Reclaiming Okinawa: The Forgotten Front in Japan's National Identity Crisis
In a recent lecture hosted by the Historical Awareness Research Committee, Satoru Nakamura of the Japan Okinawa Policy Research Forum laid out a compelling case. Okinawa, he claimed, is not merely a local political issue. Rather, it is a lens through which we can understand Japan's national crisis in identity, sovereignty, and historical continuity.
At the heart of Nakamura's argument is the claim that Okinawa has been deliberately severed from Japanese national history through educational policy and political activism. Japanese history textbooks isolate Okinawa's past under the rubric of "Ryukyuan history," often without explaining how and when Okinawa became part of Japan. "Ask the average Japanese person when Okinawa became Japanese," Nakamura said. "Most can't answer. That's not just ignorance — it's vulnerability."
Nakamura contests this narrative by situating Okinawa's incorporation into Japan within the broader context of national unification following the Meiji Restoration. The so-called "Ryukyu Disposition" was not an act of colonial aggression, he argues. Rather, it was part of the abolition of feudal domains and the establishment of a centralized state. Just as the Tokugawa-era han system was dismantled throughout Japan, Okinawa too was integrated as a prefecture.
A major portion of the lecture was devoted to exposing the weaknesses in the claim that Ryukyu was ever a sovereign state. Nakamura pointed to the 1854 Treaty of Amity between the Ryukyu Kingdom and the United States. Many often cite this as evidence of Ryukyu's international recognition.
However, recent scholarship shows that the treaty was never ratified by the US Senate and was labeled a "compact," not a formal treaty between sovereign states. France and the Netherlands also signed agreements with Ryukyu, but likewise declined to ratify them. Western powers, Nakamura concluded, never treated Ryukyu as an independent nation. "They were never equals. That's the whole point. It was diplomacy for form's sake, not for sovereignty," he said.
Nakamura further dismantled the narrative of Okinawan victimhood by highlighting the geopolitical threats posed by foreign intervention. In 1844, nearly a decade before Commodore Matthew Perry's arrival in Japan, a French warship arrived in Okinawa and demanded concessions, including permission to station missionaries. Ryukyuan officials, operating under Satsuma's suzerainty, refused.
This event prompted the Tokugawa Shogunate to order Satsuma to send troops to reinforce Okinawa, illustrating that the central government regarded Okinawa as part of its national defense perimeter. "The notion that Ryukyu was a free actor is fantasy," Nakamura remarked. "Satsuma and Edo responded as any sovereign power would — by protecting its periphery." Bingata-dyed cotton garment with peony motif from the 1800s. Bingata was part of the Ryukyuan culture born under Satsuma rule. Tokyo National Museum (Wikimedia Commons).
He also detailed Satsuma's use of Ryukyu as a backchannel for acquiring Western military technology during Japan's period of official isolation. Shimazu Nariakira's secret negotiations with France led to the construction of a modern warship — the Shouheimaru — built using Ryukyuan cover. The ship flew the Hinomaru, which later became Japan's national flag. This episode shows that Ryukyu's ambiguous status was a tool of realpolitik, not evidence of sovereignty.
Nakamura criticized the postwar Japanese government for failing to commemorate Okinawa's 1972 reversion to Japan as a national holiday. Unlike Germany's Reunification Day, Japan has made no effort to mark the end of its postwar division. This negligence, he warned, has created space for separatist ideologies and allowed China to support independence movements under the guise of international law. "If Germany can celebrate its reunification, why can't Japan?"
He cited the 2008 UN Human Rights Committee's classification of Okinawans as an indigenous people, which the Japanese government failed to contest. In 2014, then-Governor Takeshi Onaga launched a campaign declaring the 1879 annexation of Ryukyu a violation of international law. When asked to respond, the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs claimed it could not issue a definitive statement.
According to Nakamura, this diplomatic ambiguity only emboldens foreign propaganda. "What kind of country can't even say when its own territory became its own? That's not diplomacy — it's dereliction."
Additionally, Nakamura called attention to linguistic and genetic studies used to support claims of Okinawan distinctiveness.
While some activists argue that the Okinawan language is not Japanese, Nakamura referenced the work of 19th-century British scholar Basil Hall Chamberlain, who concluded that Okinawan dialects were ancient forms of Japanese.
Chamberlain, who taught at Tokyo Imperial University and published extensively on Japanese and Ryukyuan philology, observed that although Ryukyuan speech differed phonetically and lexically from standard Japanese, it retained deep grammatical and structural similarities. He classified Okinawan as a divergent but fundamentally Japanese dialect, not an independent language.
