Author: irichen

Book review: Pearl Harbor Attack: Roosevelt Knew it –15 proofs that overturn the “Surprise Attack” theory written by Shiramatsu Shigeru (Tokyo: Minerva Shobo, 2025)

Reviewed by Sugihara Seishiro
President
International Research Institute of Controversial Histories

(1) Regarding the Japanese Navy’s surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, which triggered the war      between Japan and the United States in 1941, it is an important issue in the U.S. postwar history to clarify whether the United States President Roosevelt knew about it in advance.

At the time when the President spoke in the U.S. Congress on the next day of the surprise attack, no lawmakers could have imagined any knowledge but in due time, considering the scale and damages inflicted by the attack, suspicion naturally rose that Roosevelt knew it but did not tell the base in Pearl Harbor, which led to larger casualties.

Anyhow, how the United States failed to perceive in advance an attack of that size and scale, which inflicted such tragic casualties was the great concern of the American people and unravelling it became a historically important task. To probe the issue, eight official investigations were conducted during wartime and immediately after the war ended, a joint Senate and House investigation committee was held, amounting to the total of nine official investigations.

Among these, the committee most suspicious of Roosevelt’s foreknowledge of the Japanese Navy’s surprise attack, which investigated the issue most thoroughly was certainly the one held from November 15, 1945 through May 31, 1946 by the Joint Senate and House Investigation Committee. However, despite the grand-scale investigation, they could not obtain any testimony that Roosevelt knew beforehand about the attack or any source to verify it.

Thus, for a time being, documents related to the Pearl Harbor remained classified, and the issue of Roosevelt’s foreknowledge has been kept frozen.

(2) However, about forty years after the Pearl Harbor attack, two books using the sources from the above-mentioned official investigations were published and became popular in the United States.

One is At Dawn We Slept: The Untold Story of Pearl Harbor, written by Gordon W. Prange and published in 1981 (New York: McGraw Hill, 1981). And the other is Infamy: Pearl Harbor and Its Aftermath written by John Toland and published in 1982 (New York: Doubleday, 1982).

The two books are based on the same sources, but their conclusions are the opposite.

Prange concluded at the end of his book with the words, “...But in a thorough search of more than thirty years, including all publications released up to May 1, 1981, we have not discovered one document or one word of sworn testimony that substantiates the revisionist position on Roosevelt and Pearl Harbor.”

On the other hand, the book by Toland concluded quite oppositely that Roosevelt knew about the attack. One piece of compelling evidence which did not emerge in the nine official investigations was testimony from a wireless operator Z at the 12th Naval District in San Francisco intercepted signals transmitted from the Japanese Task Force, and pinpointed the Task Force’s location, and this had been reported to Washington. If this is true, it can hardly be denied that Roosevelt knew. However, at that time, according to the Japanese history study, it was believed that the Task Force that attacked Pearl Harbor maintained strict radio silence. Affected by this theory, the wireless operator’s testimony was not fully trusted and although Toland’s theory was widely discussed in the United States, most people regarded it as unacceptable.

Essentially, it is believed that the United States fought the war with Japan as a just war and under such psychology, Americans did not want to believe that Roosevelt knew about the attack in advance and had to take the blame for the Pearl Harbor victims and it was thought that although Toland’s book was an interesting read, it did not provide concrete evidence to support the Roosevelt foreknowledge theory, which kept readers from supporting Roosevelt’s foreknowledge theory.

(3) However, nearly ten years afterwards, in 1991, on the fiftieth anniversary of the Pearl Harbor attack, the United States National Security Agency (NSA), with a view to terminating the Roosevelt foreknowledge theory once for all, investigated documents declassified before the 50th anniversary of the Pearl Harbor attack and concluded that the United States Navy could not foresee the surprise attack by the Japanese Navy. However, the book published in Japan in that year The Surprise Attack on Pearl Harbor: Did Roosevelt Know? written by Konno Tsutomu (Tokyo: Yomiuri Shimbun-sha, 1991) presented a thesis that clearly refuted the U.S. conclusion. Konno investigated each of the seven testimonies which are not direct but supportive evidence of the theory widely spread across the world that Roosevelt knew about the attack in advance and the historical value of which cannot be denied. Konno proved that although those seven testimonies describe separate situations, on close examination of each of them, they fit into one pattern and align with each other beyond time and space. Although they are not based on direct evidence, they clearly indicate that the Roosevelt foreknowledge theory is substantiated.

