Why 'sorry' is such a loaded word

Namibian-German negotiations over the genocide perpetrated in the former German colony South West Africa in 1904-1908 have just entered their third year. The start of the negotiations in late 2015 marked a turning point after more than a century of German denialism. However, analyst Henning Melber notes that tangible progress now seems elusive, ‘and a crisis may be imminent, delaying justice for the Ovaherero and Nama descendants of the main victim groups’. In a column on The Conversation site, Melber points out that there has always been unity in Namibia about the broad demands towards Germany – recognition of the genocide, an apology and reparations. ‘This has been true even though there’s been considerable controversy about the issue of representation at the negotiations, with the feud between groups representing the victims and the Namibian government turning bitter at times. In mid-2015 the German Foreign Office after decades of denial seemingly acceded, in a very informal way, to labeling what had happened as genocide. The two governments subsequently appointed special envoys to resume negotiations. But from mid-2017 matters began to deteriorate. Beginning with the German Ambassador in Namibia, German officialdom retracted from using the term genocide. Instead, references were made to “atrocities”. Two other central issues that have emerged is the apology to be tendered by Germany, and the question of reparations. In transitional justice, a “deep apology”, rendered by the sovereign of the offending state, is considered a central prerequisite of reconciliation. But German diplomacy seeks to avoid the risk inherent in an apology for mass, including state, crimes. Any apology is offered with the possibility that it can be declined.’