Ban shouldn’t hit Abe’s views: Suga


Staff Writer

Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga rebuffed criticism by U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon over Japan’s revisionist views of its wartime history and also said it is doubtful that Ban takes seriously Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s repeated calls for summits with Beijing and Seoul.

Ban on Monday criticized Tokyo’s revisionist views on Japan’s wartime history, apparently siding with his native South Korea.

Ban said at a news conference in Seoul that he believes Japanese leaders need to reflect greatly on the past, gain insight and vision in order to look forward.

His criticism was an apparent response to Abe’s position not to fully support the 1995 war apology statement by then-Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama that had acknowledged that Japan had waged a war of aggression. It is the position of both Beijing and Seoul that Tokyo had committed acts of aggression.

Tokyo will ask Ban what he meant by his comments, Suga said on behalf of Abe.

He added: “Abe has repeatedly said he is open for dialogue, even though there are issues to be solved with China and South Korea.”

Suga also said Tokyo will continue to explain its historical stance to the international community, including the United Nations. Abe is scheduled to attend the U.N. General Assembly in New York next month.

When asked about historical issues concerning Japan, South Korea and China, former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan in 2006 remained neutral, only urging the stakeholders to overcome discrepancies about their past so they could improve their relations with each other.

Asked Monday about Ban’s comments, Abe, in Kuwait on a six-day visit to the Middle East, repeated his stance that top-level communication is indispensable to maintaining peace and stability in East Asia.

However, since Abe took office last December after the Liberal Democratic Party’s election win, Beijing and Seoul have rejected offers to hold summits, saying Abe has to change his views on history.

  • Revelation

    While I believe Ban Kimoon should keep his ties to Korea out of this as he represents the UN and not solely Korea, he is right to state that Japan should acknowledge their WWII past, accept it, and move forward from there instead of attempting to revitalize Imperial Japan. Plus, for Japan to require clarification on what Ban meant is ridiculous- they know EXACTLY what he meant; there is no need for detailing.
    So, if Abe sincerely wants to hold talks with anyone, the Japanese government better sincerely rethink their stance first.

  • JANG HUN Joo

    Would you please be fair for all situation and fact?
    Don’t try to be only same side stance. Anybody can say the truth.

  • It is for Abe to deserve rejection from South Korea, since he doesn’t pay respect at all toward Nation South Korea and Korean people including residents in Japan, letting a racist demo alone, not tending to correct his racist supporters ugly attitude, even always tolerating them, trying to justify the past supposedly including what his grandfather commited.
    It is Abe who keeps rejecting to have a talk with China, because they only require “to admit an existence of the territorial dispute” then he responded it as “Making a term with holding a summit is nothing but bullying”, this is a solely fact.
    And Japan has breached a promise before he condemned China “bullying us”.
    Maybe we’re going and going to be alone and isolated and get next jingo and defeated again, no future.
    He has ranted on the last day of previous campaign, that “Let’s get back our honor again now!” in the very center of the people wagging Hinomaru, I wonder why he never explained what his honor is meant to be, or if it was taken by someone or some party.
    Apparently, and presumedly, his precious honor means that being hawky or perky toward Asian neighbors, beside flattering US to obey anything they require, and getting eager to sell something to abroad even nuclear merchandise, thus I don’t understand why it means an honor of Japan, or whether which was existed or taken in the first place.
    My kind of Japanese honor is just lying on where we’re getting loved by Asian neighbors.

  • yas

    Generaly, the UN has to be neutral, to avoid unfair jugement.

    Because it degrade UN’s authority, and decrease power to keep peaceful.

  • bwprager123

    “His criticism was an apparent response to Abe’s position not to fully
    support the 1995 war apology statement by then-Prime Minister Tomiichi
    Murayama that had acknowledged that Japan had waged a war of aggression.
    It is the position of both Beijing and Seoul that Tokyo had committed
    acts of aggression.”

    Statements like this lead more and more inescapably to the conclusion that the Japan Times is making a mockery of the concept of news coverage. The “position” that “Tokyo committed acts of aggression” is not in dispute anywhere on planet Earth aside from the radical rightist imaginations of pretending-to-be-deaf Japanese right-wing politicians. To characterize this as merely the political “position” of “both Beijing and Seoul” is a thoroughly dishonest representation, linked to the exaggerated “victor’s justice” myth that undergirds the LDP/ Japanese state ideology today. Japanese aggression and its horrid consequences are universally known and understood worldwide.The Japanese disavowal of its modern history makes Japan itself appear foolish, immature, and self-deluded in others’ eyes, and does nothing positive for the positive regard of Japan.
    Within Japan, an official Japanese school/ media/ government alliance that virtually no one believes is representing this truthfully has been allowed to occupy a central place in creating the Japanese imaginary today. It may assist the corrupt in bullying the public and seeking private profit to themselves, but based on lies, it cannot last. What can’t go on forever, doesn’t.
    Just to be clear about this, the USA’s propping up of the LDP over the years has contributed greatly to this never ending Cold War view of the world. Japanese would do well to reject it.