Murayama says Abe risks alienating neighbors if he dilutes war apology

get over it. korea and china hate japan anyway no skin off their nose rubbing salt in the wounds

Former PM Murayama will go down in history as one of Japan's greatest and wisest leaders. He brought honor and dignity to Japan at home and on the worldwide stage.

We desperately need another Murayama at the helm.

Now Hatoyama is on limelight again. So, Abe might say apology --- different than some Japanese want. Keep eyes on Hatoyama. His family was known as scholars until one of them decided tp becime a politician. With his brain he acts enjoyable antics, Ambitious DPJ ,members have headach now.

"Abe, then a rookie LDP lawmaker, was one of those who opposed the move."

Then in no way should he be spokesman for the 70th anniversary of the end of ww2 .

So now we have two former PM's and the Crwon Prince stating publicly that they oppose Abe "watering down" the apology. Is there any chance he will hear these voices of reason? Probably not.

Abe and others of his nationalist ilk are essentially narcissists. Any apology that risks tarnishing their childish sense of pride is to be avoided at all costs.

unfortunately, this is not the same LDP as it was during murayama's time. the LDP has moved far right on this issue, so you bet abe will remove the "heartfelt" from his speech in august. that being said, china and SK will harp on anything less than japan groveling before their feet,, so it's a lose-lose situation all around.

I hope Abe speaks his mind, and lay it all on the table for everyone to see. No more pretending by Japanese politicians, followed by saying something different again when they think nobody's looking.

I didn't know that Abe opposed the draft of Murayama statement back in the days. What happened happened, whatever the reason was, so I hope that Abe won't make any disrespectful remarks.

People like Abe should at least keep their nationalist pet projects for retirement when they can use their stacks of cash for whatever amuses them. Don't risk defiling Japan's image worldwide ( not just in China and Korea ) by creating an even more poisoned atmosphere while leading the country. This is grossly irresponsible.

A wise man, unlike the current PM, and history will show them both as such. Unfortunately, as is often the case with unwise J-politicians (and that itself is often the case), he'll just ignore it and pretend it never happened. Sadder still some will come on here and claim that "Murayama is being misunderstood" and that, "he meant the opposite" and other such garbage to avoid addressing the fact that Japan needs to properly atone for its past; not form panels to make 'new apologies' and white-wash what happened.

Debucho said: "Korea and Cina hate Japan anyway"

Good god, I don't know where to start with this -- but I'll just settle for a modest "You're putting the cart before the horse".

You seem to be implying China and Korea hate Japan without any good reason other than -- what, just plain ill-will? But what about this reason: "Japan did a whole bunch of horrible things to the Koreans and Chinese only decades ago, and many of the people who suffered from those atrocities are still living, and they remember it all".

And then there's the good old "The government of Japan denies Japan did anything bad to the benighted Koreans and Chinese; in fact, everything Japan did to Korea and China, she did for their own good (including of course the horrific stabbing, sexual assault and burning alive of Korea's last Empress, in that order), whose populations are ungrateful jerks who just want to see Japan's image tarnished, out of malice and ignorance".

Does that about sum it up?

Murayama says Abe risks alienating neighbors if he dilutes war apology

Seems pretty common sense to me. In fact due to his previous comments, Abe needs to issue a fresh, unequivocal apology

You seem to be implying China and Korea hate Japan without any good reason other than -- what, just plain ill-will? But what about this reason: "Japan did a whole bunch of horrible things to the Koreans and Chinese only decades ago, and many of the people who suffered from those atrocities are still living, and they remember it all".

Seven decades ago. 7 decades ago. Why didn't you specify that what happened, happened seven decades ago? Not a 1. Not 2. Seven. The average human life span is between 70-80 years in developed countries. Very, very few people living today, lived through those years. They don't hate Japan because of what happened, they hate Japan because they were taught to hate Japan by their country. Instead you offer some non-specfic 'decades ago'.

You know what else happened decades ago? Muslims invaded Constantinople and renamed it Istanbul. Just decades ago! Therefore as a Christian and a Westerner, I feel I am justified in hating Muslims. After all, they haven't even apologized for it, not once!

Illyas MAR. 11, 2015 - 03:57PM JST Seven decades ago. 7 decades ago. Why didn't you specify that what happened, happened seven decades ago? Not a 1. Not 2. Seven. The average human life span is between 70-80 years in developed countries. Very, very few people living today, lived through those years. They don't hate Japan because of what happened, they hate Japan because they were taught to hate Japan by their country. Instead you offer some non-specfic 'decades ago'.

