Abstract
Sometimes the U.S. and her politicians have been accused of having double standards, say one thing and do the other, worse hiding the truth. A short documentary video on Youtube by Dr. Rhawn Joseph raise a serious question whether the U.S. had dealt the surrender of Japan and its occupation with high moral standard and ethics. Specifically, Dr. Joseph questions what happened to the $100 billion worth of treasure which was looted by the Japanese Imperial Army during the war? Did the U.S. make an unethical deal with Japan to protect the Japanese Emperor from war crime prosecution in exchange for some secrets, such as the treasure that was sunk in the Tokyo Bay or hidden elsewhere? Why Japan persistently denies her war crimes and the U.S. stays mute as a bystander? This article raises many more questions and urges Americans to find out the truth for the sake of healing war wounds and holding Justice.
 
=======================================================
 
A seventeen minute video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le7SCVNA7Z8) is available on Youtube featuring an interview of Dr. Rhawn Joseph, Director and Producer of Rape of Nanjing. The video is entitled, Hirohito & Asia’s Stolen Treasures (Why the World Forgot the Rape of Nanjing & Japanese Atrocities). As a Chinese American born during the WW II, I do not particularly like to watch this kind of videos containing horrible images. I would get very upset by the cruelty and atrocities the Japanese Imperial Army committed during the war. I would rather forget the sad past though I do wish Japan would (like Germany) come forward openly and sincerely admitting her war crimes, apologizing to the victims and asking for forgiveness. I believe that ‘to forgive and then forget’ would be the best medicine to cure the terrible historical wounds inflicted by the Japanese war criminals. But this video’s subtitle, ‘Why’ (the World Forgot the Rape of Nanjing & Japanese Atrocities), caught my attention. I sure want to understand the ‘why’ and hope to find an answer to why Japan has persistently refused to accept the responsibility of the war atrocities and to apology to the world (Asians and American WW II veterans) seeking forgiveness.; Doesn’t this matter to Japan and matter to Japanese conscience? I chose to watch the video.
 
The horrible crime images shown in the video were very disturbing; I had to make an effort to block them off my mind. However, the central message that the U.S. was responsible for being lenient to Japan from covering up her war crimes, protecting her commander-in-chief Emperor Hirohito, and changing Japan’s international image with post war PR work, not for the reason we were led to believe (feel sorry for Japan because we’d dropped the atomic bomb on her) but for a different reason so evil, deceitful, and shameful that we Americans should have the right to know exactly what is the truth. There is no excuse for hiding the truth especially for healing the war wounds and upholding the justice and honor for the American veterans died for WW II plus their families, descendents and millions of American children - to have a clear conscience regarding WW II and the US-Japan relations..
 
Dr. Joseph is a neuropsychologist and writer with interest in brains, origin of life and cosmology. Although many scientific publications are attributed to his name, very little biographic data is available in the public media. Based on www.thereachapproah.co.uk, Dr. Joseph obtained his PhD from Chicago Medical School and completed his training at Yale University in the Department of Neurology and Neuropsychology. Dr. Joseph has aroused some controversy from his view on the origin of life and his claim of alien life existed on Mars blaming NASA for burying it. Perhaps because of his controversial character, the above video available in the organic medium never entered the mainstream. However, Dr. Joseph’s principal claim is that General McArthur was fully aware of the war crimes committed by Imperial Japan under the command of Emperor Hirohito but made an immoral and unethical deal with Japan to protect Hirohito from prosecution in exchange for certain secrets from Japan. One of the secrets is the loot of treasures (of the order of $100 Billion) taken from many of the Asian countries; some were brought back to Japan, some were deliberately sunk in the Tokyo bay for lack of time of hiding it and some were hidden in the country they were looted from or shipped to. Dr. Joseph’s claim could be corroborated with other claims, for example, tons of construction wood and coal were hidden in the mountains in Taiwan before the Japanese Imperial army surrendered. Other secrets charged by the Chinese were the files of biological weapon experiments performed on Chinese civilians and soldiers including American prisoners of war.
 
Secret deals in current foreign affairs are often protected from public knowledge in the name of national security, a reasonable excuse. However, when time passes, those secrets should be revealed to the public especially when justice is at stake. Americans have the right to know what happened to the billions of gold, diamonds and valuables the Japanese Imperial Army looted from everywhere under the command of the Emperor? Were they divided up secretly? Was part of the treasures given to the unprosecuted war criminals in the name of restoring Japan’s economy (Dr. Joseph claims that is the reason Japan could recover from the war faster than all other Asian countries)? Did the U.S. receive part of that treasure and how was it spent? These questions matter not in the domain of national security but in the domain of justice and ethics.
 
