Skip to content

Author: irichen

Published on

October 1, 2025
People’s Campaign for the Truth of Nanjing, President Ara Kenichi
International Research Institute of Controversial Histories, President Sugihara Seishiro

On July 25 this year, a film titled Dead to Rights was shown in China. Later, on July 31, the People’s Republic of China’s Embassy in Japan posted on X that Dead to Rights immediately became a box-office hit and a day after the opening of the movie, the box-office revenue exceeded 100 million renminbi. A video was also posted on the X, showing children forced to see the film shedding tears with their parents or showing violent hostility against Japan. On the same day, July 31, a Japanese mother and her child were attacked, and the mother was beaten in Suzhou City. Certain X posts reported that the incident was influenced by the film.

Dead to Rights tells the story of seven Nanjing citizens stealing photographs of massacre shot by the Japanese Army at the time of the surrender of Nanjing. However, there was no unit in the Japanese Army assigned to film the battleground scenes and the sixteen photos are far from mid-winter scenes of Nanjing at the time of the war, which rudimentarily leads to the conclusion that those photos have nothing to do with the battle of Nanjing.

In addition, on September 18 this year, another film titled 731, featuring the Japanese Kwantung Army’s Epidemic Prevention and Water Purification Department (a.k.a. Unit 731), was shown to the public. According to the production website, the film is intended to reveal the atrocities committed by the Japanese Army invading China, adapting several pieces of historical facts. One horrendous scene after another is said to be shown so that children under 18 need to be given special care after seeing the film.

Reportedly, another anti-Japanese film called Dongji Rescue was made and released in China.

Regarding Dead to Rights, the following must be pointed out. It is true that in 1937, a battle of Nanjing did take place, and it must be admitted that at that time certain imprudent Japanese soldiers committed unlawful acts such as killing, injuring or plundering noncombatants. Sadly, however, such illegal acts against noncombatants of the enemy are commonplace practice in every battleground in the world. So, it is not fair to single out and blame the case of the battle of Nanjing.

The Nanjing Incident, which did not happen but nonetheless is claimed to have happened, refers to the alleged mass-murdering of noncombatant common citizens, with the difference of intentionally, in a planned manner, systematically or negligently without a system. However, it is academically completely proved that in the battle of Nanjing, such an incident of unlawful mass murder of common citizens did not occur.

Besides the academic level, at a political level, in 2012, the then Mayor of Nagoya City Kawamura Takashi said, “There was a battle of Nanjing, but there was no Nanjing Incident.” City of Nanjing, the then sister city of Nagoya, protested Kawamura’s statement and so did the Chinese Government. Mayor Kawamura did not withdraw his statement, but neither Nanjing City or the Chinese Government could deny it and as a result, this issue has been settled politically.

Regarding the film of 731, the following must be pointed out. Although piece-meal historical facts are somewhat reflected in the depicted content of the film, eighty years after the war ended, it is politically impermissible to make a film representing history in a horrific way and to show the film publicly. From the perspective of Japan, for example, in 1937, an incident took place in which a Chinese unit formed under the Japanese Army started a rebellion and killed common Japanese citizens. If a film is made depicting atrocious scenes based on historical facts and is shown to the public, even in Japan, where freedom of expression is granted, the Japanese Government will try to prevent the film from being shown to the public, considering the atrocity and the anti-Chinese effect. Even if such a film is made, there will be no prospect of making profit out of the film. Consequently, no such attempt will be made.

As seen so far, in coping with any attempt to make and show a film which unilaterally incites anti-Japanese or anti-Chinese sentiment, the Government is responsible to prevent it. This is the responsibility of any state and government in the world in the 21st century for the sake of world peace and happiness of humankind.

However, in China, it seems that no attempt is made to restrict the making and showing of such a violent film. We must say that China’s action is against the 21st century’s world peace and human happiness.

In China, the rule of the Chinese Communist Party over the Chinese people is not based on any due process to obtain the people’s consignment, so the Party lacks the lawful grounds for governing the Chinese people. Therefore, domestically, the Party needs to oppress people beyond the necessary limit and internationally it is obliged to overly incite hostility and imbue people with hostility.

Regarding the personnel promotional management, the Chinese Communist Party should either take a people’s ballot or remotely near exercise of voting within the Party so that the reform may guarantee the legitimacy of the Chinese Party’s ruling of the Chinese people.

On the other hand, the Japanese Government must strongly protest the fact that such a film is made and is shown publicly. Why is it that the Japanese Government has not yet taken any action against it?  It is irresponsible lack of action, damaging world peace and human happiness.

On top of that, the official website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, regarding the non-existent “Nanjing Incident,” has been posting since 2007 that “The Japanese Government thinks it cannot be denied that after the Japanese Army entered the walled City of Nanjing in 1937, killing of noncombatants and acts of plunder took place. However, as to the number of victims, there are various accounts, and the Japanese Government thinks it difficult to acknowledge which is the correct number.” We simply wonder how this inaction can be justified.

