Want the truth of World War Two? Don't ask Japan

As part of the events commemorating the 70th anniversary of the end of World War Two, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe spoke last Friday at a nationally televised event about the deep remorse his nation feels. While many in Japan seemed satisfied that Abe appropriately addressed the past, governments elsewhere in Asia expressed disappointment at the lack of a clear apology.

Abe chose his words carefully to ensure his explanations and condolences would not be confused for an apology. Why?

Parts of Abe’s speech were suitably humble. “I bow my head deeply before the souls of all those who perished both at home and abroad. I express my feelings of profound grief and my eternal, sincere condolences.” He acknowledged that Japan inflicted “immeasurable damage and suffering”.

But Abe also said, “We must not let our children, grandchildren and even further generations to come, who have nothing to do with that war, be predestined to apologise.” He emphasised that 80 per cent of Japan’s population was born after 1945. He mentioned Japan’s civilian casualties in the specific – Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Tokyo, Okinawa – without touching on equally horrific events such as the Rape of Nanjing, which took 300,000 Chinese lives, and the sexual enslavement of 200,000 so-called “comfort women” throughout Asia.

Criticism of Abe’s speech from abroad was sharp. China’s Xinhua news agency called it insincere. His “adulterated apology is far from being enough for Japan’s neighbours and the broader international community to lower their guard”, the state-run agency said. In South Korea, which calls August 15 – the day Japan surrendered to the United States – Liberation Day, President Park Geun-hye said Abe’s statement “left much to be desired”.

Whenever a senior Japanese leader speaks of the war, he must parse out what will create offence because he cannot satisfy both his domestic and international audiences. In 1995, Socialist prime minister Tomiichi Murayama focused abroad when extending his “heartfelt apology” for atrocities his country committed in World War Two.

Murayama and his party held office for only 18 months, their single period in power since 1945.

Abe’s word choices fell solidly on the domestic side, not unexpected given his drive to remilitarise Japan. The word “apology” in the context of the war is seen by conservatives in Japan, including many wealthy donors to Abe’s Liberal Democratic Party, as near-profanity. The same goes for specific mentions of Nanjing or Japan’s system of sexual slavery; many in the far right still deny those events took place. Abe’s references to Japan’s own war losses was a sop to his supporters and, by Asian sensibilities, a slap in the face to those who died under Japan’s hand.

Abe is in his third stint as prime minister. His party has held power 56 of the past 60 years.

In addition to conservatives, some young people in Japan side with Abe, albeit less ideologically. They ask how many times the nation should apologise for events they see as distant and unrelated to their modern lifestyles. 

 

Stark contrast with Germany

An answer to them, as well as an insight into how the Chinese and Korean governments view Abe, lies in comparing Japan’s post-war actions to Germany’s.

Unlike in Germany, what happened during World War Two was never kneaded into Japan’s national consciousness.

Japanese textbooks still gloss over the war. Japan has a poor record of providing compensation to the sex slaves and care to the Korean victims of the atomic bombs. Abe appointed unapologetic revisionists to high-profile posts; he venerates the Yasukuni Shrine, where Japanese convicted of war crimes are enshrined. The shrine’s museum features World War Two artefacts that include a locomotive from occupied Manchuria, which is seen as an endorsement of Japan’s colonial ambitions. Abe sent a cash donation to the Yasukuni Shrine the same day as his speech. Members of his cabinet visited in person that afternoon.

Many in Asia are also acutely aware World War Two Emperor Hirohito’s son sits on the Japanese throne.

Imagine a German government beholden to Holocaust deniers, one that omits its Nazi legacy from textbooks, never apologised and compensated its war victims and annually sends its chancellor on pilgrimage to a site holy to the National Socialists, perhaps with an attached museum featuring rail cars from Dachau. All with Hitler’s son as the symbolic head of state.

That’s how many people across Asia see it.

So when a Japanese prime minister stands to speak of the Pacific War, he speaks in a type of code that includes certain words he knows will please his domestic audience and knowingly leaves out many others whose omission offend and inflame his Asian listeners. Shinzo Abe chose his words with great care – and hit his target dead in the centre.