The US Speaks Up on Yasukuni Issue

lexico

後輩
Joined
22 Dec 2004
Messages
2,584
Reaction score
155
It appeared that the US Administration and legislators preferred to stay neutral by keeping silence on Northeast Asia's historical controversies such as the Yasukuni visits, but not any more. Since PM Koizumi's trip to the shrine on the 17th 10 am, TST, the silence was broken. Within 15 hrs 15 mins from PM Koizumi's visit this year, the US State Department prepared a firm stand on the PM's visit, and made it public same day. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack briefed reporters in a briefing;
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
Monday, October 17, 2005
12:15 p.m. EDT

Briefer: Sean McCormack, Spokesman

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

QUESTION: Japanese Foreign Minister Koizumi visited Japanese shrine again, and Chinese and South Korean angry and very concerned that -- concerned already of the effect on upcoming APEC summit. So are you concerned?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, first and foremost, I think that we would hope that countries in the region could work together to resolve their concerns over history in an amicable way and through dialogue. I think that everybody understands the history here. I think that everybody understands some of the sensitivities and concerns in the region. And we would just hope that those with concerns about this issue could work together with the Japanese Government to resolve any of those concerns through the use of dialogue and in the spirit of friendship.

Yes.

QUESTION: I want to follow up. Whenever the Japanese Prime Minister visit the Yasukuni Shrine, then the Chinese Government or South Korean Government complain to Japanese Government very much, I guess because they are afraid of revival of Japanese militarism. Is the U.S. Government concerned about revival of Japanese militarism?

MR. MCCORMACK: Again, I think that I'll leave it to other countries to describe the particular reasons for their concern. I think that we -- it's well known, the history. We understand the basis for these concerns. And I'd leave it to others to describe what in particular those are.

I think that we all share an interest in good relations among the countries of the region and that we would hope that in light of that that they could work through any concerns that they might have through dialogue, through negotiation, through respectful dialogue.

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

QUESTION: Sean, the Chinese are working a deal with Australia on mining uranium and obviously it's for export to China. Have you spoken to either government and are you assured that this would just not be exported and then enriched?

MR. MCCORMACK: Right. I'm not aware of those reports. I haven't seen them, Joel.

Okay. Yes, ma'am.

QUESTION: All right.

MR. MCCORMACK: Okay. Yes, ma'am.

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

(The briefing was concluded at 12:45 p.m.)
http://hongkong.usconsulate.gov/uscn/state/db/2005/1017.htm
 
One might state that "communist" China just wants to keep Japan's defenses
down and is trying to accuse Japan of attempts to remilitarize and the visiting
of this Shrine by a Prime Minister as a symbol of remilitarization,

however,
S Korea also has been complaining so the above argument does not hold water.


Have other gov'ts in the region said anyting?
Indonesia? Burma? the Phillipines? East Timor?
 
Thanks for the thread.

Hm... I may have missed something, but to me, McCormack seemed frustratingly vague and skirty around the issues. Has he no backbone? I understand he has to be careful with his words, but his words betrayed a lack of certainty.

Anyway, despite his vagueness, the concern of the reporters was obvious.
 
All Political !

You know anything this administration has to say is like the footprints Caine(Kung Fu) left on the rice paper.

Frank

😊
 
lastmagi said:
Thanks for the thread.

Hm... I may have missed something, but to me, McCormack seemed frustratingly vague and skirty around the issues. Has he no backbone? I understand he has to be careful with his words, but his words betrayed a lack of certainty.

Anyway, despite his vagueness, the concern of the reporters was obvious.

Finally, Lastmagi you and I agree on one issue ! Lexicon don't make this out to be some big issue because its not. The U.S. is not speaking up nor out on this issue , YOU ARE , that's it !
 
Taiwan Foreign Ministry Spokesman Michel Lu Criticizes Koizumi, "Learn Your Lesson."

