Liberal Japan

Comfort women resolution (H. Res. 121) critiqued

Posted by Matt Dioguardi on August 6th, 2007

I am going to present here the entire text of resolution 121 along with associated comments. I realize I am a day late and dollar too short on this topic. After all, the resolution is a done deal.

I am doing this for two reason. First and foremost, to explore the principles underlying the resolution, which in a sense are timeless. Second, because I’m not sure that people who have commented on my criticism have responded to arguments I have made against the resolution. In other words, I want to put my criticism of the resolution in a clearer light, so if nothing else detractors can understand my viewpoint.

Below I will present the resolution. I will insert my own comments, which will be in brownish-red.

HRES 121 IH

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. RES. 121

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Government of Japan should formally acknowledge, apologize, and accept historical responsibility in a clear and unequivocal manner for its Imperial Armed Force’s coercion of young women into sexual slavery, known to the world as `comfort women’, during its colonial and wartime occupation of Asia and the Pacific Islands from the 1930s through the duration of World War II.

General Problems:

This is unconstitutional. Everyday probably, legislation like this passes through the house. However, can anyone clearly refute the claim that legislation like this is unconstitutional? Where in the constitution does it state America is supposed to be involved in taking a moral stance on another country’s educational system? Or how two other countries should resolve their treaty differences?

It’s a waste of political and economic resources. Has anyone stopped to contemplate that an entire economy has sprung up around this? How much money has congress spent to debate the issue? How much money have lobbyist spent to support it or fight it? Does anyone really doubt that in America, and in the world, there are many other contemporary and pressing issues that deserve more attention than this?

The issue is very nuanced and complicated. It is also a moral issue. Listening to a handpicked expert and then making a decision is not fair to all those involved in the debate. What is fair is leaving the issue up to those nations who are directly involved in it.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 31, 2007

Mr. HONDA (for himself, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. ROYCE, Ms. WATSON, Mr. HARE, Ms. BORDALLO, and Mr. WU) submitted the following resolution; which was refer#770000 to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

RESOLUTION

Japan has apologized. Here is a list of apologies. Why is it that these are not adequate? The above uses the words “formally acknowledge”, “accept historical responsibility”, and “a clear and unequivocal manner”. What does any of this mean?

Japan has issued apologies. So what specifically is needed now. Legal recognition? What would that entail? Consider the following statement from the Asian Women’s fund:

link to pdf

This means that for Japan to move into the area of legal remuneration, it would be opening a pandora’s box, because it would be in effect saying the above treaty doesn’t really hold. Any claim could potentially be made afterwards. I would not advise this.

Now, if South Koreans are not satisfied with this, then shouldn’t they hold their own leaders accountable? Moreover, South Korea was satisfied with the Asian Women’s fund as were several comfort women. However, according to the Asian Women’s fund:

changed to disfavor

Women were told that if they accepted apologies and/or money, they would be selling out. Despite this seven women did accept the apology and the money. However, these women were attacked for doing so. Private money was raised to effectively pay off other women so that they wouldn’t accept the fund’s money or its apologies. Not only this, but eventually the government of Korea decided, under pressure, to pay comfort women money themselves, but they refused to pay money to those comfort women who had already been “compensated” by Japan, in effect punishing them for taking the money.

So what is needed now? Again, as I understand it, “legal responsibly” is what is really wanted here. What would that entail? A voiding of the 1965 treaty. This is an exceedingly difficult, complex issue. Yet, here is the American congress in La La land, happily passing judgement on it.

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’;

Prostitution was legal in Japan and Asia. The government worked with third parities so that they would develop brothels that would cater exclusively to soldiers. There is no doubt that the reasons for this were to prevent venereal disease and to protect the native population. Believe it or not, Japanese leaders were concerned about how their soldiers were perceived overseas. Believe it or not, they actually wanted the soldiers to have a positive appearance.

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;

I don’t know how they determined that the program was unprecedented. Certainly, prostitution as it existed in Asia at that time, was a horrible institution. Fathers sold off their daughters. Rape was exceedingly common. Trying to set up exclusive brothels for soldiers obviously exacerbated the problem, especially as the war in Asia grew and the soldiers were put under more duress. Also, the sheer number of the all male troops away from home would have greatly increased the demand for prostitutes. Also some brothels were set up near the front lines of combat where discipline had broken down.

