1

Japans Pan-Asianism


The concept of nation-state, as recent research increasingly emphasizes, is a completely
natural phenomenon for most contemporaries, being perceived as a rather recent creation with a
history of, perhaps, not more than one or two centuries. The struggle to overcome the nation-
state and the so-called national boundaries established by nation states, marked by boundary
stones in earlier ages and by electric barbwire in recent years is, actually, almost as old as the
idea of nation-state itself. Pan-movements depict the attempt to overcome or relativize the idea
of the nation and, consequently, to create a certain type of regional identity or polity. Moreover,
in certain cases, pan-movements were perceived as nothing more than extensions of nationalism,
but on a general basis, above all, these movements emphasized the limitations of the national
idea and so, they put forward a transnational combination of thought and identity that went
beyond national boundaries. Nonetheless, some pan-movements served, also, as vehicles for
expansion, colonialism, and the legitimization of colonial rule and (transnational) empire-
building.
Throughout years, nationalism had major impacts that left deep imprints in history. For
instance, the German nationalism, which had a remarkable triggering contribution to the start of
the two World Wars, and it also, outlined the German geopolitics. Such phenomenon was a
necessary evil with positive contributions to the formation of nation-state mechanism which
exists even nowadays; nationalism being perceived as the coagulation of beliefs.
Like German nationalism, pre-World War II Japan has adopted the pan-nationalist ideas,
under the name of Pan-Asianism, having at its core the idea that Asia should unite against
European Imperialism. This concept was the pillar on which Japan supported their justification in
what concerns the massive external invasions, consequently developing into an intertwining
2

among debates on solidarity with Asian nations that felt threatened and under the pressure of the
West.
This paper analyzes the Pan-Asian movement in Japan, which developed from strong
national beliefs and its development throughout the years. Firstly, the paper deals with the
concept of Nationalism and Asianism before the existence of the idea of Pan-Asianism,
secondly, its focus will be directed to the Japanese Pan-Asianism from the beginning to the
recent history.


The concept of nationalism is, and has been a dominant political ideal for an extremely
long period of time, still receiving conceptualization in what concerns its ideal, mainly that the
state and the nation should cohere within a single, sovereign territory and that nation-state
thereby constituted should express, and ensure the continued expression of, a determinate
national culture or identity
1
. For example, according to John Stuart Mill, nationalism perceived
in the mentioned manner is a basic condition of representative government, since only
nationalism is able to ensure the development of the fellow-feeling
2
or unifying culture
necessary for the functioning of such government.
Many others have brought strong positive arguments for this ideal, arguing that
nationalism is a requirement of modern industrial societies, considering the fact that common,
homogenous culture helps the development and the rise of an educated workforce essential for
technological advancement, economic growth, prosperity, and progress in general.
3

However, some others have seen nationalism not only as a representation of the functional
response to the upheaval heralded by modernity, but also as a profound source of meaning for
people in the modern age, national culture granting them a feeling of rootedness, a nourishing
link to a rich past, and a sense of community. Moreover, this concept has also been often

1
Keith Breen, Shane ONeill, After the Nation? Critical Reflections on Nationalism and Postnationalism, Palgrave Macmillan,
2010, p. 1.
2
John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism, Hackett Publishing Company, 2002, p. 9.
3
Ernest Gellner, Nations and Nationalism (New Perspectives on the Past), Blackwell Publishers, 1983, p. 20-24
3

perceived as the foundation of freedom and democracy. Consequently, the nation-state proved a
resource for nineteenth-century resistance to imperial domination, and twentieth-century
struggles against colonialism.
Later on, the concept of nationalism has brought to existence a new one, mainly pan-
nationalism, a form developed from the former one, distinguished by the large-scale claimed
national territories, and because it often defines the nation on the basis of a cluster of cultures
and ethnic groups. The pan-national movements, also called macro-nationalism, provide
historical examples of the early attempts of nations to build loyalties and political institutions
across existing national boundaries. They might, surreptitiously, suggest ways to consolidate
genetic and cultural resources to create more inclusive identities while preserving key elements
of ethnic and linguistic particularity, firmly rooted in history.
Defined in Encyclopedia of nationalism, the concept of pan-nationalism depicts a super-
nationalism raised to a whole new level. According to the Jewish historian Louis L. Snyder pan-
nationalism is defined as:
Nationalism is enlarged in meaning, influence, and scope to include all (pan), who by
reason of race, geography, religion, or language, or by a combination of any or all of them, are
held to belong to the same category. The we-group sees its unity as including all those who
should belong to Fatherland or Motherland. The pan-movements grouped together all those
holding a similar national sentiment and who believed that they belonged together.
4