AFP said:
Koizumi Rejects Asian Neighbours' Objections to War Shine Visit

Taiwan on Monday urged Japan to "face history" after Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi made another controversial visit to a Tokyo war shrine.

"We hope the prime minister will not forget about the past lessons and see the future from a forward-looking perspective," said foreign ministry spokesman Michel Lu (Qing Long).

He called on Japan to "face history" and help maintain regional stability and world peace.

"With its economic power Japan can contribute a great deal to the world community," he said.

In another development, a Taiwanese indigenous lawmaker condemned Koizumi's latest visit to the shrine and vowed to stage protests.

"Koizumi defied Japan's peace constitution," said lawmaker Kao-Chin Su-mei, who helped organize protests in Japan earlier this year.

"We condemn his visit and our (counter) actions will not stop," she said.

Koizumi made another controversial visit on Monday to Yasukuni shrine that critics say glorifies Japan's past militarism, infuriating South Korea and risking damage to already strained relations with China.

The shrine honors 2.5 million Japanese war dead, including some infamous war criminals. Some 28,000 Taiwanese names -- about 10,000 of them being those of indigenous Taiwanese forced to join the Japanese military -- are listed at the shrine. Taiwan was a Japanese colony from 1895 to 1945.

Indigenous activists have repeatedly demanded that names of the soldiers from the island be removed.
This shows that ex-President of ROC on Taiwan, Li Teng Hui's support for Koizumi's Yasukuni visit was unofficial as ROC's Spokesperson announced in the briefing.

The Independent, International Edition
 
Last edited:
Criticism from Australia

The Australian said:
PM Has Poisoned Dregs of Regional Goodwill

IF he had hoped the neighbourhood would cut him any slack in response to his purposefully low-key visit to the Yasukuni war shrine, Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi was quickly disabused.

South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun is likely to cancel his December visit to Tokyo. China has apparently cancelled a visit to Beijing by Japanese Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura and the Japanese can expect a drizzle of criticism from the rest of East Asia. It was predictable and disappointing.

Though he has only ever half-kept his original promise to visit Yasukuni every August 15, Koizumi has shown himself to be too fond of his own domestic reputation for "sincerity" to cut his Government free of Yasukuni's poisonous symbolism to the rest of the region. The shrine honours Japan's war dead, including some infamous war criminals.

He had the chance. In the wake of his sweeping election victory on September 11 and with only another year of his term to serve, Koizumi could have repudiated his Yasukuni promise and offered China and South Korea a new start to their tortured political relationships with their former oppressor.

Instead, he's given Roh and the Chinese leadership fresh cause to sit out the remainder of the Koizumi era.

He risks a further souring of the mood in all three countries, in the hope that the Liberal Democratic Party selects a more accommodating leader next time.

There's also a temptation for Beijing to make things more difficult in the meantime, to remind Tokyo of the potential costs of choosing another Koizumi-style nationalist -- Shinzo Abe, say. The Japanese will be watching closely over the next few days for any evidence of anti-Japanese unrest in China.

Any political benefit Koizumi gained from his Yasukuni undertaking has long since dissipated. But the costs to his country continue to mount.
Australians have not forgotten history either, and what it means for the present and the future, for an entity is the sum of its deeds.

The Austalian
 
lexico said:
It appeared that the US Administration and legislators preferred to stay neutral by keeping silence on Northeast Asia's historical controversies such as the Yasukuni visits, but not any more. Since PM Koizumi's trip to the shrine on the 17th 10 am, TST, the silence was broken. Within 15 hrs 15 mins from PM Koizumi's visit this year, the US State Department prepared a firm stand on the PM's visit, and made it public same day. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack briefed reporters in a briefing;http://hongkong.usconsulate.gov/uscn/state/db/2005/1017.htm

Sean McCormack said, essentially, nothing whatsoever about the matter. That was as neat a job of ducking and dodging as you'll ever see.
 
lastmagi said:
Thanks for the thread.

