The reason for the change

  The crux of the problem concerns the textbook manuscripts submitted for official screening and approval; therefore, in terms of effect, it seems as though "voluntary restraint" has been exercised by the publishers. However, as seen above, the simultaneous deletion of the same section in the textbook by each of the publishers suggests not the spontaneous initiative of the publishers, but the pervasive de facto influence of the ministry.

We believe the truth is that the publishers, with strong pressure from the government and the Ministry of Education, have been compelled to impose a "voluntary restraint" on themselves for the following reasons.

In a Special Committee meeting of the House of Councilors on June 8, 1998, then Minister of Education MACHIMURA Nobutaka stated, in response to a question posed by the Upper House member NAGANO Shigeto , known for his rightist stand, that the current history textbooks contain "some points which lack overall balance," that "negative descriptions are all too common of Japanese history particularly after the Meiji era," and whether " a better balance cannot be achieved in the textbook screening to follow, or even from the preceding writing and editing phases; or whether there is not room for improvements at the level of adoption. And those issues are being debated in the advisory panel relating to textbook screening" (Diet proceedings).

"Lack of balance" is a phrase used synonymously by such organizations as "Tsukuru Kai" in suggesting "the textbooks are biased." Making improvements at the "writing phase" refers to the action of making the textbook publishers, by way of advance "voluntary restraint," "eliminate" "excessively self-critical, masochistic statements." 

In the Diet Education Minister Machimura was prepared officially to accept the attack on textbooks made by House of Councilor member Nagano, who had to resign from the post of Minister of Justice in May 1994 due to his notorious remarks which denied that Japan had committed a war of aggression and the Nanking Massacre,; thus the Education Minister pressed the textbook publishers for "voluntary restraint." 

Following Education Minister Machimura's answer in the Diet, the Education Ministry officials proposed that the textbook publisher executives "make the content more well-balanced" and "review their selection of authors ." In response to the proposal, three publishers, Tokyo Shoseki, Kyouiku Publishers, Teikoku Shoin, applied to the Ministry in August 1999 to carry out revision of their textbooks, wishing to delete, in relation to "comfort women," the phrases "in military service" and "coerced". In December 1999, permission was granted by the Ministry to revise the textbooks accordingly. Further, one publisher even went so far as to change the author in charge of the section on "comfort women."

However, although some publishers have yielded to the pressure by accepting the changes, each of the publishers seemed to have no intention of deleting reference to "comfort women" or the Japanese military's triple scorched-earth operation in China, or modifying the passage on the Nanking Massacre. 

In December 1999, however, there was a phone call from "the Office of the Prime Minister" requesting the president of a junior high school social studies textbook publishing company to deal with the statement on "comfort women" with prudence. This information has been confirmed by the president of one publisher in a meeting with the union, and an executive in charge of editing in the same publishing company has also confirmed that there was such a telephone call. But in recent interviews carried out by more than one news reporter, the textbook publishing company executive has denied this. It seems as though a gag order has been imposed.

With political pressure that even involved "the Office of the Prime Minister," it would appear that just before the printing of the manuscript to be submitted to the screening panel, each of the publishers decided on "voluntary restraint," including the deletion of the statements on "comfort women." Around February 2000, the editor-in-chief of one publisher paid a visit to each of the authors to persuade them to consent to the deletion of "comfort women" and the footnote on the Nanking Massacre. This became company policy. Further, in response to my question "What happened?", the editor-in-chief of a publisher answered, "It's a voice from heaven." 

Thus, the reason for the seven publishers' exercising "voluntary restraint" is not the voluntary intention of the textbook publishers, but is as a result of coercion by strong political pressure from the government and the Ministry of Education.

Counter-pressure of international criticism and internal movements 

The deleted/modified topics are close to the heart of those pushing for a revision of history such as conservative Liberal Democratic Party Diet members and the right wing "Tsukuru Kai", which have attacked the textbook's "masochistic perspective on history." However, the Japanese government itself has admitted to "comfort women" and the Nanking Massacre as facts, and those issues have now become matters of common knowledge internationally. It cannot be forgotten that the Japanese denial of the war of aggression and war crimes has been severely criticized by people in many countries, particularly those in Asia.

Moreover, the battle of Okinawa should be a major subject of learning in order to foster awareness on issues concerning today's Okinawa, among others, the problem of the disproportionate presence U.S. bases located there. 

No doubt stating these historical facts in the textbooks and teaching them at schools are indispensable in cultivating a correct perspective on history and war, raising the future generations who will exercise democratic control over the power of the state, and who can live together with other Asian peoples in peace.

Improvements in the content of Japanese history textbooks were made from the mid-1980s, and in the 1990s the acts of perpetration and war crimes that indicated the reality of colonial rule, the facts on the war of aggression, the issue of "comfort women," the Nanking Massacre, Unit 731, deported forced labor, killing of civilian populations in Southeast Asia, and the battle of Okinawa, finally came to be referred to in almost all of the textbooks.

At long last, it has become possible for children to gain a correct perspective on history, by learning from textbooks about war from both viewpoints- namely, aggressors and victims, inflicting damage and resistance to it. This is the outcome of international criticism led by Asian nations and the Japanese citizens' movement that has fought for 32 years, beginning with the Ienaga Textbook Trial, when historian Ienaga Saburo charged the Ministry of Education with censoring his history textbook. 

Now, the progress that has been made as the result of the citizens' long struggle is being destroyed by political intervention by the government and pressure from the right-wing. We cannot look on idly as this takes place. Among others, the issue of "comfort women" should be addressed in schools. The report of the Special Rapporteur adopted by the UN Human Rights Commission in 1996 recommended to teach the facts concerning comfort women in the school curriculum and the Japanese government replied to the Commission that it included statements on comfort women in history textbooks. The deletion of the statements carried out through government intervention is an act of overtly breaking an international commitment. 

The Japanese government has simply uttered words of regret in respect of the last war, but its political intervention regarding the content of textbooks and deletion of historical facts from textbooks by virtually coercing the publishers to impose a "voluntary restraint" must not be tolerated, neither domestically nor internationally.

SEKAI, vol. 681 (November 2000).