Legacy and controversy of Iwo Jima

One of the most iconic images of World War II is "Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima." Associated Press photographer Joe Rosenthal captured it on February 23, 1945. The photograph shows six U.S. Marines hoisting the American flag atop Mount Suribachi, the highest point on the small volcanic island.

Iwo Jima, barely 21 square kilometers in size, was the scene of one of WWII's bloodiest battles. Over the course of 36 days, nearly 7,000 American servicemen were killed and some 20,000 wounded. Japanese casualties were even higher. About 23,000 soldiers died, more than 90 percent of those stationed on the island. For the U.S. Marine Corps, Iwo Jima remains one of the costliest victories in its history.

However, the battle has increasingly become a focus of debate over how history is remembered. In 2022, former U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi honored a Marine veteran, describing the sacrifices of Iwo Jima as emblematic of "liberty triumphing over fascism." But more recent commemorations have sparked anger.

In a memorial service in March 2025, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth made a joint tribute to both American and Japanese soldiers. He said, "Over 80,000 marines, soldiers and sailors from our two countries fought at Iwo Jima. More than 26,000 died here. Today, we revere their courage." U.S. netizens accused him of minimizing American sacrifice and downplaying fascist atrocities.

Chinese scholars also criticized Hegseth's comments. Xiang Haoyu, a research fellow at the China Institute of International Studies, said such statements reflect "a misguided effort to pursue historical revisionism driven by geopolitical self-interest," blurring the line between justice and injustice. He warned that Washington's tolerance of Japan's wartime narrative risks encouraging historical amnesia and legitimizing militaristic expansion.

The controversy deepened when the U.S. State Department removed online material about Ira Hayes, a Native American Marine who was among the flag raisers at Iwo Jima. U.S. media, including The Washington Post, condemned the move as an attempt to align with President Donald Trump's directive on diversity, equity and inclusion.

Strategic significance of Iwo Jima in WWII

The strategic significance of Iwo Jima underscored the battle's ferocity. For Japan, it served as a vital early warning station against U.S. bombers approaching the mainland. For the United States, it offered an emergency landing base for B-29 bombers and a staging ground to neutralize Japanese airfields that threatened the Marianas.

Japanese commander General Tadamichi Kuribayashi ordered his men to transform the island into a fortress of tunnels, bunkers and caves. Instead of confronting the Americans at the beaches, Japanese forces used ambushes and sniper fire, seeking to inflict maximum casualties. The tactic extended the battle far beyond initial U.S. expectations.

The cost was devastating. The island became a graveyard when the fighting ended in late March 1945. The American flag on Mount Suribachi came to symbolize resilience and sacrifice, an image that still resonates today.

Criticism of the U.S. and Japan's handling of history

Relations between the U.S. and Japan have evolved from wartime hostility to an alliance. But there are still disputes over remembrance, which has provoked criticism from neighboring nations, including China and South Korea. Japanese school textbooks have been revised to downplay wartime aggression, and its political leaders continue to visit the controversial Yasukuni Shrine, where Class-A war criminals are enshrined.

Historians caution that blurring the moral distinction between fascist aggression and the Allied struggle against it risks undermining the lessons of WWII. As Xiang Haoyu noted, tolerating revisionism "represents a regression in history and a betrayal of humanity's shared memory."

Today, Iwo Jima stands as both a site of commemoration and a reminder of the immense human cost of war. The island's legacy is not only one of military strategy and sacrifice, but also of the enduring struggle over how history is remembered and who defines it.