Ishiba apologizes to Tamaki for Nishida's slur about Okinawa
Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba on May 20 apologized to Okinawa Governor Denny Tamaki for the derogatory comments uttered by a ruling party lawmaker about a war memorial in the southern island prefecture.
'I would like to take this opportunity to express my deepest apologies as president of the Liberal Democratic Party," Ishiba said at a meeting with Tamaki at the prime minister's office. 'There was a deeply regrettable statement made recently that caused great offense to the people of Okinawa.'
The offending remarks were made earlier this month by LDP Upper House member Shoji Nishida about the Himeyuri-no-to memorial, which honors female student nurses and teachers killed in the 1945 Battle of Okinawa.
Nishida angered Okinawans and the broader public by describing the exhibits at the memorial as 'terrible' and an example of 'rewriting history.'
Nishida later apologized for his remarks about the memorial but continued to insist that educators in Okinawa Prefecture were distorting the history of the fierce battle toward the end of World War II.
The memorial is a powerful symbol of peace and anti-war sentiment in Okinawa Prefecture.
During the meeting, Ishiba told Tamaki that such tragedies must never be allowed to happen again.
Speaking to reporters after the meeting, Tamaki acknowledged Ishiba's remarks, saying the prime minister had pledged to prevent similar inappropriate statements from his government and party.
Tamaki visited Ishiba to present him with an Okinawan Kariyushi shirt, promoting the local textile as part of a regional PR campaign.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
2 hours ago
Some Left in Philippines Unable to Obtain Japan Nationality
Linapacan, Philippines, June 4 (Jiji Press)--Some people who were born to Japanese fathers and Filipino mothers before the end of World War II and have remained in the Philippines since the war ended are unable to obtain Japanese nationality due to insufficient proof of their fathers' Japanese citizenship. As this year marks the 80th anniversary of the end of the war, the Japanese government is strengthening its support for these people, who are now elderly. Last month, Esperanza Morine, 87, who lives on the island of Linapacan in the western Philippines, and her sister Lydia, 85, met two relatives from the southernmost Japan prefecture of Okinawa. It was the first meeting between the sisters, who obtained Japanese nationality last September, and a Japanese relative. The relatives were Naoaki and Yasuhiko Morine, aged 49 and 40, respectively. They were in tears as they shook the sisters' hands and made a video call to other relatives in Okinawa. [Copyright The Jiji Press, Ltd.]
Japan Today
4 hours ago
- Japan Today
Europeans concerned U.S. will withdraw support from NATO; Americans should be, too
By John Deni The United States has long played a leadership role in NATO, the most successful military alliance in history. The U.S. and 11 other countries in North America and Europe founded NATO in 1949, following World War II. NATO has since grown its membership to include 32 countries in Europe and North America. But now, European leaders and politicians fear the United States has become a less reliable ally, posing major challenges for Europe and, by implication, NATO. This concern is not unfounded. President Donald Trump has repeatedly spoken of a desire to seize Greenland, which is an autonomous territory of Denmark, a NATO member. He has declared that Canada, another NATO member, should become 'the 51st state.' Trump has also sided with Russia at the United Nations and said that the European Union, the political and economic group uniting 27 European countries, was designed to 'screw' the U.S. Still, Trump – as well as other senior U.S. government officials – has said that the U.S. remains committed to staying in and supporting NATO. For decades, both liberal and conservative American politicians have recognized that the U.S. strengthens its own military and economic interests by being a leader in NATO – and by keeping thousands of U.S. troops based in Europe to underwrite its commitment. Understanding NATO The U.S., Canada and 10 Western European countries formed NATO nearly 80 years ago as a way to help maintain peace and stability in Europe following World War II. NATO helped European and North American countries bind together and defend themselves against the threat once posed by the Soviet Union, a former communist empire that fell in 1991. NATO employs about 2,000 people at its headquarters in Brussels. It does not have its own military troops and relies on its 32 member countries to volunteer their own military forces to conduct operations and other tasks under NATO's leadership. NATO does have its own military command structure, led by an American military officer, and including military officers from other countries. This team plans and executes all NATO military operations. In peacetime, military forces working with NATO conduct training exercises across Eastern Europe and other places to help reassure allies about the strength of the military coalition – and to deter potential aggressors, like Russia. NATO has a relatively small annual budget of around US$3.6 billion. The U.S. and Germany are the largest contributors to this budget, each responsible for funding 16% of NATO's costs each year. Separate from NATO's annual budget, in 2014, NATO members agreed that each participating country should spend the equivalent of 2% of its gross domestic product on their own national defense. Twenty two of NATO's 31 members with military forces were expected that 2% threshold as of April 2025. Although NATO is chiefly a military alliance, it has roots in the mutual economic interests of both the U.S. and Europe. Europe is the United States' most important economic partner. Roughly one-quarter of all U.S. trade is with Europe – more than the U.S. has with Canada, China or Mexico. Over 2.3 million American jobs are directly tied to producing exports that reach European countries that are part of NATO. NATO helps safeguard this mutual economic relationship between the U.S. and Europe. If Russia or another country tries to intimidate, dominate or even invade a European country, this could hurt the American economy. In this way, NATO can be seen as the insurance policy that underwrites the strength and vitality