Editorial: Japan's "Deep Regret" Statement Is a Primitive Smokescreen

Ask AI · How will Japan’s downplaying of the incident affect the future direction of China–Japan relations?

Several days have passed since April 24, when a serving Japan Self-Defense Forces official, Akira Murata, broke into China’s embassy in Japan with a knife. Yet Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takatsuji remains silent. What’s more, on the 27th—only then, as Defense Minister, Shinjiro Koizumi said a lighthearted, “Deeply regret it,” despite the Defense Ministry being directly responsible for the incident. It looks like Japan—from the prime minister to senior officials—is planning to handle this as crisis PR by avoiding the heavy issues and keeping the story going, trying to “drag it out” until it fades. This kind of detachment that cuts responsibility and lacks reflection is causing second-round harm to China–Japan relations.

Japan is not without historical experience in dealing with past cases where the safety of foreign envoys was violated. On March 24, 1964, U.S. Ambassador Edwin Leishol while on duty was assassinated and wounded in front of the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo. At the time, the Japanese government showed an “extraordinary” speed of response: the Prime Minister Hayato Ikeda personally called the U.S. President and, via satellite broadcast, apologized on behalf of the Japanese people to the American people. The very next day, Shukichi Hayakawa, then chairman of Japan’s National Public Safety Commission, resigned in disgrace. This case also directly helped lead to the establishment of the Metropolitan Police Department’s Security Division. Today, a serving Self-Defense Forces official bringing a knife into another country’s embassy is, in nature, even more severe. Yet Tokyo has been trying to shirk and dismiss responsibility in every possible way. Is it that American diplomats in Japan enjoy privileges above others, or that Japanese politics is taking a big step backward?

A formal apology is not an extra demand—it is the bare minimum of responsibility. As is well known, in diplomatic contexts, “regret” and “apology” are fundamentally different. Japan’s frequent use of “regret” shows an intent to downgrade the diplomatic incident into a public security case, thereby evading the responsibility for systemic dereliction of duty. There are likely two issues that Japan needs to clarify more clearly. First, in which direction should Japan conduct its investigation: is this an isolated case driven by a Self-Defense official’s emotional outburst, or why did the Self-Defense Forces fail in education, management, and control? The investigative conclusions in these two scenarios will be completely different. The second issue is whether Tokyo’s decision to file the case as a minor offense—only “illegal entry into a building”—means that the serious nature of the incident, including violations of international law and harm to diplomatic security, will not be pursued. An opportunistic mindset of making a big matter small and a small matter smaller will only expose Japan, which has long touted “a nation ruled by law,” when facing dereliction and coldness involving foreign sovereignty and diplomatic dignity—also sending Tokyo into an even more passive predicament.

It is also important to specifically mention the Japanese media that has enabled wrongdoing. In this news event that can absolutely be called a “headline,” Japan’s mainstream newspapers did not put it on the front page and did not carry out in-depth investigations; they only sent off brief notes in the corner in a sloppy way. After China disclosed this恶劣 incident first, Japanese media coverage either sensationalized “China’s strong reaction,” or hinted that the suspect “had no intent to harm” or “had no extremist ideology.” They are skilled at turning the incident into a case file and skilled at making it personal. They are skilled at breaking down what should have been a serious diplomatic incident tracing back to its root causes into one scrap of plot after another, shifting focus and cutting responsibility.

Especially during the period when Akira Murata was being handed over, the photo widely circulated by Japanese media showing his eerie smile toward the media—yet with almost no condemnation—sharply contrasts with 2024, when a news anchor on NHK read out “Senkaku Islands” as “Diaoyu Islands,” triggering a tidal wave of criticism and condemnation. This kind of approach by Japanese media is both a manifestation and a result of Japan’s distorted political ecosystem, and at the same time it also serves to fan the flames of the steadily worsening atmosphere toward China, creating a vicious cycle.

The real problem in the embassy-entry incident is not “Akira Murata,” but the soil that allows “Akira Murata-type people” to grow and proliferate. In modern Japanese history, the lesson that once militarist ideas overstepped the line and hardened emotions ran out of control ultimately boomerang back against the nation is not far away. But now, Tokyo once again pulls out a well-worn “excuse-and-avoidance routine”—using downplaying and cutting responsibility—to try to let time dilute accountability and to fantasize that mistakes will be forgotten. From tampering with history textbooks to downplay crimes of aggression, to visiting and enshrining Second World War Class-A war criminals at the Yasukuni Shrine, to denying historical facts about forced “comfort women” and laborers, to delaying and dodging issues of compensation—everything fits this routine. Today’s collective silence from Tokyo toward apologies is precisely the alarm bell, sharp and piercing, sounding for regional peace.

For that very reason, even if Japan’s side is set on brushing this off no matter what, we still must keep asking: what attitude does Sanae Takatsuji, the highest-ranking person responsible in the Japanese government, actually hold toward this matter? Demanding that Japan provide a formal, responsible explanation is not only necessary to protect China’s lawful rights and interests—it is also a necessary step to maintain regional peace and stability. How long does Takatsuji intend to stay silent? The whole world is watching.