Every December, German television broadcasts a drama based on John Rabe’s account of the Nanjing Massacre, reinforcing negative perceptions of Japan. Drawing on Emi Kawaguchi Mann’s observations and Masayuki Takayama’s Henken Jizai, this article examines historical narratives, media coverage, and the role of information warfare.

June 11, 2020
Every December, German television stations broadcast a drama about the “Nanjing Massacre” based on John Rabe’s account. According to the author, each annual broadcast reinforces negative perceptions of Japan and contributes to anti-Japanese sentiment within Germany.
I first became aware of this fact after reading Emi Kawaguchi Mann’s article, “Germany’s Mass-Circulation Newspaper Declares War on Xi Jinping,” published in the monthly magazine Hanada.
Despite the significance of this issue, Japanese media have never seriously reported on it.
Instead, newspapers such as The Asahi Shimbun, many commentators who share its views, and television networks including NHK have repeatedly urged Japan to “learn from Germany.”
In the author’s view, this reporting environment has allowed China and South Korea to make effective use of historical issues in their criticism of Japan.
South Korea has continued anti-Japanese education for many years, while China has consistently used historical issues as part of its diplomatic strategy.
Within that context, the comfort women issue based on Seiji Yoshida’s testimony and the Nanjing Incident have been widely presented internationally as evidence against Japan.
Although writing about these subjects is deeply unpleasant, I believe it is necessary to leave a record of them.
For that reason, I am republishing the substance of an article I originally posted on March 15, 2019, titled, “The Asahi Shimbun Described John Rabe—One of Those Who Created the Nanjing Massacre Narrative and Procured Weapons for the Chinese Army through Siemens—as ‘An Ordinary Company Employee,'” so that German readers may also examine the issue.
The German public should already know who John Rabe was.
He was a member of the Nazi Party and served as Siemens’ representative in China at a time when the company was one of Germany’s largest industrial firms with military-related business.
After Germany’s defeat in the First World War, the country was prohibited from exporting weapons.
According to the author, John Rabe violated those restrictions by supplying military-related materials to the Nationalist Government of China.
A well-read friend recommended that I read Henken Jizai: Russia or America—Which Is the Real Villain?, published by Shincho Bunko.
In my opinion, it is one of Masayuki Takayama’s finest works.
Throughout the book, he examines what he considers misinformation before, during, and after the Second World War, drawing upon an extensive range of historical materials.
I believe Takayama is one of the foremost researchers and investigators of modern history, not only in Japan but internationally.
While I believe his work deserves the highest recognition, he himself seeks no such honors.
Instead, he continues devoting his life to exposing what he believes are historical falsehoods and presenting documentary evidence to readers in Japan and around the world.
The opening chapter is titled, “Do Not Be Deceived by Newspapers That Publish Lies Without Hesitation.”
The First Sino-Japanese War began in July 1894.
Japanese forces landed south of Seoul, pushed back Qing forces, and advanced toward Pyongyang.
Takayama writes that Japanese soldiers were shocked by what he describes as the extreme brutality of the Qing forces.
According to his account, prisoners were subjected to severe mistreatment, prompting Field Marshal Aritomo Yamagata to instruct his troops that capture could result in unbearable torture and death, and that they should be prepared to take their own lives rather than be captured.
He also discusses the capture of Port Arthur.
Following the fall of the fortress, Japanese troops completed the clearing of the remaining enemy forces within a short period.
About two weeks later, however, the New York World published an article by reporter James Creelman alleging that Japanese troops had massacred civilians.
The report claimed that Japanese soldiers hunted down women and children and became one of the foundations for the later “Port Arthur Massacre” narrative.
The Japanese government was reportedly astonished by these accusations.
At that time, the New York World, owned by Joseph Pulitzer, was widely known as one of the leading examples of yellow journalism.
The newspaper frequently published sensational stories, including accounts of UFOs and alleged alien encounters. Even so, its description of Japanese atrocities was so vivid that it appeared as though the reporter had witnessed the events firsthand.
According to Takayama, the story was later disproved after Albert d’Anethan, the Belgian Minister to Japan, interviewed French military observers and confirmed that the allegations against the Japanese Army were unfounded.
This raises an important question: where did such graphic descriptions originate?
Takayama points to Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States for Young People, which describes the Sand Creek Massacre in Colorado.
During that attack, approximately 800 cavalry troops assaulted a Cheyenne village before dawn while many of the male warriors were away.
Women and children were reportedly shot without mercy. Testimonies describe mothers being killed while trying to protect their children, young girls waving white flags being shot, and pregnant women being mutilated.
Takayama argues that the descriptions found in Creelman’s article closely resemble these accounts.
He further maintains that the Japanese Army did not retaliate against the brutality committed by Qing forces and did not harm soldiers who surrendered.
In his view, although Creelman attempted to portray the Japanese as “barbaric non-white, non-Christian people,” the atrocities described in his article more closely reflected acts that had already occurred in Western history.
Takayama also argues that deliberate misinformation is not confined to the past.
He cites Tetsu Kariya’s Oishinbo, which depicted radiation-related nosebleeds following the Fukushima nuclear accident, together with the editorial response defending that portrayal.
According to Takayama, meaningful public debate cannot be built upon claims that are known to be false.
He also discusses the controversy surrounding the secret agreements related to the reversion of Okinawa to Japan.
Former Mainichi Shimbun reporter Takichi Nishiyama obtained confidential information through a relationship with a female Foreign Ministry employee but did not publish the information in his newspaper, instead providing it to opposition politicians.
Takayama contends that this was political activism rather than journalism.
Nevertheless, several newspapers later described Nishiyama as the reporter who had “exposed” the secret agreements.
Takayama argues that had the information actually been reported through proper journalistic channels, the controversy itself would have unfolded very differently.
He also criticizes The Asahi Shimbun for describing John Rabe, whom he regards as one of the individuals responsible for promoting the Nanjing Massacre narrative, as “an ordinary company employee,” and for referring to a campaign activist calling for the Nobel Peace Prize to be awarded to Article 9 of Japan’s Constitution as “an ordinary housewife.”
According to Takayama, such descriptions shape readers’ impressions while concealing important background information.
He concludes that not only China and the United States, but newspapers themselves, sometimes incorporate intentional distortions into their reporting.
He expresses the hope that this book will help readers recognize and question such forms of misinformation.
Summer 2014
Masayuki Takayama