Imperial Gateway

Front matter

IMPERIAL GATEWAY

COLONIAL TAIWAN AND JAPAN'S EXPANSION IN SOUTH CHINA AND SOUTHEAST ASIA, 1895-19437

SEIJI SHIRANE

Introduction

Taiwanese in Southeast Asia THE WARTIME GATEWAY Mobilizing for War

Epilogue: Postwar Legacies

Notes 175 Selected Bibliography 239

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

It gives me great pleasure to thank the individuals and institutions that made this book possible. My first debt of gratitude goes to Sheldon Garon, at Princeton, who guided this project from its inception. His unwavering support and constructive feedback helped push me to think about the project's larger significance in Japanese imperial and transnational history. Susan Naquin, Benjamin Elman, Janet Chen, and David Howell were model teachers who shaped my intellectual and professional development. Christopher Hill and Lori Watt have been steadfast mentors since I took their undergraduate seminars two decades ago.

In Taiwan, I am grateful to Chung Shu-ming for hosting me at Academia Sinica's Institute of Taiwan History (2010-11). Her graduate seminars helped me decipher handwritten documents from the Taiwan Government-General archives and deepened my understanding of Taiwanese and Japanese historiography. I am also indebted to Chou Wan-yao, Hsu Hsueh-chi, Chang Lung-chi, Lin Yu-ju, Wu Mi-cha, Caroline Hui-yu Ts'ai, Chu Te-lan, and Lin Man-houng. Their pioneering work on colonial Taiwan, including the collection of primary sources and oral histories, laid the foundation for this project. Thanks to Li Peichen, Yang Ya-chu, Chen Yi-wen, Chan Kai-chi, Chen Yi-fan, Eka Suzuki, and Chen Jung-sheng for their friendship.

In Japan, Haneda Masashi sponsored my affiliation at the University of Tokyo's Institute for Advanced Studies on Asia in 2011-12 and 2015-17. His bilingual workshops allowed me to share work-in-progress and discuss global history with scholars from all over the world. I also thank Kawashima Shin, Kato Yoko, and Wakabayashi Masahiro for allowing me to participate in their graduate seminars. Ikeda Maho tutored me in Japanese handwritten documents and Xu Hang did the same for Republic of China Foreign Ministry documents. Tomomatsu Yuka, Nakaji Yoko, Oyamada Keiichi, and the Kanaharas made me feel welcome in Japan and beyond.

For allowing me to experience China first-hand, I am deeply indebted to the Yale-China Association for a teaching fellowship in Guangzhou hosted by Ching May-bo at Sun Yat-sen University (2004-06). Thanks to Zhou Xiaolan, x ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Florian Deschanel, Andrew Smeall, Liang Minling, Shao Xiaowen, Wang Lei, Zhu Lihua, Guo Tao, and numerous others who made my years in Guangzhou and Beijing so memorable. I am also grateful to professors at Xiamen University and Sun Yat-sen University for helping me gain access to archives in Fujian and Guangdong.

My research has been facilitated by the staff and archivists of the following institutions. In Taiwan: the Academia Sinica libraries, Institute of Taiwan History Archives, National Taiwan University Library, National Taiwan Library, and Academia Historica. In Japan: the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Archives, Ministry of Defense Archives, National Archives, National Diet Library, Japan- Taiwan Exchange Association Library, and University of Tokyo libraries. In China: the Xiamen Municipal Library, Xiamen Municipal Archives, Fujian Provincial Library, Fujian Provincial Archives, Guangzhou Municipal Library, Shanghai Municipal Library, and Shanghai Municipal Archives. In Singapore: the National Archives and National Library. In the United Kingdom: the National Archives and the British Library. In the United States: the National Archives and Records Administration, College Park, the Library of Congress Asia Collections, and Princeton and Columbia University libraries.

