從阿圖島玉碎看戰時日本人精神面向

於1943年5月29日結束的阿圖島戰事，是日本第一個被大本營公開發表使用的玉碎行動，也是日本在第二次世界大戰期間唯一一次佔領美國國土的戰爭，更是日軍於太平洋戰役中轉向敗勢的轉捩點，做為多種象徵卻鮮為人知，甚至在美國稱作「被遺忘的戰爭」。本文欲以阿圖島玉碎為焦點，首先，在島上日軍燒毀一手資料的情況下，透過交叉比對日美資料，來回溯美軍登陸18天情況。再者，玉碎行為於此次戰事第一次被使用，從報章雜誌中可發現玉碎並非一開始就是「全軍覆沒」戰死之意，是阿圖島戰事後才被賦予精神性崇高的自殺攻擊象徵。在宏觀梳理阿圖島玉碎背景後，將人物研究鎖定帶領阿圖島玉碎的山崎保代部隊長以及受美式教育的辰口信夫上士兩人，探討因生長背景脈絡不同，在玉碎行動中表現也有所差異。一同赴死的玉碎行動結果背後，個體思想並不統一，過程也不盡相同。另外，研究結果發現，阿圖島戰事期間日本國內媒體報導呈現與戰況不相符的資訊操作，誤導國民；戰事結束後，官方更公開讚揚島上日軍未要求增援的勇敢形象，鼓吹國民效法、膨脹國民的愛國心，但實情為在戰事初期，官方已知日軍劣勢，並主張放棄增援，阿圖島上日軍更多次發出要求補給、增援電報。阿圖島玉碎，也可以說是被放棄的軍隊。距離終戰約75年的今日，參與第二次世界大戰的相關人士逐漸凋零，新世代人將只能以文字、映像來認識歷史，資料甚少的阿圖島戰事也不應該被遺忘。因此，回顧探討阿圖島戰事歷史，有助於完備第二次世界大戰日本軍玉碎行動脈絡。

關鍵字

第二次世界大戰；玉碎；阿圖島戰事；軍國主義；政治宣傳

並列摘要

The battle of Attu, which ended on May 29, 1943, was the first case of the banzai charge (all-sacrifice attack) that the Japanese imperial general headquarters proclaimed to the public. In addition, this was the only land battle of World War II (WWII) fought on the territory of the United States, and was also a critical point for the Japanese military in WWII showing a sign of defeat. Despite being a symbolic event, the battle of Attu is little known to the world, therefore it is often referred to as “the Forgotten War” in the United States. This study focuses on the Attu banzai charge (Gyokusai). However, as the Japanese army on Attu burnt all the official documents before their final action, this study is conducted by collecting and comparing the Japanese and American documents to restore as much as possible the 18 days of the battle of Attu, when Gyokusai was used for the first time in a real battle. Historical review shows that Gyokusai was not specifically described as a tactic of Japanese human wave attacks before the battle of Attu. After the battle, nevertheless, Gyokusai was recognized as a purifying and honorable suicide attack by the Government of Japan. Moreover, this study features two representative figures: Yasuyo Yamasaki, commander of the Japanese army on the battle of Attu, and Nobuo Tatsuguchi, member of the Japanese army who was educated in America. Owing to their different backgrounds, these two people responded differently to the order and implementation of Gyokusai. From the comparison it can be seen that behind the façade of “all sacrifice” required by Gyokusai, individual thoughts and actions are far from being uniform. Besides, evidence shows that during the battle of Attu, the Japanese local media released false information to mislead public opinion. After the battle, the government even publicly praised the army that they did not ask for further support during the battle, which was contrary to the fact. This manipulation of information was done not only to encourage people to follow the practice, but also to boost the national pride of the Japanese people. However, as a matter of fact, the government had known their military disadvantage on Attu at an early stage, and it was out of official decision that no reinforcements be dispatched to Attu despite repeated requests. In this sense, the battle of Attu is not only a “Forgotten War,” but an “Abandoned War” as well. Seventy four years have elapsed since the end of WWII. The number of people directly involved in the war is rapidly decreasing. Thus, later generations can only learn about the war through words and images. Although information about the battle of Attu is meager, it does not mean it should be forgotten. Quite the contrary, the battle deserves a place in memory due to its symbolic status and historical lesson. To this end, this study aims to contextualize, through the battle of Attu, the practice of Gyokusai and thus improve our understanding of WWII.