Ma Siyu: A Review of Research on the History of the Anti-Japanese National United Front in Japanese Academia
While reflecting on their defeat in the post-war period, Japanese academia sought a path toward the democratization of Japanese society. Some scholars argued that China’s revolutionary experience during the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression should serve as an important reference for contemplating Japan’s future direction. Among them, it was held that “the question of the united front is a question of revolutionary strategy and tactics. The question of revolution is one of the greatest issues in modern and contemporary history. Therefore, research into the history of the united front is an essential link in the study of revolutionary history as well as modern and contemporary history.” They utilized the study of the Anti-Japanese National United Front as a key entry point for analyzing the Chinese Revolution and the policies of the CPC, linking it to reflections on practical Japanese issues—such as the "Anpo Struggle" [1]—and observations of contemporary China. In the 80 years since the war, research in Japanese academia on the history of the Anti-Japanese National United Front has been closely related to trends in its study of modern and contemporary Chinese history, while simultaneously reflecting changes in Japan’s perception of China. This article attempts to organize and analyze these developments, further examining the formation of the frameworks upon which Japan relies when discussing Chinese issues and the practical significance of studying China for Japanese academia. Through this, Chinese academia may also grasp relevant research dynamics and further deepen the study of the Anti-Japanese National United Front.
I. From the Early Post-war Period to the 1960s: The History of the Anti-Japanese National United Front as Revolutionary Experience
In 1946, Nakanishi Tsutomu utilized materials concerning the Communist Party of China collected during the war—including key CPC documents and related newspapers and periodicals—and combined them with his own practical experiences and observations in China to co-author the book The Communist Party of China and the National United Front with Ozaki Shōtarō (西里龙夫). The book chronicles the development of the CPC and the Anti-Japanese National United Front from 1935 to 1937. Nakanishi emphasized the correctness of the CPC’s decision-making and the exemplary significance of the Anti-Japanese National United Front for Japan’s own democratic revolution, revealing the importance of China’s historical experience with the united front. Okamoto Saburō, who served in the Research Bureau of the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, argued that the War of Resistance led by the CPC liberated the Chinese people from imperialist aggression and ensured China’s independence and the people’s freedom. He claimed that China’s revolutionary path "is a compass providing a correct demonstration for Japan, which must absolutely exclude imperialism and restart as a truly democratic state." Okamoto summarized the characteristics of the Anti-Japanese National United Front as follows: first, the Chinese nation collectively triumphed over Japanese imperialism to guarantee national survival and independence; second, despite internal friction and contradictions, the Anti-Japanese National United Front was a union of all parties, all classes, and the entire nation, "possessing great distinctiveness"; third, the highest form of the Anti-Japanese National United Front was the establishment of a National Defense Government and an Anti-Japanese Allied Army, with this "highest form gradually taking shape during the anti-Japanese movement"; fourth, the difference between the Anti-Japanese National United Front and the anti-imperialist national united front of the National Revolution [2] period lay in the "depth of national contradictions" and the "scale of revolutionary forces."
Following the founding of the People’s Republic of China, Japanese academia showed an even greater surge of interest in the path of the Chinese Revolution. As Kojima Shinji noted, the attention Japanese academia paid to the Chinese revolutionary path during this period essentially reflected a massive shift in the Japanese view of China—moving from a previous emphasis on China’s "backwardness" and Japan’s "advancement" toward an endorsement of the Chinese path, viewing China as being "at the forefront of Asian progress and liberation." Nozawa Yutaka pointed out that "the national question in colonies is, in the final analysis, a question of a national united front formed for national independence and liberation; more specifically, it refers to the questions of 'guidance' and 'alliance' therein." He further noted that "on what basis the united front is formed, in what form it aligns, and how and by whom it is promoted under the objective conditions of the time, is the fork in the road determining the success or failure of the national liberation revolution." He believed that after the "May Fourth Movement," Chinese student and mass movements developed in tandem, and the national united front began to germinate; the "December 9th Movement" [3] linked the anti-Japanese national salvation movement carried out by intellectuals and student groups with the formation of the Anti-Japanese National United Front. While the formation of the Anti-Japanese National United Front was primarily manifested in the cooperation between the Kuomintang and the CPC, the mass anti-Japanese movement also played a special role within the united front, a significance rooted in the Chinese people's longing for unity.