Somewhat true but just because it happened a long ago doesn't mean they can get over it. Especially, those 2 countries have one of the largest population in the world, there bound to be loud nationalists indoctrinated by propaganda from the very young age. Still the attitudes of the LDP doesn't help matters either. If anything, they seem eager pouring oil in the lit fire.

Around the period Muslims invaded Constantinople, I'm sure a lot of their forces have been destroyed by the armies sent by Pope Pius, so it wasn't a complete domination either.

I really hope Abe doesn't go down that road... There is absolutely nothing go gain from enraging neighbours. And saying Japan did nothing wrong is just embarrassing. In war, pretty much everyone involved makes mistakes that they'll have to apologize for (at least the losers do, although some of the winners could do with being a bit more Humble too..) I wish for a next-generation Murayama.

Abe will not risk alienatinfpg Korea and China, he ha already done so. He will likely alienate them further. We have never had a more clueless PM. And that is saying a lot.

The people of Japan should petition the US Congress to have PM Murayama address the American people.

This is a good advicement. We will hear Abe's speech on about Aug 15.

Illyas: "Seven decades ago. 7 decades ago. Why didn't you specify that what happened, happened seven decades ago? Not a 1. Not 2. Seven. The average human life span is between 70-80 years in developed countries."

And guess what? Some of those who suffered greatly at the hands of Japanese soldiers are still alive today. Guess what else? far more who are relatives to those who suffered and/or died at the hands of the IJA are alive today. Should we all just forget about it and say their pain is meaningless because it was "way back when"? Do you say the same when it comes to commemorating Hiroshima or Nagasaki? or how about those people who simply refuse to forget the firebombing of Tokyo and are now starting up a big fuss, eh?

No, my friend. Doesn't matter if it was yesterday or seventy years ago when the powers that be are unwilling to admit what happened and blame the victims, demanding they forget and 'stop causing problems', etc. War and its suffering should NEVER be forgotten, and when someone is denying it that should never be allowed to let go. Period.

Truth is that China and South Korea are going to continue with their policies of using anti-Japan sentiment as an official political and diplomatic tool regardless of whether the statement is kept the same, duluted or strengthened. In all three instances Japan is going to axpress resmorsefor it;s pasr and pledge itself to peace in the future. As it has actually done for the 70 years following the end of WWII. China and South Korea's position can only change if those countries themselves so decide. What Abe or any other J-PM says has no bearing on this.

Truth is that China and South Korea are going to continue with their policies of using anti-Japan sentiment as an official political and diplomatic tool regardless of whether the statement is kept the same, duluted or strengthened. In all three instances Japan is going to axpress resmorsefor it;s pasr and pledge itself to peace in the future. As it has actually done for the 70 years following the end of WWII. China and South Korea's position can only change if those countries themselves so decide. What Abe or any other J-PM says has no bearing on this.

Horse manure. What amazing logic -- let's blame the victims rather than the perpetrator, because, hell, we are Japan, and since the U.S. forced a pacifist constitution on us, as well as provided the foundation for our economic recovery, we can decide when we have apologized enough, and whether those apologies have been sincere. (Not arrogant, right?) Even though the U.S. Congress has gone on record as saying they oppose Japan back-sliding on the comfort women issue, and now the Chancellor of Japan has warned Japan about watering things down. Plus, please stop saying it is just SK and China that is using the issues associated with WWII history for political gains? If you don't think Abe is doing the same thing -- appealing to his nationalist base with the concept of making a statement that is more "forward looking", and creating a committee to guide him -- then you are just ignoring the obvious.

Do you say the same when it comes to commemorating Hiroshima or Nagasaki? or how about those people who simply refuse to forget the firebombing of Tokyo and are now starting up a big fuss, eh? -

I don't ever recall the Japanese government asking apology nor compensation for those events. Hence, they were never a 'big fuss' to begin with.

As Ossan alluded to, apology by Murayama did nothing to improve the relation for those two in particular have clearly made this a foreign policy against Japan.

Typo, obviously I meant "Chanecellor of Germany", not "Chancellor of Japan".

As Ossan alluded to, apology by Murayama did nothing to improve the relation for those two in particular have clearly made this a foreign policy against Japan.

nigelboy -- which is natural, since a near constant stream of white-washing, back-sliding and clarifying that apology has happened since then. When Japan decides to take the word "but" out of its vocabulary in relation to these issues, like Germany has done, then it might have the right to tell SK and China to grow up. Until then, they are just as guilty of making this an issue in foreign policy.

nigelboy -- which is natural, since a near constant stream of white-washing, back-sliding and clarifying that apology has happened since then. When Japan decides to take the word "but" out of its vocabulary in relation to these issues, like Germany has done, then it might have the right to tell SK and China to grow up. Until then, they are just as guilty of making this an issue in foreign policy.

