Murayama Statement

With this statement, Japan acknowledged for the first time that their military was directly or indirectly involved in the military-run brothels and used coercion to make the comfort women provide sex to the Japanese soldiers.

[3] The drafting of the document was a process involving much conflict over wording and expressions, for example with the LDP's rejection of unilateral incrimination of Japan against the Socialists feeling that ambiguity in the statement would greatly detract from its significance.

Now, upon this historic occasion of the 50th anniversary of the war's end, we should bear in mind that we must look into the past to learn from the lessons of history, and ensure that we do not stray from the path to the peace and prosperity of human society in the future.

In the hope that no such mistake be made in the future, I regard, in a spirit of humility, these irrefutable facts of history, and express here once again my feelings of deep remorse and state my heartfelt apology.

Although some were concerned over indiscretions such as by Yoshinobu Shimamura, and feared that Murayama's apology may not necessarily hold if more conservative prime ministers followed to lead Japan.

However, many were encouraged when Emperor Akihito spoke in a ritual said that marked the anniversary to reinforce Murayama's apology and expressed deep remorse for Japan's actions as well as mourning for those who suffered in the battlefield.

[6] Although the statement was met with general approval from the Japanese public who said they believed expressions of remorse were long overdue, some were cautious of Murayama's words.

[7] The perceptions of the South Koreans grew suspicious about the credibility of the statement as the means of reconciliation were not ensured in concrete measures, neither did they feel that it was met.

[12] Visits to Yasukuni Shrine by Junichiro Koizumi during his time in office (April 26, 2001 - September 26, 2006) and retracting statements by PM Shinzo Abe have continued the negative sentiments among the South Korean public.

[13] A survey conducted by the Asian Institute for Policy Studies in 2012 shows that the South Korean public are unaware of the Murayama Statement and misunderstood it to be related to the Dokdo-Takeshima Island dispute.

[15] In a statement released by People's Daily, Murayama emphasized the two nations' linguistic and cultural similarities, insisting that China and Japan develop a strong bond.

[16] Although some Western nations such as Australia showed warmth and welcome towards the first explicit apology for Japan's imperialist and war time actions, other Asian countries such as Singapore and Malaysia expressed similar reactions to China and South Korea.

[17] However, in contrast to China and South Korea, Japan seems to have achieved a fair level of reconciliation with Taiwan and other Southeast Asian nations through the statement, that seem to have developed a "Forgive, but never forget" attitude.

Katsuya Okada, leader of the opposition Democratic Party of Japan, severely criticized Abe’s approach, saying that the prime minister’s remarks calling colonial rule and aggression ‘bits and pieces’ could not be tolerated, and that the original statement had already received strong international recognition.

[22] Kenji Eda, leader of Ishin no To (Japanese Innovation Party), warned Abe against altering the wording of the Murayama statement, saying doing so would “send a different message to neighboring countries”.

Japanese Communist Party chairman Kazuo Shii also urged Abe to retain key aspects of the Murayama Statement and take appropriate action.

[22] Abe delivered his statement on August 14, 2015, on the 70th anniversary of Japan's defeat in World War II, causing much controversy especially in China and South Korea.

China's state media criticized Abe's remarks as refraining from offering his own apology, this being agreed on by both the official broadcaster CCTV and Xinhua News Agency.

[25] South Korea criticized it as "disappointing", followed by comments from other Asian states as well, for example Taiwan calling on the Japanese government to examine its wartime aggression and learn the lessons of history.

The new version of the Q&A is also criticized for playing down Abe's revisionist position on war related issues in order to facilitate the passage of the upcoming changes in the controversial security legislation.