Friends and colleagues generously commented on drafts of the manuscript: Nicole Barnes, Shelly Chan, Parks Coble, Kjell Ericson, Sabine Frühstück, Elijah Greenstein, Steve Gump, Masato Hasegawa, Hidetaka Hirota, Douglas Howland, Miriam Kingsberg Kadia, Nick Kapur, Zack Kagan-Guthrie, Paul Kreitman, Radha Kumar, Michael Laffan, Sophia Lee, James Lin, Tatiana Linkhoeva, Hyung-Gu Lynn, Connor Mills, Aaron S. Moore, Brandon Palmer, James Pickett, Joseph Seeley, Gregory Seiffert, Karen Thornber, Robert Tierney, Yuma Totani, Jing Tsu, Jun Uchida, Benjamin Uchiyama, Sandra Wilson, Albert Wu, Takahiro Yamamoto, Wen-hsin Yeh, and Takashi Yoshida. Louise Young gave invaluable suggestions for revising my manuscript into a book. Evan Dawley and an anonymous reader for Cornell University Press offered detailed reader reports with insightful recommendations for revisions. Megan Pugh was an ideal developmental editor who sharpened the prose and structure of the final manuscript.

Iam also grateful for the opportunities to present my work and the support I received at workshops, conferences, research sites, and via email. Thanks to Asano Toyomi, Paul Barclay, Charlotte Brooks, Kaoru Hayashi, Todd Henry, Koji Hirata, Clay Iten, Rebecca Karl, Robin Kietlinski, Yukiko Koga, Sarah Kovner, Barak Kushner, Konrad Lawson, Victor Louzon, Brian Martin, Misawa Mamie, Teng-Kuan Ng, Nitta Ryuki, Xavier Paulés, David Serfass, Nianshen Song, Chuck Wooldridge, Chinghsin Wu, Timothy Yang, Jeremy Yellen, and Kirsten Ziomek. Christopher Mayo, Jürgen Melzer, and W. Evan Young— The

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xi

Mayonators"—epitomize the joys of international collaboration and friendship, commenting and learning from each other's work in locations including Tokyo, Yamanashi, Ise, Frankfurt, Carlisle, Tucson, and New York.

I have been blessed with supportive colleagues at The City College of New York (CUNY), where I have taught since 2014. Beth Baron, John Blanton, Richard Calichman, Lale Can, Joshua Cohen, Craig Daigle, Yaari Felber-Seligman, Barbara Naddeo, and Clifford Rosenberg provided feedback on chapters. Chair Anne Kornhauser and deans Renata Kobetts Miller, Erec Koch, and Eric Weitz championed my teaching and research. I also thank John Gillooly, Ravi Kalia, Andreas Killen, James Lewis, Moe Liu-D' Albero, Alexandra Stern, Barbara Syrrakos, Matt Vaz, Laurie Woodard, and I-Hsien Wu for their support, and students in my Japanese Empire and Asia-Pacific War classes for their questions, insights, and enthusiasm.

This book has been funded by the following sources: National Endowment for the Humanities and Japan-US Friendship Committee for Advanced Social Science Research on Japan (FO-268646-20); Social Science Research Council; Japan Society for the Promotion of Science; Fulbright IIE Program; Princeton University's History Department, East Asian Studies Program, and Institute for International and Regional Studies; Northeast Asia Council of the Association of Asian Studies; Chun and Jane Chiu Family Foundation; Florence Tan Moeson Fellowship; The City College of New York's Division of Humanities and Arts and Simon H. Rifkind Center for Humanities; PSC-CUNY; and CUNY’s Faculty Publication Program and Book Completion Award. Book subventions were supported by the National Endowment for the Humanities Open Book Program, the Chiang Ching-kuo Foundation, and the Schoff Fund at the University Seminars at Columbia University. Blakemore-Freeman Foundation grants were critical for advanced language study at IUP Beijing (2006— 07) and IUC Yokohama (2007-08).

At Cornell University Press, Roger Haydon, Sarah Grossman, Jacqulyn Teoh, Susan Specter, and Karen Hwa helped shepherd the manuscript to its completion. David Prout created the index and Michelle Witkowski oversaw copyedits. Images have been reproduced with the permission of Academia xii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Sinica's Institute of Taiwan History, Asahi Shimbun, Mainichi/ AFLO, National Archives of Singapore, National Taiwan Library and Donald and Michiko Rupnow. Mike Bechthold created the book's map on East and Southeast Asia.

