QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PACIFIC WAR
a
Why was peace in the Asia-Pacific threatened in the 1930s? Explain your answer
[12m]
The threat to peace in the Asia-Pacific came mainly in the form of Japan’s rise to power and her attempts to
expand her empire in the 1930s, first in Manchuria and later in China. There were various obstacles like the
League of Nations and China which could have resisted Japan’s threat to the region but internal politics in
Japan, as well as her military strength ‘pushed’ her towards a more aggressive and militaristic foreign
policy.
The League of Nations could have created peace in the Asia-Pacific. However, they were too weak to stop
Japan’s threat to peace in the Asia-Pacific. For example when Japan annexed Manchuria, the League of
Nations could only send the Lytton Commission to investigate the matter. Although they condemned
Japan’s actions, Britain and France did not dare risk sanctions against Japan or go to war because they were
severely weakened by the Great Depression. They even allowed Japan to withdraw from the League of
Nations in 1932.
Peace in the Asia-Pacific region was also threatened in the 1930s because China was weak and unable to
resist Japan in the 1930s. Internally divided, Japan had gained increasing territory from Japan since 1919.
They occupied the Liaodong Peninsula and Port Arthur in China. Chinese troops withdrew from Manchuria
because they felt they were not ready for war. In 1936, the Chinese again withdrew from the Chinese
provinces of Jehol, Hebei and Chahar. This made Japan more bold and aggressive in her foreign policy.
Far more importantly, peace was threatened in the Asia Pacific mainly because militarism became
increasingly popular in Japan. The military was so powerful that they were able to dictate political events in
faraway Manchuria and North China. The aggressive foreign policy had become so popular with Japanese
citizens that very often the civilian government had to agree to the actions committed by the Japanese army
located overseas. For example, in Manchuria, Japanese officers in blew up their own trains in Mukden and
used the incident to provoke an incident. They accused the Chinese of attacking them and annexed
Manchuria. The government in Tokyo had to agree to the creation of the puppet state of Manchuguo
because popular sentiment supported the actions in Manchuria. When Japanese Prime Minister Ki Inukia,
criticized the army, he was criticized and assassinated. This best explains why militarism in Japan
threatened peace in the 1930s. Domestic politics in Japan was a ‘push’ factor which made the whole region
unstable. It was so strong that even the weakened League of Nations, as well as China could not resist it.
b.
"The most important reason for Japan’s decision to start the Pacific War lies in their inability
to fully occupy China between 1937-1940”. How far do you agree with this statement?
Explain your answer.
[13m]
I do not agree that Japan’s failure to occupy China between 1937 to 1940 was the most important reason for
Japan’s decision to start the Pacific War. It only painted the environment and laid the background for
Japan’s decision to attack Southeast Asia. It must be remembered that the Pacific War began when Japan
attacked Malaya, Pearl Harbor, Hong Kong and the Pacific Islands simultaneously on December 8th 1941.
People who argue that war began because Japan failed to complete her annexation of China between 1937
to 1940 would argue that the war in in China was not going well for Japan because the immense population
and rugged terrain of China used up all of Japan’s resources in the war. The war consumed Japanese
manpower, material and resources. This made it difficult for Japan to purchase raw materials from abroad
and made them seek to conquer British Malaya for its rubber and tin and occupy the Dutch East Indies for
its oil. This paints the background for Japans decision to attack Pearl Harbour and Southeast Asia.
However, it does not explain the timing of the attack. Why didn’t Japan attack Pearl Harbour in 1939 or
1940 when the western powers were distracted? I think that the war in China therefore only paints the
background and underlying reasons for the war in the Pacific.
Some have argued that the war in Europe had left European colonies in Asia undefended. Japanese troops
were in an ideal position to attack Southeast Asia. In May 1940, Germany had occupied the Scandanavian
countries and France. Britain was fighting a desperate war against Germany in the Battle of Britain. The
Southeast Asian colonies were undefended. This again I think is an important reason for the war because it
provided Japan with the opportunity to attack Southeast Asia. However, again, it falls short because it does
not explain the timing of the Pacific War and the attack on the USA. World War Two had begun in Europe
in September 1939. In May 1940, the war was already not going well for Britain and France. France had
fallen in June 1940. Yet, Japan waited another 7 months before they started the Pacific War.
I believe the most important reason for the Pacific War lies in what had occurred between May 1940 to
December 1941. Worsening US-Japan relations between those months were the most important reason for
the Pacific War. It best explains the causes for the Pacific War. For example in 1940, US Congress
authorized the expansion of the US fleet by 17 battleships, 11 aircraft carriers, 40 cruisers, nearly 70
submarines and over 100 destroyers. The US Pacific fleet was also ordered to move to Pearl Harbor in
Hawaii. US forces in the Philippines received an increased flow of supplies. US fighter pilots were also
allowed to volunteer to serve in China. This made Japan feel increasingly threatened.
Worse was to follow. In 1941, the US placed an embargo on steel,oil and scrap-iron exports to Japan. The
embargo was a threat to Japan’s survival because she could not fight a war in China if she did not have oil
and metal.
When negotiatons between Japan’s ambassador Nomura Kichisaburo and US Secretary State Cordell Hull
failed to settle the issue of the embargo and failed to improve relations, war had become inevitable. This is
because the embargo on oil threatened Japan so severely that for Japan, it was about survival. This made
Japan decide to attack Pearl harbor to cripple and destroy the Pacific Fleet. The option to attack Southeast
Asia and the Pacific Islands simultaneously also seemed more attractive because all attempts at diplomacy
had already failed.
