Misperception diffused across the world

In the beginning, comfort women issue was a "local story" of Social Dept., Osaka HQ of Asahi Shimbun. Tales in Seiji Yoshida's confession was featured as just a sentimental story in the serial dubbed "Women's World War II" (Onnatachi-no-Taiheiyou-sensou in Japanese) by Kiyoyasu Kitahata, a lead writer of Asahi. It can be guessed Asahi was in a mood that a few misperceptions could be ignored since denouncements against Japanese military's war crimes were quite common at that time and there was no objection to them.

     However, the issue could not be proved when developed into a serious diplomatic problem. It would be expected that they should have awkwardly withdrawn it then paused even though they could not correct. Other newspapers than Asahi were away from the comfort women issue while they also featured some until around 1992. Why was Asahi the only one to persist with the comfort women issue and argued that the Japanese government should compensate individual comfort women?

　　１．Truth of "Administrative/military personnel directly taking part in" 

Shortly after Jan. 11, 1992 , immediately after  Asahi Shimbun published the major misinformation/false report, Prime Minister Miyazawa visited South Korea and conferred with President Roh Tae-woo about the comfort women issue, then apologized for it for eight times.  That  was the beginning of the ensuing chaos. Once Prime Minister officially did that, there had to be a reason for such apologies, then further investigations had been initiated. 

As a result of investigations, Koichi Kato, the chief cabinet secretary of the Japanese government, addressed in July 1992 that no evidence to confirm a coercive conscription (forcible draft) by the Japanese military while being directly involved in some administration of comfort stations:

"The inquiry has revealed that the Government had been involved in the establishment of comfort stations, the control of those who recruited comfort women, the construction and reinforcement of comfort facilities, the management and surveillance of comfort stations, the hygiene maintenance in comfort stations and among comfort women, and the issuance of identification as well as other documents to those who were related to comfort stations…(cut)...The Government again would like to express its sincere apology and remorse to all those who have suffered indescribable hardship as so-called "wartime comfort women", irrespective of their nationality or place of birth. "

However, the South Korean government were not convinced with this announcement and  demanded the Japanese government should admit some degree of "coerciveness", then the Japanese government conduced another investigation again. Despite no evidence found to confirm coerciveness at all even in the second investigation, "Kono Statement" in the following year has been having a lasting effect until today because "coerciveness" was accepted in its ambiguous expression:

 "The Government study has revealed that in many cases they were recruited against their own will, through coaxing, coercion, etc., and that, at times, administrative/military personnel directly took part in the recruitments."

Because of being slammed in Source Korea since then, the Japanese government released "Kono Statement" (c.f. Chapter 1) as an official statement to the comfort women issue in Aug., 1993. The biggest problem in the statement is to explicitly describe such that "they were recruited against their own will, through coaxing, coercion, etc., and that, at times, administrative/military personnel directly took part in the recruitments". In a press conference after the announcement, Yohei Kono responded to the question about what this part of the statement is meant and said that "There were really such facts.", which has been a South Korea's basis to insist on that the Japanese government admitted the forcible draft. However, Kono himself was not involved in the course of compiling this statement, and he did not understand what the phrase of "directly took part in" was meant. 

It was allegedly explained in another session of that press conference in Ministry of Foreign Affairs that this part was regarding so-called Semarang Comfort Women Incident. During a session in the Diet in 1997,  "there were only a case found which was concerning the incident in Batavia in Indonesia besides the testimony of ex-comfort woman whom the South Korean government allegedly interviewed with.", said an official of Cabinet Secretariat at that time.

It makes no sense to mention "coerciveness" in a diplomatic document for South Korea based on a remote incident in Indonesia, and so-called Semarang Comfort Women Incident was not a case of forcible draft as it was mentioned in the Diet. This incident has been often featured in the guise of human rights since there have been no other case to confirm forcible draft in the Korean Peninsula, which does not matter because the comfort women is an issue between Japan and Korea and there are some records of lawsuits for war criminals. The verification article also depicts as follows:

(NOTE: Asahi's online quote not determined yet) "In Korea and Taiwan which were Japan's colonies in wartime, brokers affiliated with military were able to coaxingly recruit women by telling "I can give you a good job for living", however there was no document to confirm forcible draft such as organized abduction by military. Meanwhile, in Indonesia or others which were under the Japanese military's occupation, there were some documents to confirm that the military forcibly drafted local women against their will."

Firstly, the problem is whether or not this was surely a forcible draft. Forcible draft stands for a form of violence for conscription. Given that a regular conscription can be a part of forcible draft for the sake of argument, forcible draft could not exist because there were no conscription system in South Eastern Asian countries at that time.