Eto Shinkichi utilized a series of materials on the CPC from 1932–1937 compiled by Hatano Kan’ichi during the war to focus on the CPC’s considerations of realpolitik and policy adjustments. He emphasized the independence and correctness of the CPC’s decision-making, represented by Mao Zedong, arguing that the CPC balanced the requirements of its basic program with the practical political environment in terms of political strategy and tactics. Based on the upsurge of national resistance and the experience of the Northeast Anti-Japanese United Army, the CPC reflected on the deficiencies of traditional anti-imperialist strategies regarding practical political considerations. The proposed Anti-Japanese National United Front could both resist Japanese aggression more effectively and restore the CPC’s own strength. Rather than believing that the Comintern played a decisive leading role in the CPC’s policy adjustments, Eto leaned toward the view that the "August 1st Declaration" [4] was authored by the CPC Central Committee, emphasizing the CPC’s autonomy and spontaneity. On the 10th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China, Ishikawa Tadao’s book Research on the History of the Communist Party of China was published, collecting a series of his research articles on CPC history. It focused on the evolution of CPC principles and lines, linking them to the influence of the Comintern and changes in the revolutionary situation. While utilizing investigative data on the CPC from the wartime Japanese military, government, and research groups, he also emphasized the use of Chinese materials such as Hu Qiaomu’s Thirty Years of the Communist Party of China and the CPC central organ newspapers, as well as Western scholarship. Regarding the formation and development of the Anti-Japanese National United Front, Ishikawa believed it necessary to clarify the "interweaving of the two revolutionary lines—the returned-student faction from the Soviet Union and Mao Zedong" during the Soviet Revolution period [5], focusing on discussions within the CPC regarding the shift in revolutionary lines. On the other hand, Ishikawa also monitored the relationship between the CPC, the Soviet Union, and the Comintern. He argued that during the period when Mao Zedong led the Anti-Japanese National United Front, it could not be said that the CPC was completely independent of Comintern guidance, but its increasing autonomy was obvious to all. Notably, the Zunyi Meeting [6] established Mao Zedong’s leadership position in the CPC Central Committee and "was conducted without Moscow's interference," which could be seen as an important manifestation of the germination of the CPC’s autonomy.
In the 1960s, the Japanese public launched the "Anpo Struggle," a large-scale social anti-war movement opposing the revision of the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan by both governments. "This event deepened researchers' understanding of the relationship between academia and politics." Yasui Sankichi regarded the "Anpo Struggle" as an important opportunity that propelled research into the history of the Anti-Japanese National United Front into a new stage, stating that the question of the united front received academic attention due to its practical significance in movements aimed at transforming Japan. Building on previous research, Nozawa Yutaka pointed out that Japanese academic research on the Anti-Japanese National United Front mostly focused on the process of KMT-CPC cooperation and policy agreements between the two parties, with fewer results analyzing it from the perspective of a social movement. He focused on the historical relationship between the National Conference during the First United Front, the People’s Political Council during the Second United Front, and the post-war Political Consultative Conference, stating that his research was "related to the National Council Against the Security Treaty in Japan."