Me thinks you haven't read the Weizsäcker statement. It's essentially "It's Hitler's fault. We suffered, too". You know very little about Germany to even make a legitimate comparison.

Update: To Germany: Meet the new Korea of Europe. Greece!

Nigelboy: Japan can't ask for any apology or compensation for Nagasaki or Hiroshima because it was the very perpetrator of the war. This is very different to the situation in the rest of Asia (e.g. China, korea, singapore, Philippines etc) that were invaded by and suffered huge damage from japanese aggression. This is partly why Abe wanted to change the definition of agression to depict it's invasion of others as an equally fought war vs an outright invasion (war of agression). This way it doesn't need to apologise and blurs the lines. This is basically a shrugging off of responsiblity.

The atomic bombs, which were extremely unfortunate, were dropped by the US because a significant measure was needed to end Japanese aggression which included kamikaze (suicide pilots) and a ' to the death' war mentality. Something I am sure no normal person would support and would be ashamed of. The current emperor regrets this dark history and doesnt visit yasukuni shrine. And it's why a pacifist constitution was enforced by the US.

As for its neighbours being anti Japan you only need to go to yahoo.jp to see how popular Korea and China bashing by many Japanese internet users are. It's obsessive and outright bizarre. Its something which has become commonplace, especially under the Abe administration which prefers attacks on individuals (especially on foreigners, especially zainichi Koreans who are considered as 'foreign') but not on its administration or policies. Please check out all the legislation they rolled out limiting individual freedoms

Nigelboy: Japan can't ask for any apology or compensation for Nagasaki or Hiroshima because it was the very perpetrator of the war.

You hit me first type of childish argument.

Japan isn't asking apology nor compensation simply because it's useless.

Murayama-sans speech on the 50th anniversary was a good one & IF Japan had stuck to it & followed afterwards & shown some sincerity things might be different now.

BUT Japan didn't, ever since his speech the ldp & their ilk have denied & whitewashed constantly.

Also for those of you who were here for the 50th the LDP wasn't in power by itself then but a rag tag coalition that included Murayama-san's party the SDP.

Given the 50th anniversary was coming up the LDP ever the conniving SOBs that they are allowed an SDP member to be PM conveniently for the 50th anniversary, the thinking CLEARLY was that since the LDP didn't give THAT speech it DIDNT apply to them, this was all done on purpose back in 95.

Sure Murayama-san was aware WHY he become PM & he stepped up & delivered a good speech. The sad fact is right afterwards the LDP & a lot of others distanced themselves from the speech & have been hard at work denying & white washing EVER SINCE TO THIS VERY DAY!

And people wonder why Japan has issues with Korea & China......well DUH!!

Me thinks you haven't read the Weizsäcker statement. It's essentially "It's Hitler's fault. We suffered, too". You know very little about Germany to even make a legitimate comparison.

It seems you either haven't read the speech or didn't understand its message.

Weizsäcker is very clear about the German responsibility for the suffering of the millions of victims, but also for the German suffering itself. Even he was clearly a conservative and part of the establishment during the Nazi era, he was not at all apologetic about the German role in WW2.

Other then Abe and his revisionist fellows Weizsäcker never did any nitpicking about the German responsibility for atrocities before and during WW2. Of course there were also Germans who tried to get into details about this and that and who tried to alleviate and relativize the German responsibility, but Weizsäcker clearly dismissed such attempts.

Another really important politician who was able to change the notion other nations had about Germany was Willy Brandt who famously knelt in front of the "Warsaw Ghetto Heroes Monument", a very symbolic gesture of humility and penance by a Chancellor of Germany towards the victims of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising.

Even though Brandt had been fighting against the Nazis as a post war Chancellor he was very clear about the responsibility Germany had to bear for holocaust and WW2 and he was also able to show this in a symbolic and convincing way on the international stage.

It is difficult to directly compare the German and the Japanese situation, but it is of course possible for Japan to learn from understanding the German post-war experience, which is much more positive and forward-looking then the Japanese.

Thank you slowguy2. And a bummer to you illyas for thinking that no one is left alive from the war. There are plenty of Chinese left alive from those days--my husband for one! And he's still angry about the war! Four of his siblings are still alive also. He was in Shanghai in the 30s and 40s and saw what the Japanese were doing. They were slaughtering Chinese to make way for Japanese settlers. Some of the women who were made into sexual slaves are still alive too. Don't you think they have reason for being upset that their lives were ruined or do their lives (dwindling in number as they are) mean nothing to you for that reason? By the way, are you Japanese?

It seems you either haven't read the speech or didn't understand its message.

