This year, S. Korea with a more muted response to Japanese history textbooks

Posted on : 2016-03-19 20:56 KST Modified on : 2019-10-19 20:29 KST
Due to comfort women agreement with Japan, Seoul “laments” but doesn’t denounce Japan’s claims to Dokdo
Hideo Suzuki
Hideo Suzuki

The South Korean government has made an extremely muted response to Japan’s distorted textbooks. One example is the government’s choice of the word “lament,” which strongly implies a personal sense of regret, rather than “protest” or “denounce,” which directly express opposition to the other party.

Experts are attributing this approach to the settlement that Seoul and Tokyo reached on Dec. 28 about the so-called comfort women for the Imperial Japanese Army. This clearly reflects the wishes of the government and the Blue House, which are prioritizing cooperation with the US and Japan on the North Korean nuclear issue, experts say.

The statement released by the spokesperson for South Korea’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Mar. 18 is different in tone from the “firm response” that the South Korean government made to Japan’s distortions in history textbooks until last year.

While the government’s position about Japan’s “illegitimate claim to Korea’s sovereign territory of Dokdo” remained the same, it only “strongly lamented” Japan’s approval of textbooks that included this claim and called for Japan to correct them immediately.

The word “lament” expresses personal sorrow and regret, but it is does not communicate a sense of opposition.

When Japan announced the results of its high school textbook assessment in 2013, by contrast, a statement by the spokesperson of the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs made clear that it “strongly protested” the textbooks and called for a “fundamental correction.” The statement pulled no punches, declaring that “he who shuts his eyes to the past cannot see the future.”

When Japan completed its assessment of elementary school textbooks in 2014, the government used the expression “strongly denounce,” which implies finding fault and taking someone to task, and forcefully criticized Japan for “being unable to abandon its imperialistic ambitions.”

Though Seoul’s response to Japan’s publication of the results of its middle school textbook assessment last year was milder, it still described the assessment as “a provocation.”

Seoul’s tame response was foreshadowed by the Dec. 28 settlement. The government has clung to its position that the “final and irreversible resolution” of the comfort women issue was a diplomatic achievement.

The fact that the Foreign Ministry spokesperson’s statement called on Japan to correct the textbook distortions while urging it to “show its efforts to open up a new era in South Korea-Japan relations through sincere action” is also in line with these trends.

Since the government is placing the highest priority on sanctions diplomacy against North Korea, it is more concerned with cooperating with the US and Japan than on calling Japan out for historical issues.

Indeed, in an address to a session of high-ranking officials on the UN Human Rights Council at the beginning of this month, South Korean Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se made no mention of the issue of the comfort women, marking a break with past years.

The government’s response also can be seen as groundwork for proceeding with the next phase of the Dec. 28 agreement after South Korea’s parliamentary elections on Apr. 13.

The Japanese media reported recently that South Korea and Japan are planning for bureau chief-level officials in their two Foreign Ministries to meet within this month to discuss what measures should be taken following the Dec. 28 settlement. This will be the first meeting to be held on the comfort women issue since the agreement was reached in December of last year.

Furthermore, there is reportedly a high probability of a trilateral summit among the leaders of South Korea, the US and Japan taking place during the Nuclear Security Summit, which will be held in Washington, D.C., at the end of this month.

“This muted response was made because the South Korean government is trying to avoid a confrontation with Japan. The government and the Blue House have not only defined the Dec. 28 agreement as a diplomatic achievement, but they are also emphasizing sanctions against North Korea. Given their need to maintain cooperation with the US and Japan, they believe there is no reason to sow the seeds of conflict with Japan,” said Yang Gi-ho, a professor at Sungkonghoe University.

By Kim Jin-cheol, staff reporter

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]

button that move to original korean article (클릭시 원문으로 이동하는 버튼)

Related stories

Most viewed articles