Chen Haiyi: The Historical Status of the Eastern Main Battlefield from the Perspective of the International Order
In the mainstream narrative of Western historiography, the outbreak of the Second World War is generally defined by the German invasion of Poland in September 1939. China, situated at the eastern end of the Eurasian landmass, had by that time already conducted a war of resistance against Japanese aggression for eight years. However, for a long time, foreign research into the important status and role of China’s resistance within the global anti-fascist war has been lacking, or even deliberately avoided. Therefore, it is necessary to profoundly recognize the important historical position of the Chinese theater. Examining the evolution of the international order provides a beneficial perspective for understanding the historical status of the Main Eastern Theater.
The First Theater to Begin the Global Anti-Fascist War
On September 18, 1931, the Japanese Kwantung Army launched the September 18th Incident [1], carrying out actual aggression under the name of "self-defense." The Nanjing National Government pursued a policy of "non-resistance" and appealed for a solution to the League of Nations, the organization established after World War I to maintain the international order. On December 10, 1931, the League of Nations resolved to form an inquiry commission to investigate the situation in East Asia. During the investigation, the League of Nations Commission of Inquiry received thousands of petitions (shuōtiě) from the Chinese populace. The contents of these petitions revealed the facts of the people's resistance—"resisting the Japanese army everywhere," "the spirit of the people of the three provinces [2] to resist Japan and save the nation and their determination to oppose the puppet state," "volunteer armies everywhere rising up to resist the barbaric Japanese military," and "swearing to oppose and duel to the end."
In sharp contrast to the National Government's policy of "non-resistance," the Communist Party of China (CPC) held high the banner of resistance against Japan and clearly recognized the essence of Japan's aggression against China. This was fully reflected in a series of statements by the CPC Central Committee regarding the Report of the League of Nations Commission of Inquiry. On October 5, 1932, the CPC Central Committee encouraged "the masses to spontaneously organize 'Northern Expedition Death Squads' to join the Northeast Volunteer Armies and recover the lost territory of the three northeastern provinces... to strike down Japanese imperialism through a national revolutionary war." On October 7, the CPC Central Committee pointed out that "the predatory aggression of Japanese imperialism against China is a crucial stage in the development of the war."
Beyond propaganda and mobilization, the CPC actually led the anti-Japanese struggle in the Northeast region. The CPC Manchuria Provincial Committee actively carried out anti-Japanese propaganda, workers' strikes, and peasant movements against rent and taxes. From the spring of 1932 to the spring of 1934, the CPC successively established 18 anti-Japanese guerrilla units across the Northeast. Subsequently, the CPC organized the Northeast People's Revolutionary Army and the Northeast Anti-Japanese United Army, fighting across the "White Mountains and Black Waters" [3], becoming the backbone of the resistance against Japanese aggression in the Northeast theater during the period of partial resistance [4].
After the September 18th Incident, the League of Nations, led by Britain and France, adopted a policy of appeasement, and the United States also failed to contain Japanese aggression. This not only resulted in China effectively bearing the pressure of Japanese aggression and the war of resistance alone but also indulged Japan's aggressive acts in China. After the League of Nations refused to recognize the "Manchukuo" puppet regime propped up by Japan, Japan resolutely withdrew from the League and step by step expanded its war of aggression against China. Examined from the perspective of the League of Nations, it is clear that the Chinese theater was the earliest theater in the world to begin the anti-fascist war and, for a considerable period, bore the heavy burden of resisting Japanese aggression alone.
A Resilient Theater of Sustained Resistance Against Japanese Militarism
After the July 7th Incident [5], Japan launched a full-scale war of aggression against China. China faced an unprecedentedly grim situation, and the Nanjing National Government once again appealed the issue of Japanese aggression to the League of Nations. As the barbarity of Japan’s aggressive acts and the heroism of the Chinese military and civilians’ resistance gradually became known to the world, the League of Nations supported China on a moral level and condemned Japan. On September 27, 1937, the Far East Advisory Committee under the League of Nations Assembly passed a resolution condemning Japanese air raids. On October 6, the League recommended that member states provide assistance to China. During the subsequent Brussels Conference, the international community only verbally requested that Japan cease military operations, which led to Japan becoming even more unscrupulous in its aggression and expansion. On December 13, 1937, the Japanese invading army perpetrated the Nanjing Massacre. The Nanjing National Government once again filed a complaint with the League of Nations, calling for aid to China, and the League Council announced that member states could implement sanctions against Japan. Japan responded with even more intense confrontation, announcing its decision to terminate the cooperative relationships it had maintained with various League of Nations agencies since its withdrawal.
