Contested Geopolitical Messages For Tourists at The Okinawa Peace Park and Memorials

Japan Forum
ISSN: 0955-5803 (Print) 1469-932X (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjfo20
Contested geopolitical messages for tourists at the

Okinawa Peace Park and memorials
Atsuko Hashimoto & David J. Telfer
To cite this article: Atsuko Hashimoto & David J. Telfer (2018): Contested geopolitical
messages for tourists at the Okinawa Peace Park and memorials, Japan Forum, DOI:
10.1080/09555803.2018.1451354
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09555803.2018.1451354
Published online: 03 Apr 2018.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 166
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rjfo20
Contested geopolitical messages for
tourists at the Okinawa Peace Park
and memorials
ATSUKO HASHIMOTO and DAVID J. TELFER
Abstract: Now marketed as a tropical beach destination, Okinawa’s identity

is also forever linked with the horrors of war. Okinawa’s tumultuous past
encompasses the Ryukyu Islands, which had close economic ties to China until
being annexed by mainland Japan, were invaded by the US in the Second World
War, were occupied until 1972 and, more recently, have become the centre of
heated debates over the continued presence of US military bases. The Battle of
Okinawa was one of the bloodiest of the Second World War and the inhabitants
faced not only the American invasion but also the tactics of the Japanese army, who
viewed the islands as expendable in order to slow invading forces from reaching
mainland Japan. In the context of the seventieth anniversary of the end of the Battle
of Okinawa in 2015, and beyond, it is argued here that these conflicting geopolitical
disputes present significant challenges in terms of the messages presented to
educational dark tourists visiting the Okinawa Peace Park and Memorials. The
Peace Park Story Tellers or kataribe who are the Second World War survivors, have
the critical task of mediating the message to both domestic and international
tourists, some of whom are not prepared to hear anti-Japan sentiment. Through an
examination of the historical and geographic background, and an analysis of the
tourist experience at the Peace Park and Memorials, this paper explores the
complexity of educational dark tourism where competing messages collide.
Keywords: educational dark tourism, geopolitics, Okinawa, Peace Park Museum,

storyteller
Introduction
Okinawa has a surging number of tourists heading to tropical resorts, yet the
islands are inexorably linked to conflict and war. Historically known as the
Ryukyu Islands, they had close economic ties to China before being annexed by
Japan. The islands were deemed expendable by mainland Japan in one of the
bloodiest battles of the Second World War and remain at the centre of the debate
Japan Forum, 2018

https://doi.org/10.1080/09555803.2018.1451354
Copyright Ó 2018 BAJS
2 Contested geopolitical messages
over the continued presence of American military bases. The concepts of war,
peace and tourism have become deeply entwined in Okinawa since the ending of
the Second World War (Figal 2012). It is this turbulent past that is at the heart
of the contested geopolitical messages educational dark tourists receive while vis-
iting Okinawa. The Battle of Okinawa is recognised in numerous war memorial
sites, particularly in the southern end of mainland Okinawa. Visitors come to pay
their respects at the war memorials at Mabuni Hill in Itoman City, which con-
tains the Okinawa Peace Park, the Okinawa Senseki (Battle Site) National Park,
the Konpaku-no-Tou1 memorial and the Himeyuri Memorial complex,2 which
are all in close proximity. Peace Parks in Japan present memorials and peace
museums as part of ‘educational’ dark tourism, and while the focus here is pri-
marily on the Okinawa Peace Park, nearby memorial sites cannot be completely
divorced when examining the geopolitics of dark tourism in Okinawa. While all
of these memorial sites have different meanings to visitors, visitation to these
dark tourism sites, especially by school excursionists, is influenced not only by
museum displays but also by the messages of the aging Peace Park Storytellers or
kataribe, who experienced war first hand. Some tourists may not be prepared for
the anti-Japan (mainland) narrative presented, which contrasts with the formal
memorials for fallen soldiers. The Flame of Peace at the Okinawa Peace Park
stands over the names of those who died in Okinawa in the Second World War
including not only soldiers, but also local civilians. It is argued that these conflict-
ing geopolitical issues present significant challenges in terms of the messages for
dark tourists visiting the Okinawa Peace Park and Memorials.
This article begins by investigating dark tourism with a focus on educational
dark tourism and presents visitor numbers to Okinawa. To set the stage for
examining the Okinawa Peace Park, the article briefly traces the geographical
and historical background of Okinawa with an emphasis on the Battle of Oki-
nawa. It is paramount to understand Okinawa’s history and its relationship to
Japan, to explain why the Okinawa Peace Park is distinctively different from the
Peace Parks in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Okinawa Peace Park and war
memorials are then presented as educational dark tourism attractions highlight-
ing the tourist experience, and the messages they receive. The historical evolution
of the sites of atrocity reveals how the memorials became dark tourism attractions
as well as geopolitical symbols. Further complicating the narrative for visitors, the
paper examines how the interpretations of the Battle of Okinawa, especially as
told through the Peace Park Storytellers (kataribe) present conflicting messages
for educational dark tourists.
While the number of research publications on Okinawa in English has
increased considerably in recent years, part of the purpose of this research is to
bring Japanese documents to an English-speaking audience. Therefore, applying
an interpretive research method, this research relies heavily on secondary data
published in Japanese and English, including academic and non-academic docu-
ments, comprising brochures, and online information. The researchers have
Atsuko Hashimoto and David J. Telfer 3
Figure 1 Visitors gather at Peace Park Memorial at the seventieth anniversary of the Battle of
Okinawa (photo by authors)
made multiple visits to the Peace Park and nearby monuments, including visiting
the site on the day of the seventieth anniversary of end of the Battle of Okinawa,
in 2015. Families of those lost during the Battle came to pay their respects, as
seen in Figure 1. In addition, through non-obtrusive participatory observation,
the researchers observed volunteer guides’ telling stories, and noted visitors’
reactions and comments, and listened to the recorded kataribe’s testimonies at
the Peace Museum, later used to confirm the findings of visitor comments from
secondary data. The article now turns to examine dark tourism.
Dark tourism and visitation to Okinawa as a ‘learning’ opportunity

There are several definitions of dark tourism. Tarlow (2005, p. 48) describes it as
‘visitations to places where tragedies or historically noteworthy death has occurred
and that continue to impact our lives.’ Stone (2006, p. 146) defines it as an ‘act of
travel to tourist sites associated with death, suffering or the seemingly macabre.’
Stone (2006) further created a spectrum of dark tourism. The darker category of
dark tourism is more focused on history and is perceived as being more authentic
while lighter dark tourism is more heritage-focused, and is perceived to be more inau-
thentic. Cohen (2011) proposed the term ‘educational dark tourism.’ He argues that
by having educational elements, it has the potential to encourage tourists to be more
mindful, thereby increasing meaning and satisfaction of the tour. Lisle (2004, 19)
highlights this, suggesting, ‘tourists are willing to be confronted with irresolvable
questions of politics, ethics and violence.’ Dark tourism however can be heavily influ-
enced by geopolitics (Lisle 2000; Gillen 2014) as seen through the example of the
War Remnants Museum in Ho Chi Minh City. Gillen (2014) argues the Communist
Party of Vietnam is using the museum to legitimise its existence.
Cohen (2011, p. 194) notes that the distinction between dark tourism sites
where sites of disasters are referred to as in situ, and memorials and museums
being set up at other locations as secondary or created sites, is too simplistic. He
calls for the term in populo to describe sites, ‘which embody and emphasize the
story of the population to whom the tragedy befell.’ This creates a person-based
category focusing on authenticity, as the sites can be located at population and/or
spiritual centres of the people who were victimized, irrespective of the geographi-
cal distance to where the events occurred and are commemorated. Winter
(2009) notes the dichotomy between pilgrims and tourists in those visiting battle-
field sites may be not of much use as it may be better to consider motivations for
visitation along a continuum. She also raises the issue of the passage of time since
the dark event occurred. Over time there is a shift towards creating new memori-
als focusing on education and new forms of commemoration as growing numbers
of tourists are finding it difficult to relate to the memories of previous generations
who were more focused on pilgrimage (Winter 2009).
Suzuki (2016) examined ‘peace education’ tours of Japanese students from
mainland Japan to Okinawa. He revealed the importance of the narratives of local
‘peace guides’ in mediating the spatiotemporal dilemma for students. The stu-
dents must bridge the gap between their everyday home life routines and what
happened in the past in the destination in order to have a meaningful educational
experience. Suzuki (2016) argues that engaging and provocative pedagogical per-
formances by local actors in situ, can help students overcome this dilemma.
In Okinawa, some peace guides belong to The Okinawa Peace Network, an
NGO that promotes education based on the residents’ experiences of the Battle
of Okinawa (Tanji 2006). An itinerary for a peace tour for high-school students
to Okinawa involves visiting caves where civilians and soldiers hid from the
American attack, as well as the Peace Park and related memorials, and viewing
American military bases from beyond the fence (Tanji 2006).
Tourism in Okinawa continues to grow, with 8,769,200 people visiting the
islands in 2016, which represents a 19.5 per cent increase from 2015. Of those
arrivals, 2,212,100 were from overseas, a 27.5 per cent increase, while domestic
tourism numbers were 6,640,100, a 6 per cent increase from the previous year.
The growth in numbers can be attributed to expanding foreign and domestic air-
lines and an increasing number of cruise ship arrivals (Japan Update 2017).
A large number of international tourists are from other Asian countries and in
2016 increases in these growth rates include Taiwan C29 per cent (652,000),
Korea C35.8 per cent (452,000), and Mainland China C22.7 per cent (435,400)
(Japan Update 2017). Total tourism revenue in 2016 was 660,294 million Yen
(approximately US$6.1 billion; €5142 million), which was a 9.6 per cent increase
from the previous year (Department of Culture, Tourism and Sports 2017).
A survey (multiple answers allowed) in 2014 revealed that the main purpose
of trips to Okinawa was 60 per cent for sightseeing, 41 per cent for enjoying
Okinawan cuisine, however, only 10 per cent was for visitation to war memorials
(Okinawa Prefecture 2014a, Department of Culture, Tourism and Sports
2014a). As a reflection of this low 10 per cent figure, Figal (2012) notes
Okinawa’s tourism is dependent on its history of war and occupation, yet both
are increasingly absent in tourism promotion. Eighty-one per cent of tourists
were repeat visitors (Okinawa Prefecture 2013) indicating the popularity of desti-
nation and the potential for future growth.
Okinawa Prefecture has been successful in attracting school trips (or shugaku
ryoko) from outside Prefectures. On average, 2500 schools with between
400,000 and 450,000 students visit Okinawa a year. Seventy-six per cent of the
student numbers is in the age group 16 to 18; with Tokyo and Osaka being the
top two Prefectures in terms of numbers of school children sent (Department
of Culture, Tourism and Sports 2014b). Although the Okinawan Prefectural
Government indicates concern about the declining number of school trip visitors
to the Peace Park Museum (Okinawa Prefecture n.d.), recent school visitor
numbers to Okinawa in general are showing a healthy growth rate (Okinawa Pre-
fecture 2017).
As part of pre-trip preparations, students learn about the geography, history
and culture of Okinawa. Once in the destination, trips are divided into a peace
studies component, visiting battle memorials, museums and US military facilities
while the second component centres on cultural and natural studies with visits to
nature parks, art museums and participation in Okinawa crafts (Suzuki 2016).
A recent trend involves Okinawa Prefecture and a private company providing
pre-trip learning materials, i.e. worksheets, DVDs, as well as sending Peace
Study advisors to mainland schools (Okinawa Convention and Visitors Bureau
2017, Gachiyun 2017). During the peace component, students are led by
Okinawan peace guides and these guides and their narrative performances have a
critical task in getting the students to understand past events in relation to their
own lives (Suzuki 2012, 2016). Students guided by the kataribe through the
Peace museum also have a chance to hear their stories in a separate room at the
end of the tour. However, there is a risk that ‘educational tours to in populo sites
could also end up turning the participants into dispassionate observers, if not
voyeuristic consumers, of the past tragedies and the people who suffered in them
as Otherized objects’ (Suzuki 2016, p. 117). The goal of the peace guides narra-
tives is to encourage students to ‘not merely mourn the battle victims but also
to question the spatiotemporal rupture between the violence and deaths in
the Okinawan battlefields in the past and the ostensibly “peaceful” lives in their
Naichi (mainland) home today’ (Suzuki 2016, p. 118). Historically, the teachers
and peace guides viewed the shugaku ryoko trips to Okinawa as an act of anti-war
pacifism against the authoritarian government where there was a possibility of a
return to militaristic nationalism and student trips were a medium to spread the
message of peace to a wider range of Japanese youth (Suzuki 2012). More recent
debates continue today over the role of the National Defence Force in Japan rais-
ing new types of issues for these tours.
Geographical setting and brief historical background of Okinawa