I owe my initial interest in wartime Japan to my grandparents—Kuni ichi and Keiko Suzuki, Gen and Sakae Shirane—whom I was blessed to have in my life for over two decades. In recent years, Konomi Sugimoto and Chen Hsuan-chou have welcomed me as part of their family in Taiwan and Japan. My wife, Yuki Chen Sugimoto, has supported me through the ups and downs of writing this book, completed during the pandemic, with love and patience. Without her sacrifice and willingness to care for our family during the pandemic, I could not have completed revisions. I owe her hundreds of deliciously cooked meals as she is finally liberated to build her own career in news media. This book is dedicated to my parents, Tomi Suzuki and Haruo Shirane, who taught me the joys of cross-cultural learning from an early age. I hope to pass on the love, time, and opportunities that they gave me to my beautiful son, Issey.

NOTE TO THE READER

Japanese-language words have been transliterated in the modified Hepburn system, ezcept for the place-names Tokyo, Kyoto, Osaka, and Hokkaido. Chinese-language words have been transliterated in Hanyu Pinyin. Exceptions are made for when an alternate is commonly well-known (for example, Taipei, Chiang Kai-shek, Manchuria) and for Taiwanese scholars whose names are commonly transliterated in Wade-Giles. There is no standard system for transliterating Austronesian (indigenous) names. When possible, I have used the spellings cited by other English-language scholars or the romanized spelling of the Japanese katakana cited by Japanese-language scholars. I follow the standard order of Asian names (surname first, followed by the given name) except for the names of scholars who publish mainly in English.

Though, historically, Taipei was called Taihoku under Japanese rule from 1895 to 1945, I use today’s Taiwanese place names instead of colonial-era names in the body text. Transliterations in parentheses throughout the text are Japanese terms: (dohd). When both Japanese and Chinese terms are given, they are indicated separately: (J. doho, C. tongbao). The translations from Japanese and Chinese are all mine unless otherwise indicated.

Iadopt the term “Taiwanese” (J. hontojin, Taiwanjin, C. bendaoren, Taiwanren) as a legal term used by the Japanese for ethnic Han residents in Taiwan with colonial subjecthood. Though colonial Taiwan consisted of Han and indigenous residents, I generally use "Taiwanese" to refer to the Han Taiwanese and “indigenous Taiwanese" to refer to the latter group. I use "overseas Taiwanese" to translate the Japanese term Taiwan sekimin (C. Taiwan jimin), which referred to Taiwanese subjects residing outside of Taiwan in mainland China or Southeast Asia. The "overseas Taiwanese" included both Taiwanese subjects who had migrated abroad and resident ethnic Chinese (in China or Southeast Asia) who had naturalized as Taiwanese subjects. Contemporary Japanese terms for "South China" included Minami Shina, Nanshi, or taigan (across the [Taiwan] Strait). At its most expanded form, "South China" could include Fujian, Guangdong, Guangxi, Guizhou, Yunnan, Hong Kong, Macau, and Hainan. However, I use the term as the Taiwan Government-General generally did to refer to the xiii xiv NOTE TO THE READER narrower geographical region of Fujian and Guangdong provinces across the Taiwan Strait. Lastly, the Japanese term Nan’yé (literally, the “South Seas”) was a malleable geographic designation that referred more or less to the present-day South Pacific, Southeast Asia, or a combination of the two. After Japan occupied Micronesia (Nan'yo Gunto) in the 1910s, the Japanese often referred to Micronesia as the “Inner South Seas" (Uchi Nan yo) or "Rear South Seas” (Ura Nan’y6) and present-day Southeast Asia as the “Outer South Seas (Soto Nan'yo) or “Front South Seas" (Omote Nan'yo). For the sake of intelligibility, I use the term "Southeast Asia" as the English translation for Nan'yo. The English term "Southeast Asia" is a wartime invention and its geographic parameters remain debated. In this book, "Southeast Asia" generally refers to Siam (Thailand) and the Western colonies of Malaya, North Borneo, the Philippines, Indochina, and the East Indies.