"Day of Liberation", "guilt or innocence of a whole people does not exist. Is to blame, as innocence, not collective, but personal.", mentioning "Hitler" five times.

Let's not forget that he has maintained his father's (a CONVICTED war criminal) innocence even in later years after his statement.

It is difficult to directly compare the German and the Japanese situation

It is. As Weizsäcker states, "..The genocide of the Jews, however, is unprecedented in history.." That we agree on.

And of course, we have different 'neighbors' which fortunately for Germany, are more developed and forward thinking which even Merkel had praised.(France, being one)

As Koizumi stated just recently, there is no need to issue an apology simply because it marks another decade.

Japan has proven themselves over the last 70 years that they have become a productive member of the international community and have abided by the pacifist direction where not a single foreign civilian has died at the hands of their SDF.

nigelboy Mar. 13, 2015 - 01:57AM JST And of course, we have different 'neighbors' which fortunately for Germany, are more developed and forward thinking which even Merkel had praised.(France, being one)

Abe and Yasukuni focus good for Japan? Every year, over 150+ of the top Japanese goverment representives visit and pray for 14 class A war criminals. You don't see German Chancellor or goverment officials visiting and praying at Nazi cementary. For some, Yasukuni issue might be more of a exaggerated politics from China, but the reality is, it continues to open the wounds from WWII. For Japan, China is a major trade partner and you cannot ignore that. Continue bad relations will eventually affects all sprectrum of the bilateral trade and some will look for alternative suppliers. Politician like Abe should not boast before having some accomplishments to show, which he has none. Japan's relationship with its neighbor, has at best been superficial. No deep, long term friendship established. Most Asian nations view Japan as a stranger. He is talking "Japan is back". Back from what and to where?

Every year, over 150+ of the top Japanese goverment representives visit and pray for 14 class A war criminals.

No. Please dispense with the dramatics.

nigelboy Mar. 13, 2015 - 04:59AM JST No. Please dispense with the dramatics.

Facts speaks for itself. Most of Japan's PM has gone to Yasukuni. Unfortunately for Japan, they are not well developed and backward thinking to improve relations with neighboring countries. Merkel is just rolling her eyes.

Facts speaks for itself. Most of Japan's PM has gone to Yasukuni. Unfortunately for Japan, they are not well developed and backward thinking to improve relations with neighboring countries. Merkel is just rolling her eyes.

No. The "fact" is China nor Korea have made an issue about them even during the times when "most of Japan's PM has gone to Yasukuni" until later. It's these types of shifting goal posts and setting a new bar is the reason why apologies isn't necessary for it's a sure guarantee that they would nitpick the words and subsequent actions. It's what they do. It's in their nature.

nigelboyMar. 13, 2015 - 06:01AM JST No. The "fact" is China nor Korea have made an issue about them even during the times when "most of Japan's PM has gone to Yasukuni" until later.

Do Japanese goverment need to be told about common sense and still don't get it? If that is the case, why is that your Emperor doesn't have to be told not to go to Yasukuni? He must be a wise man. Germans figured it out right away.

Do Japanese goverment need to be told about common sense and still don't get it? If that is the case, why is that your Emperor doesn't have to be told not to go to Yasukuni? He must be a wise man. Germans figured it out right away.

Paying respects for the war dead is universal. Emperor stopped going after 1975 due to the pressure from the Socialist Party when the debate of 'public' and 'private' came about.

Paying respects for the war dead is universal

Nope, it's not. Not when you have war criminals enshrined, and a museum nearby glorifying the IJA. Chidorigafuchi serves the purpose of remembering the war dead - Yasukuni glorifies them. Big difference

nigelboy MAR. 13, 2015 - 01:57AM JST

"Day of Liberation", "guilt or innocence of a whole people does not exist. Is to blame, as innocence, not collective, but personal.", mentioning "Hitler" five times.

Is this an attempt to analyze Weizsäcker's speech? If so I have no idea what you are trying to say with these fragmented quotes out of context.

While Weizsäcker rightly states that there is no guilt or innocence of an entire nation, he's also very clear about the importance of memory and the need of a nation to take responsibility for its past:

"The vast majority of today's population were either children then or had not been born. They cannot profess a guilt of their own for crimes that they did not commit. No discerning person can expect them to wear a penitential robe simply because they are Germans. But their forefathers have left them a grave legacy. All of us, whether guilty or not, whether old or young, must accept the past. We are all affected by its consequences and liable for it. The young and old generations must and can help each other to understand why it is vital to keep alive the memories. It is not a case of coming to terms with the past. That is not possible. It cannot be subsequently modified or made undone. However, anyone who closes his eyes to the past is blind to the present. Whoever refuses to remember the inhumanity is prone to new risks of infection."