In Toland’s book mentioned above, for example, it is pointed out that a wireless operator detected the transmission from the Japanese Task Force, pinpointed the location and reported it to Washington. Regarding this information, a theory was introduced that a task force was moving in the North Pacific Ocean in a range as large as the size of the Japanese Awaji Island, and radio waves transmitted from the Funabashi communication facility to the task force were reflected like a mirror by the task force, which produced an effect as if a new radio wave was transmitted. If this theory stands valid, it proves the validity of both testimonies that the Task Force was strictly observing radio silence and the U.S. Navy analyzed the radio wave transmitted from the Japanese Task Force, pinpointed the location of the Task Force and reported it to Washington.

(4) Nearly ten years afterwards, in 2000, a scholarly book titled Day of Deceit: The Truth about FDR and Pearl Harbor, written by Robert B. Stinnett was published (New York: Free Press, 2000). Navy documents around the start of the U.S.-Japanese War were declassified as historical sources and became accessible, which prompted the new development in the study of the Roosevelt foreknowledge theory.

Stinnet got access to the record of the wave reception from the Japanese Navy related to the Pearl Harbor attack, which clarified to considerable extent the movement of the Japanese Navy and with the vital information that the Washinton leaders did not inform the base in Pearl Harbor of these pieces of information, the crucial failure can be asserted based on historical facts. Incidentally, the unidentified wireless operator Z mentioned by Toland was identified as Robert Ogg and Toland put the photograph of Ogg holding the original source indicating that he caught the wireless transmission from the Japanese Task Force as Toland had pointed out. Thus, Toland’s assertion was decisively proven to be correct.

(5) Twenty-five years later, in 2025, the Japanese scholar Shiramatsu Shigeru got access to historical sources, including those Stinnett could not get access to, and clearly proved that the United States decoded the D Code which the Japanese Navy used, being fully confident that it was impossible to decipher. Then, he extensively read books published on the study of the Pearl Harbor issue in the world and published the book Pearl Harbor Attack: Roosevelt knew it—15 proofs that overturn the “Sneak Attack” theory (Tokyo: Minerva Shobo, 2025), the object of this book review.

Prior to the publication of this book, Shiramatsu published the book There was no aircraft carrier then—examining Pearl Harbor (Tokyo: Bungei-shunju-sha, 2013). He had read extensively books published across the world related to the Pearl Harbor issue, examined them and added the following historical facts of great significance.

On December 4, three days prior to the Pearl Harbor Attack on December 7 (U.S. calendar), The Chicago Daily Tribune reported a war plan to mobilize an army of 10,000,000 strong, which put Roosevelt in an utter predicament. In fact, this was an intended leak that Churchill plotted, and Roosevelt approved. In 1940, Roosevelt was successfully elected for his third term as President with his promise not to go to war. It could be tantamount to betrayal to the American people for him to make such a war plan. And if this fact had been known to the people, Roosevelt would have faced an extraordinary predicament. In the above-mentioned book, Toland describes how dismayed Roosevelt was over this leaking incident. However, in his book, Shiramatsu made it clear that this was an intentional leak plotted by Churchill and Roosevelt.

Why did they plot such a thing? Their aim was, with the knowledge of the Japanese Navy’s attempt to attack Pearl Harbor and on this premise, to manipulate Germany, which had no obligation to join the war after it broke out, into unfailingly entering war with the United States. If Hitler was to know about the war plan of this scale, Hitler would have judged a war with the United States unavoidable and there would be no alternative but to declare war at this point even though the preparation for war has not yet been completed. In fact, after Hitler went through agony after agony, he declared war against the United States on December 11.

This is the first book in Japan to introduce the mechanism of the leaking incident. Thus, the Roosevelt foreknowledge theory has been perfectly proven. It is an epoch-making fact to both Japan and the United States in postwar history studies to substantiate that a Japanese has perfectly proven the Roosevelt foreknowledge theory.

(6) In the first place, however, why are both Japan and the United States obsessed with the Roosevelt foreknowledge theory as a historical issue? Thinking about it, we learn that there is a big difference between Japan and the United States as to the significance of the obsession. In the United States, to put it in extreme terms, it goes that even though Roosevelt knew about the Japanese Navy’s surprise attack on Pearl Harbor in advance, he did not appropriately alert the Pear Harbor base, which led to many American casualties without cause. On the other hand, considering Japan was accused of being a despicable country for the “sneak attack” and forced into waging a devastating war, it is of much more significance to prove the Roosevelt foreknowledge theory.

