Japan apologizes over colonialism and aggression

Remove all ads!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4471495.stm

So far I got the impression Koizumi's cabinet has been pursuing a policy that aimed at appeasing the more right-wing groups in Japan, and the history textbook case seemed rather worrysome. I hope that the future proves such anxiety wrong.
By the way, this is the first time so far a Japanese high official has apologized for WWII or what came before it. Hopefully it's not just a token speech.

 

I don't see this as a big deal. I think many history books don't report atrocities committed by that country. I'm sure there were atrocities committed by the Chinese too that never made it into their text books. Similarly, I'm sure that there were cases of abuse by soldiers from France, Britain, and the U.S. that never makes in into text books either. The only type of atrocity committed by the U.S. during WWII that I ever read about was the imprisonment of Japanese-Americans in mass prison camps. But I'm sure that other atrocities were committed over in Europe that we never hear about.

The bigger story here (IMO) is that Japan wants a permanent seat on the Security Council. I agree that if the Security Council permanent members are supposed to represent the powers at be in the world, then to speak frankly, I think Japan should be in and France should go.

 

Who are the current seat holders at the security council?

 

In 1972 an official Japanese communique stated:

"The Japanese [are] keenly conscious of the responsibility for the serious damage that Japan causes in the past to the Chinese people through war and deeply reproaches itself."

1982 Prime Minister Suzuki said:

"I am painfully aware of the responsibility for inflicting serious damages during the past war. We need to recognize criticism that (Japan's occupation) was invasion."

In 1984 Prime Minister Nakasone told the South Korean President:

"(Japan) brought enormous difficulty to your country and your people. I feel a deep sense of regret about that"

1990 Emperor Akihito said:

"I can't help feeling the deepest regret when I think of the suffering of the people . . . during this unfortunate period brought by my country."

1990 Prime Minister Kaifu said:

"I humbly feel deep regret and express forthright apology for the fact that the people of the Korean peninsula experienced unbearable anguish and grief because of our country's action."

In 1992 Emperor Akihito, while visiting China, said:

"I express my regret and contrition for what my country did to the people of China."

In 1993 Prime Minister said at a press conference:

"The last war was war of Japanese aggression."

1994 Prime Minister Murayama said during a visit to Korea:

"I'd like to express my apology from the bottom of my heart and deep regret seriously."

In 1995 Prime Minister Murayama said:

"In the not-to-distant past, Japan, through its colonial rule and aggression, caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly those of Asia. In the hope that no such mistake will be made in the future, I regard, in the spirit of humanity, these irrefutable facts of history and express here once again my feelings of deep remorse and state my heartfelt apology."

In 2001 Foreign Minister Tanak said:

"We have never forgotten that Japan caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries during the last war. Many lost their precious lives and many were wounded. The war has left an incurable scar on many people, including former prisoners of war. Facing these facts of history in a spirit of humility, I reaffirm today our feelings of deep remorse and heartfelt apology."

In 2001 Prime Minister Koizumi said:

"I offer heartfelt apology and condolences to the Chinese victims of Japanese aggression"

He also laid a wreath a a memorial to Chinese war dead and signed the visitors book with characters asking for "forgiveness".

It amazes me how fashionable it is to castigate the decendants of some genocidists but not others.
For example Americans as opposed to Japanese still enjoy the rewards of the crimes but we never see American officials apologizing. No day of rememerberance. No gigantic monument to the victims in Washington etc.

 

The permanent members, all with veto power, include the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, and China. Basically the victors from WWII. There are also additional council members, who serve one-year terms on a rotational basis. I have no idea what countries were selected for this year.

 

Well first off I think this thing reeks of politics. It's all about the power sturctutres of Asia and China is worried of Japan seeking to become a permanent member of the security council.Even though the motives of the Chinese government are hypocritical to say the least they do have a point. Japan has apologized several times their deeds but they have not admitted that they in fact committed genocide in the area. Unlike Germany Japan still has not fully gone through their grim history as a militaristic nation and still do not accept that as a big dark spot in their future. No amount of apologies is going to do until they take full responsibility in accepting their deeds. Oh and the Japanese attorocoties in China and Korea pale in comparison only to the horrors brought by Germany in eastern Europe. Any singular attorocities committed by the Brittish, Americans, French or Italians do not come anywhere near that.