The difference between "being directly guilty" and "taking responsibility for the wrongdoings of ones forefathers" is something apologists simply can not and don't want to understand... maybe because they are so much into to their national identity thing that they feel personally guilty if someone speaks openly about wrongdoings committed in the name of their nation in the past.

Anybody interested in the topic should read Weizsäcker's speech and judge for themselves on how to put this in relation to what Japanese state representatives say and have said: http://www.lmz-bw.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Medienbildung_MCO/fileadmin/bibliothek/weizsaecker_speech_may85/weizsaecker_speech_may85.pdf

It's these types of shifting goal posts and setting a new bar is the reason why apologies isn't necessary for it's a sure guarantee that they would nitpick the words and subsequent actions.

The world is quite aware about China becoming more belligerent and proactive in pursuing its geopolitical goals in East-Asia and that is exactly why people are worried about the nitpicking of Abe and his apologist fellows about Japans militarist past.

As other posters have made it clear before, if the LDP and Abe were clear and consistent about the Japanese responsibility for WW2 atrocities nobody would take Chinese and South Korean warnings serious and one wouldn't have to worry so much about tensions blowing up.

The only thing Abe is clear about is his apologetic view of Japans militarist history and how one views history is the clearest indicator for how one could act in the future.

Is this an attempt to analyze Weizsäcker's speech? If so I have no idea what you are trying to say with these fragmented quotes out of context.

No it does not for even mentioning "guilt or innocence of a whole people does not exist. Is to blame, as innocence, not collective, but personal." is an attempt to water down. Mentioning "Hitler" by name instead of "we" is a lame "passing the buck". Stating '..The perpetration of this crime was in the hands of a few people.." is again a attempt to absolve guilt of general population of Germany at that time. Calling "the 8th of May was a day of liberation. It liberated all of us from the inhumanity and tyranny of the National-Socialist regime." is an attempt to distancing oneself from the general population at that time.

In other words, any person who is not willing to accept an apology can nitpick these statements and come to a conclusion that it lacks honesty and sincerity.

Let's not forget his interview with Spiegel where he states "My father was tried before the wrong kind of court..." and "The sentence was neither historically, morally nor humanly just.". If this was a leader of Japan, it would surely be interpreted as "denial" and would cancel out his statement in 1985. This is a type of double standard that a person like yourself would never admit.

FM Kishida is correct.

"A simple comparison of Japan and Germany is inappropriate. The two countries differ in terms of what happened during the war, under what circumstances they engaged in post-war settlements, and which countries they have as neighbors"

In other words, any person who is not willing to accept an apology can nitpick these statements and come to a conclusion that it lacks honesty and sincerity.

So then why did his message resonate so well with former victims and enemies? Because the main message is perfectly clear.

Weizsäcker's speech was powerful because it was understood not only by liberal minds, but also by staunch conservatives inside Germany and abroad.

Weizsäcker's speech was not the strongest expression of German remorse, but one of the most widely agreed upon. His message was clear enough that victims of the German aggression could feel sincere remorse but also gentle enough for the "guilty" Germans not to shut their ears.

Weizsäcker's apologetic stance towards his father was seen critically in Germany as well, but then who is without flaws, especially regarding family business?

What Murayama and Weizsäcker have in common is both were able to empathize with the victims in a way that they could strike the right chord and get their message heard on the other side of the aisle. China and South Korea can not ignore the Murayama message and it was an important milestone in the still ongoing reconciliation process.

I'm not done.

"The vast majority of today's population were either children then or had not been born. They cannot profess a guilt of their own for crimes that they did not commit. No discerning person can expect them to wear a penitential robe simply because they are Germans"

I love this because it's essentially stating that who ever defies this is of person with low characters. The subsequent sentences essentially elevates the modern Germans as "we are so above the rest that despite there are no responsibilities to the current generation, we'll take your complaints so fire away"

He uses words like "commemorate" when he addresses the Jews, all nations who suffered in war, especially the countless citizens of the Soviet Union and Poland who lost their lives, Sinti and Romany gypsies, the homosexuals and the mentally ill, and the hostages who were executed but in the same paragraph, he uses "mourn" "our own compatriots who perished as soldiers. Is there an apology somewhere? And let's not dismiss the jab he takes towards Soviet Union shall we? "bombing crew...destroyed churches and houses in Kleve"? Or shifting the blame to "For a century, Europe has suffered under the extreme clash of extreme nationalistic aspirations".

You ask why his message resonates so well despite the fact that he has denied the legitimacy of the Nuremburg trials.

