Japan fails to apologize to Asia

Japan's tripartite ruling coalition has reached a compromise at the last minute, enabling it to keep its promise to draft a resolution commemorating the 50th anniversary of the ending of World War II. The resolution must be passed before the Diet session ends on June 18, but Jakarta Post Asia correspondent Harvey Stockwin anticipates that, before then, more Asian voices will condemn rather than praise it.

HONG KONG (JP): The present Japanese ruling coalition has narrowly averted breaking up over the issue of World War II but in doing so has avoided properly apologizing to Asian countries for Japanese atrocities during that conflict.

The government, led by Socialist Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama, is now all set to pass a parliamentary resolution which in effect says that Japan feels remorse because it copied the European powers and the United States in seeking to possess colonies in Asia.

The fire bombing of the Japanese Cultural Center in Seoul by infuriated South Korean students, in a related incident, bears eloquent testimony to a sad and avoidable reality: Japanese politicians and bureaucrats, far from lessening the burden of history carried by Japan for its past misdeeds have almost certainly increased it.

When the three political parties in Murayama's coalition came together in July last year they pledged to pass a resolution commemorating the 50th anniversary of the ending of the war in the Pacific.

As has been reported by the Jakarta Post, for the last three months or so there has been a very real risk that the coalition would break apart over its irreconcilable views of history.

Murayama's Socialist Party wanted a clear cut apology for the past, while the largest party in the coalition, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) was opposed. What were earlier regarded as right wing views on the war are now clearly in the ascendant within the LDP. Essentially these views boil down to believing that Japan did little or nothing for which it needs to apologize.

Needless to say, the LDP attitudes are completely unacceptable to countries such as China, Korea, Singapore and the Philippines.

In the last 12 months the Socialists have been forced to abandon long held principles such as their past refusal to recognize the constitutionality of Japan's military forces, or their non-acceptance of the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty. Now they have virtually given in over their view of the war, too.

After a protracted period of brinkmanship between the three parties, and with the end of the current Diet (parliament) session due on June 18, the three parties finally agreed on a five paragraph compromise resolution late Tuesday, June 6, which reads in full:

This Diet, in the 50th year since the war, offers its sincere tribute to the memory of the war dead throughout the world and victims who have suffered because of war and other deeds.

Recalling the many instances of colonial rule and acts of aggression in the modern history of the world, we recognize those acts which our country carried out and the unbearable suffering inflicted on the peoples of other countries, particularly the nations of Asia, and express deep remorse.

Transcending differences in historical views of the past war, we must humbly learn the lessons of history and build a peaceful international community.

This Diet links hands with the countries of the world, under the doctrine of lasting peace enshrined in the Constitution of Japan, and expresses its determination to open up a future of coexistence for humankind.

We affirm the above.

Clearly, in the second crucial but highly ambiguous paragraph, the draft resolution implies that Japan was only doing what other powerful countries had done.

The paragraph indicates that the LDP view, that Japan, far from fighting a war of aggression was actually fighting a war of liberation for Asia against the white race, carried the most weight in the coalition negotiations over the resolution.

Put another way, Murayama and the Socialists preferred to stay in power rather than stick by their past principles.

At best, the resolution is successful as a domestic political instrument, since it allows the Socialists to claim that it indicates regret for what happened, while the LDP will be able to assert that the resolution justifies the Japanese war record.

However as an instrument of foreign policy it appears valueless. China will not appreciate the whitewash of its (probably excessive) claim of 35 million war dead as a result of Japanese aggression. Several Southeast Asian nations will tend to resent the implication that Japan was a liberating force in their history. Most important, Japan's current allies in the economically developed world, particularly the United States, will, presumably, not be amused by the anti-white race theme in the LDP version of history. Above all, Americans will carefully note that there is not the slightest bit of Japanese remorse for what they still regard as the treacherous Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, which brought the U.S. into World War II.

In short, the draft Japanese resolution "celebrates" the 50th anniversary of World War II by threatening to reduplicate the circumstances of mid-1945 when Japan stood alone against the civilized world.

Meanwhile, in both parts of divided Korea views have been illustrated by the wave of understandable outrage which has swept South Korea following a speech by former Japanese Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Michio Watanabe in which he asserted that Japanese control over Korea 1910 to 1945 was not colonial rule because Japan annexed Korea "amicably (by agreement), not by force".

This travesty of the truth presented to a domestic Japanese audience -- Watanabe did not expect to be reported in the outside world -- was quickly followed by spirited South Korean official and unofficial denunciations, followed by an apology from Watanabe. But, of course, what he originally said is a natural extension of the view that Japan heroically fought a war of liberation on Asia's behalf against the wicked West, and Watanabe, and many LDP leaders like him, will go on believing that no matter how many apologies they make. In a similar vein, some LDP leaders will continue to occasionally assert that the Rape of Nanjing in 1937, or the Rape of Manila in 1945, never took place.

For close observers of the Japanese scene what is deeply disturbing is not so much the ambiguous resolution itself -- though that is deplorable -- but rather the ignorant, bigoted and downright mendacious political and historical views which lie behind it. For Japanese politicians to talk of "humbly learning the lessons of history" when they perennially and arrogantly assert a self-righteous view of the past, a history that did not happen, is plain and simple hypocrisy.

By June 1945, with Germany already defeated, Japan fought on regardless, refusing to admit its follies and failures.

In June 1995, Germany has long since accepted responsibility for its past, and satisfied the world with its apologies. But in Japan today it is as if nothing has changed.