Chinese President Xi Jinping traveled to Russia on the 7th to attend Victory Day celebrations in the Great Patriotic War. Meanwhile, Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te is scheduled to deliver a speech on the 80th, commemorating the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe in World War II. Consequently, the historical memory and interpretation of World War II on both sides of the Taiwan Strait have risen to a battle for national identity, political legitimacy, and international discourse power.
On the eve of Xi Jinping's visit to Russia, Xinhua News Agency published an article titled "History Illuminates the Future," claiming that "China and Russia, as the main battlefields in Asia and Europe during the Second World War, made enormous national sacrifices and made indelible contributions to winning the final victory in the world anti-fascist war." However, the article did not mention the contributions of the Kuomintang and the National Government to the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.
The CCP's narrative of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression consistently places the Party at the forefront of the conflict, claiming it played a "pivotal role." However, Mao Zedong's repeated statements thanking Japan for its invasion of China have also sparked considerable controversy. During a meeting with a Japanese visitor, Mao Zedong stated, "Japanese imperialism served as a good teacher for us. First, it weakened Chiang Kai-shek; second, it enabled us to develop base areas and armies led by the Communist Party. Before the war, our army had reached 300,000 men, but due to our own mistakes, it was reduced to just over 20,000. During the eight years of the war, our army grew to 1.2 million men. You see, didn't Japan help us a great deal?"
Who is passively resisting Japan?
Since the founding of the Communist Party of China in 1949, official CCP propaganda has highlighted the guerrilla warfare roles of the Eighth Route Army and the New Fourth Army behind enemy lines, while simultaneously disparaging Chiang Kai-shek and the Nationalist government as representatives of "passive resistance to Japanese aggression."
Song Yongyi, a professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, was imprisoned for five years during the Cultural Revolution. While in prison, he read the Selected Works of Mao Zedong ("Selected Works of Mao Zedong"), whose second and third volumes focus on the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression. During the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, Mao Zedong instructed the Chinese Communist Party's military forces to adopt a policy of "passive resistance, active preparation, expansion of forces, preparation for civil war, and preparation for the seizure of power." Any army that attempted to resist, as Peng Dehuai did with the Eighth Route Army, was criticized. Furthermore, during the infamous "Southern Anhui Incident" of 1942–43, the New Fourth Army, led by the Communist Party, was ordered by the Nationalist government to march north to fight the Japanese. However, the New Fourth Army disobeyed orders and fled, leading to encirclement and annihilation.
Song Yongyi then cited another example, "The Truth About Mao Zedong's Collusion with the Japanese Army: Memoirs and Archives of Japanese Spies," written in 2016 by Japanese professor Endo Takashi. The book argues that during the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, the Communist Party, in order to actively strengthen its own power and passively resist Japan, even sent agents to negotiate with Japanese intelligence agencies, providing information on the movements of the Nationalist army in exchange for Japan not attacking the Communist forces. Furthermore, Chiang Kai-shek originally intended to eliminate Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai in the Shaanxi-Gansu-Ningxia region. Later, Zhang Xueliang launched the Xi'an Incident, and the Kuomintang had already been infiltrated by the CCP or the Communist International. Chiang Kai-shek was forced to agree to a joint anti-Japanese war.
Song Yongyi analyzed that the Eighth Route Army's 20,000-mile Long March in Yan'an ultimately ended in defeat and retreat to the northwest. However, the eight-year War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression saw the CCP's army expand from just over 20,000 to 1.2 million. This means that during the eight years of the War of Resistance against Japan, the CCP was the only one strengthening its own power, enabling it to challenge the Nationalist government in the civil war. "After seizing power in 1949, Mao Zedong said three times that we should be grateful to Japan. Without the Japanese invasion, we would have been wiped out by the Nationalist government long ago. The CCP's claim that the 20,000-man army he led achieved victory in World War II is a joke."
"In the narrative of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, what the CCP fears most is seeking truth from facts and 'truth, reality and truth,'" said Zhou Xiaozheng, a former professor at Renmin University of China.