In the battle of Nanjing, despite the differences as to whether the Japanese Army acted intentionally or in a planned manner, or systematically or non-systematically, the Nanjing incident in which allegedly noncombatant Nanjing citizens were mass-murdered unlawfully did not happen, which is proved perfectly academically. Nevertheless, the misleading depiction as if the Nanjing Incident had happened is left unchanged on the official website. Under such circumstances, Japan may lose the grounds for duly protesting films such as Dead to Rights.

On April 3, 2023, at the House of Councilors’ Committee on Audit, in response to the then Councilor Wada Masamune’s question, the Government replied to the effect that regarding the battle of Nanjing, there were no historical sources found to prove the existence of the “Nanjing Incident.” If so, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs should immediately either correct or delete the description related to the battle of Nanjing.

We, the People’s Campaign for the Truth of Nanjing and the International Research Institute of Controversial Histories, in unison, send this statement to the Chinese and the Japanese Governments.

Published on

Making of The Rape of Nanking: A Big Lie from World War ll English Edition
Published in 2021

This book review is written by one of the authors and it also serves as an introduction to the book.  In Canada, Canadians believe that Iris Chang's The Rape of Nanking (November 1997)　is true history, therefore, the author, a Japanese Canadian, was determined to publish this book in search of the true facts of history. The two authors kept in close contact with Kenichi Ara and other historians in Japan, who should be called the leading authority in the study of the Nanking Incident, to make sure that there were no errors in the description. Research into the Nanjing Massacre is progressing in Japan. It is now proven that the so-called Nanjing Incident, which was allegedly committed by the Japanese military in violation of the international law, never took place. In 2023, we learned that no historical documents have been found to substantiate the Nanjing Incident and the Japanese government made a cabinet decision stating that there was no evidence to substantiate the case.

Making of The Rape of Nanking: A Big Lie from World War ll

This book, co-authored by Kanzako Mikiko and Kashima Akira, examines in detail the distortions and fabrications of facts contained in Iris Chang's The Rape of Nanking (November 1997). Several such rebuttals to Chang's book have already been published in Japanese, but this is probably the first such book to be published in English.

The publication of Chang’s book is of great significance, because it became a bestseller in North America and many people still believe in its claims.

There must have been Japanese people who felt guilty about having roots in Japan, the country that "sneaked in" at Pearl Harbor. And once again, Japanese Canadians and Japanese living in Canada must live forever with a sense of guilt and need of atonement[MM1]  based on the lie that "300,000 civilians in Nanjing were massacred." This must not happen. That is why we need to learn history.

"Making of The Rape of Nanking: A Big Lie from World War II" has been published privately but can be purchased from Amazon.  The book is concise and to the point, and the photographs at the end of the book give a first-hand look at what the city of Nanking was like at the time. This book is the first step in the reader's own process of thinking for themselves.

 [MM1]Both words are good, but you can say it in this way: “sense of guilt and need of atonement (redemption)”.

Review :

Immediately after publishing 『Making of The Rape of Nanking: A Big Lie from World War ll』,I had my family member read the book for feedback. His first reaction after reading it was, "This is not for high school students!" That was his honest reaction to graphic descriptions directly quoted from the book and its unbearable depiction of barbaric acts. I also had my friend, Mr. N, a former high school history teacher, read the book, and he also said that it was not for high school students.

We would like to present here some of the descriptions from textbooks used in Ontario high schools.

Japanese leaders ordered intense bombings of civilian targets, causing millions of casualties. Brutality was just as common on the ground. The Chinese capital city of Nanjing endured a massacre that lasted six long weeks. During this time, Japanese soldiers raped and murdered as many as 300 000 Chinese soldiers and civilians. The Japanese also used chemical weapons during the war. These atrocities caused the United States and other Western countries to begin to harden their attitudes toward Japan.

( “Creating Canada: A History 1914 to the Present”, 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill Ryerson 2014, Unit 3, pg. 278)

The basic outline of the incident in the above textbook passage, referring to six weeks of indiscriminate killing of Chinese soldiers , massacres of civilians, mass rape, 300,000 victims, matches Chan’s book.

"When I taught at high school, this kind of content wasn't in the curriculum," says Mr. N. He also seemed to find it hard to believe that such descriptions would appear in high school textbooks. I sincerely hope that by reading this book, Mr. N, a teacher of history, will become interested in the Nanking Incident and think about it for himself.

Besides high school students, the author's intended audience for “Making of The Rape of Nanking: A Big Lie from World War ll” was the Japanese Canadians who were not familiar with history. The ideal reader for this book happened to be the author's friend, Ms.M.  Her parents are Japanese who immigrated to Canada from Japan, and Ms. M. was born in Canada. She was one of the people who supported the passage of the Nanjing Massacre Memorial Day Bill, which was submitted to the Ontario Legislature in 2017. She must have believed in Japan's atrocities without a doubt. When I told her about this book, she was simply astonished, and asked, "Oh! The Nanjing Massacre was a lie?"