Therefore to me, failed diplomacy and worsening relations between the USA and Japan best explains the
cause for the Pacific War.
c.
Why was the democratic system unpopular in Japan from 1929 to 1932?
The democratic system was unpopular in Japan between 1929 to 1932 because there were constitutional
limitations which prevented the rise of democratic parties in Japan. For example, the Diet only had limited
power in Japan’s constitution. Power instead lay in the hands of retired Japanese statesmen called the genro
who served as informal advisors to the Emperor. This limited the power of democratic leaders.
The democratic system was also unpopular in Japan because corruption had ruined the reputation of
democratic parties. Many democratic leaders collaborated with large Japanese corporations called
zaibatsus. In return, Japanese democratic leaders passed laws to favor the zaibatsus. This led to rumors that
the zaibatsus and democratic leaders were corrupted. Fistfights during parliament and rumours of
corruption ruined the reputation of democracy.
The democratic system was also unpopular because the Great Depression destroyed once and for all the
reputation of democracy in Japan. Working conditions in Japan were already horrible in the 1920s with
25,000 people going on strike in Tokyo and the formation of large trade unions. The situation worsened
when the Great Depression hit Japan. Countries adopted protectionism to protect their own economies and
silk, Japan’s main export was the worst affected. Banks shut down. The workers lost their job and farmers
lost their means of livelihood. There was only one scapegoat to blame — democratic parties which were in
power and unable to alleviate suffering of the people.
In retrospect, a weak constitution which did not favor democracy, as well as rumours about the corruption
of democratic parties ruined their reputation. The Great Depression affected Japanese financially and hit
them the worst. This explains why the Great Depression made the democratic system unpopular between
1929 and 1930.
d.
How far do you agree that Japanese domestic politics best explains the growing popularity of
Japanese Fascism in the 1930s?
Fascism in Japan refers to the growing power of the military. In the 1930s, Fascism took many forms.
However, in Japan, Fascism took the form of the growing influence and popularity of the Japanese military.
This is also called militarism.
1) I think that external events are far more important in explaining the growing popularity of Japanese
Fascism in the 1930s. The argument is based on external events like the Great Depression causing Fascism
to be popular. Rural Japan was very badly affected by the Great Depression because many countries
adopted protectionist policies to protect their own economies. Japanese farmers relied on silk to supplement
their income and they lost their income when the Great Depression occurred. Thus, many farmers joined
the army or patriotic parties which promoted fascism. It was therefore an external event which led to the
rise of Fascism in Japan.
2) It has been argued that domestic politics best explains and demonstrates the growing popularity and
appeal of Japanese Fascism. Many peasants joined patriotic societies like the Black Dragon Society and the
Cherry Blossom Society which wanted to restore power to the emperor and get rid of democratic leaders.
The cause for this however was again an external event. It was the economic conditions of the Great
Depression, caused by the collapse of the world economy which resulted in the rise of patriotic societies.
3) External events like the reunification and strengthening of China in 1927 also explain the popularity of
Japanese Fascism in the 1930s. For example, when the Guomindang and CCP joined forces to form a
united army to reunite warlords, they demanded an end to all ‘special concessions’ to colonial powers.
They also held demonstrations and boycotts of Japanese goods which hurt Japanese economic interests.
This led to Kwantung Army officers calling for occupation of Manchuria and North China before antiJapanese feelings became strong. Many Japanese supported their calls for Japanese fascism. This again
showed that external events led to the rise of Japanese fascism.
It has also been argued that domestic politics are important because the Japanese army and navy became
increasingly popular. Two Prime Ministers (Hamaguchi Osachi and Ki Inukai) and other political leaders
were assassinated by Japanese militarists for refusing to support the military’s ambitions. The army even
tried to seize power by force. The fact that all of them received light sentences demonstrates the popularity
of militarism in Japan. This seems to show how domestic politics best explains and demonstrates the
growing popularity of militarism. Again however, this argument is flawed because in all those instances,
external events have influenced these internal events.
For example, when the Washington Naval Conference of 1921–1922 limited Japan’s navy in the ratio of
3:5:5 compared to the US and British navy, it resulted in the assassination of the Japanese Prime Minister
Hamguchi Osachi in 1930. When Prime Minister Ki Inukai criticised the Japanese Kwantung army for the
Mukden Incident and their annexation of Manchuria, he was assassinated by Japanese officers. These two
incidents demonstrate that external events roused and stirred Japanese citizens to support the militarists.
External events are very important because they also best explain where popular militarists feelings were
targeted. It was at China. This was because China was unified under Kuomintang rule and there was
growing strikes, demonstrations and boycott of Japanese goods for their special concessions and rights in
China. This again stirred Japanese militarism because the Kwantung Army stationed in Manchuria
proposed that Japan occupy Manchuria and North China before anti-Japanese feelings in China became too
intense. This again stirred Japanese militarism at home.
In all these incidents — whether it was the cause of militarism, the symptoms of militarism in the form of
rise of patriotic societies or frequency of assassinations – external events always served as triggers which
made militarism even more popular and firmly entrenched in Japan as ever. Therefore, I will like to argue
that external events best explain the growing popularity of Japanese Fascism, not domestic politics.
Domestic politics was merely a barometer or indicator of that growing popularity.