# Why was it WWII Japanese policy to murder POWs? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 23, 2003, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160 "2003-08-23T15:19:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Dogface](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@Dogface](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dogface)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2003, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/1 "2003-08-23T15:19:38Z")
I’ve no doubt that all participants in WWII mistreated POWs at some point or another, but why was it Japanese policy to murder all POWs they captured up until Wake Island? Were the officers who ordered these murders all hunted down and punished for their atrocities? Was the Nuremburg Principle likewise applied to ensure that the common soldiers also faced justice for the atrocities they committed? ---
**Author:** ![MC\_Master\_of\_Ceremonies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bb73d2/32.png) [@MC\_Master\_of\_Ceremonies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MC_Master_of_Ceremonies)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2003, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/2 "2003-08-23T15:41:14Z")
The Japanese believed it was better to die than surrender and they believed that anyone who did surrender was beneath contempt. I also do remeber that there was a Japanese equivalent to the Nuremburg trials. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2003, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/3 "2003-08-23T15:42:43Z")
How can anyone ever explain such a thing? How did one of the most civilized European nations become a charnel-house? How is it possible for an entire nation to go mad? There is another interesting historical perspective. During the Russo-Japanese war, the Japanese astonished and abashed the European world with its civility and compassion for wounded enemy soldiers. It was common for one or several Japanese soldiers to “adopt” a wounded Russian to nurse back to health. There were litterally thousands of Russian letters sent home attesting to the humanity shown by the average Japanese soldier. An amazed world poured praise upon the Japanese, and they were justly proud. So where did it go? God only knows, and the Freedom of Information Act only goes so far. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2003, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/4 "2003-08-23T15:51:52Z")
**MC** , I suspect you are referring to the trial and execution ofTomoyuki Yamashita, also known as the “Tiger of Malaya”. The trial is interesting to note because it established a principle of responsibility for the actions of subordinates. Even though no evidence was offered that Yamashita ordered, or was even aware of, the atrocities committed by Japanese soldiers, we was held responsible for same and executed. Hence, the principle was established that an officer is responsible for the actions of his subordinates _regardless_ of his own personal awareness: if he didn’t know, he should have known. ---
**Author:** ![Tallayan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Tallayan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tallayan)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2003, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/5 "2003-08-23T15:52:30Z")
It’s not really a different concept. In the russo-japaneese war they were taking care of, in their minds, brave and worthy advesaries who fought untill they were injured. I belive they killed POW’s who surrendered, in their minds these people were simply scum and cowards. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2003, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/6 "2003-08-23T16:05:16Z")
Mostly a matter of indoctrination before the war. The Japanese military decided its soldiers would fight better if they were deliberately trained to see their enemies as inhuman. There is unfortunately some real psychology to back this concept up. If you can convince a person to perform some action as a member of a group that would be immoral to perform as an individual, it promotes the person’s loyalty to the group. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2003, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/7 "2003-08-23T16:05:24Z")
> **[HistoryOfMilitary.com is available at DomainMarket.com](https://www.domainmarket.com/buynow/historyofmilitary.com)** > > Domain for Sale. HistoryOfMilitary.com. Request Price. What Are the > Advantages of a Super Premium .Com Domain? Increased Traffic. Search Engine Ranking. Brand Recognition. > Immediate Presence. Higher Profits. Great Investment. #1 in Premium Domains.... “…Jukes registers several other interesting points about the war, such as the exceptionally good treatment afforded to prisoners of war by both sides. Unlike the Second World War, Japan had not yet had decades of Bushido propaganda to alter their attitudes toward defeated foes…” ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2003, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/8 "2003-08-23T16:05:42Z")
So the russians hadnt surrendered ? Only been wounded and captured ? This good treatment of the Russian Prisoners is strange… never heard of it. Got any cites… I would like to read about it. The contempt for soldiers that surrender was certainly the main reason for their mistreatment and negligence. Disease and malnutrition were the methods of killing. ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2003, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/9 "2003-08-23T16:09:07Z")