There might be a case that a soldier "drafted" a woman, however that was not systematic operations of slavery led by military and was a sex crime (indecent assault) incident committed by subordinate soldiers whose chief was punished. This is quite similar to a rape incident a solder of U.S. Army in Okinawa committed, thus it makes no sense to question a state responsibility due to such an incident. The incident nonetheless influenced Kono Statement. Nobuo Ishihara said in the Diet:

"Although we found no document which explicitly confirms the Japanese government or Japanese army forcibly recruited women, we are not able to deny there seemed to be a couple of brokers doing so and some of them were affiliated with (Japan's) authorities, according to the women's testimonies. Therefore, by considering this, such official thought was accounted in the Kono Statement".

At the same time, Prime Minister Miyazawa allegedly decided to express that coerciveness is admitted since the South Korean government suggested the Japanese government that the comfort women issue can politically come to an end with Japan's admission of some coerciveness. The basis for admitting the coerciveness was that of Semarang Comfort Women Incident. Therefore, an ambiguous statement "at times, administrative/military personnel directly took part in the recruitments" was invented instead of using "forcible draft". 

Now that we wonder some coerciveness by soldiers and private brokers were actually true. Needless to say, there might some cases in the battlefields. It would not be realistic that there were no violence and coerciveness at all in the frontline of the war where more than 3 million were killed.  From time to time, past wars have often brought on rape incidents, therefore the military administered comfort stations in order to prevent from them. 

　　　　２．How Kono Statement was invented.

The Japanese government released the result of re-examination of the so-called Kono Statement in 1993. It says, as also addressed in the speech of ex-deputy chief cabinet secretary Ishihara in the Diet, that Kono statement was altered in response to South Korean's demand, however the South Korean government fiercely lodged objections on this.

This examination shed light on details of the passage. South Korea demanded to alter specific sentences of the statement draft because the official statement must deserve South Korean citizens' recognition in order to make the (comfort women) issue settled, thus Foreign Affairs Ministries of both Japan and South Korea worked together on altering a part of official announcement. More details in the re-examination report are as follows:

"coordination took place until the last moment on “coerciveness” to describe the recruitment of the comfort women on the Korean Peninsula. Communication continued until the evening of August 2, based on the point that “The Korean Peninsula was under Japanese rule in those days,” if seen across the stages of their “recruitment, transfer, control, etc.,” regardless of how they were recruited, the sense that this was conducted as a whole against the will of the individuals was finally coordinated as being expressed as “generally against their will, through coaxing, coercion, etc."

As seen above, Japan dealt with South Korea's demand for altering statements, and the statement was finally concluded in response to decisions of both Prime Minister Miyazawa and South Korea President Kim Young Sam. Japan side seemed to expect that South Korea never resurrect this issue by this statement released, however, it doesn't mean South Korea side promised so. The South Korean government admits they certainly had inquiries from Japan beforehand, but insists on South Korea unofficially responded to Japan's persistent requests with some ideas and opinions.

If both governments never yield to each other concerning a problem  it is not a bad idea for both to compromise things under a certain condition such that both of governments will no longer touch on the problem. It is reasonable that Japan inquired beforehand to South Korea because the goal is to convince them. However, it was a mistake to place ambiguous statements such as "against their own will" and "administrative/military personnel directly took part in the recruitments" which could be interpreted into "Japan admitted forcible draft".

Although the South Korean government was supposedly convinced of this statement as a political settlement, Teitaikyo and medias stirred arguments and spouted "Japan admitted forcible draft" then the issue eventually came to a major problem. I have to say the Japanese government underestimated what would happen, however it makes no sense that South Korea, addressed that President Kim Young Sam appreciated the final draft by Japan and the South Korea government agreed on that draft, eventually brings it up again and insists "That was unofficial opinion". I wonder if a President's decision is unofficial in South Korea.

　　　　３．Mizuho Fukushima, diffused the issue

Nobuo Ishihara, who was the deputy chief cabinet secretary at that time, confessed to Sankei Shimbun the reason why they placed such misleading statement:

"No doubt about that Japanese government never officially induced forcible draft of women to make them comfort women regardless of whether or not they are Korean, there's no data to confirm such. Guidelines of transfer and administration for comfort women and facility sanitization in each region were found, however documents were not found to even urge coercive recruitment even if it's against their own will. Meanwhile, Kono Statement and Cabinet of Prime Minister Miyazawa intended Japan has no other options than admitting that there were some who were unwilling to become comfort women against their will."

