This article was downloaded by: [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria]

On: 10 January 2015, At: 22:35

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Philippine Political Science Journal

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rpsj20

Japan's soft power viewed through the

lens of the Philippines’ commemoration
of historical events
a
Lydia N. Yu Jose
a
Ateneo de Manila University, Department of Political Science ,
Quezon City , Philippines
Published online: 27 Nov 2012.

To cite this article: Lydia N. Yu Jose (2012) Japan's soft power viewed through the lens of the
Philippines’ commemoration of historical events, Philippine Political Science Journal, 33:2, 146-160,
DOI: 10.1080/01154451.2012.734095

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01154451.2012.734095

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
 Philippine Political Science Journal
Vol. 33, No. 2, December 2012, 146–160

Japan’s soft power viewed through the lens of the Philippines’

commemoration of historical events
Lydia N. Yu Jose*

Ateneo de Manila University, Department of Political Science, Quezon City, Philippines

As early as the 1920s, Japan had used auspicious historical events as a source of soft
power to make itself attractive to the Philippines. However, toward the turn of the
present century, an aspect of this strategy turned out to be problematic because Japan’s
Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 22:35 10 January 2015

choice of February as the month to hold the cultural component of its soft power,
packaged as the Philippines-Japan Festival, clashed with the commemoration of the
Battle for the Liberation of Manila. This article traces how the annual Philippines-
Japan Festival came to be celebrated in February; narrates how the Battle for the
Liberation of Manila is celebrated and contrasts it with the grander annual celebration
of national historical events; and recounts the criticisms hurled by Filipino elites
against the holding of the Philippines-Japan Festival every February. Because of the
criticisms, the word “festival” is no longer used, but cultural events have spread to
other months, including February. The article concludes that in this particular case a
World War II memory that is the Battle for the Liberation of Manila has not proved
strong enough to radically challenge Japan’s soft power.
Keywords: soft power; historical memory; Japan; Philippines; Battle for the Liberation
of Manila

This article is about two contrasting annual rituals in the Philippines involving Japan’s soft
power: a solemn commemoration and a festive celebration held in the same month.
The solemn commemoration focuses on the non-combatant victims and the destruction of
Manila in the battle for its liberation in February 1945, described as the worst battle in the
history of World War II for the Philippines, second only to the destruction of Warsaw,
Poland. The festive celebration is the Philippines-Japan Festival, a celebration started in
1988 after decades of the slow rekindling of friendly bilateral relations since the end of
World War II. The Philippines-Japan Festival was the way the Japanese government,
mainly through the Japan Foundation in Manila and the Japan Information and Cultural
Center (JICC), packaged most of the activities comprising the cultural component of soft
power. Despite protests and criticisms about holding the festival in February, the same
month in which commemorations are held for the victims of the Battle for the Liberation
of Manila, the festival, or at least its inaugural opening, continued to be held every
February until 2007, when in that year it was moved to July. The following year, however,
and since then, activities connected with the Japanese promotion of soft power are held in
several months of the year, including February.
Despite almost a decade of criticisms of the incongruous situation, no serious study
about the controversy has been done. And yet, a systematic examination of the controversy

*Email: lyjose@ateneo.edu

ISSN 0115-4451 print/ISSN 2165-025X online

q 2012 Philippine Political Science Association (PPSA)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01154451.2012.734095
http://www.tandfonline.com
 Philippine Political Science Journal 147

could contribute to a deeper understanding of how historical and personal memories color
Japan’s view of how to promote its soft power in the Philippines, as well as the Filipino
elite’s view of historical commemorations in the Philippines and their view of Japan’s soft
power. And more importantly, an analysis of the controversy will partly serve as a gauge
of the strength of World War II memories vis-à-vis Japan’s soft power. Measuring the
strength of a legacy of World War II takes on a special significance in the current discourse
on regional leadership in East Asia. In this discourse, the legacy of World War II is usually
presented as one of the reasons why former colonies of Japan are reluctant to accept
Japanese leadership (Dent 2008).
International mass media and a number of scholarly works on China-Japan relations
and Korea-Japan relations have explored the impact of World War II memories, such as
those related to the comfort women, Nanjing massacre, and the treatment of World War II
Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 22:35 10 January 2015

in Japan’s history textbooks on Japan’s relations with these countries (Dudden 2010;
Hughes 2008). But there has been no significant similar study on Philippines-Japan
relations. This article is the first to take up the challenge. While this article is not about
regional leadership, it assumes that ability to promote one’s culture in a foreign land is an
indication of potential for such leadership. The success of cultural promotion measured by
its persistence and acceptance by students, teachers, and cultural and intellectual elites of
the other country contributes to a reservoir of soft power.
This article will analyze the controversy by describing the festival; discussing how the
Battle for the Liberation of Manila used to be remembered, how such remembrance
changed, and how it is now commemorated; and narrating the criticisms hurled against the
holding of the Philippines-Japan Festival in February.

Historical commemoration
Commemoration, as used in this article, refers to the deliberate and open remembering of
historical events. The most visible forms of remembrance are annual public celebrations,
declaration of historical events’ anniversaries as non-working holidays, erection of
monuments in public places, putting images of historical people and events on monetary
bills and coins, and placing of historical markers on old edifices. States, being rational
actors that make policies based on perceived national interests, do not commemorate all
historical events. They select based on the utilitarian value of the events. As Paul Ricoeur
(2006) explains, events celebrated in this way fall in the Weberian concept of
“instrumentalized memory.” Habermas, on the other hand, calls them “strategic reason,”
as opposed to “communicational reason” (Ricoeur 2006).
There are deliberate and open commemorations which are not held by the state, and
these commemorations do not easily fall under such classification as “instrumentalized
memory.” One such commemoration is that of the Battle for the Liberation of Manila.
Aside from its commemoration by the City of Manila, which may fall under the concept
of “instrumentalized memory,” it is also commemorated by a private organization,
Memorare-Manila 1945 Foundation Incorporated (hereafter simply Memorare-Manila).
It was founded by the descendants and friends of the non-combatant victims of the Battle
for the Liberation of Manila. Memorare-Manila, unlike the Philippine state and unlike the
City of Manila, cannot choose and does not have to choose any historical event to
commemorate. Its members, however, commemorate the battle because they are relatives,
friends, acquaintances, or at least eye witnesses to the horrors of the battle. The sentiment
surrounding the commemoration is similar to that which brings relatives and friends to the
graves of their loved ones during All Saints Day or All Souls Day (every 1 and 2 November
 148 L.N. Yu Jose

