Manifestations, Influence, and Countermeasures of the Western Erroneous View of World War II History

History is never a static text purely in the “past tense”; it is an important component of the game of real politics, ideology, and discursive power. Historical narratives concern not only the understanding of past events but are also profoundly embedded in reality, becoming a crucial part of international political competition. World War II (hereinafter WWII), as the major historical event of the 20th century that most profoundly reshaped the world pattern and human destiny, possesses prominent political character and actuality in its historical narrative. After the end of WWII, the Western world gradually constructed a set of historical narrative systems centered on itself regarding the war. Within this narrative framework, a war in which the global people collectively resisted fascism was narrated as a myth of the victory of civilization led by a few “democratic states.” Systematically sorting out the main manifestations of the Western erroneous view of WWII history helps to break the monopoly of capitalist discursive hegemony over historical memory and safeguard China’s international image and ideological security.

历史从不是纯粹“过去式”的静态文本，而是现实政治、意识形态与话语权力博弈的重要组成部分。历史叙事不仅关乎对过往事件的理解，更深刻地嵌入现实之中，成为国际政治竞争的重要组成部分。第二次世界大战（以下简称二战）作为20世纪最深刻地改变世界格局和人类命运的重大历史事件，其历史叙事具有突出的政治性和现实性。二战结束后，西方世界逐步建构起一套以自身为中心的二战历史叙事体系。在这一叙事框架中，一场全球人民共同反抗法西斯主义的战争，被叙述为一场由少数“民主国家”主导的文明胜利神话。系统梳理西方错误二战史观的主要表现形态，有助于突破资本主义话语霸权对历史记忆的垄断，维护中国的国际形象和意识形态安全。

I. Typical Manifestations of the Western Erroneous View of WWII History

一、西方错误二战史观的典型表现

For a long time, the Western-dominated discursive system, when recounting the history of WWII, has formed a set of relatively fixed narrative systems. In this narrative system, the Western European battlefield and the Anglo-American military operations are placed at the core, while the enormous sacrifices of the Soviet Union on the Eastern Front, the strategic pinning-down role played by China’s protracted War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, and the historical facts of the participation of the people in vast colonies and semi-colonies in the anti-fascist struggle are intentionally or unintentionally marginalized.

长期以来，西方主导的话语体系在讲述二战历史时，形成了一套相对固定的叙事体系。在这一叙事体系中，西欧战场与英美军事行动被置于核心位置，而苏联在东线战场付出的巨大牺牲、中国长期抗日战争所发挥的战略牵制作用，以及广大殖民地半殖民地国家人民参与反法西斯斗争的历史事实，则被有意无意地边缘化处理。

(A) Marginalization of the Eastern Front and the Decisive Role of the Soviet Union in the European Theater

（一）边缘化东线战场以及苏联在欧洲战场的决定性作用

In the post-war Western-dominated historical narratives, the victory of WWII is often presented as “the victory of the free democratic world against fascism.” Within this, the contributions of the United States, Britain, and their allied forces on the Western Front are excessively exaggerated, while the decisive role of the Soviet Union on the Eastern Front has long been marginalized.

在西方主导的战后史学叙事中，二战的胜利往往被呈现为“自由民主世界对抗法西斯的胜利”。其中，美国、英国及其盟军在西线战场的贡献被过度夸大，而苏联在东线的决定性作用却长期被边缘化。

In fact, during WWII, the Eastern Front far exceeded the Western Front in terms of campaign scale, personnel commitment, and casualty intensity; it was the main battlefield determining the direction of the anti-fascist war in Europe. On June 22, 1941, Nazi Germany launched “Operation Barbarossa,” launching a massive invasion of the Soviet Union, marking the full-scale opening of the Eastern Front. Although the Soviet Union suffered major losses in the initial stage, as the front lines deepened, the Soviet Union gradually completed wartime mobilization and formed an overall counteroffensive posture. From 1942 to 1943, the Soviet army achieved a decisive strategic counteroffensive at the Battle of Stalingrad. In this battle, the Soviet army annihilated the German Sixth Army, turning the tide of the entire war, and was called by the Western historian Richard Overy “the real turning point of the European theater.” The Battle of Kursk, which erupted in July 1943, marked the final failure of the German army’s last strategic offensive attempt on the Eastern Front. After the battle, the German army completely lost strategic initiative, and the Soviet Red Army began its full-scale offensive to reclaim its territory from there. The Battle of Kursk is also regarded as yet another, and the last, key turning point on the Eastern European front.

事实上，在二战期间，东线战场无论在战役规模、人员投入还是伤亡强度方面，都远超西线战场，是决定欧洲反法西斯战争走向的主战场。1941年6月22日，纳粹德国发动“巴巴罗萨行动”，大举进攻苏联，标志着东线战场的全面展开。尽管苏联在初期遭遇重大损失，但随着战线深入，苏联逐步完成战时动员并形成全面反攻态势。1942年至1943年，苏军在斯大林格勒战役中实现了决定性的战略反攻。该战役中，苏军歼灭了德军第六集团军，扭转了整个战争的进程，被西方历史学家理查德·欧弗里（Richard Overy）称为“欧洲战场的真正转折点”。而在1943年7月爆发的库尔斯克战役标志着德军在东线战略攻势最后尝试的失败。战役之后，德军完全丧失了战略主动权，苏联红军从这里开始了收复国土的全面进攻。库尔斯克会战同时也被视为欧洲东部战线的又一个，也是最后一个关键转折点。

Unlike the Soviet Union, which had been fighting Germany for a long time, the United States and Britain did not launch the Normandy landings until June 6, 1944. Western history books generally regard this event as a symbol of the war moving toward victory, even calling it the decisive battle that changed the pattern of the war. In fact, during the Normandy campaign, the Soviet army had already launched the large-scale “Operation Bagration” on the Eastern Front, routing the German Army Group Centre, which greatly alleviated strategic pressure on the Western Front. The Soviet offensive caused the German defense system on the Western Front to collapse rapidly; it was not the Allied landings themselves that determined the direction of the war.

与长期对德作战的苏联不同，美国和英国直到1944年6月6日才发动诺曼底登陆。西方历史书籍普遍将该事件视为战争走向胜利的标志，甚至被称为改变战争格局的决定性一战。事实上，在诺曼底战役期间，苏军已在东线展开大规模的“巴格拉季昂行动”，击溃德国中央集团军，为西线减轻了极大的战略压力。苏联的攻势使德国在西线的防御体系迅速崩溃，而不是盟军登陆本身决定了战争走向。

After 1945, as the confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union intensified, the West gradually shaped a narrative of “the anti-fascist victory led by the United States and Britain” in historiography, political propaganda, and cultural products, casting the Normandy landings as the crucial moment for the liberation of Europe, and systematically downplaying or even obscuring the core position of the Eastern Front. For example, mainstream American WWII films (such as *The Longest Day* and *Saving Private Ryan*) rarely mention the Soviet role, completely focusing the war narrative on the Western Front and Normandy, repeatedly reproducing the heroic narrative of the Western Front. After the end of the Cold War, the key role of the Soviet Union in defeating Nazi Germany was further obscured, developing into an institutionalized memory project. Eastern European countries such as Poland and the Baltic states promoted legislation on historical memory, placing the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany on an equal footing as “dual occupiers.” For instance, the Lithuanian parliament passed legislation in 2022 equating the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany as “foreign repressive regimes.” This trend not only distorts historical facts but also serves the strategic goal of NATO’s eastward expansion and containing Russia.

