Into the Atomic Sunshine

My Thoughts on the Traveling Exhibition in Okinawa

By: Shinya Watanabe

To hold an exhibition on Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution and post-war art here in Okinawa, where many ordinary citizens lost their lives caught in the ground battle during World War II, has a special meaning.

After World War II, the U.S. government declared that the people of Okinawa were of separate ethnic group who suffered under the rule of Japan’s imperialism, and kept them under their military administration. However, after the breakout of the Korean War, they repositioned Okinawa as being a base at the forefront of the East Asia theater and forcefully seized lands owned by the local people for military use.

At the signing of the San Francisco Peace Treaty in 1951, Japan was half-forced into concluding the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty with the U.S. as a condition for ending the Allied occupation by the GHQ. As a result, Japan was brought into the capitalist block under the U.S. nuclear umbrella. During this period, the U.S. acknowledged the residual sovereignty of Okinawa by Japan, but at the same time, the U.S. formally placed Okinawa under its military jurisdiction.

In 1956, as a result of presenting the “Price Report,” which ignored the “Four Principles to Defend Land” petitioned by the Okinawans, the Okinawans launched an anti-U.S. military base movement called an “island-wide struggle.” Later, when the Vietnam War broke out, Okinawa became the frontline base for the U.S. forces, and as a result, the number of incidents and accidents increased. Moreover, as complaints from the local residents over bombers flying out from Okinawa directly to the war zone intensified, the local residents became actively involved in the return-to-motherland movement with strong anti-U.S. and anti-war views.

On the other hand, local residents who were employed by industries with demands from the U.S. military had no choice but to take sides with those who opposed the reversion of Okinawa to Japan and those who supported the stationing of the U.S. military forces in Okinawa, and clashed with those who supported Okinawa’s reversion to Japan. In 1968, when the chief executive election of the Ryukyu government was held, Chobyo Yara, who was in favor of Okinawa’s reversion to Japan, was elected after close to a 90% voter turnout and called for an “immediate unconditional complete reversion.” Later in 1969, in exchange for the extension of the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty, President Nixon promised to return Okinawa at the U.S.-Japan Summit, and on May 15th, 1972, Okinawa was to return to Japan.

But as the idea for the reversion of Okinawa between the governments of Japan and U.S. began to take shape and became clear, ideas of “anti-reversion theory” and “independence theory” also became evident in Okinawa. The background behind this was the fact that the Japanese government continued to swallow demands from the U.S. military regarding the conditions at the U.S. bases in Okinawa during the negotiation for the reversion, and this situation has hindered the realization of “immediate unconditional complete reversion,” an “anti-war reversion” committed to Article 9 which the Okinawans had hoped for. The reversion was called “kakunuki / hondonami (non-nuclear policy / application of U.S.-Japan Security Treaty in Okinawa as applied in mainland)” and fueled the distrust towards the Japanese government. The independence theory had the notion of rejection of rule by Japan and U.S. in nature, whereas the anti-reversion theory was in nature critical of the state sovereignty itself.

Moreover, there is also the theory that the presence of the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty for the purpose of defending Japan is indispensable for steadfastly maintaining the Article 9 resolution, and it is possible to expand this idea to mean that ironically, there is still a huge U.S. base presence in Okinawa. As this condition indicates, to think about the issues of Article 9 and the present state of affairs in post-war Okinawa is very important as a debate which reflects the nature of the current state, and I felt that it is only logical to include works by artists from Okinawa in this traveling exhibition with its theme of Article 9 and post-war art, when it makes its way to Okinawa.

Through wartime experience and longing for peace by many of the local citizens, we may ask ourselves what have the Okinawan artists expressed in their works regarding the ideals of Article 9 and reversion and identity of Okinawa as a theme in the post-war era. This traveling exhibition at the Okinawa Prefectural Art Museum is titled “Into the Atomic Sunshine in Okinawa,” and in addition to the works exhibited at the traveling exhibition in New York and Tokyo, post World War II art works from Okinawa are also included in this exhibition. My hope is that through these post-war art works and their expressions, they will create opportunities to share and reflect upon the themes of Article 9 and post-war art among the Okinawans, the Japanese citizens and people around the world and to smooth the way for the coming future.

(Translated by Harutaka Oribe)

Top