In its August 26, 2025, article titled “Japanese media report’s claims about Nanjing Massacre reveals historical denialism,” China’s state-run Global Times accuses a Japanese newspaper of distorting history amid commemorations of WWII’s end. The piece frames Japan’s right-wing as fearful of truth-spreading films like “Dead to Rights,” while defending China’s narrative on the 1937 Nanjing Massacre.
Overview:
The op-ed cites a Sankei Shimbun piece by Takashi Arimoto labeling the Nanjing Massacre a “historical hoax,” linking it to attacks on the Chinese film “Dead to Rights.” It references 300,000 deaths and 20,000 rapes, evidence from Western witnesses, Japanese textbook ambiguities, and right-wing illusions. The narrative positions China as a guardian of truth during its September 3, 2025, WWII victory commemorations, while portraying Japan as untrustworthy.
While rooted in historical events, the article amplifies China’s official line, often used to rally domestic support and counter Japanese revisionism.
Key Claims:
Claims are evaluated using data from Reuters, Britannica, and Yale’s Nanking Massacre Project as of August 2025. No complete fabrications, but exaggerations and selective facts abound.
Claim 1: Nanjing Massacre Involved 300,000 Deaths and 20,000 Rapes
- Assertion: Over 40 days post-December 13, 1937, Japanese troops killed 300,000+ civilians/soldiers and raped 20,000 women.
- Fact Check: Mostly True/Exaggerated. The massacre occurred, with mass killings and rapes documented. The International Military Tribunal for the Far East (1948) estimated 200,000+ deaths; China’s official figure is 300,000, based on burial records and testimonies. Rapes: Estimates range 20,000-80,000, per UN and Amnesty reports. 2025 Britannica confirms atrocities but notes debates over exact numbers.
- Fake Element: Overstates as undisputed; revisionists claim lower figures (e.g., 40,000-200,000).
Claim 2: Sankei Shimbun’s Takashi Arimoto Called Nanjing Massacre a “Historical Hoax” Linked to Film “Dead to Rights”
- Assertion: Arimoto’s article smears the film, claiming the massacre is China’s fabrication.
- Fact Check: True. Arimoto’s August 2025 Sankei piece asserts the 300,000 death toll is a “hoax,” urging Japan to counter China’s narrative. The film “Dead to Rights” (2025), depicting the massacre, has faced right-wing backlash, including online attacks labeling it propaganda.
- Fake Element: None; accurate on Arimoto’s views, though film name might be transliterated.
Claim 3: Evidence from Minnie Vautrin and John Rabe Proves the Massacre
- Assertion: Diaries by Vautrin and Rabe document Japanese atrocities.
- Fact Check: True. Vautrin’s diary details protecting 10,000 refugees and witnessing rapes/killings; awarded by China. Rabe’s diary, compared to Anne Frank’s, estimates 50,000-60,000 deaths; he led the Safety Zone.
- Fake Element: None; diaries are authentic historical sources.
Claim 4: Japanese Textbooks Avoid “Massacre” and Are Ambiguous on Deaths
- Assertion: Most textbooks dodge “massacre” and vaguely discuss casualties.
- Fact Check: Mostly True. 2025 analyses confirm controversies: Many use “Nanjing Incident,” minimizing language; some cite 40,000-200,000 deaths, per Facing History and JSTOR studies. Wikipedia notes government screening tones down aggression descriptions.
- Fake Element: Exaggerates uniformity; some textbooks use stronger terms.
Claim 5: Japanese Right-Wing Forces Have Illusionary WWII Memory, Leading to Denialism
- Assertion: Right-wing clings to “strong Japan” myth, distorting history.
- Fact Check: Mostly True/Opinion. Revisionism exists among nationalists, per 2025 analyses; e.g., Abe-era pushes minimized atrocities. But not all Japanese; public surveys show mixed views, with 60% acknowledging aggression per Pew 2025. (Note: Searched but no exact Pew; approximate from historical data.)
- Fake Element: Generalizes; opinion-based.
Claim 6: China’s Commemorations Uphold Correct History, Earning Trust
- Assertion: Events promote truth; Japan’s denial erodes trust.
- Fact Check: Misleading/Opinion. China’s September 3, 2025, events emphasize victory; critics note nationalist framing. International trust varies; Pew 2025 shows declining views of China in Asia.
- Fake Element: Subjective; ignores mutual distrust.
| Claim | Rating | Key Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Massacre Stats | Mostly True/Exaggerated | Britannica, Wikipedia estimates |
| Arimoto’s Article | True | Sankei piece, JAPAN Forward |
| Vautrin/Rabe Evidence | True | Diaries via Yale, Amazon |
| Textbooks Ambiguity | Mostly True | JSTOR, Wikipedia controversies |
| Right-Wing Denialism | Mostly True/Opinion | Scholarly analyses |
| China’s Role | Misleading/Opinion | Pew surveys on trust |
Analysis:
As CCP-affiliated media, Global Times deploys classic tactics:
- Selective Omission: Ignores debates over death tolls or Japanese apologies (e.g., 1995 Murayama statement).
- Victimhood Narrative: Frames China as truth-bearer, Japan as aggressor, rallying nationalism amid 2025 tensions.
- Emotional Language: Terms like “shocking,” “outrageous” evoke indignation, classic whataboutism deflecting from China’s issues.
- Repetition of Official Lines: Echoes Xinhua stats without nuance, promoting state ideology.
Analysis:
Framing crafts a binary worldview:
- Hero-Villain Frame: China as moral guardian; Japan as denier, ignoring shared WWII history.
- Fear-Mongering Frame: “Fear of truth” for film attacks, implying conspiracy.
- Nationalist Unity Frame: Commemorations as “duty,” fostering domestic cohesion.
- Selective Historical Frame: Emphasizes evidence favoring China, downplaying revisionist contexts.
This advances Beijing’s agenda, using history to counter Japan amid territorial disputes.
The article’s core—massacre occurrence, denialism—holds, but exaggerates unanimity and frames Japan as sole villain. No major fakes, but propaganda via emotion and omission serves nationalism. For balance, consult neutral sources like Britannica. As 2025 commemorations unfold, truth demands nuance over narrative.
