Peer reviewed analysis from world leading experts

Abe treads a fine line on WWII

Reading Time: 3 mins
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe makes his speech during the memorial service at Nippon Budokan Hall in Tokyo, Japan, 15 August 2015. (Photo: AAP)

In Brief

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's statement commemorating the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II probably satisfies no constituency — not his right wing base, not the political opposition, not the Chinese nor the Koreans. If the US government has any qualms about it, it is keeping them to itself.

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

But Abe did invoke the four key words of the Murayama Statement— aggression, colonialism, apology, remorse — even if not in first person declaratory sentences. And he did not say anything so outrageous as to make an angry response unavoidable. In this sense Abe dodged a bullet.

If China and South Korea want to improve relations with Japan, the statement gives them enough to work with — it shows appreciation to the Chinese for the magnanimity they showed to Japanese civilians caught up in the war in China, and sympathy for the Chinese victims of the war. It refers to the ill treatment of women — in lukewarm language to be sure, but better than saying nothing. The influence of the prime minister’s advisory panel led by Professor Shinichi Kitaoka is evident throughout the statement, including its admission that Japan fought a wrong war and that political parties were too weak to control the military.

Abe did try to make the case that Japan went down the road it did because the Great Depression and the trade policies of the western countries were strangling the Japanese economy. This implies that in the end going to war was a defensive action.

But at least he didn’t say what the right wing believes and what was best stated by the previous emperor Hirohito in his radio address accepting the surrender terms of the Potsdam Declaration: ‘we cannot [help] but express the deepest sense of regret to our allied nations of East Asia, who have consistently cooperated with the Empire toward the emancipation of East Asia’.

Abe referenced the Russo–Japanese war as an inspiration for anti-colonial movements from Asia to Africa, which is entirely true. But he did not pay homage to the right-wing view that Japan’s Greater East Asia War had anything to do with liberating Asian countries from western colonialism. Unfortunately and worryingly, in contrast to the expressions of compassion for Chinese victims of the war, he had virtually nothing to say about the Korean victims of harsh Japanese colonial rule.

It is disappointing that he did not say something about what needs to be done now so that future generations are not ‘predestined’ to engage in unending apologies as he put it. The only way to end demands for apology is for the current generation to apologise in so convincing a manner that attacks on Japan’s lack of repentance lose all credibility.

This is not likely to happen as right-wing self-defined defenders of Japanese national pride can be counted on to find a way to provide ammunition for Chinese and Koreans to continue to demand apologies. He also could have used a better writer or a more skilled editor. He could have said what he said in half as many words and have had more of an impact that way. The statement is painfully repetitive and tedious.

The statement in a certain sense reflects the strength of Japan’s democracy. Abe would not have issued this statement if he were unafraid of how the public and the media would react had he given one more in line with the views of the Liberal Democratic Party’s right wing — views he himself has expressed repeatedly in the past. This statement probably won’t help his poll numbers but it is unlikely to hurt them either. It is a wash. And that is probably true for its impact on relations with China and South Korea as well.

Gerald Curtis is Burgess Professor of Political Science, Columbia University.

4 responses to “Abe treads a fine line on WWII”

  1. An apology is ‘convincing’ when it is followed up by acts of contrition. When someone, or a country, actually does things to make amends, people are more likely to believe the words are genuine. Or ‘sincere’ as the Chinese are wont to say about Japan.

    Given that Abe is so invested in his nationalist, historical revisionist perspective it is hardly surprising that he fails to grasp this point. He has said he is unwilling to engage in ‘masochistic’ activities with neighboring countries like China or S Korea. ie, he is not willing to humble himself or Japan to its neighbors.

    Future generations of Japanese will continue to be burdened by these unresolved issues until a leader emerges who understands and implements actions which will make amends to the country’s former victims.

    Look at how Germany has done this: pay reparations to victims, build memorials or museums to honor them, hold commemorative ceremonies for them, stop publishing history textbooks which white wash the facts of Japanese aggression, and stop pressuring foreign publishers who tell the truth about comfort women and other untoward things the Japanese military did.

    • Let’s not forget John 8: 7 “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.”

      While I concur that there is a lot for Japan to do, I sincerely hope the US does likewise to Vietnam for ruining that country physically up to 1975 by a needless war of invasion and then trying to strangle it diplomatically until 1995, to Iran for toppling a popularly elected government in 1953 and only expressing deep regret and making an ex gratia payment for downing Iran Air flight 655 in 1988, to Cuba for trying to subvert its government by sending CIA operatives into that country in 1961. . . I could continue this list ad nauseum for the victors of WW2 as well who have yet to apologize for a lot of their deeds.

      • I concur that the USA has MUCH to apologize to the world for. To your list I would add things like its use of the atomic bombs in Japan, firebombing cities in Japan and Germany during WW II, the invasion of Iraq, etc. I would have loved to see President Obama attend the recent 70th anniversary ceremonies and offer apologies for the nuclear bombs. To do that would have led to howls of protest here in the USA because most Americans see these acts as necessary to end the war. But it would mean he was truly living up to his having received the Nobel Peace Prize.

  2. Why don’t scholars spend a little less time on line-by-line analysis of Abe’s public statements and a little more time on the historical lies and distortions of the Stalinist dictatorship with Chinese characteristics?

Support Quality Analysis

Donate
The East Asia Forum office is based in Australia and EAF acknowledges the First Peoples of this land — in Canberra the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people — and recognises their continuous connection to culture, community and Country.

Article printed from East Asia Forum (https://www.eastasiaforum.org)

Copyright ©2024 East Asia Forum. All rights reserved.