The Marmot’s Hole

Perhaps unsurprisingly, President Roh Moo-hyun took aim at Japan in his March 1 Independence Movement address, calling on Tokyo to “respect globally accepted principles of conscientious behavior.” From the Korea Times:

“Leaders of the two nations pledged efforts to go in a reconciliatory and harmonious way last year. But Japan has changed little in the way it viewed its past,” Roh said, citing the unsettled disputes over the sovereignty of the Dokdo islets in the East Sea and distortions in Japanese history textbooks.
If Japan wants to become a leading country in the world, it must first win over the trust of the international community by respecting globally accepted principles of conscientious behavior, prior to building up its military power, the president emphasized in his strongly-worded speech delivered during a ceremony held at the Sejong Center for the Performing Arts in central Seoul.
He added Japan should follow the way Germany dealt with its wartime history in order to be a true member of the world community.

So sayeth the president.
The Japanese government, meanwhile, shot back by telling Seoul to “take a look at the path Japan has walked for the last 60 years.” Prime Minister Koizumi Junichiro said he believed in friendly Korea-Japan ties, while Chief Cabinet Secretary Abe Shinzo told Roh to fuck off called on Roh to “look squarely on Japan, which protects freedom, democracy and human rights and is working to bring about world peace.” Abe also said it was in both nations’ interests to develop Korean-Japanese ties into a future-oriented relationship.
Interestingly enough, Japanese newspapers noted that Roh’s rhetoric was not quite as fiery as it was last March 1. I’ll let you be the judge of that: here’s the full text of this year’s March 1 address, and here is the one from 2005.
Roh also noted government efforts to “clarify our history to uncover truth as a prerequisite to forgiveness and reconciliation.” Said Roh:

To be able to urge the neighboring countries with a clear conscience that erroneous historical records be corrected, we must rectify any inaccuracy in our own history. The process of clarifying our history that we are undertaking now should be understood in this context and should proceed with this prospect in mind.

He followed this up with more of the “public outcry of the entire nation with one voice” spiel that makes me wonder whether the government’s intention is to “uncover the truth” of construct new ways of avoiding it.