“China’s new propaganda war against Japan is in full swing. This time, Beijing is going all out to talk the US and European nations into believing that there actually were not 200,000 but 400,000 comfort women who were ‘sexually enslaved’ by the Japanese military during World War II. Beijing claims that half of them were Chinese, and that Chinese women were the real victims of Japanese sexual enslavement.”

　　　　　This statement was made by Professor Shiro Takahashi of Meisei University, Tokyo, during his hour-long appearance last Friday on the weekly “Genron” Internet television show that I host.

　　　　　In making his point, Prof. Takahashi, a specialist in education, referred to an article entitled “Focus-Asia” that The China Youth Daily carried in its December 16, 2014 edition. The daily, boasting a million circulation, is the official organ of the Communist Youth League of China. The article cited statistics compiled by the Comfort Women Research Center (CWRC) of Shanghai Normal University, which claimed: “During the war, approximately 300,000 ‘comfort women’—equaling the total number of the ‘Nanjing Massacre’ victims—were murdered by the Japanese military, accounting for 75% of the total number of women forced to become sexual slaves.”

　　　　　If 300,000 “comfort women” were actually killed by the Japanese military, as is claimed by the center, their total number would have been 400,000. Taking issue with these numbers, Prof. Takahashi noted:

　　　　　“The claim—that there were altogether 400,000 ‘comfort women’; that 300,000 of them were killed by the Japanese military; and that there were a total of 200,000 Chinese women among them—is an absurd fiction that forms the strategic pillar of China’s new propaganda war against Japan. The CWRC at Shanghai Normal University is blatantly trying to lend credence to this farce by giving it a seemingly academic face. This institution is headed by Professor Su Zhiliang, who in 2014 authored Chinese Comfort Women (Oxford University Press) with two Chinese scholars, and has since been participating in various UN-related committees as a Chinese representative.

　　　　　Last October, an international advisory committee made the decision to include the “Nanjing Massacre” in the UNESCO Memory of World Registry. Prof. Su was also a member of this committee.

　　　　　Chinese Comfort Women is a compilation of oral histories of 12 Chinese women. Scrutinizing the book, Prof. Takahashi managed to verify that most of their accounts could not be substantiated, and in cases where verification was claimed, the CCWC based its conclusions on hearsay, which would absolutely not be recognized in Japan—despite the importance given this testimony by the authors. Takahashi brushes aside Su’s book as completely of no consequence, but warns that the authors have taken some clever precautionary measures in an attempt to give it credence.

“Rape Centers”

　　　　　“The authors call it a compilation of oral histories of ‘comfort women,’” observed Takahashi. “Their strategy is obviously based on a calculation that any lapse of memory on the part of the women would be within an allowable range of error. Prof. Su and his co-authors have adroitly publicized the plight and agony of hapless women, which readers in the US and European nations have generally accepted as the legitimate basis of their appeal for compassion and compensation.”

　　　　　The book has automatically worn the mantle of credibility, being published by the prestigious Oxford University Press. Its back cover carries a testimonial by Ms. Gay McDougall, a former UN independent expert on minority issues who in the late 1990s served as United Nations special rapporteur on the issues of systematic rape, sexual slavery, and slave-like practices in armed conflict.

　　　　　In 1998 Ms. McDougall submitted a report on the ‘comfort women’ to the UN that was far more based on emotion than fact and that was also more harshly critical of Japan than the one compiled two years earlier by her predecessor, Radhika Coomaraswamy, who is internationally known as a human rights advocate. For example, Ms. McDougall described the Japanese military “comfort stations” as “rape centers.”

　　　　　Prof. Takahashi quoted Ms. McDougall as complimenting Su’s work as follows:

　　　　　“Reading the stories of Chinese women who have survived the torture and brutality
of the Japanese military ‘comfort stations’ is deeply disturbing. But these are stories that must be told. This book is a tremendous contribution to our understanding of the human cost of the gross abuses that occurred in Japanese-controlled areas during WWII.”

　　　　　His authority having been significantly enhanced by having the prestigious Oxford University Press publish the book, and with an endorsement by a former special UN rapporteur, Prof. Su has become known in the international community as a new authority on ‘comfort women.’ Last December 31, he appeared on a CNN news show in the US almost immediately after Japan and South Korea reached a historic and “irreversible” accord on the ‘comfort women’ issue. Prof. Takahashi, who had watched the show “very closely,” stated:

　　　　　“Introducing Su as a professor of Shanghai Normal University and an expert on ‘comfort women,’ the program highlighted his claim of 400,000 total ‘comfort women,’ half of them Chinese forced into sexual slavery without pay.”

