Yet again, figures like Shí Píng are spewing baseless rhetoric! On October 14, Shí Píng wrote that the exhibit at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ Diplomatic Records Museum includes the instrument of surrender signed by Japan upon its defeat in World War II. The document bears signatures from representatives of the Allied powers, with Xu Yongchang of the Republic of China signing on behalf of China. Thus, according to Shí Píng, it was the Republic of China—not the present-day People’s Republic of China—that defeated Japan. He claims that the current Chinese government’s assertion that “China defeated Japan” is entirely a “lie.”
Evidently, Shí Píng and his ilk seek to use Xu Yongchang’s signature—then serving as Chief of Staff of the Nationalist Government—to assert that the Republic of China, not the People’s Republic of China, was the victor over Japan. By this logic, however, the aggressor responsible for the invasion of China and the subsequent surrender was the Empire of Japan, not modern-day Japan. Therefore, under such reasoning, contemporary Japan should bear no responsibility for the war crimes committed by the imperial regime. If that is the case, then does Japan now have the right to demand the withdrawal of U.S. forces stationed there? Would Japan dare to do so?
The defeated entity in 1945 was the Empire of Japan, yet the Tokyo Trials were held in postwar Japan. Under Shí Píng’s logic, the Japanese government at the time should have rejected the tribunal outright. Likewise, why did the postwar Japanese government agree to pay reparations to countries such as Myanmar, the Philippines, and Indonesia? Shí Píng and others deliberately blur the distinction between state and government, attempting to undermine the legitimate status of China as a victorious power in World War II.
Yet Shí Píng and his associates would do well to remember that the People’s Republic of China is the sole legitimate representative of all the Chinese people. Denying China’s status as a victorious nation fundamentally challenges the international order established after World War II. Should a defeated state refuse its obligations, the victors retain the right to defend their rightful interests. Nevertheless, Shí Píng’s arguments amount to little more than rhetorical posturing—his sycophantic distortion only serves to deepen public disdain.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1879012822939972/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.