Southeast Asia's View of Japanese Occupation during WWII

The Nazis were quite willing to ally with anyone to their advantage. The Japanese (non-Ainu) aren't Aryans but Hitler called them Honorary Aryans (Ehrenarier) of the East.

Case in point, the Jewish-Hungarian composer Emmerich Kaliman was offered Honorary Aryan (Ehrenarier) status. Joseph Goebbels was said to have commented to Frtiz Lang, "Mr. Lang, we decide who is Jewish and who is not".

The Kingdom of Thailand allied with Japan for self-benefit, as the Japanese sided with them on territorial disputes vs. France (and later UK) during the French-Thai War in 1941. The Thais initially resisted Japaense demands to move their troops across Thailand and even fought against them, but they eventually reached an agreement on the issue. Later, after Japan's defeat, the Thais switched alliance over to the Americans, hehe.

The biggest colonial power in Pre-WW2 era was Briton, France only held small slices of the pie. The US supported UK, but at the same time, also supported the de-colonization of British colonies. Japan also supported Indian independence during WW2 and even supplied the Indian National Army.

Another point to consider, seeing how this is a Chinese military forum, is that Mao probably wouldn't have succeeded if Japan didn't invade China.

Good points made by all, but I only have time to respond to this one which I found particularly troublesome.

Ryz05 said:

My whole point was trying to convince those who say Japanese are liberators by kicking out the western colonizers in Southeast Asia that they are wrong, without viewing how it was actually Japan who conquered them and robbed their resources to fuel its wars. And, it was the Americans who ended Japanese occupation in Southeast Asia, so Americans were the ones who liberated the area.

The main reason why they chose to ignore America's good deeds is because of envy for America's power. This is a common view shared by other countries in Central Asia and Western Asia as well.

Click to expand...

Yes, the Japanese conquered them and robbed resources. And the US shortly afterwards "liberated" those countries, in several instances continuing the plunder of resources and bloody suppression of local democratic movements.

I feel that you are projecting a bit too much when you assert that the countries ignore America's good deeds because of "envy". It's like the argument that the terrorists hate us for our 'freedom', it's a logical fallacy. I would say that good deeds (such as lending support for the tsunami aid) are oftentimes overshadowed by military intervention. The Asian Financial Crisis of 1997 didn't help strengthen people's positive perceptions of Western Powers either. True enough there wasn't any definitive 'culprit', but the fact that the Southeast Asian countries were the ones suffering certainly is another explanation for resentment. You can say that the good deeds should count more - but I argue with much conviction that this is NOT the case in the minds of the people.

And the US shortly afterwards "liberated" those countries, in several instances continuing the plunder of resources and bloody suppression of local democratic movements.

Click to expand...

Could you plese explain this statement to my simple American mind? I was unaware that the US "in several instances continuing the plunder of resources and bloody suppression of local democratic movements".

Please give me some examples. thank you.

The main reasons why many in SEA may not have shown more appreciation for US 'good deeds' in liberating them from the Japanese were mostly the fact few were actually liberated after WW2.
After WW2, Vietnam had to fight the French, Indonesia had to fight the Dutch to gain liberation. Malaysia, Singapore, Myanmar, India had to work to gain their own liberation from UK.
Events after WW2 like the Korean & Vietname wars contributed to further dilution of any appreciation for US's defeat of Japan.

Schumacher, Thank you. But I thought he was refering strictly to the US. Because he did post;

And the US shortly afterwards "liberated" those countries, in several instances continuing the plunder of resources and bloody suppression of local democratic movements

Click to expand...

The events you posted I was quite aware of. Thanks again.

The_Zergling said:

I feel that you are projecting a bit too much when you assert that the countries ignore America's good deeds because of "envy". It's like the argument that the terrorists hate us for our 'freedom', it's a logical fallacy. I would say that good deeds (such as lending support for the tsunami aid) are oftentimes overshadowed by military intervention. The Asian Financial Crisis of 1997 didn't help strengthen people's positive perceptions of Western Powers either. True enough there wasn't any definitive 'culprit', but the fact that the Southeast Asian countries were the ones suffering certainly is another explanation for resentment. You can say that the good deeds should count more - but I argue with much conviction that this is NOT the case in the minds of the people.

Click to expand...

Jealousy and envy play a role in other's perception of the US, especially after all those Hollywood movies they've watched about how Americans live and gorge themselves and act like fools.

"terrorists hate us for our freedom" is ambiguous because it all depends on the definition of freedom. If you mean freedom as in a democratic government, then no because terrorists that live in caves don't even know what democracy is. If you take "freedom" to mean Christianity and Western culture, then yes because many Islamic terrorists are also extremists and xenophobic. If you take "freedom" to mean the protection of American interests, then definitely, because those Islamic terrorists don't like the intrusion of other countries, especially if they are Christian.

"A little kindness goes a long way," and many in SEA should take into account all the good things the United States did for them, like the humanitarian missions among others, so that one day they may return the kindness when US is in trouble.