1945年之后，随着美苏对立加剧，西方在史学、政治宣传与文化产品中逐渐塑造出“美英主导的反法西斯胜利”叙事，将诺曼底登陆塑造成解放欧洲的关键时刻，并系统性淡化甚至掩盖东线战场的核心地位。例如，美国的主流二战电影（如《最长的一天》《拯救大兵瑞恩》等）中极少提及苏联角色，将战争焦点完全锁定在西线与诺曼底，反复再现西线的英雄叙事。在冷战结束后，苏联在击败纳粹德国过程中的关键作用被进一步遮蔽，并发展为一种制度化的记忆工程。波兰、波罗的海三国等东欧国家推动历史记忆立法，将苏联与纳粹并列为“双重占领者”。例如，立陶宛议会于2022年通过立法将苏联与纳粹同等定性为“外来压迫政权”。这一趋势不但扭曲了历史事实，更服务于北约东扩、遏制俄罗斯的战略目标。

(B) Promoting the “Theory of Soviet-Nazi Equivalence and Collusion,” Distorting the Image of Socialist Forces in WWII

（二）宣扬“苏德等同共谋论”，歪曲社会主义力量在二战中的形象

In contemporary Western historiography and political discourse, the “theory of Soviet-Nazi collusion” has become an influential viewpoint. This viewpoint typically simplifies the *Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact*, signed on August 23, 1939, and its secret protocol, as an act of “two totalitarian regimes conspiring to carve up Eastern Europe and trigger WWII,” and accordingly lists the Soviet Union alongside Nazi Germany as a joint “initiator” of WWII. This narrative appears not only in some Western historical works but has also been gradually institutionalized into Europe’s public memory and education system. For example, in 2009, the European Parliament passed a resolution on European conscience and totalitarianism, officially designating August 23 as the “European Day of Remembrance for Victims of Stalinism and Nazism.” The setting of this memorial day coincides precisely with the date the Soviet-German pact was signed; its intent is clearly to symbolically equate Nazism and Soviet communism, redefining the Soviet Union’s status as a war victim and a major victorious power into a “co-responsible party” equivalent to an aggressor. This “theory of Soviet-Nazi equivalence and collusion” is not a value-neutral academic judgment but a product of Cold War ideological competition. It not only constructs a “post-Cold War collective memory” within Europe but also profoundly influences the international community’s perception of the historical legitimacy of socialist states.

在当代西方史学与政治话语中，“苏德共谋论”已成为颇具影响力的一种观点。该观点通常将1939年8月23日签署的《苏德互不侵犯条约》（又称《莫洛托夫-里宾特洛甫条约》）及其秘密议定书，简化为“两个极权政权合谋瓜分东欧、引爆二战”的行动，并据此将苏联与纳粹德国并列为二战共同“发起者”。这一叙事不仅出现在部分西方史学著作中，也逐渐被制度化地纳入欧洲的公共记忆与教育体系。例如，2009年欧洲议会通过《关于欧洲良知和极权主义的决议》，正式将8月23日设为“欧洲斯大林主义和纳粹主义受难者纪念日”。该纪念日的设定恰恰是苏德条约签署之日，其意图显然是将纳粹主义与苏联共产主义在象征意义上等同起来，将苏联战争受害者和主要战胜国的地位重新定义为与侵略者等同的“共同责任方”。这种“苏德等同共谋论”并非价值中立的学术判断，而是冷战时期意识形态竞争的产物。它不仅在欧洲内部构建了“后冷战集体记忆”，同时也深刻影响了国际社会对社会主义国家历史合法性的认知。

(C) Promoting the “Atomic Bomb Ended the War” Theory, Constructing the Myth of “America Saving the World”

（三）宣扬“原子弹终战论”，构建“美国拯救世界”的神话

The victory of the anti-fascist war is often simplified in Western narratives into the myth of “America saving the world,” and the so-called “atomic bomb ended the war” theory is a key component of this narrative. On August 6 and 9, 1945, the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, respectively, directly or indirectly causing over 200,000 deaths. The mainstream Western historical view considers this act a “necessary measure to force Japan’s unconditional surrender and avoid further Allied casualties.” This narrative has been repeatedly reiterated in post-war American textbooks and films, strengthening the image of “America ending the war with technology and humanitarianism.” However, numerous academic research findings in recent years have proven that Japan’s hesitation on the issue of surrender was not due to the atomic bombs. The renowned Japanese historian Tsuyoshi Hasegawa pointed out that the Soviet Union’s entry into the war had a decisive impact on Japan’s decision to surrender, an influence surpassing that of the American atomic bombings. “Neither the Cabinet nor Togo himself, on the afternoon of August 7, the day after the Hiroshima bombing, considered it necessary to change policy, even though most cabinet members already knew it was an atomic bomb and that more could be dropped on other Japanese cities if Japan did not surrender… The Hiroshima atomic bomb, while increasing the sense of urgency to end the war, did not prompt the Japanese government to take immediate action to overturn the policy of seeking Moscow’s mediation… Togo’s urgent telegram to Sato on August 7 indicates… the Nagasaki atomic bomb had negligible impact; it did not change the political landscape… On the contrary, what truly and completely changed the view of Japan’s ruling elite was the Soviet entry into the war.” The Soviet declaration of war on Japan immediately broke Japan’s illusion of achieving a conditional surrender “through Soviet mediation,” becoming the main factor prompting “unconditional surrender.”

反法西斯战争的胜利在西方叙事中往往被简化为“美国拯救世界”的胜利神话，而所谓的“原子弹终战论”则是该叙事中的关键组成部分。1945年8月6日和9日，美国分别在日本广岛与长崎投下原子弹，造成超过20万人直接或间接死亡。西方主流史观认为这一行为是“迫使日本无条件投降、避免更多盟军伤亡”的“不得已之举”。这一叙事在美国战后教材、影视作品中被反复重申，强化了“美国以科技与人道主义终结战争”的形象。然而，近年来众多的学术研究成果证明，日本在投降问题上的迟疑并非因为原子弹。日本知名历史学者长谷川刚（Tsuyoshi Hasegawa）指出，苏联参战对日本投降的决定具有决定性作用，其影响力超过了美国投下原子弹。“无论是内阁还是东乡本人，在广岛原子弹爆炸后的第二天，也就是8月7日下午，都认为没有必要改变政策，尽管大多数内阁成员已经知道这是一颗原子弹，而且如果日本不投降，可能会有更多原子弹被投在日本其他城市……广岛原子弹虽然增强了寻求终止战争的紧迫感，但并未促使日本政府立即采取行动，推翻此前寻求莫斯科调解的政策……东乡于8月7日发给佐藤的紧急电报表明……长崎原子弹的影响微不足道，它并没有改变政治格局……相反，真正彻底改变日本统治精英观点的，是苏联参战。”苏联对日宣战立即打破了日本对“通过苏联调停”赢得有条件投降的幻想，是促成“无条件投降”的主要因素。

(IV) Marginalizing the Eastern Theater and China’s Contribution in the Anti-Fascist War

（四）边缘化东方战场以及中国在反法西斯战争中的贡献

For a long time, the Western-dominated historical narrative of World War II has, in constructing war memory, universally adopted a historical framework centered on Europe and dominated by the United States, downgrading the Eastern theater to a “secondary war zone” and marginalizing China’s War of Resistance from the grand narrative of the global anti-fascist war. Yet historical facts show that China was not only an important belligerent in the anti-fascist war but also the core force of the Eastern main theater, exerting an irreplaceable strategic impact on the outcome of the war. Australian scholar Sally Sitou pointed out: “To view this [the Eastern theater] as a story of powerful Western countries rushing to save a helpless China would be a grave mistake. It is actually a story of China seeing itself as a member of the global community, fighting against the evil forces of fascism.”