Nakamura also referred to a recent university presentation he attended at the Okinawa Prefectural Museum, where a professor explained the latest findings in DNA research. These showed that during the time of the Ryukyu Country (1429-1879), the Okinawan population was composed of roughly 60% indigenous Ryukyuan and 40% mainland Yamato genetic material.
Today, the Yamato component has increased to about 80%, reflecting centuries of integration. Interestingly, the study also indicated that a significant portion of Okinawan genetic material, particularly from Miyako Island, has flowed back to the Japanese mainland over time, further reinforcing the genetic continuity between Okinawans and other Japanese. "Even our DNA tells the story of unity, not separation," Nakamura said. A Japan Coast Guard patrol boat searches the waters around Miyako Island, Okinawa Prefecture, after a GSDF helicopter went missing. April 7, 2023 (© Kyodo)
Nakamura also noted that the term "Ryukyu Kingdom" is itself an anachronism. Historical documents refer only to "Ryukyu Country" ( Ryukyu-koku ), and the term "kingdom" appears to have originated in modern English-language translations. He argued that this semantic shift is part of a broader ideological campaign to frame Okinawa as a postcolonial victim rather than a participant in the national project. "It's a psychological operation, not a historical debate," he warned.
In closing, Nakamura warned that historical distortion is not merely academic — it has strategic consequences. Misrepresenting Okinawa's past weakens Japan's internal cohesion and invites external manipulation. To counter this, he urged a national effort to reclaim and teach the true history of Okinawa's integration into Japan, not as an act of conquest, but as part of the country's modernization and unification.
"Okinawa's crisis is Japan's crisis," Nakamura concluded. "We cannot defend our nation if we don't even understand how it came to be."
Author: Daniel Manning
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Japan Forward
8 hours ago
- Japan Forward
Comfort Women Revisited: Law, Politics, and Academic Freedom
At a recent seminar hosted by the Heterodox Academy East Asia, the comfort women issue took center stage as scholars from across disciplines engaged in a candid debate. Founded in 2015, Heterodox Academy is an American non-profit organization dedicated to promoting academic freedom and greater political diversity in higher education. Its East Asia Chapter, of which I'm a founding member, was created in late 2021. Since its inception, we have tackled some of the region's most polarizing and sensitive issues. Legal historian Marie Kim opened the discussion by examining the South Korean judiciary's growing role in adjudicating historical grievances. She cited the 2021 ruling in which a South Korean court awarded damages to 12 former comfort women who had sued the Japanese government, despite Tokyo's invocation of state immunity. A comparable ruling followed in 2023, when the Seoul High Court overturned a lower court's dismissal of a similar case. The High Court stated that state immunity did not apply, as the comfort women system constituted "an egregious human rights violation." Kim argued that rulings by domestic courts, which are often not entirely free from political influence, tend to complicate disputes between sovereign states. "Courts are not well-equipped to find out what really happened many, many years ago," she said. "Judicialization of the past is often dangerous because courts tend to favor moralization of history in the name of justice." Further complicating matters, Kim noted, is the inconsistency in how South Korean courts have approached colonial-era cases. In comfort women rulings, for instance, South Korean courts have asserted that the Japanese military violated both international law and penal codes enforced on the Korean Peninsula at the time. Yet in a separate wartime labor dispute, the Supreme Court in 2018 took a markedly different approach. It ruled that Japan's entire colonial legal framework was unlawful on the grounds that the 1910 annexation of Korea was itself "invalid." Attorneys for South Korean plaintiffs responding to reporters' interviews before the first meeting of the public-private council to resolve the wartime labor issue on July 4, 2022, in front of the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs (©Tatsuya Tokiyoshi) Kim, who is also a jurist, suggested that both positions cannot be held simultaneously. Either colonial-era laws were valid and enforceable, or they were invalid and void. "Some scholars argue that colonial law had no force because the people of Korea lived under foreign occupation. This sort of argument is rather kind of embarrassing," Kim said. "It's like saying that people without national sovereignty, like Korea at that time, are not capable of entering into any contractual relationship." Professor Chizuko Allen of the University of Hawaii offered a broader international context. She pointed out that the Korean Council, South Korea's largest comfort women advocacy group, was not formed in response to victim testimony, but rather emerged as part of a wider international feminist