Abstract
What lessons can Asian countries learn from the European experience of grappling with the past? The Asian debate over history has been polarized between those who believe the contrite German stance on history should serve as a model and those who argue that it is irrelevant. A careful analysis of the European record, however, reveals that both positions are overstated. The advocates of a “German model” overlook the extent to which the policies on history adopted by Germany and other European countries have been driven by practical necessity as well as a genuine, morally inspired effort to pursue reconciliation. To the extent that geopolitical circumstances differ between Europe and Asia, adopting a German approach might be inappropriate. At the same time, those who deny that Europe is relevant at all fail to recognize that many of the same general forces that have driven increased contrition in Germany, France, and Austria may be at work in Asia as well.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Art, D. 2006. The Politics of the Nazi Past in Germany and Austria. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Art, D. 2010. “Memory Politics in Western Europe.” Working Paper, Max Weber Program, European University Institute, Florence. http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/13248/MWP_2010_01.pdf?sequence=1.
Bacia, H., and M. Stabenau. 2007. “Schwierige Verhandlungen in Brüssel” [Difficult negotiations in Brussels.] Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung June 23: 1 and 2.
Barkan, E. 2001. The Guilt of Nations: Restitution and Negotiating Historical Injustices. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Berger, T. 2002. “A Perfectly Normal Abnormality: German Foreign Policy after Kosovo and Afghanistan.” Japanese Journal of Political Science 3(2): 173–93.
Botz, G., and G. Sprengnagel, eds. 1994. Kontroversen um Österreichs Zeitgeschichte: Verdrängte Vergangenheit, Österreich-Identität, Waldheim und die Historiker [Controversies in Austrian history: the suppressed past, Austrian identity, Waldheim and the historians]. Frankfurt: Campus.
Conan, E., and H. Rousso. 1998. Vichy: An Ever-Present Past, translated by N. Bracher. Hanover, NH: Dartmouth.
Deák, I., J. T. Gross, and T. Judt, eds. 2000. The Politics of Retribution in Europe: World War II and Its Aftermath. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Edkins, J. 2003. Trauma and the Memory of Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Eizenstat, S. E. 2003. Imperfect Justice: Looted Assets, Slave Labor and the Unfinished Business of World War II. New York: Public Affairs.
Falkowski, M., and A. Popko. 2007. “The Germans about Poland and the Poles 2000–2006.” Institute for Public Affairs, Warsaw. http://www.isp.org.pl/?v=page&id=285&ln=eng.
Frei, N. 2002. Adenauer’s Germany and the Nazi Past: The Politics of Amnesty and Integration, translated by J. Golb. New York: Columbia University Press.
He, Y. 2009. The Search for Reconciliation: Sino-Japanese and German-Polish Relations since World War II. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hoischen, O., H. Bacia, and M. Stabenau. 2007. “Europa sucht neue Wurzeln” [Europe seeks new roots]. Frankfurter Allgemeine June 24: 1.
Howe, S. 2010. “Colonising and Exterminating? Memories of Imperial Violence in Britain and France.” Histoire@politique. Politique, culture, société 11 (May–August): 1–18. http://www.histoire-politique.fr/documents/11/pistes/pdf/HP11_Howe_pdf_260510.pdf.
Lincoln, E. 2004. East Asian Economic Regionalism. Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Lind, J. 2008. Sorry States: Apologies in International Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Lübbe, H. 1983. “Der Nationalsozialismus im politischen Bewusstsein der Gegenwart” [National Socialism in contemporary political consciousness]. In Deutschlands Weg in die Diktatur: Internationale Konferenz zur nationalisozialistischen Machtübernahme im Reichstagsgebäude zu Berlin [Germany’s path to dictatorship: international conference on the National Socialist taking of power in the Reichstag building in Berlin], edited by M. Broszat, 2–10. Berlin: Siedler.
Mendelson, S. E. 2006. “Failing the Stalin Test: Russians and Their Dictator.” Foreign Affairs 85(1): 2–8.
Merling, M., C. Mudde, and U. Sedelmeier. 2001. “The Right and the Righteous? European Norms, Domestic Politics and the Sanctions against Austria.” Journal of Common Market Studies 39(1): 59–77.
Minow, M. 2002. “Breaking Cycles of Hatred.” In Breaking the Cycles of Hatred: Memory, Law and Repair, edited by N. L. Rosenblum, 14–30. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Niven, B., ed. 2006. Germans as Victims. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Nobles, M. 2008. The Politics of Official Apologies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Okazaki, H. 2006. Yasukuni Mondai to Chugoku. Tokyo: Kairyusha.
Olick, J. K. 2005. In the House of the Hangman: The Agonies of German Defeat, 1943–1949. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Olick, J. K., and B. Coughlin. 2003. “The Politics of Regret: Analytical Frames.” In Politics and the Past: On Repairing Historical Injustices, edited by J. Torpey, 38–57. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
Pick, H. 2000. Guilty Victims: Austria from the Holocaust to Haidar. London: I.B. Tauris.
Reichel, P. 1995. Politik mit der Errinerung: Gedächtnisorte im Streit um die nationalsozialistische Vergangenheit [Playing politics with memory: sites of memory in the struggle over the National Socialist past]. Munich: Carl Hanser Verlag.
Rousso, H. 1991. The Vichy Syndrome: History and Memory in France since 1944, translated by A. Goldhammer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Rozman, G. 2004. Northeast Asia’s Stunted Regionalism: Bilateral Distrust in the Shadow of Globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sherlock, T. 2011. “Confronting the Stalinist Past: The Politics of Memory in Russia.” Washington Quarterly 34(2): 93–109.
Snyder, T. 2010. Bloodlands: Europe between Hitler and Stalin. New York: Basic Books.
Tsunekawa, K. 2006. “Dependent Nationalism in Contemporary Japan and Its Implications for the Regional Order in the Asia Pacific.” Asia Research Centre, Murdoch University, Perth, Australia. http://wwwarc.murdoch.edu.au/wp/wp133.pdf.
Uhl, H. 2006. “From Victim Myth to Co-responsibility Thesis: Nazi Rule, World War II, and the Holocaust in Austrian Memory.” In Politics and Memory in Postwar Europe, edited by R. N. Lebow, W. Kansteiner, and C. Fugu, 210–48. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Wolf, J. 2004. Harnessing the Holocaust: The Politics of Memory in France. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Wolffsohn, M., and T. Brechenmacher. 2005. Denkmalsturz? Brandt’s Kniefall [Knocking over a monument? Brandt’s fall to his knees [in Warsaw]]. Munich: Olzog.
Young, J. E. 1993. The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Editor information
Copyright information
© 2013 Kazuhiko Togo
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Berger, T.U. (2013). Neither Exemplary nor Irrelevant: Lessons for Asia from Europe’s Struggle with Its Difficult Past. In: Togo, K. (eds) Japan and Reconciliation in Post-war Asia: The Murayama Statement and Its Implications. Palgrave Pivot, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137301239_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137301239_5
Publisher Name: Palgrave Pivot, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-45343-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-30123-9
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)