Woman Who Could Not Forget

by Richard Rhodes

  Iris wanted the movie to include sets of characters from each different ethnic group (American, German, Chinese and Japanese), and to show the changing of characters as well as the contrast exposed during wartime. She wanted to show how a person would make decisions under pressure in the darkest, most difficult times—the conflict between self-interest and humanity. For example, Frank Tillman Durdin was a foreign correspondent for the New York Times in 1937. Iris said, “He was my age when he covered the Rape of Nanking. He was twenty-nine when he broke his first big story, the Rape of Nanking, and I was twenty-nine when my book was published and hit the New York Times ‘Best Sellers’ list. For that reason, I felt a special link with him.”

  In Durdin’s obituary, published in the New York Times in 1998, Iris was quoted as saying: “Tillman Durdin was not only writing the pages of history under pressure, but tried to save Chinese lives in Nanking. He should be remembered as an exemplar of humanity and courage in the darkest of times.” Iris said that Durdin had had to decide whether he wanted to be an impartial observer, exploiting the suffering of others for the front-page news, or to step in and help the war victims.

  Minnie Vautrin, the American missionary educator, was in Nanking in 1937 when the Japanese soldiers invaded and occupied the city. She saved thousands of men, women, and children in the Safety Zone. However, when the Japanese soldiers came to the Safety Zone demanding women, she believed their claim that some prostitutes were in the Zone. She handed over the “bad” women so the “good” women in the zone could be saved. Later, Vautrin realized that some of the “bad” women had voluntarily given themselves up as “prostitutes,” sacrificing their lives to save others. She had fought fearlessly against the Japanese soldiers, but in the end she couldn’t sustain the mental sufferings and some of the decisions she’d made. After she returned to the U.S. in 1940, she committed suicide.

  John Rabe, a German businessman and a Nazi, who chose to stay in Nanking to protect his employees and thousands of Nanking civilians in the Safety Zone by using his Nazi armband, was caught in his ideals of socialism and the brutal reality of Nazism after he returned to Berlin. Iris said that Rabe changed from an ordinary German citizen to a hero in China—and then to an outcast in Germany.

  Dr. Robert Wilson was the only surgeon in Nanking during the Nanking Massacre. He worked extremely hard and sacrificed his own health to save the lives of others.

  General Tang, who vowed to Chiang Kai-shek that he would fight to the death to defend the city of Nanking, abandoned the city and fled before the fall of Nanking. (However, he was following the orders of Chiang. It was not completely Tang’s fault.) He eventually became a high-ranking Communist after previously having been a Nationalist. Iris said the story of General Tang was a good contrast to an ordinary Chinese pregnant woman, Li Xiuying, who fought with her bare hands against two Japanese soldiers trying to rape her. She miraculously survived thirty-seven bayonet wounds.

  Iris said the movie should include a Japanese character: a soldier or a news reporter who was torn between stopping the violence and obeying authority. The character needed to be sacrificed to illustrate what happened to Japanese people who defied the system. It could be a Japanese soldier who disobeyed his orders and was executed, or a news reporter who rebelled, seeking the truth, and lost his status but gained his soul.

  Iris passionately described her vision of the movie to anyone who was interested in adapting her book into a movie. Finally, in March, Iris told us that a Hollywood production firm had made an offer for the movie rights to her book, but it took another several months before the formal contract was signed. She had been working on this project for so long, and finally her hard work had borne some results!

  In spite of her fertility problems and the movie project, which sometimes distracted her from her writing, Iris had been working steadily on The Chinese in America. She mailed us a copy of the manuscript all the way to Hong Kong, about two thirds of the book, and wanted us to give her our comments. Shau-Jin and I read her manuscript carefully and gave her a list of errors we’d found, along with our thoughts, without any reservation.

