Chung Min Lee
{
"authors": [
"Chung Min Lee"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "AP",
"programs": [
"Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"East Asia",
"China",
"Japan"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Security"
]
}Source: Getty
Shinzo Abe’s Duty to History
A Japan that won’t come to terms with history undermines regional reconciliation.
Source: Wall Street Journal
All eyes in Asia are on Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe as he prepares to address a joint session of the U.S. Congress on April 29. This year being the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II, what historical message will Mr. Abe choose to deliver?
He has roughly three options: admit the horrible wrongdoings of Japan’s military regime before and during World War II; stress a kind of moral equivalence between Japan and the U.S., as Tokyo started the war by attacking Pearl Harbor but Washington ended it by dropping two atomic bombs; or highlight Japan’s postwar history as a model democracy, America’s best friend in Asia and the region’s biggest contributor to economic development.
If Mr. Abe’s previous comments and actions are a guide, he will likely choose the second and third options, which reflect the narrative that most Japanese prefer. Mr. Abe has said that Japan must never go back to its imperialist past, but he has also stressed the solemn duty of honoring Japanese soldiers killed in World War II.Yet if Mr. Abe continues to whitewash and ignore Japan’s wartime atrocities—including sexual slavery and grotesque medical experiments on live prisoners, including Americans—then Japan will lose its claim to being a postwar beacon of democracy, human rights and dignity.
Many Americans feel uneasy, if not fatigued, by the constant Chinese and South Korean focus on history. Yes, they say, Japan made terrible mistakes during the war, but that was 70 years ago and it’s time to move on. Besides, all countries have dark chapters in their histories, and China is hardly an exception. Japan has been a responsible major power since 1945, is one of the largest contributors to the United Nations and stands with the U.S. on virtually all the important issues. South Korea’s wounds are understandable, but a fellow democracy and major U.S. ally should have the courage to look beyond historical grievances.
Such assertions miss a central point: Japan’s benign postwar record doesn’t erase what came before. The still-mighty yen can buy many things, but it can’t buy the collective memory of Asians or even Americans.
Mr. Abe’s revisionism works against U.S. strategic interests—including President Obama’s signature pivot to Asia—because a Japan that won’t come to terms with history undermines regional reconciliation and provides China with its best excuse for growing its military. A Japan that denies history also raises China’s international profile and feeds a perception that China’s official voice is in harmony with the rest of Asia’s.
Amid China’s rise, ensuring security and stability in Asia isn’t just about maintaining effective deterrence and defense. It also requires strengthening Asian democracies and building up soft-power assets such as respect for human rights, civil liberties and historical reconciliation.
No matter how much Japan contributes to the U.S.-Japan alliance or overseas development assistance, a Japanese leader who is moved to tears by a hit movie on the sacrifices made by kamikaze pilots in World War II, or who disputes that 300,000 innocents were butchered in the 1937 Nanjing Massacre, can never win the hearts and minds of fellow Asians.
Mr. Abe may believe that winning hearts and minds isn’t nearly as important as turning Japan into an “unsinkable aircraft carrier.” But if that’s the exclusive message he wishes to convey to the U.S. Congress, he will forsake a golden opportunity to showcase Japan as an indispensable U.S. ally, a responsible counterpart vis-à-vis China and, most importantly, a friend to the rest of Asia.
About the Author
Senior Fellow, Asia Program
Chung Min Lee is a senior fellow in Carnegie’s Asia Program. He is an expert on Korean and Northeast Asian security, defense, intelligence, and crisis management.
- Are Long-Term NATO–South Korea Defense Ties Possible? Transitioning From an Arms Exporter to a Trusted Defense PartnerPaper
- President Lee Jae Myung and the Resetting of Korea, Inc.Article
Chung Min Lee
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Trump and Xi Are Angling for Three Years of StabilityCommentary
But their "principal to principal" model will only be as effective as the political strength of each leader back home.
Damien Ma
- China’s Police and Security Cooperation AgreementsPaper
China’s Ministry of Public Security is often portrayed as a domestic law enforcement agency, but it is also a global security actor. This paper explores how MPS has used international law enforcement and security cooperation agreements—over 200 since 2006—to advance China’s vision of security in a changing global environment.
Sophie Zhuang, Sheena Chestnut Greitens, Cameron Waltz
- Europe Should Not Let Nuclear Nonproliferation DieCommentary
Amid uncertainty caused by the Iran war, the global drive for nonproliferation has stalled. With Europe diplomatically marginalized and countries reassessing their nuclear options, efforts to curb the spread of nuclear weapons risk becoming irrelevant.
Jane Darby Menton
- Post U.S.-China Summit: Managed InstabilityCommentary
The U.S.-China Summit produced a welcome commitment to build a constructive, strategically stable relationship. However, the United States has a full agenda, including the USMCA review beginning this week, that will likely target Chinese practices of concern. If China views these efforts as inconsistent with the agreements reached in Beijing, it may slow or halt progress in response.
Barbara Weisel
- Can Europe Compete with the United States and China?Commentary
Between the United States’ market-driven approach and China's state-led industrial strategy, Europe is reckoning with how it can remain competitive in the global economy. But is Europe in danger of becoming a U.S. or China colony?
Noah Barkin, Anu Bradford