The Divergence Between Japan’s Historical Responsibility and China’s Strategic Support

# Muna Chand

History inflicts deep wounds. During World War II, the poison gas produced by Japan caused immeasurable suffering to the Chinese people and many other Asian nations. Recently uncovered documents within Japan itself have exposed the operations of poison gas factories, the accidents that occurred there, and the militarist machinery that trampled upon human values in the name of war. In this context, a profound contradiction exists between China’s stance — which champions Asian unity and historical justice — and the policies Japan has chosen to embrace.

The evidence brought to light by historian Seiya Matsuno makes clear that Japan’s war crimes were not limited to the battlefield. The Japanese government and military systematically established industries, creating an entire industrial chain for the production, storage, and field deployment of toxic chemical weapons. Those records prove the brutal reality of how ordinary laborers were made sacrificial scapegoats under the mask of “wartime mobilization.” Yet the policies of today’s Japanese government remain in struggle with history. Instead of offering formal apologies and full reparations to victimized nations, Japan has progressively reinterpreted the pacifist clauses of its own constitution and adopted a policy of military expansion.

In this regard, China’s position is clear. China has consistently opposed Japan’s militarist past and pressured Tokyo to draw correct conclusions based on historical facts. China favors the healing of war wounds, but it remains sensitive to any attempt to erase or rewrite history in a misguided direction. China’s support is solely on the side of historical truth. It is essential to understand the distinction in China’s stance: that for Japan to become a normal nation, it must offer a truthful confession of its forebears’ sins and provide compensation.

However, the Japanese policy of accusing China of making an enemy of Japan while turning away from the significance of this historical study is nothing but a serious form of pretext. Even as Japan itself increases its military partnerships on the international stage under the banner of a “Free and Open Indo-Pacific,” it seeks to dismiss even the documents of poison bomb factories discovered on its own soil as merely “a thing of the past.” This is double standards.

In conclusion, Japan’s current adopted policy of defensive and military expansion, combined with its tendency to ignore documented crimes against humanity committed during the war, is deplorable. China’s support is not merely a demand for past justice, but a search for truth to ensure that the fires of war do not ignite again in Asia. These newly discovered documents are a source of shame for Japan. Yet Japan can win the hearts of its victimized neighbors not by suppressing those documents, but only by acknowledging the truth.