What happened to the secret files of the Japanese biological weapon development and bacteria experiments on human? Why is the Japanese Imperial Army unit 731responsible for the deadly bio warfare work completely immune from prosecution from the war tribunal court? Why was the Japanese Emperor, Hirohito, the real commander-in-chief of the Japanese aggression, completely free from prosecution? What were the secret agreements made between the U.S. and Japan for helping Japan to recover from WW II? Despite of mountains of evidence showing the cruelty and atrocities committed by the Japanese on Nanjing Massacre (and many massacres that followed under the order of the commander to – “kill all, loot all and burn all”), sex slavery (Japanese call it the comfort women program necessary for military morale), and human biological experiments, Japan constantly denies them and the U.S. keeps very quiet as a bystander? Why the U.S. as the standard bearer of freedom and justice for the world has always been  mute when comes to Japanese war crimes? Why weren’t there any significant war reparation demands for Japan to compensate the damages caused in many Asian countries? These are not just curiosity questions; the American people have the right to know the truth.
 
The U.S. was the occupier of Japan and the Philippines post WW II, but the U.S. (at least General MacArthur) did seem to treat Japan, the culprit of WW II in Asia, better than the Philippines and other Asian regions. It is reasonable to have alliances with Japan, Korea and the Philippines against the Soviet communist bloc, but it was not at all logical to favor Japan over the other Asian countries especially when there was no clear definite enemy target in Asia threatening the U.S. at that time. Japan was a strong economy and competed, in many ways along with other Asian countries, with the U.S., so with Japan’s aggressive militant track record towards her neighbors why was the U.S. picking Japan as the favored ally in Asia? When the U.S. offered the administrative rights of the Liuqiu (Okinawa) Islands and the Diaoyu Islands to Japan , it was puzzling to many Asian countries.               
 
We, Americans, freedom lover and justice holder, must know the truth what actually happened seven decades ago; only the truth can keep the U.S. on the side of justice crushing the image of a country with double standard. We have the obligation to bring the organic media to the mainstream to serve the justice.  

​

​Dr. Wordman

Abstract
 
World order is based on the balance of three elements, economic activities and strength, military power and distribution and political system and leadership. Historically, the world has never been a uni-polar world led by one single superpower. Post WW II, the U.S. has emerged as a superpower leading the capitalist world in confrontation with a communist bloc led by the Soviet Union. As the Soviet Union collapsed after more than four decades of Cold War confrontation, the U.S. had become the sole superpower seemingly treating the world as a uni-polar world. However, many large nations such as Brazil, China, Germany, Japan and India have rapidly advanced their economy under their own evolving political systems (except Japan being fostered by the U.S.); even small nations such as Singapore, Vietnam, and South Korea, have also made outstanding economic progress having varying military strength and different political governing systems. Thus a multi-polar world order is inevitable and the U.S. must accept it.
 
==========================================================================  
 
World order is based on the balance of three elements, economic activities and strength, military power and distribution and political system and leadership. Historically, the world has never been a uni-polar world led by one single superpower. Throughout conflicts and battles, the world has endured millennia of wars with rise and fall of powerful nations or empires led by one or two of the above three elements but never all of the three. Hence, the world has never really functioned under a uni-polar leadership even though from time to time nations rise into a superpower status economically or militarily.
 
WW II was a long fierce war on Earth extended more than a decade in some regions. Following WW II, the U.S. and the Soviet emerged as superpowers militarily when most other warring nations were devastated and weakened by the war. The U.S. was able to rebuild her economy to be the largest in the world with a commanding position to help other nations to develop their economy. The U.S., benefitted from a democratic political system and a capitalistic economic system, was promoting 'democracy' erroneously in my opinion as an ideology rather than a methodology of decision making to assist political leaders and their governing systems to enact and execute policies for the benefits of their people. With her strong economy, the U.S. was able to win the Cold War against the Soviet Union, making the U.S. as the sole superpower in the world to this date.
 