He also responded to a question, "Was that Prime Minister Miyazawa's political decision?", and said "Yes it was, because it was a statement by the Cabinet. It was of the chief cabinet secretary, but it was released in response to Prime Minister's intent.". It can be implicitly interpreted Ishihara objected to Kono Statement. In a meeting with the Diet members in 1997, he accounted for details of what was going on in a publication titled "Questions to history textbooks " ("Rekishi Kyokasho eno Gimon" in Japanese) . In particular, we should note the following:

"In the very beginning of this issue(1992), the South Korean government did not incite arguments. I even felt a mood not to bring it up again as a major problem. However, some of Japan side that I did mention about dug out and made the issue bigger there (in South Korea), then others raised questions in the Diet in turn. There was such a collaboration work, so that the South Korean government could not ignore that. (Page 314)"

"Some of Japan side that I mentioned about" are Kennichi Takagi and Mizuho Fukushima. Fukushima publicly stated so on a TV show. That is, Fukushima is the one who clamored "forcible draft" and invented diplomatic disputes between Japan and Korea at that point when the South Korean government was almost on the way to be politically settled. She admitted that her affiliates and herself picked up some of ex-comfort women whom the South Korean government interviewed.

　　４．A Human Rights Attorney aiming a lawsuit for 1 trillion yen

Some readers, if being recently interested in the issue but not having knowledge about its complex passage in the past,  might be confused with what is different between this issue and "women's human right". Japanese government has never neglected women's human rights. What South Korean government demands is not such a "universal right", but is Japan's state compensation for comfort women which is the reason why the Japanese government has not been able to accept and the issue has stayed unsettled.

In general, there have never been a case in the world history that an ex-suzerain state compensated or apologized for its past colonies, and with Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea (known as Nikkan Kihon Joyaku in Japanese) a funding for economic support by 500 million dollars was settled. Since the funding was set from a government to another and there's no limitation in terms of what purpose it would be used for, South Korean government is able to take advantage of this to compensate individuals of its citizens if Park Geun-hye's Administration intends to do so.

By contrast, Kennich Takagi insists that the treaty (the above-mentioned Nikkan Kihon Joyaku) does not invalidate the right of liability claim for individual compensation. He visited South Korea in 1990, recruited ex-comfort women plaintiffs who were applied to his calls then raised a lawsuit. This was the turning point where Seiji Yoshida's lie has developed into a political issue. Takagi summoned Yoshida as a witness for the lawsuit for liability claim of holdovers in Sakhalin, and Yoshida's testimony had been a basis in his ensuing comfort women lawsuits.

Takagi has allegedly stated that 1 trillion yen is enough to do much. His intent is to make individual compensations for comfort women a showcase, which is a smart tactic. No one is interested in a forcible draft of men, while the world pays attention to "Sex Slave". Once Japanese government admits a single case of state compensation, a lawsuit of 1 trillion yen can be raised. If it's settled with the compensation for a single comfort women who had not even been employed by the military,  it would also deserve more for all the Korean (men and women) who were employed by the military.  Takagi and Fukushima could gain a plenty of lawsuits' commissions sufficient for their lifetime.

As seen above, the essential of comfort women issue was not about women's human rights, thus it is a matter of forcible draft for men. Therefore, Japanese government conveyed unofficial apologies but has not accepted state compensations, because it would only deserve the benefits for ripping-off lawyers, not for anyone else.

Comfort women are internationally known as "Sex Slaves". This word was invented by a lawyer dubbed Etsuro Totsuka. In an interview by Sekainippo, he proudly confessed "I invented the name of "SexSlave". He had taken advantage of his position belonging to UN's NGO, urged UNCHR (United Nations Commission on Human Rights) over and over again to announce an advisory concerning comfort women issue, then distributed English translation of Seiji Yoshida's confession in order to introduce comfort women as "Sex Slaves" to the world through more or less 20 times of committees he attended.

　　　　５．UN diffused Sex Slave

What Totsuka's address is based on is Yoshida's testimony that Asahi admitted it was false.  Coomaraswamy Report announced in 1996 cites regarding the background of sex slaves as follows based on Yoshida's testimony:

"The wartime experiences of one raider, Yoshida Seiji, are recorded in his book, in which he confesses to having been part of slave raids in which, among other Koreans, as many as 1,000 women were obtained for "comfort women" duties under the National Labour Service Association as part of the National General Mobilization Law. /10"

The reference number "10" is Yoshida's work titled "My War Crimes: the Forced Draft of Koreans (Watashi no Sensou Hanzai in Japanese)" which was quoted for several times in this report. There were no other original source in this report except ex-comfort women's interviews that Totsuka and others collected. Based on these testimonies, this report advised for Japanese government to accept legal liability for sex slavery and compensate individual victims. 

Although there are some testimonies by victims in this report,  most of them are not more than ex-comfort women's  reminiscences which were distorted by layers' inductions. As an example, the account of Chong Ok Sun, who is an ex-comfort woman and appears in this report over and over, is the following:

"One day in June, at the age of 13, I had to prepare lunch for my parents who were working in the field and so I went to the village well to fetch water. A Japanese garrison soldier surprised me there and took me away, so that my parents never knew what had happened to their daughter. I was taken to the police station in a truck, where I was raped by several policemen. When I shouted, they put socks in my mouth and continued to rape me. The head of the police station hit me in my left eye because I was crying. That day I lost my eyesight in the left eye. 