To understand Okinawa’s past, it is necessary to consider its geographical loca-
tion. Okinawa is the southernmost Prefecture of Japan in the East China Sea,
located between Taiwan and Kyushu Island. The Prefecture comprises 160
islands spreading 400 km from north to south and over 1000 km from east to
west (Okinawa Convention and Visitors Bureau 2015a). The Prefectural capital
city of Naha is 1558 km southwest of Tokyo while Naha to Taipei is 626 km and
Naha to Shanghai is 822 km (timeanddate.com 2015), illustrating Naha is much
closer to other Asian major cities than to Tokyo. The geographical distance
from Tokyo played a part in how the Okinawa islands were regarded and used
strategically during the Second World War by the Japanese military to delay the
American invasion of mainland Japan. The final geographical aspect to consider
is the tropical climate as Okinawa evolves into a Japanese favourite holiday desti-
nation. The location of Okinawa, and the locations discussed in this article are
shown in Figure 2.
Historically the name ‘Ryukyu’ (琉球) appeared in the ancient Chinese record
‘Book of Sui’ (隋書) (completed in 7 CE). Archaeologists have found some groups
of prehistoric Okinawans resembled southern Chinese, while others showed simi-
larities to South-eastern Asian cultures, and some other groups’ tools resembled
those of the southern Japanese (Okinawa Prefecture 2014b). A 1993-excavation
of rice fossils demonstrated there was rice farming in Okinawa 2800 years ago
(800 BCE) (Kameshima 1999). Commerce with China was known, but recent
findings of ancient Chinese coins (over 2400 years old) has revised the possibility
of trading to before 200 BCE, rather than commonly believed 6 CE (Kameshima
1999). Some argue that armed merchants (pirates) were active in the East China
Sea, and southern Chinese pirates settled in Okinawa some 2000–3000 years ago
(Kameshima 1999).
By the fourteenth century, three regions were ruled by leading families. From
1372, Ryukyu was under the protection of China in return for sworn loyalty and
the regular dispatch of a diplomatic entourage and tributes. Samurai clans who
lost in various battles also fled to the Ryukyu Islands from mainland Japan.
In the late fourteenth century, one of the three Kings of Okinawa invited Hakka
Chinese to migrate to Okinawa, subsequently having a significant impact on poli-
tics, language, trade, culture and food (Kameshima 1999). In the fifteenth cen-
tury, one unified dynasty, the Ryukyu Kingdom was formed and with China’s
protection, flourished through international trade (Okinawa Prefectural Board of
Education 2014).
Figure 2 Location of Okinawa (cartographer Loris Gasparotto)
In the sixteenth century, the Kingdom was absorbed into the Satsuma feudal
domain of mainland Japan (Okinawa Convention and Visitors Bureau 2015b).
During the eighteenth century, French, British and Americans were planning to
take over the Ryukyu archipelago if trade negotiations with the Japanese govern-
ment failed (Okinawa Prefecture 2014b). The Meiji government created the
Ryukyu feudal domain in 1871, and changed it to Okinawa Prefecture in 1879.
The purpose of this annexation was to prevent Europe and China from claiming
the territory (Fumi no Yakata n.d.). Okinawa only agreed to be a Prefecture of
Japan if it could remain as a Kingdom; however, this was denied, and the Japa-
nese government took Okinawa by force (Okinawa Prefecture 2014b). Due to
differences in political systems and traditions between Okinawa and mainland
Japan, the assimilation was not a smooth transition (Okinawa Prefecture 2014a).
During the Meiji era, mainland Japanese were assigned to represent Okinawa
Prefecture and Okinawans were not allowed to participate in national politics
until 1912 (Okinawa Prefecture 2014b). The Economic Depression of 1914 to

1930 hit Okinawans hard. During the Showa Kyoko (Showa era economic
depression) a drop in the sugar market devastated the sugar cane industry and
many Okinawan farmers lost their livelihoods (Kabira 2004). The time was also
known as ‘Sotetsu (cycad-tree) hell’, as the starving people ate the poisonous
cycad-tree to survive even though they knew ingestion might cause death (Sasaki
1994; Kabira 2004). Many others migrated to foreign countries and mainland
Japan (Sasaki 1994; Kabira 2004; Okinawa Prefecture 2014b; Okinawa Conven-
tion and Visitors Bureau 2015b, 2015c).
The Battle of Okinawa and aftermath

Towards the end of the Pacific War in 1944, the Japanese military had plans to
build large-scale air bases on Okinawa. The Okinawa Defence Army (Japanese
32nd army) was also dispatched to fly bombers in suicide attacks against US and
British forces. Fifteen air bases were completed by the spring of 1945; however,
the losing Japanese Army did not have the means to send the required aircraft to
Okinawa. The Japanese military strategy changed to prolonging the resistance
against the advancing enemy (Okinawa Prefecture 2014b). Although the
Japanese military decided Okinawa was to be sacrificed as a throwaway pawn,
this message was not conveyed to the Okinawans who believed that the Japanese
troops were there to protect the Okinawan civilians from enemy assault. The US
had developed the following three plans to defeat Japan, two of which were not
used, due to the ending of the war by the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in
the summer of 1945.
(1) Operation Iceberg (Take over Okinawa, March–October 1945).

(2) Operation Olympic (Land at Southern Kyushu, November 1945–
February 1946).
(3) Operation Coronet (Land at the Kanto Plain, March 1946) (Okinawa City
Office & Gender Equality Section 2008, 2012).
The victory of Operation Iceberg was paramount for the American military
in the Far East. The US military strategy was to build the largest base in the
Western Pacific region, for what would be the centre of the Cold War structure
in East Asia, and Okinawa was strategically the most important location (Antill
2003; Okinawa City Office & Gender Equality Section 2008, 2012).
Okinawa endured the bloodiest battle of the Asia–Pacific War: 77,166 main-
land Japanese soldiers and 150,000 local civilians were either killed or committed
suicide. Of the local civilians that died, 100,000 lost their lives in the fiercest
battle in the south of Okinawa while the Allies suffered 14,009 deaths. The air
bombing started on 23 March 1945 over the Ryukyu archipelago. The first land-
ing of American soldiers was on the Kerama Islands, across from Naha city on
26 March 1945, followed by the arrival of a major landing force on Okinawa

