Comparison of Historical Memory Narratives in Japan and the FRG after the Second World War
https://doi.org/10.55105/2658-6444-2025-2-21-48
Abstract
The article is devoted to identification of similarities and differences in the historical memory of Japan and the Federal Republic of Germany after World War II. These issues are a relevant topic for research in the face of the enduring influence of historical grievances on Japan’s relations with its former victims, in contrast to similar relations of Germany. As a theoretical framework, the paper uses O. Malinova’s approach, which interprets historical memory as a product of social construction and a variation of symbolic politics. In addition, the author uses the classification of historical memory proposed by Matteo Dian. In the scope of the study, the author examines the impact of occupation policies on the further development of historical memory in the two countries. The paper compares the original content of the main narratives of historical memory in each country, the main mnemonic actors promoting them, and the evolution of these narratives from the end of the war to the present day. The author also highlights the reasons for the differences in the content and evolution of the narratives in Japan and the FRG.
The author concludes that, despite a certain similarity of the occupation policy in the two countries, as well as the formation of two traditions (conservative and left-progressive) in each country’s historical memory, its content and evolution are substantially different. In the FRG, the conservative tradition initially included the narratives of self-victimhood and amnesia, while the progressive tradition included the narrative of contrition; over the years, however, the traditions have evolved from polarization to a consensus around contrition and elements of self-victimhood. In Japan, the conservative tradition initially included glorification of the past in addition to self-victimhood, i.e., it was more revisionist, while the progressive tradition focused on self-victimhood rather than contrition. Over time, the traditions in Japan shifted from a consensus around self-victimhood to a sharp polarization: progressives moved to a contrition narrative, while revisionists gained ground among conservatives.
Keywords
historical narratives,
traumatic past,
politics of memory,
Japan,
Federal Republic of Germany,
World War II.
Supporting agencies: This research was supported by the Russian Science Foundation (grant number 23-18-00109).
About the Author
I. P. Fokin
Institute of Asian and African Studies of Moscow State University;
Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO-University)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Fokin Iaroslav Pavlovich – PhD student; Researcher
11/1, Mokhovaya Street, Moscow, 125009
76, Vernadskogo Prospect, Moscow, 119454
References
1. Ahonen, P. (1998). Domestic Constraints on West German Ostpolitik: The Role of the Expellee Organizations in the Adenauer Era. Central European History, 31, Nos. 1/2.
2. Berger, T. U. (2012). War, Guilt, and World Politics After World War II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. Buruma, I. (1995). Wages of Guilt. Memories of War in Germany and Japan. London: Vintage.
4. Conrad, S. (2010). The Quest for the Lost Nation: Writing History in Germany and Japan in the American Century. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
5. Dian, M. (2017). Contested Memories in Chinese and Japanese Foreign Policy. Oxford: Elsevier.
6. Dower, J. W. (1999). Embracing Defeat: Japan in the Wake of World War II. New York, NY: WW Norton & Company.
7. Duke, B. C. (1973). Japan’s Militant Teachers: A History of the Left-Wing Teachers’ Movement. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
8. Finn, R. B. (1992). Winners in Peace: MacArthur, Yoshida and Postwar Japan. Berkeley – Los Angeles: University of California Press.
9. Frei, N. (2002). Adenauer’s Germany and the Nazi Past. Transl. by J. Golb. New York: Columbia University Press.
10. Gluck C. (1990). The Idea of Showa. Daedalus, 119 (3), 1–26.
11. Harries, M., Harries, S. (1987). Sheathing the Sword: The Demilitarization of Postwar Japan. New York: MacMillan.
12. He, Y. (2008). The Search for Reconciliation: Sino-Japanese and German-Polish Relations Since World War II. Cambridge – New York: Cambridge University Press.
13. Herf, J. (1997). Divided Memory: The Nazi Past in the Two Germanys. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
14. Hirata, T., Dower, J. W. (2006). Japan’s Red Purge: Lessons From a Saga of Suppression of Free Speech and Thought. The Asia Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, 5 (7), 1–8.
15. Jander, M. (1990) Ending the ‘Universalisation’ of the Holocaust and the Wars Against Israel: The GDR People’s Chamber Declaration of 12 April 1990. Fathom. Retrieved from https://fathomjournal.org/ending-the-universalisation-of-the-holocaust-and-the-wars-against-israel-the-gdr-peoples-chamber-declaration-of-12-april-1990/#_edn2
16. Japan-U.S. Relations: Issues for Congress. Updated January 6, 2023. Congressional Research Service. Retrieved from https://sgp.fas.org/crs/row/RL33436.pdf
17. Jaspers, K. (2000). The Question of German Guilt. Transl. by E. B. Ashton. New York: Fordham University Press.
18. Kersten, R. (1996). Democracy in Postwar Japan: Maruyama Masao and the Search for Autonomy. London: Routledge.
19. Lyozina, E. V. (2015). Lyustratsiya i otkrytie arkhivov v stranakh Tsentral’noi i Vostochnoi Evropy [Lustration and Opening of Archives in Central and Eastern European Countries]. Vestnik obshchestvennogo mneniya. Dannye. Analiz. Diskussii, 2 (120), 61–62. (In Russian).
20. Malinova, O. Yu. (2018). Politika pamyati kak oblast’ simvolicheskoi politiki [Memory Politics as an Area of Symbolic Politics]. In Miller, A. I., Efremenko, D. V. (eds.), Metodologicheskie voprosy izucheniya politiki pamyati [Methodological Issues of Studying Memory Policy] (pp. 27–53). Moscow – Saint Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriya. (In Russian).
21. Mann, T. (1945). Germany and the Germans. Washington: Library of the Congress.
22. Nelidov, V. V. (2022). Istoricheskaya pamyat’ vo vneshnepoliticheskom diskurse Yaponii [Historical Memory in the Foreign Policy Discourse of Japan]. In Streltsov, D. V. (ed.), Problemy istoricheskogo proshlogo v otnosheniyakh Yaponii so stranami-sosedyami (pp. 29–52). Moscow: Aspekt-Press. (In Russian).
23. Olick, J. K. (2005). In the House of the Hangman. The Agonies of German Defeat, 1943-1949. Illinois: University of Chicago Press.
24. Orr, J. J. (2001). The Victim as Hero: Ideologies of Peace and National Identity in Postwar Japan. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.
25. Samuels, R. J. (2007). Securing Japan: The Current Discourse. The Journal of Japanese Studies, 33 (1), 125–152.
26. Seaton, P. (2015). The Nationalist Assault on Japan’s Local Peace Museums: The Conversion of Peace Osaka. The Asia-Pacific Journal. Japan Focus, Vol. 13, Issue 30, No. 3, Jul 27, p. 1–20 (1).
27. Seraphim, F. (2006). War Memory and Social Politics in Japan, 1945–2005. Vol. 278. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
28. Streltsov D. V. (2020). «Diplomatiya izvinenii» vo vneshnei politike poslevoennoi Yaponii [“The Diplomacy of Apologies” in the Foreign Policy of Postwar Japan]. Yearbook Japan, 49, 29–61. (In Russian).
Review
For citations:
Fokin I.P. Comparison of Historical Memory Narratives in Japan and the FRG after the Second World War. Russian Japanology Review. 2025;8(2):21-48. https://doi.org/10.55105/2658-6444-2025-2-21-48
Views:
14
JATS XML
Email this article 