77-year-old Richard Overy was born in the shadow of World War II. At that time, it had just been two years since the World Anti-Fascist War won the difficult victory.
Now, Overy, professor of history at the University of Exeter in the United Kingdom, has become an internationally renowned war historian. He is a member of the National Academy of Academic Affairs of the United Kingdom, a fellow of the Royal Historical Society of England, and an advisor and expert on a series of World War II documentaries in the BBC.
In September 2025, the 80th anniversary of the victory of the Chinese People's War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War, Overy accepted an exclusive interview with China Newsweek. He pointed out that China made great contributions to the victory of its allies, and the main change brought to the world by World War II was the "end of the Western colonial empire."
Richard Overy Photo/Provided by the respondent
The beginning and end of "Imperial War"
Overy:In the past, most people (Western) believed that World War II was mainly a war against "Hitler Germany". In contrast, other battlefields of World War II were not given enough attention. But in my opinion, this Eurocentristic perspective ignores the fundamental significance of World War II, that is, World War II is a war caused by imperialist expansion, and it must be examined in the context of imperial competition in the 20th century. Germany, Japan and other countries are not only launching wars, but also seizing territory. They hope to establish a new empire that competes with traditional empires such as Britain and France through territorial expansion.
Territorial expansion was a way of behavior of European empires in the 19th century and before, and was no longer "popular" in the early 20th century. But on the one hand, although Europe had a wide range of peace movements after World War I, and many people no longer wanted war, but in defeated countries, especially Germany, a new radical nationalist political movement emerged, Hitler believed that territorial expansion was a way to rebuild the status of a great power so that they could make up for what they lost in World War I. The mentality of the other half of Europeans no longer wanting war has led to appeasement of Germany.
Under this background, World War II evolved into a global event, affecting Europe, East Asia, South Asia, the Pacific and Africa. Japan's invasion of Northeast China in 1931 was the first step for these "new empires" to expand their territory.
On September 18, 1931, Japan bombarded Beidaying, the Northeast Army base of China.
Overy:The accidental factor exists, but I think the key problem is that Japan's leadership, military and civilians were all driven by the idea that Japan must somehow challenge the traditional Western powers and establish itself as the "only East Asian power", and that Britain and the United States would be obstacles to this path.
We must also realize that Japan's decision-making method at that time was different from that of Western countries, and many major matters were not decided by the Prime Minister and the Cabinet sitting together to discuss and discuss. On the contrary, Japan's military and political system was very fragmented, and the aggression and expansion was driven by "radical thinkers" in the army and navy, who were usually low-ranking officers. There are also many military strategic decisions, which are actually chosen by front-line officers on the front line. Some leaders of the Japanese Army and Navy may be more visionary, but they are entangled by radical groups below.
In addition, although some senior officials do worry about the risks brought by the war, many people believe that "if Japan wants to become a big country, it must take risks." In general, the specific course of the war from 1931 to 1937 was unexpected, but when Japan invaded China in 1937, they were already considering how to dominate the larger world.
On September 19, 1931, the Japanese army attacked the Chinese army at the foreign gates of Shenyang.
China Newsweek: Your latest research focuses on the complex process of Japan's defeated and surrendered war. Is this complexity also related to Japan's special military and political system at that time?
Overy:Yes, Japan's "final battle" decision is an extremely complex process, which reflects the issue we just discussed, that is, Japan's decision-making system was kidnapped by radicals. Some militants in the military want to continue fighting, and what they want is actually "national suicide", and most senior officials and the emperor think this is not worth it because it will cost too much.
The Japanese leadership did not consider how much the nation they invaded, but at this time they were worried that the Japanese people would pay too much. So, they are looking for a political solution. While pursuing the end of the war, they want to avoid the rebellion of military radicals. This is a very subtle process and a difficult problem that Emperor Hirohito had to deal with back then.
There are many historical details in this process. At present, popular views still believe that Japan's surrender was because the United States dropped the atomic bomb. I think that's just a small part of the factor. The US Air Force's conventional bombing of Japanese cities may have played a greater role. But in general, this is another game between the Japanese leadership and domestic radicals after realizing that the war must be over.
Northeast Anti-Japanese United Cavalry Unit
China's two major contributions to the victory of the Allies
China Newsweek: Looking back on the 14-year war from 1931 to 1945, how do you evaluate the role played by the Chinese military and civilians in the final victory of the allies?
Overy:At that time, some Western countries were dismissive of China's military capabilities, believing that China's industrial foundation was limited and that there were almost no advanced weapons. However, looking back at history today, I think China played two key roles in World War II.
First of all, China is the first country to fight against this wave of new imperialism. Before the European battlefield began, China had been fighting Japan's imperial expansion ambitions alone from 1931 to 1939. This itself is an important contribution, especially in comparison with the situation in Europe. Before Britain and France decided to declare war on Germany in 1939, no country was effectively fighting the rise of neo-imperialism in Europe. It can be said that China is ahead of the world.
On the other hand, China has never lost the war with Japan. From 1931 to 1945, regardless of whether the resistance process was smooth or not, China had been fighting, and Japan had not been able to defeat China and failed to force China to surrender. This means that Japan cannot end the war in China, and therefore is in a state of fighting on both sides in the Pacific War from the end of 1941 to 1945. Japan's economy and industry are weaker than Western countries. It is impossible to win by allocating strength and resources in both lines.
