In the high-stakes theater of international diplomacy, few phrases carry greater moral weight — or strategic consequence — than “I’m sorry”. Properly delivered, an apology can heal wounds, restore trust, and prevent conflict. Spoken too late — or never — it can harden resentments and imperil peace. This month, Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo demonstrated how a responsible leader should act. In doing so, he offered Japan a timely lesson it continues to ignore.

When racist remarks by two Finnish politicians offended Asian communities, Orpo did not equivocate, deflect, or hide behind technicalities. He issued clear, institutional apologies through Finnish embassies across East Asia, affirming that such views “do not reflect Finland’s values”. It was not a sign of weakness but of moral confidence. Orpo understood that dignity in diplomacy flows from accountability, not denial.

Finland’s case involved offensive acts by individual politicians — wrong, regrettable, but limited. Japan’s current predicament is far graver. It involves the Japanese prime minister herself, speaking in parliament, uttering words that were not merely insensitive but dangerously inflammatory. On Nov 7, Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi publicly suggested that a “Taiwan contingency” could trigger the deployment of Japan’s Self-Defense Forces — a choice of words that openly signals potential military intervention.

This was not a slip of the tongue. It was a reckless, unjust, and grossly irresponsible statement that shattered Japan’s long-standing posture of strategic ambiguity and recklessly escalated regional tensions.

The error of Takaichi’s remarks is profound on three levels.

First, it is historically false. Taiwan is not a separate sovereign state in international law but part of China, a fact acknowledged by Japan itself under the internationally-accepted one-China principle. The current situation of the Taiwan Strait stems from an unfinished civil war. Japan’s role in this history is particularly troubling: It forcibly and illegally seized Taiwan from China in 1895 under the unequal Treaty of Shimonoseki, illegally occupying the Chinese island until 1945. For Japan to imply a “moral” or “strategic” right to intervene militarily in the Taiwan Strait is to ignore its own horrible aggression and reopen deep historical wounds which have never fully healed.

The tragedy is that the cost of such reckless rhetoric will not be borne by politicians, but by ordinary Japanese citizens — through diminished security, strained trade, and eroded regional trust. Finland provides an object lesson — leadership means owning up to mistakes before they metastasize

Second, the statement constitutes blatant interference in China’s internal affairs. No responsible leader should publicly define conditions for military action in another country’s internal dispute. China’s strong rebuke was inevitable — and justified. Such rhetoric violates the most basic norms of international conduct and endangers regional stability.

Third, and most damningly, it resurrects the specter of Japanese militarism. Asia still remembers the devastation of Japan’s 20th-century wars. This year, in fact, is the 80th anniversary of Japan’s defeat in World War II. For a Japanese prime minister to casually invoke military action today is not merely tone-deaf — it is historically alarming and ignites fury. It undermines Japan’s postwar pacifist identity and fuels justified distrust for Tokyo across Asia.

This is why Finland’s example matters. Orpo addressed a relatively minor diplomatic crisis with humility and wisdom. Japan, by contrast, has manufactured a major crisis through arrogance, insensitivity and shocking historical amnesia.

History offers powerful evidence that apologies work. Germany’s repeated and unequivocal apologies for Nazi crimes rebuilt trust across Europe. Australia’s apology to its indigenous peoples helped advance reconciliation. Canada’s apology for the Indian residential schools system, and South Africa’s post-apartheid truth-and-reconciliation process transformed national wounds into foundations for peace. Even the United States has formally apologized for the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II — an act that strengthened democratic credibility rather than weakened it.

Japan itself has benefited when it has shown contrition. But each retreat from humility revives suspicion and fear.

The tragedy is that the cost of such reckless rhetoric will not be borne by politicians, but by ordinary Japanese citizens — through diminished security, strained trade, and eroded regional trust. Finland provides an object lesson — leadership means owning up to mistakes before they metastasize.

Asia does not need louder threats. It needs wiser words. Finland has shown how a nation preserves its dignity through humility. Japan now faces a choice — persist in provocation, or rediscover the strength that comes from restraint, sincere apology, and genuine commitment to peace.

The author is an economics and politics analyst, an award-winning columnist of the Philippine Star and Abante, a book author, and moderator of the Pandesal Forum.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.