in the Philippines). While not done for a utilitarian purpose, the commemoration of the
battle has educational value in that through such commemoration and other activities
related to the battle, Memorare-Manila wishes to impart its memory to present and future
generations.
Going back to state commemorations, the utilitarian values that guide the Philippines
in selecting historical events to commemorate – as well as to stop commemorating some
of them or change the names of the events – are reflected in the Constitution, laws,
executive orders, and speeches of high government officials during the commemoration.
As listed in section three, article 14 of the Constitution of the Philippines, the aims of
education – the basic institution through which history is learned – are as follows: to
“inculcate patriotism and nationalism, foster love of humanity, respect for human rights,
appreciation of the role of national heroes in the historical development of the country,
Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 22:35 10 January 2015

teach the rights and duties of citizenship, strengthen ethical and spiritual values, develop
moral character and personal discipline, encourage critical and creative thinking, broaden
scientific and technological knowledge, and promote vocational efficiency.” As will be
seen below, the Philippine government prioritizes patriotism and nationalism and
appreciation of the role of national heroes. The other values such as love of humanity,
respect for human rights, and ethical and spiritual values are not stressed.
Viewed from the perspective of nationalism and appreciation of the role of national
heroes, it is understandable why the historical events that are publicly commemorated
every year are connected with the fight for independence. Independence Day, every 12
June, is a commemoration of the Philippine declaration of independence against Spain in
1898. National Heroes Day at the end of August is a commemoration of the outbreak of the
Philippine Revolution led by Andres Bonifacio on 29 to 30 August 1896. Bonifacio Day,
every 30 November, is of course a celebration of the anniversary of Andres Bonifacio’s
birth, the founder of the Katipunan, the revolutionary association he led. Rizal Day, every
30 December, is a commemoration of the execution of Jose Rizal in 1896. Araw ng
Kagitingan, every 9 April, is a commemoration of the fall of Bataan (9 April 1942) and
Corregidor (6 May 1942) to the Japanese forces. The name of the holiday used to be “Fall
of Bataan,” but it was changed in 1984 to “Araw ng Kagitingan” or Day of Valor, thus
giving the signal that what is being commemorated is not the defeat, but the gallant defense
by the brave American and Filipino soldiers (DBC 1984). The change of name also made it
possible to commemorate the fall of both Bataan and Corregidor on the same day.
Laws and executive orders implement constitutional mandates, and that is also the case
for national historical commemorations. For commemorations other than the national ones
in provinces, cities, and towns, the local chief executives issue ordinances.
Prior to August 1964 the legal historical holidays of the Philippines had been Bataan
Day, Independence Day (4 July, not 12 June), Bonifacio Day, and Rizal Day. By virtue of
a legislative act passed in August 1964, 4 July became Republic Day and 12 June became
Independence Day. National Heroes Day, on the other hand, was a new addition to the list
in the 1980s (see Executive Order 203). And, in August 2004, Ninoy Aquino Day (21
August) was declared a regular holiday (Republic Act Number 9256), to commemorate the
assassination of Benigno Aquino, Jr, arch political enemy of Ferdinand Marcos.
To sum up, the historical events that are commemorated by the Philippines may be
separated into two groups. The first consists of the four events and personalities related
to the Philippine Revolution, the revolution itself, and the declaration of Philippine
independence. The second consists of the events that are related to the disruption of the
road to independence and the destruction of democracy. These are the Japanese invasion
and consequent occupation of the Philippines in 1941 and the dictatorial rule of Ferdinand
 Philippine Political Science Journal 149

Marcos from 1972 to 1986. In connection with the Japanese invasion and the Japanese
occupation, the event that is commemorated is the fall of Bataan and Corregidor, but this
has been given the name of “Araw ng Kagitingan,” a celebration of valor, not of defeat.
In connection with the dictatorial rule of Marcos, the event that is commemorated is Ninoy
Aquino Day, to celebrate a hero whose death was instrumental in the toppling of Marcos in
February 1986.
Memorare-Manila’s commemoration of the battle falls only in the periphery of this
frame of celebrating nationalism, bravery, and independence, as will be explained below.
It is, however, within the constitutional mandate of fostering love of humanity, respect for
human rights, strengthening ethical and spiritual values, and encouraging critical and
creative thinking. Nonetheless, the fact remains that the battle is not commemorated
throughout the nation, and is not a non-working holiday. The Philippine president has not
Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 22:35 10 January 2015

attended any of the commemorations of the battle by Memorare-Manila.

Speeches of high government officials during the commemoration of national public
holidays are the other indication of the utilitarian values of these historical events. A brief
general description of such speeches will further show that it is hard to put the
commemoration of the Battle within the frame of utilizing historical events to promote
nationalism, bravery, and celebration of independence.
The historical event related to World War II that is nationally and publicly celebrated
and is a non-working holiday is “Araw ng Kagitingan.” As years go by and as Philippine-
Japanese economic, social, political and cultural ties deepen and broaden, the
commemoration of “Araw ng Kagitingan” has increasingly become an opportunity for
whoever is the president to advertise current policies, especially foreign policies toward
the United States and Japan. References to the fall of Bataan and Corregidor and the
hardships of life during the war are mentioned but easily get burried in the politics and
diplomacy observed during the commemoration. To cite just an example: In the April
2003 commemoration of “Araw ng Kagitingan” in Capas, Tarlac, President Gloria
M. Arroyo reviewed the past briefly with token praises of the bravery and sacrifices of the
veterans. She then dwelt on the importance of international cooperation to combat
terrorism, and asserted that peace in Mindanao would be achieved, thanks to the
“Balikatan,” the joint US-American military exercises aimed at training Filipino soldiers
to combat terrorism. The diplomatic slant of Arroyo’s speech is not surprising, considering
the fact that this particular ceremony was held just a few months after both Japan and the
Philippines supported the US military attack on Iraq. In this ceremony Japan and the US
were represented. The representative of the Japanese Embassy, Minister Egawa Akio, spoke
of the friendship between Japan and the Philippines. The American ambassador, Francis
Ricciardone, thanked Japan and the Philippines for their support in the US-Iraq War.1
In 2012, it was the turn of President Benigno S. Aquino III to give a speech. In the
speech he delivered in Mt Samat, Bataan, he connected the bravery of the Filipino soldiers
who fought in Bataan and Corregidor 70 years ago to the bravery needed now by all
Filipinos to defend the Philippine territory against China’s claims over the Scarborough
Shoal and Kalayaan Islands. China and the names of the disputed territories were not
mentioned, but anyone who was knowledgeable about current events knew that this was
what the president was referring to when he mentioned helicopters and ships acquired by
the Philippines Armed Forces for the defense of Philippine shores and territorial waters.
To quote:
This is why today, it is only fitting for us to remember another kind of courage. This is the
courage of our leaders: those who did not falter from the weight of the decisions they had to
make – decisions that ended up molding the destiny of their fellow Filipinos (Aquino 2012).
 150 L.N. Yu Jose

