Japanese Imperialism and War Crimes

Former Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono

The Murayama statement apologizes for Japanese war crimes and atrocities committed during the period of Japanese imperialism, especially during the Second Sino-Japanese War, World War II, and the annexation of Korea. The war crimes mainly involved the Imperial Japanese Army and the Imperial Japanese Navy, responsible for the deaths of millions. Actions include a wide range including torture of prisoners of war, forced labor, biological warfare, looting, rape, and the use of comfort women. In addition, Japan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs states the country acknowledges its role in the damage caused by Japan during World War II.

The Kono Statement (1993)

Japanese governments have issued several official apologies for their war crimes and other actions during the Imperial era. The apology that most immediately preceded the Murayama Statement was the Kono Statement announced by LDP Chief Cabinet Secretary Yōhei Kōno on August 4, 1993. With this statement, Japan acknowledged for the first time that their military was directly or indirectly involved in the military-run brothels and used coercion to make the comfort women provide sex to the Japanese soldiers.^[1][2]

Japan

The majority of the Japanese population was greatly supportive of Murayama's statement. Although some were concerned over indiscretions such as by Yoshinobu Shimamura, and feared that Murayama's apology may not necessarily hold if more conservative prime ministers followed to lead Japan. However, many were encouraged when Emperor Akihito spoke in a ritual said that marked the anniversary to reinforce Murayama's apology and expressed deep remorse for Japan's actions as well as mourning for those who suffered in the battlefield.^[6]

Although the statement was met with general approval from the Japanese public who said they believed expressions of remorse were long overdue, some were cautious of Murayama's words. Some believed that there was no need for an apology, due to what they perceived as insufficient evidence for Japan's actions during World War II.^[7] There were occasional beliefs that politicians were apologizing purely for the sake of maintaining and improving diplomatic relations without making investigations. The Education Minister at the time, Yoshinobu Shimamura, told reporters he was unsure whether repeated apologies were useful and that Japan had not necessarily been the aggressor in the war. However, he quickly apologized and retracted his comments after meeting protests from the public population and other Asian countries.^[7]

South Korea

The perceptions of the South Koreans grew suspicious about the credibility of the statement as the means of reconciliation were not ensured in concrete measures, neither did they feel that it was met. The Asian Women’s Fund, which was created in spirit of the statement, was later rejected by South Korean comfort women and the South Korean government.^[8] They argued for direct compensation from the Japanese government.^[9][10] The Korean elites, additionally, required the Japanese government to declare, hence, acknowledging that there was a forced annexation in 1910. The Japanese did not comply to this demand.^[11] Therefore, South Koreans perceive inconsistency with the Japanese government. After the normalization of diplomatic relations between Japan and South Korea in 1965, Korean victims could legally not make individual claims against the Japanese government nor Japanese companies.^[12] Visits to Yasukuni Shrine by Junichiro Koizumi during his time in office (April 26, 2001 - September 26, 2006) and retracting statements by PM Shinzo Abe have continued the negative sentiments among the South Korean public.^[13]

A survey conducted by the Asian Institute for Policy Studies in 2012 shows that the South Korean public are unaware of the Murayama Statement and misunderstood it to be related to the Dokdo-Takeshima Island dispute.^[14] The study concluded that the island dispute is considered as “the biggest obstacle in mending South Korean-Japan relations”.

China

Murayama was known as the first Japanese prime minister to apologize to China, and also the first to formally address Japan's actions during its colonial rule. According to Chinese media, As the "good friend (好朋友, hao peng you)" of Chinese people, Murayama's actions were praised by Asian countries, including China. Even after his resignation, Murayama has been invited to ceremonies in China to mark the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II.^[15] In a statement released by People's Daily, Murayama emphasized the two nations' linguistic and cultural similarities, insisting that China and Japan develop a strong bond.^[16]

Other nations

Although some Western nations such as Australia showed warmth and welcome towards the first explicit apology for Japan's imperialist and war time actions, other Asian countries such as Singapore and Malaysia expressed similar reactions to China and South Korea. Reactions were generally subdued compared to Western states, and not all Asian states issued official responses to the Murayama statement.^[17] However, in contrast to China and South Korea, Japan seems to have achieved a fair level of reconciliation with Taiwan and other Southeast Asian nations through the statement, that seem to have developed a "Forgive, but never forget" attitude.^[18]

The Koizumi Statement (2005)

Former PM Junichiro Koizumi issued an additional statement on August 5, 2005, regarding Japan's 20th century militarism during his time in office from 2001 to 2006. Nations such as China and South Korea repeatedly warned that attempts to avoid explicit apologies that would jeopardize diplomatic ties.

