One of my more “popular” posts was a translation of the controversial Japanese textbook. Recently, the Minsitry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology approved the latest textbooks that were up for approval. Marmot mentioned the issue and Plunge skewered them, but here’s a more substantial summary of the approvals, using information from four of Japan’s major newspapers (from both the Left and the Right).

I know most readers are sick of the East Asian history issue, but there’s a real lack of accurate information in English. Also, this is relevant to global security in East Asia. For those of you who want to read more, read below the fold.

• All General Science, Physics, and Chemistry textbooks were approved. 84% of Home Economics books were approved. The highest rejection rate was in Math, of which half textbooks were rejected.

• The Ministry insisted on clarification of territorial disputes. A total of thirty textbooks (in Political Economy, Civics, and Modern Society courses) included sections on territorial issues, and those that did were required to be clear: Takeshima is Japanese territory occupied by South Korea; the Northern Territories are Japanese territory occupied by Russia; and the Senkaku Islets are Japanese territory occupied by Japan with a claim from China. Lumping the first two and the third as issues related to “Territorial Disputes,” or saying the Senkaku Islets are “currently being negotiated” is ambiguous, inaccurate, and dilutes Japan’s claim to the territory.

• Clarifications on the abduction of Japanese citizens by North Korea were requested so as to not suggest that the issue was resolved: “Not all abducted citizens have been returned.”

• Thirty-Eight textbooks for Home Economics and Modern Society courses that included sections on gender discrimination were accepted. However, two textbooks that said the genders were the same were not approved.

• Listing victims of the Nanjing Massacre as over 200,000 is deemed revisionism and exageration. Textbooks using the words “massacre” and “invasion” were approved. The Ministry said it was inappropriate to turn Nanjing into a major theme of modern history studies. The conservative Sankei Shinbun criticized the approval of the explanation of a picture titled as “a Japanese Army Tank used to destroy Nanjing,” noting the the “tank” in question was a personel carrier.

• Textbooks that said “Women forced to serve as Comfort Women by the Japanese army” were not acceptable; textbooks that said “Women forced to serve as Comfort Women for the Japanese army” were acceptable.

• Textbooks that said “The Prime Minister’s Yasukuni Shrine visits have been ruled unconstitutional” are unacceptable. This is a reference to the diverse rulings on the issue. The Fukuoka District Court said the visits are unconstitutional; the Osaka High Court and Takamatsu High Court have ruled that the visits could be unconstitutional but the plaintiffs lack standing; and the Chiba Distric and Tokyo High Courts have said they are constitutional. The Ministry denied that it had any discussions on this issue with the Prime Minsiter or the cabinet.

• The US attack on Iraq was not a “first strike attack” or a “preemtive attack,” both of which are illegal invasions under international law. Also, the Japanese SDF is not part of the multinational force in Iraq: it is involved in humanitarian activities and not part of the military forces.

• BROWSE / IN TIMELINE
• « Julio-Claudian Family Tree
• » Painted into a corner