|
KMT keen to distort history as well
By Nathan Novak 李漢聲
Thursday, Sep 16, 2010, Page 8
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) did his own bit of distorting
history on Thursday with his assertion that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)
defeated the Japanese in the Chinese war of resistance against Japanese invasion
from 1937 to 1945. Even though Ma and the KMT’s claims are stronger than those
made by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), they are only slightly so.
The fact of the matter is that neither the CCP nor the KMT, either individually
or collectively, either did or could defeat the Japanese without US intervention
in the Pacific during World War II. US material and logistical aid, not to
mention direct US military involvement after Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor,
effectively defeated Japan. A reading of former president Chiang Kai-shek’s
(蔣介石) diaries clearly illustrate the importance of US aid to China during
China’s war of resistance, which later became the Chinese Theater of World War
II.
Soong Mayling’s (宋美齡) visits to the US during this period also underscore the
importance of US efforts to help sustain China’s war effort. Her visits were
meant to drum up US popular and congressional support for China and her
presence, arguments and personality also had a strong effect on then-US
president Franklin and first lady Eleanor Roosevelt.
What these facts, so twisted by the Ma administration and the KMT, reveal is
that China did not defeat Japan. Indeed, Japan had a strong and growing foothold
in China before US military intervention. Moreover, the rapid defeat of KMT
forces during Japan’s Operation Ichigo, which consisted of a series of battles
in China from April to December of 1944, further demonstrates the Japanese
ability to muster enough troops and firepower to effectively neutralize Chiang’s
forces even after the US had been fighting in the Pacific for more than two
years.
Claims from either the KMT or the CCP that China played a role in the defeat of
Japan are certainly well founded. Japan became bogged down in China, unable to
assemble enough troops and firepower to effectively garrison the areas it
conquered — a situation that led to the growing power of the CCP, which
strengthened itself mostly behind Japanese lines during this time. Japan’s
supply lines also became increasingly stretched and more men and materiel were
needed to press Japan’s advantage in China and defend the territorial gains the
Japanese made.
In comparison, Germany suffered the same problem in the Soviet Union during
Operation Barbarossa. Hitler’s forces became bogged down attempting to cross
vast expanses of western Russia before the Russian winter set in. The Soviet Red
Army was able to destroy the German army at Stalingrad. The Soviets had the
upper hand against the Germans thereafter, almost single-handedly rolling back
prior territorial losses and, at the end of the war, taking Berlin. Most
impressively, the Russians had already defeated the Germans and were rolling
them back on the Eastern Front before the Allied invasion of France was able to
open the Western Front on the European continent.
Chiang and the KMT never had a Stalingrad. Chiang hunkered down in Chongqing and
decided to fight a long and costly protracted war. In retrospect, this was
probably Chiang’s only viable option. He knew his military was outclassed and
outgunned by the Japanese, yet making a smart strategic decision does not make
one a victor.
Indeed, China’s role in the Pacific War most closely resembles the role of
France in Western Europe. The French state was quickly defeated by the German
invasion in 1940. Although many French soldiers were able to retreat to Britain,
the French role in the war was limited. (Chiang was never defeated by the
Japanese, but his forces were effectively neutralized by the Japanese.) The
French were included in the partition and occupation of Berlin following the
war, but no one can viably claim that the French defeated the Nazis. And no one
can viably claim the French won the war in Europe.
The war in the Pacific, though it had Chinese involvement, was won almost
entirely by US forces. The US plan to invade Japan, conceived before the use of
the atom bomb was thought possible, did not involve Chinese forces invading the
Japanese islands. The Chinese could have attempted, in the event of a US
invasion of Japan, to make advances against Japanese forces in China, but any
advancements would most likely have been due to the withdrawal of huge numbers
of Japanese forces from China to defend the Japanese homeland against US
invasion. This possibility is essentially moot though, as history took another
track. Although Japanese forces in China at the end of the war surrendered to
Chiang’s, and not Chinese Communist forces, they were ordered to do so by US
General Douglas MacArthur. They most certainly were not defeated there by either
Chinese party.
One can appreciate the Chinese struggle from 1937 to 1945. One can appreciate
the Chinese nation-building struggle from 1911 to 1945. One can praise the
patient persistence of the Chinese government and people during China’s war of
resistance. One can easily say that China played a role in the Pacific War.
However, one cannot claim that China defeated Japan. Even the decision to
“return” Taiwan to China was the decision of a US president. Moreover, that
decision was then, has been, and still remains under scrutiny.
Nathan Novak studies China and the Asia-Pacific region with
particular focus on cross-strait relations at National Sun Yat-sen University.
|