Of course the German self whipping after WWII is somewhat an unique phenomenon that I don't expect to be repeated in Japan. Another nation which has serious issues in accepting the dark side of its past is Russia but I find Russia even more unlikely to do that than Japan.

EDIT: I don't think stripping France of it's Veto would be a good idea (or even possible). UK really can't represent Europe alone being a bit isolated from the continent. Germany or France would have to wield Veto for it to represent EU in some way, and France in oppinion is a bit better because of the nukes they have.

 

History is indeed written by the victors.

I agree with the sentiment that Japan isn't the only one that hasn't been apologizing. And I'm not talking only about Russia.

 

Germany should be the European mainland representative in the security council. Germany is Europe main industrial superpower. It certainly outprouces both France and the UK.

 

No, both the UK and France should be kicked and the EU should get one chair. I also think India should get a seat before Japan.

 

And after Japan apologizes and changes its offending textbooks, will China have a similar mea culpa and admission of historical fact with regard to Tibet, Mongolia, Vietnam, Cambodia, its Uighur population, Tianamen, the Cultural Revolution, the Great Step Forward, etc etc?

 

And your reasoning for such?

 

The time was 91, or 92, or 93, i was watching a documentary made by Sinaporean tv about Japanese atrocities during world war 2. Several scenes are still planted colourfully in my mind.

There were this old Korean lady being force into "comforting women" for the Japanese imperial army at that time. She was describing how she was abuse in a seminar held for japanese (wether it is not japan or not, i forget). Being force to have sex with hundred of japanese everyday is not a pleasent memory to describe. i remembered when she was talking about how japanese soldier forced her, the translator stopped. She just wouldn't translate for her. The old korean lady was shouting at her with tear asking why wouldn't she translate those horrible things she experienced to the presented japanese. The translator just stopped, wouldn't say anything.

The documentary also interviewed an education minister representative about the change of Japanese invasion in war world 2 in high school text book. The words as i remembered was japan "in out" China, "in out" as oppose to "invade". The content was about how Japan helped Asia Pacific get rid of western imperialists. The representative was, all the way, denying everything that happened in war world 2. He said such accussion was "unfair". The interview was conducted in english and i still remember how he said "unfair". When the Singaporean interviewer showed him something (which i forget, i think those was studies did by Japanese scholars), the representative stopped answering any question. He just stopped talking, just like the Japanese translator.

To us, chinese people not the citizens of china, Japanese never apologized. We cannot comprehend what kind of apologization it is when one day they apologized, the other day they turned around and worshipped the ww2 capital criminals. All the Japanese capital criminals of ww2 were placed in their "patriot" shrine. Annually, Japanese prime minister would go to worship there. Annually, that caused a stir in Asia Pacific. i remembered seeing on tv news one year, in protesting Japanese prime minister going to the shrine, some Korean university students gather infront of the Japanese embassy, chopped off their index fingers and sent them as petition. Now, think, what kind of incident you need to make yourself willingly to chop off your healthy index finger?

The word Chinese means two kind of people, that of China citizens and that of people spead around the world and practice Chinese customs. This is not just an issue between China, Korea and Japan. Little countries spread around Asia Pacific worried about Japan every now and then. To make the situation worse, U.s. shielding Japan from just about every issue including letting them to form their own army which, as agreed, was prohibited. What can us little countries do about it? Nothing.

Yes, we fear Japan and u.s. more than China, at least China never invaded any place outside China (which begs the question, how can China invade any place that is China). China tibet issue, Culture revolution issue, great leap forward issue, those are all issues within China. Japan invaded us and they never acknowledge that part of their history. Japan issue among south east pacific has been here for a long time. Since media tyrannts ... i mean media titans showed little interest in it(or they had been shielding it), it was not widely reported in within the Caucasion western world. Imagine, if your German Cardinals named Hitler a saint and worship him regularly, what kind of reaction would come from neighbouring countries?

 

To dismiss Japan's war crimes would be like saying the Holocaust never happened. If no one cares about Japan's war crimes, then no one should care either whether Prince Harry wears a Nazi shirt.

Fricking hypocrites.

 

I find this absolutely stunning.

I'm not criticiizing you, I'm just...stupefied.

 

Well, to be honest AMaster, China doesnt have much of a history in meddling in things beyond their borders. They have always been a quite introvert people, dictatorship or not. China took Tibet and are slavering over Taiwan but as far as I know they have quite a good claim as to both places being Chinese in the first place (that of course doesnt mean they have a right to take them).

