EAI Fellows Program Working Paper Series No. 16

Abstract

Historical disputes are central to current relations among Northeast Asian nations and promoting historical reconciliation will be critical not only to ensuring regional peace and security but also protecting American interests in this important region. The primary aim of the article is to explore whether the U.S. has any role to play in the process of historical reconciliation in Northeast Asia. After reviewing past attempts at historical reconciliation, it is argued that the U.S. is not an outsider nor free of responsibility for the history problem in the region and that it can play a constructive role in facilitating regional reconciliation.

Author

Gi-Wook Shin, Director of Asia-Pacific Research Center and Professor of Sociology, Stanford University

This paper was submitted to "EAI Fellows Program on Peace, Governance, and Development in East Asia" supported by the Henry Luce Foundation based in New York. All papers are available only through the online database.

It is now well known that over the last fifteen years Northeast Asia has witnessed growing intra-regional exchanges and interactions, especially in the realms of culture and economy. China has become the number one trading partner of South Korea, and Chinese products constitute the largest share of Japanese imports. Reflecting such economic exchanges,there has been a marked increase in the number of Northeast Asian people traveling to other nations within the region. There are growing numbers of Chinese students studying in Japan, and Korean films and dramas have been popular in China and Japan. China, Japan, and South Korea are active participants in regional institutions such as ASEAN Plus Three and the East Asian Summit, which often excludes the United States.

Yet wounds from past wrongs—committed in times of colonialism and war—are not fully healed and have become highly contentious “diplomatic” issues. All nations in theregion have some sense of victimization and often blame others, rather than taking responsibility. Anti-Japanese sentiments seem undiminished in China and Korea, even among the younger generation with no direct experience of colonialism or war. The Japanese suffer from “apology fatigue,” questioning why they must continue to repent for events that took place six or seven decades ago. Ironically, increased regional interaction has not diminished but rather intensified disputes and contention over the past.

According to a 2006 survey, Chinese listed their top four reasons for unfavorable views of Japan, as related to history issues: the most often selected was the Nanjing massacre (42.19%) followed by historical issues (19.76%), denial of historical crimes (15.62%), and visits to the Yasukuni shrine (10.19%). More than half of the respondents (54.78%) said that the difficulties of Sino-Japanese relations should be resolved by addressing “historical issues first.” Another survey of Koreans conducted in 2005 shows that 93% of the respondents said that “unresolved historical issues are very important or somewhat important to Korea-Japan relations.” Japanese largely concur with Chinese and Koreans in their view of the importance of resolving historical issues as a way to improve their relations with China and Korea.

As with many other cases around the world, reconciliation between countries in Northeast Asia first occurred between governments. Japan established diplomatic rapprochement with countries it had once invaded or colonized: with the Republic of China in 1952, with the Republic of Korea in 1965, and with the People’s Republic of China in 1972. The ROK also normalized its relations with former enemies, the PRC and Russia, in the early 1990s, and inter-Korean relations have improved significantly in the last decade. Yet, reconciliation in Northeast Asia has been “thin” since these nations have failed to come to terms with the past. Japan paid no reparations to its former colonies—though it gave “grants and aid” to South Korea for normalizing their relations. China and Korea were excluded from the San Francisco Treaty that settled Japanese war crimes and atrocities. Historical issues such as war responsibilities, disputed territories, and Japan’s colonial rule and crimes against humanity were largely overlooked in the Cold War system.

The question of history has now become a central one across Northeast Asia. It is not simply about what has happened in the past but touches upon the most sensitive issues of national identity, including the formation of historical memories and national myths that have a powerful role to play. Whether it is Japanese atrocities in China or the American decision to drop atomic weapons on Japan, no nation is immune from the charge that it has formed a less-than-complete view of the past. And all nations, sharing a reluctance to fully confront the complexity of that past, tend to blame others...(Continued)