It's simply the difference in their respective neighbors. This is why I quoted FM Kishida.

You are nitpicking bits and pieces out of a context that you apparently are not able to understand in its entirety.

The reason why Weizsäcker talks about the "penitential robe" is because a majority of young Germans of the 70ies and 80ies were feeling so personally guilty for German WW2 crimes that he wanted give them some relief. Given the hands-on remorseful German attitude since the late 60ies nobody in Europe felt this was apologetic.

What you say about Weizsäcker's usage of "commemorate" and "mourn" is simply wrong:

"we mourn all the dead of the war and the tyranny" and "the women of all nations ... mourned their fallen fathers and sons"

And in the original German version Weizsäcker's uses "gedenken" for all instances. It is only in the english translation that words were exchanged for syntax reasons.

Is there an apology somewhere?

Maybe this is difficult to understand from a Japanese perspective, but at that time Germany was already far beyond the apology stage.

There had been plenty of crystal clear apologies and it was more important to show that Germans knew exactly what were the crimes, e.g. to name the crimes, and show sincere empathy with the victims of German aggression. And that is were I feel the biggest difference between Japan and Germany, while most Japanese kind of know that Japan had done something wrong during WW2, you hardly find a postwar born Japanese who can tell what exactly were the crimes of the Japanese military and it is very rare to observe any form of empathy towards to the foreign victims of Japanese war rage in Japan, while we frequently observe heartfelt sympathy for the Japanese victims (Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Yasukuni, etc.).

To say sorry is very easy, but to empathize with the victims of crimes that your forefathers have committed and understand the misery they had created is much more difficult. That is what is so clear in Weizsäcker's speech.

You ask why his message resonates so well despite the fact that he has denied the legitimacy of the Nuremburg trials. It's simply the difference in their respective neighbors. This is why I quoted FM Kishida.

You are making it yourself quite easy. There are always two in a conflict and Japan is not a clueless victim here. The difference between Germany and Japan in regards to how they deal with their past is that Germany is credible and Japan is not. Not because of upright people like Murayama, but because of apologists like Abe.

The reason why Weizsäcker talks about the "penitential robe" is because a majority of young Germans of the 70ies and 80ies were feeling so personally guilty for German WW2 crimes that he wanted give them some relief. Given the hands-on remorseful German attitude since the late 60ies nobody in Europe felt this was apologetic.

Seems like wishful thinking on your part. By distancing the current population to that of previous generation and to further blame their 'powerless' nature at that time is an excuse and nothing more.

And in the original German version Weizsäcker's uses "gedenken" for all instances. It is only in the english translation that words were exchanged for syntax reasons.

No. He uses "in Trauer" (in mourning) specifically for Germans.

There had been plenty of crystal clear apologies and it was more important to show that Germans knew exactly what were the crimes, e.g. to name the crimes, and show sincere empathy with the victims of German aggression. And that is were I feel the biggest difference between Japan and Germany, while most Japanese kind of know that Japan had done something wrong during WW2, you hardly find a postwar born Japanese who can tell what exactly were the crimes of the Japanese military and it is very rare to observe any form of empathy towards to the foreign victims of Japanese war rage in Japan, while we frequently observe heartfelt sympathy for the Japanese victims (Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Yasukuni, etc.).

Again repeating the same when even Weizsäcker through his own admission have pointed out that the Nuremburg trial was in of itself unjust. You only assume that Germany has more empathy when it's evident that the quality of neighbors accepted this ambiguous statement as well as his stance on the unjust nature of the criminal procedure.

To summarize Weizsäcker statement, it's "Hitler was bad. We were victims, too". Or more simply, "$hit happened. Let's move on cause we contributed so much" nationalistic BS.

No. He uses "in Trauer" (in mourning) specifically for Germans.

Wrong, he uses Trauer for all victims:

"Wir gedenken heute in Trauer aller Toten des Krieges und der Gewaltherrschaft."

You only assume that Germany has more empathy

So then please help us a bit... where can we find those public expressions of empathy of the Japanese society towards the foreign victims of WW2? Where are the monuments for foreign victims, where the public museums that clearly depict the Japanese atrocities and when were there any public events in Japan where empathy was expressed directly addressing the foreign victims?

The few attempts by Japanese peace museums in the 90ies to display a more balanced view and show the Japanese atrocities abroad drew fierce opposition by nationalist and mostly ended in vain.

In Germany on the other hand there are thousands of monuments for the foreign victims, hundreds of Museums where one gets a clear understanding of the German atrocities and there were numerous public occasions on which German leaders expressed their feelings of remorse directly addressing the victims of WW2.

