Key question: Why did Japan attack Pearl Harbor?
Success criteria:
1. Identify aspects of Japanese foreign policy.
2. Explain Western foreign policy.
3. Analyse and evaluate evidence.
4. Decide if the attack on Pearl Harbor was successful.
Success criteria:
1. Identify aspects of Japanese foreign policy.
2. Explain Western foreign policy.
3. Analyse and evaluate evidence.
4. Decide if the attack on Pearl Harbor was successful.
Warm up task:
- Describe the Japanese occupation of Manchuria.
- How long before the 'official' start of WWII in the Pacific (commonly thought to be December 7th, 1941) did military operations begin for Japan?
Task 1: How did the Meiji Restoration assert Japan's status as a world power?
Watch the YouTube video below and answer the two questions.
Extension: Read the essay from 'Asia for Educators' and answer the seven questions at the end.
Extension: Read the essay from 'Asia for Educators' and answer the seven questions at the end.
- What pressures did this so-called 'revolution' face? Justify your answer.
- Now click on the link below to open the excellent overview essay from Asia for Educators & complete the 7 (SEVEN) discussion questions.
Thinking about the nature of 'modernization' or 'Westernization' isn't complete without a quote from historian, Prof John Dower:
“Westernization,” however, had many meanings. Looking inward, it involved building a strong state and rich industrialized nation capable of resisting Western pressure and exploitation. Looking outward at an international arena dominated by expansionist powers, Westernization” obviously entailed competing in the great game of modern conquest and empire...
Domestically, what this entailed in practical terms became apparent quickly. By the mid-1870s, the former warrior fiefs or domains had been turned into prefectures. The hereditary warrior class itself had been abolished. The military had been converted into a conscript army and navy (with many former samurai recruited as the officer corps). Simultaneously, “industrialization” was jump-started with intimate governmental support...
Industrialization went hand-in-hand with political and cultural Westernization. Beginning in the mid-1880s, the emperor and empress, cultivated as symbols of a deep imperial tradition, were simultaneously presented as arch-exemplars of Western-style monarchical splendor. A succession of brightly colored “brodcade picture” woodblock prints (nishikie) presented the imperial couple as fashion plates for Western high couture. The emperor (who almost never appeared in photographs after the first few years of his reign) was invariably depicted in Western-style military dress. Starting in 1886, his consort always appeared in public—and in popular illustrations—wearing the most up-to-date European gowns...
The symbolic capstone of these various developments in “modernization” and “Westernization” was adoption of a Western-style constitution in 1890. Based primarily on conservative German legal precedents, the Meiji Constitution had two particularly notable features. It formally established Japan as a constitutional monarchy “reigned over and governed by a line of Emperors unbroken for ages eternal,” in which the reigning emperor was “sacred and inviolable.” (The government’s German legal advisers had balked at codifying this “divine descent” ideology, but to no avail.) At the same time, the new constitution established an elective “diet” or parliament that lay the ground for a more generally representative government... No other non-Western country had covered so much ground so quickly in responding to the American and European challenge. Foreign observers were impressed.
The Treaty of Versailles... again!
Japanese delegates to the Versailles conference came away feeling that their claims to equal power status with the other victorious allies had received a polite, but definite rebuke when their claims that a ‘racial equality clause’ be inserted in the final treaty were ignored.
For its part, the USA refused to join the League of Nations and embarked on a policy of ‘isolationism’. There was a desire to avoid any entangling commitments that might draw the USA into future European quarrels. In Asia, however, the USA had a strong interest in maintaining the ‘Open Door’ free trade policy in China accompanied by a desire to avoid open conflict with Japan (Dennett & Dixon. 2008, p3). |
The Washington Naval Conference, November 1921 to February 1922
The Washington conference was, on the surface, an exercise in disarmament in the spirit of the Versailles Treaty. In reality, the conference originated as an American attempt to contain Japanese expansion and ended by shifting the strategic balance of power in the Pacific in favour of the Japanese.
The key naval treaty limited the number and tonnage of battleships allowed to the USA, Britain, and Japan to a ratio of 5:5:3. As both the USA and Britain had to spread their fleets, in the American case between two oceans, this gave Japan an advantage in the Pacific. Furthermore, Japan’s agreement to the battleship ratio was conditional on Britain and the USA agreeing to a scaling back of fortifications. Within the western Pacific they agreed not to establish or build up bases, with the exceptions of Hawaii, Singapore, and the Japanese home waters.
The standstill agreement on bases meant that Hawaii, over 6000 kilometres away, was the nearest place from which a naval force could be mustered against the Japanese islands if war came. Because of Japan’s ability to refuel and re-equip its fleet from its home bases, it had little to fear from an attack from its only two naval rivals.
The Great Depression.