Our government is working hard to ensure that our soldiers receive the services and benefits
they rightfully deserve. In the event of battle, we want to be able to hold our own. The BRP
Gregorio del Pilar, our first Hamilton Class Cutter, has set sail – proudly guarding our
territory. This May, a similar ship will be arriving, so that we can further patrol our shores and
our seas. A few months ago, four out of eight Combat Utility Helicopters were turned over to
our Armed Forces; this November, the remaining four helicopters will be arriving as well.
There are also 138 projects lined up in our Defense Acquisition System, all of which we will
be implementing within the next five years (Aquino 2012).
Since the normalization of Philippines-Japan relations in 1956, Philippine presidents have
stressed in their Araw ng Kagitingan speeches that “the former enemy is now a friend and
ally,” to quote President Aquino. Toward the end of his speech in 2012 he said, “the
country we once considered an enemy is now a trusted friend. And the alliance we formed
with the Americans who were our comrades in war has only deepened” (Aquino 2012).
Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 22:35 10 January 2015

Japan is now a friend; alliance with the United States has deepened. Given this thrust in
presidential speeches, it would take a great deal of word manipulation to mention the non-
combatant victims of the Battle for the Liberation of Manila and the destruction of some of
the buildings by American shelling. The speech-maker would not be able to put the horrors
of the battle in the framework of heroism and bravery, as he would be able to do in the case
of the fall of Bataan and Corregidor. This is because the non-combatant war dead of the
Battle for the Liberation of Manila, the focus of Memorare-Manila’s commemoration,
were not heroes. They were helpless victims of the war. Instead of being able to extol
heroism and bravery, the speech-maker might bring to mind images of inhumanity and
cruelty.

Historical commemoration and Japan’s soft power

Joseph Nye defines soft power as “the ability to get what you want through attraction
rather than coercion and payments” (Nye 2004). He elaborates:
In terms of resources, soft-power resources are the assets that produce such
attraction . . . Whether that attraction in turn produces desired policy outcomes has to be
judged in particular cases. Attraction does not always determine others’ preferences, but this
gap between power measured as resources and power judged as the outcomes of behavior is
not unique to soft power (Nye 2004, 6).
He identifies institutions, values, culture, and policies as the most likely resources of soft
power, and force, payments, sanctions, and bribes as most likely sources of hard power
(Nye 2004).
Japan has used soft power to make itself attractive to Filipinos from the 1920s to the
present. Culture, especially in the form of traditional and popular arts, whether performing
or visual, is consistently a component of this soft power. But Japan has also often used
historical events to make itself attractive to the Filipinos. For example, during the Japanese
occupation, Japan, in narrating the history of Philippines-Japan relations, stressed that
there were Japanese Christians too, as shown by the exile of Japanese Christians to the
Philippines in 1614 (Iwao 1943; Jose 2007). The aim of such narration was to stress
similarity between Japanese and Filipinos. An example in the more recent period was
when the Philippines celebrated the centennial of the declaration of independence in 1998.
In this year the annual Philippines-Japan Festival was advertised as Japan’s contribution to
the Centennial Celebration (Jose 2007). Moreover, no less than President Fidel Ramos
encouraged Japanese participation in the centennial celebration. Japanese participation
yielded at least two cultural grants amounting to around 94 million Yen (approximately
47 million pesos) Japan Bulletin 1997; JOCPCC 1998). Still another example was when
 Philippine Political Science Journal 151

the 50th anniversary of the normalization of Philippines-Japan relations was celebrated

in 2006 and 23 July of that year was declared by the Philippine government as Philippines-
Japan Friendship Day (Proclamation Number 854). To follow suit, Taniguchi Hiroko,
Director of the Japan Information and Cultural Center (JICC), in an email to Johnnie
D. Villanueva, president of the Philippine Association of Japanese Ministry of Education
Scholars or PHILAJAMES on 29 January 2007, announced that the JICC would celebrate
Philippines-Japan Friendship Day on and around 23 July.
But the most persistent cultural component of Japanese soft power that was hinged on a
Philippine historical event was the Philippines-Japan Festival. Originally called
Philippines-Japan Friendship Week, it was first held in February 1988 (Manila Bulletin
1993/1994). February was deemed a good month to celebrate friendship between the two
countries because Jose Rizal visited Japan in February 1888 (Manila Bulletin, 1993/1994).
Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 22:35 10 January 2015

To be more precise, Rizal arrived in Japan on 28 February and left on 13 April (Lanuza and
Zaide 1961).
It may be noted that 1988 was the centennial of Rizal’s visit to Japan. A centennial
commemoration was held in Tokyo on 29 February, sponsored by the Rizal Society of
Japan, Order of the Knights of Rizal, Tokyo Chapter, and Friends of Rizal. Aside from
Filipino students on government scholarship, like the author of this article, the more
distinguished guests, Filipinos and Japanese alike, were businessmen, politicians, and
members of the diplomatic corps. Okita Saburo, former Minister of Foreign Affairs,
delivered a speech, paying homage to the greatness of Jose Rizal, observing that Rizal’s
prediction that Japan would become an important country to the Philippines in the future
had been realized, and expressing joy over the blooming economic relations between the
Philippines and Japan (Rizal in Japan Centennial Committee 1988).
The centennial celebration of Rizal’s sojourn to Japan that was held in Tokyo was a
private initiative, but it obviously was picked up by the Japanese Ministry of Foreign
Affairs. And the policy was carried out by the Japan Information and Cultural Center in
Manila in February 1988. Whether soft power has been enhanced by using historical
events and has resulted in attraction is outside the scope of this article, but the case of the
centennial of the declaration of Philippine independence has shown that it serves the mutual
interests of Japan and the Philippines. On the other hand, celebrating the Philippines-Japan
Festival in February, during which month a private group of Filipino elites commemorated
the non-combatant war dead of the Battle for the Liberation of Manila, had created an
anomalous situation.