Let history restore the truth
In an interview with RTHK, Daijun Guo, a research fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution and editor of "Revisiting the History of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression," explained that since the Mao Zedong era, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has consistently insisted that the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression was led by the Communist Party, refusing to acknowledge the contributions of the Nationalist Army on the front lines. This narrative continued until Deng Xiaoping's reform and opening-up policies, and particularly during the Hu Jintao era (2002–2012), when the historical perspective on the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression began to gradually relax, acknowledging the contributions of the Nationalist Army and acknowledging the "front lines" and "rear-line battles" of the war.
She pointed out that, especially in 2006, the "Diary of Chiang Kai-shek" was declassified and made public at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, attracting a large number of Chinese scholars to go to the United States for research. During the Xi Jinping era, the CCP suddenly emphasized the "14-year War of Resistance" instead of the traditional "8-year War of Resistance", and pushed the starting point of the War of Resistance forward to the September 18th Incident in 1931, rather than the July 7th Marco Polo Bridge Incident in 1937. The CCP's intention is to highlight that the Communist Party has assumed the responsibility of "national salvation" since 1931, implying that the Kuomintang was more passive in avoiding war at the time. Guo Daijun believes that this is not controversial in the academic community. "Because the September 18th Incident marked the beginning of Japan's invasion of China, and the July 7th Marco Polo Bridge Incident marked the beginning of the Sino-Japanese War."
"To date, numerous archives and research, including by scholars in mainland China, show that after the September 18th Incident, Chiang Kai-shek and Wang Jingwei collaborated to address the changing situation within the Nationalist government, with Wang in charge of politics and Chiang in charge of the military. Chiang's diaries and public speeches reveal that he had long been determined to resist Japan. However, due to the disparity in national strength between China and Japan, a hasty response risked total collapse. Therefore, he adopted a strategy of 'forbearance and preparation' to buy time and prepare for a full-scale war," Guo Daijun continued. "The term '8-year' or '14-year' war of resistance has no special distinction in history or scholarship; it was primarily used by politicians to emphasize political objectives."
What is Xi Jinping’s purpose in mentioning the “14-year war of resistance”?
The so-called "14-year War of Resistance" was first proposed and transformed into policy in 2015, when Xi Jinping formally proposed the term in his speech commemorating the 70th anniversary of the victory of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, pushing the war's starting point back to 1931. Furthermore, the CCP has continued to institutionalize and ritualize the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression. This includes establishing the "National Memorial Day for the Victims of the Nanjing Massacre" and "Victory Day of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression" in 2014, and staging a military parade in 2015, merging military and historical memory.
Gong Xiangsheng, an associate researcher at the Institute for Chinese Political-Military and Operational Concepts at the Taiwan-based National Defense Security Research Institute, told Taiwan News that since its founding, the CCP has extended its ties between legitimacy and nationalism, evolving from its original theory of "overthrowing the bourgeois regime and liberating the proletariat" to a narrative combining the "great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation" led by the Communist Party with the "anti-Japanese" narrative. "To represent the CCP as both a party of the 'proletariat' and the only legitimate party capable of resisting foreign invasion, the CCP's internal narrative relies heavily on nationalist packaging."
Song Yongyi analyzes that China's rewriting of the history of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression serves three purposes: first, to conceal the CCP's passive resistance to Japanese aggression during the war, and even its collusion with the enemy and puppet forces; second, to obliterate the Nationalist government's involvement in the anti-fascist alliance, thereby claiming the fruits of victory for itself. If the United States had not dropped the atomic bomb on Japan, even the Nationalist government would not have been able to defeat Japan; and third, to fabricate a "second truth" that the CCP fought bloody battles and seized power, thereby rationalizing its victory in the civil war. He summarizes it in one sentence: "taking credit for what others have done."
The evolution of Taiwan's anti-Japanese war history from Chinese orthodoxy to Taiwanese subjectivity
Taiwan has also strived to dominate the interpretation of the history of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression. Chiang Kai-shek, the paramount leader of the Republic of China during the early years of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, defined the victory of the War of Resistance as a victory for the entire nation under the leadership of the Nationalist government. However, after the 1990s, during the administration of former President Lee Teng-hui, Taiwan's historical narrative of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression gradually shifted from the traditional KMT-style "Chinese orthodoxy" to "Taiwanese subjectivity." Since then, the KMT's narrative of the War of Resistance has been gradually marginalized. This year, President Lai Ching-te will participate in the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe as president, officially placing Taiwan's narrative of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression within the international narrative of democracy against authoritarianism for the first time.
