论文部分内容阅读
THERE have always been contradictions between countries around the world. We， however， should not be vexed by them， but instead adopt the right attitude and appropriately respond to them，” Nakayama Toshio of the Clausewitz Society of Japan said at an international seminar held in Beijing last July to retrospect World War I and II. Mr. Toshio went on to say that the hegemony of world big powers has fallen apart since WWII. He added that in the contemporary age of nuclear power， China’s advocacy and practice of pacifism and keeping pace with the historical trend by developing its economy is a positive force for world peace.
Scholars from more than a dozen countries around the world gathered at the seminar. Among the topics they discussed were the cause and backdrop of the two world wars， recollections of them and their impact on the international order， lessons to be drawn from the wars， and world peaceful development.
Reviewing and summarizing the two world wars and learning from that piece of history is vital to fostering healthy inter-country relations， especially those between major powers， maintaining world peace， and promoting the common progress of humankind.
Root Causes
World War II， involving 60 or more countries and two billion people， was a disastrous event for humankind. Almost 60 million lives were lost， five countries having suffered casualties exceeding fi ve million. China was among the worst affected， with more than 35 million casualties and property losses upward of US$500 billion.
Participants in the July seminar， entitled “World War I and World War II in Retrospect， Lessons and Inspirations，”attributed the outbreak of the two wars to the longstanding unjust， irrational international order that resulted from the imperialist powers’ colonial expansion and the rivalry among them.
“Adolf Hitler’s ruthless ambitions for boundless “Lebensraum” （living space）， Benito Mussolini’s pursuit of “supreme power，” and Japan’s goal of conquering fi rst Asia and then the whole world signified unbridled expansionism，” professor of history at Capital Normal University Xu Lan said. Contention for world hegemony was most prominent in the countries that started WWII.
Nationalism also played a key role. In Ms Xu’s opinion， by the 20th century the nationalist sentiment in Western countries had lost its progressive quality of safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of a people. It had degraded to extreme nationalism， national chauvinism， colonialism， and imperialism， all in the interests of the bourgeois ruling class. The Versailles System after WWI acted as an incubator for WWII， Xu said. “The Treaty of Versailles required that Germany accepts responsibility for the loss and damage that Germany and her allies caused during the war. This had grim consequences， exacerbating friction between the defeated and the victors，” Ms. Xu said， adding， “The policy of appeasement， adopted by Western democracies headed by the U.K. in the 1930s， is another factor that detonated WWII earlier than expected.” According to research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Military Sciences Wang Jinhua， Japan’s invasion of China should also be interpreted in the histori-cal context. Militarism swelled after the Meiji Restoration， laying the ideological foundation for its later aggression towards other Asian countries. Japan’s political and military mechanisms， centered on adulation of the emperor， moreover created the conditions for a large-scale aggressive war. The prospect of capital accumulation and appreciation through military expansion was also strong motivation for Japan to wage a massive war.
Prof. Iko Toshiya of Tsuru University made the point that， after WWI， Japan attempted to disguise its intended aggression towards China under the cover of international laws. When civil war broke out in China， Japan took military measures on the pretext of protecting its interests in the country， ostensibly waging aggressions in the interests of“self-defense.”
“The world today is completely different from it was during WWI and WWII. The hegemony of certain superpowers persists， but under economic globalization it is no longer manifest in contention for colonies， labor， land， and other resources， but instead secured through exports of capital， commodities， services， and management expertise， as well as the establishment of transnational corporations. Mutual openness between countries is an important check on wars，”Shen Yongxing， a research fellow at the Institute of World History， under the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences， said. He added that countries around the world are now more closely knit than ever before. War anywhere， therefore， has ripple effects on other parts of the planet. The UN Security Council， its peace keeping missions， and other international peace organizations and campaigns are also strong anti-war tools and forces.
Defending the Post-WWII International Order
At the end of WWII the allies， including the U.S.， the Soviet Union， U.K.， China， and France， reached a broad con- sensus on key issues such as coordination of their relations， penalization of the Fascist axis powers， and foundation of an international organization – the UN. Appropriate actions were accordingly taken， and the post-war international order took shape.
“The post-WWII international order was established with the goal of preventing another world war and sustaining universal and lasting peace and security. It is based on prosecution of militarist crimes and eradication of the roots of militarist aggression. Widely ratified international laws， including the Atlantic Charter， Cairo Declaration， Potsdam Declaration， and Declaration by United Nations， are the bedrock of this order， and the cooperation and unanimity among big powers within the collective security mechanism of the UN constitutes a guarantee of its function，” Zhou Xiaoning of the Chinese Academy of Military Sciences said. He believes that the world today still needs broad international cooperation built on the basis of cooperation between big powers to share risks. Sylvanus Nicholas Spencer of the University of Sierra Leone said that the cruelty and brutality of WWII exposes the dark side of human nature， but the conduct of social development since testifies to the triumph of the humanitarian spirit.
