Japanese history is fascinating to me, perhaps especially because of their blend of the highest art, culture and sensitivity with the most incredible brutality and bestiality.
Such things have always existed in every society, but as far as I’m aware the Japanese are nearly unique in their ability to combine these in the same person, indeed almost at the same time, without seeing a conflict.
For example, the Japanese Army was well known in the Russo-Japanese War and WWI for being chivalrous and well-behaved. By the time WWII came around, the extreme opposite. A good many have tried to attribute the change to Nazi influence. But a cursory study of the period will show the Japanese didn’t really pay all that much attention to the Nazis.
The answer, IMO, is that the brutality of WWII as compared to earlier wars of the century was merely a different aspect of the Japanese military tradition coming to the fore. They were both there all the time. The only difference was which one was in the ascendant.
Japan of the turn of the century treated Europeans with respect and POW (Russians) with respect. But that is where it stopped. Treatment of Chinese POW and Korean POW during the Sino Japanese War of 1895 was not so kind. Japan adopted the European convention that European nations are civilized thus accorded civil treatment in the time of war, while the rest of the world was barbaric, thus civil treatment was not necessary and optional. Japanese treatment of POW escapes were simple, any Chinese POW escaped, the rest who did not run were randomly selected and beheaded. Check out the reports on the Sino Japanese War of 1895. Same was done to Korean troops resistng Japanese violation of its territory when they marched thru Korea to Manchuria to fight the Russian forces. By the time of World War II the Japanese asked themselves why apply brutal methods to non European POW’s, just apply the brutal methods to all of them.
WWII = more of a ‘Peasant’ army perhaps? I have read that since the guarding of POW was seen as a ‘very low class’ job or task, the gutter scrapings were used. Also, the idea of being defeated didn't sit well with many of the Jap military high up.
In the end, they all got a taste of the other shoe.
As a note, when visiting the Mazda factory, they have a time line/pictograph, show what (civilian) products were made. In the mid 40s, no products are shown, just a small mushroom cloud.
When visiting certain Temples, out guide was very proud of how earthquake proof they are.
The cement version replaced the one firebombed by the AAC.
So, I would say, at least with the few Japanese I have known well, WWII is recognized - but like many things of embarrassment, it is not discussed in polite company.
I think you are correct. To elaborate, however, I think that the Japanese had been trying very hard to act western (specifically British) in the ~1850-1920 period. Then in the years between the world wars there was a huge growth in Japanese nationalism. Bushido and other cultural aspects became much more important than following a western code of “fair play”.
I think much of the Japanese behavior in WWII can not be understood without understanding that they were trying to distinguish themselves as apart from the western powers. We are seeing the same thing today as the Arab/Muslim world tries to distinguish themselves as non-western.
Unfortunately both groups accepted violence and cruelty as a means to that end.