Germany offers Japan lessons in history
Eric Teo Chu CheowChina Daily  Updated: 2005-12-01 06:14

Germany and Japan have come to the fore recently in their differing approaches and successes in integrating themselves into their respective regions.

Russian President Vladimir Putin's recent visit to Tokyo to meet Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi not only failed to produce concrete results on the issue of the four disputed islands, but more importantly, underscored the fundamental differences which still divide the former World War II enemies, despite calls for greater trade between them.

However, Japan's greatest challenge will come from deteriorating Sino-Japanese relations.

Nowhere will this be more obvious than at the upcoming East Asia Summit in mid-December in Kuala Lumpur, when 16 Asian leaders historically gather to try to launch a new community of sorts. But, Koizumi will not be meeting face to face with his Chinese counterpart, Premier Wen Jiabao, in Kuala Lumpur, just as Chinese President Hu Jintao had earlier refused to accede to a bilateral meeting with Koizumi, after his most recent (and fifth since coming to power) visit to the Yasukuni Shrine in mid-October; Beijing (as well as Seoul and Pyongyang) believes no high-level Japanese officials should officially visit or worship there.

At a time when Asia seeks to organize itself, the leaders of the two most powerful Asian giants, China and Japan, cannot even sit down together to talk.

The Germans have accepted history and their atrocious role, and France has accepted and put this history in the past, whereas Japan is still grappling with its own World War II past, with China and its other immediate neighbours not accepting post-war Japan, thanks to its clumsy inability to atone for its war atrocities.

But fundamental differences between Japan and Germany abound in their approaches and successes in regional integration. Three factors demonstrate this.

First, although both were defeated nations after the war, Germany was divided and had to live with this geo-political "shame" for more than 40 years till 1991, whereas Japan, after direct US administration, was returned to full sovereignty and has since functioned as a nation, albeit with a "pacifist constitution."

Japan seeks to break out of this "pacifist" past, via an important constitutional amendment of revising Article 9, and with Tokyo's Self-Defence Forces being "rehabilitated" to perform overseas military missions as well.

Japan's priority today thus seems to be to a "return to normalcy," just as Germany's over-riding priority has always been the reunification of the motherland, two different perspectives on socio-political importance and priorities.

Second, Japan has in history never been fully integrated with its Asian hinterland, being an island, whereas Germany has always been at the heart of European history, economics and social development. In fact, it is very telling that Japan had never been effectively occupied before 1945, which has convinced many Japanese of the "divine isles" concept, and contributed to the rise of nationalism and the belief in Tokyo's splendid isolation and invincibility.

On the other hand, Germany has been embroiled in numerous conflicts on the European Continent since ancient times, such as Charlemagne and the Roman Empire. However, being at the heart of Europe, Germans have had to form alliances and partnerships to deal with varying threats and opportunities in European history, right through two world wars and the Cold War.

Third, the approaches taken by German and Japanese leaders contrast as well. Germany has been "involved" directly in the European construction process in parallel with the bilateral entente (as contained in the 1963 Elysees Accords) after Germany apologized for its Nazi past and atrocities. In 1991, French President Francois Mitterrand was faced with a tough decision to accept and embrace a much stronger Germany, which could have altered the fundamentals of the Franco-German axis; but Mitterrand realistically did so, based on German atonement, as well as Germany's unambiguous integration into Europe.

Japan's approach has been historically different, as it had always focused its development on the West, first on Europe with the Meiji Restoration and then on the post-war United States, right through today. Japanese leaders have always premised the modernization of its society on the Western model and seen Asia as backward and unpromising; the "US first, Asia second" maiden speech of Foreign Minister Taro Aso was clearly in this same perspective. Tokyo's economic linkages with Asia have grown tremendously, but Japan's mindset and fascination is still resolutely fixed on the West.

The author is a council member of the Singapore Institute for International Affairs

(China Daily 12/01/2005 page4)

Close