Special Feature

A storm of criticism raged across Japan and a host of other nations in Asia following recent comments about “comfort women” by Toru Hashimoto, the out-spoken mayor of Osaka City and co-leader of the Japan Restoration Party (JSP) – an emerging conservative political party. At the same time, however, there were also those who spoke up in defense of Hashimoto. How should the Japanese address the issue of the “comfort women”? Journalist Yoshiko Sakurai examines the matter.

　　　　　I suppose I am not alone in having mixed feelings about the provocative May 13 remarks by Mayor Hashimoto pertaining to “comfort women.” Hashimoto resorted to his mightiest weapon – crisp and easy-to-understand rhetoric – as he tackled a subject that every politician must know requires the utmost sensitivity. As expected, there have been fierce repercussions from many quarters, including the US, dwarfing the controversial statements about Japan’s war-time past by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe which in recent weeks made frequent headlines.
　　　　　I have since analyzed Hashimoto’s remarks, breaking them down into the following eleven points:
　　　　　①Japan should fully acknowledge and apologize for its war-time
　　　　　　　aggression;
　　　　　②Japan must properly consider the hardships suffered by the
　　　　　　　“comfort women”;
　　　　　③During World War II, all militaries had facilities in place for
　　　　　　　prostitution;
　　　　　④Why is Japan singled out for accusations involving war-time
　　　　　　　prostitution?;
　　　　　⑤Countries like South Korea accuse Japan’s military of having a
　　　　　　　lax attitude towards rape, but such　accusations have never
　　　　　　　been substantiated;
　　　　　⑥Politics in Japan does not allow the government to properly
　　　　　　　discuss or apologize for these issues;
　　　　　⑦Soldiers need prostitution;
　　　　　⑧He told the US military commander of Futenma Air Station on
　　　　　　　Okinawa that the adult entertainment business there should be
　　　　　　　“utilized more”　by US personnel to “release sexual frustration”
　　　　　　　on their part;
　　　　　⑨The commander replied that is “off-limits” for the US military;
　　　　　⑩To this Hashimoto replied that it was better to talk openly about
　　　　　　　the reality of the situation; and,
　　　　　⑪The US armed forces did “the same thing” (utilizing prostitution)
　　　　　　　during the Korean War, and during the occupation of Okinawa
　　　　　　　(1945-1972).
　　　　　I believe Hashimoto is hard-pressed to justify his remarks on five points – from ⑦ to ⑪. Particularly questionable was his advice to the US base commander, which is beyond all imagination, making one wonder if he has any common sense not only as a politician but as a Japanese citizen.
　　　　　Ordinarily, any sensible politician would refrain from making public that he had made such an embarrassing statement, but Hashimoto dared publicize it most likely because as a politician he completely failed to understand how senseless and outrageous it was for him to publicly advocate “making better use” of the existing sex industry.
　　　　　I understand that Mr. Hashimoto is currently putting together his claims in proper Japanese, which will then be translated into refined English so as to touch the hearts of those in the international community interested in the latest controversy. The English version of his statement is expected to be completed around the time the issue of the magazine carrying this column is on the newsstand. However, I cannot help but think Hashimoto is trying to lock the stable door after the horse has bolted.
　　　　　The incident clearly reveals that Mr. Hashimoto as a politician completely failed to take into consideration how to judge the timing of his remarks, to whom and under what circumstances his intended remarks would be made, and how they would be expressed in order to most effectively address the pertinent matter. He also should have been prepared to cope with repercussions, as he should have assumed his remarks would likely provoke a strong reaction.
　　　　　Education Minister Hakubun Shimomura wonders if there is “any hidden purpose” to intentionally make such remarks at this juncture, pointing out: “Those certainly weren’t the kind of comments someone representing a political party should make. Mr. Hashimoto should know he must behave like a responsible politician – not like some average Joe in your local neighborhood.”
　　　　　Hiroshi Nakada, a JRP member of the lower house of the Diet, attempts to defend Hashimoto by noting that the latter is “strongly frustrated” over the fact that Japan has over the years been “groundlessly accused” of being a “nation of rapists,” while also being charged with having forced approximately 200,000 women, mostly Koreans, into prostitution. Nakada says Hashimoto strongly desires to resolve this problem, adding that Hashimoto is still firmly determined to thrash out the problem despite the on-going controversy, ready to meet with former “comfort women” now visiting Japan and to state his views before the representatives of the foreign press at the Foreign Correspondents Club of Japan in Tokyo on May 27.