China's information warfare has spread beyond Asia to the rest of the world. Naturally, the United States and Canada are no exception. In Canada, the Ontario Legislature passed a motion to mark the Nanjing Massacre Commemorative Day in 2017. This motion is not legally binding, and furthermore, barely over a dozen of the 124 provincial assembly members participated in the vote, which was a poor move. However, the fact that the “motion was passed” is a very effective weapon in information and history warfare. In 2018, the Nanjing Massacre Victims Monument was erected in a cemetery in Richmond Hill, Ontario. Since the monument was erected, a memorial service has been held there every December.

The idea for this book came from a previously published booklet about the comfort women. We launched the project to publish this book motivated by a strong desire to clarify the problems with the Chang book and to get as many people as possible to read it. We are too small to stand up to such a large-scale, long-term, and powerful propaganda, but we cannot help but do something to free ourselves from the spell of this cunning deception. There was no choice but to take action when good people like Ms. M and Mr. N, and the high school students who knew nothing, were being deceived.

The focus of this book is on Chang's fabrication because the book is well known among the general public in the English-speaking world and is highly regarded by historians and academics. This book is a short account, but it is designed to provide easy access to first-class sources such as Minnie Vautrin's diary and the records of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (Tokyo Trials) for readers who want to know more about the details. I want people, especially young people, to understand how important it is to develop the ability to think for themselves and discern between fact and fiction.

We are very grateful to Jason M. Morgan, Associate Professor at Reitaku University, who is well-known for his search for true historical facts related to World War II, for his review of 『Making of The Rape of Nanking: A Big Lie from World War ll』*.

“There are no taboos, dogmas, or epithets in historical work. Truth is the only standard, and the only goal.”

There is no statute of limitations on the search for true historical facts. Ultimately, history should be written only by those who seek the truth and are willing to tell the truth.

The author believes that if Japan becomes vibrant, the world will become healthy and peaceful. Our hope is that Japan will be revived as a truly independent and sovereign nation. In the process, Japan's history should be reclaimed by the Japanese people without the interference from other countries. We have no use for political consideration or government-sponsored scholars.  

* Jason Morgan, A Massacre in the Making: Separating Truth from Fiction about Nanking, Jul 26, 2023,

Published on

November 18, 2024

Dear Ms. Ana Peláez Narváez,
chairperson, and Honorable Members of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women:

The International Research Institute of Controversial Histories (iRICH) is a Japanese NGO. We research the history of human rights and develop an international understanding and cooperation. Our representatives participated in the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) 89th session. We deeply respect the committee members’ efforts and contributions to the progress of women’s rights.

　However, we are strongly against the recommendation regarding the Japanese Imperial House Law in paragraphs 11 and 12 of the concluding observations on the ninth periodic report of Japan (CEDAW/C/JPN/CO/9) and request to delete the recommendation immediately because of the reasons below.

　Concluding observations on the ninth periodic report of Japan (CEDAW/C/JPN/CO/9) Paragraph 11. It also takes note of the State party’s position that the provisions of the Japanese Imperial House Law are not within the purview of the Committee’s competence. However, the Committee considers that allowing only male offspring in the male line belonging to the Imperial Lineage to succeed to the throne is incompatible with articles 1 and 2 and contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention. Paragraph 12. The Committee recommends that the State party look at good practices of other States parties that have reformed their succession laws to ensure equality of women and men, and amend the Imperial House Law to guarantee equality of women and men in the succession to the throne.

1. Before the committee published the concluding observations, we informed the committee members of the various materials about the Japanese Imperial House Law including the facts as follows:

  • “The succession of the Imperial Throne” in Japan is an intrinsic, domestic affair and is outside the jurisdiction of CEDAW;
  • The Charter of the United Nations of 1945 Article 2, Paragraph 7 states “Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state”;
  • The “succession to the Imperial Throne” has been the practice inherited for nearly two thousand years since the national foundation and thus is an indispensable tradition of the Imperial House. It has nothing to do with discrimination against women;
  • The Catholic Church’s Pope, the Islamic clergy, and the Dalai Lama of Tibetan Buddhism are all exclusively male. Is the committee ready to demand them to “eliminate discrimination against women”?;
  • The Imperial House Law allows a civilian female to join the Imperial Family through marriage which does not permit the opposite. This could be viewed as reverse discrimination against men.

Upon knowing these facts, the committee considers the Imperial House Law to be incompatible with articles 1 and 2 and recommends amending the Law to guarantee the equality of women and men. The recommendation reflects the committee’s lack of understanding of Japan’s unique history, tradition and culture, and it is seen as disrespectful to the Japanese Imperial House. The majority of Japanese citizens feel very displeased and upset about the recommendation.

2. Paragraph 12 of the Ninth periodic report submitted by Japan (CEDAW/C/JPN/9) and the Japan delegation’s response at the 2105th meeting on Oct 17, 2024, is fairly　consistent with the common consensus of Japanese citizens.

That is:

 “Systems such as the Imperial House of Japan and the royal families of other countries have remained in place to this day against the backdrop of each individual nation’s respective history and tradition with the support of their people. The system of succession to the throne in Japan, which is stipulated in the Imperial House Law, is a matter related to the foundation of a State.”