  On April 1, 2001, a U.S. Navy surveillance plane collided over the South China Sea with a Chinese fighter jet sent to intercept it, and the surveillance plane made an emergency landing on Chinese territory, Hainan Island. We watched the news attentively in Hong Kong, which was not very far from Hainan Island. We were sensitive to any news related to China-U.S. relations because we would be affected by it. Originally we had planned to visit Guangzhou while we were there, but we decided to cancel the trip because of the high tension between China and the U.S. After a ten-day standoff between the U.S. and China, on April 11 the crew was allowed to return to the U.S. without the plane.

  On April 20, Shau-Jin read a New York Times article reporting that the U.S. State Department had warned Americans of Chinese origin that they could be detained in China for spying if they had ever written critically about the Beijing regime or had contacts with rival Taiwan. Shau-Jin and I immediately wrote to both Iris and Michael about the news. It was especially relevant to Iris, as we knew she was always outspoken—and her previous and current books were related to China.

  Iris replied to us:

  Dear Mom,

  I think you’re being very wise.

  The detention of these Chinese Americans reveals the precarious nature of our status as an ethnic minority. When Sino-American relations are excellent, Chinese-Americans benefit by serving as visible role models and goodwill ambassadors between the two countries. But when Sino-American relations are tense, Chinese-Americans can suffer reprisals from both white Americans and native Chinese.

  Remember when I mentioned that the Chinese-Americans are often perceived as foreigners in the US—even if they make enormous contributions as US citizens? The same applies to the PRC. I can tell you horror stories about Chinese Americans who moved to mainland China after World War II, with idealistic hopes of rebuilding the country, only to lose their businesses, their savings and even their lives during the Cultural Revolution. They were not embraced by the PRC simply because they were racially Chinese.

  Perhaps that is the real story of the Chinese in America—we are “strangers” and “foreigners” on both shores.

  Love, Iris

  At the end of our stay in Hong Kong, in June, Shau-Jin and I visited Xian, the ancient city of China. We had a wonderful time seeing the Terra-Cotta Warriors of the First Emperor of the Qin Dynasty near his mausoleum, with many other tombs nearby. While we were in Xian, Iris was taking a break from her writing with Brett in Lake Tahoe. They visited Carson City and Virginia City and took a gondola ski-lift ride to the peak of a mountain. She said it was a relaxing vacation, and she felt rejuvenated when she returned home.

  On July 15, when we returned to our Urbana home from Hong Kong, Iris wrote:

  Dear Dad,

  It was wonderful to talk with you and Mom the other day. You mentioned you might be interested in doing some research on the Chinese in America at the U of I library. If you have time, please let me know if the library has copies of the Statistical Yearbook of the INS. Mainly, I need the annual data, since 1949. Here are the questions that I had submitted to the INS history office, followed by the table with the information (they have not yet responded.). . . .

  Love, Iris

  For the next several weeks I helped Iris, reviewing the INS Statistical Yearbook borrowed from the U of I main library and doing research for her.

  Besides writing her book, Iris seemingly could not sit silently without voicing her concern about a series of reports of Japan trying to whitewash its war-crime history. The year 2001 was full of reports on the rise of Japanese revisionism of its war history and emerging nationalism. In one report, South Korea and China were angry over a new textbook which toned down or eliminated the war crimes Japan committed during World War II in Asia such as the Nanking Massacre, the sex slavery system (Comfort Women), and the Unit 731 chemical an
d biological experiments on live POWs. In the meantime, American veterans forced into slave labor for Japanese companies (such as Mitsui & Co., Nippon S Corps) while captive during World War II were pushing for compensation in court.

  On July 21, 2001, Iris and Barry A. Fisher, a Los Angeles international human-rights lawyer, representing slave labor and Comfort Women victims, co-authored a commentary published in the Los Angeles Times. In the article, they criticized the U.S. government not only for not helping the ex-Comfort Women and former American veterans in pursuing justice in court, but, also, because “the American government in April filed a formal ‘Statement of Interest of the United States of America,’ asking that the case be dismissed.”

