Research on the Japanese Red Cross Society documents concerning the treatment of western prisoners of war in Japanese hands during the World War II

首先，我们考察了日本帝国陆军(IJA)当局对战俘(POW)的看法，通过前陆军外科主任Setsuzo Kinbara在战争期间一直撰写的“活动记录”。在战争开始时，战俘新闻局局长坚持遵守1929年7月27日关于战俘待遇的日内瓦公约，日本政府没有批准该公约。但当时的陆军部长拒绝了这一提议。通过军事等级制度，陆军大臣对战俘本身的看法被传播到战场或战俘营的日本官兵手中。这可能导致了许多战俘虐待案件。其次，我们研究了二战期间的前日本红十字会(JRCS)记录，但其中大部分在战后丢失。为了弥补这一不足，我们查阅了保存在…国际委员会档案馆的相应的以前的记录更多来自日内瓦的红十字会(ICRC)。但是，前红十字委员会的记录是如此巨大，以至于我们可以查阅从1942年到1944年上半年的记录。因此，我们考虑了(1)战俘营访问，(2)救济-分发，(3)红十字信息，查阅了1942年至1944年上半年JRCS和红十字委员会的前记录。结果，我们发现以下三点：a)由于禁止在没有证人的情况下与战俘自由交谈，红十字委员会代表对战俘营的访问几乎没有效果，除了1944年对函馆主营的访问；b)红十字会战俘救济委员会与红十字委员会驻日本代表团合作，向每个战俘营分发救济物资，但无法核实这些物资是否真的到达了正确的目的地；c)红十字会的信息系统是在战俘新闻局、红十字会战俘救济委员会和红十字委员会驻日本代表团的相互合作下建立的。总体而言，尽管IJA持否定态度，但JRCS战俘救济委员会与红十字委员会驻日本代表团一起，继续为战俘开展救济活动。较少

Firstly, we have examined the view of Imperial Japanese Army (IJA) Authorities toward the Prisoners of War (POW), through the “Activity Records" which the former Army Surgeon Director Setsuzo Kinbara kept writing during the war. At the beginning of the war, the Director of the POW Information Bureau, insisted on the observance of the Geneva Convention of the 27^<th> July, 1929 relative to the treatment of Prisoners of War, which the Japanese Government did not ratify. But the Minister of Army at that time rejected this proposal. The view of Army Minister toward POW as such, through the military hierarchy, was canalized to Japanese officers and men at battlefields or POW-camps. This might have resulted in many POW-maltreatment cases. Secondly, we examined former Japanese Red Cross Society (JRCS) Records during the World War II, but, most of which were lost after the war. To make up this lack, we consulted corresponding former Records kept at the Archives of the International Committee o … More f the Red Cross (ICRC) at Geneva. But, the former ICRC Records were so immense that we could consult those from1942until the first half of 1944. So, we considered the reality of (1) POW-camp-visits, (2) Relief-Distribution, (3) Red Cross Messages, consulting the former Records of JRCS and of ICRC from 1942 until the first half of 1944. As a result, we found following three points:a) owing to the prohibition to talk freely with POWs without witness, the POW-camp-visits by the ICRC delegates were of little effect, except for the Hakodate main camp visit of 1944, b) the JRCS Relief Committee for War Prisoners, in cooperation with the ICRC Delegation at Japan, distributed Relief goods to each POW-camp, but being unable to verify whether those goods really arrived at the right destination, c) the system of the Red Cross Messages was established with the mutual cooperation of the POW Information Bureau, the JRCS Relief Committee for War Prisoners and the ICRC Delegation at Japan. On the whole, in spite of the negative attitude from the IJA, the JRCS Relief Committee for War Prisoners, together with the ICRC Delegation at Japan, continued their relief activities for the POWs. Less