After 10 days or so, I was taken to the Japanese army garrison barracks in Heysan City. There were around 400 other Korean young girls with me and we had to serve over 5,000 Japanese soldiers as sex slaves every day - up to 40 men per day. Each time I protested, they hit me or page 14 stuffed rags in my mouth. One held a matchstick to my private parts until I obeyed him. My private parts were oozing with blood." (IV. TESTIMONIES 54.)

This is exactly same as what another ex-comfort woman whose name is Lee Bok-Nyo testified in the report by Rodong Sinmun (North Korea's newspaper) in 1992. It can be assumed a single source of fabrication is copied for multiple witnesses at the direction of Workers' Party of Korea (North Korea).

The reason why this isn't her own story is that there were no comfort women in the Korean Peninsula as of 1933. "The Japanese army garrison" was not able to exist since the Korean Peninsula was not a battle field. In addition, "around 400 other Korean young girls with me" sounds also absurd. Comfort stations were located outside barracks, and the number of comfort women was a few dozen. If each of 400 comfort women took 40 soldiers per day, the total number would be 16 thousands per day and 5000 soldiers took a sex service for 3 times per day or more. 

There were stories like this in the interviews held for Kono Statement, and those testimonies were ex-comfort women picked up by Takagi, Fukushima or else. The depiction did not match historical facts, a testimony changed her story back and forth, without any supporting evidence. Since it is no doubt about that ex-comfort women themselves are not able to prove the military involvement, "forcible draft" cannot be proved no matter how many times we'd interview them.

In the sentimental reports of Asahi and New York Times as well as the ruling in "The Women's International War Crimes Tribunal on Japan's Military Sexual Slavery", what is commonly seen is that those were based on only ex-comfort women's reminiscences. No official document that confirm testimonies has not been found in the past colonies,  as admitted Asahi. 

All the documents presented are not enough trustworthy to confirm the facts since they are all assembled with hearsay statements. Most frequently quoted source is a book written by G. Hicks, another is Yosida's "My War Crimes: the Forced Draft of Koreans", which is to say that the Coomaraswamy Report's source is requotations from two published works only. 

G. Hicks, an economic analyst who used to live in Hong Kong, can't read both Japanese and Korean. In his citation in the book, he said "I referenced to the English translated document from South Korea.". That is, Coomaraswamy Report is nothing but a scrapbook of ex-comfort women's hearsay accounts that Korean activists translated (with some intent) into English. Therefore, his book is not admissible at all, only the remaining original source is Yoshida's testimony which also turned into unreliable as Asahi retracted in their verification article, we have to see this report is not reliable at all. It is agreeable that Coomaraswamy allegedly addressed "No need to revise the report", since this report must be fully revoked instead of being revised just like Asahi's retracted articles.

Murayama's Cabinet allegedly blocked the Foreign Affairs Ministry's attempt to lodge an objection about this report which depicted:

(No online English quote found) "The special representative depicts the passages of Japanese military's comfort stations in the history such as so-called the recruitment of comfort women and what their lives looked like at comfort stations, however only references to most of scrapped pieces from a book of G. Hicks, who is critical to Japanese government, which make it easy to come to her intended conclusion. It is a common responsibility that published materials that critics ground on must be carefully examined, however there was no clue to indicate such examinations have been done. In addition, the report was subjectively exaggerated. This report is full of irresponsibility and prejudice, and not worth being called an 'Investigation Report' "

Even after 16 times reported Yoshida's testimony is denied, Asahi has dodged the question and has still insisted "Core of 'comfort women' issue remains unchanged", however, Yoshida's testimony had been referenced as a basis by such bogus reports and had produced significant impacts in the world. Ministry of Foreign Affairs should lodge the objection in order to urge UN to revoke that report.

Japanese government's reactions to this report have been mysterious. At that time the Foreign Affairs Ministry retracted the 40-page document submitted to the Coomaraswamy's committee due to unknown reasons, then all they did was a diplomatic objection statements compiled in a half page document. Details are still unknown, however, it is assumed that it was ordered by Murayama Cabinet's. Yohei Kono, who used to be the Foreign Minister at that time, is still responsible to account for details in the Diet.

　　６．Ex-comfort women's incoherent testimonies

Two women Kim Bok-Dong and  Kil Won-ok, who visited Japan but abruptly cancelled a scheduled meeting with Osaka Mayor Toru Hashimoto in 2013, nonetheless attended another conference held in Osaka. According to Chosun Ilbo, a Korean newspaper, Kim allegedly was coaxingly told to be moved to a munitions plant when she was 14 years old then she was actually transferred as a comfort woman to the battle field in the islands in Southeast Asian Sea (Micronesia). Her testimony is the following:

" At first I was taken to the comfort station in Guangdong, China. There was a headquarter of ground-force command where we underwent physical examinations by officers and surgeons, then we were moved to prepared rooms. Japanese government says that was not done by the government. How were civilians able to organize comfort stations for soldiers?"