Of course, even if Japan concentrates its resources and military power in China, it cannot win the victory of the Pacific War. But if China does not insist on resisting Japan, it will definitely be a much longer war for European and American allies. In this sense, in general, China received limited direct assistance from the Allies, but made a huge contribution to the victory of the Allies.
China Newsweek: The Allies finally won the victory of World War II. How did this change the world order?
Overy:
After that, the world became relatively peaceful. Nuclear deterrence played an important role in this, but the more critical factor is that the era of imperialism has ended, and major countries in the world no longer confrontation through territorial wars. Of course, the post-war order has also undergone great changes in the past few decades, including the rise of China and the resurgence of conflicts in some regions. I don't think the recent increase in conflicts in various regions is enough to evolve into a world war, but it does represent an instability in the current global system.
On July 7, 2025, in Nanjing, Jiangsu, the Memorial Hall of the Victims of the Nanjing Massacre of Japanese Invaders held a ceremony to commemorate the 88th Anniversary of the Outbreak of the All National Anti-Japanese War". Photography/Reporter Yang Bo
"Absolutely no reason to deny the Nanjing Massacre"
China News Weekly: Is the instability you mentioned also related to the insufficient reflection of the international community on World War II today? Today, the Japanese far-right forces still deny Japan's role as "perpetrator" in the war of aggression. In contrast, Europe's post-war reflections are relatively deep. How do you view this difference?
Overy:First of all, Europe had fought for five or six hundred years before the outbreak of World War II. For Europeans, World War II was the climax of long-term inter-national violence on this land for centuries. After this era of massive violence and barbarity, every European country paid a staggering price. This taught the European people that no matter which side of the "Iron Curtain" was on the subsequent Cold War, everyone had had enough of the war and all sides had a strong desire to find a better response.
Of course, now we don't know how long this era can last, nor how fragile the current peace is. Europeans have begun to talk about war widely again, the first time since 1945.
About Japan, I know that some Japanese historians face history very honestly and have reached consensus with historians from other parts of the world. But some Japanese intellectuals also believe that Japan had every reason to challenge the West at that time, and even "if it was not for the West to obstruct it, Japan would have led Asia." They think none of this is Japan's fault, and Japan is just responding to threats from other empires. Some people even refused to accept historical facts about the Nanjing Massacre and the comfort women issue. I don't think these are honest narratives.
China Newsweek: You mentioned the Nanjing Massacre. In "New History of World War II", you specifically list a chapter focusing on crimes against civilians and regard the Nanjing Massacre as an important case. What are the special features of the atrocities against civilians during World War II? How would you view the doubts of a few Japanese scholars about the Nanjing Massacre and the Japanese war crimes?
Overy:First of all, it is undeniable that serious crimes against civilians are a pathetic feature of World War II. During World War I, civilians were hurt from time to time, and Germany, Britain and France all began bombing cities in the air battles of World War I. But in general, considering the renewal and development of war means during World War II, the scale of civilian casualties in World War I was not comparable to that in World War II.
On the other hand, in World War II, civilians, as part of the battle, played a greater role in the conflict. In France, after the French army was completely defeated, many French civilians participated in the resistance movement against Germany. In the Soviet Union, the German army was very strict in the suppression of various types of civilian resistance and guerrillas, and millions of people may have died. Civilian mobilization and civilian resistance were also one of the reasons for the significant increase in the number of crimes committed by the military against civilians during World War II.
In addition, World War II was a real global war, with crimes against civilians spreading across all areas of conflict. In the West, we often talk about war crimes committed by Germany and about the Jewish massacre, which is very necessary. But if we say "nothing can compare to the Gestapo (crime)," it is because we have no idea what happened in China, what happened in Southeast Asian countries such as Indonesia and Malaysia.
In the Asian battlefield, the Nanjing Massacre was the tip of the iceberg of this series of serious crimes, behind which tens of millions of Chinese died in the war. For a massive crime, we may never have access to precise data. The same is true for bombing in most cities in Europe.
Historists need to work hard to reconstruct what happened in the past and provide the closest data to the reality possible. But we must realize that some history cannot be reconstructed 100% and we cannot deny the fact that the crimes have occurred. I think there is absolutely no reason to deny the Nanjing Massacre.
China Newsweek: Looking back on that dark history, what lessons should people learn from the history of World War II today?
Overy:This question is difficult to answer. Historians always hope that politicians and those with weapons can learn history better, but the reality is obviously disappointing. But I think at least two obvious lessons should be emphasized.
First, civilians must be protected in conflict and war. During World War II, civilians received almost no protection. As a result, the number of civilian casualties far exceeded that of the participating personnel.
Another lesson is that war must be further restricted and restricted. One of the lessons from World War II is that once the war begins, it will soon move towards a more radical strategy. For example, in August 1945, the United States dropped an atomic bomb on Japan, something the United States would not have thought of in 1941. Today, we should be wary of the risk of war becoming more radical. To take a step back, any war that has begun should be bound to a limited goal, should be carried out within the scope permitted by humanitarian law, and civilians should be protected. I think this is one of the lessons we need to learn from the history of World War II.
Reporter: Cao Ran ([email protected])
Editor: Xu Fangqing