Uno Shigeaki inherited the investigative concerns of Eto Shinkichi and Ishikawa Tadao from the 1950s, analyzing the Anti-Japanese National United Front from the perspective of the relationship between the CPC and the Comintern. Uno believed that the Anti-Japanese National United Front was a "necessary product of history," whose significance lay not only in leading the Chinese nation to victory in the War of Resistance and the CPC's seizure of leadership in the Chinese Revolution but also in "providing an ideal template for modern national revolutions and a new mode of international collaboration between the Comintern and the CPC." He pointed out that the CPC and the Comintern "influenced each other." For example, regarding the attitude toward Chiang Kai-shek, the Comintern suggested "uniting with Chiang to resist Japan," but the CPC Central Committee, based on China’s actual conditions, pursued "forcing Chiang to resist Japan," reflecting the CPC’s autonomy. Fujii Takami also highly affirmed the CPC’s autonomy, pointing out that discussions on the anti-Japanese people's front policy had already occurred within the CPC by late 1934, distinct from the Comintern’s movements. Fujii emphasized analyzing the impact of the Japanese invasion on the formation and evolution of the Anti-Japanese National United Front, arguing that Japan, "instigated by a paranoid military," did not expect to struggle against the CPC and the entire nation within the united front, which "accelerated the occurrence of the tragedy." Kasahara Masaaki divided the evolution of the Anti-Japanese National United Front into two stages: the early "resist Japan while opposing Chiang" front and the later "resist Japan while uniting with Chiang" front, viewing the Red Army’s Eastern Expedition in February 1936 as the turning point for the CPC’s shift toward "uniting with Chiang."
In the 1960s, Japanese research on the Anti-Japanese National United Front showed a tendency to break through the narrow scope of CPC history. Furushima Kazuo advocated for exploring the significance of the united front within the broader context of the history of the Chinese Revolution. He argued that the Anti-Japanese National United Front was not just a temporary political issue but a fundamental issue throughout the entire revolutionary process. In the process of socialist construction, the united front likewise holds great significance. Additionally, he emphasized that as the War of Resistance approached victory, the Anti-Japanese National United Front transitioned into a People's Democratic United Front, and the role played by "intermediate forces" [7] deserved attention. Yazawa Kōsuke argued that research on the Anti-Japanese National United Front should also include the Kuomintang in the scope of investigation; although the KMT had counter-revolutionary characteristics, "the Chinese Revolution was a national revolution, and the KMT also participated in it."
Reflecting on this period, Japanese academia attached great importance to research on the Anti-Japanese National United Front, regarding it as an important topic in the fields of modern and contemporary Chinese history and revolutionary history. In the early post-war period, this was mainly manifested in the objective of learning from the CPC’s experience of revolutionary victory; scholars like Nakanishi Tsutomu explored the correctness of the united front and its exemplary significance for Japan's democratic revolution. In the 1960s, this trend was further strengthened in the face of Japan’s practical problems. Scholars represented by Eto Shinkichi, Ishikawa Tadao, and Fujii Takami, based on the study of CPC history, gave high appraisals to the CPC-led united front, focusing on the relationship between the CPC and the Comintern during its formation and affirming the CPC's correctness and autonomy. Furthermore, Japanese scholars represented by Nozawa Yutaka emphasized the history of the united front from the perspective of a "movement," linking its establishment to the national salvation movements of intellectuals and students at that time. Furushima Kazuo's focus on intermediate forces and Yazawa Kōsuke’s advocacy for a re-evaluation of the Kuomintang influenced subsequent Japanese research on the history of the Anti-Japanese National United Front.
II. The 1970s–1990s: Research on the History of the Anti-Japanese National United Front under New Perspectives
The restoration of diplomatic relations between China and Japan and China’s reform and opening-up policy provided the conditions for gradual academic exchanges and created opportunities for researching modern and contemporary Chinese history under new perspectives. Nozawa Yutaka argued that post-war Japanese research on Chinese history focused on the "absorption of Chinese revolutionary experience," specifically noting issues such as "equating modern Chinese history with revolutionary history, and equating revolutionary history with CPC history," as well as the "insufficient establishment of Japan as an independent subject of research." At the same time, he pointed out: "We should grasp the vivid images of the masses who directly engage in production, thereby re-examining modern and contemporary Chinese history." From this, it is evident that in the 1970s, Japanese academia began to question the "revolution-centered view of history" and advocated for focusing on the images and power of the masses. These new characteristics were also reflected in the research on the history of the Anti-Japanese National United Front.