The Philippines-Japan Festival

The first Philippines-Japan Friendship Week held in February 1988 became Philippines-
Japan Friendship Month. To better capture the nature of the activities which were
generally promotions of Japanese culture, visual and performing arts, and symposia to
discuss Japanese history, society, economy, culture, and Philippines-Japan relations, the
name of the annual celebration was changed to Philippines-Japan Cultural Month. In the
succeeding years, the activity extended to more than a month (although the inaugural
opening was still in February), and thus, came to be known as the Philippines-Japan
Cultural Fair. Perhaps because the name was too long or the activities involved events
other than cultural, the name finally became in 1997 simply Philippines-Japan Festival.
In 2012, the cultural activities, which have spread practically throughout the year,
included a series of activities in the month of July, called Philippines-Japan Friendship
Month.2
 152 L.N. Yu Jose

The inauguration of the annual Philippines-Japan Festival was held every February
without any major problem, embarrassment, or criticism. Invitees to the lavish
inauguration would usually consist of personalities in the Philippine cultural scene, high-
ranking government officials, businessmen, former scholars of the Japanese government,
and university professors. Faculty members and students in universities and colleges
attended its numerous events either as joint-organizers, guest lecturers, contestants in
Nihongo contests, or just part of the audience.
In 1990, aside from the usual film-showing, performing arts, musical concerts, and
seminars, two days of the Friendship Month were ceremonies about Lord Takayama Ukon,
a Christian daimyo. He was one of those exiled to the Philippines in 1614, mentioned
above. On 3 February, Japanese visitors toured the museum of the University of Santo
Tomas (UST) and saw samples of jars, Japanese armors, swords, and other sixteenth and
Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 22:35 10 January 2015

seventeenth-century artifacts. Then, they attended an international symposium on

Takayama. Activities for the following day included a visit to Takayama’s grave in the
compound of the Sacred Heart Novitiate in a suburb of Manila, wreath-laying at the
Takayama monument in Paco, Manila, and a walking tour of Intramuros and Fort Santiago
(Philippine Daily Inquirer 1990). The activities were fitting if the aim was to remember
the anniversary of the death of Takayama in the Philippines. On the other hand, it is
tempting to wonder if, during the tour and amidst explanations given by the guides, the
guests were also reminded that UST was an internment camp for the American prisoners of
war during World War II, that many Filipinos and Americans were tortured and massacred
in Fort Santiago during the Battle for the Liberation of Manila, and that Intramuros was
destroyed amidst the intense fighting in February and March of 1945.
In 1993, participants in the Friendship Month were reminded of such violence and
suffering, but in a different venue. A commemoration of the war dead of 28 February 1945
in Lipa, Batangas (a province in the Philippines) was inserted in the long list of cultural
festivities. The ceremony was organized by a private cultural organization founded by
Miki Mutsuhiko, a Japanese long-time resident in the Philippines, who founded the
organization partly to apologize in a personal way for World War II (Manila Bulletin
1993/1994; Philippine Daily Inquirer 1991).
But what Miki did in 1993 was exceptional. The annual celebrations were usually a
display of Japanese culture, ushered in by a lavish inauguration in February. Newspapers
advertised the activities, and editorials and commentaries praised the affair as proof of the
strong and blooming ties between the Philippines and Japan.
In the mid-1990s the series of cultural activities came to be held not only in Manila, but
in other major cities as well, such as Baguio, Cebu, Davao, and Bukidnon (Dy 1995).
Newspaper coverage of the activities was in the beginning not so widespread, prompting
one journalist to lament (Vergara 1993). This journalist attributed the lukewarm attitude
of the press to the unwillingness of most Filipinos to talk about Japan, because, according
to him, mention of Japan usually would bring about memories of World War II.
He believed that Filipinos had long lingered on war-torn Manila, comfort women,
Yamashita Treasure, and General Homma. To him, it was high time to move on and focus
more on the growing economic relationship between the two countries and the new
beginnings of cultural relations. Everyone would agree with him that Japan and the
Philippines should move on, but not everyone would agree on his point that memories of
World War II had lingered in the minds of Filipinos for too long. As will be seen later,
members of Memorare-Manila would say that such memories, painful as they were, should
stay forever. Nonetheless, press coverage of the cultural activities has become more
widespread since then. Commentaries in newspapers appear before, during, and after the
 Philippine Political Science Journal 153

activities (for example, see Filipino 1994; Today 1995; The Philippine Journal 1996;
Philippine Daily Inquirer 1998; Manila Bulletin 1998). The activities, packaged as the
Philippines-Japan Festival, had become popular, almost a tradition in Philippines-Japan
relations and Japanese studies.