Island on 1 April. The main island was attacked by numerous naval Task Forces,
with 1457 ships (Ota 1981; Peace Museum 2012). Included in the naval attack
were the US Task Force 58, with some eighty-eight ships (seventeen carriers,
seven battleships, eighteen cruisers, destroyers, frigates and minesweepers, and
support ships), and the British Task Force 57 (four carriers, two battleships, five
cruisers, fourteen destroyers and a fleet train); along with Task Forces 51, 52,
53, 54 and 56 (Antill 2003; Appleman, et al. 2011). Of the 450,000 American
soldiers, 180,000 landed while battleships and airplanes bombarded the island.
Civilians and Japanese soldiers hid in the shelter of natural caves and the Ameri-
cans used flame tanks, napalm, rockets, bombs, machine guns and gas to clear
the way. Japanese soldiers killed many civilians who were involved in military
affairs or building airfields, to prevent the disclosure of military secrets (Peace
Museum 2012). As the Americans had intercepted the Japanese army’s plan to
disguise their soldiers as civilians in order to ambush US soldiers, the American
soldiers killed civilians indiscriminately, causing an unduly high casualty rate
among civilians (NHK 2004; Ambrose 2010; HistoryJapan.org 2016). Many
Japanese civilians and soldiers were driven to commit suicide before being cap-
tured. The systematic battles ended on 23 June 1945; however, it took until
7 September when the last fighting army surrendered (Peace Museum 2012;
Cabinet Office Okinawa n.d., Toyooka 2014; Okinawa City Office & Gender
Equality Section 2008, 2012). Many decades after the war, the documents – the
translation of Japanese military intelligence that the American military inter-
cepted – were found in Maryland, US. They revealed the Japanese military
planned to use Okinawa as a pawn (‘suteishi’), just to buy time and delay the
Allies’ invasion of mainland Japan (Hein and Selden 2003; Peace Museum
2012). The 7000 Japanese soldiers posted in Okinawa were too few to achieve
this goal, and therefore, almost all male civilians aged between 13 and 70 from
Okinawa were conscripted, to fight against the Americans without adequate com-
bat training or weapons (NHK 2004; Ota 2017).
After the Second World War the Americans occupied the archipelago from
1945 to 1972. The entire Okinawa archipelago was removed from the terri-
tory of Japan and the government in Tokyo had no political autonomy over
Okinawa. The Nimitz Proclamation of April 1945 suspended ‘all executive
powers of the Japanese Imperial Government’ and placed the Southern
Islands under the ‘jurisdiction of a US Navy Military Government’ (Peace
Museum 2012). Travelling between Okinawa and mainland Japan was
strictly limited and required a passport (Higashide 2015). The surviving
Okinawans were held in sixteen refugee camps and the US army bulldozed
the land, confiscating farmland and ancestral land for Army bases (Asato
2003; NHK 2007). Food was rationed and many people died from malnutri-
tion in the refugee camps. In the first four years after the war, nearly 200
cases of rape or attempted rape of Okinawan women by US soldiers were
reported, but no one was charged (NHK 2007; see also McLauchlan 2015).
After the civilians were released from the camps in October 1945, their lives
were little better than during wartime, without their own farmland
or ancestral land. Claiming extra-territoriality, any crimes by US Military
personnel were excused. As a result, there were many riots and actions
against the Americans (Peace Museum 2012; awakm3 2013). Human rights
violation by US soldiers against Okinawans became so notorious that Roger
Baldwin of the American Civil Liberties Union issued a report in 1959, rec-
ommending reforms to the accountable US government agencies (Peace
Museum 2012).
It was clear that the US Military ruled Okinawa directly. In April 1946, at the
143rd Military personnel–Civilian Meeting, Major Watkins made it clear that
the ‘Military Government is a cat and Okinawa is a mouse. The mouse can play
as much as the cat permits’ (Okinawa Prefectural Archives 2008). The Price
Report in 1955 justified the permanent presence of the US Military on Okinawa,
including the possession of nuclear weapons, the governance of Okinawa, and
therefore the further acquisition of land (NHK 2007; Peace Museum 2012).
This report led to the Island-wide Struggle movement (Peace Museum 2012;
Okinawa Prefectural Archives 2012). The reversion movement (calls for
Okinawa to be returned to Japan) started in 1946 on the Japanese mainland, led
by Okinawans in Tokyo. After the San Francisco Peace Treaty in 1951/52, more
than twenty organisations joined the movement (Peace Museum 2012). Despite
Okinawa’s petition, the Japanese government signed the San Francisco Peace
Treaty permitting Japan’s (mainland) independence only if Japan disclaimed
the southern islands (NHK 2007; Peace Museum 2012). The US Military
governance, and presence, continued in Okinawa. The US Military government
unlawfully discharged the then-Naha Mayor, Senaga, the leader of the
Okinawa Reversion campaign. Mainland media took this up, and a petition was
sent to US President Eisenhower. In 1960, The Okinawa Prefecture Reversion
Council was formed. US major involvement in the Vietnam War started in the
mid-1960s, and the need for US Bases in Okinawa became even greater. Japa-
nese Prime Minister Sato and US President Nixon agreed to revert Okinawa to
Japanese sovereignty in 1969, under the condition that the US Bases would
remain. The Okinawans were against this, wanting the bases withdrawn. Yet
this agreement went ahead and, in May 1972, Okinawa was returned to Japan
(NHK 2007; Peace Museum 2012). Today, seventy-five per cent of all US
military bases in Japan are concentrated in Okinawa (Asato 2003; NHK 2007).
More radical organisations such as the ‘Ryukyu Independence Movement’
(Ryukyu Dokuritsu Undou 2015) emerged and are still fighting for Okinawa’s
independence.
Origins of the Okinawa Peace Park

The Okinawa Peace Park is built on Mabuni Hill, where the Battle of Okinawa
ended. However, antagonism towards the Japanese mainland for colonising the
Ryukyu Kingdom, drafting Okinawans for the Asia–Pacific War, not protecting
the Okinawans from the American invasion, letting the Americans rule them
until 1972, (Cooper 2006; Figal 2007; Eades and Cooper 2013) and the contin-
ued presence of American military bases have meant that the Peace Memorials
on the soil of Okinawa have a different meaning from other Peace Memorials on
mainland Japan. Near the Peace Park is the southern tip of the Okinawa main-
land with a steep cliff facing the East China Sea where many civilians jumped to
their deaths rather than be captured. Long before it was designated as a Peace
Park, the Ryukyu government tended the park from 1965. After reversion to
Japan, the park was designated as a quasi National Park in 1972 (Okinawa Heiwa
Kinen Zaidan n.d., Natural Parks Foundation 2015). The Peace Park, the
Himeyuri Peace Museum and Memorials for Student and Teacher Volunteers
are located within the Okinawa Senseki [Battle Site] National Park. This park is
the only ‘Battle Site’ park in Japan, designated by the national government and
managed by the Prefecture (Natural Parks Foundation 2015).
Figal (2007) described the origins of the Peace Park. During the post-war US
occupation, the Japanese government was not permitted to clean up devastated
Okinawa. Okinawan survivors picked up the bones of the fallen and collected
them in one place for burial, at the ‘Konpaku-no-Tou’ memorial near the
Himeyuri Memorial complex. After the 1951/52 Peace Treaty, the Japanese gov-
ernment appealed to the US to allow it to collect and bury the dead and mark the
sacred sites so that survivors and families of victims could visit. However, behind
this, as Figal wrote, was the ‘gradual nationalisation’ of Okinawan sacred sites to
the Japanese national imagery (soldier-centred glorification of the spirits of the
war dead). All bones, except one,3 from Konpaku-no-tou were transferred to the
National Cemetery on Mabuni Hill in 1979. The Okinawan civilian victims are
now laid next to Japanese military personnel. Mainland Japanese memorials are
quite different in style from traditional Okinawan memorials, and the standard
epitaphs to glorify the war dead caused the ‘epitaph issue’ (Figal 2001). Civilian
victims and survivors were not the focus of commemoration. The initial phase
(1945–1960) of building the memorial centres was ad hoc, by local Okinawans
created out of respect for the dead. In the 1960s, the Japanese government built
Japanese Prefectural war memorials in Okinawa for fallen Japanese soldiers. This
was an attempt to extend Japanese sovereignty over occupied Okinawa, i.e. to
bind Okinawa more closely with the mainland. It was only in 1995 (the fiftieth
anniversary of the ending of Battle of Okinawa) that the Cornerstone of Peace
was constructed where the names of American servicemen, other nationals and
Okinawan civilian victims were inscribed (Figal 2007), yet the names were still
separated by nationality and ethnicity (Figal 2001).
Geopolitics of Okinawa Peace Park and Memorials and the