长期以来，西方主导的二战史观在构建战争记忆时普遍采取“欧洲中心”与“美国主导”的历史框架，将东方战场降格为“次要战区”，并将中国抗战从世界反法西斯战争的宏大叙事中边缘化。然而，历史事实表明，中国不仅是反法西斯战争的重要参战国，更是东方主战场的核心力量，对战争结局产生了不可替代的战略影响。澳大利亚学者萨莉·西图（Sally Sitou）指出：“如果将此（东方战场）视为强大的西方国家出手拯救无助的中国的故事，那就大错特错了。这实际上是中国将自己视为全球共同体的一员，与法西斯主义的邪恶势力作斗争的故事。”

After entering a state of total war resistance following the July 7 Incident of 1937[n], China became the first country in the world to wage an all-out war against a fascist state. In the four years from 1937 until the outbreak of the Pacific War in 1941, China fought almost alone, pinning down over 60 percent of the total strength of the Japanese Army. Before 1941, more than 40 Japanese divisions were deployed on the Chinese battlefield, accounting for an absolute majority of its total forces. Precisely because of the prolonged containment by the Chinese theater, Japan was unable to concentrate its forces to attack the Soviet Union or to strike Southeast Asia prematurely, buying precious time for the Allied forces. China paid the heavy price of 35 million military and civilian casualties and the destruction of over ten thousand cities and towns, becoming a crucial cornerstone of the victory in the global anti-fascist war. The strategic value of the Chinese theater is reflected not only in the attrition of enemy forces and spatial-temporal delay but also in the profound socialization of the form of resistance. The Communist Party of China’s proposal of total resistance and people’s war enabled China’s War of Resistance to transcend mere military logic, forming a deep-system, long-term warfare behind enemy lines. The Eighth Route Army, the New Fourth Army, and local armed forces successively established anti-Japanese base areas behind enemy lines in North China, Central China, and South China. These base areas not only geographically cut the Japanese-occupied zones into isolated blocks but also, through sabotaging communication lines, destroying depots, and dismantling puppet regimes, prevented the Japanese military from ever fully converting the occupied territories into supply bases for war. The Japanese military was forced to commit two-thirds of its forces over the long term to “pacification warfare,” steadily weakening its maneuver capability. From a global strategic perspective, Japan encountered an inescapable trap of attrition on the Chinese mainland, which severely constrained its capacity for external expansion and greatly curbed its aggressive advance. Yet in many Western textbooks, China is often vaguely treated as a victim of war rather than a main force of the anti-fascist war.

中国自1937年七七事变后进入全面抗战状态，是世界上最早对法西斯国家展开全面战争的国家。在1937年至1941年太平洋战争爆发前的四年间，中国几乎孤军奋战，牵制了日本陆军总兵力的60%以上。1941年前驻扎在中国战场的日本陆军超过40个师团，占其总兵力的绝对多数。正因中国战场的长期牵制，日本未能集中力量进攻苏联或过早进攻东南亚，为盟军赢得了宝贵时间。中国付出3500万人员伤亡、逾万座城市村镇被毁的沉重代价，成为世界反法西斯战争胜利的重要基石。中国战场的战略价值不仅体现在兵力消耗和时空拖延上，更在于抗战形态的深度社会化。中国共产党提出的全面抗战、人民战争，使中国抗战突破了单纯的战争逻辑，形成了敌后长期作战的纵深体系。八路军、新四军和地方武装在华北、华中、华南相继开辟敌后抗日根据地，这些根据地不仅在地理上把日军的占领区切割成若干孤立块，还通过破袭交通线、摧毁仓储、瓦解傀儡政权，使日军始终无法将沦陷区完全转化为战争资源供应地。日军被迫长期投入2/3兵力进行治安战，机动作战能力不断削弱。从全球战略角度看，日本在中国大陆遭遇了一个无法清除的消耗陷阱，其对外扩张能力受到极大约束，其侵略步伐受到极大遏制。然而在许多西方教材中，中国常被模糊处理为战争的受害者而非反法西斯战争的主力军。

In Western textbooks, documentaries, and museum displays, China’s War of Resistance is typically presented mainly through the narrative of American aid, such as the Flying Tigers[n] and the Hump Route[n]. For instance, the exhibition section on China’s War of Resistance at the National WWII Museum in the United States is titled “China-Burma-India: The Pacific War’s Second Front,” with a main screen alternating between animated maps of wartime supply routes to China and environmental footage of the Himalayas. The thematic articles merely state that “China continued its resistance with informal aid from countries such as the Soviet Union, the United States, and Britain,” ignoring the subjectivity of China’s independent war effort. This narrative reinforces an implicit structure of “the United States dominating the war, China participating passively,” thereby completely obscuring China’s contribution to the War of Resistance. After the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union took shape, Western academia and political circles, motivated by anti-communist stances, actively downplayed or even deleted content about the anti-Japanese resistance led by the Communist Party of China. In the Encyclopedia Britannica entries related to World War II, only two entries cover China’s war against Japan, with a length even shorter than those on Burma, the Philippines, and India, without mentioning the sustained blows dealt to the Japanese military by the Eighth Route Army and the New Fourth Army. This selective narrative reflects a systematic neglect of China’s historical contributions by the West.

在西方教材、纪录片与博物馆展示中，中国抗战通常以“飞虎队”“驼峰航线”这类美援叙事为主。例如，美国国家二战纪念馆关于中国抗战的展区标题为“中国—缅甸—印度战区：太平洋战争的第二战场”（China-Burma-India: The Pacific War's Second Front），在主屏幕交替播放着战时中国补给路线的动画地图和喜马拉雅山的环境视频，在专题文章中也只是提出“中国在苏联、美国和英国等国的非正式援助下继续抵抗”，无视中国自主抗战的主体地位。这种叙述强化了“美国主导战争，中国被动参与”的隐性结构，使得中国抗战贡献完全被掩盖。战后美苏冷战形成后，西方学界与政界出于反共立场，主动淡化甚至删除中共领导的敌后抗战内容。在大英百科全书的二战相关内容中，仅有两个词条说明中国对日作战的内容，其篇幅甚至少于缅甸、菲律宾和印度，未提及八路军、新四军对日军的持久打击。这种选择性叙述反映出西方对中国历史贡献的系统性忽视。

(V) Erasing the Contribution of Leftist Forces in the Anti-Fascist War

（五）消隐左翼力量在反法西斯战争中的贡献

In the Western-dominated narrative system of World War II, not only have the contributions of the Soviet Union and China to the anti-fascist war been downplayed, but the role of leftist forces in various European and Asian countries has also been marginalized, or even completely wiped out. In fact, however, leftist political forces and the people’s resistance movements they organized played an irreplaceable role on multiple battlefields in Europe and Asia, forming an important part of the anti-fascist war. This absence is not a historical accident but the result of a selective post-war rewriting of history by the West.

