ABSTRACT
The Ryukyu Islands-commonly referred to as Okinawa after the largest among the islands-have long found themselves and their people central to questions of Japanese state building, national identity, and sovereign control. Matsushima Yasukatsu, a leading member of the contemporary movement for Ryukyuan independence from Japan, underlines several points of departure for understanding the islands’ history and their incorporation into modern Japan. He places equal weight on the Tokugawa era Satsuma clan’s 1609 invasion of the islands and the Meiji government’s 1879 annexation of them into the emerging Japanese empire. These histories notwithstanding, Matsushima stresses that Tokyo’s decision to “discriminate” indiscriminately against Ryukyu islanders during World War II-despite having forced them to become subjects of the Japanese empire-and to “sacrifice the islands” outright at war’s end has made them and their peoples’ history a parallax for contemporary Japan’s efforts at nationalized control over them (Matsushima 2012, i). Tokyo has repeatedly altered its claims vis-à-vis Okinawa and its people since 1945, which in turn makes the islands themselves appear to shift in meaning for Japan. Even a short essay about contemporary Okinawa and its people must begin by
making clear that these islands have been inhabited for tens of thousands of years. During excavation for a construction site in 2010-11 on the southernmost of the islands, workers uncovered fragments of rib shards among other pieces of human bone thought to be about 24,000 years old; local and national papers quickly declared them “the oldest in Japan” (Yaeyama Mainichi Shimbun, 10 February 2010; 11 November 2011). To be sure, the island of Ishigaki where the bones were found is legally defined as part of “Japan,” yet claiming these ancient skeletal remains as “Japanese” is another matter. Complications with nationalizing the islands’ people across time become clear at local history museums throughout the islands where displays consistently emphasize similarities between Okinawans and islanders in the northern Philippines in terms of ethnography and cultural practice. These islands are, of course, closer to Okinawa when compared to Tokyo or even Kyushu; moreover, the North Pacific’s famous ocean current, the Kuroshio (Black Stream), flows from the south to the north throughout all of these islands, continuing to carry fish and boats along its path. Equally important, even with formal annexation in 1879 into the Japanese empire,
Okinawan islanders continued longstanding agricultural and fishing practices for their livelihoods through the end of the devastating Asia-Pacific War (1931-45). In 1944, one of the greatest historians of Japan in the modern era, E.H. Norman, wrote a brief report for the Canadian government detailing features of life throughout the Japanese empire that he viewed as critical for understanding and creating any successful future
post-war policy planning for Japan. At the time of Norman’s writing, it was still possible to emphasize the rudimentary nature of Okinawan life and also to describe the islands themselves as relatively undeveloped, something unimaginable today now that the islands hold such a central and militarized place in America’s post-1945 world order. In his report, Norman wrote: “[The Ryukyu Islands’] loss to Japan would not be of
any serious economic consequence since the chief occupation of the islanders is fishing and Japan’s best fishing grounds are in northern waters” (Norman 1944). In simplest terms, in 1944, similar to 1879 or even 1609 for that matter, it was
impossible to foresee what has become of Okinawa and Okinawans’ way of life today. Norman also addressed the question of who might control the islands after war’s
end. His observations suggest that protracted Allied domination-let alone purely American control-was not a consideration for even the most involved observer at the time of his writing (six months before the Allied invasion): “Although these islands have been administratively part of Japan since 1879, and their inhabitants are perhaps closer to Japan than China in language and custom, the Chinese still have a case to argue that they should be by right, Chinese” (Norman 1944). Norman understood that although Japan had incorporated the islands into its
empire during the early moments of its overseas territorial expansion, after Japan’s defeat China could make legitimate claim to the islands in terms of the region’s lengthy pre-Japanese imperial history; additionally, Norman’s notice indicates that the Allies’ post-war settlement with Japan would not collapse if Tokyo were to forfeit claim to Okinawa together with Korea and Manchuria (the plan that was already in the works). The reality, therefore, in 1944 for Norman’s analysis that the islands were economically and strategically of minimal consequence to Japan proper brings into relief how profoundly American occupation of the islands after 1945 has changed them and their people forever. At the end of the war, the Allies-particularly the Americans-occupied Japan in
order to refashion the enemy into a peaceful partner. The Occupation technically lasted until 1952, and although this history is far too detailed to reduce to a few sentences, Okinawa’s place in the mix would always be different. In important ways, even with the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty’s restoration of sovereignty to Japan proper, the Ryukyu Islands (Okinawa) became differently controlled, as Article 3 of the treaty explained:
Japan will concur in any proposal of the United States to the United Nations to place under its trusteeship system, with the United States as the sole administering authority, Nansei Shoto south of 29deg. north latitude (including the Ryukyu Islands and the Daito Islands), Nanpo Shoto south of Sofu Gan (including the Bonin Islands, Rosario Island and the Volcano Islands) and Parece Vela and Marcus Island. Pending the making of such a proposal and affirmative action thereon, the United States will have the right to exercise all and any powers of administration, legislation and jurisdiction over the territory and inhabitants of these islands, including their territorial waters.