Commemoration of the Battle for the Liberation of Manila

The Battle for the Liberation of Manila, 3 February to 3 March 1945, used to be called
simply the Liberation of Manila. On 3 February 2003, during the commemoration of its
58th anniversary at the Manila City Hall, and upon the instigation of the National
Historical Institute (now National Historical Commission) the name was changed to Battle
for Manila (Ocampo 2003). Benito Legarda, Jr, historian and eye witness to the battle,
Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 22:35 10 January 2015

believes that the battle and the liberation are inseparable and prefers to call it the Battle for
the Liberation of Manila (Legarda 2007).
Philippine history textbooks consistently mention the Battle alongside the earlier
events of World War II, namely, the bombing of Pearl Harbor and the Death March. With
regard to the battle, the textbooks describe the advance of the Americans, the retreat of the
Japanese, the burning of houses, killing, and turning parts of Manila, especially Ermita and
Malate, into a hellish scene (Agoncillo 1981). Every year, accounts of the battle usually
appear in newspapers and magazines around February and March. The City of Manila
commemorates it every year, but does not declare it as a non-working holiday for the city.
Most accounts of the battle focus on the fighting and the destruction of the city and
there is hardly any mention of the killing of non-combatants. The scant mention has
become even more scant on the website of the City of Manila Tourism Office. When
accessed in 2008, the official webpage mentioned three historical sites in the city that were
reminders of the battle. They were Paco Park, the municipal cemetery of the city during
the Spanish period, Fort Santiago, a sixteenth-century citadel, and Intramuros, the walled
city built by the Spaniards in 1571. Regarding what happened in Paco Park in World War
II, the notes said that it was used by the Japanese as a central supply and ammunition
depot. There was no mention of the killing of the non-combatants. Moreover, accessed
again in 2012, Paco Park was no longer on the webpage. Regarding Fort Santiago, the
explanation in part used to say that the Japanese used the fort as their final redoubt against
American forces. Visited again in 2012, the webpage described Fort Santiago as “Shrine of
Freedom” and a reminder of the heroic Filipinos imprisoned and killed there during the
Spanish and Japanese eras. Not only was there no mention of the non-combatant victims;
there was a renewed emphasis on heroism and freedom. Several lines about Intramuros
used to read: “Intramuros was the locus for most major conflicts and invasions to befall the
pre-independence Philippines, culminating in the devastating Battle for Manila, between
the Japanese and Americans, in 1945, in which over 100,000 locals died.” The commentary
about Intramuros failed to clarify that majority of these over 100,000 “locals” were non-
combatants. Moreover, visited again in 2012, the webpage simply said that in Intramuros
“many buildings were reduced to shambles in World War II” (City of Manila 2012).
Moreover, being of Spanish vintage, the historical notes about these places referring to
the Spanish period are more substantial than those that refer to World War II. In the case of
Fort Santiago, of course, the center of attraction is Jose Rizal, its most famous prisoner.
In the 1990s, a new perspective was added to this manner of commemorating the
battle. Survivors and relatives of the civilian victims who had, until then, mourned in
silence the death of their relatives and friends, decided to speak and act to commemorate
the non-combatant war dead. These survivors, now in their eighties or early nineties,
 154 L.N. Yu Jose

are established entrepreneurs, businessmen, intellectuals, former ambassadors, members

of the Philippine elite.
They undertook several activities aimed at correcting the vague, if not the lack of,
account about civilian casualties in newspapers, history textbooks, historical markers, and
in the city’s commemoration ceremonies. Memorare-Manila commissioned an abridged
translation into English of a Spanish book about Japanese atrocities during the battle.
It published the translation and donated copies to school libraries. This book, El Terror
Amarillo en Filipinas by Antonio Perez de Olaguer, published in Spain in 1947, contains
eye-witness accounts of the destruction of Manila. It is greatly dependent on Spanish
sources, but Memorare-Manila believes that the sources “give us a good view of the
general picture. For example, 1,600 men were taken to Fort Santiago during the battle.
About 150 were Spaniards, but the few who survived gave us an idea of what happened to
Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 22:35 10 January 2015

the hundreds of Filipinos” (Olaguer 2005). By donating copies of the abridged translation
to schools, Memorare-Manila has stressed the importance of transmitting historical
memories from generation to generation through education.
A personal approach to the Japanese ambassador, Yamazaki Ryuichiro (ambassador to
the Philippines, 2004– 2007), was also made. The president of Memorare-Manila, Juan
Rocha, gifted him with a book on the battle (Yamazaki, 2006). He also took the ambassador
to the Memorare-Manila 1945 monument. This monument was unveiled by Memorare-
Manila on 18 February 1995 in a public space just across from the Manila Cathedral. The
monument resembles the Pieta – a grieving mother holding a lifeless child in her hands. Next
to her is a violated woman. Beside the rape victim is a confused, despairing man. At the
mother’s feet are lifeless children and men. The caption of the monument reads:
Memorare-Manila 1945
This memorial is dedicated to all those innocent victims of war, many of whom went nameless
and unknown to a common grave. Or never even knew a grave at all. Their bodies having been
consumed by fire or crushed to dust beneath the rubble of ruins.
Let this monument be the gravestone for each and every one of the over 100,000 men,
women, children and infants killed in Manila during its battle for liberation, February 3 –
March 3, 1945. We have not forgotten them. Nor shall we ever forget.
May they rest in peace as part now of the sacred ground of this city: the Manila of our
affections.
Since 1995 – the 50th anniversary of the battle – its non-combatant war dead are
remembered in front of this monument every February by Memorare-Manila. The solemn
ceremony usually begins with the singing of the national anthem, followed by a prayer said
by a Catholic priest. Wreaths are then offered, followed by short speeches about the battle,
the massacres of civilians, and the destruction of Manila. In 2006, for the first time, the
Japanese ambassador, Yamazaki Ryuichiro, honored the commemoration with his
presence. He offered a wreath and delivered a speech wherein he offered his apologies for
the atrocities committed by the Japanese military (Yamazaki 2006; Macairan 2006).
The core audience consists of a score of members of Memorare-Manila and their friends.
Until 2008 the larger public usually consisted of employees of the City of Manila and
political supporters of the mayor. Under a new mayor since 2008, the larger public
consisted of students of a city high school accompanied by their teachers. Over the last
couple of years, however, the audience has consisted of just the core members of
Memorare-Manila and their friends, and a few Japanese non-governmental organization
members and advocates of peace.
This annual commemoration is primarily an activity of Memorare-Manila.
Participation by the City of Manila is limited to providing traffic officers to direct the
 Philippine Political Science Journal 155

flow of vehicles during the ceremony. The 50th anniversary of the battle was the occasion
when the people who experienced, witnessed, or even just heard about the massacres, rape,
and destruction of buildings during the battle spoke for the first time, after half a century of
silence (Legarda 2007). It seems that some of them deliberately waited for the anniversary
to speak out. “This being the 50th anniversary, I decided to tell my story. After this month,
I shall not talk about it anymore and the story will be buried with me,” said a company
president who was five-and-a-half years old when all the members of his family were
massacred in De la Salle College, where, ironically, they had sought refuge (Philippine
Daily Inquirer 1995). “The horror of that time caused the survivors to put it behind them
and very few of them said much in the following years, until the 50th anniversary . . . .
Then the dammed-up memories came rushing out, in interviews, articles and books”
(Olaguer 2005).
Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 22:35 10 January 2015

Despite the fact that those who witnessed the horror of the Battle for the Liberation of
Manila have decided to speak out and act in order to increase public awareness of it,
consciousness about the battle has remained low. The scant narration about it in history
textbooks partly accounts for this. Another explanation is the local character and low-key
manner of commemorating it. Memorare-Manila’s commemoration, in particular, has
always been solemn, almost private, presenting a stark contrast to the national
commemoration of historical events by the Philippine government.

