The Japanese government cannot avoid criticism due to its endorsement of a contentious history textbook that denies the forced conscription of Korean women to serve as sex slaves for Japanese soldiers during World War II. The textbook, infamous for its staunchly conservative stance, asserted, "There was no forced mobilization, and they were compensated." Furthermore, it went on to claim that the Japanese army did not transport Korean women to the war front as they did with war correspondents andnurses.

The textbook's claim is baseless. The sexual enslavement of Korean women was already confirmed in the Kono Statement in 1993. The statement acknowledged that the mobilization was initiated by the Japanese army. Subsequently, the Japanese government pledged to confront historical truths squarely and committed to avoiding similar transgressions in the future. In light of this, it is deeply regrettable that the Japanese government endorsed the textbook, contradicting the essence of the Kono Statement.

The textbook is slated for use in Japan's middle schools starting next year. However, such ultra-right textbooks are seldom adopted by schools. Nevertheless, the authorization of textbooks that distort Japan's wartime atrocities is inherently disgraceful. This illustrates Japan's contradictory approach to addressing historical issues.

Japan's recent approval of the textbook, which whitewashes its dark past, warrants strong international condemnation. Additionally, Japan's assertion that its colonization facilitated Korea's modernization is utterly nonsensical. As Japanese students are exposed to this false history filled with absurd claims, Japan could find itself confronting a bleak future.

In a similar context, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has drawn criticism for his recent speech to the U.S. Congress, where he notably avoided addressing historical issues. This stands in contrast to his predecessor, the late Shinzo Abe, who, despite being perceived as more conservative, issued apologies for past wrongdoings at the same venue nine years ago.

Even more concerning, Japan's foreign ministry reaffirmed its territorial claim over Dokdo in its"2024 Diplomatic Bluebook," revealed on April 16. Both historically and geographically, Dokdo is unequivocally part of Korea's territory, leaving no room for dispute on the matter.

Japan's Self-Defense Forces initially used the term "Greater East Asian War," which justified Japan's aggressions, on its social media platform, only to remove it later. Additionally, despite strong opposition from civic organizations, Gunma Prefecture pushed for the demolition of a memorial stone honoring wartime Korean workers in a park in January.

Relations between Seoul and Tokyo have shown signs of thawing under the current Yoon Suk Yeol administration, after plummeting to the lowest point during the previous Moon Jae-in government. Such an improvement in bilateral ties has mainly been possible due to brisk efforts by Seoul to hold summits.

Eager to mend ties with Japan, the Yoon government has been taking proactive steps regarding contentious issues such as the forced conscription of Korean workers. The Korean government has been eagerly awaiting follow-up measures from its Japanese counterpart regarding past historical issues. Yet, despite such expectations, Japan has largely failed to take any concrete steps.

If Japan persists in adopting such stances, bilateral relations may potentially sour again, contingent upon shifts in political circumstances. Yoon is currently grappling with a political setback following the resounding defeat of his ruling People Power Party in the April 10 general elections. Tokyo's current approach toward Seoul is unlikely to contribute to any improvement in bilateral relations and may present another challenge for Yoon, who has been advocating for a package of pro-Japan policies.

Many conscientious people in Japan and Korea worry about the future of bilateral relations. The Japanese government should attentively heed their voices and intensify efforts to strengthen bilateral relations based on its own principled understanding of history and the subsequent actions taken.