Yasukuni Shrine

As three more Japanese cabinet ministers plan to visit the Yasukuni Shrine on August 15 to commemorate the end of World War II and the Prime Minister has confirmed he will visit the shrine again next year, the appropriateness of their visits is once again being debated. Mr. Koizumi has visited the shrine on four occasions since he became prime minister in 2001.

As demonstrated by the recent Asia Cup soccer tournament held in China, many Asian countries, especially South Korea and China, still hold a great amount of ill-will towards Japan and feel that having government ministers visit a shrine where convicted war criminals are enshrined is indicative of Japan's lack of remorse for its past imperialistic actions and a continued hostility towards its neighbours.

The shrine, located just outside the Imperial Palace in Tokyo was built in 1869 on the request of the Emperor Meiji following the restoration of the monarchy and the end of shogunate rule. The shrine originally housed the spirits of those who died in the Boshin Civil War. As the 20th century progressed and Japan became involved in a variety of conflicts, the number of spirits climbed to approximately 2,466,000. Although the shrine always espoused nationalistic and militaristic views, the addition of 1,068 war criminal spirits including General Tojo, the wartime prime minister, sparked further suspicion of Japan's inability to come to terms with its past. It is interesting to note that prior to the enshrinement of the war criminals, Japan's Asian neighbours did not criticize the visits of public officials. However, after 1978, the opposition has become more and more vocal with concerns that Japan is returning to its imperialist past and may once more threaten the sovereignty of its neighbours.

To provide a western perspective, imagine the outcry if Germany's prime minister visited a shrine where, among others, the spirits of Hitler, Goebbels and other members of the Third Reich were enshrined. Although the prime minister could claim he was commemorating the other spirits of the war dead, the mere appearance of worshipping such hated and vilified figures would create uproar among Germany's neighbours and other groups, especially the Jews.

Although the opposition to the visits has been most vocal externally, there has been heated discussion within the country as to whether or not the visits by public officials, especially the prime minister, violate the constitutional separation between state and religion. A number of cases have been brought before a variety of Japanese courts and the rulings have been inconsistent. The cases have centered on whether or not Junichiro Koizumi has visited in the shrine in the official capacity as prime minister. Earlier this year a Fukuoka court decided that the Prime Minister had visited the shrine in the official capacity of prime minister thereby violating the constitution. However, other courts have sided with the Prime Minister citing that his visits were of a personal nature.

Junichiro Koizumi is a Japanese citizen and is entitled to the same degree of personal freedom that other Japanese are entitled too. As a citizen, he has the right to visit a shrine of his own choosing. However, as Prime Minister, his actions in his private life cannot be completely separated from his position as prime minister. Many professions expect their members to maintain standards that are higher than those that are set for the general public. This is what generates respect and reverance for the position; the job of prime minister is one of supreme responsibility and his conduct, whether or not it is in an official capacity, reflects upon this position. Furthermore, during his visits, he signed his name as Prime Minister, used prime ministerial vehicles and staff to assist his visit. In other words, it had all the trappings of an official visit although he considered it to be private.

Mr. Koizumi has noted that his visits to other shrines have not provoked any controversy although they too could be considered a violation of the constitution by the same rationale. While this is true, the Yasukuni shrine is symbolic of Japan's militaristic past and as such generates strong feelings of anger and resentment. This has fuelled those who feel slighted by the visits to take the matter to court. Since his other visits to other shrines have not generated such emotion, there has been no desire to pursue the matter through the courts. Furthermore, I believe that the plaintiffs are less concerned about the requirement for the separation of religion and state. They want to put an end to the Prime Minister's visits to the Yasukuni Shrine. The most effective way they can do this is to use Article 20 as a tool to legally force the Prime Minister to cease his annual worshipping at the Yasukuni shrine.

All heads of state need to pay respect to those that have died in the name of the country. To not have this opportunity would denigrate the sacrifices that so many people have made. However, the secret ceremony in 1978 to enshrine the sprits of the war criminals has polluted the shrine's meaning and allowed this controversy to erupt and fester. Unless some action is taken to separate or remove the war criminals from the shrine, the Prime Minister's visits will forever be seen as a glorification of past militarism and a refusal to reconcile relations with neighbouring countries.

The Yasukuni website is located here. It provides some interesting reading that would make Orwell proud. "Nevertheless, to defend the independence of the nation as well as the peace of Asia, the sad development of wars with other countries arose." Perhaps the Shrine's hired scribe is the same person who helps the Bush administration justify their war on Iraq...