Scholar Fears Escalating War of Words Between U.S.-Japan

The chairman of General Motors Corp. wants his company “to beat the hell out of the Japs,” echoing battle-cry sentiments from numerous congressional representatives who say that the Asian nation is conducting an economic Pearl Harbor against the United States.

And the Japanese prime minister refers to the literacy problems of America’s ethnic mix with just enough ambiguity to revive memories of his country’s repeated claims to racial superiority made during World War II.

In such cases, UC San Diego history professor John Dower worries whether the rhetoric will heat up sufficiently to reopen wounds of racial antagonism seemingly well-healed 40 years after the atomic bombings brought an end to the bitter Pacific war.

Dower is well-positioned to monitor the increasing frequency of harsh words concerning U.S. trade woes from Japan’s economic powerhouse. Critics have praised his just-published book, “War Without Mercy: Race and Power in the Pacific War,” as breaking new ground in detailing the strong racial hatreds that fueled perceptions on both sides during the conflict.

“What I found (in researching the book) was the sheer visceral hatred during the Pacific conflict,” said Dower, newly ensconced in his UCSD office where he will help formulate programs for the university’s new graduate school of International Relations and Pacific Studies. “As well, I found how such bitter hatred could be transformed into admirable, strong relationships following the war.

“But what is happening now, as U.S.-Japan relations change, raises the question of whether old and potentially destructive ways are coming to the fore once again.”

While Dower cautions strongly that neither country should be seen as monolithic, he nevertheless is bothered by trends toward each side seeing the other in black-and-white terms.

Traditionally, the United States and Japan had a teacher-pupil relationship, in which Americans automatically assumed their superiority over Third World peoples, and in which the Japanese accepted material inferiority to the West. After Japan failed in its military attempt to assert political and cultural superiority during World War II, the teacher-pupil hierarchy resumed, Dower said, as the Japanese agreed to learn more about democracy, power, science, business and technology from the West. With both sides accepting the unequal position as natural, the rancor of battle quickly and surprisingly receded.

“But now Japan indeed has learned in remarkable and credible ways, and as the postwar parent-child, teacher-student relationships shifts to something new, where Japan can teach as well, there is tension and awkwardness in redefining relative positions,” Dower said. That tension manifests itself in arrogant and violent language not heard since the war years, he said.

Dower readily agrees that nothing approaching the animosity of World War II--where Japanese were portrayed as inhumane fanatics and Westerners were seen as degenerate demons--is possible.

“Never again will there be a war,” he said. “There exist too many economic ties and a tremendous web of (personal and non-governmental) relationships. But the trade deficit is leading to some Japanese arrogance expressed as superiority and racial pride to explain their (economic prowess), as if no other nation ever had such trade success.

“And on our side, you have the rhetoric of Japanese treachery and unfairness, commonly known as ‘Jap-bashing.’ ”

Dower says that many academics and government officials knowledgeable about Japan and the United States fear that a significant souring of relations across-the- board could take place.

“Human nature and national pride leads to simplistic, monolithic views of others,” Dower said. “At a certain point, one side simply stops trying to see things also through the eyes of others. This is even more disturbing given the appalling number of deaths that took place in the (Pacific during World War II), to the extent that they will never be (totaled) accurately.”

Several scholars told Dower that his book, by dredging up unpleasantness and breaking the taboo on racial questions, would rekindle old passions and fuel trade-related tensions. Some asked him not to pursue the project.

“But we can’t sanitize the past; we must confront it,” Dower said, “not to point fingers but to learn and avoid mistakes in the future.” In December, the book will be published in Japanese, and Dower expects it to provoke considerable discussion, in particular with regard to Japanese racial attitudes toward other Asian peoples. “The Japanese themselves have a long way to go in establishing a creative, generous spirit toward others, especially other Asians. But they are not monolithic either (in attitudes), and it is a mistake to see them as such.”

Dower takes hope in that many Americans and Japanese have strong personal ties today, compared to the pre-World War II period, making them a powerful group in fighting stereotypes and racialism.

“That’s why I’m here at UCSD,” Dower said. “It’s imperative to treat issues (at the school of international studies) from all sides, and see conflicts through (the eyes) of your antagonist. That involves as many people as possible in decision-making.

“It’s a new project (designed) so that Asia and the Pacific can be understood not just only through American eyes. You can be critical of another country, but it should not be for animosity or the sake of dislike, but because you are concerned about the other country.”