“It is regrettable that， due to the demands of the Cold War， the U.S. failed to bring Japan fully to account after WWII. It not only made peace with Japan， debarring the involvement of Russia and China， but also unilaterally handed over to Japan the Liuqiu （Ryukyu） and Diaoyu islands. In recent years Japan has accelerated territorial contentions with neighboring countries， gravely undermining the international order，” Zhou Xiaoning said. Shinzo Abe has throughout 2014 accused China of challenging the current international order， an assertion that Prof. Lü Jie of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Academy refutes as the complete reverse of the truth. In modern history the headspring of Asian wars has always been Japan. Though the country formulated a pacifist constitution after WWII， its intentions to challenge the Yalta System remain a ceaseless undercurrent. The country’s expansionist ambitions have expanded significantly， particularly since Shinzo Abe was reelected as prime minister， so stoking further tensions in East Asia.
As Wu Enyuan of the Institute of Russian， Eastern European and Central Asian Studies， Chinese Academy of Social Sciences （CASS）， sees it， the Cairo Declaration laid the foundation for postwar treaties that concern Japan as well as the international order， in particular the order in Northeast Asia. But the rightwing forces in Japan have geared up efforts to revise the pacifist constitution and to deny its war crimes. “This actually amounts to denial of the outcome of WWII， and reveals Japan’s intention to restore its political and military prowess and subsequently dominate the political situation in East Asia，” Wu said. He added that this move is also part of the U.S. strategy of containing China through Japan， and which introduces a new factor of instability into the situation in the Asia-Pacific and the world at large.
“Elements of the Cold War still exist in Asia because of the shift in U.S. policies towards Japan. The Abe administration is building a net to contain China， a maneuver which is more a manifestation of the U.S.-Japan alliance in the 21st century than a revival of Japanese militarism，” Nakayama Toshio said. He hence proposes global advocacy of the Chinese philosophy of harmony to buttress world peace. History Is a Mirror
It has been 75 years since WWII erupted， but memories of it remain in the minds of people around the world. The many books， films and TV dramas about the war are constant reminders of that dark period of history. Over the past 50 years more than 43，000 books on WWII were published in the U.S. alone.
Professor Robert Jeffrey Moore of the University of Sheffield said， “WWII is still fresh in the minds of people in the U.K. and is constantly the subject of publications， TV programs and films.” He nonetheless believes that this effect is not one solely engineered by the state or media， but also attributable to emotions evoked by reflections on the sacrifices of men and women that served in the armed forces and the conflicts in which they fought during WWII.
After WWII， Germany and Japan adopted contrasting approaches to it. As Prof. Li Lezeng of Tongji University said， Germany’s transition to a modern political system is accredited to the heavyhanded measures that the Western allies took to eradicate the root causes of war in Europe， and their inclusive policy of bringing Germany into their alliance under the background of the Cold War.“Though the development of Germany’s political culture did not keep pace with the progress of its political system， it is distinctive by virtue of an in-depth understanding of Nazi rule and of selfexamination with regards to its role in WWII，” Li said. “This affirmative factor in Germany’s political culture provides an important non-institutional guarantee of the country’s contribution to world peace and security and prevention of wars.”
Nakayama Toshio has observed the dangerous trend of the Japanese government， at U.S. connivance， in constantly attempting to revise the constitution and build up its military， despite anti-war sentiments among its people.
Reflections on WWII by the governments and the general public of countries that were involved in it have never ceased. Since the year 2002， representatives of researchers， teachers and civil organizations in China， Japan and South Korea have convened annually a forum on history and peace in East Asia， according to Bu Ping， former head of the Institute of Modern History， CASS. After discussions， the forum set up a joint history compilation committee. It oversaw the publication in 2005 of A History that Faces the Future – the Modern History of Three Asian Countries， an auxiliary middle school textbook in China， Japan and South Korea. History study summer camps for students from these three countries are also organized every year. From 2006 to 2012， scholars from all three countries collaborated on another book， A Modern History of East Asia Beyond the Boundaries. It features a perspective on the region， rather than on specific countries.
“For many young people the war is in the hoary past， or something that exists only in the virtual world of their computers. This hollow， abstract conception of the war is prey to influences by sentiment-laced information. It can be easily misled in extremist or parochial directions，” Bu Ping warned. He called on scholars to guide the younger generation in developing a deep and full understanding of the war， broaden their vision through history education， and contemplate the past and future of East Asia from a broader perspective.
