This blog was first posted in Asia Times.
Japan’s Prime Minister Abe
got a belated Christmas present from South Korea—some might say the exceptional
deal of seven decades since the end of WWII—when the Korean government
agreed to formally end any further reference to the sexual slavery Japan
enforced on the Korean women during WWII.
Thus, the book on the suffering of the Korean people in the hands of
Japan’s imperial troops during the War and 30 years of brutal occupation before
the War can be closed and the two countries can look ahead.
South Korea’s president Park
accepted a verbal apology from Abe by telephone with the specific proviso that
there would be no formal documentation of the apology in print that would
benefit the posterity. The apology was accompanied by one billion yen
compensation taken from Japan’s government budget, which because it did not
come from private donations, was to pass as an official and formal apology. The
disposition of the one billion yen was vague and not specifically designated as
compensation to the surviving victims of Japan’s sexual slavery.
Japan did require that the
statue commemorating the suffering of Korean comfort women be removed from its
present location in front of the Japanese embassy in Seoul. So, I suppose part
of the billion yen could be used to relocate the statue so that Japan need not
face daily reminders of their shameful past.
Some quarters in Japan
praised Abe for his courage in “breaking” with the past. Other supporters
belonging to the right wing of the LDP were incensed that Abe made any sort of
concession at all and suggested that only seppuku can expiate Abe’s disgrace.
Promptly the day after the
agreement with South Korea was announced, Abe’s wife went to the controversial
Yasukuni Shrine to pay her respects to the tablets memorializing the war
criminals. She even posted selfies of her visit to make sure her appeasement to
the right on behalf of her husband did not go unnoticed.
So much for the supposed
sincerity of Japan’s apology.
According to various polls, the
people of South Korea like Abe even less than they like the North Korea leader,
Kim Jong-un. The puzzle then is why President Park so quickly came to terms
with Abe. As recently as last November she was not willing to meet Abe much
less discuss the conditions that would lead to the agreement. The only logical
answer is that she felt heavy pressure from Washington.
Getting South Korea to
forgive and forget about the sexual slavery issue might be a diplomatic win for
Abe but is an even more important development for Obama. According to his
worldview, Obama needed a solid alliance in northeast Asia as part of his pivot
to Asia. However, whether the tie between
South Korea and Japan can withstand facing China remains to be seen.
Not that China is likely to
challenge the link up based on military force. But as Asia Times reported on “China hits India where it hurts,” China builds its international ties with economic
inducements. The piece was referring to China’s development with Nepal, “…so as
to achieve mutual benefits, win-win results and
common development, and elevate the long-lasting and friendly China-Nepal
comprehensive cooperative partnership to new levels”.
China’s approach with Nepal is
typical of China’s diplomacy with any country—namely, butter in the form of
mutually beneficial economic advantages rather than guns. This approach as
applied to South Korea has meant bilateral relations of ever-closer economic
ties and increasing frequency of cultural and people exchanges.
Two years before South Korea
concluded the Free Trade Agreement with China (in 2015), the bilateral trade
with China already exceeded the total trade South Korea had with the U.S. and
Japan, their No. 2 and 3 partners in trade. With the large volume of trade, it
made sense for the two countries to enter into currency swap agreements so that
the trade transactions can be settled in their respective local currency and
by-pass the need to pay in dollars. In Korea today, the renminbi has become the
only currency other than the dollar that is freely convertible into the won.
About 40% of all the foreign
students studying in China come from South Korea, more than from any other
country. Second only to the “American Dream,” the “China Dream” has become an
appealing career option for many young aspiring Koreans that did not go to America
to study.
In light of S. Korea’s
“lopsided” (according to Foreign Affairs)
economic dependence with China, the Obama administration should consider
whether South Korea would act against its own self-interest and side with Japan
on any dispute between Japan and China.
Since Obama “won” the Nobel
Peace Prize even before he was sworn into his first term, his foreign policy
decisions were on many occasions mistaken because he chose the inferior fork on
the road. Deciding to rely on Japan, as an ally to counter China, is one of
these.
While most Americans are
willing to forgive and forget Japan for its WWII atrocities—in truth, many are unaware
of Japan’s dark past—people of Asia are unwilling to let Japan off the hook.
Abe’s latest apology was a case in point. When Park announced the settlement,
the people in Korea rose up on behalf of the surviving “comfort women” and
strenuously objected on the grounds that Abe’s apology lacked sincerity, was deliberately
vague and did not treat the victims with respect and dignity.
Japan’s response has been to
complain that repeated apology has never been enough. After each apology, the
critics find fault and demand another. Japanese officials would ask why Japan couldn’t
be treated like Germany and not be subjected constant badgering for another
apology. But the critics’ response has been that unlike Japan, the German’s
apology was official and formal and they have always been ready to admit their
collective guilt and never attempted to deny, recant or revise their history with
the Jews.
After the Abe/Park agreement,
the Korean American Forum of California (KAFC) also vigorously objected.
One important objection raised by KAFC was that Abe’s apology needed to apply
to victims of 11 nations and not just to the women of Korea. Thus, far from putting
the history of WWII to bed, the people of Asia and anybody of conscience will
not let Japan forget.
For Obama to pick Japan as an ally is to stand on the wrong side
of history. It’s an undeniable fact that America has not always taken the
principled high road. But to let Japan erase its past in the interest of
expediency and perceived geopolitical advantage is to let the world know that
the U.S. supports and condones heinous acts against humanity and could care
less about the feelings of the people in Asia.
Obama has encouraged Abe to re-interpret Japan’s constitution
and take on a more militarily aggressive stance. But surely a nation that will
deny its past can’t be trusted to behave with honor in the future. Let’s hope
Obama and the American people won’t have to rue the day Japan was encouraged to
take up their sword again.