　　　　　Six days later, on January 3, a local Ottawa daily, The Ottawa Citizen, ran an article based on similar fabrications. Observed Prof. Takahashi:

　　　　　“The report, which likely reflected the assertions advanced by Prof. Su and his co-authors, put the total number of wartime ‘comfort women’ at 410,000, claiming that most of the victims were young girls between 14 and 18 years old; that the Japanese military was after virgins; that there were cases in which members of families that resisted abduction were killed; and that there were only 46 survivors at the end of the war. This is absolute nonsense.

　　　　　“Lies told by the Chinese in their propaganda war against Japan are spreading rapidly across North America via the English language media. The historic accord reached last December 31 between Tokyo and Seoul fundamentally has nothing to do with Chinese ‘comfort women.’ However, China is vigorously trying to help Prof. Su make an impact in the international community.”

　　　　　It is widely known that China has been making preparations to have the “comfort women” added to UNESCO’s Memory of the World Registry after successfully campaigning last year to have the “Nanjing Massacre” registered. Can the Japanese government block the move? The prospects appear slim.

　　　　　Today, six months after the World Heritage registration of the “Nanjing Massacre,” the Japanese government has only seen a list of the documents Beijing submitted for application. Beijing has steadfastly turned down Tokyo’s request to show the pertinent documents themselves. In point of fact, the registry is a system designed to store the world’s historically important documents in order to allow anyone access at any time. It must also be noted that when the application for registration was submitted, none of 14 members of UNESCO’s International Advisory Committee saw the documents accompanying the application, although it was their right and responsibility to do so. A substantive review was conducted by the Register Sub-Committee instead, but only one of the nine sub-committee members allegedly read the actual documents submitted by Beijing. Remarked Prof. Takahashi:

　　　　　“Incredibly, the Sub-Committee and the International Advisory Committee are completely devoid of professional historians who know anything about the ‘Nanjing Massacre.” All of them are professional archivists only trained to store documents.”

Real Villain: Japanese Foreign Ministry

　　　　　China is prepared to team up with five other nations, including South Korea, in jointly applying for “comfort women” registration by the end of May. Even if Japan has access to the documents China will submit, Prof. Takahashi fears too little time is left to refute each of the charges. What is more effective would be to attempt to revamp the registration system for World Memory itself by vigorously arguing against the negative aspects of the current system. That should be the role the Foreign Ministry plays.

　　　　　But the ministry can hardly be expected to perform such a task, emphasizes Ms. Mio Sugita—another guest on my show. A former Liberal-Democratic Party member of the lower house, Ms. Mizuta has actively argued at the United Nations and other international forums that the “comfort women” were not coerced into sexual servitude. She has made similar assertions to representatives of left-leaning Japanese non-government organizations who tend to flock to the various UN offices in Geneva. Commented Ms. Mizuta:

　　　　　“Viewed from the position of a member of a conservative NGO like me, the moves our Foreign Ministry makes are completely beyond my comprehension. Believe it or not, the ministry has been engaged in varied activities by teaming up with Japanese NGOs that are notorious for their strongly anti-government words and deeds, with the liberal Japan Federation of Bar Associations at the center. Of course, these activist bodies take up the ‘comfort women’ issue in the same anti-government fashion as they forge ahead with their activities.”

　　　　　Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has made clear at the Diet that there is no historical proof that “comfort women” were abducted. He has asserted time and again that “sexual slavery” by the Japanese military is a fiction, and that the Chinese claim that there were 200,000 Chinese “comfort women” is totally unsubstantiated. Isn’t it the primary responsibility of the Foreign Ministry to globally disseminate information that precisely reflects the prime minister’s statements? Why does the ministry continue to spread information that grossly differs from what our prime minister had to say in the Diet and is bound to impair Japan’s national interests? I cannot but feel very strongly that the Foreign Ministry is the real villain benefitting our adversaries in their propaganda war against Japan.

(Translated from “Renaissance Japan” column no. 702 in the April 28, 2016 issue of The Weekly Shincho)