  The article also stated that “The U.S. government’s stance also reveals a racist double standard. In the recent series of cases against German, Swiss, and Austrian banks and industries that enslaved Jews and Slavs, the U.S. championed the rights of the European victims and eventually helped them achieve multi-billion dollar settlements. But when it came to the Asian victims, the U.S. not only refused to help but actively thwarted efforts to seek justice.”

  Because of the wide media coverage on forced labor and “Comfort Women” compensation lawsuits against Japan, on August 15, 2001, Iris informed us that she had been invited to appear on a panel on Ted Koppel’s Nightline program. After the program, we congratulated her, and Iris forwarded a number of e-mails she had received reflecting the same sentiment. One e-mail wrote: “Your point that Japan, in the past, was never forced to deal with its past, in WWII, hit home.” Another e-mail: “Ted Koppel asked the panel members why it is so difficult for the Japanese to apologize for their wartime atrocities. He did not get a direct answer from the Japanese on the panel. The only person who gave a reasonable answer was Iris Chang. She said it is because Japan was not required to be apologetic.”

  On the personal side, in August 2001, viewing the risks and the side effects of IVIG therapy and experimental drugs, Iris finally decided, for safety’s sake, to go with the surrogacy route. She had been busy investigating the surrogate-mother service and interviewing candidates. Close to their tenth wedding anniversary, Iris and Brett went to Yosemite National Park for a break; and on the way there, they went to meet the future surrogate mother and her husband. Iris told us she found the surrogate mother and her family satisfactory. She had followed all the proper procedures with the service and her doctor in preparation for having a baby by surrogacy.

  Over Labor Day weekend, 2001, Iris went to Chicago as a bridesmaid for her friend Carolyn Wu’s wedding. She did not have time to drive home to see us, so we drove to the hotel in Chicago to meet her on September 1. Although we had had e-mail and telephone exchanges throughout the year, to see her in person after all this time was still exciting. We only stayed one night with her, but she updated us on all the things happening around her: her new book, for which she would finish the first draft very soon, and her movie project, for which she was awaiting the final written contract. She said she wanted to delegate chores to others once she had a baby. She and Brett also intended to buy a house when the baby arrived. I told her we were thinking about moving to California, near her, so we could help her out. She was very happy to hear that.

  In September 2001, there was a big conference in San Francisco organized by U.S. and Japanese officials in celebration of the fiftieth anniversary of the San Francisco Peace Treaty. Japan insisted that all matters related to wartime reparations to its victims had been settled by the San Francisco Peace Treaty. In reality, Iris said, a close reading of the actual treaty revealed that the reparations matter was merely postponed until Japan had the financial means to pay. The entire issue had been left hanging for more than half a century and still had never been resolved.

  To protest and counteract the official commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of the San Francisco Peace Treaty, the Bay area activist groups, Global Alliance and the Rape of Nanking Redress Coalition (RNRC) and University of California at Berkeley Ethnic Studies, jointly held a big three-day conference and a rally from September 7 to 9. The conference coincided with the official one, at the same time and in the same city. The conference was named “Fifty Years of Denial: Japan and its Wartime Responsibilities.” Iris was invited to be the keynote speaker on the first day of the conference.

  On September 8, 2001, Iris wrote to us to report on the event:

  Dear Mom and Dad,

  I just wanted to let you know that I returned from SF safely tonight! The conference was incredible—it was almost as if the entire event was designed to honor me. Congressman Mike Honda, a member of Sen. Feinstein’s staff and several luminaries heaped lavish praise on me during their dinner speeches—how this book changed their lives, made world history and launched an international movement. And the crowd went wild over my opening lecture this afternoon—Washingtonians wanted to have it introduced in the Congressional Record, the director of the Nanking massacre museum asked for a copy so he could translate it into Chinese, reporters asked if they could publish it. My lecture was interrupted constantly by rousing applause and cheers; at the very end, everyone gave me a standing ovation. Amazing, considering that I wrote the speech at midnight yesterday, and had no time to rehearse. Anyhow, I will give you more details later.

