The Enemy

Dr Sadao Hoki's dilemma was acute, painful, and deeply moral: The situation: Dr Sadao, a Japanese surgeon of great distinction, finds a badly wounded young American soldier washed up on the beach near his house on the Japanese coast during World War II. Japan and America are at war. The American is the 'enemy.' His dilemma: 1. Patriotic duty vs. medical duty: As a Japanese citizen, his duty is to hand the enemy soldier over to the police or military authorities — in effect, sentencing him to death. As a doctor, his entire training and ethic demands that he treat and save any patient who comes to him, regardless of nationality. 2. The legal risk: Helping an enemy prisoner of war could be construed as treason, putting both himself and his wife Hana in extreme danger from the Japanese military and authorities. 3. His own personal biases: Sadao had been educated in America and had initially harboured prejudices about Americans — his father had worried that he might 'fall in love with a white woman.' He had complicated feelings about Americans. 4. The humanitarian impulse: The soldier was young, gravely injured, and would die without treatment. Whatever his nationality, he was a suffering human being in front of a doctor. Resolution: Dr Sadao chose to treat the soldier and saved his life — his medical ethics triumphed over his patriotic duty. He then secretly arranged for the soldier's escape on a rowboat, giving him food and his own German flashlight. His humanity ultimately prevailed over the demands of war.

The servants' reactions to the American soldier were a revealing commentary on social attitudes during wartime: The servants' reactions: 1. Gardener (Yumi and the cook/Yumi as head): The servants were deeply disturbed by the presence of an enemy American in the house. They felt it was morally wrong and legally dangerous. 2. Yumi, the old gardener/nurse: She refused to wash the American soldier's wounds, saying she 'don't' want to wash a white man's wounds.' The racial and nationalistic disgust is explicit. 3. The cook: Declared he could not remain in a house where the enemy was sheltered and given food. 4. Collectively, the servants left — all of them resigned rather than serve in a household that harboured the enemy. What their reaction reveals: 1. Wartime nationalism and propaganda: The servants reflect the emotional impact of wartime propaganda — they have internalised the belief that the American enemy is inherently 'bad,' not to be helped or respected as a fellow human being. 2. Class and education: The servants, unlike the educated Sadao and Hana, do not have the intellectual or ethical framework to separate the individual human being from his national/political identity. 3. Peer pressure and social conformity: Their decision to leave is partly driven by fear of social censure — they are afraid of being seen as collaborators or traitors if they continue to serve in Sadao's house. 4. The contrast with Sadao and Hana: The servants' rigid nationalistic response highlights the moral courage and compassion of Sadao and Hana, who risk their safety to follow a higher ethical principle.

Pearl S. Buck's story explores the tension between the demands of war and the imperatives of human morality with great depth and nuance: 1. War creates artificial 'enemies': • Tom (the American soldier) and Dr Sadao are not natural enemies — they share much in common. Sadao was educated in America; Tom's grandfather was a farmer just like Sadao's father. • The enmity between them is entirely created by the political and military fact of war — not by any personal conflict or genuine incompatibility. • Buck suggests that wars impose labels — 'enemy,' 'ally' — that obscure our shared humanity. 2. The medical ethic transcends national identity: • Sadao's medical training at the core of who he is. He 'could not think of any other way in which the man might be helped.' The duty to heal a suffering patient is absolute for him. • This represents the author's belief that certain human values — compassion, healing, the relief of suffering — are universally binding, above the claims of nation or politics. 3. Moral courage in the face of social pressure: • Sadao and Hana act rightly in the face of enormous pressure — from the servants, from society, from the law. Their moral courage is the emotional centre of the story. 4. The ambiguity of the General: • The General (who is Sadao's patient) knows about the American and promises to have him killed — but forgets, distracted by his own health concerns. • The General is neither a villain nor a hero — he is a pragmatic figure who looks the other way. This is a subtle commentary on how many people in war make moral compromises out of convenience. 5. The ultimate message: • The story does not offer a neat resolution. Sadao is troubled by his own actions — he helped his 'enemy' but also sent him away, uncertain of his fate. • Buck's message is that genuine humanity requires looking past national boundaries and seeing the suffering individual — and acting on that perception, even at personal cost.