The Great Depression of the 1930s caused massive unemployment and major social problems in Japan. This led to a military takeover of the government. The military rulers of Japan took a far more aggressive approach to solving their economic issues. Throughout the interwar period, Japanese politics was dominated by nationalist and militarist movements. Of all these movements, the notion of a ‘Greater East Asian co-prosperity Sphere' emerged. This notion centered on the idea that East Asia could exist and prosper free of Western influences. It was proposed that Japan assume the lead role in an Eastern Bloc of countries (Asia and Pacific) working together. The reality of the situation was that this was essentially designed to afford Japan more power and influence over neighbouring countries and enhanced access to rubber and oil. In 1936 an agreement between Japan and Nazi Germany was signed, known as the Anti-Comintern Pact. Then in 1940, the Tipartite Pact was signed, sealing the alliance between the Axis powers (Germany, Italy and Japan).
The Manchurian Incident, September 1931
During the 1920s, Japan had been content to exercise influence in Manchuria through a semi-puppet warlord. However, the rise of Chinese nationalism under Chiang Kai-shek, and the gradual unification of the country in the later 1920s, posed an increasing challenge to Japan’s position on the mainland.
On the evening of 18 September 1931, a bomb exploded on the South Manchurian Railway, near Mukden. The commander of the Kwantung Army (as the Japanese forces in Manchuria were called) mobilised his forces against this ‘Chinese aggression’. In fact, the bomb had been planted by Japanese
officers to provoke an incident.
By early 1932, the conquest of all Manchuria was completed. In March 1932, the ‘independent state’ of Manchukuo was proclaimed, and the last Chinese emperor, P’u Yi, was installed as a puppet ruler. Japanese action in Manchuria was a clear breach of the League of Nations covenant, though the major European powers were unwilling to commit themselves to military or economic sanctions because of their own domestic problems with the Depression. In February 1932, the League sent the Lytton Commission of Enquiry to Manchuria. It reported in September that Manchuria was Chinese, the setting up of Manchukuo was illegal, and that Japanese troops should withdraw. On 27 March 1933, Japan withdrew from the League of Nations.
Japanese foreign policy during this period rested on two main supports: a growing climate of militant nationalism, which had its origins in Japanese medieval culture, and a related desire to expand Japanese power and influence through a policy of regional imperialism, which had begun with the
Sino-Japanese war of 1894–95. The Japanese observed how the major powers had carved out colonial empires from the Asian mainland or Asian–Pacific islands and felt that their attempts to do likewise should be accepted as a confirmation of their great power status, rather than condemned as illegal aggression, as had happened over Manchuria.
The Washington conference was, on the surface, an exercise in disarmament in the spirit of the Versailles Treaty. In reality, the conference originated as an American attempt to contain Japanese expansion and ended by shifting the strategic balance of power in the Pacific in favour of the Japanese.
The key naval treaty limited the number and tonnage of battleships allowed to the USA, Britain, and Japan to a ratio of 5:5:3. As both the USA and Britain had to spread their fleets, in the American case between two oceans, this gave Japan an advantage in the Pacific. Furthermore, Japan’s agreement to the battleship ratio was conditional on Britain and the USA agreeing to a scaling back of fortifications. Within the western Pacific they agreed not to establish or build up bases, with the exceptions of Hawaii, Singapore, and the Japanese home waters.
The standstill agreement on bases meant that Hawaii, over 6000 kilometres away, was the nearest place from which a naval force could be mustered against the Japanese islands if war came. Because of Japan’s ability to refuel and re-equip its fleet from its home bases, it had little to fear from an attack from its only two naval rivals.
The Great Depression.
The Great Depression of the 1930s caused massive unemployment and major social problems in Japan. This led to a military takeover of the government. The military rulers of Japan took a far more aggressive approach to solving their economic issues. Throughout the interwar period, Japanese politics was dominated by nationalist and militarist movements. Of all these movements, the notion of a ‘Greater East Asian co-prosperity Sphere' emerged. This notion centered on the idea that East Asia could exist and prosper free of Western influences. It was proposed that Japan assume the lead role in an Eastern Bloc of countries (Asia and Pacific) working together. The reality of the situation was that this was essentially designed to afford Japan more power and influence over neighbouring countries and enhanced access to rubber and oil. In 1936 an agreement between Japan and Nazi Germany was signed, known as the Anti-Comintern Pact. Then in 1940, the Tipartite Pact was signed, sealing the alliance between the Axis powers (Germany, Italy and Japan).
The Manchurian Incident, September 1931
During the 1920s, Japan had been content to exercise influence in Manchuria through a semi-puppet warlord. However, the rise of Chinese nationalism under Chiang Kai-shek, and the gradual unification of the country in the later 1920s, posed an increasing challenge to Japan’s position on the mainland.
On the evening of 18 September 1931, a bomb exploded on the South Manchurian Railway, near Mukden. The commander of the Kwantung Army (as the Japanese forces in Manchuria were called) mobilised his forces against this ‘Chinese aggression’. In fact, the bomb had been planted by Japanese
officers to provoke an incident.