Incidentally, though there remains a question of whether it was regarded as a form of declaration of war, thirty minutes prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor, Japan was to hand an “ultimatum” to the U.S. Secretary of State. However, due to the clerical blunder on the part of the Japanese Embassy in Washington, it was handed to the United States after the attack on Pearl Harbor started. In terms of formality, it turned out to be a “sneak attack,” without a notice in advance. As a result, the American people got far more furious than in the case if the event followed the scheduled course.

On the ground of the American people’s utter fury, on January 24, 1943, at Casablanca, Roosevelt declared the demand for unconditional surrender of Japan and Germany. Regarding Japan, on February 8, 1945, at Yalta, Roosevelt concluded a secret pact with Stalin that in two to three months after Germany surrendered unconditionally, the Soviet Union would enter war with Japan, abandoning the Russo-Japanese neutrality treaty. On the following day, Churchill learned about the pact and advised Roosevelt to the effect that if Japan was informed that the Soviet Union decided to enter war with Japan, Japan would certainly surrender and then war casualties would be terminated at that earlier point. However, Roosevelt turned a deaf ear to this advice. After all, war casualties on both parts of Japan and the United States after that time onward were victims whose lives were lost for no cause, because if the U.S. consolidated its victory at that time, they could have ended the war then but did not do so. On the part of Japan, clearly victims of the atomic bombing and Tokyo air-raids had nothing to do with the victory or loss of the war. Let alone, the result of the Soviet entering the war enticed by Roosevelt was that Roosevelt led Japan to the national division and total destruction as Roosevelt intended.

The Joint Senate-House Investigation Committee proved that Roosevelt provoked Japan into war by presenting the Hull Note to Japan. It was also found out that the United States decoded and read every Japanese diplomatic telegram and knew that Japan initially tried to hand the “ultimatum” to the U.S. 30 minutes prior to the Pearl Harbor attack, and it was substantiated that Japan did not intend to attack Pearl Harbor without any advance notice.

However, relying on the theory that it was not clear whether Roosevelt knew it before the Japanese Navy attacked Pearl Harbor, the fact has been ignored that Roosevelt inflicted unnecessary hardship on the Japanese people and forced Japan to follow a bitter fate of a divided nation. And in the United States, all has been left unquestioned, including not only the fact that knowing in advance about the Japanese Navy’s Pearl Harbor attack, they did not tell the local Pearl Harbor base of the attack and American soldiers at Pearl Harbor fell a victim to the attack unreasonably but also that the war was expanded beyond the scope of victory or defeat and many American soldiers’ lives were lost in vain. We must have the American people clearly recognize all these facts.

Roosevelt intended to force such cruel destiny on Japan, well knowing that he himself provoked Japan into entering the war between Japan and the United States and that the Pearl Harbor attack without advance notice was not a planned “surprise attack,” and expanding the American casualties to such an unnecessary extent. According to statistics, more than half of the American casualties during the U.S.-Japanese War were caused after the surrender of Saipan in July 1944, when the victory of the United States over Japan was practically decided. That is, in the U.S.-Japanese War, more than half of the American casualties were caused after the winner was decided. This fact should equally be shared by both the American and the Japanese peoples.

For this purpose, in whatever way, we must prove completely the Roosevelt foreknowledge theory. This book, through the thorough investigation of historical sources and the examination of all scholarly books, proves perfectly the theory that Roosevelt knew about the Japanese Navy’s Pearl Harbor attack in advance and is a shining beacon as a book on history from now on.

Lastly, let me add that the author Shiramatsu plans to publish the English version of this book.

Reviewed Book: Mark Ramseyer, transtated by Nobukatsu Fujioka, Yumiko Yamamoto, Shunichi Fujiki, Yoshiaki Yano and Hiromichi Moteki, Complete Refutation by Prof. Ramseyer
Reviewer: Jason Morgan（Associate Professor, Reitaku University）

Review by Jason Morgan

Articled in "Historical Awareness Research" Vol.14, 2024by Historical Awareness Research Committee

The name of Professor J. Mark Ramseyer of Harvard Law School has now become well known in Japan. It all started with a mere eight-paged paper Professor Ramseyer posted on the website of the academic journal on law and economics, International Review of Law and Economics in December 2020. The paper was titled “Contracting for Sex in the Pacific War.” In his paper, the professor contested the characterization of comfort women as sexual slaves, suggesting instead that their situation resembled an extension of a business model similar to “indentured servitude.” He employed economic “game theory” to support his analysis. Nothing happened immediately after the post.

