作者 英国前驻日大使修·科塔兹（Hugh Cortazzi）2013年1月16日 The Japan Times
Japanese ministers should be aware that going back on the Murayama apology not only would offend Japan's neighbors in Northeast Asia (China and Korea) but also would outrage opinion elsewhere in Asia where many people suffered under Japanese occupation. It would in addition arouse anti-Japanese sentiment in Western countries including Britain.
Most of Japan's former prisoners of war who suffered so much, as in the Bataan death march and the building of the Burma-Siam railway have passed away, but their families and friends have not forgotten their sufferings.
Friends of Japan in the West and many Japanese have put great efforts into fostering reconciliation and mutual understanding. Rescinding the Murayama statement would cause a serious setback to these efforts.
The nationalists in the Japanese Cabinet are also reported to want to re-inspire patriotism in Japanese youth. Patriotism is not necessarily wrong, although it always reminds me of the famous saying of Dr. Samuel Johnson, the 18th-century English lexicographer, that "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." He was critical of the unthinking people who shout "my country right or wrong."
Japanese should, of course, know more of their culture including the wonders of Japanese art and the masterpieces of Japanese literature. They should also learn about Japanese history in the pre-modern as well as in the 20th century. The Heian court and the merchant civilization of the Edo Period are fascinating and worthy of study by Japanese and by foreigners.
Japanese need to understand not only how Japan developed after the re-opening to the West in 1858 but also why what has been called Taisho democracy failed with the rise of Japanese militarism.
International history is complex and we must beware of sweeping judgments, but the image that some Japanese nationalists attempt to draw of Japan as a victim rather than an aggressor is not in accord with the facts. The attack on Pearl Harbor was no more a defensive action by Japan than were Japanese military actions in Manchuria and China. Japanese attacks on the British and the Dutch in Southeast Asia were not based on anti-colonialism but on the Japanese wish to get hold of natural resources, particularly oil.
The argument that the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 made Japan the victim and atoned for Japanese aggression ignores so many facts. Japanese were certainly victims, but they were victims of their own evil and misguided rulers.
If the Japanese government as a whole had recognized, as former Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe did, in January 1945 that Japan could not win and had sued for peace, the air raids on Japanese cities, which killed so many Japanese citizens and nearly destroyed the country, might have been avoided.
No one can deny the importance or value of Confucian ethics as major factors in the history of Japan, but it seems to many of us who have studied Japanese history that Japanese have often placed too great an emphasis on loyalty making it the supreme virtue. Loyalty cannot reasonably be used as an excuse for dishonesty or mistakes in government or in business as it sometimes seems to be used, such as in the attempt to cover up the recent Olympus scandal.
It is also reported that Education Minister Hakubun Shimomura wants to "annul" the verdicts of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE) held between 1946 and 1948, thus rehabilitating such war criminals as Gen. Hideki Tojo.
Criticisms can be made of the way in which the IMTFE conducted these trials and some of the decisions made by the court can be justifiably questioned, such as the guilty verdict and sentence on politician and diplomat Shigemitsu Mamoru, who had opposed the war, but the evidence over war crimes committed by members of Japanese forces overseas was overwhelming.
The argument that other countries have also committed war crimes and their leader have not been punished and tried is not a reason to try to overturn these verdicts. No one should condone war crimes, no matter who commits them or where they occur.
The Japanese government have no legal right to annul these decisions and any unilateral attempt to do so would attract international condemnation and scorn.
Fortunately Shimomura and his rightwing nationalist colleagues are unlikely to stay in their posts for long except in the unlikely event that the Japanese habit of reshuffling ministerial posts to give jobs "for the boys" on the kawari-banko(taking turns) principle has been discarded.
The image of Japan conveyed by the unwise ranting of Japanese nationalists is bad for Japan's international prestige and can only harm Japan's relations with their friends. Japanese ministers who pay official visits to Yasukuni Shrine may think that it attracts votes at home.
Foreigners do not have votes in Japanese elections, but Japanese national interests can be impaired in other ways. Japan seeks foreign investment and foreign visitors. For the moment I hope that neither will be put off by a few rightwing nationalists who are not in my assessment representative of general Japanese public opinion. Japanese politicians are understandably sensitive to criticism but are not always themselves sensitive to the feelings of their friends or conscious of the negative impact made by their nationalist rhetoric.
Japan will always remain an island, but it cannot isolate itself as it did at one time from the rest of the world. To survive and prosper Japan needs to participate in international trade without being encumbered with isolationist ultra-nationalists. Like horses in blinders, they are unable to see beyond their noses.
They do not seem to recognize that Japanese national interests make it necessary for Japan to play a positive role in international affairs and that the narrow- minded intolerance of nationalism damages Japan's prospects.