Nice link… maybe the japanese were still following Napeolonic Era War customs of treating well officers especially ? Surprised to know that the japs were 100% literate ! ---
**Author:** ![Master\_Wang-Ka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/master_wang-ka/32/3325_2.png) [@Master\_Wang-Ka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Master_Wang-Ka)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2003, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/10 "2003-08-23T16:15:36Z")
Little Nemo is quite correct; there is considerable information backing up the idea that if one sees one’s opponent as “other than human,” one is better, somewhat more ruthless, in dealing with him as an enemy. You kill more efficiently, apparently. There is considerable evidence that racism was heavily encouraged by MOST of the sides in WWII. The Japanese had the advantage of also being told that they were helping to “liberate” their Asian brothers from the hated yoke of white oppressors. In short, they were killing white scumbags in order to help out their own kinfolks, so to speak. This didn’t go over THAT well… apparently, most Japanese don’t much regard Chinese, Malayans, or Filipinos as “brothers”… but it was official policy. As propaganda, it worked on some folks. The Singaporeans welcomed the Japanese as liberators … until it became pretty clear that it was a case of “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.” ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2003, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/11 "2003-08-23T17:11:36Z")
Interesting aside: once it became known that the japanese killed and tortured POWs, many allied commanders stopped any compassionate behavior toward Japanese POWs. For example, Capatain “Mush” Morton (the US submarine ace) forbade his men to aid topedoed japanese seamen-he evn machine-gunned japanese seamen in the water. Later, McArthur’s men (in the invasion of the Philppines took noprisoners at all). So, it must be said that the japanese military’s behavior came backto haunt them! If you want to know the fukll extent of japanese atrocities, read Prof. Arnold Brackman’s “THE OTHER NUREMBURG”. ---
**Author:** ![MMI](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@MMI](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MMI)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2003, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/12 "2003-08-23T17:58:42Z")
The good treatment of POW’s in the Russo-Japanese war is a matter of record but cannot be directly compared to WWII - up to the twenties the Japanese were aspiring to European/western standards in all things military. Only with the growth of militarism and the modern Bushido mindset did concerns for western ideas such as Geneva conventions and what not fall by the wayside. I don’t think that any substantive difference in treatment can be seen between those who fought hard until forced to surrender (and therefore would deserve decent treatment according to Tallyan’s theory above) and those who surrendered before it was truly necessary. Certainly the defenders of Wake, who fought off the initial Japanese invasion, were treated no better than any others. I think Japanese mistreatment of allied POW’s can be attributed to a number of factors: 1.) The thorough indoctrination in the idea that surrender negated a soldiers’s worth (which also meant that Japanese soldiers captured were generally unprepared to resist questioning) 2.) Complete unpreparedness for the vast numbers captured, who often outnumbered their captors during the early part of the war. This fed into the indoctrination and contempt mentioned above. It also meant that the Japanese soldiers were often completely unprepared logistically to feed and medically care for the vast numbers of POW’s they now had to control. 3.) Inadequate supervision of the lower ranks and junior officers allowed mistreatment to become systemic. 4.) Near obsession with honor and discipline - the allied men and officers were treated with the same harshness that the Japanese used internally, although Allied prisoners were already weakened with hunger and disease. 5.) Providing an allied soldier with the same diet as a Japanese soldier might not be enough, especially if already weakened by hunger and disease. 6.) The utter inadequacy of Japanese logistics to often even cope with its military requirements, let alone those of POW’s 7.) Extensive use of Allied prisoner labor on work projects in unhealthy regions of southeastern asia compounded all of the above issues. 