If the committee urges a state party to change its history and tradition, all UN treaty bodies will eventually lose their credibility and the trust of the Japanese people.

3. In the summary records of 2105th Meeting on Oct 17, 2024（CEDAW/C/SR.2105）, Ms. Ana Peláez Narváezhe, the Chair, states as follows:

“Para 69.

The Chair said that she wished to point out that the Committee’s mandate concerned equality between women and men and the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women, which included issues such as discriminatory royal succession laws. The Committee had raised similar issues with other States parties too. Any and all gender-discriminatory laws were of direct relevance to the Committee and its remit under the Convention. “

During the 89th session, Saudi Arabia was one of the state parties to be reviewed. In 1992, Saudi Arabia issued the Basic Law of Governance, and its article 5 states, “Rulers of the country shall be from amongst the sons of the founder King Abdulaziz bin Abdulrahman Al-Faisal Al-Saud, and their descendants.” While both Japanese and Saudi Arabia‘s laws rule male succession, in the concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of Saudi Arabia（CEDAW/C/SAU/CO/5）, the committee does not address Article 5, nor do they recommend any amendments to it. We believe this reflects a double standard in the committee's perspective.

We agree to the CEDAW’s principle, “determined to adopt the measures required for the elimination of such discrimination in all its forms”, and we hope that women’s rights are to be protected from suffering and discrimination. However, the royal and imperial house is inherited and formed through long-standing traditions and history, and it has nothing to do with “discrimination against sex.”  On behalf of the majority of Japanese, we would like to clarify that the imperial house should not be an issue to be interfered with by the UN treaty bodies.

Therefore, we strongly request CEDAW to delete its recommendation regarding the Japanese Imperial House Law from the concluding observations.

Sincerely,

Published on

On July 10, 2024, the Third International Symposium over the Comfort Women Issue was held at Seiryo-kaikan Hall at Nagata-cho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, to refute the fiction of the comfort women issue and to pursue a true understanding between Japan and South Korea.

The symposium was held once in Tokyo in 2022 and twice in Seoul in 2023.

The persistent lie about the forced abduction of comfort women during the Pacific War has already been perfectly refuted by studies reported during the past two symposiums.

The main goal of the symposium this time was for Japanese, American and South Korean researchers of the comfort women issue to get together in Tokyo, review the activities so far, exchange information
related to the situations in the respective countries, deepen the mutual bonds and clearly show the way to the complete solution of the comfort women issue.

As this is an extremely important theme in terms of the national honor of Japan and peace and security in the entire East Asia, an audience of nearly 300 people packed the hall and the symposium was opened in
the most enthusiastic atmosphere.

The program was as below:

Part 1: Keynote lectures

  1. Mr. Nishioka Tsutomu, Professor at Reitaku University
    The comfort women issue as a historical recognition issue
  2. Mr. Lee Young hoon, ex-Professor at Seoul University Destructive impact of the Japanese military comfort women issue on the South Korean society
  3. Mr. Ramseyer, Professor at Harvard University Historical issues and the issue of U.S. universities -what we should do from now on

Part 2: Study reports

  1. Mr. Lew Seok-choon, ex-Professor at Yonse University Lecture at Yonse University and defamatory criminal charge
  2. Mr. Fukui Yoshitaka, Professor at Aoyama University The problem of the facts and value judgement about the comfort
    women; from a viewpoint of economic analysis
  3. Mr. Kim Byeong-heon, director of the Korean Historical
    Textbook Research Center Judgement document for the comfort women lawsuit against Japan in
    2023 and descriptions of the comfort women issue in school textbooks
  4. Mr. Lee Wooyoun, researcher at the Naksongdae Economic Research Institute Reporting trend of Korean media about the comfort women issue:
    Focus on the Park Yu-ha’s case and the academic riot against Ramseyer
  5. Mr. Matsuki Kunitoshi, director of the Korean Modern History
    Research Center Lawsuit against Japan on the comfort women issue: danger of revival
    of the individual right for claim, which will destroy the Japan-Korean
    relationship

Mr. Matsuki compiled an overall report on this event, which has been published in Hanada+ from August 7. With permission of Hanada+, we will introduce his report in serial form of three Parts.

PART1

PART2

PART3

Published on

Reviewed Book : The Comfort Women Hoax: A Fake Memoir, North Korean Spies, and Hit Squads in the Academic Swamp
Author : Robert Eldrige and Jason Morgan

Explanation

Robert D. Eldridge, who wrote a book review of Comfort Women Hoax was born in New Jersey, USA in 1968. He earned his doctorate in Japanese Political and Diplomatic History from the Graduate School of Law, Kobe University, in 1999. He is a prominent scholar on the Okinawa issue; he wrote The Origin of the Okinawa Issue—Okinawa in the Postwar US-Japan Relationship 1945-1952 (published by Nagoya University Publishing Society) and won the special award of the Asian-Pacific Awards. Later, he worked as an assistant professor at Osaka University and became deputy director of the diplomatic policy department of the United States Marine Corps in Japan.

