2 ministers visit Yasukuni shrine

“It is natural for me as a parliament member to extend my sincere condolences to the sprites of the war dead who had served their lives for this country,”

Name on single thing that is natural for someone responsible for safety to visit a place that is sure to endanger the state of the nation? If it was in a personal capacity, then fine. If he signed in under his job title, he has done nothing but create MORE danger.

It is an honourable and right thing to do, to honour those who gave their lives for their country. This is an internal matter, not a matter for outside examination or protest. China and other countries have abused their own citizens at times, yet the world does not constantly badger them or monitor their reverence for their history. In Japan honouring the spirits, and that is clear that is what the word means, the souls or the essence of the ancestors, they honour the spirits regularly and it is a deeply national characteristic of Shinto and other aspects of Japan. I am glad that Abe continues to support what he believes in and what many of his nation believe in. It would be very wrong to abandon honouring all those people who paid the ultimate price. I am glad this is strong and continues and i am glad that JT covers this.

@CrisGerSan

They didn't "give" their lives, their lives were stolen by a lunatic, right-wing government.

The current government seems intent on reviving the spirit of those times. This was a carefully-orchestrated visit, designed to send a clear message of pure hatred to Korea and China. Nothing "right" or "honourable" about it.

It is an honourable and right thing to do, to honour those who gave their lives for their country.

Well then, I'd like to see Germans go honour Hitler. I wonder how Japanese would feel if Americans dedicated a day each year to those who dropped the two biggies?

I personally don't care who goes to that pray at that shrine next to that war museum full of lies. Go ahead, also leave some oranges, write an ema, clap your hands and do all the religious clap-trap. But I'm not going to moan when China, Korea and other countries take their business and money elsewhere.

In the mindset of the average middle age to older Japanese man there is a complete inability to see anything from any point of view but their own. It might be pride, stubbornness, selfishness or lack of empathy but there is no flexibility or room for discussion at all. How can this person seriously conduct any kind of diplomatic mission with his neighbour countries? Visit the shrine by all means but not during your tenure in government. Some of us may start believing that the separation between religion and the state in Japan is merely lip service.

Name on single thing that is natural for someone responsible for safety to visit a place that is sure to endanger the state of the nation? If it was in a personal capacity, then fine. If he signed in under his job title, he has done nothing but create MORE danger.

All of that is on the nutjobs who think a visit to a shrine on the part of a politician is a reason to act out and "endanger the state of (Japan)". Giving in to the emotional, financial or violent blackmail of those folks too stupid to mind their own business would be the real crime.

If it was in a personal capacity, then fine.

Like it or not there is no "personal capacity" when you are a head of state. None, you are the figure-head of a nation and supposed to be it's leader not a puppet.

If Abe wants to visit Yasukuni in a "personal capacity" then quit being PM and quit being a part of the Diet. Otherwise it's TOTALLY a political move, nothing more nothing less.

There is one very simple solution to this problem, if politicians are sincere about paying their respects build a secular shrine and dedicate it to ALL people from ALL countries who died in the war, invite the heads of state from all the countries that participated and make it forever a peace memorial.

BUT no....that's too easy.

The nut jobs who freak out about this are nut jobs, but just calling them names ignores the fact that they do exist, and that these visits do cause problems. Anyone too stupid to see this deserves the repercussions that come from visits like this. It's too bad for the rest of the people that aren't part of the old boys club, that they have to deal with these repercussions as well. These visits are essentially selfish. The people who make them are the Japanese equivalent of the NRA, essentially a small group of people who are going to do whatever they want, regardless of the will of the people, and the danger they cause to them.

@lucabrasi: This was a carefully-orchestrated visit,to send a message of hatred to Korea and China. Nothing "right" or "honourable" about it.

Thats right! Many japanese mentality is alike Germany after World War1 with the 'Stab in the back' theory biggoted in their minds! That why I said the pacifistism in japan is a 'faking innocence'!

It doesn't matter people, sometimes things are just as they appear. This visit to the shrine is just that a visit to a verterans memorial.

The nut jobs are the people who knowing anger Asian victims of the Japanese holocaust by visiting Yaskuni. It is not just the war criminals enshrined there but the entire imperialism-justifying mentality of the place that makes it vile. Imagine a church in Germany that enshrined Nazi war criminals and justified the Hitler regime.