Criticisms of the holding of the Philippines-Japan Festival in February

The commemoration of the Battle for the Liberation of Manila of course has to be held in
February because it happened in February. On the other hand, the Philippines-Japan
Festival does not have to be held in February but, as explained above, it was, under a
different name, started in February of 1988 in celebration of the centennial of Rizal’s
sojourn to Japan. Between the late 1980s and mid-1990s the survivors and descendants of
the non-combatant victims of the battle were not actively and publicly commemorating the
battle. The remembrance of their departed loved ones was carried out in a quiet, personal
manner. Because of such silence, the holding of the Philippines-Japan Festival every
February was not controversial at all – it was not a contrast to any solemn, public
commemoration. The consistent public show of disapproval for holding the festival,
especially its grand inauguration in February, started only in the early 2000s.
The leading critic of the anomalous timing of the festival was Benito Legarda, Jr, a
teenager during the war, civilian survivor, scholar, author, and a member of Memorare-
Manila. He writes about World War II out of his own experience, supported by accounts
from the diary of his father and oral accounts of relatives and friends, and secondary
material. His essays about the Battle for the Liberation of Manila usually appear in
February. Between 2002 and 2005 he wrote essays that criticized the annual inaugural
opening in February of the Philippines-Japan Festival.3
The first essay, written in 2002, “Ordeal in Paco, 1945,” is subtitled “We celebrate
friendship between Japan and the Philippines, but who remembers the sack of Manila and
the atrocities committed by the Japanese army here 57 years ago” (Legarda 2003). He
opens his essay thus:
A fellow columnist once called February, with bitter irony, a “merry month.” It’s the month
when the Japanese go, if previous years’ scheduling is followed, on a “cultural rampage”
(to use the words of another columnist) celebrating Philippines-Japan Friendship Month, the
same month in which their predecessors went on a military rampage causing the death of a
hundred thousand civilians in the sack of Manila in 1945 (Legarda 2003, 16 – 18).
 156 L.N. Yu Jose

The main body of the essay is a detailed account of the senseless, brutal killing of around
70 men on the night of 10 February 1945. The Japanese rounded the men up and locked
them inside a small toilet. Then, the Japanese threw grenades into the small window of the
toilet. The women and children who were not rounded up had sought refuge in a school
house. The following morning, one of the families decided to go back to their house, only
to fall victim to the Japanese soldiers who happened to be on the premises. The mother
was bayoneted, and the daughter was raped and killed. In conclusion, Legarda
recommends the inclusion of detailed accounts of the battle – in addition to the accounts
about the Death March, the fall of Bataan and Corregidor and the military battles of the
liberation of Manila – in Philippine history textbooks. He writes, “Stories like that of
Peping and his family deserve to be known by every Filipino” (Legarda 2003, 18).
Peping’s family was the family that left their hiding place to return to their house, only to
Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 22:35 10 January 2015

be killed by the Japanese.

In the second essay written in 2003, Legarda narrates the massacre in De La Salle
College on 12 February 1945. Forty-one people, mostly Filipino evacuees with children
but also including 16 Christian Brothers, mostly Germans, were killed by the Japanese
with gunfire and bayonets. This was also the date (12 February) that marked the start of the
annual Philippines-Japan Festival in 2003. Legarda criticizes the organizers of the Festival
for choosing such a sad date for the inauguration. He writes: “In fact, the festival continues
during the rest of the month, and again one wonders why they persist in holding it during
this month, the anniversary of the bloodiest and most destructive month in Philippine
history” (Legarda 2003, 145).
According to Legarda, a scholar-diplomat had called the festival a “Carnival of Death”
(Legarda 2003). Legarda warns that “if this festival keeps on being held in February,
it will continue to be a Festival of Death rather than a celebration of friendship” (Legarda
2003, 147). He concludes with a recommendation: “The holocaust that was Manila in
February 1945 is an integral part of where we came from. If the Philippines-Japan Festival is
to look forward it should be held in a different month, perhaps in July, when the treaty of
peace was signed. For that, too, is a part of where we came from” (Legarda 2003, 147).
In a 2004 essay, Legarda reiterates his suggestion that the month in which the festival
is held be moved to another month, July, for instance. He also mentions that “they” – one
may surmise he means he and other members of Memorare-Manila – had personally
approached the Japanese ambassador to make the suggestion. But the suggestion fell on
deaf ears. Because of this, he stresses the fact of the horrors of the battle by listing locally
published eyewitness accounts of what happened in Manila in February 1945. He lists 14
titles, which, he knows, does not exhaust the whole literature (Legarda 2007).
A fourth essay, written in 2005, is “Manila Holocaust: Massacre and Rape,” an
exposition of massacres that took place in numerous places in Manila. Despite the long list
of 20 places, it is not complete. At the end of the essay, he writes: “The list of massacres is
far from complete, but serves to give an idea of what Manilans went through in February
1945. It is the worst possible month, and a desecration of the memory of Manila’s 100,000
war dead, in which to celebrate the Philippines-Japan Festival” (Legarda 2007).
Legarda was not alone in criticizing the festival. He was joined by other columnists,
journalists, and intellectuals (See for example Araneta 2005; Roces 2003). But their joint
efforts did not produce a dent in the promotion of Japanese culture. In the beginning of
2000, when criticisms about the celebration in February began to appear in newspapers,
further explanations, that is, in addition to the one earlier given (that Rizal visited Japan in
February 1888), were put forth. The Japan Information and Cultural Center claimed that
February is the best month for cultural activities because the weather is dry and not too hot
 Philippine Political Science Journal 157

and since it is spring vacation in Japan, it is easier to invite Japanese as guest speakers to
symposia and other academic activities. In 2005 the program for a symposium in
connection with the Philippines-Japan Festival revived the explanation that the festival
was “launched in February 1986 [should be 1988] to commemorate the arrival of the
Filipino national hero, Dr. Jose Rizal in Japan on February 28, 1888 and, during his short
stay in Japan, Dr. Rizal envisioned the future of the Philippines and Japan in his letter to
his family, writing that . . . ‘in the future we shall have much contact and relation with
Japan’” (JICC 2005). The explanation sounded like a defensive response to the public
criticisms about holding the festival in February.