8.) Once the allied bombing campaign over Japan began downed airman were executed for war crimes. This is a somewhat different situation from the others listed above. Some of the above factors may partially mitigate the responsibility of the Japanese. As noted by other above, as a result of early reports of the Bataan Death March and other atrocities there was a period during the war when both sides’ soldiers tacitly agreed that Japanese soldiers should not surrender. Only later in the war was there much interest on the allied side in taking prisoners other than necessary for intelligence. On a side note, there are a number of good books which cover the racial aspects of the WWII in Asia and the Pacific ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2003, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/13 "2003-08-23T19:14:16Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MC Master of Ceremonies \* > \*\*I also do remeber that there was a Japanese equivalent to the Nuremburg trials. \*\* There were the Tokyo war crimes Trials for Class A defendants, and there were also a large numbers of other trails for the ~5,700 Class B and C defendants. I agree with everything **MMI** wrote. The shift from humane treatment in the Russo-Japanese war in 1905 to the use of Chinese prisoners for bayonet practice in the late 1930s is quite marked. A large part of it was the rise of militarism in Japan, and with it the extension of a bastardized form of Bushido to the masses. In World War II, after the early Allied defeats which netted large numbers of POWs, there was very little quarter given in combat by either side. ---
**Author:** ![Eolbo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d07c76/32.png) [@Eolbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eolbo)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2003, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/14 "2003-08-23T19:18:02Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Dogface \* > \*\*I’ve no doubt that all participants in WWII mistreated POWs at some point or another, but why was it Japanese policy to murder all POWs they captured up until Wake Island? > > \*\* Have you a cite that this was actually the case? It wasn’t always the case in the Sino-Japanese war as although Chinese prisoners were very often murdered they were also deported and used as slave labour suggesting there was no such blanket policy to kill them. And given that Wake Island fell in the very first days of the pacific war, any prisoners there were likely the first american soldiers they captured. ---
**Author:** ![Tapioca\_Dextrin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Tapioca\_Dextrin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tapioca_Dextrin)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2003, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/15 "2003-08-23T19:28:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Eolbo \* > \*\*Have you a cite that this was actually the case? \*\* From [this site](http://www.goldtel.net/ddxa/war.html) > [@](#): > > T’he Japanese took approximately 1,600 prisoners on Wake Island (450 military, 1,150 civilian) . During January, 1942, all military prisoners and about 750 of the civilian prisoners were transported to Prisoner of War (POW) camps in China and Japan. The prisoners remaining on Wake Island were utilized by the Japanese building island fortifications. In,September 1942, all remaining prisoners except 98 heavy equipment operators were transported to POW camps in China. The 98 personnel who remained on Wake Island were eventually executed by the Japanese in October, 1943. So, not all of the prisoners were killed. ---
**Author:** ![Frostillicus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Frostillicus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frostillicus)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2003, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/16 "2003-08-24T02:08:33Z")
There is a great book on this subject entitled “Prisoners of the Japanese”, by Gavan Daws. It explains the psychology behind the horrible treatment of American and British POWs by the Japanese during WWII. There are also some very disturbing photos of POWs being beheaded and suffering the effects of tropical diseases such as wet beriberi. ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Owes\_Bess](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c37758/32.png) [@Alan\_Owes\_Bess](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Owes_Bess)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2003, 11:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/17 "2003-08-24T11:13:24Z")
Whether a country was a signatory to the Geneva Convention or not, also has a bearing on the matter. In WWII the German Army treated POWs from all allied countries, except the USSR, in accordance with the Geneva Convention, as far as it could, because those countries were signatories to the Convention. The USSR’s Joe Stalin refused to sign the treaty (most of the signatories signed well before the outbreak of WWII, incidentally). As a result, neither side was bound by the constraints of the Geneva Convention and the context of war on the Eastern front ended up as being no holds barred and POWs were badly treated by both sides, to put it mildly. Similarly with the Japanese. The Japanese pre war government was dominated by the military, and Japan had signed no treaty regarding humane treatment of POWs prior to WWII. Actions taken by the various participants often had valid reasons for happening as they did, and too little emphasis is placed on these reasons by historians. ---
**Author:** ![bizzwire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/958977/32.png) [@bizzwire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bizzwire)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2003, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/18 "2003-08-24T12:10:23Z")
Before anyone jumps ugly on **Rashak Mani** for this: > [@](#): > > Surprised to know that the japs were 100% literate ! let me point out that he was referring to a cited article which stated that in the Russo-Japanese war, 100% of Japanese _conscripts_ were literate, _versus_ only about 20% of Russian conscripted soldiers. A word of warning, Rashak; there are some who might take exception to the term “japs,” as it was a derogatory term used by allied soldiers during WWII. ---