First of all, a discrepancy in articles can be found regarding which the islands in Southeast Asian Sea (Palau, Saipan, etc.) or Guangdong in China she was actually taken to for her first time. In addition, Kim allegedly addressed that she moved from Guangdong to Hong Kong, Malaysia, Sumatra, Indonesia, Java, Singapore. Since even Japanese corps did not move around Pacific Ocean by thousands kilometers,  it is impossible at all for a comfort woman to attend them.

As Kim is deemed 87 years old, it was in 1939 or 1940 when she was "14". The man who coaxed her to take to a munitions plant was supposedly a civilian since at that time there were no issued mandates for military conscription in the Korean Peninsula. It is reasonable for surgeons to conduct physical examinations which were surely for sanitation. It can be reasoned that civilians organized comfort stations for soldiers because it was for gaining money. After all, what she mentioned means that she was coaxed then worked at comfort stations that civilians operated. No "forcible draft" can be seen in what she meant.

Meanwhile, Kim allegedly addressed that she had moved around Asian battle fields to oppressively work as a comfort woman for 8 years, according to Okinawa Times. In case it was true that she became a comfort woman in 1939, 8-year work would have ended in 1947 when Japanese military did not exist. She may have worked for several civilian's brothels.

On the other hand, Kil Won-ok allegedly addressed that she was enforced to take soldiers in the comfort stations of Japanese military since 1940 when she was 11 years old, according to Mainichi Shimbun. 11-year old girl was in the 5th grade of elementary school when she would have never had her first menstruation. Her testimony can be assumed a fiction she made up so as to make what she addressed and her current age congruous, and she have never specifically depicted what she had experienced as a comfort woman even in that conference.

All the "testimonies" of comfort women that New York Times' writer Tabuchi relies on are more or less than what can be seen above. Testimonies can't be an admissible evidence no matter how many of them are collected since they are not congruous at all with historic facts. It can be assumed the reason why she abruptly cancelled the meeting with Osaka Mayor Hashimoto was their supporting affiliates decided that they could have not managed to answer counter examinations in a preparatory meeting. 

７．"The Women's International War Crimes Tribunal on Japan's Military Sexual Slavery" sentenced Showa Emperor for sexual assault

The disreputable evasion of Asahi which they addressed that "forcible draft" to comfort women was reported by other medias as well is a truth.  The most accusable media should be NHK. In the Women's International War Crimes Tribunal on Japan's Military Sexual Slavery in 2000, which caused the so-called "NHK Program Alteration" issue, Showa Emperor was sentenced as follows in spite of not being presented and pleaded.

"The Tribunal finds, based on the evidence before it, that the Prosecution has proved its case against the accused Emperor Hirohito, and finds him guilty of responsibility for rape and sexual slavery as a crime against humanity, under Counts1-2 of the Common Indictment" 

According to Yayori Matsui (ex-Asahi's reporter) who belonged to VAWW-NET (Violence Against Women in War Network Japan) Japan which organized this tribunal, comfort women issue was a "wartime sexual violence", which is a fallacy. A wartime sexual violence is a sexual crime such as a rape incident happened in wartime. Japanese military established comfort stations to prevent such crimes from being committed. 

However, this "War Crimes Tribunal" prosecuted Showa Emperor and convicted him for rape on the ground of dubious evidence such as Seiji Yoshida's testimony. No such episode of rape against comfort women appears even in Yoshida's testimonies. Although it is surprising that NHK aired a 45-minute TV program on their ETV (Educational TV) channel, it got rather controversial that NHK's executives intervened the compilation of that program. 

A producer Eriko Ikeda (Not a relative of mine) of NHK Enterprise 21 who sponsored that program was one of founders of VAWW-NET, which was concealed by assigning her subordinate as the producer of the program. She used to be a leader of far-left group within NHK known as "China School" and also a commissioner of the "War Crimes Tribunal", which means that she may not have produced a fair report since the actual producer of that TV program was a commissioner who sponsored the tribunal.

This fact was revealed to the right wings before aired, and pointed out by Shinzo Abe and other legislators, which urged controversies against which NHK's executives intervened the TV program beforehand to significantly alter its contents and "account for" the altered contents to legislators because it was shortly before their budgetary debates for NHK.  Then Asahi spouted NHK distorted TV program in response to politicians' intervention, and VAWW-NET raised a lawsuit to claim the aired program was different from what was expected when interviewed. 

In the first and second trials, the court affirmed "a right for expectancy", meanwhile the Supreme Court confirmed NHK prevailed. In 2005, there was a fuss Asahi reported political intervention of Shinzo Abe and others, however it is quite reasonable for such nonsense TV program to be slammed and revised to get reverted to the original. That program should have rather been cancelled. 