Then, anti-Ramseyer campaign started when the news opinion website “Japan Forward” introduced the summary of the professor’s paper in English on January 12, 2021, and on the 28th of the same month, the Japanese newspaper The Sankei Shimbun published an explanation and a summary by Professor Fukui Yoshitaka at Aoyama Gakuin University.[i] First, in South Korea and then in the United States and other countries of the English-speaking sphere and Japan, a wave of hatred against Professor Ramseyer erupted and grew violently, materializing in various “accusations.”

“History revisionist,” “history denier,” “the same as the Holocaust deniers,” “white supremacist” and “racial discriminator,” etc. --all kinds of thinkable slanders and groundless accusations were made against Professor Ramseyer, demanding his apology for what he wrote and the withdrawal of his paper. A barrage of blackmail and threats poured against Professor Ramseyer, and he even received a death threat. The most shocking fact about the incidents was that those who led the anti-Ramseyer campaign and violently instigated the hate-movement were so-called “scholars” employed at universities in South Korea, Japan, the United States, Australia and Singapore. Thus, Professor Ramseyer came to be known in Japan through his study on comfort women and the chaotic confusion over that study.

Though many Japanese may know the name of Professor Ramseyer and may be aware that he has been studying the comfort women issue, only a few can describe correctly his ideas. Under such circumstances, the book Complete Refutation by Prof. Ramseyer came along. The book is a collection of Professor Ramseyer’s papers which prove theoretically that comfort women played a part in the well-regulated prostitution business, based on the licensed private prostitution system as a legal business. Those women voluntarily entered into “indentured labor contracts” on the premise of the payment of high wages, which proved that there was no systematic or forced abduction of women on the part of the Japanese Government or military. The book was translated into Japanese. The editing and translation work was done by the Deputy Chairman of the Japan Society for History Textbook Reform Mr. Fujioka Nobukatsu and four other persons participated in the work. The translated book includes three papers written by Professor Ramseyer as the result of his research over the past thirty plus years and the fourth paper was rebuttal of his critics. The first paper was published in 1991 under the title “Indentured Prostitution in Imperial Japan: Credible Commitments in the Commercial Sex Industry”.[ii]

The second paper was “Comfort Women and the Professors.” The third paper was “Contracting for Sex in the Pacific War”, which instantly made Professor Ramseyer famous. The fourth paper was “Contracting for Sex in the Pacific War: A Response to my critics.”[iii]

One thing to regret is that the book does not include the paper “The Comfort Women Issue and the North Korean Connection,”[iv] co-authored by Professor Ramseyer and Professor Arima Tetsuo at Waseda University. In addition, the four papers were written over a period of more than thirty years and since they include refutation, there are some duplicate parts. But let me make it clear that duplications do not matter when it comes to the true value of Professor Ramseyer’s study. It is truly a blessing that Professor Ramseyer’s monumental study, though only part of it, was translated into Japanese for the first time for Japanese readers to appreciate.

Professor Ramseyer’s study is not just about comfort women. Together with Professor John Owen Haley, a predecessor of Professor Ramseyer in the field of study on history of the Japanese legal system by European and American scholars, Professor Ramseyer is known to everyone and has devoted his scholarly career to understanding the Japanese society and its legal system and history of legal economics, using the principles of the Chicago School of economics which applies the method of micro economics not only to economic issues but also to various other issues present in the society. I would like to urge those who become interested in Professor Ramseyer’s studies through the book Complete Refutation by Prof. Ramseyer to read other papers written by the Professor, who is an expert on the Japanese legal and economic history.

In his 2020 paper “Contracting for Sex in the Pacific War,” Professor Ramseyer argued – using game theory method associated with the Chicago School of economics – that comfort women worked under commercial contracts within a licensed prostitution system. The paper, unfortunately, provoked significant backlash and threats. Game theory, in simple terms, is a framework used to model strategic decision-making among multiple actors, each seeking to maximize their own benefit.  Professor Ramseyer applies the “game theory” concept of “credible commitments” to the relationship between comfort station owners and the women who worked there. According his analysis, owners sought to secure profit by establishing trust with the women. While the women, in turn, could increase their own expected payment by cooperating within the contractual framework; in this model, both parties are seen as pursuing mutually beneficial self-interest. Ramseyer thus argues, using microeconomic reasoning, that comfort women – or their families – chose participation in the licensed prostitution system as strategy to improve their lives within a limited set of option.