One of the most important figures of the geopolitics of pan-ideas is no other than Karl
Haushofer. The geopolitics of pan-ideas and the Geopolitics today are two of his works that
emphasize the threat for Germany which was coming from the maritime powers. In his view, this
power configurations were represented by Europe ( which bore the hope to become Germanic),
Eurafrica (this configuration included the Mediterranean Basin and Northern Africa which, at the
time, was subordinated to pan-Europe), pan-Russian (situated between Elba and Amur), pan-
Pacific (the hope of the Japanese domination against UK and SUA growing bigger), pan-
America, and pan-Islam. Haushofer offered a strong ideological basis for Hitlers Mein Kampf.

4
Louis L. Snyder, Encyclopedia of nationalism, St. James Press, 1990, p. 304.
4

However, in the end he proves that geopolitics is a tool intended to offer a superior political
thought.
Moreover in the 1920s and 1930s, in his works, Haushofer pays tribute to the pan-Asian
movement, seeing it as a proof of his theory that international relations would come to be
dominated by regional blocs. He introduces to his readers the writings and activities of pan-
Asianists such as Sun Yat-sen, Rabindranath Tagore, and Benoy Kumar Sarkar. Haushofer was
convinced that the writings of these Asian activists and revolutionaries reflected a trend toward a
future world order that would be dominated by large, regional blocs, replacing the existing order
characterized by the sovereign nation-state.
5

In what concerns the case of Japan, geography and Imperialism had played a tremendous
role for its modern history. Due to the general thought according to which foreign presence could
spoil the traditional culture, Japan has lived isolated from any encounter with foreigners. From
the beginning of their existence, and until today Japan has remained characterized by a strong
national feeling, being excruciatingly loyal toward their traditions, and aiming at preserving their
nationalist spirit intact, with no alteration throughout time.
According to an official definition, provided by the Encyclopedia of Nationalism,
Japanese nationalism was commonly known as fascism between the mid-1930s and the end of
World War II, when the military officials seized control of Japanese politics. The term is also
used to refer to the right-wing movement that seeks the restoration of the emperor as the highest
power in the nation. Another interpretation of Japanese nationalism is the belief that Japanese are
pure Yamato Minzoku (Japanese race) and superior to other races. Purity of the race is also
related to the geographical isolation of the country and the governments seclusion policy from
the rest of the world between the 17th and the mid-19
th
century.
6

Although Japan had diplomatic relationships with foreign nations for many centuries in
spite of its geographical isolation, the first three generations of Tokugawa shoguns tried to close
the country through the prohibition of Christianity and trade control. Christianity, which teaches
equality among people before God, was not compatible with the feudal system, which separated

5
Christopher W. A. Szpilman (ed.), Sven Saaler (ed.), Pan-Asianism: A Documentary History, 1850-1920, vol. I, Rowman &
Littlefield Publishers, 2011.
6
Alexander J. Motyl (ed), Encyclopedia of Nationalism, vol. II, Academic Press, 2000, p. 251-252.
5