"Freedom of media" has been emphasized for similar cases in the past, meanwhile comfort women issue seriously reminded us of other aspects of mass media. If a media continues to retain false reports, it is rather capable of inventing such a "comfort women issue" regardless of whether it's actually existent and collapse Japan - Korea relationship to make it chaotic.

　８．A lawyer reimported "common sense" of international society

Who diffused overstated disinformation about comfort women issue to the world was "human rights" attorneys such as Mizuho Fukushima. They also spouted reimported disinformation of what they spread by themselves as "international common sense". Likewise, an article of Kazuko Ito, chief director of an NGO, can be a typical twisted rhetoric. Her quote of what Navi Pillay, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights addressed is more serious since it is published as an official remark of UN.

"During my visit to Japan in 2010, I appealed to the Government to provide effective redress to the victims of wartime sexual slavery.the UN Human Rights Committee called on Japan to take “immediate and effective legislative and administrative measures” to ensure that all allegations of sexual slavery are investigated and perpetrators prosecuted."

What UN urged to Japan is not a commonly-known "protection for women's human right", but state compensations for ex-comfort women by the Japanese government and prosecution against who were responsible at that time. However, this was already settled in Tokyo Tribunal of War Criminals (known as Tokyo Saiban in Japan) and  Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea (known as Nikkan Kihon Jouyaku), therefore demanding further individual compensations and persecution is an outlawry to the international law. 

UN's basis to release such absurd "advisory" is a series of reports which criticized "sex slaves" and were ignited with  Coomaraswamy Report. Who touted this to UN was a lawyer Etsuro Totsuka, and this has remained an "international common sense" since then because Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not lodge any object to UN. Again, the most significant basis of this report basis is Seiji Yoshida's testimony. Then another lawyer such as Ito reimported the disinformation to naively accuse the government to say that the government attitudes look inhuman. She insisted that Germany accepted their responsibilities for holocausts by Nazi and full-heartedly apologized for them, however, I wonder if she thinks the Japanese military committed genocides against comfort women.

If compensations settled under a treaty need to be revised, it is only a possible way to conclude another Nikkan (Japan-Korea) treaty. When it comes to true and if it concludes compensations even for civilians who were found to be war victims since 1965, 320 thousands estimated victims for "forcible draft" would raise lawsuits and all kinds of retired military personnel including nurses who worked for private businesses would demand compensations.

If the government responds to such demands for individual compensations for comfort women not having direct labor contract with the military, all the disputes of postwar compensations which cost trillions yen of national budget would recur, while it would be a tangible business opportunity for lawyers such as Fukushima and Ito. It is a major misperception to think flagging "women's human rights" makes them prevail over issues. What about men's human right while there's no one to deny women's human right? For a case where hundreds of men labors were killed, known as Hanaoka Incident, a private company Kashima compensated for them while the government did not.

The Japanese government had heartily apologized for the comfort women issue and compensated for them with utmost efforts as "The Asian Women's Fund" instead of state compensation. The situation has been chaotic since the South Korean Government has insisted it's not enough. The treaty, Nikkan Jouyaku, was an agreement of comprehensive funding not to limit what is to be utilized for. The South Korean government is allowed to compensate comfort women if wanted.

　９．Worldwide spreading acts for criticizing comfort women issue

The turning point of acts for criticizing comfort women issue which have been decided in 27 countries was a resolution H.Res.121 for the Japanese American Mike Honda's bill set out to the House (US House of Representative) in June 2007. This resolution's prologue insanely starts as follows:

"Whereas the Government of Japan, during its colonial and wartime occupation of Asia and the Pacific Islands from the 1930s through the duration of World War II, officially commissioned the acquisition of young women for the sole purpose of sexual servitude to its Imperial Armed Forces, who became known to the world as ianfu or ``comfort women''; Whereas the ``comfort women'' system of forced military prostitution by the Government of Japan, considered unprecedented in its cruelty and magnitude, included gang rape, forced abortions, humiliation, and sexual violence resulting in mutilation, death, or eventual suicide in one of the largest cases of human trafficking in the 20th century;"

Medias reported comments of Lantos, the chairman of U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs, to say the attitude of Japanese to criticize victims is vomity, however they did not report any reason why the issue can be "the largest cases in the 20th century". Rep. Honda responded "the Japanese government apologized in 1993" when questioned like "where's the evidence you have?". That means Japan's political decision for apologies instead of thorough examinations against the facts endorsed the fallacy of forcible draft. 

A testimony such that a man attired in military uniform took her away can't be an evidence to confirm a military order. There might be some cases of human trafficking because of poverty, and some of comfort women who were coerced into unwilling sex. At that time, there were prostitutions and human trafficking all over the world, and brothels in both US and British army were confirmed, German army established 500 prostitution facilities for conscripted prostitutes under its direct operation, and Russian army systematically raped women in the battle fields.