The positive relation Germany has with its former enemies and victims now is not only the result of a hand full of tepid apologies and the payment of a lump sum, it is the result of a 50plus year long complex and difficult process. It is not by courtesy of indulgent former victims that overly welcomed the first apology attempts as you try to make it look like.

To summarize Weizsäcker statement, it's "Hitler was bad. We were victims, too". Or more simply, "$hit happened. Let's move on cause we contributed so much" nationalistic BS.

Nobody can stop you from interpreting Weizsäcker's speech in your own way, but you are surely the only one with such a reading. There have been numerous international reactions to the speech non even remotely sharing your harsh view.

Murayama's apology and expression of remorse was the first truly official and momentous attempt. It came very late, but still it was a beginning and subsequent leaders could have build up on it, unfortunately it showed up to be a rather singular event regarding its significance and it has not been backed up by a broader concept of remorse and atonement like in Germany. And Abe is now trying undo the few sincere attempts to show remorse and Murayama is right to issue a warning because he know that things can get much worse.

Wrong, he uses Trauer for all victims:

What part of "specifically" do you not understand?

So then please help us a bit... where can we find those public expressions of empathy of the Japanese society towards the foreign victims of WW2? Where are the monuments for foreign victims, where the public museums that clearly depict the Japanese atrocities and when were there any public events in Japan where empathy was expressed directly addressing the foreign victims?

As to the first question, many leaders have expressed their empathy through written statements and speeches at general sessions of another country (Korea) which followed after Japan executing bilateral treaties to address and resolve outstanding issues as a result of the war. As to your second question, I see you are again trying to equate German atrocities which is relegated to Holocaust which Japan, in any shape or form, was not part of nor conducted anything remotely resembles such crimes against humanity. As Weizsäcker stated in his speech, the Holocaust, namely ""..The genocide of the Jews..", is ".. however, is unprecedented in history.." Why is unprecedented? From a logistical standpoint, there are concentration/annihilation camps in Germany and parts of Europe. When the war was over, the said locations were no longer used. What do the locals do? They preserved it. What followed? Some became a memorial. So no. There are no memorials simply because Japanese did not conduct this type of atrocity.

Nobody can stop you from interpreting Weizsäcker's speech in your own way, but you are surely the only one with such a reading. There have been numerous international reactions to the speech non even remotely sharing your harsh view.

If you haven't got a clue yet, I doubt you'll get what I'm trying to get at. What I'm doing here is playing a devil's advocate. If any leader of Japan issues a statement similar to that of Weizsäcker speech where he waters it down by "passing the buck to Tojo", blaming certain elements of their society as opposed to a whole, make a statement where it suggest to absolve the current generation, and to take a jab at the Allies for their wrongdoing as well, I have no doubt that the naysayers will conclude what I concluded in Weizsäcker's speech.

You're even doing it despite the fact that the statement hasn't been issued yet but the position you assume Abe would take but completely ignore Weizsäcker's public stance on the rejection of the Nuremburg trial which he took to the grave. Talk about double standard.

bam_boo Mar. 17, 2015 - 07:20AM JST So then please help us a bit... where can we find those public expressions of empathy of the Japanese society towards the foreign victims of WW2? Where are the monuments for foreign victims, where the public museums that clearly depict the Japanese atrocities and when were there any public events in Japan where empathy was expressed directly addressing the foreign victims?

If you remember few year ago, two Japanese goverment officials visited Palisades Park, New Jersey, and they wanted local administrators to remove a small monument from a public park. The monument, a brass plaque on a block of stone, was dedicated in 2010 to the memory of so-called comfort women, tens of thousands of women and girls, many Korean and Chinese, who were forced into sexual slavery by Japanese soldiers during WWII. The Japanese authorities wanted Korean memorial removed. The consul general said the Japanese government was willing to plant cherry trees, donate books to the public library and do some things to show that we’re united in this world and not divided. But the offer was contingent on the memorial’s removal. The town officials rejected the request, and the delegation left.

The second delegation arrived few weeks later with four J-goverment reps. Their approach was less diplomatic. These Japanese politicians, tried and asked that the monument be removed, to convince the Palisades Park authorities that comfort women had never been forcibly conscripted as sex slaves. They said the comfort women were a lie, that they were set up by an outside agency, that they were women who were paid to come and take care of the troops. Downplaying of history still continues.

As to the first question, many leaders have expressed their empathy through written statements and speeches at general sessions of another country (Korea)

It is quite obvious that the only reason for LDP politicians to express some remorseful words was pressure on the international stage, not sympathy for the victims (there might be some exceptions in the LDP though). In the case of Murayama the way he phrased his speech makes it clear that he felt true sympathy for the victims. His speech was understandable for everybody everywhere, something you can't say for the other so called "apologies".