movement. Notably, the first comfort woman victim in South Korea stepped forward in August 1991, nine months after the organization was established. Before the Council's formation in November 1990, Allen said, South Korean intellectuals worked closely with North Korea and Japan's Socialist Party, organizing joint women's conferences in Seoul, Pyongyang, and Tokyo. Former Korean Council head Yoon Mee Hyang (center) with comfort women Lee Yong Soo (right) and Moon Phil Gi. Taken in 2002 at Pyongyang's Juche Tower in North Korea. (© Yoon Mee Hyang/ Facebook post) Around that time, North Korea was engaged in diplomatic normalization talks with Japan, starting in January 1991. But after failing to secure economic assistance, Pyongyang publicly alleged that hundreds of thousands of Korean women had been forced into sexual slavery under the guise of the Women's Volunteer Corps during Japanese colonial rule, Allen said. In many ways, the conflation of the Women's Volunteer Corps with the comfort women system reflects a broader lack of historical understanding. The Japanese government established the Corps in 1944 to conscript unmarried women into industrial labor roles amid acute wartime labor shortages. Yet this misunderstanding was not limited to Pyongyang. The Korean Council, too, frequently blurred the distinction, even incorporating the term Volunteer Corps into its original name. In 2018, the organization abruptly rebranded itself to Justice for the Comfort Women. North Korea, of course, is not the only nation exploiting the comfort women issue as a diplomatic tool against Japan. China is also increasingly doing so. Since Xi Jinping's rise to power in 2014, Allen explained, China has moved from indifference to proactive engagement in the comfort women issue. Cities like Shanghai and Nanjing opened museums dedicated to claimed victims, while Beijing actively pushed to include their testimonies in UNESCO's World Heritage registry. In 2024, families of 18 former Chinese comfort women filed a lawsuit seeking compensation from Japan. Chinese President Xi Jinping (©Kyodo) "[China would do] anything to isolate Japan internationally….and to weaken the US-Japan-South Korea security partnership," Allen said. Beyond geopolitics, the professor also noted a mental dimension. "It's kind of like psychological warfare," Allen said. "They want to attack Japanese self-esteem, especially among the young people, so that they will lower their guard." Wrapping up the seminar, Harvard Law professor J Mark Ramseyer provided a critical perspective on the origins of the comfort women narrative. "This [Comfort women issue] isn't something where the answer is sort of a little of this and a little bit of that," he said. "This whole thing is a fraud." According to Ramseyer, the modern controversy originated with Seiji Yoshida, a former Imperial Japanese soldier who published fabricated memoirs in the 1980s claiming he had been involved in "hunting down" Korean women for sexual slavery. Yoshida later admitted that his account was falsified. "If you go back and look at Korean and Japanese newspapers from 1945 to 1983, there's virtually nothing about comfort women," Ramseyer argued. The turning point, he said, was the dissemination of Yoshida's memoir in Japan in 1983 and its Korean translation in 1989. Alongside this, The Asahi Shimbun amplified the claims through its nationwide readership. Ramseyer also addressed his academic work that ignited controversy. In 2021, he published a brief paper arguing that the comfort women system operated under contractual terms, with women receiving upfront payments and the possibility of shortened service periods based on performance incentives. The backlash was immediate and intense. Faculty and students at Harvard and beyond launched petitions calling for the journal to retract his paper and demanding an apology. "The notion that in 2021, people would attack me for talking about the contract structure just had me completely blown away," Ramseyer said. Professor J Mark Ramseyer of Harvard University gives a keynote speech at a trilateral symposium on the comfort women issue in Nagatacho, Tokyo, on July 10. (©Sankei by Takao Harakawa) When asked by Joseph Yi, the moderator, whether he was politicizing his scholarship by engaging with right-leaning groups and political parties in Japan, Ramseyer responded: "If Hillary Clinton wanted to talk to me, I'd be happy to talk to her too. I'm not picky." "I've never heard of any colleague of mine being criticized for speaking to a left-wing group," he added. While our chapter has extended invitations to academics from the other side of the aisle, very few have been willing to participate in the seminar and openly challenge opposing views. Author: Kenji Yoshida
Winnipeg Free Press
8 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Okinawa marks 80 years since end of one of harshest WWII battles with pledge to share tragic history
