Value of apology debased
Past wrongs can never be undone but in the healing of the scars there is no single act more powerful than a heartfelt apology. The recent swelling of demands for governments and national leaders to apologize for various perceived injustices, however, threatens to debase an apology's value. To demand an admission of guilt from those who did not perpetrate an act is to invite hollow words aimed at placating special interest groups rather meeting genuine concerns. A meaningful apology is best given by the perpetrators and, indeed, is only theirs to give.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair recently expressed regret for the potato famine that caused than one million Irish deaths in the mid-19th century. Mr. Blair certainly did not accept personal responsibility for the events surrounding the famine and neither should he. During her State visit to India this week, an apology was demanded of the Queen for the 1919 massacre at Amritsar where hundreds of unarmed Indians were killed by British troops. Australians have agonized about the Human Rights Commission report into the stolen children. But the Prime Minister has given only his personal regrets and the Federal Government still has to respond formally.
Certainly, many public actions of past generations, from Japan's role in World War II to the actions of religious orders in orphanages, have led to increasingly strident demands for an expression of sorrow, regret and even shame at such a stain, and every attempt should be made to make the facts of each event fully known. As heads of State or government, the Queen, Mr. Blair and Mr. Howard can express compassion on behalf of those they represent and a desire to repair the damage. Australia's indigenous people will be better served by an effort to improve understanding for the pain inflicted by policies which separated children from their family and culture than a false claim of responsibility. Sorry is no excuse and no cure, but a genuine apology is too precious to devalue.
-- The Australian