The deeds of resistance and the strategic contributions of the Chinese theater gradually gained positive evaluations from the international community, as recorded in many instances in Headway, the journal of the British League of Nations Union. In June 1938, Headway published an article emphasizing that "no matter the final direction of the war, China has already shattered the myth of the so-called 'invincibility of the Japanese army'; its significance is so profound that it is no less than any victory on the battlefield." In March 1940, H. J. Timperley published an article in Headway warning that the war of resistance against Japan should not be ignored due to the war in Europe: "When the critical events of the European theater capture the world's gaze, it is extremely easy to forget... China’s war of resisting aggression with extraordinary courage and firm will." In September 1942, Headway explicitly pointed out that "China was in fact the first victim of the aggressive atrocities that ignited World War II. Even if the September 18th Incident is not counted, China’s war of resistance has lasted nearly twice as long as that of other Allied nations."
The Main Eastern Theater: Gestating and Catalyzing a New International Order
In September 1939, Germany launched its blitzkrieg against Poland, and World War II broke out in full. The League of Nations existed in name only, and the international order urgently required reconstruction. The status of the Chinese theater as the Main Eastern Theater of the global anti-fascist war was thus established.
Given that the international order maintained by the League of Nations failed to effectively contain Japanese aggression, discussions regarding a new international order had sprouted in China long before, and the Main Eastern Theater became the fertile soil for gestating this new order. On February 11, 1938, Mao Zedong proposed the concept of three anti-aggression united fronts: the Chinese united front, the world united front, and the Japanese people's united front. Among these, the concept of a "world united front" contained the ideological foundation for a new international order. In December 1941, the Pacific War broke out. Regarding the establishment of a global anti-fascist united front, the CPC Central Committee emphasized: "The components of this united front should include the governments, parties, and people of all classes of all nations opposing Japanese aggression." Public opinion also stirred with heated discussions on designs for a new international organization, with various contributions ranging from "restructuring the League" to a "new League of Nations."
China’s immense sacrifice and strategic contributions during the war of resistance laid the foundation for its status as a core member of the new international order. Japan was deeply mired in the Chinese theater, causing its overall military strategy to be hampered in multiple ways: China's dogged resistance forced Japan to abandon its "Northward Advance" plan [6], allowing the Soviet Union to transfer troops to support the defense of Moscow; China's sustained resistance delayed the speed of the Japanese military's "Southward Advance," buying time for the United States and Britain to prepare for war; China dispatched the Expeditionary Force "Westward" into Burma to fight, rescuing British troops and crushing the plot for Japanese and German forces to link up in the Middle East. It was precisely based on these great contributions to the war of resistance that China became one of the primary architects of the new international order. On January 1, 1942, China, along with 26 countries including the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union, jointly signed the Declaration by United Nations, forming the global anti-fascist united front, and China became one of the "Four Powers." On October 30, 1943, China, the US, the UK, and the USSR passed the Declaration of the Four Nations on General Security, proposing to "establish a general international organization," marking the joint establishment of a new international order by the four major powers.
Its core status as the Main Eastern Theater was one of the key factors in China obtaining a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council. From August to October 1944, China, the US, the UK, and the USSR held a meeting at Dumbarton Oaks to draft the charter for a new international organization. The Chinese delegation actively offered suggestions and submitted the "Essential Points of the Charter of the International Organization," and the four powers jointly drafted and issued the "Proposals for the Establishment of a General International Organization," defining the outline of the future United Nations. The Yalta Conference in February 1945 unanimously agreed to establish the United Nations after the war. China became a founding member of the United Nations and obtained a permanent seat on the Security Council, laying the foundation for China's participation in the new order of international relations. On April 25, 1945, the United Nations Conference on International Organization opened; the heads of the delegations of the four sponsoring nations—China, the US, the UK, and the USSR—took turns serving as chair of the plenary sessions. On June 26, the signing ceremony for the Charter of the United Nations was held, and Wellington Koo (Gù Wéijūn) was the first to sign on behalf of China.
From the ineffective League of Nations after WWI to the more authoritative United Nations after WWII, the evolutionary process profoundly embodies the lessons learned from China's War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the strategic contributions of the Main Eastern Theater. After the September 18th Incident, China appealed to the League of Nations, but the League's policy of appeasement and compromise toward Japan forced China to resist Japanese aggression alone and without aid, making it the first theater in the world to begin the anti-fascist war. Under extremely difficult conditions, the Chinese military and people persisted in the war of resistance throughout, demonstrating the resilience of the Chinese theater and finally winning broad recognition from the international community. It was the immense sacrifice made and the key role played by the Chinese theater that allowed China to become one of the "Four Powers" and to realize a historical transformation from a recipient of aid to an architect of the international order within the United Nations mechanism.
(This article is a staged result of the National Social Science Fund Major Project "Collection and Research of Historical Materials of the League of Nations concerning the Sino-Japanese Series of Conflicts (1928-1939)" (24AZS 017))
(The author is an Associate Professor at the Center for Republican China Studies, Nanjing University)
Source: CASS Website - Chinese Social Sciences Today, September 3, 2025. Web Editor: Tongxin