POST-WAR JAPAN

Timaru Herald, Volume CLV, Issue 22789, 13 January 1944, Page 2

POST-WAR JAPAN

Removal Of Monarchy

Opinion Of Chinese

“Post-war Japan must be a republic. The victory must be determined to do away completely with the monarchy if world peace is to be lasting and if the Japanese people are to be given an opportunity for reform, progress, and happiness.” This sums up the opinion of many liberal Chinese in different walks of life whom I interviewed on the subject of Allied post-war policy toward a defeated Japan, says Mr Guenther Stein, special correspondent of the “Christian Science Monitor,” in a dispatch from Chungking in November. They warned against the temptation of letting the institution of monarchy survive in Japan in an attempt to use it for the desired political changes in the country. This temptation easily may arise from two facts: Not Power in Itself First the Imperial Throne of Japan has never been a power in itself. But it always was possible for any political group that succeeded in establishing itself as the real power behind the throne to make the Emperor its instrument and to have him “sanctify” the domestic and political policies of that particular group which formed the Government. Second, other influences in the immediate circles around the Emperorlike permanent court officials, elder statesmen, and representatives of big business, with which the huge private fortune of the Imperial family is closely connected—have nearly always tried to moderate the most extreme policies of ultra ambitious adventurers in the army, navy, and bureaucracy. In consequence, there are many persons who believe that it might be possible, after victory over Japan, to use the institution of the Imperial Throne to give protection and prestige to liberal democratic forces, to win support for them from the conservatively inclined court circles, to change the role of the Emperor to that of a constitutional monarch, and thus to prevent not only the recurrence of Japanese aggression, but also an extreme revolutionary reaction on the part of the masses. To the Chinese with whom I talked, all of whom are well acquainted with Japan and Japanese history, any such argument appears fallacious and extremely dangerous. Their first point is that it pays more attention to the fundamental feature of the monarchic institution of Japan—that is, to the divine descent of the Japanese Emperor, which is firmly rooted in the country. There is only one way, they maintain, to destroy that myth with its implicit claim to the superiority of Japan over all other nations—to demonstrate to the Japanese people, by destroying the monarchy together with its military might, that the Imperial House is neither inviolable nor eternal. There are already many in Japan who do not believe in this legend, although police terror prevents most of them from confessing to their better knowledge. And there are even more in whose thoughts vague and halfadmitted doubts have been growing all the time, who will immediately be convinced they have been fooled if the throne is replaced by a modern republic, and who will provide a firm foundation for a new and progressive regime. Legend Will be Fortified On the other hand, if the Imperial dynasty is permitted to continue after Japan’s defeat, its legend will only be fortified, no matter what constitutional qualifications may restrict the status of the Emperor. In that case, it would be said that the Allies, who proved strong enough to destroy Japan’s navy, army, and air force, and who were audacious enough to tread on Japan’s “sacred soil,” had neither the power nor the courage to interfere with the "divine” institution of Monarchy. This thesis, plausible to average Japanese, would soon become a most effective weapon against the, modernisation of Japanese thought and life and a driving force behind secret preparations for another war. Second, the relatively weak demo- : cratic and progressive forces which would try to entrench themselves behind the remaining facades of the throne would very soon be terrerised, or at least be used as mere camouflage, and eventually be replaced by the old militaristic and imperialistic cliques. These cliques, like imperial myths, can be effectively suppressed only by the root and branch destruction of the dynasty itself. Third, the circles close to the throne, though they often have exerted , a moderating influence against the most foolhardy militarists, are by no means in favour of real constitutionalism. As their attitude during the days of a strong trend towards democracy after World War 1 has shown, their ambition would be to aid the reactionary and militaristic elements against democratic tendencies that would threaten their privileges. Nor would the hope of using the throne to reform the country be any more justified if the Allies merely tried to deprive the Imperial House of its claims to “divine descent”—that is, if they attempted to bring it down to earth and humanise it. Mere Presence Threat As long as the Japanese Emperor is in his palace in Tokio, or in fact as long as a single member of the Imperial Family is on Japanese soil, all the disappointment at defeat and much of the popular dissatisfaction at Japan’s inevitable economic difficulties during the first post-war years would once more crystallise into a strong movement for the restoration of the legendary position of the Emneror. This is precisely what happened in the days after Japan had been opened to contact with the outside world by the American “black ships” in 1853. The idea of full restoration of the Emperor’s old position would once more be identical with aggression against other nations. It may be distasteful to many in the Allied camp to interfere with internal affairs of a defeated enemy which are more or less of a religious character, especially since immediately before and after its military defeat, Japan’s domestic anti-imperial forces may not have sufficiently recovered from ageold suppression to participate decisively in the dethronement of the Imperial dynasty. Such qualms, however, must be overcome and the matter must be faced squarely and uncompromisingly, not only for the sake of the nations which have suffered so greatly from Japanese aggression, but also for the sake of the Jananese people themselves. We must be clear in our thought, said one of the Chinese to whom I talked, that the only potentially reliable co-operators for world peace we shall ever find in Japan must necessarily be in that still relatively small group of progressives already opposed to the continuation of the Imperial dynasty, just as such persons alone can achieve the task of re-educating and reforming the bulk of the Japanese nation for the role of active participation in world progress.