×

Opinion

Editorial: Prime minister’s speech in Indonesia may signal statement to mark 70th anniversary of war’s end

What are Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s perceptions of history? His high-profile speech on April 22 at a meeting of the Asian-African Conference (Bandung Conference) in Indonesia did not fully satisfy.

Calling for unity in the fight against terrorism and climate change, Mr. Abe positioned Asia and Africa as partners for growth and promised to “invest for the future,” including technological advancements and the development of human resources. At the same time, his nod to history included only “deep remorse over World War II” and made no mention of an “apology.”

It seems clear that he takes a dim view of the sort of expressions of contrition expressed by previous prime ministers.

Mr. Abe is preparing the ground for his statement to mark the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II. He may have been feeling out the reactions of China and South Korea to this content. However, South Korean officials responded sharply, saying they greatly regretted that Mr. Abe had not included an apology.

It is true that expressions of remorse over the war or words of apology were not necessarily vital to this speech. Firstly, the Bandung Conference began as a venue for leaders from Asia and Africa to gather in opposition to colonialism, and for this 60th anniversary of the conference, the agenda was focused on cooperation involving economic development and counterterrorism measures.

Nonetheless, then Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, who delivered a speech at the conference in 2005, followed the Murayama statement which had been issued ten years before and expressed “deep remorse and heartfelt apology” for colonial rule and aggression. This idea was also expressed in his statement marking the 60th anniversary of the end of World War II, issued in the summer of that year.

The gap between the attitudes of Mr. Abe and Mr. Koizumi cannot be overlooked. An expression of apology from Mr. Abe is not expected in his statement to mark the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II.

After Mr. Abe’s speech, a summit meeting between Japan and China was held for the first time in five months. The prime minister’s aides stressed favorable outcomes, saying that this meeting affirmed stronger relations and a cautious rapprochement.

Even so, perceptions of history remain a major obstacle to mending the relationship. In fact, Chinese media reported that, at this meeting, Chinese President Xi Jinping had wanted Mr. Abe to respond sincerely and send a message which squarely faces history.

Mr. Abe must fully grasp the weight of the statement he will make to mark the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II. Nonetheless, it is regrettable that he delivered a speech which caused repercussions.

In a TV appearance, Mr. Abe said that he would not echo the Murayama statement, explaining, “I uphold the basic thinking behind perceptions of history, which means there is no need to reiterate them.” At this time, a committee of experts, who are entrusted with reviewing the contents of the prime minister’s anniversary statement, are still engaged in discussion. It is odd that Mr. Abe would brush aside the committee’s work and made such a comment as if it were a conclusion. It is only natural that some in the ruling party raised questions over this comment.

Mr. Abe has raised questions about the definition of “aggression” in responding to questions in the Diet. Though he states that he will abide by the perceptions of history of previous administrations, looking at his desire to issue remarks in his own words cannot be helped.

Mr. Abe will speak before the U.S. Congress next week and may mention World War II again. Following the Bandung Conference, it seems that he may consider his speech before Congress a touchstone for exploring the reactions of the American public to his historical views. As an allied nation of Japan, the United States is particularly worried about the worsening relations between Japan and South Korea.

He must hold in mind that if he is viewed as a revisionist of history, this will affect Japan-U.S. relations, too.

(Originally published on April 23, 2015)

Archives