Asia

Home page

Asia

Japan’s apology for colonial rule of Korea draws mixed reaction

11 August 2010 03:09 (UTC +04:00)

Baku-APA. Japanese Prime Minister’s well-timed apology on Tuesday that came in the form of a statement released on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the nation’s annexation of the Korean Peninsula, has been met by mixed reactions in Tokyo and Seoul, APA reports quoting news.xinhuanet.com website.

In the statement, that had received the overall support of the Japanese Prime Minister’s Cabinet, Naoto Kan expressed deep remorse and offered a heartfelt apology for the monumental damage and pain that the 1910-1945 colonial rule caused to Koreans and vowed to build up future-oriented bilateral relations.

APOLOGETIC DIPLOMACY

However, the statement was issued in spite of objections from a number of conservative government factions in Japan, who remain opposed to the notion that Japan should be held financially culpable for its colonial rule of Korea.

The statement, whilst echoing previous prime ministerial apologies by Tomiichi Murayama in August 1995 and another by Junichiro Koizumi in August 2005, again notably avoided any wording that could lead to further debate about the necessity for Japan to provide financial compensation for its colonial rule.

Japan’s position is that he issue of compensation has been settled with the signing of the Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea in 1965 that normalized diplomatic ties between the two countries.

"The situation is something of a double-edged sword," Tetsuyo Shimura, director of foreign affairs at the Asian Exchange Foundation, told Xinhua.

"On the one hand if the Japanese government were to offer financial compensation to Korea and the people who suffered at the hand of the imperialists during Japan’s occupation of the Korean Peninsular, it would be a somewhat dignified and transparent gesture of genuine remorse," Shimura said.

"But at the same time it would suggest that Japan admits the annexation was illegal, which would stir up a diplomatic and social discord between the two countries at a time when political and economic ties have never been so important," Shimura said, adding that Japanese conservatives calling today’s move merely " apologetic diplomacy," was not far from the truth.

In an editorial released in Japan Tuesday in The Mainichi Daily News, Kan’s admission of the atrocities inflicted by Japan on the Korean people is evident and this is no longer a point of contention.

However, as political commentators and activists in both Japan and Korea -- of both Korean, Japanese and mixed descent -- are attesting the issue of legality has once again been ignored by the Japanese leadership, giving some credence to the notion of " apologetic diplomacy."

According to The Maininchi Daily News, "While Seoul claims that the Japan-Korea Annexation Treaty, which was signed on Aug. 22, 1919, and promulgated on Aug. 29, was illegal, Kan’s statement does not acknowledge its illegality, pointing out that the colonial rule began with the signing of the pact," the editorial said.

The South Korean Yonhap News Agency highlighted a similar point raised by the ruling Grand national Party (GNP).

"The ruling Grand National Party said the statement was "a step forward" from similar statements issued by former Japanese prime ministers, but "not enough to allay" Korean people’s decades-long anger over Japan’s wartime misdeeds."

The GNP were referring to the issue of the mobilization of hundreds of thousands of Korean men for forced labor and women for sexual slavery during the colonial period, known as "comfort women in Japan," not being mentioned in the statement.

"The statement has no mention of illegitimacy of the forced annexation and Koreans forced to work as sex slaves or manual laborers by the Japanese army," Yonhap quoted Ahn Hyoung-hwan, a spokesman of the party, as saying.

Similar sentiments were reflected by a statement from Korea’s main opposition Democratic Party.
"I still cannot stop doubting the sincerity of the apology," said Jeon Hyun-heui, spokeswoman of the party, noting that two things -- a declaration that the forced annexation of the peninsula is void and direct references to the Korean victims of the colonial rule -- were missing in the statement."
"Japan’s plan to return some of the Korean artifacts now in its possession is progress, but more important is that the country should come up with a sincere follow-up measure," Yonhap quoted Jeon as saying on Tuesday.
Indeed, some Korean scholars said that Kan’s apology can be meaningless as long as Japan keeps insisting that the annexation was legal.
"Despite Kan’s apology, Japan hasn’t changed its perception that the colonization of Korea was based on international laws at the time. It can - once again - be just lip service by a Japanese leader,"The Korean Times quoted Doh See-hwan, a senior researcher at the Northeast Asian History Foundation, as saying on Tuesday.
BOUND BY CIRCUMSTANCE
Despite a tainted history the two nations have and will remain inextricably linked and this bond is likely to strengthen and not deteriorate.
After the apology had been issued Kan highlighted the importance of Japan’s relationship with south Korea and vice-versa, noting that the Asian economy in general was expanding with the two countries very much at its hub.
More pertinently perhaps, the Japanese prime minister noted that cooperation between the two countries and the U.S. was absolutely essential, in light of increasing volatility on the Korean Peninsular.
Japan and (South) Korea both host tens of thousands of U.S. troops, and Japan was quick to offer support to South Korea after it accused the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) of sinking one of its warships with a torpedo in March, killing 46 of its sailors.
"It is no secret that Japan has a colorful history. However a lot of armchair historians are quick to judge without knowing all the facts. Japan has apologized for colonizing Korea and the violent and somewhat sordid evolution of this occupation -- financial compensation I feel would be an empty gesture," political commentator and author Philip McNeil said.
"More importantly, if it weren’t for America’s compliance to a degree, history would have been very different indeed, as the two countries expressed and secretly agreed on trade interests in Korea and the Philippines respectively, with Japan stake its claim on the former," said Philip McNeil.
"The legality of the annexation of the Korean Peninsular would be easy to determine, both commonsensical and legally, but there’s a much bigger picture here that’s being missed," McNeil said.
"History aside, Japan and Korea are joined at the hip economically and any diplomatic rifts would compromise the security of both countries and neither governments will allow for that at this delicate time," McNeil said.
Japan’s occupation of Korea ended when it surrendered in 1945 at the end of World War II.
Japanese leaders have repeatedly apologized in the past for aggression against its Asian neighbors with the list of war apology statements issued by Japan stretching across the decades after the Second World War was concluded.