASIAN PERSPECTIVE 115 Downloaded from http://ann.sagepub.com at Beijing Language and Culture University on May 9, 2009