Lesson still to be learned
Without soul-searching it is impossible for an unrepentant Japan to win the trust of its East Asian neighbors
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has declined to say whether he will visit the Yasukuni Shrine on Aug 15, the anniversary of Japan's surrender in World War II, but he has made it clear that he will not stop his cabinet ministers from visiting the war-linked shrine on that day. Tomomi Inada, the minister in charge of administrative reform, has received approval from the prime minister's office after voicing his intention to visit the shrine.
Visits to the Yasukuni Shrine by Japanese cabinet members and politicians on Aug 15 will blatantly challenge the current international order and justice, and seriously hurt the feelings of the people of the Asian countries that suffered from Japanese atrocities and could have serious consequences for the region's peace and stability.
Over the last 68 years, there have always been sharply divided views in Japan about its wartime past. On the one hand, a number of influential politicians in Japan, such as Tomiichi Murayama and Yohei Kono, have straightforwardly apologized for Japan's colonial rule and aggression, which caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries. On the other hand, we also hear frequent denials from right-wing conservatives, who question the Tokyo Trials and even attempt to claim there is no agreed definition of aggression.
The international community has been shocked by Abe's revisionist remarks claiming that the definition of aggression has yet to be firmly established by academic experts or the international community, Osaka Mayor Toru Hashimoto's comments that "comfort women" were necessary, and Finance Minister Taro Aso's remarks suggesting Japan should follow the Nazi example and change the country's constitution stealthily and without public debate. The words and deeds of these rightist politicians do not represent the will of Japanese people as a whole, so why have their intemperate words and actions not caused a crisis of confidence in the government or been morally condemned?