the Japanese into four different social classes, creating a caste system. Sakoku (seclusion
policy) was completed in 1639, allowing only Dutch and Chinese traders to visit the port of
Nagasaki in the southern part of Japan. Although Sakoku contributed to the development of
unique Japanese culture and traditions for almost 200 years, the absence of diplomatic
relationships drove many Japanese to adopt Western culture when Sakoku ended in 1853.
Near the end of Sakoku and collapse of the Shogunal government due to frequent visits
of foreign traders and diplomats to Japan, there emerged a movement to restore Shintoism and
the emperor system. The movement, which emphasized nationalism, was very popular among
the lower class warriors and wealthy farmers, and became the Sonno Joi movement. The
Sonno Joi movement in the early 1800s promoted respect for the emperor and the abolition of the
shogun government. Related to the end of Sakoku and the collapse of the Shogunal government
due to frequent visits of foreign traders and diplomats in Japan, is the movement meant to restore
Shintoism and the emperor System. The movement became extremely popular among the lower
class warrior and wealthy farmers, and it was meant to promote respect for the emperor and the
abolition of the Shogun government.
In 1860s Meiji Revolution has taken place which led to the establishment of the Meiji
Constitution, which had the role to abolish many of the previous restrictions, for instance the
land owning system and the class system, proving, therefore, equality among the Japanese.
Moreover, to catch up with the industrial development of the Western nations, Japan welcomed
cultural influence from the West on traditions in areas such arts, food, clothing and even
industry. However, there were many Japanese, especially previous warriors, who were against
the new Meiji government and the philosophy of equality among people. This was the origin of
the right wing group, which criticized westernization, supported nationalism, and sought the
revival of the emperor system. During the Sino-Japanese war (1894 1895) and the Russo-
Japanese war (1904 1905), the government emphasized militaristic nationalism, colonizing
several parts of Korea and China. These incidents partly contributed to nationalism in a negative
way, nurturing the ideology that Japanese were superior to people of other nations.
Later on, in the 20
th
century, Imperialism supported by fascist government grew in Europe and
Asia, which led to the World Wars I and II. In Japan military officials, led by Lieutenant General
Hideki Tojo, literally seized control of Japanese politics for ten years from the mid-1930s. The
6

fascist government prohibited freedom of speech, Christianity (which taught love to people
regardless of race), proletarian literature, and Marxism.
In this respect, one of the most striking aspects of the international history of the 1930s is
the revival and official endorsement of a pan-Asian vision of regional world order in Japan. The
pan-Asian discourse of East-West civilizational difference and comparison was influential in
various intellectual circles in Asia. But during the 1920s, as a political project of Asian
solidarity, it was irrelevant for Japans foreign policy, and it did not have any international
momentum or movement. The period after the Manchurian Incident in 1931, however, witnessed
a process by which pan-Asianist ideas and projects became part of Japans official foreign policy
rhetoric.
7

After 1933 Japans pan-Asian internationalism began to overshadow liberal
internationalism, gradually becoming the mainstream vision of an alternative world order. This
process culminated in the declaration of the Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere in 1940, a
project that relied heavily on the rhetoric of pan-Asian internationalism. In 1943, seventeen years
after the ineffectual 1926 Nagasaki pan-Asiatic conference that was ridiculed by official and
liberal circles in Japan, the Japanese government itself hosted a Greater East Asia Conference to
which it invited the leaders of the Philippines, Burma, the provincial government of India, the
Nanking government of China, Manchukuo, and Thailand.
Consequently, even thought the concept of pan-movement originated within the
framework of European history and international relation, and might seem as an inappropriate
tool for analyzing Asian history, the end of the nineteenth century proves different. In the
aforementioned period terms such as Asian solidarity (Ajia rentai), Raising Asia (k-A),
Asianism (Ajia-shigi or Ajia-shugi), Pan-Asianism (Han- Ajia-shugi or Zen-Ajia-shugi) and
Asian Monroe-ism (Ajia Monr-shugi) have had a wide circulation in discussions of foreign

7
The Manchurian Incident of 1931 initiated a process that led to the establishment of a Japanese-controlled puppet government
in Manchuria and Japans withdrawal from the League of Nations. Japans Kwantung army guarding the South Manchurian
Railways bombed parts of the railway in Mukden to create a pretext to occupy Manchuria with the ostensible purpose of
providing security against Chinese nationalists in September 1931. Instead of withdrawing from the occupied territories, the
Japanese government created the puppet state Manchukuo in February 1932. Non-recognition of this state by the League of
Nations became the reason for Japanese withdrawal from the league in 1933.
7

policy-making as well as in the discourses leading to the construction of modern identities in
East Asia.
8