Unless otherwise noted in the endnotes and selected bibliography, all Japanese-language books were published in Tokyo and all Chinese-language books were published in Taipei.

diem

X

JHDVd HINOS

($n) uedies

(SN) eM

NYDO JHDvd

VANIND

"s[neeg M E "e

(sn) weng SINIddITIHd

opleyyoH à $

"d

NV320 NVIONI

IMPERIAL GATEWAY

Introduction

One year after Japan annezed the subtropical island of Taiwan in 1895 as its first overseas colony, Taiwan governor-general Katsura Taro (1848-1913) wrote that "Colonial rule in Taiwan cannot be restricted to the island's borders: it must also involve overseas expansion." Katsura's June 1896 report, which he sent to the Tokyo central government, was titled Principles of Taiwan Rule and described his recent month-long observation tour of both the island and, across the Taiwan Strait, South China. He outlined Taiwan’s strategic importance to Japan's southern imperial interests: “On the opposite side of Taiwan and the Pescadores is the South China coast connected to the key port of Xiamen; to the south of Taiwan are the islands of the South Seas [Nan'yo Shoto, present-day maritime Southeast Asia]. Taiwan is thus the perfect site from which to gain control of the South China Sea."! Katsura's report was the first of many such arguments that framed Taiwan's importance in terms of continued imperial expansion.

Taiwan's modest landmass—13,000 square miles, or less than one-tenth the size of Japan's archipelago—was located at the maritime crossroads of East and Southeast Asia: 100 miles from southwest Japan's Okinawan islands, 100 miles off the coast of South China, and between Japan and the Philippines. Since the seventeenth century, Taiwan had served as a commercial hub for Chinese, Japanese, Dutch, Spanish, British, American, and Southeast Asian traders. It also had been the target of imperial ambitions due to its strategic position and natural resources. Parts of the island had been governed by the Dutch (1624—62), the Spanish (1626-42), the Sino-Japanese "pirate" Koxinga (C. Zheng Chenggong) and his family (1662-83), and the Manchu Qing dynasty (1683— 1895)? After the opening of Qing Taiwan's treaty ports to foreign trade in 1860, the island became a site of commercial and geostrategic competition among Britain, France, the United States, and Japan.?

Japan's victory in the First Sino-Japanese War (1894—95) led it to annex Taiwan from Qing China (1644-1911), thereby joining the ranks of the Western imperial powers in Asia. The Japanese Meiji government (1868-1912) faced opposition from the local population, which included roughly 2.8 million ethnic Han Chinese and 100,000 indigenous peoples.” To quell anti-Japanese resistance, "civilize" the island's residents, and develop the island's economy, the Tokyo central government established the Taiwan Government-General (Taiwan Sotokufu, 1895-1945) in the colonial capital of Taipei (J. Taihoku). Headed by Japanese military leaders selected from among high-ranking officers in the Imperial Army and Navy, the Government-General was granted complete military and civil jurisdiction over the island.”

As hinted by Katsura Taro's 1896 report, Japanese colonial leaders focused, right from the start, on promoting Taiwan as Japan's "southern gateway" (nanmon) through which the nascent Japanese empire could continue to advance. Under Qing rule, Taiwan had been a political and economic appendage of Fujian province. Under Japanese rule, the fourth governor-general Kodama Gentaro (1852-1906, served 1898-1906) wished to reverse the cross-strait relationship to make Fujian into Taiwan’s imperial frontier on mainland China.” Yet a central paradox of early Japanese colonialism was that Government- General leaders advocated for overseas expansion at a time when they could hardly afford the finances or personnel to undertake it. For the first decade, they were plagued by incessant anti-Japanese uprisings and fiscal insolvency. In 1898, for example, subsidies for Taiwan had so drained Tokyo's finances that some Japanese officials in the central government suggested selling off the island to a Western power."