“History is a mirror. Restoring the truth of history and distinguishing right from wrong is an imperative political mission. To defend history is to defend peace，” Party secretary of the Institute of Japanese Studies， CASS， Gao Hong said.
Scholars from more than a dozen countries around the world gathered at the seminar. Among the topics they discussed were the cause and backdrop of the two world wars， recollections of them and their impact on the international order， lessons to be drawn from the wars， and world peaceful development.
Reviewing and summarizing the two world wars and learning from that piece of history is vital to fostering healthy inter-country relations， especially those between major powers， maintaining world peace， and promoting the common progress of humankind.
Root Causes
World War II， involving 60 or more countries and two billion people， was a disastrous event for humankind. Almost 60 million lives were lost， five countries having suffered casualties exceeding fi ve million. China was among the worst affected， with more than 35 million casualties and property losses upward of US$500 billion.
Participants in the July seminar， entitled “World War I and World War II in Retrospect， Lessons and Inspirations，”attributed the outbreak of the two wars to the longstanding unjust， irrational international order that resulted from the imperialist powers’ colonial expansion and the rivalry among them.
“Adolf Hitler’s ruthless ambitions for boundless “Lebensraum” （living space）， Benito Mussolini’s pursuit of “supreme power，” and Japan’s goal of conquering fi rst Asia and then the whole world signified unbridled expansionism，” professor of history at Capital Normal University Xu Lan said. Contention for world hegemony was most prominent in the countries that started WWII.
Nationalism also played a key role. In Ms Xu’s opinion， by the 20th century the nationalist sentiment in Western countries had lost its progressive quality of safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of a people. It had degraded to extreme nationalism， national chauvinism， colonialism， and imperialism， all in the interests of the bourgeois ruling class. The Versailles System after WWI acted as an incubator for WWII， Xu said. “The Treaty of Versailles required that Germany accepts responsibility for the loss and damage that Germany and her allies caused during the war. This had grim consequences， exacerbating friction between the defeated and the victors，” Ms. Xu said， adding， “The policy of appeasement， adopted by Western democracies headed by the U.K. in the 1930s， is another factor that detonated WWII earlier than expected.” According to research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Military Sciences Wang Jinhua， Japan’s invasion of China should also be interpreted in the histori-cal context. Militarism swelled after the Meiji Restoration， laying the ideological foundation for its later aggression towards other Asian countries. Japan’s political and military mechanisms， centered on adulation of the emperor， moreover created the conditions for a large-scale aggressive war. The prospect of capital accumulation and appreciation through military expansion was also strong motivation for Japan to wage a massive war.
Prof. Iko Toshiya of Tsuru University made the point that， after WWI， Japan attempted to disguise its intended aggression towards China under the cover of international laws. When civil war broke out in China， Japan took military measures on the pretext of protecting its interests in the country， ostensibly waging aggressions in the interests of“self-defense.”
“The world today is completely different from it was during WWI and WWII. The hegemony of certain superpowers persists， but under economic globalization it is no longer manifest in contention for colonies， labor， land， and other resources， but instead secured through exports of capital， commodities， services， and management expertise， as well as the establishment of transnational corporations. Mutual openness between countries is an important check on wars，”Shen Yongxing， a research fellow at the Institute of World History， under the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences， said. He added that countries around the world are now more closely knit than ever before. War anywhere， therefore， has ripple effects on other parts of the planet. The UN Security Council， its peace keeping missions， and other international peace organizations and campaigns are also strong anti-war tools and forces.
Defending the Post-WWII International Order
At the end of WWII the allies， including the U.S.， the Soviet Union， U.K.， China， and France， reached a broad con- sensus on key issues such as coordination of their relations， penalization of the Fascist axis powers， and foundation of an international organization – the UN. Appropriate actions were accordingly taken， and the post-war international order took shape.
“The post-WWII international order was established with the goal of preventing another world war and sustaining universal and lasting peace and security. It is based on prosecution of militarist crimes and eradication of the roots of militarist aggression. Widely ratified international laws， including the Atlantic Charter， Cairo Declaration， Potsdam Declaration， and Declaration by United Nations， are the bedrock of this order， and the cooperation and unanimity among big powers within the collective security mechanism of the UN constitutes a guarantee of its function，” Zhou Xiaoning of the Chinese Academy of Military Sciences said. He believes that the world today still needs broad international cooperation built on the basis of cooperation between big powers to share risks. Sylvanus Nicholas Spencer of the University of Sierra Leone said that the cruelty and brutality of WWII exposes the dark side of human nature， but the conduct of social development since testifies to the triumph of the humanitarian spirit.
