Sir Ian Blair, the London police commissioner, stopped short of an outright apology as he expressed "deepest regrets" and accepted "full responsibility" for the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes, a 27-year-old Brazilian electrician who died on Friday after he was shot five times in the head by the local police at the Stockwell subway station in south London.
It reminded me of the long standing dispute between China and Japan over various atrocities committed but never officially acknowledged in a manner that appeased the Chinese sufficiently.
Much has been made in the western press of the game of semantics that Japan plays when confronted about their role in WWII. The Japanese language is extremely precise, and they've managed to use every imaginable variation of regret, but always falling short of what the Chinese want: an outright apology. Often the articles approach this as if it were a uniquely Asian trait, to explain to readers as some cultural quirk of the east. The implication is also that perhaps the Chinese should just get over it. Why quibble over the specific Japanese word used? Is not expressing regret a million ways to heaven good enough?
Why? Because words have meaning. And the phrase that would truly express remorse and apology in the context of Japanese culture has not been uttered in reference to WWII atrocities. And that's why year after year, the Chinese continue to raise a stink over Koizumi's visit to Yasukuni Shrine. It may be a political ploy, but casting aside ulterior agendas and China's own less than stellar records, the issue of Japan's role in WWII is one that has escaped the scrutiny and condemnation that many parties feel they deserve.
So yes. I am bemused to see London play this game, and for the NYT to report it accordingly. I guess some things are same the world over. It's a quirk of humans, not of ethnicity.