Hm... I may have missed something, but to me, McCormack seemed frustratingly vague and skirty around the issues. Has he no backbone? I understand he has to be careful with his words, but his words betrayed a lack of certainty.

That's because, as a spokesman, it is his job to go out and explain positions, not create them. Backbone has nothing to do with it.
 
As has been pointed out the Emperor has not even visited
there recently.

ツ・Emperor Hirohito had visited Yasukuni eight times after the war, but he stopped that after his last visit in Nov. 1975.
Yasukuni Shrine and other controversial topics.

The Class A war criminals were placed there in '78

Surely the act of not visiting by a traditional Japanese icon
since then would also be a sign of disaproval.
 
NYT: Shrine Visit a Calculated Affront to Descendants of Japanese War Crime Victims

NYT Editorial said:
Pointless Provocation in Tokyo

Fresh from an election that showcased him as a modernizing reformer, Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi of Japan has now made a point of publicly embracing the worst traditions of Japanese militarism. Yesterday he made a nationally televised visit to a memorial in central Tokyo called the Yasukuni Shrine. But Yasukuni is not merely a memorial to Japan's 2.5 million war dead. The shrine and its accompanying museum promote an unapologetic view of Japan's atrocity-scarred rampages through Korea, much of China and Southeast Asia during the first few decades of the 20th century. Among those memorialized and worshiped as deities in an annual festival beginning this week are 14 Class A war criminals who were tried, convicted and executed.

The shrine visit is a calculated affront to the descendants of those victimized by Japanese war crimes, as the leaders of China, Taiwan, South Korea and Singapore quickly made clear. Mr. Koizumi clearly knew what he was doing. He has now visited the shrine in each of the last four years, brushing aside repeated protests by Asian diplomats and, this time, an adverse judgment from a Japanese court.

No one realistically worries about today's Japan re-embarking on the road of imperial conquest. But Japan, Asia's richest, most economically powerful and technologically advanced nation, is shedding some of the military and foreign policy restraints it has observed for the past 60 years.

This is exactly the wrong time to be stirring up nightmare memories among the neighbors. Such provocations seem particularly gratuitous in an era that has seen an economically booming China become Japan's most critical economic partner and its biggest geopolitical challenge.

Mr. Koizumi's shrine visits draw praise from the right-wing nationalists who form a significant component of his Liberal Democratic Party. Instead of appeasing this group, Mr. Koizumi needs to face them down, just as he successfully faced down the party reactionaries who opposed his postal privatization plan. It is time for Japan to face up to its history in the 20th century so that it can move honorably into the 21st.
Mr. Koizumi might do well by taking heed to some common sense coming from the generous benefactor to which Japan owes a debt in more than one way.

NYT Editorials/Op-Ed. October 18, 2005
 
Last edited:
mikecash said:
That's because, as a spokesman, it is his job to go out and explain positions, not create them. Backbone has nothing to do with it.

Sean McCormack said, essentially, nothing whatsoever about the matter. That was as neat a job of ducking and dodging as you'll ever see.

You're right. What I meant was that he seemed to even have a hard time explaining the position, whatever it was. (I'm a bit unclear where I made it sound like otherwise? Maybe saying no backbone was the wrong phrase...)


McTojo said:
Finally, Lastmagi you and I agree on one issue ! Lexicon don't make this out to be some big issue because its not. The U.S. is not speaking up nor out on this issue , YOU ARE , that's it !

Don't put words in my mouth. McCormack seemed dodgy, which is more or less the given of politicians and spokespeople anyway. But the reporters certainly seemed concerned about the repercussions of Koizumi's visit. And if the majority of posts on the matter are any indication, you can probably guess what a good number of Westerners feel.

edit: and the NYT article adds even more criticism, too. Anyone with half a brain would understand that Koizumi is doing a Very Irresponsible Thing.