Over time, however, the Taiwan Government-General did extend its imperial interests across the East and South China Seas. To explain this process, I adopt the concept of the "imperial gateway." From 1895 to 1945, Japanese colonial leaders envisioned the island as an open-ended channel through which they could continually expand Japan's southern frontiers, with colonial Taiwan— both its Japanese colonialists and Taiwanese subjects—mediating Japan's strategic, economic, and military expansion in South China and Southeast Asia.” The skills and experiences of Taiwan's institutions and personnel critically shaped Japan's informal empire in prewar South China and military occupation of the

“Southern Regions” (Nanpo, the Japanese term that collectively referred to South China, Southeast Asia, and the South Pacific). This book illustrates how Japanese imperial strategies and practices were not merely dictated by the Tokyo central government. Japanese colonial leaders in Taiwan innovated new imperial strategies to compete with Chinese and Western powers for regional hegemony.

The trajectories of the Japanese empire were also shaped by intra-imperial rivalries. Although the Taiwan Government-General sought to expand Japan's imperial power overseas, its objectives were not always aligned with those in the Tokyo central government. The Japanese metropole's imperial aspirations, especially as advanced by the Foreign Ministry and Imperial Army, initially prioritized northern continental advance through Korea and Manchuria over the southern expansion promoted by colonial leaders in Taiwan. Technically, the jurisdiction of the Government-General was circumscribed to the island and remained legally subordinate to Tokyo until 1945. Nevertheless, the Government-General took advantage of Taiwan's geographical proximity to and cultural affinities with South China and Southeast Asia—especially their shared ethnic Han Chinese populations—to elevate its strategic importance in Japan's empire.? This book analyzes both the synergies and tensions between the expansionist ambitions of the Government-General and the imperial priorities of Tokyo, including those advanced by the Foreign Ministry, army, and navy.'°

Even when lacking the support of the Tokyo government, the Taiwan Government-General enacted new imperial strategies centered on mobilizing its overseas Taiwanese subjects. The Japanese legal category of “overseas Taiwanese” (J. Taiwan sekimin, C. Taiwan jimin) included both Taiwanese subjects who had migrated abroad as well as resident ethnic Chinese in South China or Southeast Asia whom the Japanese had naturalized as Taiwanese subjects. In North and Central China, there were significant numbers of Japanese migrant settlers. In South China, by contrast, Japan's economic and demographic representation was weak. In response, the Government-General welcomed thousands of resident Chinese who eagerly sought out Taiwanese subjecthood because it granted them the extraterritorial rights—such as exemption from Chinese taxes and laws and Japanese consular protection—that Japan had obtained after 1895.!! Such practices, which I call “proxy colonialism," were in sharp contrast to those of rival Western powers in China's treaty ports that increasingly used racialized nationality policies to restrict Chinese naturalization.”

Japanese colonial leaders viewed overseas Taiwanese as ideal Sino-Japanese intermediaries. South China’s Fujianese dialect, Hokkien (C. Minnanhua), was similar to the Taiwanese dialect (C. Taiwanhua) and spoken by sizable overseas Chinese populations throughout Southeast Asia. Japanese officials relied on wealthy, well-connected, and even armed overseas Taiwanese as gateway subjects to help mediate Taiwan's economic, geopolitical, and cultural interests across the East and South China Seas. There were limits, however, to how much Japanese authorities could monitor the growing overseas Taiwanese population. Chinese and Taiwanese alike learned to exploit loopholes in nationality laws to pursue individual interests irrespective of national loyalties. Japanese policies toward the overseas Taiwanese were thus as much about reacting to the unpredictable behavior of Taiwanese subjects in South China as they were about directing such behavior.

