謝罪 is the most common word you use to say that “Person X did not give an apology” in Japanese but not the word to say “I apologize”

In other words, there is nothing strange in the Yomiuri article…except I am emphasizing that they are much different in emphasis than Asashi. Yomiuri is playing to the nationalist opinion by emphasizing China’s responsibility and the recent damage to the embassy, and Asahi is trying to take a more balanced approach by suggesting that the Japanese government is also at fault.

You can’t (or it would sound really strange) to say the “there is a demand for a government owabi” when talking about “an apology”

When you ACTUALLY do the apology, say the apology, give the apology – you don’t usually every use the word “shazai” and other terms, like “owabi” are much more appropriate. You don’t usually ever say, “I give my shazai to you” which is possible, but kinda weird. You can say, “I offer my owabi” or “I have no wake to môshi to you”

When Yomiuri demands an apology, the word used is “shazai” – but it is silly to think that Yomiuri wants the Chinese government to actually use the word “shazai” in the statement. That would be weird in Chinese too! Ok? Do we all understand now? Shazai has a particular kind of usage and it isn’t usually found (that I know of, I’m happy to be corrected) in any actual apologies. Search for yourself in the thousands of cases of company presidents apologizing for scandals and offering their deepest shazai and you won’t find them actually saying “shazai” in the apology itself… You will find descriptions saying, “There was a demand for a shazai” but when he actually speaks, it is not the word “shazai” he uses, ok?! Apology in English is actually multiple words in Japanese, and in Chinese! For example, just as apologize might be translated into Chinese as 道歉, in Chinese it is usually used as a verb, but not as often as a noun (if ever) – it is different from English where we use it often for both…ok? There are differences between usages in languages….

Anyway, Yomiuri demanded “shazai,” and not “owabi” in spite of it’s possibly sounding weird. Why? It’s not like the Chinese government ran over their dog, put their kids in a wheelchair, or especially, killed anybody, among the few situations where such strong language would be warranted. Why demand something you would in fact never consent to yourself?

The world, unforunate to Japan, is changing. China, for the first time in the past 200 hundreds, really struggles to be a powerful country; Korean enjoyed unprecedented economic and cultural achievement after asian crisis.

Only Germany approach can work if Japan wants to live and spread real influence (not $) in the region. Now, Japan is still seen as the polticial puppet of American and has never enjoyed real ‘independence’ after American occupation in 1952. We can’t only dispatch the peace force to Iraq, with the support of America. We can declare ‘Taiwan strait’ as a strategic region only in a Japan-American joint statement.

The underlying reason is that: we, except money, anime and sony, are not popular in Asia. While I can easily name sincere allies on Chinese sides, I can’t name any on Japanese sides. The foreign affair strategy must be changed.

Part of the ridiculous nature of this apology issue:
1) It assumes that some organic community called “Japan” or the “Japanese” are somehow still collectively “guilty” of the atrocities of some of its soldiers two generations ago. – when you overcome a nationalist perspective and deconstruct such organic communities this becomes somewhat ridiculous. Also, the guilt for such crimes can’t pass across generations, although a good argument (similar to that of Takahashi Tetsuya if I remember correctly) can be made to say that we all have a responsibility to “not forget” atrocities of the past (the dayuejin/great leap forward with its millions of dead or the many thousands killed by the guomindang in ’27 ranking right up there with the other atrocities of the 20th century such as the rampant killing and rape of non-combatants by Japanese soldiers in China) This bizarre idea that guilt crosses generations is partly why anti-semitism has often been justified, presumably because of their “crimes” during biblical days against the Christian messiah. Once you overcome this tired old category of the nation, there is no more (but also no less!) reason to dwell on the horrible crimes of Japanese soldiers, than of China’s government against its own people or of any other kind throughout history…

2) This “apology” issue depends on an “official” statement of the government, of which there have been many differing (obviously) in tone depending on the political configuration at the time (which destroys the idea that some “static” “Japan” can make statements representing “itself” for all time), and yet every unofficial action (Diet members visiting Yasukuni, various politicians making revisionist claims, or textbooks making claims) is seen as “canceling out” an apology given. This silliness again shows that there is an essentializing nationalist assumption behind this issue. “Japan” is somehow expected to act as one “it” should “never” do “anything” again to “hurt the feelings of” the organic community “China” – a post-nationalist perspective finds this almost comical.

Let the apology issue die a quiet death, it won’t solve anything and the demands for an apology have clearly been met. Let us shift our concern towards the real problems we must face on the Japan side: 1) increasing nationalism in historical narratives and the failure of the left to respond effectively 2) increasing hostility towards the rest of East Asia, often as a reaction its own hostility.

On the China side, of course, little can be done until young Chinese students are allowed to learn about their own past both factually and with a greater diversity of narratives. Currently the majority of them have grown up on notions such as that the great leap forward was really “three years of natural disasters” etc. The list is endless. Not just factual problems, but different narratives need to be available. Much of this will resolve itself when China opens up to free speech, if and when that happens.

The oddest in the apology issue is that, if shazai and owabi can be interchangable, the best strategic apology to China or British POWs is to say “Shazai”. It does not only undermine the excuse on chinese side, it can also help eliminate suspicions from the victims. After all, China hasn’t requested Seppuku of anybody. ‘Shazai’ pays off.

When blaming the mistrust of China, there’s more issue in Japan to deal with. Japanese, unlike autocratic China, is the diversed society with different voices, but note that Germany, in which no diversed voice legally allowed on apology issue, wins the applause from the world and receives no controversy in joining UN Security council.

Ironically, on the recent clash in Sino-Japan relation, amid the climate of China-threatening conspiracy theory, democratic Japan should win the sympathy from the world, but it’s rarely seen this time.

Australia, rival to China, muted over the issue; Singapore, who muted over most regional political clashes, voiced the complaint on Japan’s approval of textbooks this time; UK media, like BBC, and The telegraph, would rather express no support to either sides. BBC even expressed doubts over the renaissance of militarism. I just screened several US media, some local papers say “China is promoting anti-Japanese sentiment, but………”
Interestingly, La figaro, leftist french paper, wants China to forgive, but their government and EU itself have expressed strong support to China side. It’s unusual, especially after the bubble burst in 1990s that faded Japan-Threatening conspiracy.

Now, what we are facing is the fact that —- we lose! “Japan’s hope in joining security council fades”, as said by US government-funded Voice of American’s headline. That’s the cost of Prime Minister’s failure to lead Japan to new post-war age, but he’s only eager to fulfill the self-satisfaction of Japanese ego.

The choice is simple: to be a world society or not to be?

Shazai is quite widely used and well understood in Korea, and i think, like the Yomiuiri, that is what they would have preferred. I don’t see why such a conscious attempt was made to avoid it.

shazai (xiezui) is not widely used in modern chinese, but it is commonly known. The worst is that chinese also knows concisely the difference between ‘shazai’ and ‘owabi’ simply because there are also various chinese words for magnitudes of ‘apology’.

see:
http://news.searchina.ne.jp/2005/0423/national_0423_002.shtml

Since my Mandarin is still pretty basic, I’m not sure if this word is still used in modern Chinese (it’s still used in Korea), but I typed “Xiezui” in my computer and the same characters popped up.