Examining the Japanese History Textbook Controversies
Kathleen Woods Masalski
November 2001
Textbooks with individuality are multi-dimensional; they are
pluralistic; a pluralism must permeate them that allows teachers in
the classroom to select what is most suitable for their own
use.
Ienaga Saburo, Court testimony, 1969.(1)
The Importance of History Textbooks in Japan and the United
States
The controversy surrounding the adoption of middle school history
textbooks in Japan raises the question, Why are textbookshistory
textbooks in particularimportant enough to fight over? Historians
Laura Hein and Mark Selden tell us that "history and civics
textbooks in most societies present an 'official' story
highlighting narratives that shape contemporary patriotism";
"people fight over textbook content because education is so
obviously about the future, reaches so deeply into society, and is
directed by the state. Because textbooks are carried into
neighborhood schools and homes, and because, directly or
indirectly, they carry the imprimatur of the state, they have
enormous authority."(2) Richard H. Minear, Japanese historian,
answers the question this way: "As a practicing historian, I
encounter at every turn the power textbooks exercise over my
students' minds. In...Japan it is the government that influences
the content of textbooks. In the United States today the problem is
not the government but textbook publishers. As far as the effects
on students go, the difference is not great. . . . our students
believe absolutely what they read in textbooks."(3)
More than one American scholar has suggested that Japan is a mirror
for Americans. If so, then we Americans can learn from the
controversy over textbooks in Japan. At the very least, this
controversy in Japan should raise a related question for Americans:
Why aren't there more debates in this country over textbook
content? Why don't American teachersand their studentslook more
deeply into the authorization process that American publishing
companies and state and local adoption agencies follow here at
home?
Background on the Japan Textbook Controversies
The present system of screening and approving textbooks dates to
pre-war Japan: "Struggles over the national narrative existed . . .
before and even during World War II, when official narratives such
as the Imperial Rescript on Education and other 'fine militarist
stories' played a crucial role in Japanese identity formation."(4)
In the early months of the postwar period, Japanese bureaucrats
changed existing textbook policy by blotting out passages that
might offend the American occupiers. By 1946 the Supreme Command
for the Allied Powers (SCAP), in an effort to ensure that textbooks
did not encourage emperor-worship and militarism, imposed on the
nation a system of government "certification" of schoolbooks. That
system continued after the Americans left.
In Japan, each public and private school selects one history
textbook from a list of seven or eight authorized by the Ministry
of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
(Monbukagakusho) every four years. This screening process then
lasts one full year. In the United States (where adoption takes
place on no set schedule at the state or local level), for all the
talk of alternative means of instruction, the conventional textbook
remains the core and often the sole teaching tool in most middle
and high school classrooms. Japanese textbook companies submit
manuscripts to the Ministry of Education, whose appointed
committees examine them according to prescribed criteria. The
Ministry offers the textbook companies opportunities to revise
their drafts, and copies of the Ministry-approved manuscripts are
then available for consideration by the local districts.
In 1965 Ienaga Saburo, a prominent historian, filed the first of
his three lawsuits against the Ministry of Education, charging that
the process of textbook approval was unconstitutional and illegal.
The Ministry had rejected Ienaga's history textbook because it
contained "too many illustrations of the 'dark side' of the war,
such as an air raid, a city left in ruins by the atomic bomb, and
disabled veterans."(5) His second suit two years later also
involved the issue of constitutionality and, in addition, focused
on points related to Ienaga's characterization of Japan's
foundation myths and a description of the 1941 Japan-USSR
neutrality pact.
In 1982 the screening process in Japan became a diplomatic issue
when the media of Japan and neighboring countries gave extensive
coverage to changes required by the Ministry of Education. The
Ministry had ordered Ienaga to remove critical language in his
history textbook, insisting that he write of the Japanese army's
"advance into" China instead of its "aggression in" China, of
"uprising among the Korean people" instead of the "March First
Independence Movement." Pressure applied by China and Korea
succeeded in getting the Ministry to back down and resulted in the
Ministry's adding a new authorization criterion: that textbooks
must show understanding and international harmony in their
treatment of modern and contemporary historical events involving
neighboring Asian countries.(6)
Ienaga's lawsuits lasted thirty years. Although in 1997in response
to Ienaga's third lawsuit instituted in 1986the Supreme Court of
Japan unanimously upheld the Ministry's right to continue screening
textbooks, Ienaga and his fellow critics enjoyed a partial victory.
The court requested "that the Government refrain from intervening
in educational content as much as possible."(7)
By the time of the final ruling, however, Ienaga and the tens of
thousands of Japanese who joined him in his battle against the
authorization process had been victorious in fact if not in law.
The most widely used Japanese textbooks in the mid- and late-1990s
contained references to the Nanjing Massacre, anti-Japanese
resistance movements in Korea, forced suicide in Okinawa, comfort
women, and Unit 731 (responsible for conducting medical experiments
on prisoners of war)all issues raised in Ienaga's suits.
