Photo/Illutration Prime Minsiter Shigeru Ishiba presents personal reflections to mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II at a news conference held at the prime minister’s office on Oct. 10. (Takeshi Iwashita)

Outgoing Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba on Oct. 10 released a statement of personal reflections to mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II by posing a tantalizing question: “Why couldn’t Japan avoid that war?”

A former defense minister, Ishiba clearly wanted his name associated with the historic milestone--albeit after the fact--just as his predecessors did on key anniversaries.

Building on the historical perspectives of past Cabinet-approved statements issued every decade since the 50th anniversary, Ishiba took it upon himself to offer his own historical review and outline key lessons learned.

Titled “On the occasion of the 80th year since the end of the war,” the document spanned approximately six A4 pages, exceeding the length of previous anniversary statements.

This refers to the “Murayama Statement” on the 50th anniversary in 1995, the “Koizumi Statement” 10 years later and the “Abe Statement” marking the 70th anniversary of the war’s end in 2015.

Ishiba released his perspective during a news conference held at the prime minister’s office.

In his message, Ishiba acknowledged that he “also inherits” the historical understanding expressed in past statements that referred to Japan’s “colonial rule and aggression,” “deep remorse” and “heartfelt apology.”

He then addressed a topic not thoroughly explored in previous statements: “Why couldn’t Japan avoid that war?” 

He noted that in the past three anniversary statements, “little mention was made of why that war could not have been avoided.” He said he decided to offer personal reflections to examine this question “together with the people of Japan at this 80-year milestone.”

Ishiba first pointed out a structural flaw in the prewar Imperial Constitution, which lacked the principle of “civilian control”—the idea that politics must be superior to the military.

He then analyzed three key areas: “politics,” “parliament” and “media,” citing specific historical examples.

Regarding politics, he referred to the 1935 controversy over the “Emperor organ theory” proposed by constitutional scholar and House of Peers member Tatsukichi Minobe.

This theory, under the Imperial Constitution, held that sovereignty resided in the state as a legal entity, and the emperor governed as “the highest organ of the state” in accordance with the Constitution.

Ishiba noted that the Keisuke Okada Cabinet at the time “yielded to military demands and rejected the previously mainstream Emperor organ theory,” stating that “the government lost control over the military.”

Regarding parliament, Ishiba cited the 1940 expulsion of Lower House member Takao Saito after he delivered an “anti-military speech” criticizing the war.

Ishiba emphasized that “parliament also lost its function to control the military.”

Regarding the media, Ishiba stated that from around the time of the Manchurian Incident in 1931, the press “shifted to actively supporting the war.”

He pointed out that “newspapers widely reported” the Kwantung Army’s occupation of Chinese territory, “which mesmerized many citizens and further fueled nationalism.”

Based on this analysis, the prime minister summarized the “lessons for today.”

He acknowledged that postwar Japan had established civilian control, but warned that “it is merely a system, and without proper implementation, it is meaningless.”

He wrote, “We must not repeat a history where emotional and spiritual judgments are prioritized over calm and rational decisions, causing the nation to err in its course.”

Related News