Note however, that these problems were mostly of a criminal nature. And that in general, it’s not clear anyone in Asia was concerned about women’s rights at the time, be they Chinese, Korean, or Japanese. Consider the following passage from Culture and Customs of Korea (page 175):

One of the most troubling aspects of the comfort women story in Korea was that even though the facts had been known for many years, the Korean government had done nothing to repair the damage. There had been no investigation, no attempt to locate the victims and attend to their needs, or to support their demands for justice from Japan. Rather, as the anthropologist Choi Chungmoo has written, male-dominated Korean institutions connived at keeping the story quiet. Choi suggests that the cover-up in Korea was part of a much older habit of thinking, going back hundreds of years. Any Korean woman who left home and the protection of her male relatives risked being looked upon as a “returned woman” (hwanhyang nyŏ), one who, it had to be assumed, had lost her chastity while away from home. Rather than being greeted and welcomed, she was put away and hidden as a shameful secret. Comfort women, like the hwanhyang nyŏ of olden times, were Korea’s shameful secret, and the institutions of Korea were more interested in hiding them than winning justice for them. Koreans themselves despised the Korean victims, and the victims were so terrified about being identified that they maintained their silence.

In Sex Between Allies by Katherine S. Moon, Moon clearly documents how disastrous becoming a prostitute serving the American military is for women in Korea. Women face health problems, poverty, and social ostracism. How does a women become a prostitute in Korea? This way:

Most women do not come into the clubs equipped with “hostessing skills” and the willingness to share flesh with GIs. For women who are new to the club scene, an initiation process often takes place. Some women attest to having been raped by their pimp/manager; others have been ordered by the club owner to sleep with a particular soldier; yet others stumble into bed with GIs on their own; some receive advice on the type of man to avoid (e.g., violent types) from more experienced prostitutes.

Are Korean women who serve American GIs free? No, according to Moon:

The”debt bondage system” is the most prominent manifestation of exploitation. A woman’s debt increases each time she borrows money from the owner–to get medical treatment, to send money to her family, to cover an emergency, to bribe police officers and VD clinic workers. Most women also begin their work at a new club with large amounts of debt, which usually results from the”agency fee” and advance pay. Typically, (illegal) job placement agencies which specialize in bar and brothel prostitution place women in a club and charge the club owner a fee. The owner transfers the fee onto the new employee’s”account” at usurious rates; Ms. Pak mentions one club owner charging 10%. 25 Often, women ask the owner for an advance in order to pay off her existing debts to another club, and the cycle of debt continues. Owners also set up a new employee with furniture, stereo equipment, clothing, and cosmetics–items deemed necessary for attracting GI customers. These costs get added to the woman’s account with interest. In 1988, the left-leaning Mal Magazine (Malchi), reported that on the average, prostitutes’ club debts range between one and four million won 26 ($1,462 and $5,847 respectively in 1988 terms). For this reason, women try to pick up as many GIs as possible night after night, and for this reason, women cannot leave prostitution at will.

What is the attitude in Korea towards these prostitutes? Again, according to Moon:

Excessive restrictive measures [regarding prostitution] . . . may be objected to by certain segments of the Korean population . . . since it would mean that the mobility of the Korean female national in close, continuous contact with the American would be heightened to the extent that she would infiltrate in hitherto”purely Korean” residential areas.

Like their political leaders, Koreans generally have viewed camptown prostitution as a”necessary evil” but ultimately have blamed the women rather than the foreigner or the pimps and club owners for such prostitution.

This would seem to indict both Americans and Koreans in engaging in what is tantamount to sexual slavery. The US report above blatantly states the sexual slavery practiced is acceptable because Korean society finds it necessary.

Why is it needed to point this out? Not to in any way say that the comfort women system was some how morally acceptable, though in Asia at the time it clearly was, but because the US congress has stated it was “unprecedented.” Perhaps they mean to say that US prostitution around military bases throughout the world has never been “unprecedented” and is therefore tolerable? Perhaps contemporary Korean sexual slavery with its rape initiations and debt bondage is not “unprecedented” and therefore okay?

Whereas some new textbooks used in Japanese schools seek to downplay the `comfort women’ tragedy and other Japanese war crimes during World War II;

Imagine the US Congress were to pass a non-binding resolution stating that all former confederacy states need to include in their junior high school history text books information about the rape of black female slaves by their white masters. To what extent was the raping of slaves a problem? I don’t know, it is controversial issue. So is the comfort women issue. Experts say different things.