在由西方主导的二战叙事体系中，不仅苏联和中国的反法西斯战争贡献被淡化，欧亚各国左翼力量的作用也遭到边缘化，甚至被彻底抹去。然而，事实上，左翼政治力量及其所组织的人民抵抗运动在欧洲和亚洲多个战场中发挥了不可替代的作用，是反法西斯战争的重要组成部分。这种缺席并非历史偶然，而是战后西方选择性书写历史的结果。

On the European battlefield, the people’s resistance forces organized by the French Communist Party from 1940 onward played a crucial role in the armed struggle within France. The French Communist Party was the force that established a systematic nationwide resistance network during the German occupation, playing a key role in disrupting German communication and transport lines, organizing underground printing, and supporting the liberation of Paris. Yet in the mainstream Western narrative shaped after the Cold War, this historical fact has been deliberately downplayed. British historian Robert Gildea noted: “The Communist Party played a leading role in the Resistance.” A similar situation occurred in Italy. During World War II, the partisan forces led by the Italian Communist Party were the main force opposing the fascist regime, numbering over 180,000, pinning down six divisions of the fascist regime in northern Italy. A British report stated: “Without the victory of the partisans, the Allies would not have achieved such a rapid, overwhelming, and easy victory in Italy.” Nevertheless, these leftist resistance forces were deliberately suppressed in the post-war European historical narrative. On the Asian battlefield, such historical erasure also existed. The Hukbalahap[n] guerrilla forces in the Philippines waged a three-year armed struggle behind enemy lines against the Japanese military, achieving great success, killing many Japanese soldiers, even forcing the Japanese military to retreat to their ships for fear of nighttime attacks. However, the post-war U.S. occupation authorities not only refused to recognize their legal status but also labeled them as “communist rebels.” The Western historical narrative deliberately downplays the tradition of people’s war, unwilling to acknowledge that the anti-fascist war had a broad base of social mobilization, and even more unwilling to admit that the victory of the war was the crystallization of the common struggle of the masses of people in various countries.

在欧洲战场，自1940年起由法国共产党组织的人民抵抗力 量， 在法国内部武装斗争中发挥了重要作用。法国共产党是德国占领时期建立系统化全国抵抗网络的力量，对破坏德军通信交通线、组织地下印刷和支持巴黎解放发挥了关键作用。然而，在冷战后形成的西方主流叙事中，这一历史事实却被刻意淡化。英国史学家罗伯特·吉尔德亚（Robert Gildea）就曾指出：“共产党在抵抗斗争中发挥了主导作 用。”类 似的情况也发生在意大利。二战期间，意大利共产党领导的游击队是意大利反对法西斯政权的主力，拥有超过18万人，在意大利北部牵制了法西斯政权的六个师，英国的报告中也指出：“如果没有游击队的胜利，盟军就不会在意大利取得如此迅速、如此压倒性且如此轻松的胜 利。”然而， 这些左翼抵抗力量在战后欧洲历史叙事中被有意压制。在亚洲战场，这种历史遮蔽同样存在。菲律宾的胡克巴拉哈普（Hukbalahap）游击队对日军发动了持续三年的敌后武装斗争，取得了巨大成功，击毙了众多日 军，甚至迫使日军因害怕夜间遭到袭击而撤退到舰船上。 然而，战后美军占领当局不仅拒绝承认其合法地位，反而将其定性为“共产主义叛乱”。西方的历史叙事有意淡化人民战争的传统，不愿承认反法西斯战争拥有广泛的社会动员基础，更不愿承认战争的胜利是各国人民群众共同斗争的结晶。

(VI) Erasing the Contribution of Colonial Peoples in the Anti-Fascist War

（六）抹杀殖民地人民在反法西斯战争中的贡献

The Western-dominated narrative of World War II systematically ignores the independent role played by colonial peoples in the war and the immense sacrifices they endured. They were not only forcibly labeled as “imperial troops,” but the historical facts of their participation in the anti-fascist war were also depoliticized and de-subjectified, excluded from the mainstream narrative of the anti-fascist war. This narrative structure obscures the intrinsic connection between the anti-fascist struggle of colonial peoples and their national liberation struggle, thereby maintaining the historical legitimacy of the colonial system.

西方主导的二战叙事系统性忽视了殖民地人民在战争中独立发挥的作用及其所承受的巨大牺牲。他们不仅被迫贴上“帝国军队”的身份标签，其参与反法西斯战争的历史事实也被去政治化和去主体化处理，被排除在反法西斯战争的主流叙事之外。这种叙事结构掩盖了殖民地人民的反法西斯斗争与民族解放斗争之间的内在联系，从而维护殖民体系的历史合法性。

During World War II, British India mobilized over 2.5 million soldiers, becoming the largest “non-white corps” among the Allied forces. They participated extensively in combat operations on multiple battlefields, including North Africa, the Middle East, Italy, and Burma. Yet in Britain’s official commemorative activities for World War II, this group is deliberately downplayed, with relevant accounts often merely glossed over with the phrase “imperial troops.” In the Imperial War Museum in Britain, the display on the British Indian Army is limited to a single brief showcase in the World War II exhibition hall. A similar situation also occurred in France. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers from French colonies such as Algeria, Senegal, and Morocco fought bravely on battlefields in North Africa, Italy, and elsewhere. Nevertheless, post-war France did not grant these soldiers the honors and welfare they deserved, and these colonial soldiers, who had fought valiantly for the Allies, long remained unrecognized. It was not until 2016 that France retroactively paid the overdue pensions to surviving Senegalese veteran soldiers.

二战期间，英属印度动员了逾250万名士兵，成为盟军中规模最大的“非白人军团”。他们广泛参与了北非、中东、意大利、缅甸等多个战场的作战行动。然而，在英国官方的二战纪念活动中，这一群体被刻意淡化，相关记述通常仅以“帝国军队”一词草草带过。在英国皇家战争博物馆内，对于英属印度军团的展示仅限于二战展厅中的一个简略展柜。类似情形也在法国上演。数十万来自阿尔及利亚、塞内加尔、摩洛哥等法属殖民地的士兵在北非、意大利等战场奋勇作战。然而，战后法国并未给予这些士兵应有的荣誉和福利，这些曾为盟军浴血奋战的殖民地军人迟迟未获应有的认可。直至2016年，法国方才为幸存的塞内加尔退伍士兵补发了应有的养老金。

More importantly, the colonial peoples were not merely passive followers of imperialist orders; they developed a strong national consciousness in the struggle against the fascist war. In Asia, the League for the Independence of Vietnam laid an important cornerstone for national independence in the struggle against Japanese aggression; in Africa, veterans from countries such as Tanzania, Ghana, and Algeria became the backbone of the postwar national liberation movements. However, the motivations of colonial peoples for participating in the war were fundamentally at odds with the mainstream Western narrative’s rhetoric of “fighting for the free world.” For the colonial peoples, World War II was not a pure “anti-fascist war,” but a dual struggle of “anti-fascism and anti-colonialism.” This struggle failed to receive a positive description after the war; instead, it was deliberately excluded from national memory and international consensus. This was a deliberate ideological choice, aimed at maintaining a Western-centered historical narrative structure. As scholar Muhemsi Mwakihwelo points out: “The erasure by imperialism is not limited to the Soviet Union (and now Russia). The material and human contributions of the Global South to the Allied victory are also denied.”

