‘Jews of the East’: Chinese Migrants in Japanese Discourse on Southward Expansion, 1880–1945

ABSTRACT

From the late nineteenth century until the end of the Pacific War, Japanese expansionist discourse urging the country to take on an ever greater role in Southeast Asia had a great impact on how Japanese people imagined their destiny as a nation. That this discourse took Western colonial powers in the region as presumed adversaries is well known, but the fact that it also posited the Chinese diaspora there as a main competitor has received little scholarly attention. This article analyses the growing concern of Japanese southward expansionism since the end of the nineteenth century over Chinese migrants in Southeast Asia. It addresses a gap in existing research on pre-war and wartime Japanese geopolitical and racialist thinking on Southeast Asia. It also presents a wider view on Japanese treatment (or mistreatment) of Chinese in occupied Southeast Asia during World War Two.

Acknowledgments

The author is grateful to Professors Hamashita Takeshi, Kagotani Naoto, and Tanaka Masakazu for their advice and support. He also thanks the Centre of Southeast Asian Studies at Kyoto University for a six-month fellowship in 2013 and the Institute for Research in the Humanities at the same university for an eight-month fellowship in 1998 and several short-visit grants in subsequent years. Professor Martin Collcutt directed the author’s attention to the Bakumatsu and early Meiji sources, Professor Sandra Wilson kindly commented on an early draft, and Mr David Kelly did an excellent copy-editing job. Many thanks to them! The author is solely responsible for any mistakes and shortcomings in the article.

Notes

¹ Most Japanese primary sources referred to Chinese migrants simply as Shinajin (Chinese), although some used the term kakyō (Chinese abroad), especially from the late 1920s on.

² Akashi, ‘Japanese Policy’; Hayashi, Kakyō gyakusatsu; Hayashi, Shingapōru kakyō; Kratoska, Southeast Asian Minorities; Hamashita, ‘Kajin kakyō chōsa’; Reynolds, ‘International Orphans’.

³ Yano, ‘Nanshin’ no keifu; Yano, Nihon no Nanyō shikan; Shimizu, ‘Taishō shoki ni okeru nanshinron’; Shimizu, ‘Kindai Nihon no kaigai tsūshō’; also see Peattie, ‘Nanshin’; Shimizu, Southeast Asia in Modern Japanese Thought; Shimizu, Ajia kaijin.

⁴ Fogel, ‘Japanese Literary Travelers’; Fogel, ‘A Decisive Turning Point’.

⁵ See, for example, Saaler and Koschmann, Pan-Asianism.

⁶ Nor have I examined government archives, both civilian and military, as their inclusion would make this article far too long. Interested readers may consult the archives at the Japan Center for Asian Historical Records and Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

⁷ Tanaka, DatsuA, 193–208; Matsuzawa, Kindai Nihon, 69–184. The Tokugawa delegation to China of 1862 also brought back unfavourable observations on the Chinese in Shanghai; see Fogel, ‘A Decisive Turning Point’, 104–24.

⁸ Kume, Tokumei zenkentaishi, 5: 307–08; Tanaka, DatsuA, 196–205.

⁹ Tamamushi, KōBei nichiroku.

¹⁰ Nagao, Akō nikki, 213.

¹¹ Morita, Akō nikki, 246; Fukushima, Kaki kōkai nisshi, 388.

¹² Nonomura, Kōkai nichiroku, 170.

¹³ Fukushima, Kaki kōkai nisshi, 387–88.

¹⁴ Ibid., 333.

¹⁵ Katō, Futayo gatari, 92.

¹⁶ Morita, Akō nikki, 246.

¹⁷ Tamamushi, KōBei nichiroku, 58.

¹⁸ Fuchibe, Ōkō nikki, 20.

¹⁹ Kume, Tokumei zenkentaishi, 1: 111–12.

²⁰ Ibid., 5: 316, 333.

²¹ Ibid., 1: 134–35.

²² Ibid., 5: 293, 316–18.

²³ Ibid., 5: 316.

²⁴ Ibid., 5: 318.

²⁵ Kōbushō, Shamu kikō.

²⁶ Ibid., 2: 4, 8.

