‘how Should We Look Back At History On The 70th Anniversary Of The End Of World War Ii?’

The Second World War was arguably the most seismic event of the twentieth century. Millions were killed as racial hatreds were exposed, manipulated, and used to justify the murder of others. In the aftermath of the war, a new age of superpowers emerged as the United States vied for power and influence with the Soviet un ion in the Cold War. International relations came to be dominated by this rivalry. However for a large part of the world, the key question was not about the Cold War. The most pressing concern for the newly independent countries of the Third World and elsewhere was how to effectively build and formulate their nations through the cultivation of a peaceful form of nationalism.

Nations and nationalism are two concepts that have directly impinged upon our view of history in the past seventy years. Perspectives on history and current events are still so heavily shaped by analysis of nations and their people. Nationalism and national competition have dramatically shaped the nature of North East Asian history in the post-war world.

Nationalism can work as a positive force for constructive change it can be harnessed to promote economic growth, ties of solidarity, and a strong sense of communal well-being. However, nationalism is all too frequently used negatively as means to create a sense of fear or suspicion of outsiders to extraneously assert claims over territory to promote exploitative economic practices and at its most extreme, to promote violence and conflict. The ethnocentric nationalism of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan reflected these trends in their terrible totality.

The writer James A. Baldwin once stated that people are trapped in history and history is trapped in them . This is undoubtedly true. History is a fundamental part of our human state - it is trapped in us. It shapes our views, frames cultural norms, and fashions our opinions of other groups or nations. However, the key issue in North East Asia and elsewhere is that many are trapped in history - and are beholden to negative nationalist approaches that obstruct peace. In North Korea, Japan is deemed to be the same imperial power it was seventy years ago and the United States is blamed for starting the Korean War. Japanese nationalist politicians decry and reject claims regarding Comfort women and play down atrocities committed during the Second World War. The Chinese Communist Party uses nationalist fervour to justify claims over territory in Xinjiang, Tibet, and islands in the South China Seas. In South Korea, some figures can be overly derogatory towards Japan and, at times, The United States.

We should look back at history on the seventieth anniversary of the Second World War with a sense of awareness. More countries than ever before are determining their own affairs, which is a good thing. However, there is a worrying tendency towards various types of nationalism that highlight the worst aspects of human nature. Extreme nationalistic sentiments are divisive and pit people against each other. If the pressing problem is the tendency towards divisive forms of nationalism then how can we promote peace?

To many commentators, the most effective way to build peace across North East Asia would be for its component nations to emulate either the ASEAN countries or even potentially to work towards building an organisation like the EU. Both organisations have had substantial successes in terms of building economic, social, and political cooperation between its members. The move towards an interdependent economic bloc would benefit the economies of North East Asia. Engaging in regular discussion as part of a collective organisation would also help to solve some of the key issues facing North East Asia. However, both ASEAN and the EU illustrate particular problems.

For ASEAN the main problem is how to effectively handle tensions with China over disputed islands. The EU, arguably the strongest supranational organisation in the world, did ensure prosperity and enabled close cooperation before 2008. However since the financial crisis, the Eurozone fallout and growing euroscepticism have highlighted the way in which supranational institutions, in times of crisis, can exacerbate tensions between nations.

Ultimately, the route towards a shared peace must be based on dialogue and exchange. Cooperation on developing a more shared, coherent view of the past would also ease tensions in North East Asia. The notion of a joint history textbook, although hard to implement, is a sound idea. Further to this, continued cross-cultural exchange programs help to foster a sense of shared cultural acceptance and should be expanded.

However, the key challenge is to address the various factors that breed aggressive nationalistic sentiment and to finally settle the vital questions that have trapped people in history. On the seventieth anniversary of the Second World War, we should remember that our history does not need us to regress and perpetually hate others for past sins, it should be used to warn us and illuminate our understanding of the past so we can build a better present and future.