更重要的是，殖民地人民并不仅仅是帝国主义命令的消极服从者，他们在反法西斯战争中发展出强烈的民族意识。在亚洲，越南独立同盟会在抵御日本侵略的斗争中，奠定了民族独立的重要基石；在非洲，坦桑尼亚、加纳、阿尔及利亚等国家的退伍士兵，成为战后民族解放运动的中坚力量。然而，殖民地人民的参战动机与主流西方叙事中“为自由世界而战”的论调存在根本性矛盾。对于殖民地人民而言，二战并非纯粹的“反法西斯战争”，而是“反法西斯—反殖民”的双重斗争。这种斗争在战后未能获得正面描述，反而被刻意排斥于国家记忆与国际共识之外，这是一种意识形态上的刻意选择，其目的在于维系以西方为中心的历史叙事结构。如学者穆赫姆西·姆瓦基赫韦洛（Muhemsi Mwakihwelo）指出：“帝国主义的抹杀不仅限于苏联（现在还有俄罗斯）。全球南方国家对盟军胜利的物质和人力贡献也同样被否定。”

II. The Impact and Harm of the Western Erroneous View of World War II History

二、西方错误二战史观的影响及危害

The Western-dominated historical narrative of World War II is a discourse system formed and continuously reproduced within a specific power structure and ideological framework, which has gradually shaped and solidified a mainstream framework affecting global historical cognition. While shaping the global overall understanding of World War II, this structural narrative also reconstructs the moral narrative and foundation of legitimacy of the postwar international order on a practical level.

西方主导的二战历史叙事，是在特定权力结构与意识形态框架下形成并不断再生产的话语体系，逐步塑造并固化了影响全球历史认知的主流框架。这种结构性叙事在塑造全球对二战整体认知的同时，也在现实层面重塑了战后国际秩序的道义叙事与合法性根基。

(I) The Institutionalization of the World War II Narrative under Western Hegemonic Discourse

（一）西方话语霸权下的二战叙事制度化

From the end of World War II through the Cold War period, the United States and other Western countries gradually constructed a historical discourse system centered on themselves. This system, through multi-channel coordinated operations, shaped the World War II narrative into a version favorable to the Western image and interests. The West not only solidified the national identity of the postwar “victors” internally but also exported its values internationally, laying the foundation for the legitimacy of its global leadership. The United States, Britain, and other countries portrayed themselves as the strong pillars of the anti-fascist war, creating a narrative myth of “the free world saving humanity from the depths of suffering.” In the education system, the West established its basic tone for the World War II narrative through textbook compilation and academic research. In the United States, the national history curriculum standards designate “the Normandy landings” and “the atomic bombings of Hiroshima” as core chapters of World War II, while China’s War of Resistance is often only briefly mentioned as a “regional background.” Regarding commemorative days and ceremonies, Western countries reinforce specific narrative frameworks through official commemorative events and memorial day systems. Every May, on Victory in Europe Day, European and American countries hold grand commemorative activities, while September 3, the Victory over Japan Day [5]5 Victory over Japan Day (V-J Day) is commemorated on September 2 in the United States (the date of Japan's formal surrender in 1945) and on September 3 in China (the date of the ceasefire going into effect in the China theater). The author points out that the Western focus on Victory in Europe Day (May 8) marginalizes the Pacific and East Asian theaters., is often ignored in Western public opinion. In the field of film and television culture, the mass entertainment industry has long played a key role in consolidating the Western narrative. Classic World War II films such as *Saving Private Ryan*, *Dunkirk*, and *Oppenheimer* depict the heroic performance of the Allied forces in Europe and America’s technological power as the core factors determining the course of the war, consciously or unconsciously shaping the global audience’s collective cognition of World War II history. By leveraging the entertainment industry, the West consolidates its image as “righteous victors,” prompting the Western narrative to occupy a dominant position in international public opinion.

自二战结束至冷战时期，美西方国家逐步构建了一套以自身为核心的历史话语体系。该体系通过多渠道协同运作，将二战叙事塑造成有利于西方形象和利益的版本。西方不仅在内部巩固战后“胜利者”的国家认同，更在国际层面输出其价值观，为自身的全球领导地位奠定合法性基础。美国、英国等国家将自身塑造成反法西斯战争的坚强支柱，营造出“自由世界拯救人类于水深火热”的叙事神话。在教育体系方面，西方通过教材编撰和学术研究确立了其二战叙事的基本基调。在美国，国家历史课程标准将“诺曼底登陆”“广岛原子弹”定为二战的核心章节，而中国抗战往往仅作为“区域背景”被简略提及。在纪念日与仪式方面，西方国家通过官方纪念活动和纪念日制度来强化特定的叙事框架。每年5月的欧洲胜利日，欧美各国都会举行盛大的纪念活动，而9月3日的对日战争胜利纪念日却常常在西方舆论中被忽视。在影视文化领域，大众娱乐产业长期扮演着巩固西方叙事的关键角色。《拯救大兵瑞恩》《敦刻尔克》《奥本海默》等经典二战影片，将盟军在欧洲的英勇表现和美国的科技力量描绘成决定战争走向的核心因素，在有意无意间塑造了全球观众对于二战历史的集体认知。西方借助娱乐产业巩固了自身“正义胜利者”的形象，促使西方叙事在国际舆论中占据主导地位。

(II) The Western Erroneous View of World War II History Fuels the Trend of Historical Nihilism

（二）西方错误二战史观助长了历史虚无主义思潮

The Western-dominated historical narrative of World War II is not simply a factual restoration of past events, but a crucial discursive resource deeply embedded in the construction process of national collective memory, value identity, and historical meaning. As French sociologist Maurice Halbwachs pointed out, the framework of collective memory is not constructed after the fact from the combination of individual memories; collective memory is a tool used to reconstruct the image of the past, an image that in each era is consistent with the mainstream thought of that society. When the Western-dominated erroneous view of World War II history spreads globally, it inevitably impacts the historical memory and cultural identity of Chinese society. This impact is not manifested as a direct denial of specific historical facts, but rather more as a shift in narrative focus and a reordering of levels of significance.