Say, don't you reject what the West say, anyway?
 
lastmagi said:
You're right. What I meant was that he seemed to even have a hard time explaining the position, whatever it was. (I'm a bit unclear where I made it sound like otherwise? Maybe saying no backbone was the wrong phrase...)

I think the clear answer is that there is no position on the matter, hence the display of talking without saying anything.
 
Harvard Prof. Ezra Vogel: Koizumi's Jeopardising Visit

I apologise for the misleading title, US Speaks Up; it should have been "US Spokesperson under Media Pressure to Take a Stand." You are right, Mike; the spokesperson only revealed that the US government is still hesitant to take a firm stand, still watching out for the tiny interests, oblivious of long-term interest based on trust and soft diplomacy. To make up for the fiasco, let me offer an article from 11 months ago.
IHT/Asahi shimbun said:
A Partnership in Review: EAST ASIAN PERIL: Fragile ties
By MANABU HARA, Senior Staff Writer

Tensions between Japan and China are more dangerous than Washington realizes. This is the 22nd in a series of interviews examining Japan-U.S. ties and their implications.

Ezra Vogel, a Harvard professor and prominent expert on Japan and China, believes the key issue in East Asia centers on increased dialogue between Japan, the United States and China over such issues as North Korea and the relationship with China.

Vogel also suggests that Japan should train its future leaders for the new era in the same way Shokason-juku, a private school at the end of the Edo Period (1603-1867), educated young samurai to lead the country.

Q: Now that President George W. Bush has been re-elected, do you think the influence of the neoconservatives will increase ?

A: The early appointments Bush made for his second term suggest that he is more concerned with gaining tight control than with whether appointees are neoconservative or cosmopolitan. It is understandable that a president confronted with limitless complex issues should interpret his re-election as a mandate to try for tighter coordination. The danger is that, with a narrower circle of loyalists, Bush will again make errors like invading Iraq and allowing national budget deficits to explode. It is therefore all the more important for concerned Americans to rely on one of our nation's great strengths, our vibrant civil society, to help make up for our government's limitation.

'Koizumi's visits to Yasukuni Shrine make it impossible for Chinese leaders to come to Japan.'

Q: What is your overall view of the current political relationship between Japan and the United States ?

A: At the government-to-government level, the political relationship is good, partly due to Tokyo's close cooperation with Washington on such issues as the U.S.-led war against Iraq. The Bush administration also has talented officials, such as Richard Armitage, James Kelly and Michael Green, who understand Japan very well.

But a good relationship depends on public opinion in the long run, and the Japanese people are critical of the government's stance toward Washington. So, we need to see action that the public on both sides can support in order to maintain a good relationship in the long run.

Q: What might have happened if Japan had refused the U.S. request for cooperation in Iraq? How can they sustain a solid, long-term relationship ?

A: Japan's refusal would have complicated the relationship. This could have created more friction between the two countries.

But I think that in the end we would maintain the alliance because we need an alliance with Tokyo, and Japan needs an alliance with Washington as well. So, if Japanese diplomats had carefully explained that the Japanese public does not support the dispatch of Self-Defense Forces to Iraq and found other ways to contribute to global security, the United States would still continue to support the U.S.-Japan alliance because it is in the interest of the United States as well as Japan.

When I was in the government during the Clinton administration as National Intelligence Officer for East Asia (1993-1995), (former Assistant Secretary of Defense) Joseph Nye and I were concerned about how to sustain a solid relationship between the two countries after the Cold War era. Our view was that the two countries should maintain a strong alliance to contribute to global stability, with the United States continuing to defend Japan from attack.

Q: What do you think of Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi ? Can you compare him to other Japanese prime ministers ?

A: Prime Minister Koizumi is very skillful at dealing with the public. He is very good at sound bites when he faces the camera. He is sensitive to public criticism of old-style politics and appeals to public criticism of crony politics. Paradoxically, this has enabled him and his party to gain enough public support to keep in power many of those he's been critical of.