seventieth anniversary of the end of the Battle of Okinawa
There are a multitude of geopolitical messages relayed at the Okinawa Peace
Park conveying often-conflicting viewpoints to visitors. The Okinawa Peace Park
simultaneously presents the atrocity of war and a call for peace in the future. A
sign at the Peace Museum commemorating the seventieth anniversary (2015) of
the end of the Battle of Okinawa read: ‘Okinawa is the only place in Japan that
had a large-scale modern warfare involving citizens. We should never forget that
time and won’t let it fade away by handing it down to our posterity. That is the
only way to grow a heart for peace’ (see Figure 3). A second large museum mural
read: ‘Mankind must remember that peace is not God’s gift to his creatures. It is
our gift to each other’ (see Figure 4).
When the authors revisited the site in 2015 during the seventieth anniversary
ceremony for the end of the Battle of Okinawa, it was clear the debates surround-
ing the American military bases were continuing. Figures 5 and 6 illustrate the
ceremony setting where Prime Minister Abe spoke and was heckled by some in
the crowd. During his speech, Abe stated: ‘The People of Okinawa are bearing a
heavy burden for security with the concentration of US bases… We will continue
to make every effort to lighten your burden’ (cited in Lies 2015). The Okinawa
governor Takeshi Onaga has rejected the proposal to move the US Marines’
Futenma base to reclaimed land in the Henoko district in northern Okinawa. He
is calling for the removal of the base entirely. At the ceremony he stated, ‘I
strongly call on the government to not be bound by stubborn concerns and to
change their policies to lighten our burden’ (cited in Lies 2015).
The competing geopolitical messages are also relayed through the design of the
Park and the resulting experiences the tourists encounter. The beautifully mani-
cured 40-hectare Peace Park is divided into four zones; the Peace Zone, the
Sacred Ground, the Peace Ceremony Ground, and the Memorial Path (see
Figure 7). The most popular zone for tourists is the Peace Zone, where the
‘Cornerstone of Peace’, the ‘Peace Memorial Museum’ and the ‘Peace Prayer
and Memorial Hall’ are located (Tabira n.d.). The origins of building this Peace
Park are quite political. At the core of the semi-circle Peace Zone is the Flame of
Peace (see Figure 8). The flame was taken from Zamami village from the Kerama
Islands (where the US soldiers first landed), and from the flames from Hiroshima
and Nagasaki Peace Parks in 1991, and was relocated to its current place in 1995
(Peace Museum 2012). The Cornerstone of Peace project started in 1991, and
was completed in 1995 (team DREAM 2010). It consists of 118 black granite
blocks spread in a fan-shape (Itoman City 2013) and approximately 241,000
names of the victims of the Battle of Okinawa, regardless of nationality, are
inscribed (Peace Museum 2012, Itoman City 2013) (see Figure 9). By including
the individual names of all nationalities, Hein and Seldon (2003) remark that
this internationalism in a commemoration site is rare. They argue that this leaves
Figure 3 Sign commemorating the seventieth anniversary of the end of the Battle of Okinawa
(photo by authors)
the visitor to contemplate that the deaths of the war victims are beyond a single
logic of assailant and victim by nationality. The first Museum was built in 1975
(Okinawa Heiwa Kinen Zaidan n.d.) and this aging Museum was replaced by the
new Peace Memorial Museum completed in 2000 (Peace Museum 2015). The
architect Fukumura and his team designed this building with over 100 roofs cov-
ered in red tiles representing an old Okinawan community, lost in the war (team
DREAM 2010, Mabuchi 2014). It is arranged circumferentially so that wherever
in the Museum building people are (see Figure 10), they can see the Flame of
Peace and The Cornerstone of Peace (team DREAM 2010).
Figure 4 Peace sign in Peace Park Museum (photo by authors)
Figure 5 Crowds gathering for the seventieth anniversary ceremony (photo by authors)
Figure 6 Centre stage for the seventieth anniversary commemorations (photo by authors)
Figure 7 Map of the Peace Park (photo by authors)

Figure 8 Media behind the Flame of Peace during the seventieth anniversary (photo by authors)
Figure 9 Visitors gathering among the Name Stones at the seventieth anniversary (photo by
authors)
Figure 10 Okinawa Peace Park Museum (photo by authors)
Inside the Peace Museum, the design takes visitors upstairs to ‘A Place for
Experiencing History’. The first section ‘The Road to the Battle of Okinawa’
includes displays of photos, facsimiles of old documents, maps, and interactive
information displays between the Meiji era up to the point of the actual land bat-
tle of Okinawa. This section explains world issues and events, the influence of
Japanese Imperialism on Okinawans and the colonies in Asia, the mistreatment
of Okinawa under the Japanese government and the beginning of the Okinawa
assault. The second and the third sections are entitled ‘The Battle of Okinawa as
witnessed by local residents’. The second room is ‘The Typhoon of Steel’ dis-
playing the attack by American battleships and bomber planes. Maps, graphic
photos, video screens showing old footage, and artefacts collected while the
remains of the dead were being gathered show the severity of the catastrophic
attacks. Towards the end of this room, the explanations turn to the cruelty of
Japanese soldiers, the maltreatment of civilians, massacres by Japanese soldiers,
mistreatment of Korean forced labourers, the suicide order from Japanese sol-
diers/commanders and other related topics. This shift in focus leads to the third
section entitled ‘Hell on Earth’, with a diorama of life size mannequins inside an
underground cave. Although the graphic photos and artefacts displayed include
the Japanese soldiers as victims of war, the diorama’s depiction focuses on victim-
isation of Okinawans under the Japanese military. Figal describes the focus of
these Battle of Okinawa displays as disproportionate in terms of the scale of civil-
ian loss, ‘in particular, on the issue of discrimination and outright violence
against Okinawans by ”friendly" forces during the war, even as many Okinawans
were striving mightily to prove themselves loyal Imperial subjects’ (Figal 2001, p.
39). The fourth room is named ‘Testimony’, where original writings are trans-
lated into other languages (see Figure 11). There is a section where people can
watch videotaped testimonies. The fifth room is presented as a historic document
Figure 11 Stories of survivors of the Battle of Okinawa (photo by authors)
covering issues of the American occupation of Okinawa, the return to normal life,
facilities and infrastructure built by Americans from which Okinawans benefited
(schools, hospitals, etc.), human rights oppression by the American governing
agency, the reversion movement to Japanese sovereignty, and changes to Oki-
nawa after reversion. This section concludes with a ‘Building Peace for the
Future’ display, which leads visitors to the Ground Floor exhibits and special
events.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki Peace Parks on mainland Japan include a focus on
anti-nuclearism and on sending messages of ‘World Peace’ from the victims of
the horrific atomic bombs (for further discussion see Yoneyama 1999; Fujitani
et al. 2001). Non-Japanese critics argue that Hiroshima and Nagasaki Peace dis-
course emphasises the Japanese sense of victimisation with less focus on Japan’s
role as ‘aggressor’ in the Asia–Pacific War (e.g. Figal 2001, Cooper 2006, Eades
and Cooper 2013). The Okinawa Peace Park, on the other hand, has a different
story to tell. All Peace Parks in Japan employ Storytellers or ‘kataribe’ to relay
their stories to visitors. Many kataribe are war survivors. Although the aging of
war survivors threatens the kataribe, some measures are being taken to train
younger people to be the next generation of kataribe (NHK 2011, Itoman City
2014). These kataribe deal with numerous school trip students, as many as 5000
a day (Izumatsu 2003), and most are of high-school age from mainland Japan.
The use of kataribe is not without controversy. Although the number of negative
reviews of kataribe stories has decreased in recent years, visitors from mainland
Japan have experienced an unwelcoming atmosphere of open hostility from the
war victims towards the Japanese soldiers and the Japanese government as told by
the kataribe. The tragedy of the Battle of Okinawa was strongly attributed to the
cruelty of the Japanese soldiers and military commanders. As a variety of media
(newspapers, blogs, social media, Q&A sites, etc.) examined in this research
demonstrate, the messages of the kataribe to high school students were about the
war between Okinawa and mainland Japan or about Okinawans suffering under
the Japanese military. Some of the contributors to these social media posts were
very offended and rejected the truth of the story of the kataribe rather than learn-
ing this part of history. One commentator even suggested that these kataribe
should be prepared to deal with the generation who knows nothing about the war
(Tokyo FM 2014).
Having kataribe as peace guides at the Peace Memorial Park has two main fac-
ets. The first is war survivors can tell their stories that textbooks cannot convey.
They can relate their own personal perspectives and memories, frozen at one
point in their life history. Each kataribe’s life story gives a voice to the voiceless
people in war. Some kataribe have even volunteered digging in caves in search of
the Okinawan war dead, however, this is becoming increasingly difficult as they
age (NHK News 2017). The second facet is the matter of accuracy of the memo-
ries and the teller–audience relationship (Kumamoto 2007). A large number of
survivors remained silent for 30 years after the War out of respect for the dead
(Himeyuri Peace Museum 2004). Although academic disciplines treat oral his-
tory or life stories differently, there is general agreement that the story is con-
structed between the teller and the audience. Kumamoto (2007) observed that it
could not be denied that the story told between the Okinawan kataribe and
an audience from mainland Japan, and the story told between the kataribe and
Okinawan visitors is inevitably different in content and tone. The main objective
of Okinawa Peace Volunteers is to ‘correctly/truthfully pass the lessons from the
Battle of Okinawa down to the next generations’ (Tonoike 2014). Figal however
notes the objectives of setting ‘the historical record straight’, especially the issue
of ‘past Japanese discrimination and violence against Okinawans, which is bound
up with contemporary discrimination and violence resulting from an overwhelm-
ing U.S. military presence on Okinawa’ (Figal 2001, p. 39). When Peace Guides
include both war survivors and post-war generations, there seems to be unspoken
intimidation from war survivors that post-war generation volunteers cannot tell
the true horror of the war and cannot convey anti-war messages (Fukunishi
2012). As of 2014, Tonoike summarised that the volunteers are mostly in their
fifties and sixties, the generation who heard their parents’ and grandparents’ sto-
ries of war. Many had a job related to education, and only about twenty-eight
certified volunteers are currently active, of which only three are war survivors.
The Okinawa Peace Museum’s archive project of Life Stories hired volunteers of
different backgrounds (Okinawan soldiers, student volunteers, civilians, atomic
bomb radiation victims, malaria survivors, Siberian POWs, etc.) in addition to
kataribe’s life stories, yet in reality most of their stories focus on ‘personal war
experiences in Okinawa’. The kataribe have autonomy of what to tell visitors, but
the Museum requests they include ‘war experiences’ and a ‘hope for peace’ in
their stories (Tonoike 2014). The accuracy of memories over time can be a con-
cern; yet, oral history must be understood from the perspective of the ‘meaning’
of the story, i.e. why the story was told in such a way or why such a particular
story was selected (Kumamoto 2007).
The Okinawan peace philosophy of ‘no military base, no weapons’ is apparent
in peace demonstrations, the Henoko Fund campaign (fund established to sup-
port activities to stop new US bases), and in pop culture. There are critics calling
this position as ‘na€ıve’ or it ‘lacks a reality check’ as China’s territorial dispute
over the Ryukyu archipelago will be more imminent if the US military leaves
Okinawa (Conway and Maher 2012; Meguro 2012; Megumi 2014; Japan Times
2015). Miyagishima (1971) considers Okinawans as placing themselves as
‘Asian’, and Meguro (2012) attributes the Okinawans’ optimistic views about
China from the relatively amicable trade relationship they had with China before
Japanese annexation, while not considering the Chinese military might of today.
The US bases are also receiving more attention as North Korea increased its mis-
sile testing in 2017. The continued existence of US bases in Okinawa is an
important negotiation card for the Okinawa government in dealing with the
Japanese government (Figal 2001, 2007; Conway and Maher 2012; see also
Hook 2015). With such a multifaceted geopolitical background reaching from
the past to the present, the role of the Okinawa Peace Park in educational dark
tourism is rather daunting.
Anonymous online opinions and reviews are often unreliable; yet they can help
formulate people’s preconceptions or misconceptions about a place. The authors
examined blog sites, where hundreds of Japanese visitors to the Okinawa Peace
Park left positive messages. For instance, on TripAdvisor (185 Japanese mes-
sages, fifty English and five other languages), only one Japanese message ques-
tioned the contents of the exhibit; and six English messages mentioned the
strained relationship between Japan and Okinawa. Other comments are positive
in the sense that the authors loved the beautiful park, were moved by the Corner
Stones, and they learned about the tragedy of war in general. A few of the visitors
were guided by kataribe but only one non-Japanese tourist used an audio-guide
and commented on the Japan–Okinawa issue. Other Japanese blog sites reveal
similar messages, with comments on the park itself and prayers for not repeating
war. It seems the written messages on display in the Museum, even if the content
of these messages is to ‘set the historical record straight’, do not seem to sink in
to the visitors’ minds as strongly as the spoken messages from the kataribe.
To illustrate this, Yahoo Chiebukuro Q&A websites (in Japanese) were examined
for message content and it was found. between 2005 and 2017, there were quite
a few negative opinions posted about the Okinawa Peace Museum exhibits and
the messages from the kataribe, which describe mainland Japanese as being cruel-
ler than Japan’s enemies. For example one comment from 2011 asked ‘Is it true
what the kataribe are saying?’ while another commented on the bias of the
museum. In response to the questions posted online about the Peace Park and
museum, answers from other participants were posted with some criticising the
museum for bias while others responded in support of the museum and, in turn,
criticised the critics. Some of the negative comments and concerns were posted
by students who had already visited the Peace Park and had unpleasant experien-
ces listening to the kataribe; or by parents of the students who would visit the
Okinawa Peace Park in the near future and heard about the kataribe.
Discussion and conclusion