Taiwanese historian Professor Li Xiaofeng, in an interview with this station, stated that Taiwan, under Japanese colonial rule, was forced into the war, with many conscripted into the Japanese military. From a historical perspective, Taiwanese people were effectively colonized and sacrificed. This argument leads to the conclusion that Taiwan must strive for its own identity and cease being a colony of any country, whether Chinese or Japanese. He believes that Lai Ching-te's stance today aligns with this, arguing that Taiwan should interpret history from its own perspective, viewing World War II as a battle between the democratic camp and the fascist regimes of Germany and Italy. The ultimate defeat of the fascist regime, which represented authoritarianism and anti-democracy, underscored the importance of liberal values.
"Therefore, Taiwan's commemorative activities today should focus on the historical significance of freedom against autocracy, and emphasize that Taiwan now stands in the free camp and faces challenges and threats from authoritarian groups," Li Xiaofeng offered his suggestion.
The 80th anniversary of the victory of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression has become a new battleground across the Taiwan Strait.
This year marks the 80th anniversary of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression. With leaders from both sides of the Taiwan Strait participating in high-profile commemorations, "historical memory" has become a new battleground between Beijing and Taipei. For Beijing, facing a period of economic decline and mounting social pressure within China, coupled with the raging US-China tariff and trade war, historical narratives have become a crucial tool for strengthening internal cohesion and dispelling the "China threat" narrative. For Taiwan, the country must seek international support amidst Chinese diplomatic and military pressure. Highlighting the contributions of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and linking it to democratic and liberal values will help garner international support.
Gong Xiangsheng analyzes that the CCP actively manipulated the international narrative of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, attempting to integrate itself into the framework of the victorious nation, originally dominated by the Nationalist government. Although the CCP had not yet seized power and stepped onto the historical stage, it articulated a theory of power succession after its establishment in 1949, positioning itself as China's sole representative in the international system. This included replacing the Republic of China's seat in the United Nations and demanding the complete replacement of symbols of the victorious nation, such as the national flag.
Overall, Gong Xiangsheng believes that the CCP, through historical education and the inheritance of national dignity, replaced the ROC government and fully transitioned to the New China. This shift in narrative, both internally and externally, was necessary to smoothly align itself with the banner of nationalism and the image of a victorious nation.
Taiwan experiences identity rupture and reconstruction
Guo Daijun emphasized that Taiwan was undoubtedly a victim during the war, but after the war, due to China's victory in the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, "Taiwan was regarded as a part of China" and was "recovered" and incorporated into the Republic of China system. This arrangement turned Taiwan from a victim into a victor.
"For the people of Taiwan, they were unprepared to face the rupture and reshaping of their historical identity, from being conscripted and exploited under the Japanese colonial system to quickly returning to China (the Republic of China) after the war and rebuilding their national identity. Fortunately, after the Nationalist government came to Taiwan, it worked hard to build and drive economic revitalization, making it a place of democracy and prosperity. However, the discontinuous cognitive reconstruction and identity transformation that the people of Taiwan experienced was quite difficult." She reminded that when studying the history of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression today, in addition to looking at it from the perspective of the main battlefield in mainland China, we cannot ignore the views and experiences of the people of Taiwan.
Humbly learn from history
Guo Daijun noted that the history of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression is a shared memory for the people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait and the international community. However, under the reality of cross-strait division, Taipei and Beijing have engaged in a struggle over its memory and interpretation, which also affects national identity and international status. The manipulation of history by governments on both sides is fraught with political agendas.
She believes that as a scholar, historical research or narrative should return to rationality and pragmatism, transcending political emotions and facing history with a rational, objective and pragmatic attitude. Historical manipulation cannot last long and is untenable.
Guo Daijun stated that this year marks the 80th anniversary of the victory of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, a milestone of great significance for the past, present, and future. First, we must understand the history of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression. It is inherently diverse and complex, and cannot be interpreted from a single perspective. China, Japan, the United States, and Taiwan each offer distinct perspectives. Only by utilizing primary historical materials, historical archives, and international perspectives to restore the historical truth can we sincerely and humbly learn from history.