If all the cases the military permitted prostitutions in the battle fields can be inhuman, what about comfort stations that Rep. Honda admitted the US troops availed in Japan in the postwar era? VAWW-NET is rather logically consistent since it criticizes all the sex slavery prostitutions operated/supported by any military organizations regardless of how many cases of them were forcible drafting. Criticizing only comfort women for Japanese troops is racial discrimination.

Herein it is also interesting to find the word "the largest in the 20th century", instead of "the largest in the history".  Who led the largest human trafficking in the history was U.S.A that forcibly drafted 15 million salves from Africa. He seems to be aware of that history.

　１０．Arrogance of English centric principle

A memorandum of US Congressional Research Service, which was filed to the House for comfort women issue, is only an US Government's publication concerning this issue, however it can't believed it is a government's official report since it's too faulty. The major controversy on the Japanese military's responsibilities is concluded as follows:

"His emphasis on one component of the comfort women system, recruitment, has the effect of minimizing the Japanese military's deep role in other aspects of the system (transport, establishment and administration of comfort stations, and control of the women at the comfon stations), The military may not have directly carried out the majority of recruitment, especially in Korea; but the Abe government's denial of any evidence of military coercion in recruitment goes against the testimony former comfort to Japanese government researchers who compiled the 1992-1993 government report and the testimony of forced recruitment by nearly 200 former comfOrt women from different Asian countries and the Netherlands of the 400 plus testimonies cited in Yuki Tanaka' s book, Japan 's Comfort Women."

It cautiously addresses "The military may not have directly carried out the majority of recruitment", however, this memorandum is eventually only based on ex-comfort women's testimonies. In addition, "the Japanese government's  report" compiled by government researchers which is actually a Cabinet Secretary's report does not contain any of ex-comfort women's testimonies. Another basis "Japan's Comfort Women" is a secondary source which consists of support group's remarks translated into English by Toshiyuki Tanaka who was a researcher supported by the Communist party, has never been worth being quoted by researchers. After all, two of these resources, only basis to deny Prime Minister Abe's statement and stand for "military coercion", are both negligible. The writers of this report were not (capable of) reading Japanese materials, then composed recurrence of knowingly compiling a series of selective secondary sources and emphasizing the stereotyped "Unrepentant Japanese for that war".

Such "English centrism" has been interfering objective researches on historical facts from objective perspective. It is really disappointing to find that this report was compiled only as a referenced source for H.Res.121 which intended to accuse Japan from the beginning, however it indicates American bureaucrats' intellectual level are far lower than Japanese ones. 

What makes matters worse is there are some like Toshuyuki Tanaka who appeal "achievements" in English to get along with stereotypes of Americans and Europeans. Those would like to strike a chord with Americans and Europeans by seemingly complaining about "Japan's nationalism" and to become a member of white people's community.

Japanese foreigners had overly appealed their loyalty to US in postwar era because they were persecuted as enemies. However Americans do not tell those of Japanese, Chinese and Korean. In addition, there has been increasingly lots of Chinese and Korean immigrants lately, thus Japanese foreigners' population is one of minorities ranked 6th in Asian immigrants in US. In particular, President Bush addressed 9.11 was compared to Pearl Harbor attack, which aroused recurrent American's hostility against Japan, thus there were discriminatory incidents happened. Since then Japanese foreigners have tended to represent their own identities as Asian.

While Chinese and Korean people in their community are closely united, Japanese community come apart because they tend to dislike being called "Japanese Foreigners" and masochistically criticize Japan. This indicates a uniqueness of Japanese by contrast to other Asian countries. While blood relationship is still highly respected today in China and Korea, Japanese do mind the territorial relationship. This is commonly known as "Ie-society" where "family and relatives" in Japan typically organize a functional unit, instead of a community based on blood relationship. That is why people not in a blood relationship get closely accompanied soon in a group once "Ie" turns into a business organization such as a company.

By contrast, Japanese people are not much interested in those who do not share actual interests because of lacking awareness to cognate relationship. This is why Rep. Honda insists on proposing bills for criticizing comfort women issue of Japan no matter how many times he is pointed out for his misperceptions to the facts, so as not to be coldly looked in his own society. Now that those who collaborate with these people and support criticisms abroad to fabricate historical facts are Japanese medias.

　１１．New York Times' reports about "sex slaves"

A reporter Onishi, who used to be assigned the chief of Tokyo brach during 2003 - 2009, published a lot of articles he criticized that the first Abe's Administration's revising Kono Statement. As an example he addressed in the front page in Mar. 8th, 2007 that Abe's denial to Kono Statement hurts sex slaves.