As clearly seen in the first and second papers in Complete Refutation by Prof. Ramseyer, “Contracting for Sex in the Pacific War” is a result of studies in which Professor Ramseyer has long been engaged that prove the effective combination of the contract system of comfort women and its rationality on one hand and the “game theory” in microeconomics on the other. His studies do not discuss ethical issues concerning prostitution nor do they deny the existence of comfort women. I cannot help wondering why then it caused such fuss as to induce the violent anti-Ramseyer campaign.

Among Professor Ramseyer’s critics, some argue loudly, “There were no actual contracts exchanged between the comfort women and their employers, therefore Ramseyer is a fraud!” However, if you read his paper, it clearly indicates what was written in the contracts, because although he did not verify the “real” contract, he obtained many pieces of evidence from related sources of that time.

This means that among his critics there are those who did not read Professor Ramseyer’s papers or did not understand them. These people should not be allowed to criticize the professor’s papers or slander his personality.

Beside the professor’s four papers, the “Prologue: The fuss over the Ramseyer papers and the background: On the publication of the Japanese-versioned collection of my papers” is also worth reading. At the time when Professor Ramseyer was not only plagued by harassment but was also intimidated by death threats, he frequently contacted me about the situation. Hearing and witnessing the shameless conduct of the self-proclaimed “scholars,” I re-recognized the poor level of learning and civil consciousness of American universities and researchers. Professor Ramseyer had to endure long and merciless harassment since he published “Contracting for Sex in the Pacific War,” but unlike many other scholars, he did not apologize neither did he admit non-existent fault and he did not withdraw his papers which he believes to be correct. It was Ramseyer’s pride as a scholar. I heartily admire his undaunted scholar’s spirit.

At the time when he was exposed to severe attacks and threats, there was no room for laughing and we were totally at a loss about how to cope with the dire situation. Thinking back, after the publication of the book Complete Refutation by Prof. Ramseyer, we realize how comical the behavior of the “scholars” in the English-speaking sphere in the United States and elsewhere was. What is interesting here is that “scholars’” words and deeds and their unquestionable belief that they are right appear several times more ridiculous when they are translated into Japanese than in the original English texts. In fact, when I was reading the Prologue, “the fuss over Ramseyer’s papers and the background,” I could not help but laugh aloud several times. Complete Refutation by Prof. Ramseyer will play a great role in helping readers understand the moral depravity of many scholars in the English-speaking sphere as scholars and humans.

I am very happy that through the publication of Complete Refutation by Prof. Ramseyer, three other papers besides “Contracting for Sex in the Pacific War” were translated into Japanese and became easily accessible to the Japanese people. I have read all the papers included in the book in English. The translation team led by Mr. Fujioka did an excellent job, concisely grasping Professor Ramseyer’s intention and making the book a wonderful translation work. Thanks to their efforts, I am perfectly sure that Professor Ramseyer’s clear logic using the legal economic analysis will be understood by the Japanese readers. I pay my heart-felt respect to the translation and editing team.

To understand the present situation of the “historical controversial warfare” still being fought, the book Complete Refutation by Prof. Ramseyer should be widely read. Although there may be some misspelling in the references in the note, what matters is that the results of the studies on Japanese legal history and economic system have been translated into precise and dutiful Japanese.

Lastly, let me conclude my review by stating my wish. My wish is that Professor Ramseyer’s many other studies will be translated into precise and easy-to-read Japanese and published like this book. Professor Ramseyer is well-known in Japan for his studies related to comfort women. And yet, as I mentioned in the beginning, his studies cover a vast array of topics and are very profound. From the bottom of my heart, I’m looking forward to the day when my wish comes true.

(Translated and edited by Fujioka Nobukatsu and Yamamoto Yumiko, translated by Fujiki Shunichi, Yano Yoshiaki and Moteki Hiromichi, [v] Heart Publisher, 2023, 1980 yen.)

---

[i] “Professor Ramseyer refutes the criticism, No evidence of forced abduction” The Sankei Newspaper, dated January 14, 2021 https://www.sankei.com/article/20220114-TGQAHT3XQZNLFEUAR7GJDHN62U/ (pay article)

[ii] J. Mark Ramseyer, “Indentured Prostitution in Imperial Japan: Credible Commitments in the Commercial Sex Industry,” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, vol.7, No.1 (Spring, 1991), pp89-116 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/764879) was translated into Japanese in 1993. See Sono Hiroo “Geisha Contract—Credible Commitments in the Commercial Sex Industry,” “Hokudai Collection of Papers on Study of Law, Hokkaido University, Law Department, October 25, 1993  https://eprints.lib.hokudai.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2115/15533/d1/44%283%29_p206-160.pdf

See p.109 of the volume under review for reference to the same translation.