In February 2015, at the height of the Henoko struggle*, a man was arrested, leading the protest in front of Camp Schwab, was arrested on the charge of violation of the special criminal law. The legality of this arrest was disputed over whether he crossed the yellow line separating the base and the road. The man argued that he had not crossed the line and the Okinawan media reported that his arrest was illegal. However, the camera installed at the base recorded him crossing the line. Eldridge, unable to leave Okinawa filled with lies and deceptions as it is, sent the image caught by the camera to an anchor of a YouTube program the following March and the scene in question was shown to the public. Although the recorded image was non-confidential, the U.S. Marine Corps succumbed to the anti-United States power in Okinawa and dismissed Eldridge from his post, citing that his revealed inappropriately his confidential duties through a private route.

Eldridge, learning from this experience that lies and deceptions overrule the truth, presumably wrote this book review to warn people of the crisis. He says, “For one having intelligence, nothing is more sinful than to lack courage to do the right thing using intelligence.” He just wanted to give a strong warning that if scholars lack conscience and courage, their attempts to improve and advance the society and culture would only bring deterioration and decay. strongly warn that study for improving and progressing society and culture reversibly invites deterioration and decay of society because scholars lack conscience and courage. Moreover, he wanted conscientious scholars and journalists to endeavor harder for justice.

Body of Review :

The Comfort Women Hoax exposes the lies and myths of the comfort women issue and ends the myths surrounding it. This is done through meticulous, multilanguage, and multiarchival research and cross-disciplinary cooperation. Meanwhile, the book calls for the restoration of integrity and honesty in academia and an end to canceling and censorship. Cont'd...(JAPAN Forward)

Published on

Author : Rhee Young-hoon
Book : Anti-Japan Tribalism

The book entitled Anti-Japan Tribalism was published in July 2019. It sold 110,000 copies in South Korea and became a bestseller selling over 400,000 copies in Japan. The leading author, Principal Lee Young-hoon used the term ethnicism, not nationalism, stating that the Anti-Japan Tribalism means “animosity regarding the neighboring Japan as evil.” Unchanging hostility allows no objective discussion and in it, lies play the role of a totem uniting the ethnicity. At the time of the publication of this book, South Korea was exposed to the stormy anti-Japan policy under the Moon Jae-in administration and the Japan-South Korea relationship was the worst ever. School textbooks were decorated with the statues of the so-called mobilized workers and comfort women right from the front page and the town and TV broadcasting were uniformly painted with anti-Japanese colors. Former President Park Geun-hye and many political dignitaries in her government were imprisoned and things became so critical that many feared that the Federal Democratic Republic of Goryeo, upheld by North Korea, might emerge at any moment. At such a critical time the book Antil-Japanese Ethnicism emerged, like a savior. To prevent the Korean Peninsula from becoming red, it was urgent to recover the Japan-South Korea relationship, which was on the brink of bankruptcy. In order to resume the normal relationship, seminars were held everywhere, inviting scholars and experts. To enlighten the Korean people, conservative patriots desperately endeavored, purchasing tens of copies of the book.

The prologue written by Principal Lee Young-hoon at the beginning of the book was particularly sensational. The title of the prologue says, “liar nation, liar politics, liar study, liar trial, and Anti-Japan Tribalism.” Many Japanese would have felt emotionally moved and relieved after many years of frustrated despair about to burst by the heroic act of the South Korean scholar who has excellently expressed what Japanese have been feeling. I quote a part of it here: “The people of this country don’t regard lies as lies while history and sociology studies in this country are a breeding ground for lies, and universities in this country are factories producing lies.” I cannot help but appreciate these candid and forthright sentences, which convey the high-leveled conscience of the scholars pursuing the truth.

In South Korea, in 1965 and onward, elementary, junior and senior high school textbooks have been teaching that the period under the Japanese rule was that of “seven deprivations.” Namely, they were deprivations of king, sovereignty, land, language, personal names, life and natural resources. Most of the South Koreans believe so. Textbooks teach so, and dramas and movies depict so. Under such circumstances, if Japanese try to tell the truth, there is absolutely no room for objective argument and there are only emotion-ridden reactions. The six co-authors of the book have superbly rejected the untruth and explained the true history based on verified sources.

South Koreans intentionally add the word “forcible” to “mobilization” and blindly believe that the Japanese military arbitrarily took Koreans to mainland Japan and forced them into slave-like labor. Mr. Lee woo-youn, who revealed the lie of forcibly mobilized workers, points out that the root of this grave issue was the book Record of Forcibly Mobilized Korean Workers written by Park Kyon-sik, a teacher at Korean University in Japan, related to the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan (Chongryon) in 1965, revealing that the South Korean education society has been creating school textbooks for sixty years based on this book without any verification of its validity.

