Reviewed by Canon Mike D Williams
Is aggressive war a crime? This question was at the heart of the war crimes trial in Tokyo at the end of the Second World War. America, as the occupying power, established an Allied War Crimes Tribunal to try Japanese leaders, like the Nuremberg trial of Nazis. Whilst Nuremberg verdicts were widely accepted, the Tokyo outcome is an ongoing source of controversy across East Asia today.
The story begins with the final days of fighting to bring about a Japanese surrender. General MacArthur established General Headquarters which made all the decisions about the rebuilding of Japan. Charges were brought against political and military leaders for war crimes and the international tribunal started work.
In this very long and detailed account, Professor Gary Bass tells the story from how the eleven judges were selected from the Allied nations, their backgrounds and how the Australian Chief Justice, Sir William Webb, soon fell out with everyone. The judges were challenged by defence lawyers about the jurisdiction of the court. A theme running through the account is how the judges failed to agree on this and other key matters of international law.
Who should be charged and with what crimes? General MacArthur protected the Japanese Emperor from being accused of war crimes. Prime Ministers, cabinet members and military commanders were brought to face the evidence presented by the prosecution. The court considered Japanese aggression across several countries in Asia that impacted on many Allied nations from 1931 until 1945. The surprise attack on Pearl Harbour is just one. There are many others detailed, from China, Russia, Korea, Dutch East Indies, French Indochina and British territories.
Eyewitness testimony of atrocities is not easy reading. The trial judges thought it would last six months, but it took two and half years. During this time China’s civil war and Russia’s grip on eastern Europe developed. The Indian judge, Radhabinod Pal, became the main dissenter producing a very long judgement acquitting all the defendants whilst the majority judgement included some death sentences. Pal’s judgement was disowned by the Indian government but is still revered in parts of Japanese society, according to Bass.
This is a very long book with extremely detailed accounts of court room exchanges alongside the background dynamics between the judges, General Headquarters and Allied governments. It gives an insight into the Japanese culture in the period of conflict in Asia and how the politics reorientated to become a bulwark against communism. I found myself skim reading large sections towards the end as the main story behind the trial that ‘misfired and fizzled’ had been told.
The research from multiple archives across many nations took a team years to translate and bring together into this accessible account. It is a book of immense scholarship that as one critic said, will leave you ‘not only moved but disturbed as well’.