What do you think?
Rate this book
Interpreters and War Crimes
Taking an interdisciplinary approach, this book raises new questions and provides different perspectives on the roles, responsibilities, ethics and protection of interpreters in war while investigating the substance and agents of Japanese war crimes and legal aspects of interpreters’ taking part in war crimes. Informed by studies on interpreter ethics in conflict, historical studies of Japanese war crimes and legal discussion on individual liability in war crimes, Takeda provides a detailed description and analysis of the 39 interpreter defendants and interpreters as witnesses of war crimes at British military trials against the Japanese in the aftermath of the Pacific War, and tackles ethical and legal issues of various risks faced by interpreters in violent conflict.
The book first discusses the backgrounds, recruitment and wartime activities of the accused interpreters at British military trials in addition to the charges they faced, the defence arguments and the verdicts they received at the trials, with attention to why so many of the accused were Taiwanese and foreign-born Japanese. Takeda provides a contextualized discussion, focusing on the Japanese military’s specific linguistic needs in its occupied areas in Southeast Asia and the attributes of interpreters who could meet such needs. In the theoretical examination of the issues that emerge, the focus is placed on interpreters’ proximity to danger, visibility and perceived authorship of speech, legal responsibility in war crimes and ethical issues in testifying as eyewitnesses of criminal acts in violent hostilities. Takeda critically examines prior literature on the roles of interpreters in conflict and ethical concerns such as interpreter neutrality and confidentiality, drawing on legal discussion of the ineffectiveness of the superior orders defence and modes of individual liability in war crimes. The book seeks to promote intersectoral discussion on how interpreters can be protected from exposure to manifestly unlawful acts such as torture.
The book first discusses the backgrounds, recruitment and wartime activities of the accused interpreters at British military trials in addition to the charges they faced, the defence arguments and the verdicts they received at the trials, with attention to why so many of the accused were Taiwanese and foreign-born Japanese. Takeda provides a contextualized discussion, focusing on the Japanese military’s specific linguistic needs in its occupied areas in Southeast Asia and the attributes of interpreters who could meet such needs. In the theoretical examination of the issues that emerge, the focus is placed on interpreters’ proximity to danger, visibility and perceived authorship of speech, legal responsibility in war crimes and ethical issues in testifying as eyewitnesses of criminal acts in violent hostilities. Takeda critically examines prior literature on the roles of interpreters in conflict and ethical concerns such as interpreter neutrality and confidentiality, drawing on legal discussion of the ineffectiveness of the superior orders defence and modes of individual liability in war crimes. The book seeks to promote intersectoral discussion on how interpreters can be protected from exposure to manifestly unlawful acts such as torture.
- GenresNonfictionHistory
192 pages, Kindle Edition
Published March 22, 2021
2 people are currently reading
7 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
March 7, 2026
This book explores the recruitment, experiences, and biographic profiles of the Japanese interpreters tried for war crimes after the Second World War, the accusations against them and the strategies of the legal defense. While several interpreters claimed to have been following orders, to have been responsible for relaying information from their superior officers, some were also accused of physically participating in abuse and torture. There is an agreement among the cited authors that neutrality, one of the ethical principles of interpretation, is impossible in the context of a military conflict. Even in cases where the interpreter is a civilian, they will be biased to work in the interest of the forces best equipped to protect, or conversely, to threaten their physical integrity. The perspectives of various actors are laid out, mainly those of court, the interpreters, and their victims.
The material collected by Takeda is fascinating and valuable in itself, but that is not the reason that I read it. This year of 2026 has been marked by increasing global tensions. Interpreters, linguists and other language specialists will certainly be recruited in greater number by military and paramilitary forces. I was curious to learn about the mentality of those that are forced, but more so those who willingly apply their expertise to these ends, deployed against people that have much in common with them, knowing it will lead to deaths. Like the Japanese wartime interpreters, they might have spent part of their lives in another country, received their education there. They might belong to an ethnic minority, grasping for opportunities to assimilate and prove their loyalty to the state.
It is fitting for these times that, in one of the first chapters, the author introduces a lack of consensus whether it was acceptable for an interpreter to violate the confidentiality agreement when it came to reporting abuses at the hands of ICE or CIA black sites. In the first case, there were professional associations that encouraged the reporting of crimes against humanity under ICE, and personalities that argued strongly against it, reasoning that under no circumstance should the information be divulged (the influence of Kant’s categorical imperative strikes again: either the principle is applicable in all cases or no case at all!). As for the latter example, it is unsurprising that interpreters accused of participating in interrogation under torture were not investigated and faced no consequences at all. Mind that the alleged crimes were comparable to those that led to the incarceration and execution of some of the Japanese interpreters—some of whom had been compelled to serve against their will, which cannot be said about the US contractor interpreters. There is an unspoken lesson here, in international law: justice favours the winner. While the strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must, &c. Wish it weren’t so, but the world is what it is.
The material collected by Takeda is fascinating and valuable in itself, but that is not the reason that I read it. This year of 2026 has been marked by increasing global tensions. Interpreters, linguists and other language specialists will certainly be recruited in greater number by military and paramilitary forces. I was curious to learn about the mentality of those that are forced, but more so those who willingly apply their expertise to these ends, deployed against people that have much in common with them, knowing it will lead to deaths. Like the Japanese wartime interpreters, they might have spent part of their lives in another country, received their education there. They might belong to an ethnic minority, grasping for opportunities to assimilate and prove their loyalty to the state.
It is fitting for these times that, in one of the first chapters, the author introduces a lack of consensus whether it was acceptable for an interpreter to violate the confidentiality agreement when it came to reporting abuses at the hands of ICE or CIA black sites. In the first case, there were professional associations that encouraged the reporting of crimes against humanity under ICE, and personalities that argued strongly against it, reasoning that under no circumstance should the information be divulged (the influence of Kant’s categorical imperative strikes again: either the principle is applicable in all cases or no case at all!). As for the latter example, it is unsurprising that interpreters accused of participating in interrogation under torture were not investigated and faced no consequences at all. Mind that the alleged crimes were comparable to those that led to the incarceration and execution of some of the Japanese interpreters—some of whom had been compelled to serve against their will, which cannot be said about the US contractor interpreters. There is an unspoken lesson here, in international law: justice favours the winner. While the strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must, &c. Wish it weren’t so, but the world is what it is.
Displaying 1 of 1 review