Yasui Sankichi affirmed the positive influence of Chinese CPC history research on Japanese academia, while simultaneously pointing out that after the "Cultural Revolution," Japanese researchers should reflect on the "common narrative models of revolutionary history and CPC history." He argued that the CPC’s considerations regarding the nature and tasks of the New Democratic Revolution, as well as the system of state and government to be established, had already become systematized during the formation and development of the Anti-Japanese National United Front. Furumaya Tadao emphasized that when discussing the significance of the united front, one must consider two things: first, its formation process; second, how the revolutionary vision (the combination of anti-resistance and the democratic revolution) was theoretically explained during this process. He argued: "The united front was intended to achieve the goals of the democratic revolution, including the bourgeoisie, within the long-term struggle of 'All-out Resistance' [8] that combined resistance against Japan with democracy." It can be said that research during this period viewed the Anti-Japanese National United Front as a long-term strategy formulated by the CPC to achieve revolutionary victory.
Furthermore, Japanese academia began to examine the mass movements associated with the Anti-Japanese National United Front from a broader perspective, focusing on the trends of the petty bourgeoisie, including intellectuals. Yokoyama Suguru paid close attention to the impact of the United Front movement on Chinese society, arguing that "the development and strengthening of the Anti-Japanese National United Front brought significant changes to China's political situation, especially to class relations." He emphasized that if the scope of research on the United Front is limited to inter-party relations, the issue of the alliance and unification of various classes and strata would be narrowed. He suggested it was necessary to center observations on mass movements such as the anti-Japanese armed self-defense movement following the September 18th Incident [9], the December 9th Movement [10], and the National Salvation Association movement to observe how the Anti-Japanese National United Front was "inherited, accumulated, consolidated, and developed."
Through his research on the All-China Federation of National Salvation Associations, Hirano Tadashi analyzed the Anti-Japanese National United Front movement in which intellectuals participated. In his view, "the political role of Chinese intellectuals and their attitude toward the United Front consistently displayed a unique character during the process of cooperation and confrontation between the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Communist Party of China (CPC)." Hirano argued that after the outbreak of the September 18th Incident, Chinese intellectuals, facing the aggression of Japanese imperialism, held the consciousness that "resistance against Japan and democracy are inseparable," which contained the ideology of the United Front. He pointed out that after the December 9th Movement, intellectuals played an important role in organizing the activities of the National Salvation Association across various regions and circles. He noted two theoretical characteristics supporting their activities: first, an emphasis that "the initiators of the United Front are the masses"; and second, that the United Front they pursued was a combination of the "upper-level United Front" (various parties) and the "lower-level United Front" (ordinary people). Hirano concluded: "Although the intellectuals' United Front movement had certain limitations, it played an important role and possesses historical significance." This perspective of analyzing the history of the Anti-Japanese National United Front from the level of mass movements centered on intellectuals is rooted in the recognition by Japanese scholars that the United Front is essentially an alliance and unity of various classes and strata; thus, they do not limit themselves to studying the establishment of the United Front solely from a political party perspective.
Amidst the research trend of relativizing the "Revolution-centric view of history," the "Republic of China (ROC) view of history"—which regards the Republican period (1911–1949) as a period of modern nation-state building and emphasizes empirical research—influenced Japanese studies of modern and contemporary Chinese history in the 1980s and 1990s. On one hand, progress in ROC history research opened new horizons for Chinese revolution history studies in Japan. "Since the beginning of Reform and Opening-up, narratives centered on the CPC have decreased in modern Chinese history research, and political history has focused on the state-building of the prevailing regime." Nishimura Shigeo provided a new perspective for Anti-Japanese National United Front research from the standpoint of state-building. He argued that reviewing 20th-century Chinese political history should focus on three aspects: first, the interaction between "state-building" and "national and social integration"; second, the developmental process of political democracy; and third, the historical stages of the development of modern Chinese nationalism. Additionally, Nishimura emphasized that political history research should focus on local society, advocating for a four-tiered structure of "Central Government—Local Government—Regional Power—Regional Society" to grasp the relationship between central and local politics in 20th-century China.