“It is regrettable that， due to the demands of the Cold War， the U.S. failed to bring Japan fully to account after WWII. It not only made peace with Japan， debarring the involvement of Russia and China， but also unilaterally handed over to Japan the Liuqiu （Ryukyu） and Diaoyu islands. In recent years Japan has accelerated territorial contentions with neighboring countries， gravely undermining the international order，” Zhou Xiaoning said. Shinzo Abe has throughout 2014 accused China of challenging the current international order， an assertion that Prof. Lü Jie of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Academy refutes as the complete reverse of the truth. In modern history the headspring of Asian wars has always been Japan. Though the country formulated a pacifist constitution after WWII， its intentions to challenge the Yalta System remain a ceaseless undercurrent. The country’s expansionist ambitions have expanded significantly， particularly since Shinzo Abe was reelected as prime minister， so stoking further tensions in East Asia.
As Wu Enyuan of the Institute of Russian， Eastern European and Central Asian Studies， Chinese Academy of Social Sciences （CASS）， sees it， the Cairo Declaration laid the foundation for postwar treaties that concern Japan as well as the international order， in particular the order in Northeast Asia. But the rightwing forces in Japan have geared up efforts to revise the pacifist constitution and to deny its war crimes. “This actually amounts to denial of the outcome of WWII， and reveals Japan’s intention to restore its political and military prowess and subsequently dominate the political situation in East Asia，” Wu said. He added that this move is also part of the U.S. strategy of containing China through Japan， and which introduces a new factor of instability into the situation in the Asia-Pacific and the world at large.
“Elements of the Cold War still exist in Asia because of the shift in U.S. policies towards Japan. The Abe administration is building a net to contain China， a maneuver which is more a manifestation of the U.S.-Japan alliance in the 21st century than a revival of Japanese militarism，” Nakayama Toshio said. He hence proposes global advocacy of the Chinese philosophy of harmony to buttress world peace. History Is a Mirror
It has been 75 years since WWII erupted， but memories of it remain in the minds of people around the world. The many books， films and TV dramas about the war are constant reminders of that dark period of history. Over the past 50 years more than 43，000 books on WWII were published in the U.S. alone.
Professor Robert Jeffrey Moore of the University of Sheffield said， “WWII is still fresh in the minds of people in the U.K. and is constantly the subject of publications， TV programs and films.” He nonetheless believes that this effect is not one solely engineered by the state or media， but also attributable to emotions evoked by reflections on the sacrifices of men and women that served in the armed forces and the conflicts in which they fought during WWII.
After WWII， Germany and Japan adopted contrasting approaches to it. As Prof. Li Lezeng of Tongji University said， Germany’s transition to a modern political system is accredited to the heavyhanded measures that the Western allies took to eradicate the root causes of war in Europe， and their inclusive policy of bringing Germany into their alliance under the background of the Cold War.“Though the development of Germany’s political culture did not keep pace with the progress of its political system， it is distinctive by virtue of an in-depth understanding of Nazi rule and of selfexamination with regards to its role in WWII，” Li said. “This affirmative factor in Germany’s political culture provides an important non-institutional guarantee of the country’s contribution to world peace and security and prevention of wars.”
Nakayama Toshio has observed the dangerous trend of the Japanese government， at U.S. connivance， in constantly attempting to revise the constitution and build up its military， despite anti-war sentiments among its people.
Reflections on WWII by the governments and the general public of countries that were involved in it have never ceased. Since the year 2002， representatives of researchers， teachers and civil organizations in China， Japan and South Korea have convened annually a forum on history and peace in East Asia， according to Bu Ping， former head of the Institute of Modern History， CASS. After discussions， the forum set up a joint history compilation committee. It oversaw the publication in 2005 of A History that Faces the Future – the Modern History of Three Asian Countries， an auxiliary middle school textbook in China， Japan and South Korea. History study summer camps for students from these three countries are also organized every year. From 2006 to 2012， scholars from all three countries collaborated on another book， A Modern History of East Asia Beyond the Boundaries. It features a perspective on the region， rather than on specific countries.
“For many young people the war is in the hoary past， or something that exists only in the virtual world of their computers. This hollow， abstract conception of the war is prey to influences by sentiment-laced information. It can be easily misled in extremist or parochial directions，” Bu Ping warned. He called on scholars to guide the younger generation in developing a deep and full understanding of the war， broaden their vision through history education， and contemplate the past and future of East Asia from a broader perspective.
“History is a mirror. Restoring the truth of history and distinguishing right from wrong is an imperative political mission. To defend history is to defend peace，” Party secretary of the Institute of Japanese Studies， CASS， Gao Hong said.