In the statement he says:

“[I]n the past, Japan, through its colonial rule and aggression, caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations. Sincerely facing these facts of history, I once again express my feelings of deep remorse and heartfelt apology, and also express the feelings of mourning for all victims, both at home and abroad, in the war. I am determined not to allow the lessons of that horrible war to erode, and to contribute to the peace and prosperity of the world without ever again waging a war...”^[19]

Like the Murayama Statement, Koizumi explicitly employed terms such as "colonial rule", "aggression" and "deep remorse". In the context of reconciliation within the region though, Koizumi's repeated visits to the controversial Yasukuni Shrine led to a worsening of relations with Japan's neighbours. Yasukuni Shrine honors 2.5 million Japanese war dead from the period between 1868 and 1954, including fourteen convicted Class A war criminals. Visits to the Shrine by serving members of the Japanese government, even in a private capacity, have attracted significant criticism from both China and South Korea.^[20]

The Abe Statement (2015)

In the summer of 2015, PM Shinzo Abe signaled his government’s position that the wording of the Murayama Statement could be altered.^[21][22] Doing so would require a Cabinet decision.^[23] Abe said that he planned to uphold the general content of statements made by previous Japanese cabinets. He said the upcoming statement will include three main points: an expression of remorse for Japan’s wartime aggression, comments on the democratic path taken by the country over the last 70 years, and the government’s plans for the future, including measures to improve regional and global prosperity.

The Murayama Statement said the country had caused “tremendous damage and suffering” to the people of Asia and other countries through its colonial rule and aggression. Abe seemed reluctant about using the same wording that appeared in the Murayama statement, saying he wanted to avoid “bits and pieces of argument over whether the previous wording was used or new wording was added”. His comments on the issue drew criticism from many opposition leaders. Katsuya Okada, leader of the opposition Democratic Party of Japan, severely criticized Abe’s approach, saying that the prime minister’s remarks calling colonial rule and aggression ‘bits and pieces’ could not be tolerated, and that the original statement had already received strong international recognition.^[22]

Kenji Eda, leader of Ishin no To (Japanese Innovation Party), warned Abe against altering the wording of the Murayama statement, saying doing so would “send a different message to neighboring countries”. Japanese Communist Party chairman Kazuo Shii also urged Abe to retain key aspects of the Murayama Statement and take appropriate action. In addition to this, Natsuo Yamaguchi, the leader of the junior Komeito party in Abe’s LDP-led coalition, said that the form of expression used in the Murayama Statement had significant meaning, thus any new statement must be capable of sending a similar message.^[22]

Abe delivered his statement on August 14, 2015, on the 70th anniversary of Japan's defeat in World War II, causing much controversy especially in China and South Korea.^[24] The Abe Statement is based on previous statements such as the Murayama Statement. However, it also consulted the report of a panel commission created to reconsider “the history of the 20th century and Japan’s role and the world order in the 21st century.” The fundamental purposes of the panel and Abe statement were to design the view of 21st century, in the context of Japan’s aim of reconciliation and international contributions in the 70 years since World War II.

Reactions

Abe's speech for Japan's role in World War II

China's state media criticized Abe's remarks as refraining from offering his own apology, this being agreed on by both the official broadcaster CCTV and Xinhua News Agency.^[25] South Korea criticized it as "disappointing", followed by comments from other Asian states as well, for example Taiwan calling on the Japanese government to examine its wartime aggression and learn the lessons of history.^[26]

Former PM Tomiichi Murayama had responded to Abe's statement, two hours after it had been announced. He had accused Abe of using words from the Murayama statement and rewording it to create a more abstract version of the statement.^[27] While Abe used words such as "aggression" in his statement, he did not mention about the specific behaviors of Japan during the war, nor did he address whom his statement was for.^[28] He stood by the statement and urged Abe to do the same.^[29][30]

The concern over the statement's wording was combined with the Japanese Foreign Ministry deleting a "History Issues Q&A" section on its website. The section was based on statements by Tomiichi Murayama and Junichiro Koizumi, but the section had been slightly altered when it was reinstated on the website on September 18. The new version of the Q&A is also criticized for playing down Abe's revisionist position on war related issues in order to facilitate the passage of the upcoming changes in the controversial security legislation.^[31]