In Japan's quest for geopolitical and economic supremacy in Asia, neither the processes of colonialism and imperialism nor the boundaries between formal empire (overseas colonies) and informal empire (“semi-colonial” Chinese treaty ports) were neatly divided.” Such boundaries fluctuated due to geopolitical contingencies and unforeseen activities by a range of actors who passed through the Taiwan gateway at the crossroads of multiple empires. The agency and flexibility displayed by overseas Taiwanese during the prewar and wartime periods challenge prevailing assumptions that the "colonizers" and the “colonized" occupied clear places within imperial hierarchies: outside Taiwan's territorial borders, gradations of power and categories of identity could be quite fluid. In turn, the geographic orientations and strategic aims of Japanese expansion from Taiwan were ever-shifting and adaptable to the changing international order.

Japan's Annexation of Taiwan

Japan's overseas empire emerged within the context of accelerated Western expansion in Asia. Western empires included both bounded territories under colonial rule and modes of imperial commerce and politics that reshaped life in coastal treaty ports. By the 1850s under the threat of steamships and cannons, Tokugawa Japan (1603-1868), along with China and Siam, was subjected to Western informal empire. The signing of unequal treaties compromised Japan's sovereignty: in coastal treaty ports, Westerners enjoyed tariff immunity and extraterritorial rights exempting them from Japanese laws. After rival samurai from southwest Japan toppled the Tokugawa regime in 1868, the new Meiji government embarked on Western-inspired modernization and military reforms to resist further encroachment and restore complete sovereignty.

At the same time that Meiji leaders strengthened Japan's industrial economy and military, they actively sought opportunities for territorial expansion. Between 1869 and 1879, they extended Japan's national borders through the forceful incorporation of Ezo (Hokkaido), the Kuril Islands (Chishima), the Bonin Islands (Ogasawara), and the Ryükyü Islands (Okinawa) as part of Japan proper.'^ They also planned to invade Korea in 1873, though those plans were aborted. A military expedition the following year sent 3,600 troops to Taiwan under the staged pretext to avenge the murder of fifty-four shipwrecked Ryükyüan subjects at the hands of Taiwan's indigenous peoples in 1871. Enlisting Western legal advisors' support, the Japanese contended that under international law, the “uncivilized” indigenous lands in southeastern Taiwan remained outside Qing jurisdiction and thereby open lands available for annexation. During the expedition, one of the officers, Admiral Kabayama Sukenori—who later became navy minister (served 1890-92) and the first Taiwan governor-general (served 1895—96)—highlighted Taiwan's potential as a naval base. General Tani Kanjo went so far as to advance grandiose visions of invading mainland China from Taiwan."

Nothing came of such fantasies, for while the 1874 Taiwan Expedition subjugated the island's southeast indigenous peoples, Meiji leaders were unprepared to go to war with the Qing. Moreover, Britain and the United States were strongly opposed to Japan's incursion: trade in Taiwan's camphor, tea, and sugar had flourished since the opening of the island's treaty ports after the Second Opium War (1856-60). These Western powers did not want to give up their profits, and the Japanese government did not want to antagonize them. In the end, Japan withdrew its forces, and the Qing paid a small indemnity that effectively acknowledged the Ryükyüs as part of Japan but required no territorial concessions. Over the next few decades, Japanese leaders turned their focus northward to rivalries with the Qing and Russia over the Korean peninsula.

Japan's imperial ambitions toward neighboring regions in Asia were driven as much by preemptive defensiveness as by the pursuit of power and prestige. By the end of the nineteenth century, the kingdoms of Southeast Asia were to be divided into the Western colonies of British Malaya and Burma, French Indochina, the Dutch East Indies, and the US Philippines.'^ Japanese leaders worried that a potential foreign occupation of Korea would make Japan, whose “western gate" (seimon) of Tsushima was just thirty miles away, a vulnerable target. Likewise, a Western annexation of Taiwan would similarly leave the "southern gate" (nanmon) of their Okinawan islands, one hundred miles away, susceptible to invasion." These fears were warranted. As early as the 1850s, American officials in East Asia, including Commodore Matthew Perry, advocated annexing Taiwan for its commercial value. They did not receive the backing of the US government, but that did not mean Taiwan was safe from invasion. Over the coming decades, as the French extended their colonial possessions in Indochina northward up to Southwest China's border, they attempted to incorporate Taiwan as well, occupying its northern ports during the Sino-French War (1884-85) to win concessions. The Qing staved off a French takeover only by mounting a successful defense of the rest of Taiwan.'? For the Japanese navy, the Sino-French War confirmed the strategic importance of Taiwan as a maritime base.” A decade later, at the end of the First Sino-Japanese War, Japan secured the island for itself.