This Abe's denial in his article about Abe's statement addressed at the Upper House Budget Committee was: "On Monday(Mar. 5th, 2007), Mr. Abe said he would preserve the 1993 statement (Kono Statement) but denied its central admission of the military’s role, saying there had been no “coercion, like the authorities breaking into houses and kidnapping” women." In response to this statement, Onishi affirmatively claim that Abe is a liar with a basis of three ex-comfort women's testimonies such as Jan Ruff O’Herne who insists she was drafted by Japanese military to Indonesia,  Wu Hsiu-mei, and Kil Won-ok.

Jan Ruff O’Herne testified that the Japanese military systematically raped her, which can be assumed Onish made her account for. It might look a "systematic commitment by military" from her perspective, however the military order can't be proved by a comfort woman. There are records of  Semarang Comfort Women Incident in the court and physical evidences found in place. The following is the facts Yoshimi also admits:

- Some military officers in a battle field abducted 35 Dutch women to plunge into 4 comfort stations and raped them in spite of the 16th command headquarter's order to recruit only voluntary women

- The 16th command headquarter shut down the comfort stations at the end of Apr. 1944 in response to an advisory of a colonel Odajima who a Dutch woman reported this criminal case to.
- 12 suspects were concluded to be guilty and class BC war criminals in the postwar military tribunal. (A major, Okada was sentenced to death.)

All of what two other ex-comfort women addressed was that they were coaxingly taken to the comfort station, which does not confirm any evidence to indicate that was committed as a systematic military crime. That is to say that it was a rape incident of a breach of military discipline which proves that the Japanese troop had not drafted comfort women.  Likewise, New York Times is not accused given Onish would commit groping. A groping incident does not prove New York Times' systematic involvement for groping.

Another vice of his articles is he accused Prime Minister Abe of a rape incident in Indonesia in spite of Abe's response was about incidents in the Korea Peninsula. Indonesia was a battle field where there might be rape incidents. Although it would make sense in case the troops supported this, the military shut down the comfort stations and also punished them.

　１２．Japanese foreigners discriminate Japanese

Needless to say, Onishi was aware of this, however New York Times reported an article in the front page which he made up on purpose to diffused the fabrication "Abe's statement about incidents in the Korean Peninsula is a lie because there's a rape case in Indonesia". In the wake of this article published, a myth of "sex slaves" spread to the world and the Japanese government has been reluctant to revise Kono Statement due to US government's pressure. 

If there is a case of rape in the battle field, it has nothing to do with Japan - Korea relationship. No one in Indonesia  may have never remembered such incident. Instead, Kenichi Takagi visited Indonesia and recruited plaintiffs by advertising to say "Gain 2 million yen once you sue Japan".

What New York Time frequently quotes as "sex slave" only brings ambiguity. If it stands for "conscription", an evidence does not exist in former colonies as admitted Asahi, since there were no conscription system thus it's impossible to find evidence. If it stands for public prostitutions administered by the military, the Japanese government admitted its existence in 1992 then apologized for it, thus it is false to insist "The government denies it".

If it stands for human trafficking, there were such cases in the Korean Peninsula as well as in China led by civilians,  which however were illegal and there's no evidence to indicate involvements of military and authorities for human trafficking. Anyway, Onishi's article "Japanese troops drafted a large number of sex slaves." is disinformation. Quoting the ambiguous and misleading term "sex slave" brings a shame on a quality paper such as New York Times.  

When I argued with Kevin Maher in a Japanese TV show "Takajin no sokomade itte iinkai" and I told him "Forcible draft and human trafficking are different issues", he responded "Such difference doesn't matter. It is not politically right to withdraw Japan's repentance to that war.". It sounds seriously disappointing because he used to be the one familiar with Japan in US Department of State. "Executive of US Department of State" that NYT reports may be advising Japan without sufficient knowledge about facts, it can be assumed he does not even understand what actual issues are.

In such a sensitive subject, it is quite normal that there's a shared consensus in the working-level arguments even though cabinet-level disputes appear to go chaotic and politicians of both ends argue all they want for a while to reach a compromised conclusion in the end. However, disputes would never come to an end if working-level personnel is not familiar with what actual issues are.

From US perspective, it would not matter whether or not there was actually forcible draft. The Japanese government also admitted a certain military involvement in administrations of comfort stations. The Japanese government has simply accounted for there's no evidence to such facts because the South Korean government insists on Japanese troops' forcible draft. The disputed point is not concerning human trafficking, it is concerning the existence of executions by public authorities.
In the past, Maher may have experienced such rape incident in Okinawa that was committed by an American subordinate soldier. Does it turn out US army's systematic involvement in the sexual crime once such a case occurs? It can be guessed he should have expressed he's afraid of such incident then officially claimed like "It was not an incident by the order of US army, hence US government is not responsible.". So does the Japanese government in tune with an international common sense since it has nothing to do with repentance to the war.