  Much love, Iris

  Iris said that Article 26 of the San Francisco Peace Treaty stated, “Should Japan make a peace settlement or war claims settlement with any State granting that State greater advantages than those provided by the present Treaty, those same advantages shall be extended to the parties to the present Treaty.” According to Iris, the latest declassified State Department records showed that the U.S. held secret negotiations with Japan and helped wartime victims in several countries, such as the Netherlands, receive compensation from Japan. But the U.S. chose to ignore Article 26 of the treaty and sold out its own veterans by waiving their claims to reparations. Iris called the San Francisco Peace Treaty a travesty of justice, a betrayal to our own American veterans.

  Just two days after the conference, on September 11, 2001, the whole world watched in horror as terrorists destroyed the Twin Towers in New York. My brother Bing, working in New York’s Wall Street financial center, escaped the catastrophe as he luckily had passed through the World Trade Center an hour before it collapsed!

  In this chaotic time, we knew that Iris was busy speaking out about her concern for civil liberties of individual citizens.

  In an e-mail on September 18, Iris wrote:

  Dear Mom and Dad,

  On Sunday night, Brett and I went out to dinner with Mike. We are all deeply concerned about the hate crimes committed against Arab Americans in our area. Just today I learned of a man of Indian ancestry, mistaken for an Arab, who was stabbed in San Francisco. The blind patriotism and religious fervor sweeping the United States is, to say the least, disturbing—and even the network broadcasts, such as this evening’s Nightline, sound like wartime propaganda. (Meanwhile, news coverage of the harassment of Islamics in America has been minimal.) A few days ago, the San Francisco Chronicle interviewed me along with several other Bay area luminaries about our reaction to the terrorism. I warned that the US government may use this crisis to erode individual freedom and American civil liberties. They ran my statement and photo in this Sunday’s Chronicle, and I can show you the article when you visit us in November.

  Events are unfolding faster than I can react to them: first the WTC and Pentagon tragedies, then the Japanese prime minister’s unexpected apology to the comfort women, and now, a major court victory of a former Korean slave laborer against a Japanese corporation. This week, I tried to work on my book and recover from general exhaustion and a mild case of flu, but I have to admit that it’s hard to stay focused. I plan to do nothing more than write, exercise and rest for the next few weeks.

  Love, Iris

  Iris was concerned about all kinds of human-rights issues at home and abroad, not just for Asian-Americans. On Octobe
r 10, Iris said that she’d been invited to participate in a live televised panel discussion on racism, along with Jewish and Arabic activists. Iris spoke out, for the latest racism against Islamics sprang from the September 11 terrorist attack. Because of the 9/11 tragedy, Muslims in this country were singled out and discriminated against. Iris fully understood this kind of racial discrimination, which every ethnic minority had gone through in time of crisis, such as Japanese-Americans during World War II and Chinese-Americans during Wen Ho Lee’s spying case. She said the best solution to combat racism was education. Through honest literature and films, we should show and proclaim the common humanity of all cultures, races, and religions that could bind us all together in a harmonious world.

  At the end of September, Iris joyfully told us that she had finished the first draft of her book on the Chinese in America. In October, she said her editor at Viking was very impressed with her writing, praised her lavishly, and had started to edit it.

  On November 10 of that year, Shau-Jin’s mother died. She lived to ninety-seven, but in the last few years she had lost her memory, and it was hard on Shau-Jin to watch his mom decline. The funeral in Los Angeles was arranged for December 1. After the funeral, we took a ride with Iris and Brett back to San Jose and lived in their town home for a month. Iris wanted us at her side during her medical procedure.

  Iris was scheduled to have her egg retrieval in December; after the IVF, the embryos would be transferred to her surrogate mother. We were glad that we could help and give her the support she needed. In the meantime, I was also looking into the real estate market in the Bay area to find an apartment to rent or a townhouse to buy.

  In the last two weeks of December, while we were living at their home, Iris finished the necessary medical procedures to complete the surrogacy. She felt happy that it was painless and her worry had been unnecessary.