Chen Mirong: Fully Recognizing the Major Contributions of China’s War of Resistance to the Victory of the World Anti-Fascist War
On September 1, 1939, Germany invaded Poland. In the history textbooks of many Western countries, this date is recorded as the "official" starting point of the Second World War (hereafter "WWII"). However, as early as 1987, Richard Overy—Professor of History at the University of Exeter and an expert in WWII history—proposed a viewpoint distinct from the traditional consensus of Western academia: the true fuse of WWII was lit as early as 1931, when the iron heel of the Japanese military shattered the tranquility of Northeast China, lifting the curtain on the Second World War. With a massive national sacrifice of over 35 million casualties, the Chinese military and people sustained the main Eastern theater of the World Anti-Fascist War. The Chinese theater bogged down and engaged the primary forces of Japanese militarism over the long term, annihilating a total of more than 1.5 million Japanese troops—approximately 70% of Japan’s total casualties during WWII—playing a decisive role in its ultimate downfall. Addressing issues such as the insufficient recognition of China’s decisive contribution to WWII within international academic circles, our correspondent interviewed Overy.
Only by taking 1931 as the starting point can the full picture of WWII be clarified
Chinese Social Sciences Today: What prompted you to break through the traditional framework of the Western academic narrative of WWII and trace its origins back to the Japanese military’s occupation of Northeast China in 1931? How has Western historiography reacted to this?
Richard Overy: Defining 1931 as the starting point of this global war is an opinion I have consistently upheld for several decades. I proposed this view as early as 1987 in my book The Origins of the Second World War (now in its fifth revised edition). Over the past 20 years, the development of imperial history and global history has profoundly influenced my perspective: WWII must not be viewed merely as a European affair; rather, it should be understood as the inevitable result of the frantic expansion of three emerging empires in the 1930s—Japan, Italy, and Germany—into China, Africa, and Central-Eastern Europe respectively.
This new imperialism directly threatened the global order then dominated by Britain and France, eventually forcing them to declare war on Germany, the most dangerous of the three new imperialist powers. But the start of the war was actually the September 18th Incident [1] provoked by Japan in 1931. This was the first time since 1919 that the international geopolitical order had been challenged by force, and it served as a major test for the League of Nations led by Britain and France. When the League of Nations hoped to preserve the international status quo through a policy of appeasement [2], the pace of Japan’s expansionist aggression against China became unstoppable. It is for this reason that 1931 was a critical turning point; a crisis that would engulf the entire world had broken out.
The indulgence shown by Britain and France toward Japan’s invasion of China directly facilitated Italy’s invasion of Ethiopia and Germany’s annexation of Austria and Czechoslovakia, leading up to Germany’s "blitzkrieg" against Poland in 1939. Only by moving the starting point of WWII forward from 1939 to 1931 can we see the full picture of this war: it was the product of resonance between three major crisis zones—East Asia, Africa/the Middle East, and Europe. Today, many Western scholars have come to accept this framework, yet critics still insist that WWII was essentially a European war caused by the Treaty of Versailles—a view that lacks a true global dimension. As research on the Chinese theater continues to deepen, more and more people are realizing that 1931 was the starting point of this decade-long global geopolitical disaster.
The persistent resistance of the Chinese theater made a major strategic contribution
Chinese Social Sciences Today: Have you noticed an undervaluation of the Chinese theater’s important contribution in global WWII literature? If such a phenomenon exists, what might be the causes?
Richard Overy: Indeed, many conventional history books on China’s War of Resistance [3] have downplayed the significance of this conflict. I believe the core issue is that the English-speaking world has long lacked detailed research on the Sino-Japanese hostilities. Although some relevant English works have been published in recent years, true dialogue between Western and Chinese historiography can only occur once the research achievements of Chinese academia are translated and introduced to the West. Similarly, limited by language barriers, very few Western scholars have consulted official Japanese military history archives. Another reason Western scholars have failed to effectively study China’s War of Resistance may be the spatial and temporal scale of the war: researchers must be proficient in Chinese geography to distinguish those critical turning points, whereas the narrative of the European theater is relatively straightforward.
I believe it must be emphasized that the Japanese military was never able to completely defeat the Chinese army and the resistance forces behind enemy lines [4]. The persistent resistance of the Chinese theater ultimately thwarted Japan’s plan to construct a "New Order" in East and Southeast Asia—this was itself a major strategic achievement for China. When Japan desperately needed to concentrate its forces against Britain and the United States, its main land forces were bogged down in the Chinese theater, forced—much like Germany in the European theater—to fight on two fronts.
Correcting historical bias regarding WWII through transnational cooperation
Chinese Social Sciences Today: Regarding China’s role in WWII, which areas of research do you believe still require in-depth exploration? How should future academic research correct existing historical biases?
Richard Overy: It is difficult for researchers unversed in the Chinese language to comprehensively evaluate China’s role in WWII. Chinese academia has already achieved a wealth of new research results, which undoubtedly cover many themes that Western scholars wish to explore in depth. For instance, while Western historiography has touched upon the social history of China’s War of Resistance, there is clearly much more room for excavation.
For Western military historians, the mechanism by which the Chinese military maintained persistent resistance despite lacking advanced weaponry and even sufficient conventional weapon production capacity remains an unsolved mystery to this day. To this end, we perhaps need a more complete economic and military history of wartime China. Furthermore, I believe that research based on archives regarding the Anti-Japanese Base Areas [5] and the leadership of the Communist Party of China will powerfully supplement existing knowledge.
Reversing historical bias has never been an easy task; while scholars may strive for objective and neutral discourse, public perception is often deeply rooted in national narrative traditions. With the gradual opening of Chinese archives and the deepening of collaborative research between Chinese and foreign scholars, this situation may slowly change, but it requires a joint push from both sides. 2025 marks the 80th anniversary of the victory of the Chinese People's War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War; this important milestone may serve as an opportunity to promote more substantive transnational cooperation in WWII history research.
(Reporter for Chinese Social Sciences Today, Chen Mirong) Source: CASS Website - Chinese Social Sciences Today, September 3, 2025 Online Editor: Tongxin