Against this academic background, Nishimura Shigeo reviewed and evaluated the significance of the Anti-Japanese National United Front in 20th-century Chinese political history based on contemporary political realities. His research on the United Front originated from his focus on China’s "One Country, Two Systems" policy. He argued that "the political foundation of 'One Country, Two Systems' is the patriotic united front, aiming for the largest united front—the 'third KMT-CPC cooperation'—and the Anti-Japanese National United Front should be regarded as its historical origin." Nishimura believed that during the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, the state-building led by the Nationalist Government and the Anti-Japanese National United Front led by the CPC existed in a parallel state, while "national consciousness became the backdrop for the policy shifts of both the KMT and the CPC." Compared to the Nationalist Government, which viewed the masses' anti-Japanese consciousness as support for stabilizing its regime and believed that resistance should be exercised through government power, the CPC emphasized the formation of a "mass nationalism" politics of anti-Japanese national salvation. The CPC consciously shifted its political line and reconstructed its own "nationalism." Regarding democracy, the CPC adapted to the mass anti-Japanese national salvation movement and proposed the concept of a "Democratic Republic," viewing political democracy as the guarantee for victory in the War of Resistance. Nishimura Shigeo's method of studying the United Front through the lenses of nationalism and democracy exerted a positive influence on Japanese academia.
During this period, Tanaka Hitoshi examined the formation process of Wang Ming's "Theory of the Anti-Japanese National United Front." He argued that regarding the shift from "Resisting Japan to Oppose Chiang [Kai-shek]" to "Forcing Chiang to Resist Japan," Wang Ming preceded the internal views of the CPC at that time, and his concept of a "People's Democratic Republic" provided a theoretical basis for the CPC later on. However, Tanaka also pointed out that Wang Ming's theory suffered from problems such as ignoring the practical demands of the mass anti-Japanese national salvation movement and the fact that concrete concepts like the "People's Democratic Republic" were difficult to realize under the conditions of the time. Additionally, influenced by Nishimura Shigeo, Tanaka paid close attention to how the CPC's "state consciousness" changed. He noted that "the concept of 'state' in the August 1 Declaration [11] differed from the previous binary theory of opposition between the Chinese Soviet and the KMT regime, showing the possibility of the CPC shifting toward a new policy system—the Anti-Japanese National United Front line. Criticizing Chiang Kai-shek and Wang Jingwei as national traitors based on the premise of the 'state' was different from the emphasis on their counter-revolutionary nature during the Soviet Revolution period." At the same time, he focused on the characteristic developmental shift of the CPC's United Front policy from being centered on "anti-Japanese national salvation" to "anti-Japanese democracy."
Furthermore, influenced by the "ROC view of history," Japanese academia placed research on the Anti-Japanese National United Front within the collaborations and contradictions among independent actors such as the KMT, regional power-holders [12], and various social strata. Imai Shun argued that previous research had ignored "how anti-Japanese thought existed among classes, parties, and political factions as political subjects" and "where the CPC's United Front theory intersected with other anti-Japanese ideologies to form a unified front, its uniqueness, and how it expanded its influence." He analyzed the positioning of various forces—including the KMT, the national bourgeoisie, and landlords—within the United Front, questioning the historical evaluation of "revolution" versus "counter-revolution." Inoue Hisashi pointed out that past research often "regarded the Nationalist Government as an object forced to participate in the United Front," emphasizing that the KMT chose to cooperate with the CPC again due to "external pressure," an explanation he found insufficient. He argued that the Nationalist Government chose the Second KMT-CPC Cooperation for three reasons: first, a tendency to cooperate with the Soviet Union to deal with Japan's full-scale invasion; second, for the Nationalist Government, establishing a United Front including the CPC meant the completion of "securing the interior" (annai) [13]; and third, the deployment of the Red Army could strengthen China's collective resistance. Ishijima Noriyuki, however, expressed a different view. He argued that although the KMT's theory of "securing the interior before resisting the exterior" (annai jōgai) reflected an intention to resist Japan, its "anti-communist" and "anti-people" nature prevented it from becoming a theory to guide the anti-Japanese nationalism of all China; this theory was ultimately overwhelmed by the CPC's "Theory of Total Resistance." Additionally, some Japanese scholars focused on the role of regional power-holders. For instance, Uchida Tomoyuki used the "Sacrifice and National Salvation League" [14] as an example, arguing that Yan Xishan rapidly formed an anti-Japanese national united front through secret negotiations with the CPC, far faster than the cooperation between the KMT and the CPC central leadership. However, he also noted that the United Front organization in Shanxi was based on the "mass control apparatus" created by Yan Xishan, which greatly restricted the CPC's mass mobilization work.