²⁷ Kume, Tokumei zenkentaishi, 5: 300–01; Ueno, ‘Kindai Nihon gaikōshi’, 106.

²⁸ Shimizu, Ajia kaijin, 120–212; Yano, Nanshin no keifu, 48–68.

²⁹ Kleeman, Under an Imperial Sun, 13–14.

³⁰ Lin, ‘Taiwan Sōtokufu’, 123–42.

³¹ Kuroda, Man’yū kenbunroku, 269–70.

³² Ibid.

³³ Takada, Shutsuyō nikki, 22–23.

³⁴ Ibid.

³⁵ Iwamoto, Shamukoku tanken, 67–69.

³⁶ Ibid.

³⁷ Ibid.

³⁸ Sugiura, Hankai yume, 21.

³⁹ Ibid., 17.

⁴⁰ Fukumoto, Firippinu guntō, 22–23.

⁴¹ Ibid.

⁴² Ibid.

⁴³ Fukumoto, ‘Nihon oyobi Nan’yō’, 8–9.

⁴⁴ Sano, ‘Firippin guntō shisatsu’, 39.

⁴⁵ Ibid., 43.

⁴⁶ Min’yūsha, Firipin guntō, 142–43.

⁴⁷ Ibid.

⁴⁸ Ibid.

⁴⁹ Ninomiya, Marē hantō jijō, 123, 128, 130.

⁵⁰ Ibid., 131.

⁵¹ Ibid., 134, 136.

⁵² Ibid., 140.

⁵³ Ibid., 140–41.

⁵⁴ Saitō, Shamukoku shutchō, 10; Saitō, Marē hantō nanbu, 1:17, 37.

⁵⁵ Saitō, Shamukoku shutchō, 71; Saitō, Marē hantō nanbu, 4:30.

⁵⁶ Tsuneya, Kaigai shokumin ron, 83–84.

⁵⁷ Ibid.

⁵⁸ Nan’yō oyobi Nihonjinsha, Shingapōru o chūshin ni, 223–25.

⁵⁹ See Yano, Nanshin no keifu; Yano, Nihon no Nan’yō shikan.

⁶⁰ Takekoshi, Taiwan tōchishi.

⁶¹ Takekoshi, Nangokuki.

⁶² Ibid., 79–80, 121, 212–13.

⁶³ Ibid., 80, 90, 101, 174–75, 209–13.

⁶⁴ Ibid., 179.

⁶⁵ Ibid., 179–81.

⁶⁶ Takekoshi was effusive in his praise for Japan’s ‘scientific’ and ‘enlightened’ rule of Taiwan in his book Taiwan tōchishi. In his view, Japan was an exemplary colonial power, and the Chinese of Taiwan benefited hugely from Japanese colonization.

⁶⁷ Hara, Nankai ikken, 132–33.

⁶⁸ Ibid., 133.

⁶⁹ Ibid., 134.

⁷⁰ Ibid.

⁷¹ Tsubotani, Saikin no nangoku.

⁷² Ibid., 238.

⁷³ Ibid., 240–42.

⁷⁴ Ibid., 242.

⁷⁵ Matsuo, Nan’yō no sangyō.

⁷⁶ Ibid., 253.

⁷⁷ Ibid., 578.

⁷⁸ Ibid., 607–08.

⁷⁹ Ibid., 611.

⁸⁰ In the same year, Bank of Taiwan (Taiwan Ginkō) published a study on the Southeast Asian Chinese (Taiwan Ginkō, Nan’yō ni okeru kakyō), which was followed three years later by another on their remittances to China (Nan’yō kakyō no kin’yū kikō).

⁸¹ Taiwan Sōtokufu, Nan’yō shisatsu fukumeisho, 67.

⁸² Ibid., 73.

⁸³ Ibid., 73–74.

⁸⁴ Ibid., 75–76.

⁸⁵ Ibid., 76–79.

⁸⁶ Ibid., 80–81.

⁸⁷ This was most likely a reference to the Tatsumaru Incident of 1908, in which a diplomatic dispute between China and Japan sparked boycotts of Japanese goods mainly in Canton and Hong Kong. Predating the Twenty-One Demands of 1915, the 1908 boycotts were the first round of mass anti-Japanese protests by Chinese in modern times. See Wu, Tatsumaru jiken.