Pukey2Apr. 21, 2013 - 04:34PM JST I wonder how Japanese would feel if Americans dedicated a day each year to those who dropped the two biggies?

Umm... actually the U.S. in general the U.S. President specifically do visit graveyards such as Arlington, which house, amongst many thousands of honorable soldiers, some soldiers who committed war crimes in Japan.

You don't see Japan causing an immature fuss do you? No.

Yubaru: "Like it or not there is no "personal capacity" when you are a head of state."

There is a difference between signing in as "Prime Minister of Japan", wearing a suit, using the nation's dime to get there, and announcing it to the press, or simply going there and signing in with your name and honoring the dead. Either will attract attention, but I think you know the difference.

Frungy: "Umm... actually the U.S. in general the U.S. President specifically do visit graveyards such as Arlington, which house, amongst many thousands of honorable soldiers, some soldiers who committed war crimes in Japan. You don't see Japan causing an immature fuss do you? No."

With a separate grave for each soldier. Do you see them going specifically to the graves of those who supposedly committed war crimes and praying? In Yasukuni the class A war criminals are heaped along with the names of Joe Tanaka, which is one reason why a whole lot of people suggest removing the names of said war criminals so the politicians aren't praying for their 'sacrifice' as well. But hey, it's Japan, and a right-wing nutter shrine, so they wouldn't remove them even if the government 'suggested' (not told, of course) it.

Umm... actually the U.S. in general the U.S. President specifically do visit graveyards such as Arlington,

Wasn't there a photo here on JT a couple of months ago with J-politicians at an Arlington procession? Don't remember anyone complaining about it

They didn't "give" their lives, their lives were stolen by a lunatic, right-wing government. What is the litmus test? When folk go to war, such as the war in question, or any other war, including those that are going on now, are their giving their lives of having them taken? Are their governments sane and not-right-wing?

In the mindset of the average middle age to older Japanese man there is a complete inability to see anything from any point of view but their own. It might be pride, stubbornness, selfishness or lack of empathy but there is no flexibility or room for discussion at all.

So, by implication, the average non-Japanese man (or woman) from nations that fought Japan, can see things from the Japanese viewpoint as well as their own? When they do so would they be justified in thinking that the Japanese (but not their own nation) is of the loony right-wing fringe? If not then would they be as stubborn as the people to which you refer?

From my own point of view, I found the gradual realisation of the Japanese point of view (it took many years) to be quiet new, surprising, and about as valid (these days I am inclined to think more valid) as the one that I grew up with. But then perhaps I have become a loony right winger? Bark.

It is not right or honorable to continue to use the war dead as pawns in Japan's political games.

There is a group of Diet members who vow to visit Yasukuni Shrine each year. This includes PM Abe.

The controversy about the site comes about because of the way Imperialist Japan is portrayed there. The Yushukan museum showcases heroic war stories and kamikaze pilots, but chooses not to mention Japanese atrocities. It depicts Japan as an Asian liberator, provoked into war by European and U.S. officials.

This is seen as support for Japanese nationalism, and a denial of the events of World War II.

timtak: "So, by implication, the average non-Japanese man (or woman) from nations that fought Japan, can see things from the Japanese viewpoint as well as their own?"

You seem to think death, or facing death, as a living being, is different based on nationality. Maybe your thinking about hatred, which again is not limited to nationality. The "Japanese viewpoint" is what's up to debate on a matter of issues, given how quickly they change it. This guy visits a shrine, quite clearly saying he is doing so as is his job, to honor a shrine which has class A war criminals and says he is doing it for peace, and you see no wrong?

It really is no wonder why Japan has become the enemy of all countries it tries to pretend it did not massacre in the past.

The big question is if any Japan actually supported the government who, of course were not alive at the time and could not actually relate to the experiences. What does Abe know of the war aside from his granddad being incarcerated for war crimes? What does Aso know, and has probably since forgotten, about the war except he is what he is based on the labor of slaves, which he has admitted? What JP PM can you admit that has not had grandparents who committed war crimes?

This man visiting Yasukuni in an official position but claiming it's a necessity is a sad farce. As I said before, there's nothing 'natural' about it. It's 100% made up.

There is a difference between signing in as "Prime Minister of Japan", wearing a suit, using the nation's dime to get there, and announcing it to the press, or simply going there and signing in with your name and honoring the dead. Either will attract attention, but I think you know the difference.