Changing the name and stretching the events

Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 22:35 10 January 2015

The annual Philippines-Japan Festival was only held outside of February in 2007.
February was deliberately skipped for this year because in the previous year the
Philippines and Japan celebrated the 50th anniversary of the resumption of diplomatic
relations between the two countries and, by virtue of an executive order, 23 July 2006 was
declared Philippines-Japan Friendship Day (Proclamation Number 854). Obviously
grabbing the occasion as an opportunity to change the date of the festival, the Japan
Information and Cultural Center informed organizations and individuals who usually co-
organized the event of the change. To quote from an email sent by the director of the center
to the president of one of these organizations, the PHILAJAMES (Philippine Association
of Japanese Ministry of Education Scholars): “with the full respect to the designation of
July 23, 2007 (sic) as Philippine-Japan Friendship Day, we would like to organize
Philippine-Japan Festival on and around July 23 this year. The idea was discussed at the
Steering Committee last year [2006] and warmly welcomed.” This author asked Cecilia
Tolentino, secretary at the Japan Information and Cultural Center, why the date of the
Philippines-Japan Festival was being changed. She said in an email on 11 February 2007
that it was done in the face of pressure from several quarters.
But it soon turned out that the change of date was only for 2007. In 2008 this series of
cultural events was again held in February, but the words “Philippines-Japan Festival”
were not used to package the events. And since then the words have not been used, except
for the word “festival” to sometimes refer to the Nihongo Festival, an annual speech
contest and the annual eigai-sai (film festival). But similar activities other than Nihongo
speech contests and film festival – Okinawan dance, lectures on Japan, manga exhibits –
have continued to be held annually. The cultural activities have spread out to several
months of the year, including February, but there are no grand inaugural openings in this
month. And in 2012 posters and invitation cards from the Japan Foundation Manila and the
Embassy of Japan advertised activities for the month of July and called July the
Philippines-Japan Friendship Month, obviously an enlarged version of the Philippines-
Japan Friendship Day first held on 23 July 2006.

Conclusion
As early as the 1920s Japan has used auspicious historical events as a source of soft power
to make itself attractive to the Philippines. The choice of February in 1988 to celebrate
Philippines-Japan Friendship Day was a part of this strategy. That year was the centennial
of Rizal’s visit to Japan. And it was an effective strategy until the incongruous situation
was noticed by the descendants and friends of the non-combatant war dead of the Battle for
the Liberation of Manila.
 158 L.N. Yu Jose

After more than 10 years it turned out that using this aspect of historical memory as a
strategy to increase soft power was problematic. It can be surmised that the Japanese
government chose February taking only Rizal’s visit to Japan and no other historical event
that also took place in this month into consideration. Such can be deducted from the
fact that the memory of the Battle for the Liberation of Manila had not surfaced yet.
The descendants and friends of the non-combatant war dead were quiet until they decided
to speak out in the mid-1990s.
During their silence, the momentum of the festival had gained strength. So, when they
broke their silence and criticized the date of the festival, it was already hard to break the
festive inertia that had been accumulated through the years. Moreover, it was not only the
descendants and the relatives of the war dead who had kept quiet. The Philippines’ annual
commemoration of the fall of Bataan and Corregidor, which eventually came to be called
Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 22:35 10 January 2015

Araw ng Kagitingan had not included the non-combatants. Philippine presidents had not
mentioned them in their speeches. Indeed, even after the criticisms about holding
the Philippines-Japan Festival in February had surfaced, bringing forward the memory
of the non-combatant war dead, there was still no mention of them. This omission
reinforced the strong momentum the festival had gained.
As explained above, mentioning the war dead could have a utilitarian value. The acts
that resulted in such death could be presented as contrary to the values of love for
humanity and respect for human rights. But, as also described above, these were not the
utilitarian values the Philippine government wanted to prioritize. They wanted to prioritize
nationalism and heroism.
Viewed as a clash between a World War II memory and Japan’s soft power, the
memory of the Battle for the Liberation of Manila has not proved strong enough to break
the momentum the festival had gained since the 1980s, a momentum which was
inadvertently helped by a lack of criticism about it. Moreover, the criticisms that
eventually surfaced were not echoed by the national politicians who prioritized values of
nationalism and heroism over the values of love for humanity and respect for human
rights. And, over the years, it seems that Philippine presidents have realized that when it
comes to the Philippines’ relations with Japan and the United States it is easy to connect
the values of nationalism and heroism to friendship toward them and to the Philippine
presidents’ other pragmatic political goals.

Acknowledgement
I would like to thank Professor Nakano Satoshi for inviting me to a conference at Hitotsubashi
University in 2008 and again in Nanjing in 2012 to present papers which eventually evolved into this
article; the School of Social Sciences, Ateneo de Manila University for the grant of a three-unit
research load that gave me much needed time to revise the papers; and the anonymous reviewers of
the manuscript for their helpful and encouraging comments.

Notes
1. The author was present at this ceremony and the description of the speeches of President Arroyo,
Ambassador Ricciardone, and Minister Egawa are from her notes.
2. Because of several changes to the name, writers about this cultural aspect of Japan’s soft power are
inconsistent when referring to this series of cultural events. Some continue calling it Philippines-
Japan Friendship Month even after the name was changed to Philippines-Japan Festival.
3. The essays that will hereafter be cited were published in the Philippines Free Press and
reprinted in two books authored by Legarda; those published in 2002 and 2003 in Occupation
’42 (see Legarda 2003), and those published in 2004 and 2005 in Occupation the Later Years
(see Legarda 2007). I cite the articles reprinted in these two books.
 Philippine Political Science Journal 159

Notes on contributor
Lydia N. Yu Jose is a Professor of Political Science at the Ateneo de Manila University and is
currently the director of the Ateneo Center for Asian Studies.

