Abstract

It is a general notion that human beings are not perfect and are capable of error. Therefore, an
apology is required to counteract an insult, undo a certain offense and restore harmony. Likewise,
is the case of countries wherein every now and then cases of error in judgment or execution by
one country are reported which cause grave peril and misery to another country or to the citizens
of another country. Hence, much importance has been emphasized on the necessity of apologies
between nation states for the purpose of maintaining cordial relations and to promote greater
national interest. In this era of globalization and self-dependency of nation states it is almost
inevitable to remain hostile to the demands of acknowledgment and rectification of flaws by one
nation state towards another.
This article aims at critically evaluating and analyzing the chapter named International Apologies
published in the book SORRY ABOUT THAT by _______________ and to provide a deeper
insight about the scope, purpose and importance of apologies in International Relations.
MEANING AND IMPORTANCE OF INTERNATIONAL APOLOGIES
International Apologies usually refer to formal acknowledgment of a mistake, shortcoming or
error by the Representative of a particular state to that of another state or sometimes the people at
large. Ever since the times of the world wars countries have gone on record to put forth its
feeling of remorse and resentment of its actions towards another nation state. One of the most
important and effective means of re-establishing trust in negotiations and a dispute is by making
an apology. The importance of apologies can be highlighted in the example put forth by the
author in the second stanza itself. The example talks about how an apology was considered to be
essential and inevitable to restore the harmony between Canada and United States of America

when a Marine from the United States carried the Canadian Flag upside down at the 1992 World
Series. The Canadians were understandably angry. There were rumors that the Canadians would
carry the American Flag upside down at the next baseball game to be held at Toronto. However
at the town hall meeting in Atlanta, President Bush discussed the incident and expressed their
deepest regret to the citizens of Canada. He spoke how much Americans value their friendship
and how they would not do anything to hurt the national feeling of Canada.
This statement expressed their resentment, reiterated the value of American-Canadian friendship,
and suggested a path to forgiveness focusing on the game. His apology restored the face to the
Canadians by showing contrition and respect-and restored face to the United States by admitting
its error. This incident suggests that a quick response by the nation at fault can restore faith and
harmony between two nations. An apology need not necessarily make you lose face or weaken
your stand in negotiations or disputes it rather a heartfelt apology can be looked upon as a good
precedent and can served as an instrument to strengthen the ties between two nations.
SCOPE OF APOLOGIES
The ambit and Scope of International Apologies is wide and different actors have different roles
to play in an apology. The nature of International Apologies is contrasting from that of national
or interpersonal apologies as each party has their own agenda behind an apology. This can
further be understood by looking at the scope and importance of apologies from the perspective
of different parties that are involved in an apology.
FROM THE GIVING COUNTRY POINT OF VIEW
Whenever a country commits an error there is always a tendency of that particular country losing
face. An international apology that is usually on official record is a very diplomatic business on

behalf of both the countries, especially for the giving country and hence the words needed to be
chosen carefully. This is because though apologizing can be the honorable thing to do it means
admitting that we are wrong and on that account losing face. It can also generate common
expectations that others will take us less seriously. The quests for honor and face are in conflict
here and the fact that a country is willing to sacrifice face helps prove that it is sincere in the
fashion of cost signaling.1
For example in the year 1968, USS Militants arrested 82 crew members of the North Korean
Forces who had boarded the USS Pueblo. The crew was held for eleven months, during which
time they were beaten, tortured and forced to sign confessions, which were reported on
Northern Korean radio. The North Korean insisted that the United States admit fault, apologize
and assure the regime that there would be no further violations and a document was handed to
Army Major General Woodward as the basis for a settlement. After a series of failed negotiations
General Woodward reiterated that the United States was blameless and that the document drafted
by the Koreans was in variance with the current position. Major Woodward emphasized on the
fact that he would sign the agreement solely for the purpose of freeing the crew and nothing else.
This is a classic demonstration of how a country behaves while offering an apology so as to
maintain diplomatic relation as well as not lose face.
FROM THE RECEIVING COUNTRY POINT OF VIEW
It is an accepted tradition that when we feel someone owes us an apology, our honor prompts us
to demand it. The apology satisfies the need of honor by helping the right to offense, and failure
to deliver it can even be taken as a challenge. In most cases it becomes a matter of national pride
failure to apologize angers the citizens and the representative of a company. As a result of which
1

The apology file

the aggrieved country may refuse to engage in commercial, cultural and political relations with
the opposite country. This makes an apology almost inevitable and the receiving country usually
wants the apology to be made in public. The terms and conditions of the apology may differ from
country to country but following are quite general and universal in nature;
a. The apology must be made on public or given on a formally written document
b. The apology must usually be made by the representative of the country
c. It must acknowledge the flaws and error in judgment or execution made by the country and
should express it deepest resentment.
d. If any monetary damage has been caused to the citizens of the aggrieved country then
adequate compensation must be given to the affected citizens.
FROM THE ADVOCATES POINT OF VIEW
It is pertinent to note that in the case of international apologies there is usually compensation that
needs to award by the giving country along with the formal apology. This compensation amount
is decided by the negotiations that takes place between the two countries. Such negotiations are
usually conducted by professionals or arbitrators who have the experience in this field which are
usually lawyers. An easy and readily available apology makes the giving country lose its
leverage in the negotiations that take place and hence the compensation amount may be increase
substantially. For this reason the advocates prefer an apology which is really formal in nature and
is brief and diplomatic. In certain cases advice is given to not apologise at all or to avoid
apologisng on public domain. In most cases personal apologies are always avoided. For instance
in the case of conflict between Japan and United States of America over the Ballast Tank

blowing Incident in the year 2001, a lot of anger was expressed by the advocates of the General
who personally went to Japan to apologize as this lost them millions of dollars in their
negotiations.2