Changing Nature of the “Comfort Women” Issue

　　　　　The circumstances surrounding the debate about these historical issues are changing almost daily, even at this moment of writing, making it difficult to predict how it will develop. Above all else, however, I am afraid Hashimoto himself may become the cause of a widening of the international scope of the “comfort women” issue. He is at a threshold where his words and deeds pertaining to this issue could seriously impair Japan’s national interests.
　　　　　Even if that is not the case, the nature of the “comfort women” issue has been undergoing a gradual change – influenced to some degree by an increasingly less sympathetic view of Japan from some within the Obama administration. Beyond this issue – beyond ascertaining whether the Japanese army actually forced women into prostitution, whether the total number was actually in the range of 200,000, whether these women had freedom of choice, whether these women were “sex slaves” – there is the possibility that the debate may move into a broader condemnation of Japan’s past treatment of women in general.
　　　　　If matters evolve in this direction, a framework may be created that will allow for continuous condemnation of Japan in light of alleged violations of “universal common values.” Under such circumstances, Japan may be forced into an indefensible position, its contention that other nations did the same during the war becoming less and less acceptable or convincing. Hashimoto’s remarks embrace a precarious element quite capable of prompting a change in that direction.
　　　　　So far, the controversy involving Japan’s “proper recognition” of history, at least formally, has had to do with South Korea and China alone. As a responsible politician, Hashimoto should come to grips with the seriousness of the repercussions of his brash and thoughtless remarks, which now involve the US after the State Department expressed displeasure with Japan in connection with the issue formally for the first time.
　　　　　But then South Korea and China, which have continually accused Japan in connection with war-time history, tend to prioritize ideology, nationalistic sentiments, and political considerations over historical facts. It is often difficult to cope with both these two nations with logic alone.

Twisted and Fabricated History

　　　　　History Textbooks and the War in Asia: Divided Memories is a compilation of studies conducted by the Shorenstein Asia Pacific Research Center at Stanford University on how history is recorded in five nations (Japan, the US, China, South Korea, and Taiwan), focusing on the period from the beginning of the Sino-Japanese war (1931) until the signing of the San Francisco Peace Treaty (1951). Daniel C. Sneider, Associate Director for Research, summarized some of the findings in an article on Nippobn.com in May of 2012 (http://www.nippobn.com/en/in-depth/a00703/). Sneider says this about textbooks in South Korea:
　　　　　“The desire to nurture a sense of national pride sometimes produces curious forms of myopia about the wartime period, most notably in the South Korean textbooks. The narrative of the wartime period offered to South Korean students is focused almost entirely on the oppressive experience of Koreans under Japanese colonial rule and on tales of Korean resistance to their overlords. The larger wartime context for Japan’s increasingly desperate and forced mobilization of Koreans for the war effort – namely the quagmire of the war in China and the mounting retaliatory assault of the Americans after 1942 – is not provided. South Korean textbooks barely mention the outbreak of war in China in 1937 or the attack on Pearl Harbor, and in the case of the main textbook published by the government there is no mention at all of the atomic bombing in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.”
　　　　　As for textbooks in China, Sneider has this to say:
　　　　　“Chinese textbooks are most obviously imbued with a passionately patriotic and ideologically shaped narrative of the war…The Chinese textbooks, published by the People’s Education Press, underwent a significant revision in 2002. The revised textbooks were slowly introduced around the country and offer a distinctly more nationalistic account of the wartime period…In its narrative about the events leading to the Japanese invasion of China, for example, the 2002 Chinese textbook offers an extensive quote from the so-called Tanaka Memorial to demonstrate the origins of Japanese ambitions in Asia from the 1920s. That there were aggressive Japanese ambitions in Asia during this period is undoubted, but modern historiography in the West and in Japan considers the ‘Tanaka Memorial’ a spurious document.”
　　　　　It is these twisted and fabricated versions of history – put in place to foster anti-Japanese sentiments – that we must resolutely cope with.
　　　　　On a different note, the South Korean Supreme Court ruled in May last year that Korean victims of forced labor still have the right to sue for compensation. Being a lawyer himself, Hashimoto must understand how serious the implications of this court’s ruling were, as it means the South Korean government has managed to pave the way for the victims of forced labor to receive compensation from the Japanese government. He should very well realize that the other side is trying to use the history issue to its best advantage in order to show contempt for and weaken Japan. Vigorous though he may be as an up and coming politician whom some quarters expect to be the nation’s future prime minister, Mr. Hashimoto must remember that making thoughtless remarks can be fatal not only to him as a politician but to Japan itself.
　　　　　Lastly, I wish to add that the struggle for proper recognition of history can be won if Japan goes about taking the necessary steps prudently and rationally. Studies aimed at probing the truth about the “comfort women” system have in recent years been published by a number of historians, including Korean scholars. One such study ― by Professor C. Sarah Soh, who teaches anthropology at San Francisco State University – is introduced in an upcoming book by George Akita, Emeritus Professor at the University of Hawaii, provisionally entitled: Japan’s Colonial Rule over Korea Was Fair. (Soshi-sha, Tokyo; Fall 2013).
　　　　　Prof. Soh discredits claims that most of the Korean women were tricked into prostitution by recruits, noting that “in most cases, the process was open and the woman (and her family) knew she was headed to a brothel because thousands upon thousands of Korean women were often sold into brothels by their fathers or husbands, or went willingly as a way to rescue their family from poverty. The Confucian patriarchy in Korean society relegated women to an expendable resource.”
　　　　　Although it is a gradual process, the truth about Japan’s past is finally being revealed. It is important that we continue to cope with the situation prudently and calmly.

(Translated from “Renaissance Japan” column no. 559 in the May 30, 2013 issue of The Weekly Shincho)