Mr. Joung An-ki, co-author of this book and former Professor at Korea University wrote what the Army Special Volunteers (Korean soldiers) were really like. He stated that all because Army special volunteers trained by the Imperial Japanese Army pledged allegiance to the Emperor, they served the Republic of Korea faithfully and patriotically after independence and with the excellent leadership in the battleground, they were able to prevent the International Communist forces from advancing southward in the Korean War. He clearly stated that with the knowledge and technology which were absent during the Joseon Dynasty, former Japanese Army special volunteer Korean soldiers, equipped with diligence and sense of responsibility, played the important role in establishing the Republic of Korea. At the same time, such history proves how greatly the Japanese predecessors ruled Korea. This book will surely clear the air regarding the general South Korean concept of “merciless Japanese villains robbing land, rice, life and chastity” and help recover the Japanese predecessors’ honor. As mentioned above, the book became a bestseller with sales of over 110,000 copies. Unfortunately, however, history textbooks carrying lies are still used as they are and lies are taught daily at South Korean elementary, junior and senior high schools. Thinking of such lamentable situations, I cannot help but wish sincerely that this book would be read further by many more people. First, more politicians, journalists and educators should read this book. I extend my heart-felt gratitude to the six co-authors of the epoch-making book Anti-Japan Tribalism. Let me mention one more thing. The term “colonial rule” is seen here and there in the book. Fact is that Japan gave everything and contributed to Korea in every possible way. The term “colony” implies exploitation of the land and making people obey the rule. I would like to have the term “colonial rule” replaced with a better expression. Then, this book would leave nothing whatsoever to be desired.

Book : Japanese / English (Link to Amazon)

Published on

Reviewed Book : Is Japanese Debate on the Atomic Bombing All Right as It Is—the first US-Japan dialogue over the atomic bombings.
Author : Harry Wray, Seishiro Sugihara
Published by Nisshin-hodo, 2015

Reviewer : Tadashi Hama

The book reviewed is Is Japanese Debate on the Atomic Bombing All Right as It Is—the first US-Japan dialogue over the atomic bombings (published by Nisshin-hodo, 2015). In the book, American Harry Wray criticizes the view of the atomic bombings the Japanese people generally have. On the other hand, Japanese Sugihara Seishiro comments and counterargues, chapter by chapter, stating his views on the Japanese side. Thus, this book is considered the first Japan-US dialogue over the atomic bombings. In the Japanese version of the book, the English texts written by Harry Wray are translated into Japanese by Ms. Yamamoto Reiko, who obtained her doctorate at Meisei University and studied the purge of teachers under the US occupation at the university’s Center for the Study of Postwar Education. The book was published in 2015 by Nisshin-hodo. The English version, titled Bridging the Atomic Divide: Debating Japan-US Attitudes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was published in 2019 by Lexington Books. Japanese texts written by Sugihara were translated into English by Chinese-Australian Norman Hoo.

The book’s coauthor Harry Wray was born in Nebraska, USA, in 1931 and died in 2017, without seeing the English version of this book. Mr. Wray finished the graduate school at the University of Hawaii in 1971 and lived in Japan for many years, teaching at various universities in Japan. In his study of the educational reform during the Occupation period, he interviewed fifty Japanese who worked for the educational reform during the Occupation and twenty-eight members of the Allied Forces personnel, making a great contribution to the study of educational reform during the occupation period. He was a Japanophile.

The other author, Sugihara Seishiro, was born in 1941 in the city of Hiroshima and lived there until immediately before the atomic bombing on the city, close to the very epicenter. In 1967, Sugihara finished the master’s course in education at the graduate school of the University of Tokyo. It is said that he did not advance to the doctor’s course because he was in conflict with the senior professor who led lecturers at the Japan Teachers’ Union that played an enormous role in spreading the self-deprecating view of history in postwar Japan.

Reviewer Hama Tadashi’s review was posted on the website of the Society for the Dissemination of Historical Fact in September 2019 as followed:

<Book Review>
Bridging the Atomic Divide: Debating Japan-US Attitudes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki
By Harry Wray & Seishiro Sughihara
Lexington Books
Reviewed by Tadashi Hama

Newsletter No. 231 introduced this newly published book, which discusses, in a frank and candid manner, an extremely sensitive subject that Japanese and Americans have long avoided.

      The book is reviewed by Mr. Tadashi Hama and is also accompanied by a comment on the review by, Professor Seishiro Sugihara, the book’s author.

     Mr. Wray wrote that his wish was to “have a dialogue about the atomic bombs...,” a “balanced dialogue”, and a dialogue which “must not be like the Tokyo Trials conducted during the Occupation...a one-sided affair imposed by the victorious nations on the losing side...” However, the book starts off by berating the Japanese for their “litany of clear-cut crimes against humanity”, and mentions, among other things, forcing Korean women to be “prostitutes”, or so-called “comfort women”, and the “rape of Nanking”, assuming that these were established historical facts.

     Mr. Hama’s criticism is that this line of thinking will not bring about a “balanced dialogue” of historical perception at all. He further details Wray’s slanted, one-sided thinking.

    In his comment, Mr. Sugihara, while acknowledging Mr. Hama’s view, emphasizes that FDR ultimately shoulders responsibility for the atomic bombings and his actions have determined the context of the dialogue on this important issue. It is recommended that his comments be also read.