Another new development in United Front research reflected in the "ROC view of history" was the increased emphasis on the role played by intellectual groups. Through his study of intellectuals, Hirano Tadashi more firmly affirmed the leadership role of the CPC, stating that "the breakthrough for the anti-Japanese national salvation movement lay in the CPC's tactical shift" and "although the urban movement was guided by intellectuals, the masses under the influence of the CPC cannot be ignored." This view was also reflected in the historical evaluations by Hirano Tadashi and Mizuha Nobuo regarding Chinese intellectuals' engagement in the United Front movement. Mizuha Nobuo argued that Chinese intellectuals united under the banner of "Stop the civil war and unite to resist Japan," initially considering a bourgeois democratic revolution based on KMT-CPC cooperation; however, upon discovering the possibility of a United Front, they began to shift direction, striving to facilitate the policy transformation of both parties and becoming the "leaders of the political situation" at that time. Hirano Tadashi countered that Mizuha's view exaggerated the influence of intellectuals and that the CPC's leadership over the national salvation movement should be emphasized.
During this period, in the field of modern Chinese history in Japan, the "Revolution-centric view of history"—which used the CPC revolutionary process as the main narrative thread—began to fade. Research on the Anti-Japanese National United Front was no longer aimed at drawing lessons from the CPC's revolutionary victory. Instead, it began to focus on how the CPC formulated and implemented United Front policies, examining the formation process from the perspective of radical strategic shifts and emphasizing the combined characteristic of "resistance and democracy." Furthermore, the United Front was studied under the "ROC view of history." On one hand, Nishimura Shigeo and Tanaka Hitoshi viewed the United Front policy as an embodiment of the CPC constructing a revolutionary theoretical position from a national rather than a class perspective. On the other hand, Japanese scholars discussed the KMT's theories of resistance and the roles of groups like intellectuals, viewing the United Front as a result of the CPC's continuous exploration through interactions with various domestic political and social forces.
III. Since the 21st Century: Research on the History of the Anti-Japanese National United Front and Contemporary China
Since the 21st century, a major trend in Japanese academia has been "promoting the vigorous development of contemporary China studies based on, or in dialogue with, modern Chinese history research." Influenced by this trend, to further consolidate modern Chinese history research and seek links with contemporary China, some Japanese scholars have integrated the study of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) by "placing the 1949 Revolution within the flow of history," building upon previous research on ROC history and KMT history. Such research contrasts with views that regard PRC history merely as a subset of CPC Party history. Although the CPC-centered narrative has declined in the broader field of modern Chinese history in Japan, this does not mean that CPC history is no longer important; on the contrary, "CPC history research that emphasizes relationships with the KMT, or treats it as part of ROC history, or links it to the world communist movement, is receiving increasing attention."
From the perspective of observing contemporary China, the focus of Japanese research on CPC history has shifted from "why the revolution succeeded" to "what actually happened." Research on the Anti-Japanese National United Front has found its place within this shift. Based on previous studies of central-local relations, Nishimura Shigeo further pointed out that 20th-century Chinese political space was characterized by two types of cohesion: "nation-state cohesion" and "Chinese national (Zhonghua minzu) cohesion," with the United Front playing a significant role in both. Nishimura argued that by adopting the United Front, the CPC utilized a "strategy of redistributing social resources"—namely, economic redistribution centered on "rent and interest reduction" [15] and political redistribution through the "Three-Thirds System" [16]. This transformed the anti-Japanese base areas from "semi-private" spaces dominated by the CPC as a single faction into "communal" spaces. Between 1941 and 1942, "by establishing anti-Japanese democratic regimes as communal political spaces, the CPC successfully integrated with national anti-Japanese politics and even the global anti-fascist political space."