of the American economy. The heart of that insurance policy is Article 5, a mutual defense pledge that member countries agree to when they join NATO. Article 5 says that an armed attack against one NATO member is considered an attack against the entire alliance. If one NATO member is attacked, all other NATO members must help defend the country in question. NATO members have only invoked Article 5 once, following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the U.S., when the alliance deployed aircraft to monitor U.S. skies. A wavering commitment to Article 5 Trump has questioned whether he would enforce Article 5 and help defend a NATO country if it is not paying the required 2% of its gross domestic product. NBC News also reported in April 2025 that the U.S. is likely going to cut 10,000 or more of the nearly 85,000 American troops stationed in Europe. The U.S. might also relinquish its top military leadership position within NATO, according to NBC. Many political analysts expect the U.S. to shift its national security focus away from Europe and toward threats posed by China – specifically, the threat of China invading or attacking Taiwan. At the same time, the Trump administration appears eager to reset relations with Russia. This is despite the Russian military's atrocities committed against Ukrainian military forces and civilians in the war Russia began in 2022, and Russia's intensifying hybrid war against Europeans in the form of covert spy attacks across Europe. This hybrid warfare allegedly includesRussia conducting cyberattacks and sabotage operations across Europe. It also involves Russia allegedly trying to plant incendiary devices on planes headed to North America, among other things. A shifting role in Europe The available evidence indicates that the U.S. is backing away from its role in Europe. At best – from a European security perspective – the U.S. could still defend European allies with the potential threat of its nuclear weapon arsenal. The U.S. has significantly more nuclear weapons than any Western European country, but it is not clear that this is enough to deter Russia without the clear presence of large numbers of American troops in Europe, especially given that Moscow continues to perceive the U.S. as NATO's most important and most powerful member. For this reason, significantly downsizing the number of U.S. troops in Europe, giving up key American military leadership positions in NATO, or backing away from the alliance in other ways appears exceptionally perilous. Such actions could increase Russian aggression across Europe, ultimately threatening not just European security but America's as well. Maintaining America's leadership position in NATO and sustaining its troop levels in Europe helps reinforce the U.S. commitment to defending its most important allies. This is the best way to protect vital U.S. economic interests in Europe today and ensure Washington will have friends to call on in the future. John Deni is Research Professor of Joint, Interagency, Intergovernmental, and Multinational Security Studies, U.S. Army War College. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts. External Link © The Conversation
Japan Today
4 hours ago
- Japan Today
Japan party execs bracing for possibility of Diet dissolution
Liberal Democratic Party Secretary General Hiroshi Moriyama holds a press conference at the party's headquarters in Tokyo on Tuesday. Political maneuvering intensified Tuesday amid suggestions by ruling party officials that a no-confidence motion against Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba's cabinet could increase the chances of him dissolving parliament for an election. Ruling party lawmakers left the door open for Ishiba to call a snap election in what appeared to be a warning to the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan, the only force able to submit a no-confidence motion on its own. Tensions rose after a source close to the leadership quoted Ishiba as telling aides that dissolving the House of Representatives was "in sight," fueling speculation he may act before a no-confidence vote is put to the lower house, which the ruling coalition no longer controls. CDPJ leader Yoshihiko Noda, who has said the party will decide "from a broad perspective," said Tuesday that Ishiba's reported intention suggests the government and ruling coalition "do not mind creating a political vacuum" by dissolving the powerful chamber. "If that's the case, this will be one factor" for the CDPJ to determine whether a motion is necessary, Noda told a meeting of fellow members. Speculation has grown that the CDPJ may forgo submitting a no-confidence motion after reaching an agreement with the ruling coalition of the Liberal Democratic Party and the Komeito party on a key element of pension reforms. Under the Constitution, if a no-confidence motion is approved, the prime minister must dissolve the lower house, or the Cabinet must resign within 10 days. Ishiba's minority government is scrambling to reverse a surge in rice prices driven largely by a poor harvest while also trying to persuade U.S. President Donald Trump to roll back higher tariffs on products from Japan, a longtime U.S. ally. "If Mr. Noda aims to realize a change of government, his party should submit a no-confidence motion," Yuichiro Tamaki, who heads the Democratic Party for the People, told a press conference. Asked if the DPP would jointly submit one with the CDPJ, Tamaki said, "We will consider (the possibility) depending on the situation." If the 465-member lower house is dissolved, it would mark the second general election in a year, following the October vote in which Ishiba's LDP and Komeito performed poorly. A separate election to replace half of the 248-member upper house is due this summer. Komeito, the junior coalition partner of the LDP, however, rejected the idea of holding the elections for both houses this summer. "We should seek voters' judgments for each house according to the length of the respective terms stipulated in the Constitution," Komeito Secretary General Makoto Nishida said at a press conference. Lower house members serve four-year terms unless the chamber is dissolved, while upper house members serve six years. LDP Secretary General Hiroshi Moriyama, a close aide to Ishiba, said the prime minister will make "the right decision at the right time," adding that the decision rests solely with him. © KYODO
