Yvette C. Rosser wrote (May 23, 2015):
Sri Kalyanaram mentioned the need to urge Pakistan to tone down the anti-India narratives. There is a precedent for that in Japanese textbooks who have to pass the 'neighboring country's clause'... because Korea and China often object to Japan's textbook treatment of the WWII period.
Sri Kalyanaram mentioned the need to urge Pakistan to tone down the anti-India narratives. There is a precedent for that in Japanese textbooks who have to pass the 'neighboring country's clause'... because Korea and China often object to Japan's textbook treatment of the WWII period.
Here is a bit of a longer treatment I wrote about Japanese textbooks:
An example of curriculum wars and the battles people are willing to wage to defend their right to write or rewrite history can be seen in the case of Japanese textbooks. The battle over how to represent Japan’s wartime military “advances” versus military “aggression” has a high level of very vocal involvement from East Asian countries that were invaded by Japan. South Korea and China have long been critical of the dismissive manner in which Japanese textbooks obfuscate wartime atrocities. The recent approval of the controversial “revisionist” history textbook prompted a wave of criticism from South Korea and China about the need for a balanced portrayal of Japan's role in the Asia-Pacific region during World War II. Seoul went to the extent of temporarily recalling the Korean ambassador to Japan. Needless to say, nationalist Japanese greatly resent the “neighboring countries” provision, since it allows what they consider to be excessive foreign influence in Japan’s internal policy issues.
In many countries the international political climate can determine whether a particular event is openly condemned or whether it is given a low priority and hidden between the pages. Groups of citizens with crosscutting agendas, both victors and victims of previous international confrontations--at least those with adequate access to power--exert pressure on the social studies curriculum at home and abroad. Offending nations are expected to include narratives that confess guilt, exude remorse, exclude nationalism, and instruct their populace about the evils of the previous regime. Often Hollywood and the popular media play a role in the international awareness gained by certain historical events such as the attention that The Killing Fields brought to the genocide of over a million Cambodians at the hands of Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge.
In contrast to Japanese textbooks, the official historical narrative in Germany is very critical of Germany’s aggression during WWII. A denigration of Nazism is central to the construct of the social studies curricula in Germany--the Holocaust is condemned and denounced in school textbooks. After the war, Germans found themselves in a situation wherein they had to take the historical sensitivities of their neighbors into consideration as they rewrote their history. Anti-Nazism was essential to Germany’s reintegration into Europe. Immediately after the war, Japan was less tied to its East Asian neighbors and did not rewrite their history to appease them. Germany on the other hand was forced by circumstances, if not by contrition, to distance itself from a past that had been defeated.
The historical narratives of some nations, such as Japan and Germany, are scrutinized by foreigners, whereas, other nations are allowed to eliminate unpleasant facts and elide nasty historical events. For instance, there is little high level and persistent international pressure exerted on the internal affairs of the education ministry in Turkey to express remorse in their school textbooks regarding the massacre of Armenians. Tibetans, and Tibetophiles in the international community, obviously have no leverage and indeed not any possibility of pressuring the education ministry of the People’s Republic of China to include an apologetic appraisal of the negative impact the Chinese occupation has had on Tibetan culture.
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 5:00 AM, S. Kalyanaraman <kalyan97@gmail.com>wrote:
Thanks to Yvette C. Rosser for focusing attention on historical studies related to two important domains of research which should be pursued by ICHR, independent scholars, policy-makers in dialogue with neighbour Pakistan:1. A dialogue should start with Pakistan to undo the inherent anti-Indianism in Paki text books -- at both Governmental and non-governmental levels. In all diplomatic communications with Pakistan, Min. of External Affairs and all other Ministries of Govt. of India should make this a mandatory subject for resolution by Pakistan Government and Pakistan Society.