By early 1932, the conquest of all Manchuria was completed. In March 1932, the ‘independent state’ of Manchukuo was proclaimed, and the last Chinese emperor, P’u Yi, was installed as a puppet ruler. Japanese action in Manchuria was a clear breach of the League of Nations covenant, though the major European powers were unwilling to commit themselves to military or economic sanctions because of their own domestic problems with the Depression. In February 1932, the League sent the Lytton Commission of Enquiry to Manchuria. It reported in September that Manchuria was Chinese, the setting up of Manchukuo was illegal, and that Japanese troops should withdraw. On 27 March 1933, Japan withdrew from the League of Nations.
Japanese foreign policy during this period rested on two main supports: a growing climate of militant nationalism, which had its origins in Japanese medieval culture, and a related desire to expand Japanese power and influence through a policy of regional imperialism, which had begun with the
Sino-Japanese war of 1894–95. The Japanese observed how the major powers had carved out colonial empires from the Asian mainland or Asian–Pacific islands and felt that their attempts to do likewise should be accepted as a confirmation of their great power status, rather than condemned as illegal aggression, as had happened over Manchuria.
Task 2: Working with Evidence.
Complete the two document studies from Dennet & Dixon (2008, pp.8-9) below.
Task 3: The World Ablaze!
Read the text below, watch the documentary, World Ablaze, then complete the Stile task (you can access the Stile task by clicking here).
When World War II started in Europe, Britain, France, the United States and Australia didn't really pay too much attention to Japan. Although there was mounting evidence of Japanese aggression, the allied nations did not believe that Japan actually posed a threat, or would do anything to provoke any military action.
The attack on The United States' naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on the 7th of December 1941 brought he threat of Japan clearly into the allies view. The reason Japan attacked the USA in a (seemingly) unprovoked act of aggression was that Japan wanted to preemptively eliminate American interference in the Pacific (See above).
Initially, the attack was thought to be a success; however, the actual damage relative to both the size of the American Pacific fleet and the United States' industrial might was negligible. Rather than preventing the United States from entering the war, it directly caused the United States, Australia, and the Netherlands to declare war on Japan. As Germany had signed both the Anti-Comintern Pact and the Tipartite Pact, sealing the alliance between the Axis powers (Germany, Italy and Japan), Germany then declared war on the United States. This (much to Churchill's relief, according to some sources) brought the military and industrial might of the United States into the European theatre of war.
When World War II started in Europe, Britain, France, the United States and Australia didn't really pay too much attention to Japan. Although there was mounting evidence of Japanese aggression, the allied nations did not believe that Japan actually posed a threat, or would do anything to provoke any military action.
The attack on The United States' naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on the 7th of December 1941 brought he threat of Japan clearly into the allies view. The reason Japan attacked the USA in a (seemingly) unprovoked act of aggression was that Japan wanted to preemptively eliminate American interference in the Pacific (See above).
Initially, the attack was thought to be a success; however, the actual damage relative to both the size of the American Pacific fleet and the United States' industrial might was negligible. Rather than preventing the United States from entering the war, it directly caused the United States, Australia, and the Netherlands to declare war on Japan. As Germany had signed both the Anti-Comintern Pact and the Tipartite Pact, sealing the alliance between the Axis powers (Germany, Italy and Japan), Germany then declared war on the United States. This (much to Churchill's relief, according to some sources) brought the military and industrial might of the United States into the European theatre of war.
Task 4. How did the Japanese attack Pearl Harbor?
Watch the two videos below that detail the attack plan and the way it all unfolded. Once you have finished, Make a judgement:
How successful was this attack by Japan?
How successful was this attack by Japan?
- For this task, you have some choice in how you present your learning...
- Step ONE: watch the videos below.
- Step TWO: Collect sources of evidence. You need at least FOUR that represent different perspectives.
- You may use the videos, but not only videos, as these are US-centric.
- Step THREE: analyse and evaluate the evidence as you have been shown (origin, purpose, usefulness, reliability.
- Step FOUR: Create a critical summary of the evidence.
- IMPORTANT!!!! This doesn't mean to just answer the question. If you just answer the question, you will not be successful in this task. You CAN/SHOULD answer the question, however, you need to talk about the features of evidence and why each piece of evidence is useful and reliable.
- Options to create your critical summary:
- Create a Powtoon by going to: powtoon.com
- Create a 3D model of the attack using Minecraft (yeah, yeah, I know you're probably too old, but it could still be fun!)
- Create a cartoon using storyboardthat.com (for this one, DO NOT PAY!!!!! Just create the three or six panes for free, then snip them using screen clipper and paste them into your OneNote.
- Create a Prezi (prezi.com)
- IMPORTANT!!!! This doesn't mean to just answer the question. If you just answer the question, you will not be successful in this task. You CAN/SHOULD answer the question, however, you need to talk about the features of evidence and why each piece of evidence is useful and reliable.
- Step ONE: watch the videos below.
|
|