Looking at the last centuries it is Japan and the US who have been muscling each other around in the area and taken and controlled various territories. I can also honestly say that I am more afraid here in Sweden for the US turning superduper wacky and go invading hereabouts than for China to do it, despite China being really naughty to its own people. China has never really given much of an impression of bothering overly much about things beyond their closest vicinity. Might be a wrong impression.

Mr Writer, short answer, why not? I think no sole European nation barring perhaps Russia has enough power and girth to deserve a place in the security council but Europe should still be represented. Enter the EU, no disproportionate amount of power to small players like France and the UK while one of the most important areas get a voice. I also find it appealing from the perspective of further integrating the EU. As for India it is just the sheer mass of them that makes them deserve a place in my opionion.

 

Yup. Have you ever read a serious book about their history?

 

Not one specific about those but when the Europeans came to China they found an introvert and closed society who didnt care one whit about the rest of the world.

 

China in Chinese is "central country". If you know chinese, the term "all under heaven" or "all under realm" means China only. These people never really care about any place besides China because in their mind, China is The place. Same time in history, around 1500~1600, you have the western imperialists expanding their territories all over the world. The Spanish, Portugese, French, English, Dutch, all the big naval forces fighting, conquering for new colonies. China was a naval power at that time, infact, their ships reached eastern africa, i think, Madagassagar (sp?). Their envoy, several times bigger than Melaka empire naval forces reach Melaka (now a state of Malaysia) seven times but the they never colonized them. Given the strength of China, south east asia should be an easy prey to take. But, 10 countries of south east asia never became colonies of China but Britain, Spain, Portugal, France and America.

 

@teekc: well, they DID invade them, but was driven back everytime. How come their border is so large if they didn't invade any other country?

Yes, "China" mean the "central country", but that doesn't mean they don't care one whit about the world, they mean that every other country is inferior and should be colonized/assimilated by them. Their most recently victim is Tibet btw.

If you still they are peaceful, they feel free to ask anyone from the countries that surround them (Japan, India, Vietnam, Laos, Mongolia, etc), I'm sure they will be pleased to tell you just how much they like China.

And no, I have nothing against China in general, I just wanted to point out some fact about their history.

[ April 25, 2005, 15:53: Message edited by: Greystar ]

 

Not only would I dispute the claim that China hasn't been a colonial power (ie, Vietnam, Laos, etc), I'd also want to ask how you think "their borders" were established in the first place, and why, for example, China is so convinced it has a right to Tibet, etc. "Nation building" in China happened in a very different way than in Europe. First, it seems to me China would be more easily compared to Europe as a whole than any single European country; imagine if the "Holy Roman Empire" had grown to include all of Europe, and been established as one state: that would be like China.

Chinese identity, like Indian identity, encompasses a vast number of different regional identities, languages, etc. In fact, there is/was IIRC more linguistic variation within either China (or India for that matter) than there is among European countries, where nearly all of the languages (except IIRC those oddball Finns) are Indo-European. In Chinese history, many indigenous languages (and associated customs) were forcibly extinguished or curtailed in favor of an "imperial" Chinese language and identity. While those who supported imperial China would see this process as unification, those who fought against it, such as the Tibetans today, would see it as forced assimilation.

Because of the need to assimilate many different peoples, Chinese national identity tends to be relatively open; i.e., most mainland Chinese still consider ethnic Chinese who have lived in other countries for generations to be culturally Chinese. The Japanese, perhaps the ultimate "insular" country, are almost exactly the opposite; for many Japanese, to truly be Japanese one must be born in Japan of purely Japanese parents. Following this, Chinese and Japanese colonialism has been completely different. While much of Chinese colonialism involved assimilation, claiming an area of land and telling its inhabitants "you are now Chinese," Japanese colonialism was not assimilative at all, and more resembled European colonialism in Asia: i.e., the colonizing power maintained a sharp ethnic distinction between itself and the people it colonized. Both cases are still colonialism, however, with the colonizing power maintaining the superiority of its culture against the backwardness of those it colonized.

I don't think anyone (except a few hardline Japanese rightists) denies that Japan engaged in war crimes in its occupation of China. But somehow I feel that a certain amount of Chinese resentment of the Japanese stems not from these events alone, but from their view of the Japanese today as insular and exclusive, culturally chauvinistic, and, to top it off, super wealthy: Chinese pop culture regularly portrays the Japanese as hyper-organized, insultingly arrogant, and rich.