The Okinawa Peace Park Museum and Memorials are considered to be educa-
tional dark tourism sites. From the Japanese student visitors’ perspective, the
Peace Park is visited for peace education; however, for other visitors, it represents
a gruesome battlefield where relatives are buried. The Hiroshima Atomic Bomb
Museum removed its life-size diorama display of atomic bomb victims showing
ghastly burns and grotesquely deformed appearances in 2016 due to criticisms
from survivors and visitors. Although the diorama displays in the Okinawa Peace
Museum are not as shocking as other photographic displays, they clearly send
the message that Japanese soldiers were not protecting Okinawan civilians. Allen
and Sakamoto (2014, p.7) suggest the focus of discourse at the Okinawa Peace
Park is ‘Japan’s role is contrived as simultaneously both victim and victimiser’,
while the Hiroshima and Nagasaki memorials focus on the discourses of ‘the vic-
timhood of Japanese’. Some of the critical reviews on the Okinawa Peace
Museum and Okinawan Peace Education guides (e.g. Ueda 2008, Ito 2010,
Mori 2016), albeit undeniably politically motivated, strongly voice concerns
about the Okinawan Peace Education objectives and the biases of personal war
experiences by kataribe, which agitate anti-Japan sentiment. The use of story-
tellers as museum guides is not unique to the Okinawa Peace Museum: however,
what is unique to Okinawa is the content of the stories by the kataribe.
Linguistically Okinawans are Japanese, however they have been strongly influ-
enced by China and Chinese migrants. In its history, Okinawa has been continu-
ously subdued or conquered by China, Japan and then the US. Yet, a retired US
Diplomat to Okinawa observed, ‘a lot of the lingering resentment people still
have is not so much directed toward Americans as it is toward Tokyo’ (Conway
and Maher 2012). The Okinawan people’s antagonism towards mainland
Japanese came from the loss of the Ryukyu Kingdom, the Okinawan people’s
involuntary involvement in the Asia–Pacific War, the Japanese military’s failure
to protect the Okinawans from the American invasion, signing the San Francisco
Treaty and letting the Americans rule them until 1972, and the subsequent pres-
ence of American military bases (Cooper 2006, Figal 2007, Eades and Cooper
2013). The political purpose in creating the Okinawa Peace Park and relocating
the civilians’ remains from the original Konpaku-no-tou to the Peace Park is
also contentious. Another controversial issue is the group suicide orders from
Japanese soldiers, which is also debated (e.g. publications of Kenzaburo Oe
1970, Ayako Sono 2006, Shonen Uehara 2013, etc.). Some argue that such is
the allegation of the suicide order, that it was for the surviving Okinawans
to receive war victims’ compensation money (e.g. Sunday Sekai Nippo,
15 December 2013). Although the accused soldiers have passed away without
being exonerated, Shonen Uehara’s documentary article ‘Pandora’s Box’, which
claimed there was no suicide order, won a lawsuit against the Ryukyu Shinpo
newspaper’s refusal to publish it in 2013. Nonetheless, while there has not been
open revolt in Okinawa against the Japanese government, to be an independent
sovereign nation after annexation in 1609, there have been protest movements.
Matsushima (1971) and Miyagishima (1971) argue that Okinawa’s history of
subjugation has shaped the Okinawans’ mentality in that they must conform to
the acceptable identity of their oppressors. The Japanese government treated
the Okinawans as if they were the lowest social caste or even foreigners, and
therefore the Okinawans have had to work harder to be recognised and accepted
as Japanese (Matsushima 1971; Miyagishima 1971; Meguro 2012). Matsushima
(1971) compared the Okinawan’s inexplicable obedience to their oppressors to a
‘desperate loyalty of an animal to a harsh master’, and suggested that this expla-
nation was the only way the Okinawans had to survive the oppression. After the
Second World War, some Okinawans thought the Americans had freed them
from Japanese military oppression, but such delusion quickly disappeared under
the more oppressive US military occupation. Thus, the signing of the San Fran-
cisco ‘Peace’ Treaty made the Japanese government more suitable than the US
military government (Miyagishima 1971), even though many Okinawans
believed that Emperor Hirohito sold Okinawa to the US through this Treaty
(Miyagishima 1971; Meguro 2012). At the time of the Reversion Movement, voi-
ces to revert Okinawa to the US were rarely heard (NHK 2004). The Okinawa
Peace Park reflects complex emotions towards the Japanese government. Oki-
nawa was not given any choice but was forcibly annexed by Japan or ruled by the
US military. Meguro (2012) argues that the discourses of anger and humiliation,
acquiescence and mistrust are the bases of a ‘twisted’ relationship between the
Okinawan government and the Japanese government. One student visitor com-
mented on the Himeyuri memorial that she was appalled by the Himeyuri Peace
Park and that it was haunted by the grudge and malice of the deceased and sur-
viving Okinawans (Tokyo FM 2014, Izumatsu 2003). The Okinawa Peace Park
on Mabuni Hill and the nearby memorials represent the tragedy of the Battle of
Okinawa. Yet, to many Okinawans, the entirety of Okinawa is a tomb of war vic-
tims. An Okinawa Tour Guide commented in 1962:
Okinawa is now putting a lot of effort into the tourism industry… What are we
showing these tourist groups? Mostly battle sites. And when we say battle sites,
it’s only the places where monuments are standing… . Even when I myself give
tours of the southern battle sites, my skin crawls at the thought of stepping on
the soil that’s the flesh and blood… . It is difficult to get this feeling across to
tourists from the mainland. (Cited in Figal 2007, p. 91)
The kataribe who survived the war are aging. Soon the kataribe will only be com-
prised of post-war generations. Their stories are learned stories and their empha-
sis on ‘setting the historical record straight’ may be influenced by the politics of
the time. The aging kataribe have a dilemma that their stories of agonizing memo-
ries are very personal and should not be told by other people, while the post-war
generation kataribe are unsure of their ability to tell the heart-wrenching stories
of older generations (Izumatsu 2003). As seen in blogs and online reviews, those
tourists who visit the Peace Park without joining a tour guided by kataribe, or
those who just visit the Corner Stone and other memorials in the park remember
Mabuni Hill for its peacefulness, its quietness, as a beautiful park, and the stag-
gering number of names inscribed on the Corner Stones, i.e. the Peace Park as a
nice place to meditate on the importance of peace. Beyond the Museum, the Oki-
nawa Peace Park is not telling the story from the Okinawan perspective.
Izumatsu’s (2003) documentary film revealed that it is not only the younger gen-
erations from mainland Japan, but also the young generation of Okinawans,
including post-war generation school teachers, who have no memories of the war
and therefore have much lower levels of interest in peacekeeping compared with
older generations. Figal (2008, p. 14) argues that despite the historical signifi-
cance of the Battle of Okinawa and its consequences, it is not promoted within
heritage tourism and is recognised even less in pure beach-resort tourism.
The Okinawa Peace Park now faces the difficult task of continuing to tell its
war and peace stories from the Okinawan perspective. Stone (2012, p. 1565)
argues ‘dark tourism is a modern mediating institution, which not only provides
physical place to link the living with the dead, but also allows a cognitive space
for the Self to construct contemporary ontological meanings of mortality.’ Given
this perspective, if the knowledge presented to tourists on the nature of the atroc-
ity in question is somehow in conflict with the tourist’s existing knowledge and
beliefs, tourists would then have difficulties processing and accepting this new
information, creating ontological insecurity. Setsuko Thurlow, a Hiroshima sur-
vivor and an advocator for abolishing nuclear weapons, remarked that war
survivors’ personal accounts must acknowledge Japan as an aggressor as well as
an atomic bomb victim, and their appeals for World Peace must be acceptable to
a global audience from various backgrounds and experiences; beseeching World
Peace is to protect the planet and its people, not to argue who was right and who
was wrong (NHK 2017).
The multitude of competing geopolitical perspectives incorporating Okinawa’s
tumultuous past are evident in the competing messages spoken and presented at
the Okinawa Peace Park, including through the design of the museum and the
Park itself. All of these perspectives influence the dark tourist’s experience. The
Okinawa Peace Park distinguishes itself from the other major Peace Parks in
Japan, as stories are told from the Okinawan perspective, exposing the Japanese
as a war aggressor and the Americans as a saviour as well as an oppressor. The
task for the post-war generation of kataribe to relate the wartime experiences of
Okinawans is one of the most difficult challenges. Visiting the Park without a
kataribe guide does not reveal the full story from the Okinawan perspective and
this needs to be addressed. These messages from the past are also juxtaposed
with messages of peace for the future and caught up in the current debate over
military bases. This deeply conflicted history also contrasts with the recent image
of Okinawa evolving into a tropical resort destination, which often highlights
classical Okinawa culture while ignoring past tensions (Tada 2015; Tanaka 2003
cited in K€ uhne 2012). Lisle (2000) notes that the modern tourist gaze makes it
difficult to hear ‘other’ stories of warfare that disagree with national narratives.
The geopolitical landscape and the nature of competing narratives that tourists
receive illustrate the complexity of the Okinawa Peace Park as an educational
dark tourism site.
Disclosure statement
The authors have no financial interest or benefit arising from the direct applica-
tion of this research.
Funding
No funding was received for this research.
Notes
1. ‘Konpaku-no-Tou’ literally means Monument of Floating Spirits (Allen and Sakamoto 2014;
Naha City n.d.). The villagers relocated to Komesu-ward, Itoman city after the war to grow
food, were hindered by scattered remains of the war dead (Naha City n.d.). People collected
bones and remains, and used a natural bowl-shaped cave as an ossuary (NHK 2009). After
it was named Konpaku-no-Tou in 1946, more bones were gathered from the southern end of
Okinawa island and 35,000 deceased (counted by skulls) were interred. However, the Japanese
government disregarded Okinawan mortuary rituals and transferred the bones to National
Cemetery in the Okinawa Peace Park in 1979.
2. The Himeyuri Memorial complex comprises a memorial, mausoleum, peace museum, and the
remains of natural caves used for field hospitals where students worked as nurses. During the
war, high-school aged boys and girls were conscripted. The ‘Himeyuri’ troop represents teach-
ers and students from only two girls’ schools. The other seven girls’ school troops have their
own memorials but they are not as well known as Himeyuri, owing to the large numbers of casu-
alties (123 Himeyuri students died out of 222 recruited).
3. Figal (2001) cited Arasaki’s book ‘Kanko kosu de nai Okinawa’, however, excerpts from 1982
Okinawa-ken Izoku Rengokai (Okinawa association of families of deceased), indicate a few
bones were left in the Konpaku-no-Tou (Umisedo 2003). Unlike the deceased from other
Prefectures, there is no memorial for Okinawans, the Konpaku-no-Tou functions as a tomb of