The Current Situation
A conservative (many would argue ultra-conservative) movement
toward reform in the Japanese history curriculum was initiated in
the early 1990s by Fujioka Nobukatsu and his Liberal View of
History Study Group. Fujioka, a professor of education at Tokyo
University, set out to "correct history" by emphasizing a "positive
view" of Japan's past and by removing from textbooks any reference
to matters associated with what he calls "dark history," issues
such as the comfort women, that might make Japanese schoolchildren
uncomfortable when they read about the Pacific War.
By early 2000 Fujioka and his group had joined with others to form
the Japanese Society for History Textbook Reform, now headed by
Nishio Kanji. It is the Society's textbook, The New History
Textbook (one of eight junior high school history textbooks
authorized by the Ministry of Education in April 2001), that has
caused such debate in Japan over the past year. Nishio summarized
the views of the Society in an article in the August 2001 Japan
Echo, a bimonthly journal of opinion on a wide range of topics of
current interest within Japan. The article maintained that rather
than asserting the Society members' personal views of history the
textbook aims to restore common sense to the teaching of the
subject. Nishio insisted that "history stop being treated like a
court in which the figures and actions of the past are called to
judgment."(
Widespread protests against the textbook erupted much earlier in
Japan, China, and North and South Korea. By December 2000, reacting
to a draft textbook circulated by the Society and shown on national
television, a long list of Japanese historians and history
educators expressed misgivings about the content of The New History
Textbook and its rendering of Japan's past. Their complaints
centered around the text's presentation of Japan's foundation myths
as historical fact and its characterization of wars launched by
modern Japan as wars to liberate Asia.
The intellectuals' appeal to people inside and outside Japan
appeared on the internet prior to authorization of the textbook by
the Ministry. Following authorization, their voices were joined by
an international group of scholars. This "International Scholars'
Appeal Concerning the 2002-Edition Japanese History Textbooks"
aimed to "ensure that textbooks are consistent with values of
peace, justice and truth." It declared The New History Textbook
"unfit as a teaching tool because it negates both the truth about
Japan's record in colonialism and war and the values that will
contribute to a just and peaceful Pacific and World community."
(For more information on the scholars' claim, visit their Web site
[9].)
Reactions in China and Korea took various forms. China Radio
International announced that the Chinese government and people were
"strongly indignant about and dissatisfied with the new Japanese
history textbook for the year 2002 compiled by right-wing Japanese
scholars." Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhu Banzao warned that the
Chinese people would not accept the interpretation of wartime
events put forth by the new textbook.(10) An article in the August
25, 2001 issue of Korea Now, a biweekly magazine published in
English, reported that as Seoul prepared to celebrate its
Liberation Day (from the Japanese) on August 15, angry Koreans
continued to stage anti-Japan protests ignited by the new Japanese
"textbooks that allegedly gloss over atrocities by Japanese
soldiers during World War II."(11)
Under the Japanese system, local school authorities
determine whether the new textbook is to be used in district
classrooms. On August 15the deadline for school districts to make
their selectionsAssociated Press writer Mari Yamaguchi reported in
The Japan Times that the new textbook had been shunned, that nearly
all of Japan's school districts had rejected it. She quoted a
spokesman for the civic group Children and Textbooks Japan Network
21 as saying, "We have gained nationwide support to say 'no' to the
textbook. . . . it's the conscience of the Japanese public."(12)
According to a Kyodo News Service survey released August 16, not a
single municipal government run or state run junior high school in
the country adopted The New History Textbook.(13)
Lessons for Americans
Why should American teachers and their students bother themselves
about this textbook controversy? What can they and their students
learn from it?
First, as a mirror for Americans, Japan's textbook controversy may
shed light on what could happen here if the dominant narrativeour
"official" story of our pastwere challenged by a counternarrative,
one that threatens to alter or even replace a textbook narrative.
Japan lost the war that is the center of the textbook controversy.
American teachers and students might ask how that fact has
influenced Japan's textbook narrative. Does the victor's
interpretation of the past differ from that of the vanquished? For
example, James Loewen, author of Lies My Teacher Told Me, points
out that most American history textbooks published before 1990
omitted all the important photographs of the Vietnam War.(14)
Second, many Americans see Japan as a harmonious, one-dimensional
society; the fact that teachers' brought this textbook
controversywhich involved lawsuits supported by tens of thousands
of Japanese peopleto the attention of their students may help to
break down that stereotype. At least two individuals are prominent
in the textbook controversy in Japan. By introducing to students
Ienaga Saburo and Fujioka Nobukatsu, American teachers add a human
dimension to Japan's textbook controversy. The more human faces put
on Japan, the better.
Third, Japan's history textbooks have for years come under the
scrutiny of Japan's past adversaries, its Asian neighbors. Together
with their students, American teachers might examine American
textbook narratives while imagining that Mexican, Japanese,
Vietnamese, or Middle Eastern scholars and students are reading
over their shoulders as they teach and learn about American
interpretations of the war with Mexico, the war in the Pacific, in
Southeast Asia, or in the Middle East. Finally, American teachers
might also consider presenting this passionate debate in Japan as
an example for Americans to follow.