Tanaka Hitoshi attempted to clarify the process and actual conditions through which the Communist Party of China (CPC) escaped its crisis and revitalized itself, using a political perspective distinct from traditional CPC Party history or revolutionary history. He argues that the CPC’s Anti-Japanese National United Front policy provided the conditions for the subsequent systematization of the New Democratic Revolution strategic system, manifested primarily in three ways: First, the CPC fully launched the new policy of the Anti-Japanese National United Front, successfully evolving from a "political guarantee" (the "Trinity" [17] formed with the Northeast Army and the Northwest Army) to an "institutional guarantee" (the Second United Front). During this process, the CPC’s organizational structure was comprehensively updated, producing a relationship between the "Party, Army, and Government" suited to Chinese politics in the late stages of the War of Resistance. Second, regarding the re-cooperation between the Kuomintang (KMT) and the CPC, Tanaka believes that with the formation of the Second United Front as a turning point, the concept of the "Anti-Japanese National Revolution" proposed by the CPC took the united front as a starting point and ultimately led to the victory of the New Democratic Revolution. This implies that during the Second United Front, the CPC’s power transitioned from a regional power to a local government, serving as a vital political turning point on the road to establishing national political power in 1949. Third, regarding Chinese politics and "White Area" [18] work during the period of policy transition, Tanaka focused on the role played by intellectuals of the "National Salvation Association" [19] faction within the united front, examining how the CPC’s shift in line affected the activities of the Shanghai National Salvation Association. Simultaneously, he noted the role of regional power-holders [20] in 1930s Chinese politics, analyzing their relationship with the mass anti-Japanese movement and the united front.
Concurrently, Japanese researchers of CPC history have inherited traditional research paradigms while absorbing and referencing the peasant revolution theories of Western scholars. They have conducted empirical research on the relationship between the CPC and rural society, focusing on how the CPC penetrated traditional rural society to make large-scale mobilization and cooperation possible. These research characteristics are also reflected in studies of the Anti-Japanese National United Front. For example, Kan Nichisho (Guan Risheng) notes that since the 21st century, Chinese academia has mostly examined the Northeast Anti-Japanese National United Front from the perspective of the CPC, reflecting how the Party used various policies to gain the support of peasants and local armed forces. However, there is relatively little research analyzing the united front from the perspective of the objects of mobilization—local magnates and bandits. Furthermore, he suggests it is necessary to discuss the CPC-led Northeast Anti-Japanese National United Front within the "internal networks of rural society centered on kinship and geographic ties." His research points out that in the rural areas of northern Northeast China during the 1930s, local magnates and bandits controlled horse-drawn carriage transport, which served as the means of regional socio-economic activity and communication. Since the establishment of Manchukuo [21], the profitability of these economic activities was severely damaged; local forces cooperated with the CPC to compensate for these losses, while the CPC obtained supplies and weapons to expand its own strength.