[iii] In January 2024, several papers related to the comfort women issue written by Professor Ramseyer were translated into the Korean language and published in one volume, though contents are somewhat different.

[iv] “The comfort women issue and the North Korean connection,” co-authored by Professor Arima Tetsuo at Waseda University and Professor Mark Ramseyer at Graduate School, Harvard University and posted on “Social Science Research Network (SSRN) (digital academic magazine) on August 17, 2022. (The original text is written in English.)

[v] https://www.810.co.jp/hon/ISBN978-4-8024-0172-2.html

Reviewed by Miyamoto Fujiko, Guest Fellow, International Research Institute of Controversial Histories

During the Moon Jae-in administration amid storming anti-Japan sentiment and the crisis looming that the Federal Democratic Republic of Korea may arise, the South Korean people kept holding large-scale rallies at Gwanghwamun in Seoul every weekend to oust the Moon Jae-in administration during his term of office. Intellectuals held lectures across the country to wipe out the anti-Japan frame of mind that penetrated deeply the minds of the South Koreans. At universities, the Truth Forum was held to recognize the true historical facts. And to overcome the crisis of the Japan-South Korea relationships, in 2019, the book Anti-Japan Tribalism was published (2019, Miraesa) in South Korea. It revealed the root of the Japan-South Korea crisis and became a best seller with roughly 100,000 copies sold. Six scholars stood up for the publication. It was an epoch-making book, closely analyzing how astoundingly untrue the South Korean anti-Japan thinking was, based on historical facts from the respective perspectives of the scholars’ expertise. The book became a sensation in South Korea. Did the book change the South Korean people’s anti-Japan sentiment? In school education, textbooks still teach that Japan is a villain and anti-Japan education is going on, the same as ever. Nothing has changed. I myself feel that South Korean people’s deep-routed anti-Japan thinking is not easy to change at all. This is my impression after I have lived with my South Korean husband in the South Korean society for more than thirty years.

I always felt it puzzling why it is that while Japan ruled Taiwan longer than it did Korea and invested far larger amounts of money in Korea than in Taiwan, Taiwan is Japan-friendly, and Korea is anti-Japan. What made it so? Ms. Oh Sonfa’s book Why Anti-Japan South Korea Has No Future gave a perfect answer to my question. The analysis, composed of six chapters, is profound, precise and perfect. The view held by most Japanese intellectuals is that “Korean people who lived through the period of Japan’s Annexation of Korea are Japan-friendly, but from the postwar Syngman Rhee administration up to the present, through the anti-Japan policy and education implemented by consecutive Presidents, South Korea became an anti-Japan state.” However, Ms. Oh Sonfa pointed out, “South Korean anti-Japan principle is not a mere political policy. Importantly, South Korea started as a state, upholding anti-Japan principle as its just cause. The preamble to the South Korean Constitution itself is false and therefore, it distorted historical facts and chose to thoroughly teach and propagandize the distorted history to the people.”

This book was published in 2013, six years prior to Anti-Japan Tribalism. Anti-Japan Tribalism explains how the distorted contexts and facts differ in terms of the six typical anti-Japan themes. Ms. Oh Sonfa’s analysis of anti-Japan sentiment is done, by deeper exploration of the South Korean DNA, close tribal ties and the roots of the Korean way of thinking. What I have felt for many years while living in the Korean society was clearly explained in printed form. “This is it!” I fully sympathized with the book and felt truly great. I was profoundly amazed at Ms. Oh Sonfa’s analyzing power. It is superbly described in Chapter IV “Why anti-Japan sentiment cannot be wiped out.” “The bitter feeling toward the period of Japan’s rule is not the basis of anti-Japan but the fact that the despicable tribe (Japan) ruled the Koreans is unforgivable, which brews anti-Japan tribalism.”(p.137) Thus, Chapter IV unravels in an excellent way South Koreans’ deep psychology, something that no other scholar has done before.

There is a sentence on page 142: “The Japanese tribe with natural savagery and aggressive traits humiliated the integrity of our sacred tribal blood.” Anti-Japan is a sentiment born out of anger which is almost a physiological response. I understand that this sentiment is used as a motive, in many newly made dramas, movies and musicals, and the people believe that they are true. This negative spiral aggravated South Koreans’ anti-Japan sentiment. Even if a decent scholar appears with the appeal, “That historical view is false and fabricated, and the truth is this!” The deep-rooted sense of value permeated to the bone will not change immediately. This is the reality.