the unknown Okinawan (Naha City n.d.).
References
Allen, M. and Sakamoto, R., 2014. Confusing the Okinawan Memoryscape: the organic memoria-
lisation of the Battle of Okinawa. In: M.R. Frost and D. Schumacher, eds. Writing the War in
Asia – a documentary history (March 2014) [online]. Available from: http://www.uni-konstanz.
de/war-in-asia/allen-sakamoto/ [Accessed 25 May 2015].
Ambrose, H., 2010. The Pacific. London: Penguin Books.
Antill, P., 2003. Operation iceberg: the assault on Okinawa - the last Battle of World War II (Part 1)
April–June 1945. [online] Available from: http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/battles_oki
nawa1.html.
Appleman, R.E., et al., 2011. Okinawa: The Last Battle (originally published in 1948 by United
States Army Center for Military History, Washington D.C.). New York: Skyshore Publishing.
Asato, E., 2003. Okinawan identity and resistance to militarization and maldevelopment. In: L.
Hein and M. Seldon, eds. Islands of discontent: Okinawa response to Japanese and American power.
Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 228–242.
awakm3., 2013. Best Answer to “Okinawa wa America no Senryouka ni atta houga Shiawase dattanode
shouka?” [Was Okinawa happier under American occupation?] [online]. Available from: http://
detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q10109326880 [Accessed 28 May 2015].
Cohen, E., 2011. Educational dark tourism at an in populo site: the holocaust museum in
Jerusalem. Annals of Tourism Research, 12 (1), 5–29.
Conway, T. and Maher, K., 2012. The other side of Okinawa. Collier’s (April 2012) [online]. Avail-
able from: https://colliersmagazine.com/article/other-side-okinawa [Accessed 25 May 2015].
Cooper, M., 2006. The pacific war battlefields: tourist attractions or war memorials? International
Journal of Tourism Research, 8, 213–222.
Department of Culture, Tourism and Sports, 2014a. Heisei 25-nendo no Kankou Shunyu ni tsuite
[2013 Tourism Revenue] [online]. Available from: http://www.pref.okinawa.jp/site/bunka-
sports/kankoseisaku/documents/140919_fy2013income.pdf [Accessed 07 July 2015].
Department of Culture, Tourism and Sports, 2014b. Shugaku Ryokou Irigomi Joukyou Chousa
Kekka ni tsuite: Heisei 25-nen (Rekinen) no Okinawa Shugaku Rykou no Irigomi Jisseki. Heisei 26-
nen 9-gatsu 5-ka [About School Trip Statistics: 2014 calendar year School Trips to Okinawa.
05 September 2015] [online]. Available from: http://www.pref.okinawa.jp/site/bunka-sports/
kankoseisaku/kikaku/statistics/edtour/documents/h25-shuryo.pdf [Accessed 07 July 2015].
Department of Culture, Tourism and Sports, 2017. Heisei 28-nendo no Kankou Shunyu ni tuite
[2017 Tourism Revenue] [online]. Available from: http://www.pref.okinawa.jp/site/bunka-
sports/kankoseisaku/documents/20170621fy2016incom.pdf [01 October 2017].
Eades, J. and Cooper, M., 2013. 16 Soldiers, victims and neon lights: The American presence in
post-war Japanese tourism. In: W. Suntikul and R. Butler, eds. Tourism and War. London:
Routledge, 205–217.
Figal, G., 2001. Waging peace on Okinawa. Critical Asian Studies, 33 (1), 37–69.
Figal, G., 2007. Bones of contention: the geopolitics of “Sacred Ground” in postwar Okinawa.
Diplomatic History, 31 (1) (January 2007), 81–109.
Figal, G., 2008. Heritage tourism: between war and tropics; heritage tourism in postwar Okinawa.
Public Historian, 30 (2), 83–107.
Figal, G., 2012. Beachheads: war, peace and tourism in postwar Okinawa. Lanham, MD: Rowman &
Littlefield Publishers.
Fujitani, T., White, G.M., and Yoneyama, L., eds., 2001. Perilous memories: the Asia-Pacific War
(s). Durham and London: Duke University Press.
Fukunishi, K., 2012. Senseou to Heiwa o Kataritugu - Ritsumeikan Daigaku Kokusai Heiwa
Mujiamu no borantia gaido no jissen o jirei ni [Telling the story of War and Peace - A case
of Volunteer guides at Ritsumeikan University International Peace Museum]. Ritsumeikan
Heiwa Kenkyu Dai-13 gou (2012.3) [Ritsumeikan Peace Research No. 13 (March 2012)] [pdf].
Available from: http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/mng/er/wp-museum/publication/journal/documents/
13_p29.pdf [Accessed 05 July 2015].
Fumi no Yakata, n.d. Ryukyu Ouhcou-shi: Rhukyu Shobun [History of Ryukyu Kingdom: Abolish-
ment of Ryukyu] [online]. Available from: http://page.freett.com/haniwa828/ryukyu/tushi/
tushi5.htm [Accessed 03 July 2015].
Gachiyun Inc., 2017. Top Page. [online]. Available from: http://gachiyun.wixsite.com/gachiyun-
inc [Accessed 17 August 2017].
Gillen, J., 2014. Tourism and Nation Building at the War Remnants Museum in Ho Chi Minh
City, Vietnam. Annals of the Association of the American Geographers, 104 (6), 1307–1321.
DOI:10.1080/00045608.2014.944459
Hein, L. and Seldon, M., 2003. Culture, Power, and Identity in contemporary Okinawa. In: L.
Hein and M. Seldon, eds. Islands of discontent: Okinawa response to Japanese and American power.
Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1–35.
Higashide, M., 2015. Todoufuken-shikuchouson. hmt Magazine. Special Issue: Beikoku Touchi-ka
no Okinawa [Okinawa under American Rule] [online]. Available from: http://uub.jp/hmt/
hmt29.html [Accessed 05 July 2015].
Himeyuri Peace Museum, 2004. Himeyuri Heiwa Kinen Shiryoukan [Himeyuri Peace Musuem
Official Guidebook]. Itoman, Japan: Himeyuri Peace Museum.
HistoryJapan.org, 2016. Okinawa-sen: Jumin no higai wa dono youni okiku nattanoka [Battle of
Okinawa: How did victimisation of civilians become so big?] Taiheiyou Sensou towa nandatta-
noka [What was Asia-Pacific War?] [online]. Available from: http://historyjapan.org/okinawa-
civic-victims [Accessed 02 February 2018].
Hook, G., 2015. The American eagle in Okinawa: the politics of contested memory and the
unfinished war. Japan Forum, 27 (3), 299–320. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/
09555803.2015.1042011.
Ito, R., 2010. Okinawa Kinenn Heiwa Shiryou Kan: Sono Shinjitsu [Okinawa Peace Museum: its
reality]. Tokyo: Tendensha.
Itoman City, 2013. Heiwa Kinen Kouen [Peace Memorial Park] [online]. Available from: http://
www.city.itoman.lg.jp/kankou-navi/docs-kankou/2013022300322/ [Accessed 27 May 2015].
Itoman City, 2014. Heiwa no Kataribe Ikusei-jigyou Kengai Kenshuu ni tuite [Kataribe of Peace
Development Project - about out-of-prefecture training]. [online]. Available from: http://www.
city.itoman.lg.jp/docs/2014080500020/ [Accessed 27 May 2015].
Izumatsu, 2003. Irei-no-hi Tokubetsu Bangumi: Kataritsugu mono - sorezoreno Okinawa-sen [Okinawa
Memorial Day Special Programme: Stories to inherit - Individual’s Battle of Okinawa -]
[online]. Available from: http://plaza.rakuten.co.jp/izumatsu/3005/ [Accessed 27 May 2015].
Japan Times, 2015. The 2015 Fund set up to fight Futenma plan adds director Miyazaki to leader-
ship. Japan Times Online, [online] 08 May. Available from: http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/
2015/05/08/national/fund-set-fight-futenma-plan-adds-director-miyazaki-leadership/#.
VWJpxes4oVQ [Accessed from 20 July 2015].
Japan Update, 2017. Visitor numbers record high, expected to continue rising. Japan Update,
[online] 24 April. Available from: http://www.japanupdate.com/2017/04/visitor-numbers-
record-high-expected-to-continue-rising/ [Accessed 27 May 2015].
Kabira, N., 2004. Okinawa- 1930-nendai no kenkyu; [Research on Okinawa pre- and post-1930s].
Tokyo: Fujiwara Shoten.
Kameshima, Y., 1999. Ryukyu Rekishi no Nazo to Roman (Sono ichi) [Mystery and Romance of
Ryukyu History, vol. 1]. Naha, Japan: Okinawa Kyohan Books.
K€
uhne, O.E., 2012. Research Report: historical amnesia and the ‘neo-imperial gaze” in the
Okinawa boon. Contemporary Japan, 24 (2), 213–241. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1515/
cj-2012-0010.
Kumamoto, H., 2007. An oral history review and oral history in Okinawan-studies. [pdf]. Available
from: http://www.hi-ho.ne.jp/hirokuma/ryuuoki2007%201.pdf [Accessed from 20 July 2015].
Lies, E., 2015. Japan PM Abe met with rare heckling at Battle of Okinawa ceremony. Reuters,
[online] 23 June 2015. Available from: http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-ww2-anniversary-
japan-idUKKBN0P30TT20150623 [Accessed 02 August 2017].
Lisle, D., 2000. Consuming danger: reimaging the War/Tourism divide. Alternatives: Global, Local
Political, 25 (1), 91–116.
Lisle, D., 2004. Gazing at ground zero: tourism, voyeurism and spectacle. Journal for Cultural
Research, 8(1), 3–21.
Mabuchi, W., 2014. Okinawa de tsukuruto iu Sentaku - Hondo no Kenchikuka [Decision to create
in Okinawa - a Mainland Japanese Architect -]. Asahi Shinbun Digital, [online] 24 October.
Available from: http://www.asahi.com/and_M/interest/SDI2014102383111.html [Accessed
from 20 July 2015].
Matsushima, C., 1971. Fukki Undou no Shuen [the End of Reversion Movement]. Joukyou
[online] January 1971. Available from: http://www7b.biglobe.ne.jp/»whoyou/matsushima
chogi.htm#matsushimachogi [Accessed from 23 July 2015].
McLauchlan, A., 2015. War crimes and crimes against humanity on Okinawa: Guilt on both sides.
Journal of Military Ethics, 13 (4), 363–380. DOI:10.1080/15027570.2014.991512.
Megumi, R., 2014. Semarikuru Okinawa Kiki [Looming Okinawa Crisis]. Tokyo: Gentosha
Renaissance Shinsho.
Meguro, H., 2012. Why are Okinawa’s base issues always entangled?— A study of perception gaps
between Okinawans and Japanese mainlanders —". Nagoya Gaikokugo Daigaku Gendai Koku-
saigakubu Kiyou [Nagoya University of Foreign Studies School of Contemporary International
Studies Bulletin], 8 (March 2012), 81–106 [online]. Available from: https://nufs-nuas.repo.nii.
ac.jp/index.
php?actionDpages_view_main&active_actionDrepository_action_common_download&item_i
dD583&item_noD1&attribute_idD22&file_noD1&page_idD13&block_idD17 [Accessed from
28 July 2015].
Miyagishima, A., 1971. Naze Okinawajin ka [Why Okinawans?], Ritousha (22 February 1971)
[online]. Available from: http://www7b.biglobe.ne.jp/»whoyou/matsushimachogi.htm#miyagi
jimaakira [Accessed from 23 July 2015].
Mori, T., 2016. Kouritsu Koukou Shuugaku Ryokou-saki 1-i, Okinawa deno Han-nichi Kyouiku no
Jittai [Truth of Anti-Japan Education in Okinawa, the number 1 School Excursion Destination]
(original article taken from SAPIO August 2016 Issue). Livedoor News [online] 19 July 2017.
Available from: http://news.livedoor.com/article/detail/11780161/ [Accessed 01 April 2017].
Naha City, n.d. Konpaku. [online]. Available from: http://www.city.naha.okinawa.jp/kakuka/heiwa
danjyo/heiwahasshintosi/konpaku.html [Accessed 25 May 2015].
Natural Parks Foundation, 2015. Okinawa Senseki. [online]. Available from: http://www.bes.or.jp/
invitation/quasi-np/14.html#q56 [Accessed 25 May 2015].