⁸⁸ Taiwan Sōtokufu, Nan’yō shisatsu fukumeisho, 81–82.

⁸⁹ Ibid., 83.

⁹⁰ Dota, Marē hantō Jawa, 78–80.

⁹¹ Ibid., 167.

⁹² Ibid., 162.

⁹³ Segawa, Nan’yō kakyō, 3.

⁹⁴ Ibid., 24.

⁹⁵ Ibid., 31–32.

⁹⁶ Ibid.

⁹⁷ Gaimushō Tsūshōkyoku, Kakyō no kenkyū.

⁹⁸ See Kuo, Networks beyond Empires for a detailed study of anti-Japanese boycotts among diasporic Chinese in the early twentieth century.

⁹⁹ Gaimushō Tsūshōkyoku, Kakyō no kenkyū, 109–10.

¹⁰⁰ Ibid.

¹⁰¹ Ibid., 122.

¹⁰² Ibid., 112.

¹⁰³ Takei, Nihonjin no shin hattenchi, 232.

¹⁰⁴ Ibid., 234, 239.

¹⁰⁵ Ibid., 229.

¹⁰⁶ Ibid., 234–35.

¹⁰⁷ Ibid., 240–41.

¹⁰⁸ Ibid., 274.

¹⁰⁹ Ibid., 275, 280.

¹¹⁰ Tōa Kenkyūjo, Nan’yō kakyō kōNichi.

¹¹¹ Nishimura, Shingapōru 35-nen, 339.

¹¹² Ibid., 367.

¹¹³ Keizai Chōsakai, Waga tainan’yō bōeki, 59.

¹¹⁴ Ibid., 59.

¹¹⁵ Ibid., 62.

¹¹⁶ Ibid., 64.

¹¹⁷ Gaimushō Tsūshōkyoku, Kakyō no gensei, 127.

¹¹⁸ Ibid.

¹¹⁹ Ibid.

¹²⁰ Ibid., 128.

¹²¹ Ibid.

¹²² Saitō, Kakyō no kenkyū, 12.

¹²³ Ibid., 12, 22.

¹²⁴ Ibid., 14.

¹²⁵ Ibid., 22.

¹²⁶ Ibid., 27.

¹²⁷ Ibid.

¹²⁸ Kikakuin, Kakyō no kenkyū, i.

¹²⁹ Ibid., 7, 11.

¹³⁰ Ibid., 2.

¹³¹ Ibid., 12.

¹³² Ibid., 112, 273.

¹³³ Ibid., 407.

¹³⁴ Haga, Tōa kyōeiken, 1–2.

¹³⁵ Ibid., 1–2, 343.

¹³⁶ Ibid., 364.

¹³⁷ Ibid., 346.

¹³⁸ Ibid., 347.

¹³⁹ Ibid., 362.

¹⁴⁰ Ibid., 365–66.

¹⁴¹ Ibid., 365.

¹⁴² Ibid., 366.

¹⁴³ Ide, Nanpō kakyō ron, 138–39.

¹⁴⁴ Ibid., 107–09.

¹⁴⁵ Watanabe, Nanpō kyōeiken, 6, 17, 117–18.

¹⁴⁶ Ide, Nanpō kakyō ron, 138–48; Watanabe, Nanpō kyōeiken to kakyō, 6.

¹⁴⁷ Moriyasu, Dainan’yō, 67.

¹⁴⁸ Negishi, Kakyō sōki, 1–2.

¹⁴⁹ Ibid., 58, 224.

¹⁵⁰ Ibid., 224–26.

¹⁵¹ Ibid., 225.

¹⁵² Ibid., 220.

¹⁵³ King Rama VI of Thailand coined the expression in a 1914 article. See Ooi, Southeast Asia, 1328–29. I thank Professor Pookong Kee for pointing out this connection to me. For anti-Semitism in wartime Japan, see Goodman and Miyazawa, Jews in the Japanese Mind, and Yō, Aru Taiwanjin no higeki.

¹⁵⁴ Hayashi, Kakyō gyakusatsu; Hayashi, Shingapōru kakyō.