Japan should bear war responsibilities

Japan should bear war responsibilities

Date: 11/21/96
Author: Xi Mi
Page: 4

FIFTY years after the Japanese army pulled out of China, many Chinese are still at risk from two million poison gas shells left behind by retreating Japanese troops.

During World War II, chemical weapons were used as part of Japan's "sanko" operation, in which the goal was to "kill all, rob all and burn all," according to Yasuji Kaneko, a 76 year-old veteran from Tokyo.

It is widely believed that Japan used mustard gas, a toxin which causes severe skin burns and produces acidic gases that lead to suffocation.

Kaneko says his unit resorted to poisonous gases when they encountered fierce resistance from the Chinese in Shandong Province in 1941.

Half a century later, these poisonous substances remain active. If anything, the passage of time has only made them more life-threatening as the shells have rusted.

So far the abandoned shells have claimed more than 2,000 lives.

The casualties of last spring's infamous sarin gas attack in Tokyo's subways, which include 11 deaths, appear insignificant in comparison. But when set against the millions of Chinese people slaughtered by Japanese soldiers (Yasuji Kaneko has confessed to killing more than 100 Chinese) it is negligible.

This might explain why the Japanese Government has recently proposed to delay disposing of these chemical weapons.

Japan has ratified the 1993 United Nations Chemical Weapons Convention, which bars signatory countries from producing or using chemical weapons and obliges them to dispose of such weapons within 10 years of enactment of the treaty, including those left behind on foreign soil.

Japan says it cannot dispose of all its chemical weapons within 10 years. The Japanese Government is planning to apply to the UN Convention for a five-year extension of the deadline.

China has urged Japan to solve the problem as soon as possible because the chemical weapons threaten the safety of residents and pollute the environment.

Considering the quantity and unstable condition of the shells, 10 years is already too long, let alone 15 years, a time period that would increase the danger to the Chinese people by at least 50 per cent.

The reasons given by the Japanese are simple: the amount is too large and the conditions too dangerous.

These points might seem objective at first glance as they are supposed to be based upon technological foundations.

But such objectivity is specious and betrays the Japanese Government's disregard for the safety and feelings of the Chinese people.

It is doubtful that Japan, which is well-known for technological excellence, could not dispose in 10 years the shells they manufactured and deployed more than half a century ago.

The large number of shells and their dangerous state should only prompt bigger efforts.

The issue is a question of sincerity rather than of technology.

Would the Japanese Government remain so cold, if so many shells had been left in Japanese soil by the Chinese?

If Japan is responsible, the answer should be simple: dispose of this poisonous stuff within the UN time-frame, or at least -- as a first step -- take it out of China.

It should be a moral obligation of any civilized and humane government to perform their long overdue duty to undo the crimes against the Chinese people, even without the mandate of the UN Convention.

Instead, the Japanese Government views the UN Convention as a convenience for delaying their duty.

During the war, the invading Japanese army repeatedly violated international norms by using chemical weapons.

Now it seems that the Japanese Government will do the same again and set a bad example by making itself an exception to the newly ratified UN Convention.

Such insensitive and senseless behaviour is consistent with a Japan half-hearted at best in its apologies for its war history, adamant and aggressive in its claim for China's Diaoyu Islands but prompt in its dealing with the Tokyo subway gas attack and quick to accuse China for conducting nuclear tests.