**Author:** ![MMI](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@MMI](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MMI)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2003, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/19 "2003-08-24T23:07:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Alan Owes Bess \* > \*\*Whether a country was a signatory to the Geneva Convention or not, also has a bearing on the matter. > > Similarly with the Japanese. The Japanese pre war government was dominated by the military, and Japan had signed no treaty regarding humane treatment of POWs prior to WWII. > > Actions taken by the various participants often had valid reasons for happening as they did, and too little emphasis is placed on these reasons by historians. \*\* I believe that Japan was a signatory to all of the earlier Geneva conventions, probably through the '30’s. I would be extremely surprised if they had formally pulled out of the treaties. Unfortunately I couldn’t find (during a 3 min google search) either the text or signatories of the pre 1949 Geneva Conventions. Do you have a citation on this (or better yet a link). I realize that the burden of proof would be on me to prove that they were at one time signatories but that ain’t gonna happen right now so if you have any more information it would be interesting and helpful. ---
**Author:** ![MMI](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@MMI](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MMI)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2003, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160/20 "2003-08-24T23:12:28Z")
Actually, taking another 2 minutes of googling I came up with this: [http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/geneva02.htm](http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/geneva02.htm) > [@](#): > > Convention between the United States of America and other powers, relating to prisoners of war. Signed at Geneva, July 27, 1929; ratification advised by the Senate, January 7, 1932; ratified by the President, January 16, 1932, ratification of the United States of America deposited with the Government of Switzerland, February 4, 1932; proclaimed, August 4, 1932. > BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA > > A PROCLAMATION > WHEREAS, a Convention Relating to the Treatment of Prisoners of War was signed by the respective Plenipotentiaries of the United States of America and forty-six other countries, at Geneva on July 27, 1929 the original of which Convention in the French language is word for word as follows: > > Translation > CONVENTION OF JULY 27, 1929, RELATIVE TO THE TREATMENT OF PRISONERS OF WAR. > The President of the German Reich, the President of the United States of America, the Federal President of the Republic of Austria, His Majesty the King of the Belgians, the President of the Republic of Bolivia, the President of the Republic of the United States of Brazil, His Majesty the King of Great Britain, Ireland, and the British Dominions beyond the Seas, Emperor of India, His Majesty the King of the Bulgarians, the President of the Republic of Chile, the President of the Republic of China, the President of the Republic of Colombia, the President of the Republic of Cuba, His Majesty the King of Denmark and Iceland, the President of the Dominican Republic, His Majesty the King of Egypt, His Majesty the King of Spain, the President of the Republic of Estonia, the President of the Republic of Finland, the President of the French Republic, the President of the Hellenic Republic, His Serene Highness the Regent of Hungary, His Majesty the King of Italy,\*\* His Majesty the Emperor of Japan\*\*, the President of the Republic of Latvia, Her Royal Highness the Grand Duchess of Luxembourg, the President of the United States of Mexico, the President of the Republic of Nicaragua, His Majesty the King of Norway, Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands, His Imperial Majesty the Shah of Persia the President of the Republic of Poland, the President of the Portuguese Republic, His Majesty the King of Rumania, His Majesty the King of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, His Majesty the King of Siam, His Majesty the King of Sweden, the Swiss Federal Council, the President of the Czechoslovak Republic, the President of the Turkish Republic, the President of the Oriental Republic of Uruguay, [and] the President of the Republic of the United States of Venezuela, > > recognizing that, in the extreme case of a war, it will be the duty of every Power to diminish, so far as possible the unavoidable rigors thereof an to mitigate the fate of prisoners of war; > > desirous of developing the principles which inspired the international conventions of The Hague, in particular the Convention relative to the laws and customs of war and the Regulations annexed thereto; > > have decided to conclude a Convention to that end, and have appointed. the following as their > > plenipotentiaries, namely: > > [Here follows a list of Participants] So it seems that at least through '29 the Japanes were into the whole rules of war schtick. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-was-it-wwii-japanese-policy-to-murder-pows/197160.md?page=2)