Developed in the discursive space between national identities and possibilities, Pan-
Asianism appeared in a wide variety of forms, and has been used in different ways. However, in
all its historical manifestations, Pan-Asianism emphasized the need for Asian unity, mostly vis--
vis the encroachment of Western colonialism and imperialism, but also put a certain emphasis on
indigenous traditions.
Pan-Asianism did not have a defined ideology or a systematic doctrine. Formulating an
ideology that was both realistic and intellectually appealing proved to be the greatest challenge
faced by official Asianism in the 1930s. Early pan-Asianism derived its appeal from its
opposition to the intellectual foundations of the Eurocentric international order while claiming to
be in harmony with Japans national interest through the idea of regional leadership in the project
of an Asian Monroe Doctrine. In the 1930s, when pan-Asianist ideology took on a more assertive
challenge to the Eurocentric world order, a new generation of intellectuals struggled to inject a
degree of international legitimacy and realism into the idea of Asianism by modifying the
content of the racial conflict thesis with reference to regionalism and geopolitics. Moreover, a
strong tide of intellectual critiques of Western modernity during the 1930s ended up
strengthening the anti-Western discourse of pan-Asianism.
The Pan-Asian ideology has been an omnipresent force not only in modern Japans
foreign policy, but also in the process of the creation of a Japanese identity. In the Meiji era
(1868-1912), it has gone through an evolution process from an idea to an ideology that was the
antithesis of the governments realist foreign policy, which aimed at joining the club of great
powers original Japanese term rekky -. Early pan-Asianist writings, in a rather romantic
and idealistic manner, emphasized Japanese commonalities with Asia and aimed at uniting
Asian peoples and countries against Western encroachment. In the process of the construction of
a modern regional identity, Asianism was part of the criticism of modernization, against which
pan-Asian thinkers advocated a return to Asia (Ajia kaiki) a return to Asian culture and
values.

8
J. Victor Koschmann (ed.), Even Saaler (ed), Pan-Asianism in Modern Japanese History: Colonialism, Regionalism and
Borders, Routledge, 2007, p. 2.
8

Identification with Asia was not always an affirmative experience, as the quest for
casting off Asia in Fukuzawa Yukichis (18351901) famous Datsu-A-ron suggests; but Asia,
as the contribution by Oguma Eiji in this volume points out, always functioned as a mirror for
Japanese efforts at defining Japanese identity. Asia was the spatial and temporal object through
which Japanese defined themselves, as Stefan Tanaka has argued.
9
The resulting discussion
about whether modern Japan was a part of the West, or rather of Asia, was central to modern
Japanese discourse on national identity.
10
During this discourse, Japan vacillated between
insisting on being not Asian at all, and declaring itself the epitome of Asianness.
11

As the time passed, the growing power of Japanese nation-state and the growing Japanese
self-confidence emerging as a consequence of growing power, eventually militated against a
return to Asia, but led instead to ever-strengthening Japanese claims of superiority over Asia and
leadership in Asia culminating in the new order of the 1930s and the aforementioned Greater
East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere of the early 1940s.
The early roots of Pan-Asianism go back to the mid-nineteenth century, when China and
Japan were forced to open up their long-isolated countries to foreign pressure and enter the
system of international relations, dominated by the European imperialist powers. During that
process, both China and Japan struggled to redefine their place in the new international order.
Historically, a system of inter-state relations and tributary trade centered on China, also called
the Sinocentric world system,
12
had been the framework holding East Asia together as a region.
In many cases, however, the Sinocentric hierarchical view of the world influenced the
thinking of some Japanese pan-Asianists who appreciated it faithfully with one significant
change. For them it was Japan, not China, that was the new Middle Kingdom and the leader of
Asia. Even though early forms of pan-Asianism often emphasized and envisioned cooperation on
equal terms, insistence of Japanese leadership (entitled meishu) in Asia increased in proportion to
the growth and expansion of Japans power in East Asia.

9
Stefan Tanaka, Japans Orient. Rendering Pasts into History, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1993, p. 77.
10
T. J. Pempel, Transpacific Torii: Japan and the Emerging Asian Regionalism, in Peter J. Katzenstein and Takashi Shiraishi,
eds, Network Power. Japan and Asia, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1997, p. 4782.
11
Gavan McCormack, The Emptiness of Japanese Affluence, Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 1996, p. 159.
12
John F. Fairbank, ed., The Chinese World Order, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1968.
9