Reviewer Hama newly included, among the reference literature, the books Lone Eagle—The Wartime Journal of Charles A. Lindbergh (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1970) and Summer, 1945: Germany, Japan and the Harvest of Hate, written by Thomas Goodrich (The Palm Press, 2018) and stated that in the Japan-US War, many atrocities were committed by the U.S. side. Based on this fact, regarding the atomic bombings, he denies Harry Wray’s accounts of the US side and emphasizes that there was no rightful cause for the United States to drop atomic bombs.

Since reviewer Hama has based his statements on historical facts, there is no exaggeration nor fiction in his accounts. In this respect, his review should be read by many Americans.

On the other hand, Harry Wray’s assertions are popularly cited in the United States, such as that the dropping of the atomic bombs was meant to end the war sooner and reduce the number of victims on both sides and that in fact the atomic bombings spared many potential victims. And if Japan had readily accepted the Potsdam Declaration when it was issued, no atomic bombs would have been used and therefore, Japan should be held responsible for the result to a relative extent.

Certainly, the later estimate of the number of victims saved by the atomic bombings may have been somewhat exaggerated, but it is true that many lives were spared. It is also true that there would have been no atomic bombing if only Japan had promptly accepted the Potsdam Declaration when it was issued.

How, then, is Sugihara, representing Japan, to refute the American assertions? The point to argue is that chances for the United States to make Japan surrender before the Potsdam Declaration was issued, rendering it useless to drop atomic bombs were many, many times more than the chance for Japan to accept the Potsdam Declaration.

What made it difficult for the United States under the then President Truman to carry out the policy of making Japan surrender before dropping atomic bombs was that the predecessor President Roosevelt had forced Japan into unconditional surrender. On the opening of the war between Japan and the United States, President Roosevelt blamed Japan for attacking Pearl Harbor “without declaring war”, instigating the Americans to fight the war against Japan and stirring up hate against Japan. In fact, the war between Japan and the United States was staged, without the knowledge of the peoples of both countries with the United States provoking Japan into the war. The alleged delay in handing the “declaration of war” on the part of Japan was not intentional but a mere blunder in clerical work. Although he knew this fact, Roosevelt instigated hostilities against Japan and forced Japan to unconditionally accept the Potsdam Declaration. By doing so, he manipulated his people to gain their strong support. Consequently, the US-Japan war obliged the United States to deploy the ground battle on the soil of mainland Japan and the United States had to continue fighting even after the defeat of Japan became evident, causing more casualties on both sides, to no avail.

Thus, coauthor Sugihara asserts that Roosevelt forced the American people to unnecessarily suffer an enormous number of casualties and in this regard, Roosevelt betrayed the American people as well. Sugihara adds emphatically that he wants the Americans to know this fact.

This review should be read widely by Americans to understand better the issue of atomic bombings.

Review : Japanese / English

Published on

Satoru Nakamura, Senior Researcher of iRICH, had a NGO speech on 55th UN Human Rights Coucils in Geneva. He had speech about Recommendations of Okinawan Indigenous People.

Thank you. Mr. Vice-President. This Council and the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination have recommended six times that the Japanese government must recognize the Okinawans as indigenous people and protect their rights. However, most Okinawans are unaware that they are considered indigenous by the UN and have been repeatedly recommended to do so. Even Okinawa Governor Denny Tamaki, who addressed at the last Council meeting, has repeatedly stated that they have never been declared indigenous or even discussed by the Okinawa Prefectural Assembly or Okinawan society. The fact that such recommendations are being issued when the Okinawans have neither discussed nor demanded them is clearly an effort by a specific government to divide the Japanese people and weaken them by making them fight each other. The UN should not issue recommendations based on a purposely manipulated and separatist report by those specific groups. We call on this Council to dispatch the Special Rapporteur to Okinawa to meet with Okinawans to learn about the real situation in Okinawa without prejudice. We then ask the Council to revisit these recommendations. Thank you very much.

Published on

In March 2024, Mr. Shunichi Fujiki, Senior Researcher of iRICH, had attended on 55th UN Human Rights Councils in Geneva. He had 3 NGO speeches about human rights issues in Eastern Asia.

Speech about: Tibet Issue

We call for your attention to express our grave concern about ongoing human rights violations in China-controlled Tibet.

 As a cultural and religious minority, the Tibetan people continue to face systematic oppression and violation of their fundamental human rights as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

 Tibetan monks died in custody due to torture and ill-treatment.
Tibetan nomads are forced to move into urban areas for migration and assimilation.

This policy is destroying traditional livelihoods and weakening the cultural identity of the Tibetan people.

Widespread surveillance, restrictions on freedom of movement, and systematic suppression of Tibetan language and culture in education.

Tibetan Buddhism faced severe restrictions, monasteries are closed, language and education marginalized in favor of Chinese, and nature destroyed for economic gain.

Independent access to Tibet is restricted, making it difficult to verify official claims.

However, consistent reports from human rights groups, journalists, and former Tibetan residents paint a very different picture.

We ask this Council for following 3 recommendations to China.

1．Allow press and UN members free access to Tibet.

2．Release all political prisoners and end the arbitrary detention of peace activists.

