[BlueUmarell]

As I understood, one of the japanese officer's hut - which is even bolder! Hence why they tricked the translator to have the japanese character for "workshop". A lot of smart and bold moves all along. Especially as the japanese were known for their "harsh" treatments (humiliations, beatings, torture, slow death, brutal death etc etc) toward prisoners, anything that would lead to a cue that they were doing something hidden would have had a radical and definitive answer...

[dan-robertson]

I assumed it was the hut used by the PoW officers. Japan did not treat PoWs particularly well (though British PoWs were treated much better than Chinese) and did not follow the 1929 Geneva Convention on the treatment of PoWs. Under that convention, officers are to be treated with due regard to their rank and part of that means being quartered separately from the other ranks (as well as not being made to work). I think officers would also be separated in PoW camps in Japan.

[darkwater]

I don't fully understand why a convention that allegedly tries to protect human rights makes a so bold difference just based on job positions (aka ranks). I mean, I do understand where it comes from, and especially when it applies to prisoners of war, so military forces. They basically can only think in hierarchies so designing a system that works with hierarchies will have more chances to be actually followed. But still, I find it weird.