'Even less directly involved observers must entertain doubts about the long-term immunity of the Japanese polity from the poison of ultranationalism, racism and militarism.'

Indeed this is the heart of the matter. The world knows of the evils of Japan's past. The world, except for those States most directly and largely affected, has accepted that Japan is incapable of issuing a sincere apology on terms amenable to our notions of what constitutes an apology.

60 years on from the end of the war the real danger lay in a repeat and reprint of Japanese inhumanity. After more than 10 years living and breathing life in Japan it is apparent to me, and I would suspect most other foreign residents, that Japanese are clearly not immune from insidious ‘ultranationalism, racism [or] militarism’. One need only witness the high degree of tolerance the government and most citizens show toward ultranationalist groups that are actively spreading a new poison along the boulevards of major Japanese cities while the mostly mindless pursuit of luxury-brand hoarding goes on in the Louis Vuitton, Gucci and Prada et al stores.

Japan for all its redeeming features is not international in outlook or aspiration. A seat on the Security Council is driven by the same level of faddish greed that motivates the young shopaholics referred to above.

If Japan wants to play a more expansive role in the world, then it needs to get real with the world. Sushi, manga, karaoke, karate, and world renowed analism can only get them so far. Saying sorry would win them more enduring and endearing fans.

The article provides a cold shower of realism to the subject.

My whinge, if it can be called one, is with some of the phrasing at its end: "It is high time that Japan did what is necessary to bury its wartime criminal legacy for once and for all".

Burying that legacy is what Japanese school history books attempt to do, as Gary Brown's article points out. Giving exposure to the reality rather than some apology, facile or otherwise, is surely what the Chinese would be expecting from Japan; an indication that it has taken the path away from those terrible times.

But we Australians should not get too pure on the matter of facing up to history. We have our own running battles over historical matters.

Tomorrow, 25th April, is another anniversary of a needless and grossly traumatic event in the lives of many young Australians and their families. It occurred three generations back. Its celebration is elevated with enthusiasm by those who believe consideration of some other events as a "black armband" attitude to history: Events involving Australian acts of murder and mayhem at home. These may be only half Gallipoli vintage, yet are considered as being "all in the past now" and better left alone.

As Gary Brown commented, from Germany's example, it is best to have unsavoury aspects of history out in the open together with the rest of it. Otherwise, lest we forget, we are not doing as much as should be to prevent repeated marches into similarly horrific events.

Japan has a problem with facing up to its wartime atrocities and whether you like it or not, I can see their point. Regardless of what they did on an individual basis, they copped Nagasaki and Hiroshima, which one can argue was a "necessary" wartime administration. Who needs to apologise the most? All countries need to bow their heads in shame at the atrocities that were committed against people individually hacking/bayoneting/whatever to knowingly dropping bombs on cities teeming with humanity. All humanity was murdered, humiliated and shamed in that war, to the extent that mankind now uses it as a benchmark to never go there again. But we still do! So to concentrate on the Japanese about not saying sorry is a bit rich. You, author, take Germany as a now decently behaved dog, with its Nazi tail between its legs that will never wag again. Don't bet on anything in this lifetime about any country. I agree that all countries should apologise and promise to never do anything awful to each other again, but then again, i don't have rocks in my head.

Any Chinese apologies to its own (and 'adopted') Nationals forthcoming? I think we can expect it about the same time as Japan, Malaysia, Australia and any other number of Nations come 'out.'

As for China being on the Security Council, it's about as good as Sudan being on the Human Rights committee - veto all criticism, infact, don't bother reporting it.

Yes, well China should acknowledge it's atrocities in Nepal and it's subversion of it's own people.While Japan suffered two atomic bombs,that does not give them the right to deny the atrocities they inflicted on millions in the South Pacific.Denial, only delays the opportunity to re-offend in the future.History does repeat itself,and if we don't learn by our mistakes ,we are destined to repeat them.

The problem with Gary's article is that he makes some assumptions that are not necessarily true. Gary believes that Japan should say sorry, bascially for political reasons. The problem is that Japan is not sorry and is not sufficiently post-modernist in its thinking to say sorry when it isn't. Besides an apology given for political reasons is probably worth squat.

This is something that John Howard recongises instincitvely but that many on the left have a problem with. This is why Howard will not apologise to idignenous people recongising that most of us are not sorry for taking Aboriginal land, also saying the words but taking no action is hypocritical.

The Japanese are not sorry, work with that fact. They do not believe that they did wrong and they also recongise the hypocracy and political agenda behind recent Chinese moves.

Of course the Japanese should be sorry, in fact they should be thoroughly ashamed of their wartime legacy. But if you can't force a country to be sorry after dropping a couple of nuclear bombs on its cities I don't see what more you can do--live with the fact of Japanese instransigence and keep a very careful eye on them in the future.