Trump has no business being at a World War Two victory parade, let alone Putin.
Should US president Donald Trump join the planned September 3, 2025 World War Two victory parade at Tiananmen?
The May 9 Victory Day parade held in Moscow earlier this year marked the 80th anniversary of Germany’s defeat. The spectacle offers further proof, if further proof be needed, that Vladimir Putin and his dezinformatziya team are expert at creating fake narratives; in this case showcasing Russia as a global bulwark against fascism.
This distortion of history will be bookended on September 3 with a commemorative parade held at Tiananmen Square in Beijing. The September date reflects China’s emphasis on marking the defeat of Japan, but with Putin as the only expected VIP guest, it is more an act of public relations for current power holders than a solemn commemoration of history.
What’s more, eighty years on, the countries of the world have reinvented themselves and realigned. Japan and Germany have been pillars of peace, trade and prosperity in the postwar years and the world is a very different place today.
To bill such a PR stunt as a “victory” celebration rings rather hollow.
Of the “Big Five” victor nations, only the leaders of China and Russia will be on the rostrum overlooking Tiananmen Square, with no confirmed plans for US, UK, or French leaders to attend.
Two leading Chinese opinion leaders, Jin Canrong of Renmin University, formerly of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, and Wang Xiangwei, former editor of the South China Morning Post, have suggested that China should invite the US president to join the event at Tiananmen.
This unlikely possibility was flagged by internet maven and China researcher Wang Zichen in his Pekingnology newsletter as being a move imbued with extraordinary promise.
Nice try, guys.
A bold gesture at a time of immense diplomatic turmoil, it’s true that this a time when it’s worth a try to think out of the box. But adding more VIP seats to an already dubious undertaking is unlikely to work political miracles as is hoped.
Any gathering at which Vladimir Putin is party to will project mixed messages and crossed signals. It is an insult to anyone who really cares about remembering the decisive end to the war that ravaged the world in the middle of the twentieth century.
Simply put, it is at odds with the spirit of the victory against global fascism.
Winners of the war never tire of the narrative that Germany and Japan were the bad guys, on the wrong side of history, but both those countries have transformed themselves beyond recognition.
The Soviet Union and the United States emerged triumphant in 1945, of course, with immense leverage between them in shaping the peace of the post-war world order.
But the fleeting solidarity enjoyed in that moment of victory was frittered away as the two very different nations turned competitors, contenders and Cold War adversaries in the rush to determine who controlled what and where and on whose terms.
China was on the winning side, but its legacy is most pronounced as a victim nation. Its losses under Imperial Japanese aggression were among the most catastrophic in history, estimates of 35 million dead or more, and while it is natural that China should want to celebrate the moment that the horror of Japanese occupation ended, China did not end it.
Some will argue the horrific bomb dropped on Hiroshima did the job, others credit the Soviet Union’s late but formidable arrival in Manchuria.
Chinese of all political factions fought bravely and made great sacrifices, but China was part occupied, part battleground and part rump state. The KMT in the wartime capital of Chungking offered continuity of governance, but Chiang’s forces were not winners on the battlefield.
Chiang Kai-shek’s family ties and diplomatic links to the US gave him a seat at the table at the Cairo Conference and subsequent discussions about reordering a broken world order. It is fitting and proper that China should be among those who salute the march of history in 1945.
But what about Britain? Under Churchill’s leadership, the UK correctly perceived Hitler to be the enemy of all mankind, even before the Nazi’s went on the rampage and began to pound London with bombs.
In the face of an insuperable threat, the UK, like China, did its best to delay the march of armies it couldn’t single-handedly stop. What both did, significantly, was to communicate to the world that fascism was everyone’s struggle.
Long before the US entered either the Pacific or Atlantic theater of the war, Washington was beseeched with pleas from old friends in both China and England to pay attention, to lend support, to get involved. Both front-line countries did much to convince the more powerful but geographically isolated US to join in.
Of the five big powers, France got a seat at the table despite its collaboration with the Nazis because of Charles DeGaulle’s guerrilla war against the Nazis. France surrendered to Nazi occupation under the guise of cooperation, only to turn on them when US intervention became a game-changer.
A similar pattern of biding time took place in the vast swathes of China. Much of the coast was occupied directly by Japan, such as in Manchuria, or indirectly ruled under the aegis of pro-Tokyo collaborationist Wang Jingwei.
Today, as several serious regional wars are already raging across the globe, the specter of world war cannot be entirely dismissed. Commemoration of World War Two can offer a useful perspective if the ceremonies are not hijacked for partisan benefit or are tone-deaf to the past.
The presence of Vladimir Putin as a guest of honor at the Beijing parade, presents a problem. No one can deny the great contribution to victory that was made by the USSR in bringing the World War to an end in 1945, but the past is another country.
Furthermore, the absence of the US, Britain, and arguably France, makes for a lopsided affair. It becomes instead a commemoration of convenience, serving present needs without really taking an honest look at what the fight against fascism was fighting against.
In the Western press, Vladimir Putin has been compared to Hitler, and as historically inaccurate as that may be, Putin did recently invade a neighboring country upon which he continues to wreak death and sow hatred.
Russia’s blatant aggression has put all of Europe on edge, setting into motion some of the same dynamics seen in continental Europe when the Allies grappled with the rising German threat of the 1940s.
Another reason why it’s worth being skeptical about the US joining China and Russia to praise the heroism of a bygone struggle against fascism is the confused state of affairs in the US at this time.
Donald Trump, self-styled strongman leader of the United States has introduced elements of fascism to his authoritarian ruling style at home and abroad. Oblivious to the nuances of history, he recently crowed about the success of his attack on Iran, comparing it to dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima.
Finally, there is the question of where Germany and Japan, the two aggressor nations so soundly defeated by the Allies and Soviets in 1945, stand in today’s world.
It’s one thing to crow about victory over the bad guys while the smoke is still clearing, but the smoke cleared 80 years ago and the world is a very different place now, with Germany and Japan rule-bound, cooperative, diplomatic and peace-abiding.
Sad to say, the two aggressor states of World War Two are in many ways exemplars of the post-war peace, while the Allied victors, especially Russia and the US, are looking more and more like aggressors these days.