The Yomiuri Shimbun
Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba delivers an address at the government’s annual memorial service for the war dead in Tokyo on Aug. 15.
8:00 JST, September 6, 2025
Is it necessary for Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba to issue a personal message about World War II? Besides the question of what will happen with Ishiba’s own political future, a key political issue this summer, which marks the 80th anniversary of the war’s end, is whether to release such a message as an alternative to an official anniversary statement, which requires cabinet approval. Ishiba has said it is “necessary to prevent war from ever happening again,” expressing his desire to issue a message that includes his own assessment of why Japan failed to prevent its reckless entry into the war. However, the timing, format and direction of the message’s content remain undecided.
Ishiba ultimately decided not to issue the message on Aug. 15, the anniversary of the war’s end, citing insufficient preparation time. Nevertheless, he struck a distinct tone by using the word “remorse” in his address at the government’s annual memorial service for the war dead. According to sources close to Ishiba, the initial draft prepared by his staff did not contain the word “remorse.” Ishiba asked why not and had it included. This marked the first time “remorse” had appeared in a prime minister’s address since former Democratic Party leader Yoshihiko Noda (now leader of the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan) used it in 2012.
Ishiba told reporters on Aug. 15 that he would “make an appropriate judgment” regarding the release of a message, leaving his policy unclear but indicating that he remains willing to issue one. Persistent concerns about the content and potential impact of such a message have caused some within the Liberal Democratic Party, particularly conservatives, to argue strongly that it should be avoided.
Takayuki Kobayashi, a former minister in charge of economic security, cautioned against the prime minister issuing a new message. “We must not burden future generations by making them continue to apologize. The statement issued on the 70th anniversary is everything,” Kobayashi told reporters after visiting Yasukuni Shrine in Kudan-kita, Tokyo, on Aug. 15. House of Councillors member Shigeharu Aoyama said, “We strongly urge refraining from any kind of statement.”
Many LDP lawmakers who oppose the new message fear it could reignite issues related to the interpretation of history that were settled by the 70th anniversary statement under the administration of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. “Issuing a new message on the war from the prime minister risks sparking a controversy on historical understanding involving relevant countries, including debates over what to address and what to omit,” a senior foreign ministry official said.
Abe understood the political importance of a statement and a message. That is why he meticulously prepared before issuing the 70th anniversary statement.
In February 2015, Abe established an advisory panel of experts, which submitted a report on Aug. 6 of that year summarizing seven rounds of discussions. Abe refined the wording of the statement based on this report, and it was approved by the Cabinet on Aug. 14.
“Colonial rule,” “aggression,” “deep remorse” and “heartfelt apology” — the Abe statement incorporated keywords from the 1995 statement issued under the Cabinet of Tomiichi Murayama and the 2005 statement under the Cabinet of Junichiro Koizumi, carrying on the positions of previous administrations. It also projected a forward-looking stance, emphasizing that “we must not let our children, grandchildren and even future generations to come, who had nothing to do with that war, be predestined to apologize.”
In his memoir “Abe Shinzo: A Retrospective” (Chuokoron-Shinsha), Abe stated, “The conservatives who support me always demand a perfect score, but that’s impossible in the real world of politics,” revealing his efforts to strike a balance. Initially reluctant to include the term “aggression,” Abe incorporated it after discussions with experts. As a result, the statement received positive evaluations from a diverse range of groups both domestically and internationally.
Some question Ishiba’s sincerity compared to Abe’s. Ishiba initially planned to establish a panel comprising such experts as historians and political scientists as early as April, aiming to begin discussions with the possibility of issuing a message on Aug. 15. However, he was preoccupied with responding to U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariff measures, which led to repeated delays.
A senior government official questioned this, saying, “If this truly needed to be done, preparations could have been made if the prime minister had given clear instructions.” Ishiba’s understanding also carries inherent risks in terms of content. The prime minister intends to focus on examining institutional failures that allowed the war to proceed, avoiding direct engagement with matters of historical interpretation and responsibility for the war. Yet those close to him fear that, regardless of the prime minister’s intent, such an assessment could be interpreted as being linked to historical interpretation or responsibility for the war.
The prime minister is not just any member of the Diet; his views carry significant weight. To realize his vision, it is essential to gain public understanding while mobilizing the administration and his party.
Since he took office last October, Ishiba’s actions have appeared to lack this fundamental approach. His handling of the message regarding the war has become emblematic of this. If he prioritizes personal motives — such as carving the “Ishiba signature” into history — without proper preparation and consideration of the political implications, it risks creating lingering problems.
Abe reflected in his memoir on the 2015 statement, which disappointed some conservatives, stating, “Keeping expectations from rising too high is the essence of running a government.” These words must be painful to hear for Ishiba, who has advocated principled arguments and ideals without confronting political realities, only to face disappointment and distrust when they remain unfulfilled.
Political Pulse appears every Saturday.
Michitaka Kaiya
Michitaka Kaiya is a deputy editor in the Political News Department of The Yomiuri Shimbun.
