One hundred years ago Sunday, Emperor Gojong of the Joseon Kingdom issued a royal edict promulgating the nation’s annexation to Japan. Koreans have since called August 29, 1910 ``National Humiliation Day,” which formally started 35 years of forced occupation and one of the harshest colonial rules in world history. It was the saddest day for Koreans at least over the past century ― and still is for too many of them.
There were some ostensible developments on its centenary this year. For the first time ever, the Japanese government admitted the forceful nature of the merger, and promised to return some historical documents and cultural artifacts taken from Korea during the colonial days.
But Tokyo neither owned up to the illegality of the annexation treaty nor declared it null and void, as called for by thousands of intellectuals from both countries in May. It also fell short of mentioning the millions of Koreans forced to toil under or even have sex with the imperial army before and during World War II, and how to compensate them.
The ruling Democratic Party of Japan came under attack from opposition parties for even the meager mea culpa act, largely similar to previous ones. Japanese conservatives say how long they should continue to apologize. We say just once is enough ― provided it is accompanied by the actions mentioned above. The two countries could have put their disputes over historical past to an end long time ago, had Japan found the conscience and courage to do so.
So President Lee Myung-bak was right to call for Tokyo to show more actions than words. Unfortunately, it was almost the only correct act he made concerning the bilateral relationship on this significant year.
In his address on Liberation Day two weeks ago, Lee reiterated his trademark dictum, ``Let’s make the past a stepping-stone to move toward future.” The problem is, not a few Japanese seem to translate this as a call for burying the past. To avoid such misunderstanding, the Korean leader should have made clear Seoul’s pledge to settle historical problems, and make detailed demands, or at least principles, Tokyo should accept if it is serious in opening a new era of cooperation in this part of the world.
Lee didn’t, and instead spent much of his address on rebuking North Korea, little more than another eventual byproduct of colonization. It is apparent the President thinks the present and future are more important than the past. Yet he needs to listen to historians who compare a nation that fails to settle historical problems to a house of cards ― fundamentally and spiritually ― however developed it might appear ostensibly and physically.
After all, he was the leader who stunned his own people by asking why Korea should not forgive Japan, as it has done so to pro-Japan collaborators at home. The President thus showed his inability to differentiate between steps for national reconciliation and the need for diplomatic clearing-up. Lee’s invitation to the Japanese emperor to visit ― turned down by Tokyo’s prudence ― should also have been made after Japan acknowledges the annexation’s unlawfulness and makes commonsense compensation to surviving comfort women and forced laborers.
In 1951 when the two countries held their first talks since Korea’s liberation, Korean chief delegate Yang Yu-chan said, ``Let’s forget old enmity and reconcile with each other.” ``Reconcile for what?” was the reply from his Japanese counterpart.
The two countries have come a long way since then. Given what their establishments are doing now, they will have to go an even longer way. And the price for not being able ― or willing ― to put the specter of the 20th century behind them will be borne by their people.