3．Respect Tibetan people's freedom of religion and belief.

Even at this moment, they are suffering.
We need to take a decisive action. Silence is not our choice.

Speech about: Uygur Issue

We call for your attention to express our grave concern about ongoing human rights violations in China-controlled Tibet.

 As a cultural and religious minority, the Tibetan people continue to face systematic oppression and violation of their fundamental human rights as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

 Tibetan monks died in custody due to torture and ill-treatment.
Tibetan nomads are forced to move into urban areas for migration and assimilation.

This policy is destroying traditional livelihoods and weakening the cultural identity of the Tibetan people.

Widespread surveillance, restrictions on freedom of movement, and systematic suppression of Tibetan language and culture in education.

Tibetan Buddhism faced severe restrictions, monasteries are closed, language and education marginalized in favor of Chinese, and nature destroyed for economic gain.

Independent access to Tibet is restricted, making it difficult to verify official claims.

However, consistent reports from human rights groups, journalists, and former Tibetan residents paint a very different picture.

We ask this Council for following 3 recommendations to China.

1．Allow press and UN members free access to Tibet.

2．Release all political prisoners and end the arbitrary detention of peace activists.

3．Respect Tibetan people's freedom of religion and belief.

Even at this moment, they are suffering.
We need to take a decisive action. Silence is not our choice.

Speech about: Freedom of speech in China

Thank you, Chairperson,

The COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan revealed the bravery of individuals whose commitment to truth and human rights resulted in persecution by the Chinese government. Their reporting highlighted the severity of the situation in Wuhan, yet they faced unjust imprisonment and espionage charges for advocating for freedom of speech.

These cases illuminate the broader issue of press freedom in China.

The government's crackdown on independent journalism not only violates human rights but also obstructs the free flow of information and stifles public discourse.

Anti-Spy Law is used to target journalists and businessmen, damaging international trust and cooperation.

These human rights violations by the China contradict the principles of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action. It is vital for the international community to raise awareness of these abuses and hold the China accountable.

As the PRC serves on the United Nations Human Rights Council member from 2024 to 2027, there is an opportunity for change and accountability. We urge the PRC to fulfill its responsibilities and demonstrate a genuine commitment to respecting human rights.

We hope that this Council will recommend China to protect their own people's human rights as a member of this Council, before making any comments on the human rights of other countries.

Thank you very much, Chairperson.

Published on

Book : The Issue of the Japanese Military Comfort Women -How to solve the farce of global fraud that deceived the entire world-.
Author: Kim Byung-heon, President of the Korean History Textbook Research Institute
Translate Japanese : Fujiko Miyamoto
Translate English　 : Society for the Dissemination of Historical Fact

Descriptiron

The author of this paper, Mr. Kim Byung-heon, is a specialist in Korean history. Having completed the doctorate course in Chinese literature at Sungkyukwan University, he now tackles the issue of comfort women as the President of the Korean History Textbook Research Institute.

He felt so indignant morally at the outrageously distorted theory of “forced abduction of Korean women by the Japanese Government,” claimed by former comfort women and their supporters, that he held a press interview condemning various lies about the comfort women issue in front of the Japanese Embassy in Seoul in December 2019.

Since then, in protest against the “Wednesday demonstrations” praising comfort women, held by the Korean Council for Justice and Remembrance (formerly, the Korean Council for the Women Drafted for Military Sexual Slavery) in front of the premises of the Japanese Embassy in Seoul, he bravely held “anti-comfort women supporters” demonstrations at the same site and continuously condemned lies related to the comfort women issue. His activities are not limited within Korea, he also flew to Berlin with his companions in June last year and protested against the Mitte District Assembly that had permitted the establishment of a comfort women statue in the district and held a rally in front of the erected statue, revealing lies of the comfort women issue to Berlin citizens.

His cooperative efforts with us at the International Research Institute of Controversial Histories (iRICH) and other Japanese groups searching for the truth about the “comfort women issue” are well under way. In August last year, we went to Nagoya, Japan, where the “Non-Freedom of Expression Exhibit” was being held and resolutely protested against it with members of “Nadeshiko Japan.”

In addition, in November last year, Mr. Kim participated in the Japan-Korea Joint Symposium to refute the lies about the comfort women issue, organized by the iRICH in Tokyo, and condemned the lies included in Korean history textbooks.

The Joint Symposium was held for the second time in Seoul in September this year. Representing Korea, Mr. Kim Byung-heon took the platform together with former Professor Ji Seokchoon of Yonsei University and Mr. Lee Wooyeon of Naksungdae Institute of Economic Research and described specific distortions and fabrications about the comfort women in Korean elementary and middle school textbooks and decisively criticized them.

This paper is a concise summary of Mr. Kim Byung-heon’s assertions, covering the important points regarding the comfort women issue, perfectly refuting assertions made by former comfort women and leftist civil groups, in extremely logical and precise manner.

The English and Japanese translations of this paper have been posted by the Society for the Dissemination of Historical Fact (SDHF) https://www.sdh-fact.com

Article : Japanese / English