Why Did Japan Change So Much During the US Occupation - Essay Example

Why Did Japan Change so Much During the US Occupation? Introduction During the US occupation of Japan, Japan experienced what has been described as “dramatic, even traumatic, social change?” (Molasky 1999, 4). In the aftermath of the Second World War, the US and allied occupation of Japan has been described in the literature as bringing about more change in that country than any other time since the Meiji Period. Historians and political scientist generally agree that it was a combination of a number of factors underlying the reasons Japan’s social, political and economic changed so dramatically during the US occupation in the immediate aftermath of the Second World War. The underlying factors include the fact that it was Japan’s first military occupation by foreigners (Takemae and Riketts xxvi). Additionally the devastation suffered during the Second World War which left Japan vulnerable so that cooperation with the foreigners was not a problem, the approach taken by the US to restructuring Japan’s post-war constitution and military (Dower 199, 24). The US occupation of Japan provided a unique opportunity for the US to influence political and social change in country that was weakened “both psycho logically and physically” (Scalapino 1976, 104). Both of these traits, Japan’s defeat and the US opportunity to influence political and social change, would provide the basic and underlying reasons for why the US occupation of Japan would bring about so much change during the former’s occupation. To begin with when US troops occupied Japan in August 1945, the country was in ruins particularly in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Japanese leaders were in a state of shock and the population fearful of what the “victors” might put them through (Schonberger 1989, 1). The Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers, General MacArthur was prepared to reconstruct what was characterized as “an ancient and highly sophisticated society” with a population of eighty million people (Schonberger 1989, 1). A political and socio-economic thought in Japan preceding the Second World War would operate in conjunction with the post-war devastation that the US met upon occupying Japan. Japan’s modern state which evolved during the Meiji era from 1868 was a “state political project” aimed at the modernization and Westernization of Japan (Shibata 2005, 2). On another level, the War itself resulted in a climate between the US and the Japan where each side demonized the other. For the Japanese, the US represented “white supremacy” and were put together with the British perceived as “demonic and beastly” Anglo-Saxons” (Koshiro 1999, 1). For the US, the Japanese were “inferior imitators of the white races” (Koshiro 1999, 1). It was therefore surprising that once the war ended, both sides were able to cooperate in the reconstruction of Japan. With the signing of the San Francisco Peace Treaty, Japan emerged as a demilitarized independent country (Koshiro 1999, 1-2). For a long time prior to the Second World War, Japan’s political and social system was built around pride in nationalism and the continuity of sovereignty. The US occupation which was focused on liberalized democratic systems would focus on processes that sharply clashed with Japan’s system. The US was not merely satisfied to change Japan’s political system, it also wanted to change its society. As Crompton (2000) writes: America’s reformers wanted more than procedural democracy; they wanted to change Japanese society at all levels. New political institutions, a pro-democratic political culture, and a more individualistic belief system required the dismantling of traditional symbols (121). The depth of the changes in Japan during the US occupation is entirely representative of the goals enunciated above and the fact that the US was largely successful in bringing about those changes. What makes these changes so unique is the fact that they took place amongst in an atmosphere where the vanquished was led by the victors and the changes were alien to the preexisting political and social structure which had been firmly established. A war weary Japan was both suspicious of and receptive when the US commenced its occupation in 1945. It is therefore hardly surprising that the Japanese and the US would cooperate and it was this cooperation that facilitated so much political and social change in the short time during the US occupation from 1945 to 1952. The most dramatic change was the implementation of the US-drafted constitution in 1947 which was different from the pre-existing Meiji constitution and perceived as an import from “an alien political culture” (McCargo 2000, 27). The 1947 constitution depowered the Emperor reducing it to no more than a figure head. Japan’s sovereignty was vested in its people who would elect their own parliament and the Cabinet was accountable to the Japanese populace. Women’s suffrage was introduced and “local autonomy” was implemented as the core principle of governance (McCargo 2000, 27). The independence of the judiciary was introduced and human rights would be protected (McCargo 2000, 27). These kinds of changes would be entirely dramatic considering the pre-existing bureaucratic government structure which vested the administrative powers in the hereditary class (Ishida 1989, 8). Change however, was largely successful because they received popular support from the Japanese citizens. The US’s goals and the means for achieving them provided some form of reconciliation which closed the gap between the population and the government and served to satisfy the current regime. It is the approach and the willingness of the Japanese elite and the ordinary citizen to accept these changes that accounts for so much change during the US occupation of Japan. During its seven year occupation of Japan, the US would employ a “massive campaign of reform” which was calculated to