Apology Is Different from Conclusion

  2010/8/24 source：

In a speech on August 10, Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan expressed his "deep remorse" and "heartfelt apology" for Japan's past colonial rule of Korea. This speech caused strong repercussions both in Japan and the world, with the focuses on the motive, response, and result of this apology.

First of all, the Apology has Political Motives

Since the Democratic Party took power, it has been trying to promote the reconciliation with Korea as an important part of its Asia policy. But the Democratic Party lacked conduit in communicating with Korean politicians and establishing interactive relations with the Lee Myung-bak administration. Issuing an apologizing announcement is an attractive suggestion to the new Japanese administration, which has been bothered by historical problems and wants to establish strategic cooperative relations with South Korea as soon as possible. As expected, after Kan’s speech, South Korean President Lee expressed that Japan and South Korea should establish new cooperative relationship for a new future.

In addition, Kan’s apology will undoubtedly help to promote the negotiation of Japan-South Korea Economic Partnership Agreement.

It is especially noteworthy that Japan hopes to strengthen military cooperation with South Korea when Sino-South Korean relationship is cooling down after the Cheonan Incident. Therefore, the apology about history has become the lubricant for domestic and foreign policies of Japan and South Korea, and it has suspiciously deviated from the original theme.

Secondly, the Japanese took a dim view on the apology

Kan’s speech is not towards all Asian countries but only towards South Korea on the issue of colonization, which is different from “the Murayama Speech” in 1995.  Therefore, people in Japan are worried that it would cause the chain reaction that North Korea and China would ask for the same kind of apologies, thus leaving potential problem for Japan’s diplomacy in Asia. Opponents in the Democratic Party usually hold such a view. For example, Kasa Hiroshi, Deputy Director of the Congressional Policy Committee, and Genba Koichiro, Chairman of Policy Research Committee, thought that Kan should decide after discussion inside the Democratic Party.

Tanigaki Sadakazu, President of the Liberal Democratic Party, thought that it was suspicious whether it was necessary for the Japanese Prime Minister to give such a speech. Former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe released an announcement that Kan’s speech was a major betrayal to the public and history, and it cannot be tolerated. The Right wing media thought that Kan’s speech was about Japan’s national pride and historical conception, it would restrain future administrations and be harmful to Japan.

Thirdly, apologizing may not put an end once and for all

The Japanese hoped that with an apology, South Korea would never bring up historical problems. But things may not be simple as that.