Since 1885, Japan and the Qing had agreed not to station their respective military forces in the Korean peninsula. When the Qing sent troops to support the Korean court against a peasant rebellion in spring 1894, Japan declared war against the Qing ostensibly “to protect Korea's independence." Over the coming months, Japan's military defeated Qing forces in a series of battles in Korea, Manchuria, and the Yellow Sea. In peace negotiations with the Qing, Japan's Imperial Army lobbied for the Qing to cede South Manchuria as a northern buffer against Russia. Japan's Imperial Navy, meanwhile, pushed for Taiwan as a southern foothold in the East and South China Seas. The April 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki ended the war and ceded both regions to Japan. A week later, however, Russia, France, and Germany mounted what came to be known as the Triple Intervention, pressuring Japan to return South Manchuria to the Qing. Japan was allowed to retain Taiwan by assuring the Western powers commercial access to the island and freedom of shipping in the Taiwan Strait.”°

Japan's acquisition of Taiwan in 1895 marked the formal start of its overseas empire. In contrast to Hokkaido and Okinawa, for example, which the Meiji government legally incorporated as part of Japan's metropole (naichi), Taiwan was governed as a colony (gaichi). Some historians have argued that Hokkaido and Okinawa should be viewed as Japan's first colonies. However, while residents of these territories initially faced legal and ethnic discrimination, they were gradually incorporated as citizens of Japan's metropole with civic rights unavailable in colonies like Taiwan.” Though Han Taiwanese subjects became Japanese nationals, they did not receive access to primary education, social welfare, and conscription duties equal to those of Japanese citizens in the metropole.” Scholars have termed the second-class status of colonial subjecthood, which later applied to Koreans and other colonized Asians, as Japanese “regional citizenship" or “sub-nationality.”” Still, the Japanese gave the Han Taiwanese more social privileges and opportunities than the upland indigenous Taiwanese (called banjin or “savages” by the authorities), who were governed separately in a specially administered indigenous territorial zone in eastern Taiwan.”

A decade after acquiring Taiwan, Japan won the Russo-Japanese War (1904— 5) and turned its focused northward. The Japanese occupied Korea, the Kwantung Leasehold in South Manchuria, Karafuto (Sakhalin), and the rest of Manchuria in 1931 before taking over strategic regions in North, Central, and South China during the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937—45). Previous narratives of Japan's empire have largely focused on these northern advances into continental East Asia.” The story of Japan's southern advance is generally told in small bursts, when historians discuss Japanese expansionist fantasies of the South Pacific in the 1870s-80s and the acquisition of Micronesia from Germany during World War I (1914—18).76 Southern expansion only takes center stage with the Imperial Army and Navy's 1936 unified policy of simultaneous northern and southern advance, which culminated in the Asia-Pacific War (1941— 45). Studies of wartime Japanese Pan-Asianist rhetoric and state-building have highlighted the puppet-state of Manchukuo (1932-45), Chinese collaborationist regimes (1937—45), and occupied Southeast Asia (1942-45). Despite the intense scholarly interest in Japan's northern advance, recapturing the importance of southern expansion—especially radiating out from Taiwan—is essential for understanding the broader history of the Japanese empire.

Japan's Southern Advance

Orienting the geographic focus to the understudied southern half of Japan's empire centered on Taiwan, Imperial Gateway contends that, even as Japan's Imperial Army and Foreign Ministry prioritized northern advance in Korea and Manchuria from the 1900s up to the 1930s, Taiwan served as a pivotal gateway for Japan's contested southward advance through the Asia-Pacific War. In spite of the multivectored nature of Japanese empire-building, the strategic significance of Taiwan has been largely overlooked in the English-language historiography. Present-day accounts of Taiwan have remained surprisingly consistent with Mark Peattie's 1984 observation that Taiwan was peripheral to Japan's long-term foreign policies: "Taiwan was an imperial accessory, a laboratory where the ‘new boy’ among the colonial powers could show off his modernizing skills, not the heart of Japan's strategic concerns." ?? Historians have shown in various ways how Taiwan did indeed serve as a colonial "laboratory," but it was much more than a site for experiments.