References
Agoncillo, T. 1981. Pilipinas kong mahal, isang kasaysayan [Beloved Philippines, a history].
Quezon City: R.P. Garcia Publishing.
Aquino, B. Jr. 2012. Speech of His Excellency Benigno S. Aquino III President of the Philippines.
Speech given in commemoration of Araw ng Kagitingan, April 9, at the Shrine of Valor, Mt
Samat, Pilar, Bataan. Official Gazette. http://www.gov.ph/2012/04/09 president-Aquino’s-
speech-in-commemoration-of-araw-ng-kagitingan-2012-english-translation/ (accessed June 28,
2012).
Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 22:35 10 January 2015

Araneta, G. 2005. Not in February. Manila Bulletin, February 22.

City of Manila. 2012. Tourism: Places to visit. City of Manila. http://www.manila.gov.ph/tourism.
htm (accessed June 3, 2012).
DBC (Defenders of Bataan, Corregidor and other USAFFE Fronts, Inc). 1984. Thirty-first DBC
anniversary. Quezon City: DBC.
Dent, C. 2008. What region to lead? Developments in East Asian regionalism and questions of
regional leadership. In China, Japan, and regional leadership in Asia, ed. Christopher Dent,
3 – 36. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Dudden, A. 2010. Memories and aporias in the Japan-Korea relationship. The Asia Pacific Journal
14 no. 3. http://www.japanfocus.org/alexis dudden/3337 (accessed November 2, 2011).
Dy, D. 1995. Japan and the Philippines: Building a friendship. Mod, February 3. Filipino. 1994.
Ikebana. Filipino, February 28.
Hughes, C.W. 2008. Japan’s policy towards China: Domestic structural change, globalization,
history and nationalism. In China, Japan, and regional leadership in Asia, ed. Christopher Dent,
37 – 51. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Iwao, S. 1943. Early Japanese settlers in the Philippines. Tokyo: The Foreign Affairs Association of
Japan.
Japan Bulletin. 1997. “Philippines-Japan Festival ‘98” celebrates Philippine Centennial. Japan
Bulletin 27, no. 3: 1 –5.
JICC (Japan Information and Cultural Center). 2005. Symposium on Japanese studies in the
Philippines: Philippines-Japan towards a new partnership in the regional and global context.
March 10 – 11, at Yuchengco Hall, De La Salle University, Manila.
JOCPCC (Japan Organizing Committee for the Philippine Centennial Celebration). 1998.
Philippines-Japan Festival ’98. Pasay City: Privately published.
Jose, L.N.Y. 2007. Historical memories as soft power: The Philippines and Japan. In Diplomatic
relations between Japan and Southeast Asia, ed. Ronald D. Holmes, 145– 61. Quezon City:
Philippine Migration Research Network and Philippine Social Science Council.
Lanuza, C., and G. F. Zaide. 1961. Rizal in Japan. Tokyo: Privately published.
Legarda, B. Jr. 2003. Occupation ’42. Manila: De La Salle University Press.
Legarda, B. Jr. 2007. Occupation: The later years. Manila: De La Salle University Press.
Macairan, E. 2006. Japan apologizes for “Battle of Manila.” The Philippine Star, February 19.
Manila Bulletin. 1993/1994. Editorial: Friendship month. Manila Bulletin, February 6/February 4.
Manila Bulletin. 1998. Friendship festival: A symbol of friendship. Manila Bulletin, February 18.
Nye, J.S. Jr. 2004. Soft power: The means to success in world politics. New York: Public Affairs.
Ocampo, A. 2003. Rightly, the Battle for Manila. Philippine Daily, February 12.
Olaguer, A. Perez de. 2005. Terror in Manila: February 1945. Trans. Trinidad Ongtangco Regala
and ed. Bernardita Reyes Churchill. Manila: Memorare Manila 1945 Foundation, Incorporated
and National Commission for Culture and the Arts.
Philippine Daily Inquirer. 1990. Takayama rites usher in Japanese cultural month celebrations.
Philippine Daily Inquirer, February 3.
Philippine Daily Inquirer. 1991. Prof. Mutsuhiko Miki: Fostering friendship between Japan and the
Philippines through art and culture. Philippine Daily Inquirer, January 19.
Philippine Daily Inquirer. 1995. World War II massacre in Manila still haunts survivors. Philippine
Daily Inquirer, February 6.
 160 L.N. Yu Jose

Philippine Daily Inquirer. 1998. Celebrating the centennial. Philippine Daily Inquirer, February 17.
The Philippine Journal. 1996. The ties that bind. The Philippine Journal, March 5.
Philippines. President. 1962. Proclamation Number 28. Declaring June 12 as Philippine
Independence Day.
Philippines. President. 2005., Proclamation Number 854 Declaring Sunday, July 23, 2006 as
Philippines-Japan Friendship Day.
Philippines. Congress. 1964., Republic Act 4166. An Act Changing the Date of Philippine
Independence from July 4 to June Twelve and Declaring July 4 as Philippine Republic Day,
further Amending for the Purpose Section Twenty-nine of the Revised Administrative Code.
Ricoeur, P. 2006. Memory, history, forgetting. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago
Press.
Rizal in Japan Centennial Committee, Order of the Knights of Rizal. 1988. Manila-Tokyo joint
celebration of Rizal in Japan centennial. Tokyo: Rizal in Japan Centennial Committee.
Roces, A.R. 2003. A well-meaning festival in an incompatible month. Philippine Star, February 3.
Today. 1995. Robust Philippines-Japan relations promise to endure till next century. Today,
Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 22:35 10 January 2015

February 18.
Vergara, R.B. 1993. Enhancing Philippine-Japanese relations. Malaya, February 28.
Yamazaki, R. 2006. Remarks by H.E. Ambassador Ryuichiro Yamazaki on the occasion of the 61st
anniversary of the Battle for the Liberation of Manila, February 18, at Plazuela de Santa Isabel,
Intramuros, Manila.