EDITORIAL: Joint history research

Once again, we are shown how difficult it is to bring countries closer together if they differ on historical perceptions. This is all the more true between two neighbors, one of which had dominated the other.

Japanese and South Korean scholars released a final report after spending three years on a second round of joint history research. With the establishment of a subcommittee on the history textbook issue, methods on writing textbooks and descriptions were discussed for the first time.

The report frankly addresses various disagreements and mutual criticism.

For example, regarding the Japan-Korea Annexation Treaty, which was signed a century ago, the South Korean side pointed out that there is no Japanese textbook that clearly states it was "illegal."

The Japanese side countered, saying, "The assertion of the South Korean academic community that the annexation was illegal has yet to be supported by many Western and other scholars of international law."

The Japanese side contended that South Korean textbooks make no reference to Japan's postwar pacifist Constitution and former Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama's statement of apology on Japan's wartime aggression. In response, the South Korean side argued that "criticism that specific themes are not discussed is nothing more than a superficial analysis."

The joint research started under the auspices of the Japanese and South Korean governments with an aim to improve bilateral relations that deteriorated with the 2001 Japanese history textbook issue and then Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's visits to war-related Yasukuni Shrine.

The second round of joint study took off under the administrations of Shinzo Abe and Roh Moo-hyun. Perhaps the nationalistic inclination of both administrations had influenced the research and caused scholars of both countries to carry the Hinomaru and Taegeukgi flags on their backs.

But the seemingly futile dispute is significant because it teaches both sides of the need to accept their differences and overcome them.

The joint research must continue. But a bolder and more creative method is needed to make the project even more meaningful.

One idea is to invite scholars from third-party countries, such as the United States and China, to deepen the joint research in a rational fashion that transcends the bounds of Japanese and South Korean sides.

This area of research is by no means an exclusive domain of Japanese and South Korean scholars. Another idea is to leave research on a specific theme to competent experts regardless of nationality.

In this age of globalization, the current approach of comparing the national histories of Japan and South Korea and attempting to bridge the gaps between the two is no longer effective. Economic activities, information and people transcend national borders.

History different from the "national story" based on the historical perspectives of each nation is needed to guide us through the new age.

Essentially, it is the duty of historians to pursue the facts and delve into their meaning without being bound by nationality.

Perhaps Japan-South Korea relations have not yet matured to such a level. But bilateral relations between them will become increasingly important in Asia from now. We have to keep thinking about history together.

--The Asahi Shimbun, March 26