TOKYO (AP) — Okinawa marked the 80th anniversary of the end of one of the harshest battles of World War II fought on the southern island. With global tensions escalating, its governor said on Monday it is the Okinawan 'mission' to keep telling the tragic history and its impact today. The Battle of Okinawa killed a quarter of the island's population, leading to a 27-year U.S. occupation and a heavy American troop presence to date. Monday's memorial comes one day after U.S. attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities, adding to a sense of uncertainty on the island about the heavy American military presence and in its remote islands, already worried about getting embroiled in a potential conflict in Taiwan. Gov. Denny Tamaki, noting the escalating global conflicts and nuclear threats, made a resolve to contribute to global peace studies, disarmament and the preservation of war remains. 'It is our mission, as those living in the present, to preserve and pass on the reality and lessons to future generations.' Fierce battle and civilian deaths U.S. troops landed on the main Okinawa island on April 1, 1945, beginning a battle in their push toward mainland Japan. The Battle of Okinawa lasted nearly three months, killing some 200,000 people — about 12,000 Americans and more than 188,000 Japanese, half of them Okinawan civilians including students and victims forced into mass suicides by Japan's military. Okinawa was sacrificed by Japan's Imperial Army to defend the mainland, historians say. The island group remained under U.S. occupation until its reversion in 1972, two decades longer than most of Japan. Monday's memorial was held at the Mabuni Hill in Itoman City, where the remains of most of the war dead reside. Remembering the tragedy Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba was in a hot seat when he attended Monday's ceremony. Weeks earlier, one of his ruling party lawmakers Shoji Nishida, known for whitewashing Japan's wartime atrocities, denounced an inscription on a famous cenotaph dedicated to students as 'rewriting history' by portraying the Japanese army as having caused their deaths, while Americans liberated Okinawa. Nishida also called Okinawa's history education 'a mess.' His remark triggered an uproar in Okinawa, forcing Ishiba days later to apologize to the island's governor, who had criticized the remark as outrageous and distorting history. The Himeyuri Cenotaph commemorates student nurses who were abandoned near the end of the battle and killed, some in group suicides with teachers. Japan's wartime military told the people never to surrender to the enemy, or die. Nishida's remarks add to concerns about the whitewashing of Japan's embarrassing wartime past as memories of the tragedy fade and ignorance about the suffering grows. Ishiba, at Monday's memorial, said Japan's peace and prosperity is built on the sacrifices of Okinawa's history of hardship and that it is the government's responsibility to 'devote ourselves to achieve a peaceful and prosperous Okinawa.' Postwar years and growing fear Okinawa remained under U.S. occupation from 1945 until the 1972 reversion to Japan. The U.S. military maintains a heavy presence there due to Okinawa's strategic importance for security in the Pacific. Their presence serves not only to help defend Japan but also for missions elsewhere, including in the South China Sea and the Middle East. Private properties were confiscated to build U.S. bases, and the base-dependent economy has hampered the growth of local industry. Fear of a Taiwan conflict rekindles bitter memories of the Battle of Okinawa. Historians and many residents say Okinawa was used as a pawn to save mainland Japan. There are also ancient tensions between Okinawa and the Japanese mainland, which annexed the islands, formerly the independent kingdom of the Ryukus, in 1879. Burden of history Okinawa remains home to the majority of about 50,000 U.S. troops stationed in Japan under a bilateral security pact. The island, which accounts for only 0.6% of Japanese land, hosts 70% of U.S. military facilities. Even 53 years after its reversion to Japan, Okinawa is burdened with the heavy U.S. presence and faces noise, pollution, aircraft accidents and crime related to American troops, the governor said. Nearly 2,000 tons of unexploded U.S. bombs remain in Okinawa, with some regularly dug up. A recent explosion at a storage site at a U.S. military base caused minor injuries to four Japanese soldiers. Remains of hundreds of war dead are still unrecovered on Okinawa, as the government's search and identification effort is slow to make progress.
Toronto Star
12 hours ago
- Toronto Star
GOP tax bill would ease regulations on gun silencers and some rifles and shotguns
WASHINGTON (AP) — The massive tax and spending cuts package that President Donald Trump wants on his desk by July 4 would loosen regulations on gun silencers and certain types of rifles and shotguns, advancing a longtime priority of the gun industry as Republican leaders in the House and Senate try to win enough votes to pass the bill. The guns provision was first requested in the House by Georgia Rep. Andrew Clyde, a Republican gun store owner who had initially opposed the larger tax package. The House bill would remove silencers — called 'suppressors' by the gun industry — from a 1930s law that regulates firearms that are considered the most dangerous, eliminating a $200 tax while removing a layer of background checks.
