Compromises, not denunciations, are the art of politics

Is the raison d`etre of South Korea`s National Assembly to denounce Japan? Although it often condemns Japan, I could not help being surprised to hear that the South Korean parliament on May 12 simultaneously approved two resolutions that fiercely denounced Japan, just a month before the 50th anniversary of the two neighbors` normalization of diplomatic ties.

One of the targets was Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe`s speech to a joint session of U.S. Congress in late April. One resolution denounced him for having failed to repent of Japan`s past aggression and wartime sex slavery. Another criticized that Japan`s Meiji industrial revolution sites applying for UNESCO World Heritage listing included facilities where many Koreans toiled under forced labor during the colonial period.

It is understandable that South Koreans could feel discontent and displeased. However, are both issues serious enough for the South Korean parliament to denounce? The word "gyutan (denounce)" is used when one condemns other`s faults or wrongdoings as if piercing him or her with a bullet. It is an expression of the strongest condemnation.

Although I, too, felt sorry for Abe`s speech, it was for the United States. In the speech, Abe did say, "Our actions brought suffering to the peoples in Asian countries. We must not avert our eyes from that." Considering that many U.S. lawmakers welcomed the remark and gave a great applause, would it not be discourteous even to the United States for other country`s parliament to denounce it in a resolution? Moreover, only a hostile country would denounce another state`s prime minister by citing his name.

At a time when Japan`s industrial revolution sites were about to be listed as UNESCO World Heritage sites, many Japanese citizens felt as if they had been hit by a bullet when the South Korean legislature strongly condemned the facilities. Many Japanese people would have sympathized if the South Korean parliament had cool-headedly assessed the industrial sites while emphasizing their compatriots` hardships there and requested that the historical facts be added to the World Heritage descriptions.

However, the South Korean parliament relentlessly denounced both. I am worried that such behavior might turn even friendly Japanese citizens anti-Korean.

Why does the South Korean National Assembly expose emotions so much? Then, it occurred to me that Park Cheol-hee, director of Institute for Japanese Studies at Seoul National University, had compared husband-wife quarrels in the two countries.

His theory goes that in Japan, a husband and his wife who do not get along would never let others see or hear them quarreling until they break up quietly. Korean couples would not mind yelling at each other in front of others but hug, cry and reconcile when there is a proper opportunity. Koreans argue with raised voice because they still care about each other, and this should not be misunderstood, he claimed.

In fact, this theory appears in my recent book of dialogue with South Korean intellectuals.

Then, can we say that the latest resolutions are an expression of affection? Japanese people would immediately endure a severe criticism from another person, but the grudge would last long.

Speaking of South Korea, Seoul is seeking World Heritage listing of sex slavery documents. Such an intentional attempt to list Japan`s shame as a World Cultural Heritage discomforts many Japanese citizens who hope that the issue is resolved.

Anyways, Seoul and Tokyo need to have the political wisdom to make a determination to disentangle the intricate thread, be it the sex slavery issue or World Heritage listings.

Therefore, I would like to introduce another dialogue from my aforementioned book. It is with Choi Sang-ryong, an emeritus professor at Korea University. He was once asked by Dr. Edwin Reischauer, a former U.S. ambassador to Japan who helped Seoul-Tokyo negotiations 50 years ago, about compromise. When Choi replied, "It is an art to integration," Reischauer was content.

Later, Choi accompanied former South Korean President Kim Dae-jung`s visit to Japan and was involved in a bilateral joint declaration on apology and reconciliation. Choi also calls the 1965 Korea-Japan Basic Treaty a result of compromise born after the hardships of the time.

We should not disparage compromises. Even a child can denounce someone. Compromises reached in the midst of high ideals and difficult realities are the art of politics.

(Written by Yoshibumi Wakamiya, senior fellow of Japan Center for International Exchange and former chief editor of the Asahi Shimbun)