NHK, 2004. Sonotoki Rekishi ga Ugoita: Satoukibi Batake no Mura no Sennsou - Shin-Shiryou ga akasu
Okinawa-sen no Higeki [The Battle of a Village in the Sugar Cane Field - A newly uncovered ref-
erence revealed the tragedy of the Battle of Okinawa]. [TV Programme]. Japan: NHK, 31 March
2004.
NHK, 2007. Sonotoki Rekishi ga Ugoita: Wasurerareta Shima no tatakai - Okinawa Henkan eno
Kiseki- [The struggle of forgotten island - the road to the return of Okinawa to Japan]. [TV Pro-
gramme] NHK, 01 August 2007.
NHK, 2009. Senseki to Shougen: Konpaku no tou [Testimony of Battlefield: Tower of Soul] [online].
Available from: http://www.nhk.or.jp/okinawa/okinawasen70/senseki/detail34.html [Accessed
from 20 July 2015]
NHK, 2011. Kaisetsu Archives - Kiroku o Yomitoku (5) Okinawa-sen o dou keishou suruka [Interpret
the Memories (5) How to hand the Battle of Okinawa down to the next generation] [online] 12
August. Available from: http://www.nhk.or.jp/kaisetsu-blog/400/93688.html [Accessed from
20 July 2015]
NHK, 2017. Asu Sekai ga Owaru to shitemo: Kakunaki Sekai e, Kotoba o sagasu, Setusko Saro; [Even
if the World ends tomorrow: World without Nuclear Weapons, Seeking the Language, Setsuko
Thurlow], NHK Documentary. [TV Programme] NHK, 12 August 2017.
NHK News, 2017. Ohayo Nippon [Good Morning Japan] Kyo “Irei no hi” Okinawa-Sen Kara 72-nen
[Today “Memorial Day” 72 years from the Battle of Okinawa]. [TV Programme] NHK, 23
June 2017.
Oe, K., 1970. Okinawa Note. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.
Okinawa City Office and Gender Equality Section, 2008. Okinwa-shi no Senseki to Kichi [A Guide
to Battle Sites and Military Bases in Okinawa City] [pdf]. Available from: http://www.city.oki
nawa.okinawa.jp/userfiles/files/page/about/1050/okinawasinosennsekitokiti.pdf [Accessed from
25 July 2015].
Okinawa City Office and Gender Equality Section, 2012. A Guide to Battle Sites and Military
Bases in Okinawa City [pdf]. Available from: http://www.city.okinawa.okinawa.jp/userfiles/
files/page/about/1051/aguidetobattlesitesandmilitarybases.pdf [Accessed from 25 July 2015].
Okinawa Convention and Visitors Bureau, 2015a. Eria jouhou [Area Information] [online]. Avail-
able from: http://www.okinawastory.jp/area/ [Accessed from 25 July 2015].
Okinawa Convention and Visitors Bureau, 2015b. Learn - History About Okinawa. [online]. Avail-
able from: http://en.okinawastory.jp/learn/history/ [Accessed from 25 July 2015].
Okinawa Convention and Visitors Bureau, 2015c. Okinawa ni tsuite shirou (Rekishi) [Lets’ learn -
History About Okinawa] [online]. Available from: http://www.okinawastory.jp/information/his
tory.html [Accessed from 25 July 2015].
Okinawa Convention and Visitors Bureau, 2017. Okinawa Shugaku Ryokou Nabi. [Okinawa
School Excursion Navigator] [online] Available from: http://www.okinawastory.jp/excursion
[Accessed 17 August 2017].
Okinawa Heiwa Kinen Zaidan, n.d. Kouen ni tsuite [About the Park] [online]. Available from:
http://kouen.heiwa-irei-okinawa.jp/kouen.html [Accessed from 25 July 2015].
Okinawa Prefecture, 2013. Kodomo Land: Sangyou no Uchiwake [Breakdown of Industries] [online].
Available from: http://www.pref.okinawa.jp/kodomo/sangyo/c1_uchiw.html [Accessed from 25
July 2015].
Okinawa Prefecture, 2014a. Heisei 25-nendo Kankou Toukei Jittai Chosa (Heisei 26-nenn 10-gatu 23-
nichi Kouhyou) [2013 Tourism Statistics Survey (published 23 October 2014)] [online]. Avail-
able from: http://www.pref.okinawa.jp/site/bunka-sports/kankoseisaku/kikaku/report/tourism_
statistic_report/h25_tourism-statistic-report.html [Accessed from 25 July 2015].
Okinawa Prefecture, 2014b. Okinawa no rekishi to Bunka [History and Culture of Okinawa]
[online]. Available from: http://www.pref.okinawa.jp/edu/bunkazai/bunkakesho/hogo/rekishi/
rekishi-002.html [Accessed from 25 July 2015].
Okinawa Prefecture, 2017. Heisei 28-nen Shugaku Rhokou Irikomi JouKyou Chousa no Kekka ni
tsuite (Heisei 29nen 7gatu 21nichi Happyou) [2016 School Tourism Statistics Survey (published
21 July 2014)] [online]. Available from: http://www.pref.okinawa.jp/site/bunka-sports/kankosei
saku/kikaku/statistics/edtour/h28-edtour.html [Accessed 17 August 2017].
Okinawa Prefecture, n.d. Shisaku Soukatsu Hyou [Policy measures summary chart] [online]. Avail-
able from: http://www.pref.okinawa.lg.jp/site/kikaku/chosei/keikaku/pdca/documents/4-2-c1.
pdf [Accessed from 25 July 2015].
Okinawa Prefectural Archives, 2008. Database: Sengo Shoki Ryukyu Minsei kikou kaigiroku [Early
post-war Ryukyu Civilian Government Mechanism Minutes from] [database] 18 April 1946.
Available from: http://www.archives.pref.okinawa.jp/search_materials/reference_tool/after_
war_records [Accessed 25 July 2015].
Okinawa Prefectural Archives, 2012. III. Amerika ni yori touchi taisei no kyouka [3. Strengthening of
American Ruling System]. Available from: http://www.archives.pref.okinawa.jp/exhibition/
2012/10/post-444.html [Accessed from 25 July 2015].
Okinawa Prefectural Board of Education, 2014. Okinawa no Rekishi to Bunka [History and Culture
of Okinawa]. [online]. Available from http://www.pref.okinawa.jp/edu/bunkazai/bunkakesho/
hogo/rekishi/rekishi-002.html [Accessed from 25 July 2015].
Ota, M., 1981. This was the battle of Okinawa. Naha: Naha Shuppan-sha.
Ota, M., ed., 2017. Okinawa Tekketsu Kin’ou-tai [Okinawa Emperor’s Army]. Tokyo: Kobunken.
Peace Museum, 2012. Okinawa Prefectural Peace Memorial Museum Guide. Itoman, Japan: Okinawa
Prefectural Peace Memorial Museum.
Peace Museum, 2015. Okinawa Heiwa Kinen Shiryou-kan Nenpo Dai-16-go (2015) [2015 Annual
Report of Okinawa Prefectural Peace Memorial Museum No.16] [online]. Available from:
http://www.peace-museum.pref.okinawa.jp/siryokandayori/pdf/nenpo16.pdf [Accessed 18
May 2015].
Ryukyu Dokuritsu Undou, 2015. Ryukyu Dokuritsu Undou Shiryoukan [Ryukyu Independence
Movement Resource Centre] [online]. Available from: http://www.bekkoame.ne.jp/i/a-001/
[Accessed from 25 July 2015].
Sasaki, K., 1994. Ijumin mondai o toshite mita okinawa to nippon [Okinawa and Japan through the
immigration problems]. Journal of International Institute of Language and Culture Studies, Ritsu-
meikan University 5 (3), 1–27. Available from: http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/acd/re/k-rsc/lcs/kiyou/
5-3/RitsIILCS_5.3pp.1-27Sasaki.pdf [Accessed from 02 February 2018].
Sono, A., 2006. Okinawa-sen/Tokashiki-jima: Shudan Jiketsu no Shinjitsu – Nippongun no Jumin
Jiketsu Meirei wa nakatta! [Battle of Okinawa/Tokashiki Island: Truth of Mass Suicide – There
was no Residents’ Suicide Order from Japanese Army]. Tokyo: WAC.
Stone, P., 2006. A dark tourism spectrum: Towards a typology of death and macabre related tour-
ist sites, attractions and exhibitions. Tourism: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 54 (2), 145–160.
Stone, P., 2012. Dark tourism and significant other death: Towards a model of mortality media-
tion. Annals of Tourism Research, 39 (3), 1565–1587.
Suzuki, T., 2012. Forming an “Activism Bubble” in tourism: peace guiding at Okinawa Battle
ruins. Tourist Studies, 12 (1), 3–27. DOI:10.1177/1468797612438457.
Suzuki, T., 2016. Bridging between “here/now” and “there/then”: guiding Japanese mainland
school “peace education” tours in Okinawa. Journal of Cultural Geography, 33 (1), 100–125.
Tabirai, n.d. Okinawa Heiwa Kinen Kouen de Heiwa o Taiken suru [Experinece Peace at Okinawa
Peace Park] [online]. Available from: http://www.okitour.net/sightseeing/tatsujin/00170/
[Accessed from 25 July 2015].
Tada, O., 2015. Constructing Okinawa as Japan’s Hawaii: From Honeymoon Boom to Resort Par-
adise. Japan Studies, 35 (3), 287–302.
Tanji, M., 2006. Myth, protest and struggle in Okinawa. London: Routledge.
Tarlow, P., 2005. Dark tourism: the appealing ‘dark’ side of tourism and more. In: M. Novelli, ed.
Niche tourism: contemporary issues, trends and cases. Oxford: Elsevier, 47–57.
team DREAM architects and associates, 2010. Column [online]. Available from: http://www.
dream-archi.com/04_Column.html [Accessed from 27 July 2015].
timeanddate.com, 2015. Distance from Naha to… [online]. Available from: http://www.timeand
date.com/worldclock/distances.html?nD775 [Accessed from 25 July 2015].
Tokyo FM, 2014. Time Line: “Korette dou nano?” (vol. 135) - Katrib e ni motomerareru muchi de mur-
ikai na hitobito o aiteni suru kakugo [“How about this?” (vol. 135) - Preparedness required of
Katribe to deal with ignorant and not-understanding audience] [online]. Available from: http://
www.tfm.co.jp/timeline/?itemidD81141 [Accessed from 25 July 2015].
Tonoike, S., 2014. Study about inheritance of telling war experience (1) -efforts of Okinawa as a
case study. Akita Daigaku Kyoiku Bunka Gakubu Kyouiku Jissen Kenkyu Kiyou [Akita Univer-
sity Faculty of education and Human Studies Practical Research Bulletin], 36, 29–38.
Toyooka, M., 2014. Okinawasen towa. Icharibers [online]. Available from: http://www.geocities.jp/
toyobox1/okinawasen.html [Accessed from 25 July 2015].
Ueda, M., 2008. Okinawa Shuugaku Ryokou de Kodomotachi ga Han-nichi ni [Okinawa School
Excursion makes children anti-Japanese] (original article taken from WiLL Magazine Septem-
ber 2008 Issue). Hi-no-moto [online]. Available from http://kabanehosi.seesaa.net/article/
187247192.html [Accessed 01 April 2017].
Uehara, S., 2013. Sunday Sekai Nippo/Uehara Shonen ni kansuru kiji (15 December 2013).
Uehara Shonen Official Site [blog], Available from: http://ueharashonen.webcrow.jp/sekainippo.
html [Accessed 18 May 2015].
Umisedo, Y., 2003. Pointo Heiwa Gakushu: (2) Konpaku no tou [online]. Available from: http://
www.gettounohana.com/order/report/point-2.html [Accessed 18 May 2015].
Winter, C., 2009. Tourism, social memory and the Great War Annals of Tourism Research, 36 (4),
607–626.
Yoneyama, L., 1999. Hiroshima traces: time, space, and the dialectics of memory. Berkeley, CA: Uni-
versity of California Press.
Atsuko Hashimoto an Associate Professor in the Department of Geography and Tourism Studies
at Brock University, Canada. Her areas of research include Green Tourism in rural Japan, socio-
cultural issues in tourism, culinary tourism, heritage tourism and social justice in tourism. She may
be contacted at ahashimoto@brocku.ca.
David J. Telfer is an Associate Professor in the Department of Geography and Tourism Studies at
Brock University, Canada. His areas of research include the relationship between development the-
ory and tourism, tourism planning, heritage tourism and rural tourism. He has been conducting
ongoing research on Green Tourism in rural Japan. He may be contacted at dtelfer@brocku.ca.

