Yesterday Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visited Pearl Harbor, the first time that a sitting Japanese prime minister has done so. This follows President Obama’s recent (and similarly historic) visit to Hiroshima.

Abe paid tribute to those who died at Pearl Harbor, offering his “sincere and everlasting condolences.” He renewed Japan’s commitment to peace, and spoke about how the US and Japan showed that it is possible for bitter enemies to become allies.

All of this is well and good. I have always taken heart from the history of our relationship with Japan, which is an achievement both countries should be proud of. And yet, for some reason, whenever there is an observance of this kind, all of the news stories seem to focus only on one question: Will Japan apologize for Pearl Harbor? (Even though Abe had made it clear in advance that that was not the purpose of this visit.)

I find this discussion to be frustrating and, as the years pass, increasingly stupid. For one thing, over the last 70 years, Japan has made many statements expressing “remorse” or “repentance” (or words to that effect). I know that in the field of international diplomacy such statements tend to be carefully constructed and closely analyzed, but come on; I’m satisfied that they’re sorry and won’t do it again.

More to the point, no one responsible for the Pearl Harbor attack is part of today’s Japanese government. Few people who were involved are even still alive. Do we really subscribe to a “sins of the father” philosophy of guilt? What is the point of extracting an apology from people who weren’t even alive at the time of the crime? Does today’s France owe anybody an apology for Napoleon? Are we still angry at Great Britain about the Stamp Act?

Actions matter more than words. For seven decades, Japan has consistently shown itself to have turned its back on the militaristic tendencies that characterized its government in the early 20th Century. It has consistently behaved as a country that is dedicated to peace (to an almost pathological degree, in my opinion) and freedom, and it has become one of our closest allies. Do these seven decades of unambiguous deeds not count? Is it really necessary, in 2016, to remind them once again that they lost the war? This is not how you treat your friends, not if you want them to remain friends.

I do not suggest that the war should be forgotten. History teaches us lessons, and we would be fools to ignore those lessons. But history is, after all, history; isn’t it time for us to move on?