First off there is no need to "sign in" when making a visit to any shrine or temple in Japan. Those that do are making a statement. And as a politician signing in or otherwise they will be seen as making an official visit to said shrine or temple whether or not that is the intent. There is no way around it. Anyone can make any and all the excuses they want but will not change the reality.

There is no requirement to "sign in", that is done to make their presence known, nothing more and nothing less, but when a member of government does it, it makes it a political action.

Anyone can justify it any way they want but it doesnt change the FACT that they went there and paid their respects.

"This guy visits a shrine, quite clearly saying he is doing so as is his job, to honor a shrine which has class A war criminals and says he is doing it for peace, and you see no wrong?"

I did not say that. But I think that there are various views on this issue. I can appreciate how many Chinese would see this as very wrong. Another view is that the Tokyo tribunal was not fair. The Dissent of the Indian Judge, Radhabinod Pal, is often used in support of this view. There are at least two popular films "Pride: The moment of Destiny" (1998 - the 50th anniversary of the tribunal), for which Masahiko Tsugawa won a Japanese academy award for his portrayal of Class A War Criminal, as not being a criminal, Toujou Hideki. Anther film from the point of view of the criminals is "I Want to become [or be reborn as] a Shellfish," based on the diary of class BC war Criminal, Katou Testutarou, initially convicted and sentenced to death but released in 1952, which was made into a TV series, and two films, the most recent (2008) starring Nakai Masahiro, the lead singer of SMAP.

Another view is that irrespective of the fairness of the tribunals, the class A war criminals therein enshrined have paid their debt to global society, and or it was their deeds, not their immortal soul which was evil (the latter view ascribed I think to Koizumi). Another view may be that the fact that while there are 14 class A criminals enshrined there, those visiting are paying respects to the millions that died serving their country.

A common view seems to be that terrible things happen in war, and people do terrible deeds, on all sides. The Japanese would not, however, think to prevent American politicians from paying their respects at Arlington, though it might be argued that there are those buried there that performed simlar deeds which might have been described as criminal, a view espoused by at least one American.

I think additionally that it is clear that there is an even greater emphasis place of paying ones respect to ancestors in Japan, and that respect is paid towards them even if they have done terrible things, to placate them, to lay them to rest, lest the terrible things be repeated. Further deeds are generally seen as a result of context to a larger extent and there is psychological research to demonstrate this (when comparing Chinese and American views of crimes for instance). There are also dissenting views of the nature of the context of the crimes committed during the Second World War, and the extent to which it was a war of Japanese aggression.

Its funny when I asked some Japanese americans about the Yasuki, over half of them did not know what it was, or did not care about it. I then asken them would they live in Japan..and most just shook thier head...

oops I meant Yasukuni shirne

also see:

http://people.duke.edu/~myhan/kaf0704.pdf

The visit by Japanese Government officials to the Yasukuni Shrine is a very controversial action, as demonstrated by the numerous comments made, and by the media attention dedicated, along with the frequent protests made by those neighboring countries, such as China, and South Korea. There appears to be no lessening of the emotional response with the passage of time. Whether this is because of the symbolism that this particular shrine holds for those who lived through the horrors of World War II, or whether because of the political nuances associated with a particular political party or philosophy, or whether because many have difficulty moving beyond the fact that this memorial site contains the remains of many of those in leadership positions during World War II whose decisions resulted in generations of suffering, this symbol of Japanese History remains a most paintful one, even for those of us who have never experienced directly the horrors inflicted by World War II. My hope is that one day, peace will prevail over the Earth, and forgiveness will be a reality. Thank you so very much.

Respectfully Submitted: Mark Kazuo Bradley Honolulu, Hawaii.

Buddha must be thinking of giving these guys some bad karma.

smithinjapan

Name on single thing that is natural for someone responsible for safety to visit a place that is sure to endanger the state of the nation? If it was in a personal capacity, then fine. If he signed in under his job title, he has done nothing but create MORE danger.

So, you say visiting a shrine will endanger a nation. Taste the hegemony of China. Visiting a shrine will not endanger a nation unless you have an aggressive and oppressive nation nearby. Which country do you support, a free country or an oppressive country?

Timtak: "I can appreciate how many Chinese would see this as very wrong. Another view is that the Tokyo tribunal was not fair."

You may well be correct, but in any case you're admitting it is all just politics, and not 'necessary' by any means, and certainly not out of the good will of this man's heart.

