The Origins of Anti-Japanese Sentiment in East Asia

Japanese imperialism from 1895 to 1945 reshaped East Asia through conquest and war. Brutal events like the Nanjing Massacre and forced labor left lasting scars in China and Korea. The issue of comfort women, where women were forced into military sexual slavery, remains a deeply emotional and unresolved topic.

These historical memories have become battlegrounds for national identity across East Asia. Post-World War II, countries in the region saw new power balances but carried their old wounds forward.

China promotes an aggressive narrative emphasizing victimhood under Japanese invasion, underscoring the suffering inflicted by the empire. South Korea centers its national education on Japan’s wartime sexual slavery and other abuses, fueling a strong nationalist sentiment. Taiwan’s legacy is more complex due to its own colonial experience under Japan from 1895 to 1945, mixing aspects of resentment and cultural influence.

Official histories, school textbooks, and public commemorations shape how each nation remembers these events.

Why this matters: Historical wounds in East Asia are not just the past but active elements that shape national identity and foreign policy today.

State-Sponsored Propaganda: Tools and Tactics

Governments in East Asia have kept anti-Japanese sentiment alive, often as a tool to strengthen political goals. Education systems play a key role, with textbooks and curricula designed to present Japan as a historical aggressor.

Media campaigns, films, and public monuments continually remind citizens of past oppression. Political leaders use rhetoric linking historical grievances and nationalism to rally support, especially when coupled with territorial disputes.

These state-backed efforts make anti-Japanese narratives central to national unity and diplomatic strategy. South Korea’s textbook revisions highlight violent Japanese wartime crimes. China’s media campaigns mark important anniversaries of Japanese aggression with strong messages of victimhood. Meanwhile, Japanese officials’ visits to the Yasukuni Shrine, which honors war dead including convicted war criminals, provoke outrage across the region.

This cycle of action and reaction keeps old antagonisms alive in public memory.

Why this matters: State propaganda in East Asia uses history to fuel nationalism, complicating diplomacy and regional peace efforts.

Consequences for Regional Stability and Diplomatic Relations

The persistence of these old wounds disrupts East Asia’s efforts at stability. Diplomatic relations between Japan and its neighbors remain strained by unresolved historical conflicts. Trade relations, security alliances, and multilateral meetings frequently feel the impact.

Territorial disputes like those over Dokdo/Takeshima (between South Korea and Japan) and the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands (between China and Japan) are intensified by nationalist feelings tied to historical grievances.

Nationalism driven by historical memory increases the risk of diplomatic crises escalating into broader conflicts. Trade tensions flare up when old resentments bubble to the surface. Security alliances including Japan, South Korea, China, and the U.S. must navigate these sensitive issues carefully.

The interplay of history, nationalism, and geopolitics makes resolving regional disputes more difficult.

Why this matters: Propaganda-linked mistrust raises the risk of conflict and undermines cooperation on key regional security and economic challenges.

Paths Toward Reconciliation: Challenges and Opportunities

Despite these challenges, some efforts exist toward healing old wounds between Japan and its neighbors. Dialogue initiatives include joint research on contentious historical topics and academic exchanges. Civil society and cultural programs also promote mutual understanding among younger generations.

However, political leaders often resist shifting national narratives because nationalist identity remains a strong domestic political tool. This reluctance slows progress on official reconciliation.

Statements like Japan's 1995 Murayama Statement acknowledged past wrongs but political pressure limits follow-up actions. Grassroots movements and educational exchanges sometimes succeed in presenting more balanced views of history, but they face resistance from entrenched interests.

Changing historical narratives is essential for peace but remains a complicated and sensitive process in East Asia.

Why this matters: Genuine reconciliation requires overcoming political barriers to rewrite divisive historical narratives and build trust.

What to watch next

The 2026 anniversary of the end of World War II will be a critical moment for East Asia. It could see fresh public debates, commemorations, and possibly diplomatic breakthroughs or setbacks.

Will political leaders take this opportunity to ease tensions and foster reconciliation? Or will nationalist propaganda deepen divides further?

Question for readers: Maintaining anti-Japanese historical narratives traps East Asia in cycles of mistrust that hinder regional peace and development.