Concern for contemporary politics has also influenced research on the history of the Anti-Japanese National United Front. 2019 marked the 70th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China, prompting a reprint of The History of Contemporary China, co-authored by several Japanese scholars of modern and contemporary Chinese history. They proposed: "What kind of historical cognition of contemporary China do Japanese people need? To summarize in very simple terms: since the late 19th century, in the process of building a wealthy and powerful state, China has always maintained a close relationship with Japan; this process should be understood within a broad historical field of vision." In its account of the Anti-Japanese National United Front, the book tends to view it as a new policy adopted by the CPC by assessing the situation when the "Soviet" [22] line faced setbacks. It also notes that in response to this new policy, the National Government began secret negotiations with the Soviet Union in the autumn of 1935, and secret negotiations between the KMT and CPC began in early 1936, drafting an agreement for anti-Japanese national salvation. 2021 marked the centenary of the founding of the CPC, and related works on Party history explored the historical origins of the current CPC regime and its characteristics by studying the historical process of the Party's establishment to narrate the composition of contemporary China. For instance, Ishikawa Yoshihiro, in reviewing the CPC’s centennial history, emphasizes alternating themes across different historical periods to discuss the various "attributes"—unique characteristics of the Communist Party—inherited by the CPC today. Additionally, these monographs on Party history focus on the links and comparisons between the CPC’s own development and the Soviet Union. In the process of establishing the Anti-Japanese National United Front, the Comintern’s "irrational and inefficient interference" demonstrated the Soviet Union’s dominance and influence over the CPC, while also highlighting the CPC’s own selection process in leading the revolution. Takahashi Nobuo, for example, argues that during the CPC’s transition to the united front policy, the Comintern played a "forceful controlling" role, and the peaceful resolution of the Xi'an Incident [23] also stemmed from the Comintern’s firm stance. He also points out that while Mao Zedong and other CPC members engaged in the second cooperation with the KMT, they advocated for maintaining the CPC’s independence and retaining its military forces—a policy that conflicted with the Comintern. He thus speculates that while the CPC remained consistent with the Comintern on the surface, in substance, "the united front with the KMT was a process of continuous expansion of struggle."
Mizuha Nobuo focused on the formation process of Mao Zedong’s united front policy between 1935 and 1937. He believes that in 21st-century Japanese academia, there has been a "stagnation in studies of the CPC and Mao Zedong" and a "weak interest in the strategic value of the united front." He asserts: "From the total Sino-Japanese War to the post-war Civil War, the formation of the united front was a prerequisite for the strengthening of the Party organization and the construction and expansion of the Party's army; this point should be re-emphasized. Even today, studying Mao Zedong and his united front policy remains a necessary task for examining the significance of 1949." In his specific analysis, Mizuha compares and links the united front theories of Mao Zedong and the CPC with the discourses of Zhang Naiqi, a non-Communist leader of the anti-Japanese united front movement. Inoue Hisashi stated: "The domestic foundation for China’s victory in the War of Resistance and its acquisition of international status as one of the UN's 'Big Five' was the national unity of the resistance against Japan, the axis of which was KMT-CPC cooperation." He argues that the historical experience of the Special Economic Zone system and the "One Country, Two Systems" framework since the Reform and Opening-up era originates from the Second KMT-CPC Cooperation in 1937.
Conclusion
The research findings of post-war Japanese academia regarding the history of the Anti-Japanese National United Front have manifested differently across various periods. On one hand, this research is linked to other fields of historiography. Changes in theories and perspectives across modern Chinese history, revolutionary history, and CPC history are reflected in united front studies; the publication of historical materials across these fields and academic exchanges between China and Japan have also served as driving forces for the continuous development of this history. On the other hand, considerations of contemporary issues influence how Japanese scholars observe the united front. In the early post-war period, facing their own national development, Japanese scholars conducted research for the purpose of learning and drawing on experience. Starting from a sense of "longing," they studied the united front, linking the study of China with the transformation of Japan. Subsequently, this need gradually faded, and Japanese academia turned toward the pursuit of objective Chinese studies and self-recognition. The focus of united front research shifted, placing it within the cooperation and contradictions among the many political forces of modern China. To this day, the study of the Anti-Japanese National United Front is integrated into observations of contemporary China, serving as an entry point for tracing the historical origins of modern China’s political system and narrating its composition. Behind this research trend lies the overall trajectory of Japanese studies of China: from exploring a revolutionary direction that could serve as a reference for themselves, to gaining insight into the developmental dynamics of Chinese politics and society. This evolution represents a shift from treating China as a "subject" to an "object." How to more accurately perceive contemporary China by reviewing history, and how to use "stones from other hills" [24] to aid Japan's own research and rethink its contemporary issues, will remain the challenges faced by Japan in its observation and study of China.
(Author: Ma Siyu, Ph.D. candidate, School of History, Nankai University) Web Editor: Tong Xin Source: The Journal of Studies of China's Resistance War Against Japanese Aggression, Issue 1, 2025.