Japan's Postwar Foreign Policy - Essay Example

Japan's Postwar Foreign Policy In his book, Dower puts across that Japan experienced imposed revolution brought about by the American forces, which in turn shaped and transformed Japan’s system of imperialism into democracy. Dower argues that after experiencing such a terrible defeat that left three million Japanese dead in addition to many more homeless, wounded, demoralized, as well as starving, Japan’s postwar foreign policy shaped. Reviews from Dower’s works cite that the foreign policy shaping occurred due to Japan’s experience gained from defeat and occupation (Kaplan and Wang 56). Given that there are facts to support this argument, this paper will identify three ways in which Dower sees Japan’s postwar foreign policy shaped by experience of defeat and occupation. The paper will also include insights into the ways of embracing defeat just as set herein by John Dower then summarize all the main points. Analytical review of embracing defeat shows that occupation and defeat of Japan played a major role in shaping this country’s postwar foreign policy. This is because Dower explains absorbingly that after the American forces imposed democracy, the people of Japan experienced an atmosphere of uncertainty and flux. Effective archival as well as Japanese academic sources captured that the atmosphere came along with suicidal despair accompanied by surrender. It is of paramount importance to note that Japan and the United States share a mutual and long lasting international relationship. Additionally, the presence of the GIs drew a huge spectrum of gratitude towards its generosity. Based on this observation, Dower set forth that defeat and occupation shaped Japan’s postwar foreign policy as democracy unleashed things like creative energy, black market entrepreneurship, and prostitution (79). Therefore, it is agreeable that America’s imposition of revolution that led to six years of occupation and the undeniable transformation of Japan into a democratic country is indeed one of the major ways in which Dower sees Japan's postwar foreign policy shaped by its experience of defeat and occupation. For quiet along time, Japan has continued to struggle to attain favorable relations with her neighboring Asian countries. Ideally, this has been so because of the foreign policy set in place by the American occupation. Indeed, the other way in which Dower finds Japan's postwar foreign policy shaped by experience of defeat and occupation. Obviously, this goes with the pragmatic change in politics in this country. Having introduced the aspect of democracy, the Americans sought to cease Japan’s way of militaristic culture. Under this struggle, American forces set out on a root to branch mission whose attempt aimed at paralyzing the culture of Japan’s military. As a result, the American forces created and established a constitution that put limits to the emperor’s power and confined it only to the head of state (92). Clearly, this was a tacit move, which ensured that occupation, and defeat shaped Japan’s postwar foreign policy. Ideally, changing the Japan’s militaristic culture involved American forces renouncing war as the only instrument capable of settling disputes internationally. This explained that, whenever Japan experienced cross border disputes, it only had that idea of going to war as the respective mode of making peace with the disturbing element. After defeat and occupation, Japan’s system of education encountered serious changes. This means that, this country’s foreign policy has got everything to with the introduced system of education hence shaped by this new education system. Furthermore, the change in the political view of Japan contributed highly to the introduction of reforms such as increased freedom of press and speech, greater sexual equality, and a liberated labor movement as well as conclusion of the Shinto state, which was a religion. Since Japan was defeated and occupied, it had to foster the spirit of foreign diplomacy which American forces made sure that it prospered. This spirit entrenched its presence into the Japanese foreign policy as it instituted Japanese prosperity, equality, and freedom (126). Dower observed that defeat and occupation fashioned Japan’s postwar foreign policy since it expressed the American’s idealism in addition to their minimal knowledge about Japan’s history. Fact findings points out that Dower sees defeat and occupation as the basic factor that shaped Japan’s postwar foreign policy because the American prosecutors omitted any testimonies regarding the responsibility of Hirohito the Emperor for all the war crimes that he committed and in turn fed the nation with its adorn sense of victimization. In this case, defeat and occupation created Japan’s postwar foreign policy as the trials of the Far East, which was a Nuremberg trials counterpart failed to force Japan into realizing its culpability for those atrocities committed against fellow Asians. This explains that, the people of Japan could not see or understand that there were atrocities that befell other Asians mainly because the American prosecutors censored the testimonies and campaigned against victimization that the nation failed to address. Indeed, Japan’s postwar foreign policy became a replica of defeat and occupation simply because the greatest irony lay underneath the introduction and promotion of the Ministry of Industry and Trade. Greater emphasis entail that symbolic figures prompting condescension like Douglas McArthur, the General, merely changed his personal mandarinate with a version in Japanese (177). A vanquishing point of view illustrates that Japan’s postwar foreign policy fashioned due to defeat and occupation as the speech about concession highlighted geared balancing of both the seed of democracy in Japan and maintenance of the Japan’s unique structure. Thirdly, John Dower sees Japan's postwar foreign policy shaped by its experience of defeat and occupation because in spite of the presence of a unique and deep-rooted traditional structure, American forces still found a way to impose their system of democracy. Truthfully, Dower’s point of view is indeed illustrative in this context. Description given by the author point out that Americans managed to remold the traditional structures of the Japanese people including their systems of governance and in turn, the established strategies ended up shaping the country’s postwar foreign policy (201). This explains that Japan was no longer able to administer traditionally or use its indigenous structures to settle international disputes. Following this argument, it is agreeable that Dower is correct when he asserts that defeat and occupation shaped Japan’s postwar foreign policy. However, it will be of great importance to note that Americans installed their democratic system with fear of having the Japan’s unique structures bring about total chaos while on their process of democratic institution. In conclusion, John Dower provides an illuminating and diligent as well as piercing insight into the Japan’s history. Moreover, his research shines light on the nation’s responsibility and culpability as far as atrocities against other Asians and the bureaucratic institution of democracy concern the history of Japan’s defeat and occupation and the subsequent creation of postwar foreign policy (265). Note that, military is part of the Japan’s foreign policy whereby people viewed its presence and operations differently. Given the fact that losers were treated with condescension, the crucial bills included in the Japan’s postwar carried with them a message of fashioned or rather a shaped policy. Believably, it is with this feeling that Dower finds Japan’s postwar foreign policy shaped by the country’s subsequent defeat and occupation. Perhaps, the absorbing explanation given by the Japanese academic and archival resources sets the detrimental feeling of a lost solemn and unique structure of governance of the Japanese. With this respect, I agree with Dower’s ways in which he sees Japan's postwar foreign policy shaped by its experience of defeat and occupation. Works Cited Kaplan, Ann and Wang, Ban. Trauma and Cinema: Cross-Cultural Explorations. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2009. Print. Read More