Hugh Cortazzi served as Britain's ambassador to Japan from 1980-1984.
安倍晋三首相已经任命了内阁，而据媒体报道，内阁中有不少想改写20世纪历史的大臣。报道说，他们，包括新任文部科学大臣，要求废除前首相村山富市1995年发表的对日本在亚洲的暴行表示悔恨的讲话。
日本大臣们应该明白，背弃村山的道歉不仅会触怒日本的东北亚邻国（中国和韩国），也将在曾被日本占领的亚洲其他地区激起众怒，此外还会在包括英国在内的西方国家引发反日情绪。
描绘成受害者不符合事实
曾被日本俘虏的战俘，比如经历过巴丹死亡行军和修筑过缅甸—暹罗铁路的，吃尽了苦头，其中多数已经作古，但是他们的亲友不会忘记他们经受的苦难。
日本的西方朋友以及很多日本人做出了很大努力来促成和解和相互谅解。背弃村山的讲话将对这些努力造成严重阻碍。
日本内阁中的民族主义者据报道也想激发日本青年人的爱国热情。爱国热情不一定错，不过这总是让我想到18世纪词典编撰者塞缪尔·约翰逊博士的一句名言：“爱国主义是恶棍的最后避难所。”
当然，日本人应该更多了解自己的文化，包括日本艺术精品和日本文学杰作。他们还应该了解现代之前和20世纪的日本历史。平安王朝以及江户时代的商业文明令人神往，值得日本人和外国人学习。
日本人既需要了解日本在1858年重新向西方开放后是如何发展的，也需要知道所谓大正民主随着日本军国主义崛起而失败的原因。
国际历史很复杂，我们必须注意形形色色的看法，但是日本一些民族主义者试图将日本描绘成受害者而非侵略者，这是不符合事实的。日本偷袭珍珠港与它在中国的军事行动一样，都不是防御行动。日本在东南亚攻击英国人和荷兰人，不是基于反殖民主义，而是基于它想抢夺自然资源，尤其是石油。
有人认为1945年对广岛和长崎丢原子弹使日本成为受害者，为日本侵略罪行赎了罪。这种看法忽视了诸多事实。日本人当然是受害者，但他们是自食其果，是误入歧途的统治者的受害者。
1945年1月份，整个日本政府如果像前首相近卫文麿那样认识到日本不可能取得胜利而求和，日本城市可能就会避免遭到空袭。空袭造成很多日本人丧生，几乎摧毁了整个国家。
执迷不悟会损害日本前途
谁都不能否认作为日本历史中主要因素的儒家思想的重要性或价值，但是在研究过日本历史的很多人看来，似乎日本人往往太看重忠实，将其视为最重要的品德。忠实不能理直气壮地用作政府或企业不讲诚信或犯错误的借口，尽管它有时似乎被这样用过，比如高人试图掩盖最近爆出的奥林巴斯丑闻。
还有报道说，文部科学大臣下村博文想要宣布远东国际军事法庭1946—1948年做出的裁决“无效”，从而给东条英机之流的战犯恢复名誉。
可以对远东国际军事法庭的审判方式提出批评，也可以对该法庭做出的某些裁决，比如对反对战争的政治家和外交家重光葵做出有罪裁定并判刑，提出合理质疑，但是日本军人在国外犯下战争罪的证据是不容置疑的。
有论调称其他国家也犯有战争罪而其领导人并没有受到惩罚和审判。这不是推翻那些裁决的理由。战争罪是不可宽恕的，不管谁犯了战争罪，也不管战争罪发生在哪里。
日本政府没有合法权利宣布那些裁决无效，而单方面去那样做只会受到国际社会的谴责和蔑视。
所幸下村及其右翼民族主义同僚们在其权位上不可能待很长时间，除非日本改组政府让“年轻人”轮流担任大臣的惯例被摒弃，而这是不可能的。
日本民族主义者不明智的叫嚣所呈现的日本形象对日本的国际声望是不好的，只会损害日本与盟友们的关系。
外国人在日本的选举中没有投票权，但是日本的国家利益在其他方面可能受到损害。日本政治人物对批评敏感是可以理解的，但是他们自己对朋友们的感受并不总是敏感的，或意识不到他们的民族主义论调造成的负面影响。
日本将永远是一个岛国，但是它不能像过去一度与世隔绝那样将自己孤立起来。为了生存和繁荣，日本需要不受孤立主义者和极端孤立主义者的牵绊而参与国际贸易。
他们似乎没有认识到，日本的国家利益使之有必要在国际事务中发挥积极作用，心胸狭窄、执迷不悟的民族主义会损害日本的前途。
