William Underwood: Historical revisionism in Japan is leading to a backlash in the US
The headline of a story by Reiji Yoshida in Wednesday's Japan Times says that "Hawkishness is watchword for Abe team." (See http://search.japantimes; )
It could also be fairly described as an "anti-historical reconciliation" cabinet, in keeping with previous media reports that PM Abe may not reaffirm the (Diet-rejected) 1995 "Murayama Statement" acknowledging Japan's war of invasion. The elevation of Nakagawa Shoichi would certainly support this interpretation, as he and Abe have been leading Diet figures in favor of history textbooks that minimize or deny Nanjing, comfort women, forced labor, etc.
The sole retention appointment of Aso Taro as foreign minister was not widely expected, with some observers anticipating the return of the previous FM, Machimura Nobutaka. Aso's retention does help explain the remarkable kid-gloves treatment that Abe enjoyed during the nationally televised, three-way "debate" a few days before the party election. Poor Tanigaki, seated in between Abe and Aso and by far the best-spoken of the three candidates, was reduced to literally rolling his eyes at times at the vacuuousness of statements by Abe, who was allowed to remain silent for the most part. Aso carefully abstained from any criticism of Abe or his ambiguity and wound up keeping his job. The debate was farcical even by US presidential debate standards, where a non-incumbent candidate would at least be forced to commit himself to a bare minimum of positions. But then Abe was a "virtual incumbent," partly because the TV performance was not conducted in, say, June when it might have made some difference in the outcome.
Many expected FM Aso to be whisked offstage if only for his deep family connections to wartime forced labor by Koreans and Allied POWs, with details about the latter program emerging only last spring and triggering a controversy much discussed by this Forum. Instead Aso will continue to be a lightening rod for forced labor reparations efforts. The South Korean government, for example, will continue asking questions about the 8,000-plus Koreans conscripted--and never fully paid--for labor by Aso Mining Co. Many questions surely remain, as the excerpt below from my recent article describes.
(Incidentally, six representatives of Seoul's Truth Commission on Forced Mobilization Under Japanese Imperialism will be in Hokkaido from Oct. 10-16. Escorted by a citizens' group called the Hokkaido Forum and illustrating the capabilities of Japanese-South Korean civil society, the government delegation will search for records at Hokkaido University and make site inspections at a former coal mine and hydroelectric plant.)
Counterintuitively perhaps, the retention of FM Aso may even assist efforts in the US Congress to grant compensation to former American POWs who worked without pay for Japanese corporations (and who remain the only nationality among the former Allies not to have received domestic compensation in recent years). Yasukuni-based historical revisionism ended up aiding the unprecedented recent passage by the House International Relations Committee of the resolution calling on Japan to take responsibility for the comfort women injustice. In fact, there is a good article in the Sept. 27 issue of "The Hill" about the future of this comfort women bill before the full House. Korean Americans are said to be lobbying hard, but Speaker Hastert is reluctant to offend Japan. See http://www.thehill.com;
Japan's new "anti-reconciliation" cabinet, with the former president of a company that once heavily used forced labor continuing to lead Japan's diplomatic corps, may yet serve to further the reparations process in a paradoxical "hitting bottom" sort of way.
It could also be fairly described as an "anti-historical reconciliation" cabinet, in keeping with previous media reports that PM Abe may not reaffirm the (Diet-rejected) 1995 "Murayama Statement" acknowledging Japan's war of invasion. The elevation of Nakagawa Shoichi would certainly support this interpretation, as he and Abe have been leading Diet figures in favor of history textbooks that minimize or deny Nanjing, comfort women, forced labor, etc.
The sole retention appointment of Aso Taro as foreign minister was not widely expected, with some observers anticipating the return of the previous FM, Machimura Nobutaka. Aso's retention does help explain the remarkable kid-gloves treatment that Abe enjoyed during the nationally televised, three-way "debate" a few days before the party election. Poor Tanigaki, seated in between Abe and Aso and by far the best-spoken of the three candidates, was reduced to literally rolling his eyes at times at the vacuuousness of statements by Abe, who was allowed to remain silent for the most part. Aso carefully abstained from any criticism of Abe or his ambiguity and wound up keeping his job. The debate was farcical even by US presidential debate standards, where a non-incumbent candidate would at least be forced to commit himself to a bare minimum of positions. But then Abe was a "virtual incumbent," partly because the TV performance was not conducted in, say, June when it might have made some difference in the outcome.
Many expected FM Aso to be whisked offstage if only for his deep family connections to wartime forced labor by Koreans and Allied POWs, with details about the latter program emerging only last spring and triggering a controversy much discussed by this Forum. Instead Aso will continue to be a lightening rod for forced labor reparations efforts. The South Korean government, for example, will continue asking questions about the 8,000-plus Koreans conscripted--and never fully paid--for labor by Aso Mining Co. Many questions surely remain, as the excerpt below from my recent article describes.
(Incidentally, six representatives of Seoul's Truth Commission on Forced Mobilization Under Japanese Imperialism will be in Hokkaido from Oct. 10-16. Escorted by a citizens' group called the Hokkaido Forum and illustrating the capabilities of Japanese-South Korean civil society, the government delegation will search for records at Hokkaido University and make site inspections at a former coal mine and hydroelectric plant.)
Counterintuitively perhaps, the retention of FM Aso may even assist efforts in the US Congress to grant compensation to former American POWs who worked without pay for Japanese corporations (and who remain the only nationality among the former Allies not to have received domestic compensation in recent years). Yasukuni-based historical revisionism ended up aiding the unprecedented recent passage by the House International Relations Committee of the resolution calling on Japan to take responsibility for the comfort women injustice. In fact, there is a good article in the Sept. 27 issue of "The Hill" about the future of this comfort women bill before the full House. Korean Americans are said to be lobbying hard, but Speaker Hastert is reluctant to offend Japan. See http://www.thehill.com;
Japan's new "anti-reconciliation" cabinet, with the former president of a company that once heavily used forced labor continuing to lead Japan's diplomatic corps, may yet serve to further the reparations process in a paradoxical "hitting bottom" sort of way.