If you compare him, for example, to former Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone, there is a striking difference between them. While Nakasone was a very good strategist and knew what was necessary for Japan, Koizumi does not think primarily in broad strategic terms.

Koizumi is now pursuing a very dangerous policy with China. Beijing's leaders are ready to move closer to Tokyo if Tokyo takes steps that allow Beijing to gain public support for warmer relations. But Koizumi's visits to Yasukuni Shrine make it impossible for Chinese leaders to come to Japan. His stance may win short-range approval, but the consequences for peace and stability in Asia are very serious.

Suspending his visits to the shrine would put Japan in a strong position to demand that China also review its textbooks and education programs to show the progress toward peace achieved in Japan after World War II. Japan after all invaded China in World War II, and it is unrealistic to expect China to take the big steps necessary to break the vicious cycle between the two countries, which is now becoming very dangerous.

Q: Do you think that Washington regards Koizumi's stance toward China as problematic for the United States as well? What should Japan and the United States do in East Asia now ?

A: I doubt that most Washington policy-makers are fully aware of the danger of heightened Sino-Japanese tension. Washington policy-makers are preoccupied with terrorism and nonproliferation, and few are making the broad constructive efforts to help create the better world that forms for many of us the basis of our patriotism. I hope that we will once again accept responsibility for our place in the world, which has given us pride in our country.

Washington no longer thinks in broad global terms or takes a long-term perspective. A heightening of tension between China and Japan would dwarf some of the intense but much smaller-scale ethnic conflicts around the world. The United States should encourage Japan to have a good relationship with China.

But the most important thing in East Asia is that Japan, the United States and China should increase discussions on such issues as North Korea and the relationship with China. Furthermore, China, Japan and the United States need to meet with South Koreans and Russians to begin discussing the Korean Peninsula problem from a long-term perspective.

Q: What are the weaknesses in Japanese and U.S. societies in terms of contributing to the global community ?

A: American people supported Bush because they want to feel safer, but the majority of Americans are now so focused on our own domestic issues that we do not do enough to play a constructive role in dealing with global issues like the environment and peace and stability around the globe. People in Washington do not pay enough attention to the importance of world opinion. The question should be not only ``How many terrorists have we killed?'' but ``How many new ones are we creating?'' This means that at the grass-roots level people are not getting enough education to understand how much the United States depends on the rest of the world.

As for Japan, it must better prepare its people for the ever increasing speed of globalization. As the world becomes smaller, Japan is hindered by the poor English skills of many of its people. Furthermore, Japan needs to give more attention to its overall goals and to do a better job of training top leaders.

In the years just after World War II, then Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida molded leaders from bureaucrats-turned-politicians (including former Prime Minister Eisaku Sato), who thought of the country as a whole. Even further back, the Choshu clan in western Japan had a Shokason-juku (a small private school founded by Yoshida Shoin, an ideologue from the end of the Edo Period who educated young samurai to lead their country into the new era). Japan needs to have the same kind of training for the new era. Profile

Born in 1930 in Ohio, Vogel received his Ph.D. in 1958 from Harvard University, where he taught from 1967 to 2000. He is now a research professor at the Asia Center at Harvard. His book, "Japan as Number One," remains one of the best-selling books in Japan ever written by a Western author.(IHT/Asahi: November 22,2004)
I hope this somewhat makes up for the bad title of the thread opener.

A Partnership in Review: EAST ASIAN PERIL: Fragile ties
 
Last edited:
Dear Lexicon

Before you start appealing to pity and fear read this very interesting article:

KimSoft ⋆ Korea Web Weekly, actualidad y más

Before you start making broad sweeping generalizations of Japanese war criminals look at the traitors first ! It's a pity how Japan accepts all the blame for what happened during WW2.

Next time you should frame your argument like this "Japan & her accomplices commit some of the worst atrocities in asia."
 
Back
Top Bottom