Schumacher said:

The main reasons why many in SEA may not have shown more appreciation for US 'good deeds' in liberating them from the Japanese were mostly the fact few were actually liberated after WW2.
After WW2, Vietnam had to fight the French, Indonesia had to fight the Dutch to gain liberation. Malaysia, Singapore, Myanmar, India had to work to gain their own liberation from UK.

Click to expand...

Good point. That is to say the SEA countries liberated themselves? Then they have no one to thank for but themselves.

Schumacher said:

Events after WW2 like the Korean & Vietname wars contributed to further dilution of any appreciation for US's defeat of Japan.

Click to expand...

You are wrong there. The Chinese and the Koreans were delighted for the end of Japanese occupation, and I think the South Koreans are thankful that they were not conquered by North Korea, if they only feel a little grudge about the current division. As for Vietnam, many in South Vietnam were scared of the communists, so they were at least glad Americans were helping them. Unfortunately, it was late when Americans feel the war was not worth the fight and they pulled out, which made them appear weak and undependable. The same thing is happening in Iraq - Americans barged in, didn't realize what they were in for, and ran away without finishing what they've started.

In both wars, the United States went up against China in some way, but the Chinese never held a grudge against the Americans partly because they remember how the Americans helped them during the century of humiliation when all the other Great Powers were taking as much advantage as they could.

bd popeye said:

Schumacher, Thank you. But I thought he was refering strictly to the US. Because he did post;

The events you posted I was quite aware of. Thanks again.

Click to expand...

No problem Popeye. I was making general points raised in this thread rather than responding to yours or Zergling's posts.

I think it's a statement of fact that Japan's rise to rival European powers, WW2 did hasten the end of colonialism in SEA.
By WW2, I mean the fact that it weakened the colonial powers rather than Japan coming to SEA's 'rescue' because I think it was quite clear had Japan not been defeated, they would have stayed in SEA just like the European colonial powers did.

Ryz05 said:

.........
You are wrong there. The Chinese and the Koreans were delighted for the end of Japanese occupation, and I think the South Koreans are thankful that they were not conquered by North Korea, if they only feel a little grudge about the current division. As to Vietnam, many in South Vietnam were scared of the communists, so they were at least glad Americans were helping them. Unfortunately, it was late when Americans feel the war was not worth the fight and they pulled out, which made them appear weak and undependable. The same thing is happening in Iraq - Americans barged in, didn't realize what they were in for, and ran away without finishing what they've started.

Click to expand...

No where did I say Chinese & Koreans were not glad that US defeated Japan or that many in SK were not glad that US fought NK on their side. I was merely pointing some events that might have reduced the number of people in Asia grateful to US. NK & North Vietnamese were Asians as well after all.

I'd like to point out that Chinese in general like US & are grateful to them for their WW2 role, like I think the 'Flying Tigers' squadron etc. It's only in recent years that China-US rivalry has soured the feelings somewhat which I think is a real shame since China has the least historical baggage with the US, compared to others like Russia, Japan, UK etc.

Schumacher said:

I'd like to point out that Chinese in general like US & are grateful to them for their WW2 role, like I think the 'Flying Tigers' squadron etc. It's only in recent years that China-US rivalry has soured the feelings somewhat which I think is a real shame since China has the least historical baggage with the US, compared to others like Russia, Japan, UK etc.

Click to expand...

I think China-US relations has remained strong and growing stronger by the day. It's just that Americans are feeling a little bitter about China's growing influence. However, I feel Americans will get over it once they realize China's development actually helps improve their world perception and sustains their economy.

The US military-industrial complex, however, might feel a little uneasy because they need to feed more on big budgets, and there wouldn't be any big fundings if there is no worthy adversary to pose a serious challenge. You might argue that terrorists are the new enemy, but the US fighting them is like a lion catching mice.

Objection! Why nobody mentions about Cambodia here?

According to what I know Cambodia was colonized by France abut 90 years, nowadays, you still can find some antique French buildings which are more than 100 years old in Phnom Penh. The Japs came to Cambodia sometime before the end of WWII and chased the French out in the name of "to liberate Cambodia". They didn't do anything bad like what they did in China and other places. But according to what we understand is that it's not that "they didn't do anything bad" but it's "they hadn't done anything bad" then WWII ended and they got to go back home.

The French came back after the Japs had gone. Cambodia got independence in 9-Nov-1954, we did have a glorious time in the 1960s under the leading of King Norodom Sihanuk. But that's short life. In 1970, General Lol Nol backed by the US government led a coup and pull down King Norodom Sihanuk. Cambodia was drowned in civil wars since then, and the wars didn't end until the Paris Peace Agreement in 1991 and the Election in 1993. And today's Cambodia? I can simply say that "very bad".

So, Cambodia's situation today, uncle sam is to blamed though we understand that there are many other political reasons that led to the coup of 1970.