abrogate militarism as well as the feudal powers with the intent that Japan could not pose a threat to international peace again (Best 2008, 336). At the same time, the US permitted the government to remain in place as well as the emperor. The US rationale was for Japan to eventually make the full democratic transition so that elites would not feel as though it had been forced upon them and then revert to former political structure once the US left Japan (Best 2008, 336). In other words, there was so much change in Japan during the US occupation because the US approach to its occupation was designed to penetrate the entire social foundation of Japan and to introduce changes that would be accepted and perpetuated. This required working with the Japanese and making concessions that would engender enthusiasm for the reconstruction of Japan. Moreover, any preexisting hostilities between the US and Japan during the occupation was tempered by the US’s developing containment policies against the spread of Soviet Communism. The US feared that a weak and hostile Japan would leave it vulnerable to assistance from China and the Soviet Union and it was best if the US implemented changes that would ensure that Japan evolved into a formidable Asian ally (Miyasato 1992, Ch. 7). This meant that the US would necessarily have to ensure that the reconstruction of Japan not only liberalized it, but strengthened it. To this end, the US could not rest its hopes merely on liberal democratic reforms, but had to ensure that economic reforms were conducive to sustaining the social and political changes. Regardless of the Cold War incentives, the mere focus on economic reform would also explain why Japan underwent so many changes during the US occupation. The fact is, the changes were not merely political in nature but also economic and both sources of change struck at the heart of Japan, making it a successful sovereign nation and a formidable US ally in the Asian Pacific. So while the US occupation of Japan focused on liberal democratic reforms from 1945-1947, the second phase of reconstruction during the US occupation turned to economic reform. This economic reform was aimed at “economic recovery and eventual rearmament” (Best 2008, 336). Best (2008) explains that: The transformation in occupation policy was caused by a number of concerns, such as the need to re-establish Japan as a key player in the world economy, and the fear that continued economic dislocation would encourage the growth of communism (337-338). In restructuring and building Japan’s economy, the US implemented a policy in 1949 which was aimed at reducing the government’s expenditure, reducing inflation and encouraging growth in exports. The export growth was cultivated by providing Japan with “preferential access to raw materials and foreign currency earnings” (Best 2008, 337). Ultimately the transformation of Japan was so mammoth because it was consistent with the political ambitions of both the US and Japan. Both sides were willing to make the necessary changes to accomplish their respective political goals. As previously noted the US wanted Japan to be a strong economic and democratic ally, safe from the grasp of Communism. Japan’s pre-War political mentality shaped a policy to become a power that rivaled the strongest of Western powers. However, having been devastated by the war, Japan was happy enough to find its way back from the spoils of war. With the US’s help it could regain sovereignty and independence and it could become an ally to the West rather than a rival. In the aftermath of the war, there was little or no prospect of Japan regaining and cultivating national pride as a world power. The US restored that hope and Japan was only too willing to recover and to regain its stature. The success of the US occupation in the context of the changes brought about in Japan is described by Schonberger (1989) as follows: The government of Japan was conservative and staunchly anti-communist. The working class, for the time, was effectively stilled…the Japanese as a whole appeared to look favorably upon the United States. Above all, the peace and security treaties and the US-Japan economic cooperation agreements had transformed Japan into America’s key military and economic ally in Asia which no other power in the region could challenge (279). None of these changes would have occurred had the US and Japan approached the occupation with the hostilities that guided their decisions and judgment during the War. The fact that they both had similar goals, albeit driven by different incentives and were able to cooperate largely accounts for why Japan experienced so much change during the US occupation. Bibliography Best, A. (2000) International History of the Twentieth Century and Beyond. Routledge. Crompton, R. (2000) East Asian Democratization: Impact of Globalization, Culture and Economy. Greenwood Publishing Group. Dower, J. (1999) Embracing Defeat: Japan in the Wake of World War II. W.W. Norton and Company. Ellington, L (2002) Japan: A Global Studies Handbook. ABC-CLIO. Ishida, T. (1989) Japanese Political Culture: Change and Continuity. Transaction Books. McCargo, D. (2000) Contemporary Japan. Palgrave MacMillan. Miyasato, S. (1992) “John Foster Dulles and the Peace Settlement with Japan.” Cited in Immerman, R. (ed) John Foster Dulles and the Diplomacy of the Cold War. Princeton University Press. Molasky, M. (1999) The American Occupation of Japan and Okinawa: Literature and Memory. Routledge. Scalapino, R. (1976) “The American Occupation of Japan – Perspectives after Three Decades.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science Vol. 428 (1): 104-113. Schonberger, H. (1989) Aftermath of War: Americans and the Remaking of Japan, 1945-1952. Kent State University Press. Shibata, M. (2005) Japan and Germany under the U.S. Occupation. Lexington Books. Takemae, E. and Ricketts, R. (2003) The Allied Occupation of Japan. Continuum International Publishing Group. Read More