As to your second question, I see you are again trying to equate German atrocities which is relegated to Holocaust

Where am I equating the Holocaust to the Japanese crimes against humanity? Seems you are just trying to divert attention here.

Every atrocity and every crime against humanity should be looked at individually. What is it good for to compare or to equate atrocities or crimes against humanity?

There are no memorials simply because Japanese did not conduct this type of atrocity.

So only certain types of atrocities deserve memorials? Why?

Btw there are numerous memorials in Germany that are for other victims then Jews and not focussed on the Holocaust. For an overview: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Gedenkst%C3%A4tten_f%C3%BCr_die_Opfer_des_Nationalsozialismus#Deutschland

It is not a question of Holocaust or not, but of how a nation faces its wrongdoings against other nations.

Could you just name me one important official memorial for foreign victims of Japanese atrocities and crimes against humanity? Just one publicly visible official expression of heartfelt empathy for the 20plus million civilian victims of Japanese war rage?

And what about the "peace" museums in Japan, do they give a balanced view of Japanese atrocities and crimes during WW2? Usually they show only how much the Japanese had to suffer and how brave the Japanese military was. Except maybe for the Osaka Peace museum which was aggressively attacked by ultra nationalist in the 1990ies for displaying some timid hints at Japanese atrocities.

As sfjp330 points out the Japanese officials even try to eliminate memorial abroad that could cast a bad light on Japan.

This and many other comportments show us that Japanese society did not squarely face what it had done in WW2. There were sincere attempts, but then there are places like the Yushukan that even glorify the Japanese atrocities, something unthinkable in Germany.

Nobody can force Japan to properly atone for what it did in WW2, but if Japan feels it did something wrong it should take care that this message gets through to the victims of its actions even this requires a bit of symbolism and endurance.

If any leader of Japan issues a statement similar to that of Weizsäcker speech where he waters it down by "passing the buck to Tojo", blaming certain elements of their society as opposed to a whole,

Nobody who heard the speech thought that Weizsäcker was passing on the buck. This is only you misunderstanding of his words.

It is quite obvious that the only reason for LDP politicians to express some remorseful words was pressure on the international stage, not sympathy for the victims (there might be some exceptions in the LDP though).

As if that wasn't the factor for Germany as well. My god your double standards are simple amazing.

Every atrocity and every crime against humanity should be looked at individually. What is it good for to compare or to equate atrocities or crimes against humanity?

They are viewed 'individually'. But the scale of the "Holocaust' is unprecedented.

Btw there are numerous memorials in Germany that are for other victims then Jews and not focussed on the Holocaust. For an overview: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Gedenkst%C3%A4tten_f%C3%BCr_die_Opfer_des_Nationalsozialismus#Deutschland

Are you trying to help my argument? What I saw on your link basically confirms Weizsäcker point that " the Holocaust, namely ""..The genocide of the Jews..", is ".. however, is unprecedented in history.." where memorials are set up by foreign countries as far as Argentina (set up by Jews who settled various parts of the world after the war, perhaps?) Like I said, concentration/annihilation/labor camps set up by Germans throughout Europe including Germany which in turn became a memorial of some sorts. No need for Germany to set up "important official memorial for foreign victims" for the foreign countries appears build them themselves.

And what about the "peace" museums in Japan, do they give a balanced view of Japanese atrocities and crimes during WW2? Usually they show only how much the Japanese had to suffer and how brave the Japanese military was. Except maybe for the Osaka Peace museum which was aggressively attacked by ultra nationalist in the 1990ies for displaying some timid hints at Japanese atrocities.

That's like asking the Ground Zero museum in NY to give a 'balanced view of U.S. crimes' which lead to the terrorist attack.

As sfjp330 points out the Japanese officials even try to eliminate memorial abroad that could cast a bad light on Japan.

They asked for the removal of the plaque since the narrative is factually incorrect.

"In memory of the more than 200,000 women and girls who were abducted by the armed forces of the government of Imperial Japan 1930s - 1945 known as comfort women, .."

Nobody can force Japan to properly atone for what it did in WW2, but if Japan feels it did something wrong it should take care that this message gets through to the victims of its actions even this requires a bit of symbolism and endurance.

It did. Even Abe had stated that he and his cabinet would abide by your precious "Murayama statement" but has it stopped? No. So again, I revert to the Kishida statement.

Nobody who heard the speech thought that Weizsäcker was passing on the buck. This is only you misunderstanding of his words.

Please read what I wrote previously which is that anybody with an agenda can misconstrue a statement and interpret them as insincere if they choose to do so.