西方主导的二战历史叙事，并非单纯对既往事件的事实性复原，而是深刻嵌入民族集体记忆、价值认同与历史意义建构过程之中的重要话语资源。正如法国社会学家莫里斯·哈布瓦赫（Maurice Halbwachs）指出的，集体记忆的框架并非事后由个人记忆的组合构建而成，集体记忆是用来重建过去形象的工具，这种形象在每个时代都与社会的主流思想相一致。当西方主导的错误二战史观在全球传播时，不可避免地对中国社会的历史记忆和文化认同造成冲击。这种冲击并不表现为对具体史实的直接否定，而更多体现为叙事重心的转移与意义层级的重新排列。

Within the narrative logic of the Western erroneous view of World War II history, the key nodes determining the course and outcome of the war are often concentrated on the Western European theater and military operations led by the United States and Britain, while China’s 14-year War of Resistance against Japan is consciously or unconsciously treated as a regional conflict or peripheral battlefield within the global war context. In this narrative structure, China’s War of Resistance is more often assigned a coloring of “containment” or “coordination,” and its strategic significance, historical initiative, and immense sacrifice in the anti-fascist war are gradually compressed into part of the background narrative. This narrative does not directly deny the historical facts, but through the weakening of significance and marginalization of position, it substantially diminishes China’s historical status in the World Anti-Fascist War. This leads to a fragmented cognition of the history of the War of Resistance and a tendency towards ambiguity in evaluating its achievements, creating space for the spread of historical nihilism. For example, some people, under the influence of Western discourse, overestimate the role of external forces in the War of Resistance against Japan. When the history of the War of Resistance is narrated as a result of “external force dominance,” the historical position of the Communist Party of China as the mainstay of the War of Resistance is correspondingly weakened or even denied.

在西方错误二战史观的叙事逻辑中，决定战争走向与胜负归属的关键节点往往被集中设置在西欧战场与美英主导的军事行动之上，而中国长达14年的抗日战争，则被有意无意地处理为全球战争背景中的地区性冲突或外围战场。在这种叙事结构中，中国抗战更多被赋予“牵制”“配合”的色彩，其在反法西斯战争中的战略意义、历史主动性和巨大牺牲，逐渐被压缩为背景性叙述的一部分。这种叙事并非对史实的直接否认，却通过意义弱化和位置边缘化，实质性地消解了中国抗战在世界反法西斯战争中的历史地位，从而导致对抗战历史的碎片化认知以及对抗战功绩评价的模糊化倾向，为历史虚无主义创造了滋生蔓延的空间。如一些人在西方话语影响下，过度抬高外部力量在抗日战争中的作用，而当抗战历史被叙述为“外力主导”的结果时，中国共产党作为抗日战争中流砥柱的历史地位，也随之被削弱甚至否定。

(III) The Western Erroneous View of World War II History Is Spilling Over into Strategic Risks

（三）西方错误二战史观正外溢为战略风险

The distortion and selective memory of history in the Western erroneous view of World War II history weaken China’s rightful historical voice in the international community. For a long time, international public opinion has almost exclusively attributed the victory of the World Anti-Fascist War to the United States, Britain, and other major Western powers, while knowing very little about China’s sacrifice and contribution during its 14-year War of Resistance. This directly leads to a situation where, when we speak out as a victim and victorious nation of World War II, it is often difficult to gain widespread resonance, and we may even be misunderstood as “reopening old wounds” or “playing up nationalism.” This disadvantage in historical narrative leaves China in a passive position in the international ideological struggle. The West, leveraging its narrative hegemony, instrumentalizes the memory of World War II to construct weapons of public opinion against China, serving its strategic containment of China.

西方错误二战史观对历史的扭曲和选择性记忆，削弱了中国在国际社会中本应拥有的历史话语权。长期以来，国际舆论几乎将反法西斯战争胜利的功劳归于美英等西方大国，而对中国14年抗战的牺牲与贡献知之甚少。这直接导致我们以二战受害者与胜利国的身份发声时，往往难以得到广泛共鸣，甚至会被误解为“重提旧事”“渲染民族主义”。这种历史叙事劣势让中国在国际舆论斗争中处于被动地位。西方借助其叙事霸权将二战记忆工具化，构筑针对中国的舆论武器，服务其对华的战略遏制。

At the same time, the Western erroneous view of World War II history weakens the international consensus on the historical responsibility Japan should bear, thereby undermining China’s efforts to safeguard the fruits of World War II and postwar justice. Due to the needs of the Cold War and geopolitics, Western countries quickly accepted Japan after the war, seeing it as a vanguard to contain China. Therefore, on historical issues, Western countries adopted a certain degree of tolerance towards Japan, lacking strong condemnation of the words and actions within Japan that beautify World War II or deny the invasion. The United States and other Western powers have consciously or unconsciously portrayed Japan as a “victim of the war,” rather than as a perpetrator who needs to comprehensively reflect on its history of aggression. Japanese right-wing forces have exploited the ambiguous space provided by the West to vigorously engage in overturning historical verdicts.

与此同时，西方错误的二战史观削弱了国际社会对日本应承担的历史责任的共识，进而消解了中国维护二战成果和战后正义的努力。由于冷战和地缘政治的需要，西方国家在战后迅速接纳了日本，将其视为遏制中国的先锋。因此，在历史问题上，西方国家对日本采取了一定程度的宽容态度，对日本国内出现的美化二战、否认侵略的言行缺乏有力的谴责。美西方有意无意地将日本塑造成“战争受害者”的对象，而非一个需要全面反省侵略历史的施害者。日本右翼势力利用西方给予的模糊空间，大行历史翻案之举。

III. National Strategies to Counter the Western Erroneous View of World War II History

三、应对西方错误二战史观的国家策略

The long-standing prevalence of the Western erroneous view of World War II history has severely distorted historical truth. It not only obscures China’s great contribution as the main Eastern battlefield, but this misinterpretation of history is also gradually transforming into actual political strategy, posing a potential threat to China’s ideological security. China must proceed from a strategic height, proactively adopt multi-dimensional countermeasures, correct the biases of the Western view of World War II history, and reverse the passive situation of “historical aphasia.”

西方错误二战史观的长期盛行严重扭曲了历史真相，不仅掩盖了中国作为东方主战场的巨大贡献，而且这种对历史的误读正逐渐转化为现实政治策略，对中国的意识形态安全构成潜在威胁。中国必须从战略高度出发，主动采取多维度的应对措施，纠正西方二战史观的偏误，扭转“历史失语”的被动局面。

(I) Constructing a Chinese Narrative System with Global Influence

（一）构建具有全球影响力的中国叙事体系

Faced with the long-dominant Western discourse system and its structural advantages in World War II narratives, China urgently needs to construct, from a strategic height, a Chinese narrative system with global influence. This process of construction should be grounded in rigorous historical research, adhere to international academic norms, and align with the logic of cross-cultural communication, forming a systematic narrative that possesses both academic persuasiveness and international acceptability. On one hand, it is necessary to continuously advance the globalization of research on China’s War of Resistance and its international publication, organically embedding the research findings of China’s War of Resistance into the overall framework of international World War II historiography. For a long time, the research system of the international academic community on World War II has had significant barriers in terms of language, access to materials, and research traditions. China’s War of Resistance has often been placed within the scope of regional history or as a supplementary case. The key to breaking this predicament lies in integrating high-quality, dialogic academic achievements into the mainstream international academic system. In 2025, the English edition of the *New History of World War II* by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences was officially launched, and the French, German, and Arabic editions are also steadily progressing. This series not only systematically demonstrates the overall position of China’s War of Resistance in the World Anti-Fascist War but also aligns with international academic norms in terms of format, annotation system, and use of historical materials, helping to enhance the citability and credibility of research on China’s War of Resistance in overseas academic circles and promoting the transformation of China’s War of Resistance research from individual output to systematic dissemination. On the other hand, it is necessary to proactively connect with the frontier concerns of the international historical community, incorporating research on China’s War of Resistance into internationally accepted analytical frameworks such as “global war,” “total war,” and “colonial system and anti-colonial struggle.” By emphasizing the commonality of issues rather than unilaterally highlighting the particularity of China’s War of Resistance, the degree of embedding of the Chinese narrative in international academic discussions is enhanced, making the history of China’s War of Resistance not only noteworthy but also necessary for international academic research. This embedded narrative helps to break the long-standing Western-centric historical perspective and promotes, from within, the transformation of the international World War II research paradigm.