However, even in South Korea as it is, it’s been five years since National Action to Abolish the Comfort Women Act led by Mr. Kim Byungheon started working to remove comfort woman statues and delete descriptions related to comfort women from the South Korean history textbooks. Things improved significantly compared to the early time of the movement and sea change was accomplished and the movement of the Korean Council for Justice was reduced in scale. Although President Yoon Suk-yeol was to face the peril of impeachment at the time when this book review was written, it is a great change in South Korea in recent years that President Yoon did not implement anti-Japan policy at the start of his administration. As mentioned earlier, all the consecutive Presidents carried out anti-Japan policy, but President Yoon did not do so for the national interest.

I am appalled by the totally outrageous anti-Japan policies of the consecutive Korean Presidents , who used every possible means to act against Japan. Ms. Oh Sonfa points out that the South Korean anti-Japan sentiment is much more extreme than the Chinese people’s.

I presume the author Oh wrote this book, worrying about the serious Korean situation in 2013. The details of her concerns are discussed in Chapter VI, covering many fields. However, I cannot help thinking that it is rather Japan that is plagued with violent crimes and serious social problems.

In fact, as I mentioned earlier, while the root of anti-Japan sentiments is deep and grave, on the other hand, if you go to bookstores in South Korea, there are many Japanese novels and manga translated into the Korean language, on TV, Japanese animations are broadcast almost endlessly and Japanese restaurants are everywhere. Through the recent expansion of the Internet, everyone can easily enjoy Japanese culture, songs and dramas and Japanese actors and talents are getting popular in South Korea. Among young people, there are many Japanese-friendly Youtubers and they attract many viewers. Even if the truth about the period of Japan’s Annexation of Korea is not taught at school, they can learn it on the Internet.

Especially at present, some say that J-POP has become more popular than K-POP. Acting in a Japan-friendly way used to be thought as evil, but this concept will gradually change through the Internet in a natural manner. Ms. Oh Sonfa was taught anti-Japan education and was anti-Japan just like other South Koreans. After she came to Japan, she had doubts about the Korean historical interpretations and devoured one book after another on Japan and South Korea histories and was gradually freed from the anti-Japan magic spell.

Ms. Oh Sonfa points out in this book that in the modern South Korean society “South Koreans do not try to view past Japan’s rule in the objective international circumstance and there are no books covering this topic.”. What will happen if this book Why Anti-Japan South Korea Has No Future is translated and published in South Korea? This book provides the most excellent analysis of South Korea and I personally wish that the book is published in South Korea some day soon. If that happens, South Korea will have future. And on the part of Japan, the self-deprecating view of history will be immediately abandoned.

Among many expressions that I truly sympathize with and feel appropriate in this book, I would like to introduce the following paragraph:

The Confucianist idea that the morally superior must always teach, educate and inspire the morally inferior forms the degrading-Japan view, which lies at the base of the Korean sense of tribal superiority tribe over Japan. Moreover, in South Korea, there is a concept of the superior tribe born out of the lesser Chinese principle that South Korea is the very authentic successor of the Sino-centrist idea. Therefore, the sense of tribal superiority over Japan is made all the more consolidated.

Such a sense seems to apply to those aged fifties and older. Young people seem to be less influenced by this sense. In either case, there is an urgent task to revise the biased South Korean history textbooks as soon as possible.    

Revieed Book: Historical Sources Unravel the Issue of “Mobilized Korean Workers,” published by Soshi-sha, 2024
Author: Nagatani Ryosuke
Reviewer: Tomoko Hifumi, Senior Reseacher, International Research Institute of Historical Controversies

This book is an epoch-making academic book, dealing with the disputed issue of Korean “mobilized workers.” Based on closely examined primary historical sources, it completely refutes the alleged “forced mobilization and forced labor” theory that during the war, Korean people were compulsorily mobilized from the Korean Peninsula and forced to work at Japanese coal and other mines.

Its author, Mr. Nagatani Ryosuke, is a researcher at the Historical Awareness Research Committee and a visiting researcher at the Reitaku University Study Center of International Issues. Mr. Nagatani was born in Kumamoto Prefecture in 1986 and graduated from the Department of Culture and History of Kumamoto University. He completed the doctoral course of Japan Study Institute at the graduate school of Hosei University and obtained the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. After graduating from the graduate school of Hosei University, he joined the Historical Awareness Research Committee (President: Nishioka Tsutomu) and is actively engaged in studying mainly the issue of wartime Korean workers. He co-authored The True Nature of Wartime Korean Workers (published by the General Incorporated Foundation National Congress of Industrial Heritage).