Asianism, however, could not always be uniquely identified as the expansionist ideology
of conservative anti-liberals, as Japans liberals also envisioned a special role for Japan in Asia,
whether as the disseminator of a higher civilization to backward areas or as the leading force in
economic development and political cooperation in the region. Moreover, an aggressive policy in
Manchuria was not the monopoly of Japanese Asianists. As demonstrated by Louise Young,
there existed within Japanese society an overwhelming consensus concerning policy in
Manchuria, which cut across the lines dividing liberals and conservatives.
13
The majority of
Japans political and intellectual elite, including the pro-Western internationalists, supported the
new orientation in foreign policy symbolized by the withdrawal from the League of Nations. For
example, Nitobe Inaz, reputed for his liberal internationalism, was willing to defend Japans
policy in China that led to the Manchurian Incident, even to the point of accepting Japans
withdrawal in 1932 from the League of Nations, in which he had served for so many years.
In conclusion, it is clearly seen that after the Manchurian Incident and Japans decision to
withdraw from the League of Nation, pan-Asianism gained unprecedented official support
among the elites of the Japanese Empire. Japanese pan-Asianists saw a great opportunity in the
unexpected patronage of their ideas by the Japanese government and military authorities after
1933. Throughout the 1930s, the radical anti-Western tradition within Asianism was focused on
the end of European empires in Asia, especially on the weakness of British Empire, without
advocating or recommending any Japanese challenge to the United States.
Nevertheless, new converts to Asianism from different segments of Japanese intellectual
life added practical and policy-oriented content to the ambivalent slogans of Asian solidarity via
social science theories of regional cooperation and multiethnic communities. Despite its internal
paradoxes and its tensions with the logic of Japanese imperialism, pan-Asianism nevertheless
allowed Japan to conduct a relatively successful propaganda campaign against Western
imperialism in Southeast Asia while motivating numerous idealist Japanese activists and their
collaborators.
Moreover, the concept of Pan-Asianism depicts an ideology or facet of thought
representing an extension of Japanese nationalism overseas, based on the Japanese belief that the
Japanese share common physical traits with their continental neighbors, Koreans and Chinese, or

13
Louise Young, Japans Total Empire: Manchuria and the Culture of Wartime Empire, Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1998
10

that they belong to an East Asian world system with historical roots. The most obvious common
denominator of this historical world system was the use of Chinese ideographs, through which
various ideas were interchanged among the peoples of this region. However, in the history of
this ideology we can distinguish a second type of Pan-Asianism which has as premise a regional
identity which sets itself between Asia and the West. In other words, there were two types of
Pan-Asianism in modern Japan, based on the preponderant self-identity of its exponents. When
exposed to the militarily superior and aggressive expansionist threat from the West, some
Japanese, motivated by their communal identity as Asiatics, believed they should work together
for the common goal of regional security, while others were more inclined to believe in their
national uniqueness and capability of establishing Japans own national security on their own.
The former sentiments became Pan-Asianism based on an Asian identity, while the latter in
effect constituted a form of self-appointed leadership of the Japanese to save the rest of East
Asia as well as themselves.














11

Bibliography
1. Alexander J. Motyl (ed), Encyclopedia of Nationalism, vol. II, Academic Press, 2000.
2. Christopher W. A. Szpilman (ed.), Sven Saaler (ed.), Pan-Asianism: A Documentary
History, 1850-1920, vol. I, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2011.
3. Curtis Anderson Gayle, Marxist History and Postwar Japanese Nationalism,
RoutledgeCurzon, 2003.
4. Daniel Chernilo, A social Theory of the Nation State: The Political forms of modernity
beyond methodological nationalism , Routledge, 2007.
5. Eri Hotta, Pan-Asianism and Japans War 1931-1945, Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.
6. Ernest Gellner, Nations and Nationalism (New Perspectives on the Past), Blackwell
Publishers, 1983.
7. Gavan McCormack, The Emptiness of Japanese Affluence, Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe,
1996.
8. J. Victor Koschmann (ed.), Even Saaler (ed), Pan-Asianism in Modern Japanese History:
Colonialism, Regionalism and Borders, Routledge, 2007.
9. John F. Fairbank, ed., The Chinese World Order, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 1968.
10. John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism, Hackett Publishing Company, 2002.
11. Keith Breen, Shane ONeill, After the Nation? Critical Reflections on Nationalism and
Postnationalism, Palgrave Macmillan, 2010
12. Louis L. Snyder, Encyclopedia of nationalism, St. James Press, 1990.
13. Louise Young, Japans Total Empire: Manchuria and the Culture of Wartime Empire,
Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998.
14. Stefan Tanaka, Japans Orient. Rendering Pasts into History, Berkeley, CA: University
of California Press, 1993.
15. T. J. Pempel, Transpacific Torii: Japan and the Emerging Asian Regionalism, in Peter
J. Katzenstein and Takashi Shiraishi, eds, Network Power. Japan and Asia, Ithaca, NY:
Cornell University Press, 1997.
16. Yoshiko Nozaki, War Memory, Nationalism and Education in Postwar Japan, 1945-
2007, Routledge, 2008.