Allied prisoners of war in Japan
[1]: 4–5 [2][3]: 237 Like other Axis Powers and the USSR, Japan significantly ignored provisions of international treaties regarding humane treatment of prisoners.
[2] By the 1930s Japanese nationalism turned the country much more xenophobic; the Western origin of the laws such as the stipulation of the Geneva Convention made them unpopular (after the war, many Japanese accused of crimes against POWs, including mid-ranking soldiers, claimed they had never even heard of the convention[6]: 24 ),[2] the interpretation of Bushido became much more harsh, and the concept of surrender became much more dishonorable (the Senjinkun military code drafted in 1940 and instituted the next year specifically forbade retreat or surrender).
The phenomenon of gekokujō which involves lower-ranking officers overthrowing or assassinating their superiors, also allowed for the proliferation of war crimes because if commanders tried to restrict atrocities that served to relieve boredom or stress of the troops, they would either face mutiny or reassignment.
[7]: 23–24 [10] In 1942, General Tojo Hideki (Japanese war minister and premier) stated that Japan would treat POWs according to its own traditions and customs, effectively distancing Japan from the Western traditions and the Geneva conventions, and specifically encouraging the use of POWs for forced labor (which was forbidden by the Geneva Convention).
Kovner notes that it was "how prosecutors put the whole POW camp system on trial", however Tamura himself was not responsible for most of the atrocities, had little actual authority to do either harm or good for the prisoners, and "was prosecuted for being in the wrong place in a bureaucratic hierarchy".
Kovner concludes that in the end, the legal system was unable to pin the blame for the POW mistreatment on any person, small group or organization.
[15]: 360 It is however still mostly ignored or glossed over in Japan (see also Nanjing Massacre denial and American cover-up of Japanese war crimes).
[12]: 2 [6]: xxii, 256–262 Conditions in Japanese POW camps were harsh; prisoners were forced to work, beaten for minor infractions, starved and denied medical treatment.
[2][6]: 24 The brutality of forced labor is exemplified the case of the Burma-Siam railway, where 16,000 out of 40,000 POWs assigned there as the workforce died.
[6]: 49–80 [12]: 5 Nonetheless according to Sarah Kovner, "much of the suffering of Allied POWs and internees resulted from Japanese logistical failures and inadequate planning for camps, not prior intent".
[12]: 95 She concludes that in Japan, with regards to Allied prisoners (except the Chinese) "there was no overarching policy or plan to make POWs suffer, or starve them, or work them to death.
POWs were simply not a priority... [most] camps were run by individual officers, and sometimes NCOs, in far-flung locales" and their commanders were given much autonomy; some prisoners experienced very harsh conditions; others were treated reasonably well.
87 Soviet POWs were released during a prisoner exchange following the 1939 border clashes Khalkhin Gol (at that point, however, USSR was not a WWII participant).