The theory of “forced mobilization” and “forced labor” was ignited by the publication of a book titled The Record of Forced Mobilization of Koreans written by a person named Park Kyon-sik in 1965. At present, the historical examination on Park Kyon-sik’s arguments has proved to be largely problematic. Nevertheless, the theory of forced mobilization and forced labor has never been abandoned, but is still smoldering, often being used politically and is about to simmer at any moment. This has not remained an academic issue limited to the historical circles. In fact, in 2018, the South Korean Supreme Court ordered Shin-Nittetsu Sumi Kin (a Japanese steel company) to compensate former South Korean workers for the alleged forced labor during the war. After the Supreme Court decision, the number of lawsuits demanding compensation from Japanese companies increased and in all the lawsuits, the plaintiffs have won. It goes without saying that all of these court rulings are against the Agreement on the Settlement of Problems Concerning Properties and Claims and on Economic Co-operation between Japan and the Republic of Korea, concluded in 1965. Thus, historical issues tend to be used politically.

This book is composed of two parts.

The first part contains the refutation of the narrative of “forced mobilization” and “forced labor” of wartime Korean workers. Chapter One refutes the concept of “forced mobilization,” through the detailed explanation of the recruiting process based on historical sources and proves that most of the workers came to Japan voluntarily. Chapter Two refutes “forced labor.” Here, historical sources are concretely analyzed in terms of wages, meals and working hours.

The second part vividly describes how Korean workers worked and lived, based on the primary historical sources. Chapter Three shows the life and work of Korean workers based on “Tokko Geppo” (Special Higher Police Monthly Report), which was compiled by the Security Section of Police Department of the Ministry of the Interior. The entire picture of labor conflicts by Korean workers is shown. Chapter Four deals with Nisso Teshio Coal Mine in Hokkaido, Chapter Five describes Sado Gold Mine and Chapter Six takes up Mitsui Miike Coal Mines. Through these studies, it is verified that the idea of “forced labor” is not factual and historical facts are revealed from objective viewpoints.

This book clearly portrays this author’s scholarly attitudes totally focusing on the principles as a history scholar. He has been steadily unearthing primary sources and strictly analyzing and examining them—theories and views induced through such steady and reliable work prove to be certainly objective and irrefutable.

Those who support “forced mobilization” and “forced labor” theories mainly depend on statements made by South Koreans as grounds for their conviction. Their testimonies alone are made much of and they are celebrated as “surviving witnesses.” Once objection or doubt is cast on their statements, they get so emotional and upset that they fiercely fight back, totally out of control, saying that their honor is damaged. Such tendency became more significant after the comfort women issue came up. Moreover, although the testimonies are primary sources, they are arbitrarily used or based on arbitrary interpretations. Among primary sources, they pick up only convenient ones that support their view and do not refer to what is inconvenient. They go even further, adding distorted interpretations in favor of their own view.

This author bravely challenges these ill trends in the history study society and strongly warns readers of the wrong and dangerous trend that influences history studies. Those who study history should not have prejudice or preoccupation. I would like to have those “forced mobilization” advocates pick up this book and sincerely look through all the primary sources and then try to refute it in an academic manner. Such an attitude will surely contribute to the sound development of learning. At the same time, this book will provide a good opportunity to start solving the deep-rooted and never-ending (because the South Korean side repeatedly brings back what has been once resolved to the table) historical issue.

In addition, to promote the true friendship between Japan and South Korea, I ardently hope that South Koreans soaked in anti-Japan thinking will read this book as a wake-up call. In a sense, South Koreans dyed with anti-Japan thinking can be called victims of the South Korean Government. On the other hand, I want Japanese people who have been made the perpetrators of “forced mobilization and forced labor” to read this book, by all means. Even if they don’t read through pages, just take up this book in hand and read the table of contents and feel the dubious claim of the “forced mobilization and forced labor.” Not to refute at the right time means a defeat in historical issue warfare and leaves far bigger regrets than armed forces and military wars. Knowing the truth is the stronger foundation of national strength, more important than the possession of armed or military forces. 

Making of The Rape of Nanking: A Big Lie from World War ll English Edition | by M Kanzako and Akira Kashima | Jan 6, 2021

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,

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

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)