To be sure, after the end of martial law in Taiwan in 1987 and ensuing political and academic liberalization, historical studies of the island have undergone a radical transformation.? Since the 1990s, scholars have begun to rewrite the history of colonial Taiwan not as a local case study in Chinese anti-Japanese resistance undertaken by China, the narrative previously promoted by the Republic of China government, but from the perspectives of Taiwanese subjectivity and agency. Cultural and literary studies have illustrated the multifaceted nature of Japanese colonial rule and its mutual impact on Japanese and Taiwanese identity formation.”” Sayaka Chatani, Evan Dawley, Paul Barclay, and Kirsten Ziomek, among others, have furthered our understanding of the limits of Japanese state power vis-à-vis colonial subjects.?' By highlighting the agency and various intermediary roles of the Han and indigenous Taiwanese, such works have revealed the fluidity of Japan's imperial hierarchies and categories. Hiroko Matsuda, David Ambaras, and Eiichiro Azuma have likewise traced the liminal mobilities of border-crossers to and from Taiwan—whether it be Taiwanese in Okinawa, Japanese adventurers from Taiwan to South China, or Japanese settlers from Hawai'i to Taiwan.” Such works have pushed the spatial and analytic boundaries of Japan’s empire beyond its formal territorial limits.

Building on such studies that challenge the standard geographies of Japan's empire, Imperial Gateway examines the intricate ties between Japanese colonial governance in Taiwan and a broader web of international relations. The conventional focus on bilateral ties between the metropole and its colonies simply cannot account for Japanese rule in Taiwan, which was shaped as much by developments in neighboring South China and Southeast Asia as by the will of leaders in Tokyo. In turn, Taiwan served as a conduit for Sino-Japanese relations and Japanese engagement with Southeast Asia. Approaching colonial Taiwan as an imperial gateway allows us to uncover regional networks and conflicts often neglected due to divisions in the academic subfields of Sino- Japanese, Sino-Taiwanese, Japanese-Taiwanese, and Japanese-Southeast Asian relations.” Imperial expansion was a contested process among state agencies and mobile colonial subjects whose interests did not easily map onto national, local, or ethnoracial categories.

Conceptualizing Taiwan as an imperial gateway also expands our understanding of the regional dynamics of Japan's territorial peripheries. No other Japanese colony played a more critical role in informal and formal southern expansion during the first half of the twentieth century. Before annexing Taiwan in 1895, Japanese leaders first viewed Okinawa (formerly known as the Ryükyüs) as their nation's “southern gateway." Since the sixteenth century, the Ryükyü Kingdom had served as a critical intermediary for maritime trade between China, Japan, and Southeast Asia.?^ In the 1870s, Japan occupied the Ryükyüs and incorporated them as Okinawa Prefecture, highlighting their potential for military defense and forward deployment. Yet after 1895, Taiwan replaced Okinawa as Japan's southern imperial gateway. Not only was Taiwan located closer to South China and Southeast Asia and further from Japan's archipelago, butit also had fifteen times the landmass and population.” Unlike in Taiwan and Korea, the Japanese government did not invest significant resources to develop Okinawa's infrastructure and industries. Hundreds of thousands of Okinawans went on to migrate to other parts of the Japanese metropole, Taiwan, Micronesia, the Philippines, Hawai'i, and Latin America for better socioeconomic opportunities but rarely as imperialists like the overseas Taiwanese.?? As for Japan's northern territories, Hokkaido (formerly Ezo) served as a migratory entryway into colonial Karafuto (Sakhalin). Karafuto, on the other hand, never developed into an imperial gateway into northern Eurasia.