Japanese ambassador in U.S. apologizes to ex-World War II POWs

Sunday 31st May, 12:10 PM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 58 Total Comments Show All

medievaltimes at 12:38 AM JST - 2nd June

Japan have by and large learnt their lesson from the war.

Not true at all becuase they don't teach any of the lessons in the first place. I'm shocked at how little WWII history Japanese are taught in schools. This event in history was a HUGE change for Japan and is very important. But from the people I have talked to it seems the only thing they are taught is that Japan was a victim.

Still, its a nice gesture that the ambassador offered. However, it would carry more weight if Japan's actions matched the words (education system, Yasukuni museum etc). Also, I'm sure before the year is over some politician (or hey, even another Prime Minister) will make a comment denying comfort women existed or Nanjing happened etc.
nigelboy at 12:48 AM JST - 2nd June

I have talked to it seems the only thing they are taught is that Japan was a victim.

Judging by your past posts, I highly doubt that you could communicate with any Japanese.

Also, I'm sure before the year is over some politician (or hey, even another Prime Minister) will make a comment denying comfort women existed or Nanjing happened etc.

None of this ever happened so my assumption about you seems to be correct.
OssanAmerica at 01:24 AM JST - 2nd June

Not true at all becuase they don't teach any of the lessons in the first >place. I'm shocked at how little WWII history Japanese are taught in >schools. This event in history was a HUGE change for Japan and is very >important. But from the people I have talked to it seems the only thing >they are taught is that Japan was a victim.

Totally disagree. From what I've seen most educated Japanese seem well aware that from 1931 onwards the Military effectively controlled the government leading all the way up to the "suffering" by the people. That Japan still persists in clutching it's "peace constitution" all these years even in the face of US pressure to change it is pretty good evidence that they "learned their lesson".
mlefler at 02:02 AM JST - 2nd June

I want to begin by saying that this is rather lengthy but there are many misconceptions about events leading up to the apology by the new Japanese Ambassador to the United States.

I have read many posts over the years but never was interested enough to write. Over the past several months I have found that perceptions of America and of Japanese-American relations have been based on mutual ignorance over events and history of our two nations.

I hope those who are Japanese are well knowledged in their history, especially since 1853. For those of us who are Americans openly acknowledge that our history is only 500 years old, that our culture is non existant because our country is a country of many cultures, including the Japanese culture. It is this fact that many nations do not understand us and who we are.

History has shown us that human beings do not make the best decisions during the best of times, during conflicts the best decision has already been ignored (not to go to war.)

Japan was forced to open it borders by Commadore Perry, but in doing so made they made sure that Japan would never become a colony of any of the Imperialist nations at that time. Instead they took the worst of what we were and became a dominate power by the end of the nineteenth century. As War Minister ToTo believed that Japan was doing nothing that the European and Americans were already doing in Asia - colonizing for power and profit.

It was the attack on China in 1927 that put Japan on a collision course with nations that had colonies in Asia. It would finally erupt on December 7, 1941.

Some claim that people knew, like 9/11, we did know - something, just not enough to identify what exactly Japan had in mind. All Pacific bases were put on alert, including Pearl Harbor. A comedy of errors resulted in the successful attack (or somewhat successful attack) on Pearl Harbor. The comedy of errors was on both sides.

Japan has always believed in honor and was honor bound to declare War before the actual attack. In their paranoia for secracy they made it impossible for their Ambassadors to submit the declaration before the attack, a most unhonorable thing to do.

In every war atrocities are committed by both sides, this is not an excuse just a reality. We, as victors, spotlight the attrocities that were committed by Germany and Japan. It doesn't mean we were without sin. The firebombing of Dresdan, of Tokyo and most of Japan's main industry cities, speak not highly of us as human beings. We helped rebuild the cities we destroyed - what we couldn't do was restore the innocent lives that were lost.

On July 26, 1945, the allies issued the Potsdam Declaration that called on Japan to unconditionally surrender or face total annilation. Japan had a choice and chosed to ignore the Declaration and continue to fight. We have to ask ourselves what did that Declaration mean by total annilation? Obviously it meant using the only two atomic bombs we had left, since we "tested" one at the Trinity site in New Mexico.

It took an additional 200,000 innocent lives to end a war that had already taken millions of lives, both military and civilians. The apology given by the Ambassador represents a documented event that was not necessary and brutal in how it was carried out.

For those of us who fathers fought, the apology is a welcome gesture that recognizes a defining moment in their lives. Soldiers know their duty, going beyond that duty and humilating their enemy is not honorable. Killing unarmed soldiers and civilians is not only not honorable but criminal.

Resentment of World War II vets against the Japanese was earned and many vets still carry that resentment. They never regretted the two atomic bombs and the lives that they cost, they believed that it was a better choice than remaining in a stockade or the number of lives on both sides that would be lost if the war continued.

