Points of Controversy Relating to Pilgrimages to Yasukuni Shrine, by Hashimoto Kotoe
"There are no war criminals among the souls of the war heroes at Yasukuni Shrine."
Points of Controversy Relating to Pilgrimages to Yasukuni Shrine1
Hashimoto Kotoe
1. Freedom of Religion
For a head of state to set the example that he cannot make pilgrimage to Yasukuni Shrine because he would be criticized simultaneously signifies that this is a country in which limits on "freedom of religion," which constitutes a fundamental human right, are effectively in place. Consequently, it is necessary that those who are leaders of Japan in whatever number show the people that one cannot deny freedom of religion. To obstruct pilgrimages to Yasukuni Shrine is nothing other than a denial of a fundamental human right.
2. The Concept of War Criminals
On the basis of Article 20 of the Bylaws of the Law On Partial Revision of the Law on Assistance to Bereaved Families of the War Dead, Sick, And Wounded (Law No. 181, 1953) and Article 4 of the Bylaws of the Law On Partial Revision of the Law on Pensions (Law N. 200, 1954), the payment of survivor's pensions to the bereaved families of those who were detained and died after the conclusion of the Greater East Asian War is fixed in law. There is no concept of "war criminal" therein. Naturally, absolutely no protest against this law has come from the so-called victory nations.
The Treaty of San Francisco (Treaty No. 5, 1952) contains the legal grounds that "Japan accepts the judgments of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East and of other Allied War Crimes Courts both within and outside Japan, and will carry out the sentences imposed thereby upon Japanese nationals imprisoned in Japan", but that is because this is a treaty that applies to living natural persons and to the "souls" of those people after death. It is not a treaty determining the treatment of religious views.
Nevertheless, the absurd legal interpretation that the "Treaty of San Francisco applies to souls as well" has taken on a life of its own, and the ridiculous theory that the enshrined deities of Yasukuni Shrine are "war criminals" has spread not only abroad but also among the senior officials, Diet members, and mass media of our country. Unfortunately, one cannot but judge this as a failure of higher education. There are no war criminals among the souls of the war heroes at Yasukuni Shrine.
3. Ethical Violations
One can also say this of the Seoul National Cemetery in Korea. If one on the one hand pays homage to the soul of Park Chung-Hee, the chief executive who deployed more than 50,000 troops in the Vietnam War, brought about the Lai Dai Han Problem, which exists even today, of the mixed-race children of wartime rapes, and turned many Vietnamese women into real "sex slaves", and on the other will not make pilgrimage to Yasukuni Shrine, where the souls of Japan's wartime leaders are enshrined, one cannot be say that racist thinking lies at the basis of this as well.
Further, William Sterling Parsons, the crew member on the B-29 Enola Gay who dropped the nuclear bomb on Hiroshima, is interred at Arlington National Cemetery. Parsons is the figure who played the extremely crucial role of setting up and activating the trigger on the atomic bomb Little Boy and performed the "direct action" that brought about the deaths of over 200,000 civilians.
If one would make pilgrimage to both Yasukuni Shrine and Arlington National Cemetery, then one could call that a stance that, on the basis of the tragic history of war, prioritizes the idea of mourning all war dead regardless of the rectitude of their individual actions, but if one possesses the asymmetry that one will not make pilgrimage when the objects of worship are Japanese, but that one will pay homage to the man who drove numerous Japanese to their deaths with the nuclear bomb, then that is racist.
From this very long X post published on August 15, 2023.
They have the so-called "Remembrance day" and other related war victory days but when the Japanese try to celebrate their war dead, they would be criticized. Western liberal democratic countries are mere hypocrites.
Thank you for the translation. I believe that a "not" has dropped out of this line: but that is because this is a treaty that applies to living natural persons and to the "souls" of those people after death.