Late last month, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe claimed that “invasion” had no definition that was firmly established, either internationally or academically. He said it differed, depending on from whose perspective it was seen. He made the remarks in reply to a question regarding Japan’s past apology for invading Korea, China and other Asian countries for colonial occupation.

It would not be too farfetched to perceive, as Korea did, that Japan under Abe was attempting to deny its brutal use of force for colonial occupation, including the abduction of Korean women as military sex slaves. In fact, Abe had earlier hinted at revising Japan’s apologies for wartime atrocities committed by its imperial army.

Abe’s “invasion” remarks added fuel to the fire, with Korean-Japanese relations having already been roiled by the homage Japanese Cabinet members paid to the war dead enshrined in the Yasukuni Shrine, including Class A war criminals. Korea, which called on Japan to “reflect itself in the mirror of history,” was harsh in its criticism and reactions. Most notable among them was the canceling of the Korean foreign minister’s planned visit to Tokyo.

But it did not take long before Abe retreated from his scandalous remarks. On Wednesday, he said he meant to say that “invasion” had no absolute definition because it was widely debated academically and that he would not get himself involved in the issue as a politician. Then he added that his Cabinet shared with the previous ones the view that Japan inflicted enormous damage and suffering on Asian people.

Few would believe Abe backtracked on his own. Instead, he withdrew his remarks undoubtedly under pressure from the United States, which would like to see Korea and Japan, two of its main military allies in Asia, promote cooperation in regional security as well as in other areas.

Abe’s retreat followed the Korean-U.S. summit, in which President Park Geun-hye presumably told President Barack Obama that military cooperation with an untrustworthy Japan was out of the question and that Abe’s denial of Japan’s wartime atrocities was posing a threat even to nonmilitary cooperation.

After her talks with Obama, Park told the Washington Post: “Japan and [South] Korea share many things in common ― our shared values of democracy, freedom and a market economy ― and there is a need for us to cooperate on North Korea and on economic issues as well as security issues. But the Japanese have been opening past wounds and have been letting them fester, and this applies not only to Korea but also to other neighboring countries. This arrests our ability to really build momentum, and I hope that Japan reflects upon itself.”

Did Abe change his historical view of Japan’s wartime relations with Korea? Probably not, given that it was not the first time for Abe to backtrack on his remarks.

When Rep. Mike Honda was pushing for a U.S. Congress resolution condemning sexual slavery in 2007, Abe denied any coercion in the recruitment of comfort women. After talks with President George W. Bush later in the year, however, Abe offered an apology, saying that he felt deeply sympathetic to the great difficulties comfort women had undergone.

An apology is the regret that a person, or a state in the case regarding Japan’s wartime atrocities, expresses for having committed an error at the expense of somebody else, or some other state. Would it be an apology if the regret were anything but heartfelt? After all, an apology may not be what can be demanded of a person or a state. It should come voluntarily.

As such, what Korea has been demanding of Japan is an admission to, rather than an apology for, having committed grave atrocities against the Korean people, including the torturing of independence fighters and the coercion of workers into forced labor as well as the forcible recruitment of women as military sex slaves.

It took almost four decades after World War II ended for Japan to formally acknowledge its crimes against the humanity. In his 1993 statement, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono acknowledged the recruitment of comfort women by the imperialist Japan and offered an apology. Two years later, Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama issued a statement in which he said that Japan, “through its colonial rule and aggression, caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations.”

Abe attempted to invalidate those historical documents, only to make a tactical retreat under pressure from Washington. What a pity!