Contested Geopolitical Messages For Tourists at The Okinawa Peace Park and Memorials

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Contested Geopolitical Messages For Tourists at The Okinawa Peace Park and Memorials

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Japan Forum

ISSN: 0955-5803 (Print) 1469-932X (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjfo20

Contested geopolitical messages for tourists at the

Atsuko Hashimoto & David J. Telfer

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09555803.2018.1451354

Published online: 03 Apr 2018.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 166

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

Abstract: Now marketed as a tropical beach destination, Okinawa’s identity

Keywords: educational dark tourism, geopolitics, Okinawa, Peace Park Museum,

Japan Forum, 2018

Dark tourism and visitation to Okinawa as a ‘learning’ opportunity

Geographical setting and brief historical background of Okinawa

Figure 2 Location of Okinawa (cartographer Loris Gasparotto)

until 1912 (Okinawa Prefecture 2014b). The Economic Depression of 1914 to

The Battle of Okinawa and aftermath

(1) Operation Iceberg (Take over Okinawa, March–October 1945).

26 March 1945, followed by the arrival of a major landing force on Okinawa

Origins of the Okinawa Peace Park

Geopolitics of Okinawa Peace Park and Memorials and the

Figure 4 Peace sign in Peace Park Museum (photo by authors)

Figure 7 Map of the Peace Park (photo by authors)

Figure 10 Okinawa Peace Park Museum (photo by authors)

Figure 11 Stories of survivors of the Battle of Okinawa (photo by authors)

Discussion and conclusion

Prefectures, there is no memorial for Okinawans, the Konpaku-no-Tou functions as a tomb of

You might also like