With the apology by the Ambassador, at least for those who still survive I am sure it was appreciated, on behalf of my father who passed away 25 years ago, I thank the Ambassador and Japan, it was an honorable thing to do.
dishdash at 04:39 AM JST - 2nd June

Good on him! BUT I think his next posting will be to Tim Buk tu!
Shumatsu_Samurai at 07:40 AM JST - 2nd June

From what I've seen most educated Japanese seem well aware that from 1931 onwards the Military effectively controlled the government leading all the way up to the "suffering" by the people. That Japan still persists in clutching it's "peace constitution" all these years even in the face of US pressure to change it is pretty good evidence that they "learned their lesson".

I agree with Ossan on that point. I can't remember the last time I met a Japanese person who didn't know about the military's involvement in politics in the 30s and 40s.

Japan could have easily amended or repealed Article 9 by now. The fact it hasn't is a sign that the war had a big impact on it, and not by giving it a victim mentality. If it did think it was mostly a victim it would have rushed to legally and physically rearm itself with a wide range of offensive weaponary, rather than limit itself as it has done.

Recently Japan has started to look towards developing more offensive muscle and revising the law so it can use its forces more flexibly, but really that's quite timid in contrast to what it could develop and field in the future if it so wished.
medievaltimes at 09:45 AM JST - 2nd June

Interesting replys to my previous post...

Nigel - Check out Shinzo Abe's profile. Also, I have nothing to gain or lose by any of my posts about Japan. My posts are simply a reflection of my experiences and observations...I have no vested interest.

Ossan - I am well aware of Japan clutching to the "peace constitution". Of course it can afford to do this becuase America is providing it a military force. Once the US military leaves, I think we will see a shift.

Also, I find the peace constitution to be a bit vague for a few reasons (Sending troops to Iraq, refueling missions during a time of war, having US nuclear tipped subs floating a few hundred miles off the Japanese coast etc.) This isn't really consistent with Article 9 is it?

Shumatsu - I agree that most Japanese know the military was involved in politics. By "WWII history" I was talking about other aspects as well.

Again, Article 9 doesn't seem to jive for the above stated reasons, so whether is repealed or not seems like a moot point.

Also, your statement about Japan "rushing to rearm itself" after the war doesn't make sense. Basically, Japan didn't have a choice...they lost the war...the allies would not allow Japan to rearm itself.
OssanAmerica at 10:45 AM JST - 2nd June

Ossan - I am well aware of Japan clutching to the "peace constitution". >Of course it can afford to do this becuase America is providing it a >military force. Once the US military leaves, I think we will see a >shift.

That is correct, they can have their cake and eat it too. However, clearly they have "learned their lesson". Maybe too well for those of us whose taxes help defend Japan.
Brunobear at 11:32 AM JST - 2nd June

I feel it was very decent, empathetic and honourable for the Japanese Ambassador to convey an apology when facing the former US prisoners of war. I am sure it was a dignified and emotional experience for all present.

Realistically, I would not want to know what many of my ancestors did in their struggle to survive over numerous generations, but in one respect, it is how I had the fantastically random chance of life on this beautiful planet. I am glad their is no one finger pointing and reminding me of what my ancestors did and for ever demanding apologies and compensation.

The spats on JP by you fellows dignifies nothing.
nadavaloryo at 10:04 PM JST - 2nd June

we must forget the postwar we must move on....
jonnyboy at 10:21 PM JST - 2nd June

those who think the atomic bombs were a crime must also believe that the japanese government would have surrendered under any other circumstances. i may be no expert, but there seems to be enough empirical evidence to suggest they would have been quite happy to let every man, woman and child be slaughtered, at least until the enemy came knocking on their doors... not to say the bombings were "right", but i find it easy to believe that a land invasion would have been a bloodbath of an unmeasurable order
nigelboy at 10:42 PM JST - 2nd June

Nigel - Check out Shinzo Abe's profile. Also, I have nothing to gain or lose by any of my posts about Japan. My posts are simply a reflection of my experiences and observations...I have no vested interest.

Maybe you should check out Shinzo Abe's profile insteading of telling me to do so because my statement still stands that no politician have made a comment "denying comfort women existed or Nanjing happened etc."
medievaltimes at 10:58 PM JST - 2nd June

Maybe you should check out Shinzo Abe's profile insteading of telling me to do so because my statement still stands that no politician have made a comment "denying comfort women existed or Nanjing happened etc."

You're mistaken.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinzo_Abe

Moderator: All readers back on topic please.
nadavaloryo at 07:52 PM JST - 3rd June

how about those comport women,,,does jp ask for apology,,,?
womanforwomen at 09:45 PM JST - 3rd June

Stop dwelling on the past. It hurts me when I read about WWII and the comfort women. But just move on. Rather than demanding for appology learn to forgive too. There is more strength involved in forgiving. Then it was comfort women, but today there are many offering comfort willingly.