CH3CHO: "So, you say visiting a shrine will endanger a nation. Taste the hegemony of China. Visiting a shrine will not endanger a nation unless you have an aggressive and oppressive nation nearby. Which country do you support, a free country or an oppressive country?"

Sorry, I don't think you meant an 'oppressive nation' which you quickly followed by 'free nation', but rather nations that were oppressed by one that was given somewhat of a free pass for doing so. Yeah, sure, millions died because of the Emperor, who was spared as part of the surrender, and some of the class A war criminals enshrined at Yasukuni are still being respected -- a wait, that's what this is about!

So to answer your question, I do not support the oppressive nation Japan was at all, nor do I think the politicians should, but I do support free countries so long as they do not promote hate, like the politicians who visit Yasukuni (as well as the Chinese government, just in case you want to use the "not with us/against us" logic").

smithinjapan

I do support free countries so long as they do not promote hate, like the politicians who visit Yasukuni

So, you believe Chinese would hate Japan if Japanese politicians visit Yasukuni. Why visiting a shrine should promote hate in China? Do you think British politicians should get upset if French politicians visit Memorial of Napoleon?

CH3CHO: "So, you believe Chinese would hate Japan if Japanese politicians visit Yasukuni. Why visiting a shrine should promote hate in China?"

Ummm... because the shrine includes class A war criminals who carried out atrocities against the Chinese and Koreans? Next question.

" Do you think British politicians should get upset if French politicians visit Memorial of Napoleon?"

I can imagine a whole lot of people would be angry if Hitler's ashes or just his name were included in church sermons and prayers. That's a far more realistic equivalent, save that the Japanese Imperial Army killed FAR more across Asia than were killed under Hitler. And yet you suggest there is nothing at all wrong with them being enshrined there and prayed for.

Japanese Imperial Army killed FAR more across Asia than were killed under Hitler.

I doubt.

because the shrine includes class A war criminals who carried out atrocities against the Chinese and Koreans?

Korea was a Japanese ally throughout WW2. Korea does not have the same qualification as China.

I do not support Yasukuni, but I support freedom of religeon.

Little known fact is that the ACTUAL remains of the A-Class war criminals are in fact enshrined at Jyunkokunanabisho in Aichi Pref.

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%AE%89%E5%9B%BD%E4%B8%83%E5%A3%AB%E5%BB%9F

If and when the lawmakers do actually go there is where people can claim that their motive was to honor "the A-class war criminals".

CH3Cho: doubt it all you want; imperial Japan killed more than 10 million across Asia, including the Rape of Nanjing, the Bataan death march, unit 731, and heaps of other massacres a lot of Japanese would rather forget than acknowledge.

CH3CHO: "Korea was a Japanese ally throughout WW2"

"Ally", eh? Funny thing to call a place you colonize, rape, and pillage. So was France an 'ally' of Germany once they were taken over? I mean, since you brought up said nations earlier.

Ally", eh? Funny thing to call a place you colonize, rape, and pillage. So was France an 'ally' of Germany once they were taken over? I mean, since you brought up said nations earlier

Lame comparison. Population doubled as well as the life expectancy with the annual GDP average growth of 4%. Amount of applicants to IJA exceeded 60 times that of the quota in one year. Make no mistake. Koreans were willing participants to Japan's campaign at that time. More proof of how distorted Korean views are in regards to the annexation period.

smithinjapan

Japanese Imperial Army killed FAR more across Asia than were killed under Hitler.

doubt it all you want; imperial Japan killed more than 10 million across Asia

Wikipedia says Nazi killed 20 million russians.

So was France an 'ally' of Germany once they were taken over?

Vichy France is considered an Axis nation. So is Austria.

CH3CHO

I think your number are wrong. Total causalities for the USSR may have been as high as 24 million but that is not the same as numbers used for war crimes.

I don't think winning an argument about which country, Germany or Japan committed the most mass murders is where you really want to go. Just doing a cursory search, it looks like a tie between 3-10 million. Basically you can replace the Jewish holocaust done by the Nazi's with the Chinese holocaust committed by the Chinese.

A war memorial is one thing and Yasukuni probably would not be a problem if it wasn't for class B, C war criminals being officially enshrined as kami in 1969 or that fact that class A war criminals were not "snuck" in. At least Hirohito never visited after 1978.