Effect on International Affairs Today
Denial of Crimes
For everyone's sanctity, war crimes need to be put behind us. This does not mean apologies aren't required. In fact, apologies--sincere admittances of wrongdoing--are strongly needed. Sincere apologies cannot be limited to simple written apologies or affected speeches. Words speak even less if the government's actions contradict the apologies. The Yasukuni Shrine is a good example of this. It was constructed to commemorate soldiers who died for the Meiji Reformation. But in recent years, war criminals have been inducted as well. Neighboring countries find it hard to accept written or spoken apologies if government official visit this shrine. It's disrespectful and undermines their suffering.
In addition, former Prime Minister Abe Shinzō refuses to acknowledge the comfort women. He discounts the accounts by saying there was no evidence of sexual enslavement whatsoever. Like the Yasukuni Shrine, this statement questions the authenticity of previous apologies. Shinzō isn't the first government official to deny war crimes. Since 1986, there have been three Cabinet resignations or firings over revisionist statements about WWII (Jameson). One of them, Shigeto Nagano, resigned in 1994 after denying the Nanjing Massacre and guilt over WWII. When upstanding officials partake in this type of behavior, it is a little wonder that Japanese textbooks refer to Nanjing as an "incident" or completely omit war crimes.
It will be difficult to move forward, especially as Abe Shinzō is expected to become Japan's Prime Minister--again.
In addition, former Prime Minister Abe Shinzō refuses to acknowledge the comfort women. He discounts the accounts by saying there was no evidence of sexual enslavement whatsoever. Like the Yasukuni Shrine, this statement questions the authenticity of previous apologies. Shinzō isn't the first government official to deny war crimes. Since 1986, there have been three Cabinet resignations or firings over revisionist statements about WWII (Jameson). One of them, Shigeto Nagano, resigned in 1994 after denying the Nanjing Massacre and guilt over WWII. When upstanding officials partake in this type of behavior, it is a little wonder that Japanese textbooks refer to Nanjing as an "incident" or completely omit war crimes.
It will be difficult to move forward, especially as Abe Shinzō is expected to become Japan's Prime Minister--again.
Island Disputes
Japan is arguing with China (and to a lesser extent, Taiwan) over islands in the East China Sea. These islands, Senkaku in Japanese and Diaoyu in Chinese, are in Japanese possession at the moment. However, the Chinese claim that the islands belong to them, since the 16th century. China claims the islands were wrongfully stolen from them in the Sino-Japanese War. Japanese sovereignty was also limited to just the main islands of Honshu, Kyushu, Hokkaido and Shikoku, as per the Potsdam Declaration. Up until the 70s, the islands were controlled by the US military before they were handed over to Japan after they left Okinawa. And ever since then, the islands have been in Japanese hands.
China is peeved about having to even dispute at all. To them, this is imperialistic spillover from World War II. During that time, Japan had occupied a huge section of eastern China.
A case similar to Diaoyu/Senkaku Island dispute is the Dok-do/Takeshima Island (Liancourt Rocks) dispute between South Korea and Japan. These islands are almost equidistant to both Korea and Japan, albeit closer to Korea’s Ulleung-do than Japan’s Oki Islands. Koreans claims to these islands have roots back to the 6th century Silla period. In addition, the 1900 Korean Empire had declared the islands as a part of Ulleung county. The Japanese asserts its dominance based on 17th century records.
So why did Japan want Dok-do? After Japan defeated the Russians in 1905 and captured Port Arthur, Japan needed to secure its dominance in the area. The best way the Russians could enter the area was through the Sea of Japan. To efficiently protect the area, Japan decided to take advantage of the islands in the area, including Dok-do. When the Russians finally arrived, these islands proved to be very helpful in destroying the Russians (Tsushima Massacre). After the Russian threat was neutralized, Japan began its survey of the islands.
In addition, Japan says that after WWII the Allies had given the Liancourt Rocks to them, yet there had been no mention of the islands in the peace treaty. In what many Koreans consider an insensitive move, Japan declared Takeshima Day in 2005. The Japanese government’s intentions were that Japanese citizens would come together to promote Japanese sovereignty in the islands. As expected, many Koreans were outraged; self-immolations and other forms of self harm ensued.
Sadly, like China and her dispute, Korea is unwilling to bring the case to the International Court of Justice because of the belief that there should be no dispute. This idea that there is no dispute is often based off of historical documents which makes their evidence more volatile and up for judgement. By not bringing the case up to a 3rd party, resolutions are unlikely. There needs to be a mediator in this dispute.
China is peeved about having to even dispute at all. To them, this is imperialistic spillover from World War II. During that time, Japan had occupied a huge section of eastern China.
A case similar to Diaoyu/Senkaku Island dispute is the Dok-do/Takeshima Island (Liancourt Rocks) dispute between South Korea and Japan. These islands are almost equidistant to both Korea and Japan, albeit closer to Korea’s Ulleung-do than Japan’s Oki Islands. Koreans claims to these islands have roots back to the 6th century Silla period. In addition, the 1900 Korean Empire had declared the islands as a part of Ulleung county. The Japanese asserts its dominance based on 17th century records.
So why did Japan want Dok-do? After Japan defeated the Russians in 1905 and captured Port Arthur, Japan needed to secure its dominance in the area. The best way the Russians could enter the area was through the Sea of Japan. To efficiently protect the area, Japan decided to take advantage of the islands in the area, including Dok-do. When the Russians finally arrived, these islands proved to be very helpful in destroying the Russians (Tsushima Massacre). After the Russian threat was neutralized, Japan began its survey of the islands.
In addition, Japan says that after WWII the Allies had given the Liancourt Rocks to them, yet there had been no mention of the islands in the peace treaty. In what many Koreans consider an insensitive move, Japan declared Takeshima Day in 2005. The Japanese government’s intentions were that Japanese citizens would come together to promote Japanese sovereignty in the islands. As expected, many Koreans were outraged; self-immolations and other forms of self harm ensued.
Sadly, like China and her dispute, Korea is unwilling to bring the case to the International Court of Justice because of the belief that there should be no dispute. This idea that there is no dispute is often based off of historical documents which makes their evidence more volatile and up for judgement. By not bringing the case up to a 3rd party, resolutions are unlikely. There needs to be a mediator in this dispute.
Growth of Former Japanese Colonies/Occupied Lands
Japan's former colonies and occupied territories--Korea, Taiwan and China--have been growing rapidly. Of course this growth isn't limited to just these former occupied areas; the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia have also grown. This observation is important because of Japan's denial of crimes. Japan's denial may have been reflecting its long dominance in the region. Indeed, Japan has only recently lost its position of 2nd largest economy-- and to China, no less. While just a speculation, these former occupied lands deserve apologies, regardless of their economic prowess. Their growth just makes the apologies all the more urgent, especially for the sake of good trade relations.