Conditions
The
treatment received, as was to prove the case many times afterwards, depended
very much on where and when one was held and by whom. This ranged from the just
acceptable to the wholly unacceptable which included extraordinarily cruel
beatings, deprivation and even death. Generally, the further one was from good
supply routes, the nearer to the front line, the greater the strategic
importance of the project, the greater the difficulty in returning the POWs to a
main centre, the greater was the probability that one would not survive.
Initially the Japanese were ill prepared for such numbers and any available
holding centre was used. Some, the cinema in Serang which held 1500, mainly
Australians, for 5 weeks as one example, were wholly inadequate for the purpose
with poor food, no medical supplies and humiliating treatment by the Japanese.
The malnutrition, sickness and death that resulted were only a taste of what was
to come. In many cases later, upon arrival at their prison camp, the POWs’ first
task was to build their own huts.
One
theme through all the camps, particularly as they came fully under Imperial
Japanese Army Regulations was the Japanese tradition of senior ranks inflicting
physical punishment on more junior ranks. A command was issued which allowed the
recipient to prepare himself and offer his face to be slapped, often sufficient
to knock out teeth. Apart from beatings, more serious crimes allowed the guilty
to commit suicide, with the most serious attracting death, usually by beheading.
This
seems to have been originally introduced as a way of maintaining discipline in
the Japanese army which had increased 5-fold since the turn of the century. The
fear created ensured immediate, unquestioning, compliance with orders. This,
coupled with the extreme conformity of Japanese life, ensured a dedication to
the Emperor that was absolute.
This
discipline also applied to POWs who received anything from a face slapping to
beatings with bamboo canes and in the worst cases beating with staves or
sledgehammers until death resulted. “Bashings” or beatings were an aspect of
captivity remembered and dreaded by all POWs and could be inflicted for the most
minor of offences. Such behaviour was alien to Allied Forces and deeply
shocking.
A major
incident occurred soon after the Fall of Singapore when POWs refused to sign a
document promising not to escape. All were herded into the compound at Selarang
under atrocious conditions. After several days, when the risk of an epidemic
became real, officers agreed to the signing to avoid widespread deaths. This “no
escape” contract was extracted from POWs, often under grievous threat, in many
locations.
The
Japanese made it clear from the beginning that escapees would be executed and
this proved to be the case on many occasions. The likelihood of a successful
escape was very small indeed.
Not all
Japanese showed this brutality, but only a minority treated the POWs as required
by the Geneva Convention. Naval and Air Force personnel had a generally better
record. It is equally clear that some Japanese, and representatives of client
countries, went far beyond the requirements of Army discipline by inflicting
wanton, sadistic punishment on sick and defenceless POWs. It is clear also that
Bushido, that had ensured respect for POWs taken during earlier conflicts, had
been forgotten. It was only later in the war that worldwide criticism of
Japanese treatment of POWs had any impact on their treatment, and then only in a
few cases.
Throughout the period of captivity, few Red Cross parcels were delivered to
POWs, and shortage of medical supplies became a death warrant for many. There is
evidence that the Japanese variously used supplies themselves, sold them to the
local population or inexplicably stored them for the future.
Conditions in POW camps near large centres of population were somewhat better.
In those camps, nutrition was better if not adequate, medical facilities,
although basic, mostly served the purpose and the other needs of life were met.
Concert halls, sometimes libraries, gardens to supplement diet, and churches
were built. Despite the brutality, POWs were allowed to follow their religious
beliefs when conditions permitted. Although discipline was harsh and the food
poor, at least the chance of survival was greater. (Pictures taken from
The Churches of the Captivity in Malaya by Rev. J N Lewis Bryan MA)
By
contrast, conditions in distant work camps in the jungle or remote islands were
often truly appalling. For those weakened by malnutrition, dysentery, cholera,
malaria, dengue fever, beri beri and maltreatment, the future was precarious.
Any insect bite could become rapidly infected, leading to jungle sores which
took flesh and bone. Treatment for this was often crude, gouging out the
decaying flesh with a metal spoon or similar, but at least it saved many
amputations. Those that were required were usually carried out without
anaesthetic.
Thousands died from malnutrition, disease and being worked beyond the limits of
human endurance. Others were simply massacred when they had fulfilled their
task.
POWs
were in principle paid for their labour, but when it was paid, it was little and
in any case in the jungle, what could be bought? Many officers refused manual
work citing the need to preserve some of the military discipline within their
units. This was often bitterly resented by the other ranks who had to work in
appalling conditions. In some cases, officer work battalions were set up making
this unavoidable and in others, officers took part in work gangs to prevent the
chronically sick being forced to work.
POW
camps, often built next to obvious military targets, but again unmarked, led to
many more unnecessary deaths due to Allied bombing. It is believed there were
nearly 250 camps in SE Asia with a further 91 in Japan.
Overall, among the main groups of POWs, British, Australian and American, it is
estimated that approximately one in three perished. The mortality rate among the
Dutch was somewhat less, probably a reflection of the fact that they were
generally acclimatised to local conditions and were more aware of how to survive
off the land.
In
comparison, deaths among POWs in German POW camps were less than 4%.
Top |
