Papers by Jean Louis Margolin
Ce qui restera probablement la plus grande atrocité commise en un lieu unique par le Japon milita... more Ce qui restera probablement la plus grande atrocité commise en un lieu unique par le Japon militariste 1 constitue aujourd'hui encore un enjeu non seulement historiographique, mais aussi politique, qui conditionne en partie les relations entre les deux grandes puissances d'Asie orientale. Le débat (qui est loin de se limiter aux seuls historiens de profession) se cristallise sur la question du nombre des victimes 2. Mais qu'on ne s'y trompe pas : au-delà, il s'agit de savoir comment qualifier ce massacre, les Chinois du continent et d'outre-mer s'entendant pour la plupart sur sa dimension génocidaire 3. 183 CERMA hors-série n° 5-Les ombres de l'Empire 1 Même dans cette affirmation, on se trouve gêné par le faible développement des études sur les violences de guerre japonaises. Ainsi attribue-ton généralement une centaine de milliers de victimes au « sac de Manille » par les troupes japonaises en déroute (février-mars 1945). Mais ce chiffre paraît aussi comprendre les « dégâts collatéraux » résultant des tirs de barrage américains sur les nids de résistance urbains des forces nippones. Par ailleurs, il convient de ne pas oublier que les morts de Nankin ne représentent qu'environ 1 % des victimes du Japon impérial… 2 J'ai abordé plus globalement l'événement Nankin (y compris dans ses aspects politiques et mémoriels contemporains) in L'armée de l'empereur : Violences et crimes du Japon en guerre (1937-1945), Paris, Armand Colin, 2007, (ouvrage revu et augmenté sous le titre Violences et crimes du 3 Le seul bestseller sur la question, oeuvre d'une Chinoise des États-Unis, reprend dans son intitulé le terme holocaust, appliqué en anglais au génocide des Juifs. Significativement, la traduction française renonce à ce qualificatif : Iris Chang, The Rape of Nanking: The Forgotten Holocaust of World War II, Londres, Penguin, 1997 (édition française : Le viol de Nankin. 1937 : un des plus grands massacres du XX e siècle, Paris, Payot, 2007).
The 500 years connection between Europe and Southeast Asia has often been narrated as the story o... more The 500 years connection between Europe and Southeast Asia has often been narrated as the story of a slow takeover, then a short apex, followed by a quick demise of European hegemony. However, things have not been so linear and homogenous. Until at least the end of the 18 th century, the ability of most Asian societies to master their own destiny has remained by and large intact. For Westerners, entering Asian networks and accommodating Asian states was a more rewarding strategy than confronting them. In Southeast Asia, Europeans fought more rabidly against each other than against Asians. Actually, crossbreeding (cultural, religious as well as physical) has been a major phenomenon, as early as the 16th century. Individuals did not act necessarily as 'Westerners' or 'Asians', and could even sometimes forget their (eventual) nationality. And Western societies have often been more deeply transformed by Asia than the reverse. The balance of power did evolve a great deal during the century of large-scale colonization (1850-1950). Nevertheless, even then, European influence remained fairly limited; colonial policies were often contradictory, and constantly lacking the necessary funding. Behind the mask of European overlordship, several indigenous groups improved their status, and made themselves indispensable. Colonial order could be described as a co-production between Westerners and (some) Asians, albeit an unequal and unsustainable one.
Books by Jean Louis Margolin
China under Mao Zedong, between 1949 and 1976, seems to offer all the necessary ingredients for a... more China under Mao Zedong, between 1949 and 1976, seems to offer all the necessary ingredients for a genocidal configuration. The number of unnatural deaths is staggering: most probably somewhere between 44 and 72 million, if one includes the mass starvation triggered by a ruthlessly utopian Great Leap Forward, 1 thus making Mao Zedong – in absolute figures – a bigger mass murderer than Hitler or Stalin. 2 Those deaths (with the possible exception of the Great Leap ones – see below) were not in any way the products of unexpected circumstances , but of a deliberate, carefully planned murderous project. The man who conceived, launched and closely scrutinized that project, Mao Zedong (1893–1976), amply possessed the megalomania, the cruelty, the pitilessness and the contempt for mankind that make good genocidal masterminds. The victims, generally speaking, belonged (or were supposed to belong) to specific societal groups, painstakingly defined and labelled, even if the primarily targeted groups changed from time to time, generally in an incremental way: new victims were targeted, but the old ones were not left aside. The eliminationist discourse was ubiquitous, especially during the numerous 'mass campaigns', and included the freak accusations, animal analogies and calls for blood letting that constitute the fare of any good génocidaire. Finally, the murderous process extended over a huge space and time span, without any significant period of détente, or area of refuge. Nevertheless these mind-boggling crimes cannot be considered as genocide – except maybe in Tibet, where the fragility of a small population and the national oppression by the Han majority government compounded general policies not radically different from those inflicted on China proper. 3 The extermination of the targeted groups, indeed, was never complete; in the most severe cases – the rural landlords, the former Guomindang cadres – human losses could be in the range of 20–30 per cent (precise evaluations are sorely lacking), but probably no more. 4 Furthermore, the killings seldom extended to family members, and even less frequently to children, although they were
Uploads
Papers by Jean Louis Margolin
Books by Jean Louis Margolin