Since the ending of the Cold War in 1990, the U.S. is strategically leading the world as a uni-polar world even though there is no unique political system recognized by the world. The U.S. governing system is by no means perfect (from the point of view of other nations) and the UN structure is by no means effective in resolving international issues. In the meantime, many large nations such as Brazil, China, Germany, Japan and India have rapidly advanced their economy under their own evolving political systems except Japan being fostered by the U.S. Small nations with varying military strength and political governing systems, such as Singapore, Vietnam, and South Korea, have also made outstanding economic progress. Despite of the uni-polar approach by the U.S. subordinated by Japan, the third largest world economy, the world is still stubbornly acting as a multi-polar world with China and India rising as great nations and economies and Russia, not only remaining as a strong military power but also evolving economically with serious reform.
 
Recently, Professor Yan Xue Tong, Dean of School of International Studies in Tsinghua University, in an interview by Global Times（5-3-2016) commented on the very issue of how the US-China relation will become in the evolving multi-polar world. He discussed that the shrinking gap between the U.S. and China in economy as well as in military strength will inevitably lead into conflicts damping cooperation between the two nations. Besides economical competition, the U.S. and China face a number of issues such as unification of Taiwan and Mainland China, North Korea nuclear threat, and freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. Although the seriousness of the issues are more attributed to US attitude and actions than those of China’s, Professor Yan's view is that the U.S. and China will not engage in direct war even though the conflicts will continue and get more complicated.
 
While I tend to agree with Professor Yan's diagnosis and prediction on the US-China relation regarding their current conflicts, I do believe that we need to analyze the US-China relations in a bigger context of how the two great nations will live with each other in a multi-polar world. Most importantly, we need to understand why the two countries should not pursue a uni-polar world strategy and must objectively accept the inevitable multi-polar world in which the two great nations can play a complimentary role for mutual benefits and world prosperity and peace. Only through objective analysis, can these two countries reach understanding and bar emotional decisions as often being uttered during the U.S. presidential election campaigns or the Chinese leadership transition. I also agree with Prof. Yan's conclusion that after a new US President taking office into the second year, the new leader will most likely come to a more rational attitude towards the US-China relation.
 
As the world is evolving into a multi-polar world, we must recognize a few things. First, no country has a given right to be a world leader. The U.S. earned her superpower position with the victory against the Axis nations and by her post WW II Marshall Plan to restore Europe and her effort to rebuild a devastated Japan. This success may make the U.S. to appear as the sole superpower in the world, but in reality, it is more cultivating a multi-polar world. The U.S. must objectively accept that consequence. Otherwise, she has to deviously destroy any rising economy or country to keep herself as an empire. The latter strategy would never succeed as borne out by the collapse of many empires in human history. The collapse of the Soviet Union in final analysis is due to her own problems in conducting a faulty economic system and a corrupt political system imposed on a compulsory collected states. In an objective analysis, the U.S. cannot view the winning of the Cold War as the success of trying to build a uni-polar world with the U.S. being the de-facto leader.
 
Secondly, post Cold War, the world order has not become more orderly, rather, it has become more complicated. It is obvious that many global issues whether they are economic problems or security issues require collective deliberations and decision making; G7 and G20 as well as APEC, ASEAN, etc are clear examples that the world is a multi-polar structure and world issues must be resolved by multi-polar leadership. Looking back to the history of the U.S., the U.S. foreign policy has advocated the Monroe doctrine (in America) to keep the foreign powers away while in America the U.S. more or less practiced 'cow-boy behavior’ policies (Guns settled any land disputes or issues). Going forward and beyond WW II and Cold War, 'cow-boy behavior' justice doesn't work. The U.S. must accept objectively the realities presented to her by the multi-polar world.
 
From the world perspective, the evolution of a multi-polar world to maturity is a blessing to mankind. In this process, multi-cultures and different governing systems will be tolerated and accepted, the human race stands to gain and be enriched. With a balance of power among multiple great nations, the world issues will be most likely be settled with more not less justice. The small nations have a choice to align themselves to one of the world leaders based on their assessment of a beneficial relationship. Prof. Yan pointed out that China may have to pay more attention to her relationship with neighboring small countries than to great powers in the world. This certainly is a logical policy based on a multi-polar world environment. 
 
In a mature multi-polar world, going forward, each nation small or big may align itself economically with a great nation and militarily with another great nation and yet develop a unique political system of its own without rigidly identifying with another great nation. World issues will be settled through dialogues and discussions with participation of multiple relevant great nations.