面对长期占据主导地位的西方话语体系及其在二战叙事中的结构性优势，中国亟须从战略高度出发，构建具有全球影响力的中国叙事体系。这一构建过程应立足于严谨的史学研究、遵循国际学术规范并契合跨文化传播逻辑，形成兼具学术说服力与国际可接受度的系统性叙事。一方面，持续推进中国抗战史的全球化研究与国际化出版，将中国抗日战争的研究成果有机嵌入国际二战史研究的整体框架之中。长期以来，国际学界对二战的研究体系在语言、资料获取和研究传统等方面存在显著壁垒，中国抗战史往往被置于区域史或补充性案例的范畴。破解这一困境的关键在于，以高质量、具备对话性的学术成果融入国际主流学术体系。2025年，中国社会科学院的《新编第二次世界大战史》英文版正式推出，法文、德文和阿拉伯文版本也在稳步推进。该系列不仅在内容上系统展现了中国抗战在世界反法西斯战争中的整体地位，也在体例、注释体系和史料运用方面与国际学术规范接轨，有助于提升中国抗战史研究在海外学界的可引用性与可信度，推动中国抗战史从个别成果输出向体系化传播转变。另一方面，主动对接国际史学界的前沿关注点，将中国抗战史研究纳入“全球战争”“总体战”“殖民体系与反殖民斗争”等国际通行的分析框架。通过强调议题的共通性而非单方面突出中国抗战的特殊性，增强中国叙事在国际学术讨论中的嵌入程度，使中国抗战史不仅能被关注，更能为国际学术研究所需。这种嵌入式叙事有助于打破长期存在的西方中心主义史学视角，从内部推动国际二战研究范式的变革。

Constructing a Chinese narrative system with global influence is a long-term and systematic project. Its core is not to form a simple opposition to the Western narrative but, through sustained, high-quality academic production and international dissemination, to gradually establish the due position of China’s War of Resistance in the World Anti-Fascist War. Only in this way can the structural advantages of Western misconceptions of World War II history be fundamentally weakened, and a Chinese solution be provided for the international community to form a more comprehensive, truthful, and diverse historical understanding.

构建具有全球影响力的中国叙事体系，是一项长期且系统的工程，其核心并非与西方叙事形成简单对立，而是通过持续、高质量的学术生产与国际传播，逐步确立中国抗战在世界反法西斯战争中的应有地位。唯有如此，才能从根本上削弱西方错误二战史观的结构性优势，为国际社会形成更加全面、真实和多元的历史认知提供中国方案。

(2) Strengthening Education on Historical Perspective

（二）加强历史观的教育

In the competition for global discourse power, history is not merely a review of the past but an important strategic resource for modern countries. Faced with the long-term Western monopoly on historical narratives, China needs to exert simultaneous efforts in education, media, and ideology, incorporating historical perspective into the national system of ideological governance and establishing a line of defense for historical security that is as important as territorial security and cybersecurity.

在全球话语权的竞争中，历史不仅是对过去的回顾，更是现代国家的重要战略资源。面对西方对历史叙事的长期垄断，中国需要在教育、媒体、意识形态等层面同步发力，将历史观纳入国家意识形态治理体系，建立起与领土安全、网络安全同等重要的历史安全防线。

First, systematically construct a basic data system for the narrative of the War of Resistance, enhancing the ability to provide unified and authoritative support from historical materials. Currently, a practical problem faced by the research and dissemination of China’s War of Resistance history is not a lack of historical materials but their dispersion and fragmented presentation, making it difficult to support sustained and systematic international communication. Therefore, it is necessary to advance the construction of infrastructure for the War of Resistance narrative at the national level, promptly integrating archival resources related to the War of Resistance held by various levels of archives, museums, memorial halls, and university research institutions within the country, and establishing a unified database for the War of Resistance narrative. This database should not only complete the digitization and standardization of historical materials but also highlight, in its content arrangement, the structural connections between China’s War of Resistance and the World Anti-Fascist War, making it capable of serving both academic research and functions of external communication and public education. Through the centralized display of an authoritative data system, the passive state of “each telling a different story” and “countering grand narratives with fragmented historical facts” in external narratives can be changed, providing a stable source of knowledge for subsequent education, culture, and external communication.

第一，系统性构建抗战叙事的基础性资料体系，增强统一、权威的史料支撑能力。当前，中国抗战史研究与传播面临的一个现实问题，并非史料不足，而是史料分散、呈现形式碎片化，难以支撑持续且系统的国际传播。因此，有必要在国家层面推进抗战叙事基础设施建设，尽快整合国内各级档案馆、博物馆、纪念馆以及高校研究机构所掌握的抗战档案资源，建立统一的抗战叙事数据库。该数据库不仅要完成史料的数字化与标准化处理，还应在内容编排上凸显中国抗战与世界反法西斯战争之间的结构性关联，使其既能服务于学术研究，又具备对外传播和公共教育的功能。通过权威资料体系的集中展示，改变对外叙事中“各执一词”“以零散史实对抗宏大叙事”的被动状况，为后续的教育、文化与对外传播提供稳定的知识源泉。

Second, systematically enrich the content of War of Resistance history education, strengthening its position within the domestic system of historical cognition. In the field of education, the history of the War of Resistance should not only be taught as part of national history or modern history but should be consciously explained within the overall framework of the World Anti-Fascist War. By revising the structure of primary and secondary school history textbooks and setting up thematic teaching units in middle and high school stages, focus should be placed on answering key questions such as “Why did China’s War of Resistance constitute the main eastern battlefield of the World Anti-Fascist War?” and “How did China’s War of Resistance profoundly impact the overall pattern of World War II?” guiding students to appreciate the international significance and world value of China’s War of Resistance. At the same time, simply instilling conclusions should be avoided; instead, through the comparison of historical materials, analysis of battlefield structures, and perspectives on international interaction, students should be aided in forming a relatively complete logical framework for historical understanding. Through the systematic strengthening of the education system, the history of the War of Resistance is not only remembered in domestic historical narratives but also understood, thereby consolidating the foundation of historical consensus at the societal level.

