Elaine B. Fischel was 27 years old in the spring of 1946 when she left her home in California to participate in the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, where the Japanese war criminals from World War II were put on trial. She arrived in Tokyo with orders to serve as a legal stenographer, but she managed to move to the Defense Division as a secretary. For two and a half years, Fischel served as a member of the American defense team in the Tokyo Trials, working for John Brannon (who defended General Sato and Admirals Shigetaro Shimada, Takasumi Oka, and Osami Nagano) and William Logan (who defended Marquis Koichi Kido, Lord Keeper of the Privvy Seal, whose 5,000 page diary was voluntarily turned over to the prosecution as evidence). Defending the Enemy: Justice for the WWII Japanese War Criminals details her experiences during this historic event.
While working for Brannon and Logan, Fischel spent many hours taking dictation, transcribing notes, and meeting with the prisoners to find out whether they needed to speak with their attorneys. She developed friendships with many important Japanese, including Admiral Shimada; General Hideki Tojo, Japan’s prime minister from 1941-1944, who would eventually hang for his role in the war; Prince Nobuhito Takamatsu, brother of Emperor Hirohito; Ambassador Kichisaburo Nomura, who was late in delivering the warning message about the Pearl Harbor attack to the White House; and Captain Yasuji Watanabe, chief of the Japanese Coast Guard during the American Occupation of Japan.
The American attorneys tasked with defending the Japanese war criminals took their jobs seriously and worked hard to ensure they were given a fair trial, even when Chief Justice William Webb refused to admit certain pieces of evidence and even acted like a prosecutor in questioning the defendants on the stand. In this memoir, Fischel describes the numerous challenges of the tribunal, namely the language barrier. Japanese isn’t easily or quickly translated into English (and vice versa), and those testifying before the court were constantly cut off by a red light indicating that they must immediately stop speaking so their words could be translated. It was a very time consuming process, especially considering that more than two dozen men were on trial.
Fischel learned some Japanese, and speaking with the defendants on an almost daily basis enabled her to develop friendly relationships with them and even their families. She found them to be pleasant, very intelligent, and even likeable. This caused some internal conflict, especially as her mother constantly reminded her in letters that the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and killed men she knew in combat and during the Bataan Death March. How could she reconcile her anger about the loss of her friends during the war with the relationships she was building? Fischel found herself torn between wanting the defendants to be punished for their crimes and wanting their lives to be spared. She didn’t think these Class A war criminals — military and political leaders who gave orders — should be punished as harshly as the Class B and C war criminals who actually carried out the atrocities. However, she acknowledged that they were not guilt-free. In letters to her mother during the trial, Fischel wrote:
They’re the ones responsible for this big damn mess. I guess my trouble is I can’t align in my mind a picture of these guys committing atrocities. Then I think in terms of them being responsible for military and political acts like so many other nations that have done the same things on a political scale. Why, if the English were on trial for what’s going on in Palestine, you couldn’t go in there and spit at an English defendant. What I’m trying to convey is that — when I saw the actual criminals down at Yokohama, I would have gladly killed any one of those Japs. But some of our clients guided policy and weren’t soldiers — and how many other statesmen are responsible for just as much evil, and that means nations that are our allies? (page 122)
I came over here after seeing the U.S. cartoons expecting to see 26 monkeys sitting in court and being on trial, and yet there are 26 men up there each with individual personalities and faces. That’s probably surprise No. 1. Then, too, when you speak to them and learn their background, you find they are intelligent. They’re gracious and they show it — these men occupied high positions in the government and you can’t help but feel they are misguided fools. Even the worst ones on trial have valid defenses. There are some of the 26 who sanctioned atrocities even if they didn’t perform them themselves. That doesn’t excuse them and I know it. . . . I’m not blind or impressed by the glamour, but there’s a difference in being close to the situation that I can’t explain in writing so that you wouldn’t worry or misunderstand. (page 136)
I found Fischel’s stories about the tribunal especially fascinating, but the legal battle isn’t the crux of the story. Her memoir focuses on the relationships she made (both among the Japanese and her colleagues), her desire to pursue a law degree after the trial, and her appreciation for being given a role in the making of history. Not only did she participate in the Tokyo Trials, but she also witnessed the beginning of the reconstruction of a defeated nation. Much of the book is devoted to her travels throughout Japan and her love and respect for the land, the Japanese people, and their culture.
Although the writing is disjointed at times and the placement of the trial information and her vacations around the island nation could have been organized better, I found Defending the Enemy to be a fascinating memoir. I liked that Fischel includes pictures from her time in Japan, passages from letters to her mother, and reproductions of letters from her friends after the trial and related newspaper articles. Fischel’s memoir emphasizes that war is not a black and white issue, and her inside information about the Tokyo Trials provides a unique perspective about the aftermath of World War II.
Disclosure: I received a copy of Defending the Enemy from Phenix & Phenix Literary Publicists for review purposes. I am an Amazon associate.
© 2011 Anna Horner of Diary of an Eccentric. All Rights Reserved. Please do not reproduce or republish content without permission.
Though I’m not inclined to read memoirs, I must say that this one sounds fascinating. Great review, Anna! I will add this title to my list.
LikeLike
Thanks, Beth! I’m not big on memoirs either, but those involving events during WWII always grab my attention.
LikeLike
Sounds a wonderful read
LikeLike
Yes, I thought it was very interesting.
LikeLike
This sounds like quite the fascinating read. Thanks. I just finished reading Bending Towards the Sun which I discovered on your blog and loved.
LikeLike
Great! I will have to check out your review.
LikeLike
I do love memoirs, but I’m not sure the disjointed style is for me. I’ll have to look this one over when I see it in the bookstore.
LikeLike
I think it would have been difficult to better organize her travel and the trial, but I think she was going for a linear timeline. I can understand why it was set up this way, but there was a lot of back-and-forth. I don’t think you should let that keep you from giving it a try, though.
LikeLike
Nice review. But yes not the book for me this time, still enjoyed hearing about it
LikeLike
Thanks! I appreciate you taking the time to read my review.
LikeLike
I read about this one somewhere else a while back and thought it sounding intriguing.
LikeLike
The author definitely had some exciting experiences!
LikeLike
sounds like an interesting memoir…though what happened between her and that lawyer??? Did she get into that personal relationship at all after sort of mentioning it in passing? LOL I know that may be too much information for an online response…you know where to find me.
LikeLike
I e-mailed you, but I can say here that the author’s personal relationships were not explored in great detail. Things were mentioned to make me curious, though.
LikeLike
This sounds fascinating. What a unique perspective on such a polarizing time and place.
LikeLike
She definitely has a unique perspective, one that makes for a very interesting book!
LikeLike
Sounds very interesting. I might look at it for my sister, who travels to Japan often, as it might give her insight into the history. Does it spend much time discussing the crimes for which those men were on trial?
LikeLike
There isn’t a whole lot of time devoted to the actual crimes. Some are mentioned in passing, the word “atrocities” is used several times without any actual details. There is some mention of whether or not certain defendants played a role in the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor. But mostly the book is about her travels in Japan and her work for the top defense attorneys. I hope this helps!
LikeLike