第二，系统性充实抗战史教育内容，强化抗战在国内历史认知体系中的地位。在教育领域，不应仅将抗战史作为民族史或近代史的一部分进行讲授，而应有意识地将其置于世界反法西斯战争的整体框架中加以阐释。通过修订中小学历史教材结构，在初高中阶段设置专题化教学单元，着重解答“中国抗战为何构成世界反法西斯战争的东方主战场”“中国抗战如何深刻影响二战总体格局”等关键问题，引导学生领会抗战的国际意义与世界价值。同时，应避免单纯灌输结论，而是借助史料对比、战场结构分析和国际互动视角，助力学生形成相对完整的历史认知逻辑。通过教育体系的系统强化，使抗战史在国内历史叙事中不仅被铭记，更被理解，从而巩固社会层面的历史共识基础。

Third, improve the governance and guarantee mechanisms for historical narratives, preventing the long-term harm of Western misconceptions of World War II history to the cognition of young people. In dealing with issues of historical nihilism [6]6 Historical nihilism (历史虚无主义): A term used in Chinese political discourse to refer to the distortion, denial, or selective erasure of the history of the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese revolution, often associated with a rejection of China's official historical narrative. and historical distortion, passive post-event responses should be avoided; instead, proactivity and stability should be enhanced through institutionalized governance. Establish an interdepartmental coordination mechanism to conduct regular assessments of historical content in textbooks, media reports, films and television works, and online platforms, focusing on major omissions, distorted presentations, or deliberate downplaying of the history of the War of Resistance. On this basis, by clarifying the boundaries of legal responsibility and industry norms, guide society to form a basic consensus on historical issues. At the same time, in the governance of cyberspace, cooperation with major platforms should be strengthened. Fact-checking prompts or authoritative information guidance should be provided for content that clearly distorts the historical facts of the War of Resistance, reducing the risk of Western misconceptions of World War II history spreading among the youth demographic. Through the combination of governance and education, maintain the basic seriousness of the historical narrative of the War of Resistance and the order of public cognition.

第三，完善历史叙事的治理与保障机制，防止西方错误二战史观对青少年认知的长期侵害。在应对历史虚无主义和历史歪曲问题时，应避免事后被动应对，而是通过制度化治理提升前瞻性和稳定性。建立跨部门协调机制，对教材、媒体报道、影视作品及网络平台中的历史内容进行常态化评估，重点关注对抗战历史的重大遗漏、失实呈现或刻意淡化现象。在此基础上，通过明确法律责任界限和行业规范，引导社会形成对历史问题的基本共识。同时，在网络空间治理中，应加强与主要平台的合作，对明显歪曲抗战史实的内容进行事实核查提示或权威信息引导，降低西方错误二战史观在青少年群体中的传播风险。通过治理与教育相结合的方式，维护抗战历史叙事的基本严肃性与公共认知秩序。

(3) Expanding International Communication, Dialogue, and Cooperation, Strengthening Narrative Influence

（三）扩大国际传播与对话合作，强化叙事影响

China needs to actively go global, using multilateral cultural exchanges, joint commemorative activities, academic visits, and other means to lead the construction of a global “multilateral memory network,” so that China’s history of the War of Resistance gains broader international recognition and communicative influence.

中国需积极走向国际，通过多边文化交流、联合纪念活动、学术互访等途径，引领构建全球“多边记忆网络”，使中国的抗战历史获得更广泛的国际认可与传播影响力。

First, by leveraging joint traveling exhibitions with transnational museums and memorial halls, reshape the foundation of international public perception of China’s War of Resistance. Compared with written narratives, the physical historical materials and spatial experiences inherent in museums and memorial halls are more likely to break down barriers of language and ideology, achieving cross-cultural understanding. Therefore, by conducting cooperative traveling exhibitions with important overseas war museums and historical memorials, systematically introducing archives, artifacts, and multimedia displays related to China’s War of Resistance into local public cultural spaces, and supporting these with special lectures, academic tours, and public exchange activities, international audiences can grasp the status and significance of China’s War of Resistance within specific historical contexts. In particular, Chinese scholars familiar with the international historical discourse system should be enabled to participate in explanations and dialogues, responding to long-standing cognitive biases in an academic manner, so that transnational traveling exhibitions can effectively play a role in cultural diplomacy.

第一，借助跨国博物馆与纪念馆的联合巡回展览，重塑国际公众对中国抗战的感性认知根基。相较于文字叙述，博物馆与纪念馆所蕴含的实物史料以及空间体验，更易打破语言与意识形态的壁垒，达成跨文化理解。故而，通过与海外重要的战争博物馆、历史纪念馆开展合作巡回展览，将与中国抗战相关的档案、实物以及多媒体展示有系统地引入当地公共文化空间，并配套举办专题讲座、学术导览以及公众交流活动，能让国际观众在具体的历史情境中领会中国抗战的地位与意义。尤其应当让熟悉国际史学话语体系的中国学者参与讲解与对话，以学术化的方式回应长期存在的认知偏差，从而使跨国巡展切实发挥文化外交的作用。

Second, using normalized academic exchanges as a starting point, construct a transnational, multilingual dialogue mechanism for the study of the history of the War of Resistance. The transformation of international historical cognition is inseparable from long-term, stable mechanisms of academic interaction. To this end, international exchange scholarships or visiting research programs focused on the history of the War of Resistance can be established for overseas scholars, attracting young scholars from different countries and academic backgrounds to engage in the study of China’s War of Resistance. Through joint seminars, archival research programs, and multilingual publication of papers, a cross-cultural research community can be gradually formed. In this process, academic discussions should be encouraged to revolve around historical materials, methods, and comparative perspectives, rather than exchanges based on predetermined conclusions. This allows the study of China’s War of Resistance history to integrate into the international framework of historical discussion in a more open manner, thereby enhancing its visibility in the global academic system.

第二，以常态化的学术交流为切入点，构建抗战史研究的跨国、多语种对话机制。国际历史认知的转变，离不开长期稳定的学术互动机制。为此，可以设立面向海外的抗战史国际交流奖学金或者访问研究项目，吸引不同国家、不同学术背景的青年学者投身中国抗战史研究。通过联合研讨、档案研修以及多语种论文发表，逐步形成跨文化的研究共同体。在此过程中，鼓励学术讨论围绕史料、方法以及比较视角展开，而非进行预设结论式的交流，让中国抗战史研究能够以更为开放的姿态融入国际史学讨论框架，进而提升其在全球学术体系中的可见度。

Third, deepen overseas non-governmental exchanges and localized communication to promote the integration of the narrative of the War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression into specific social contexts. Compared with grand narratives, small-scale, localized exchange activities often produce more lasting influence. In countries and regions that have some historical connection, carry out targeted non-governmental exchange projects by combining local research traditions and social memory. For example, in the United Kingdom or Southeast Asian countries, around specific historical topics such as the Far Eastern theater or the Chinese Expeditionary Force’s operations in Burma, invite local scholars, historical researchers, and relevant historical witnesses to review the war experience together with Chinese researchers, and disseminate the content through local media or public forums. This exchange method, which takes specific battlefields and specific figures as its entry point, more easily evokes emotional resonance among the local public, gradually raising the recognition and acceptance of the Chinese narrative of the War of Resistance in the international community.

第三，深化海外民间交流以及本土化传播，推动抗战叙事融入具体的社会语境。相较于宏大叙事，小规模、本土化的交流活动往往更易产生持久影响。在部分具有历史关联的国家和地区，结合当地的研究传统以及社会记忆，开展具有针对性的民间交流项目。例如在英国或东南亚国家，围绕远东战场、中国远征军援缅作战等具体历史议题，邀请当地学者、历史研究者以及相关历史见证者，与中方研究人员一同回顾战争经历，并通过当地媒体或公共论坛进行传播。这种以具体战场、具体人物为切入点的交流方式，更易引发当地公众的情感共鸣，逐步提高中国抗战叙事在国际社会中的认知度与接受度。