But that isn’t even the main issue. In the past on this blog I have repeatedly stated that the real problem for the text books is not the issues themselves, but that there is centralized education in Japan. (link1, link2, link3, especially here — link4, and especially here — link5, link6. ) My argument in response to these issues has been to consistently argue centralized education is the problem, not what is being taught. Indeed, in America education is far less centralized and that is a boon.

In a previous post on the comfort women issue, when I brought up the issue of facism, people appeared shocked and appalled and claimed I was merely using a pejorative word. No, not at all. One principle of facism is that education be geared at producing outstanding citizens of good moral character. This is what Benito Mussouline had to say on this:

corporative, social, and educational institutions

(link)

Who is the US congress to lecture the Japanese state on what kind of moral education it must give to its students? This is outrageous. Is America such an empire then, that it must watch over what its client states teach their children in schools.

How outraged American parents would be if something similar were done to them.

Whereas Japanese public and private officials have recently expressed a desire to dilute or rescind the 1993 statement by Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono on the `comfort women’, which expressed the Government’s sincere apologies and remorse for their ordeal;

This, of course, is silly because if the Kono statement is read properly it admits nearly nothing. Indeed, however untactful or cold or politically inept Abe’s statements about the comfort women might have been, they were certainly, if nothing else, in line with the Kono statement!

Whereas the Government of Japan did sign the 1921 International Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Women and Children and supported the 2000 United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace, and Security which recognized the unique impact of armed conflict on women;

Please correct me if I am wrong, but the United States of America never even signed the 1921 treaty, did they? So we’re going to lecture Japan about not following a treaty that wasn’t even good enough for America to sign and participate in? Moreover, this seeming legalism is nullified by the fact there is no evidence that the Japanese government ever advocated coercion towards comfort women. The converse is far more likely. People will rush to say I am an apologists when I say this, but this will only be because they misunderstand the issue. Comfort women were treated abysmally and suffered. But there was never an explicit policy to do this, on the contrary at first almost surely the converse was true.

Whereas the House of Representatives commends Japan’s efforts to promote human security, human rights, democratic values, and rule of law, as well as for being a supporter of Security Council Resolution 1325;

Whereas the House of Representatives commends those Japanese officials and private citizens whose hard work and compassion resulted in the establishment in 1995 of Japan’s private Asian Women’s Fund;

Whereas the Asian Women’s Fund has raised $5,700,000 to extend `atonement’ from the Japanese people to the comfort women; and

I have already noted above that Korea has actively subverted the use of the fund by literally paying those who won’t take money from it, while not paying those who will. Massive private funds have been used to keep Korean comfort women from accessing these funds.

Whereas the mandate of the Asian Women’s Fund, a government initiated and largely government-funded private foundation whose purpose was the carrying out of programs and projects with the aim of atonement for the maltreatment and suffering of the `comfort women’, comes to an end on March 31, 2007, and the Fund is to be disbanded as of that date: Now, therefore, be it

At least part of the reason for ending the fund is that comfort women have not been able to gain access to the funds. I do think the fund should continue. I think it should broaden its activities to prostitution in general in Asia. It should either act to abolish prostitution or, if not that, then to make it more humane.

Resolved,

(1) should formally acknowledge, apologize, and accept historical responsibility in a clear and unequivocal manner for its Imperial Armed Force’s coercion of young women into sexual slavery, known to the world as `comfort women’, during its colonial and wartime occupation of Asia and the Pacific Islands from the 1930s through the duration of World War II;

Look, I hate nationalism as much as the next guy. But the fact is it is incredibly unlikely the Japanese government ever endorsed coercion. The Japanese government was concerned about treaties and keeping its face looking good. There is evidence that on some levels rules were issued to treat the comfort women properly and not to recruit underage comfort women. That was almost surely the government policy. Was this carefully enforced by field commanders who were busy dodging bullets and figuring out how they were going to get their troops next meal. No. In fact, it was for the most part ignored. There’s evidence to suggest that in remoter areas, women were actually hostile abducted into the system. Basically, this was criminal activity. So what should be done? What is the US congress suggesting? They use the word “unequivocal”.

As I understand this Korea wants Japan to accept legal responsibility. It wants the diet to accept legal responsibility for any person deemed a comfort women by the Korean government. I don’t support that. A treaty was signed already to end all legal claims, why in the world would Japan want to open pandora’s box by in effect voiding this treaty? It’d be a ludicrous move.

I do realize that some nationalists in Japan want to paint a picture of noble Japanese soldiers treating the comfort women gently and with care. And we are told these comfort women made great amounts of cash. There may be some kind of special unique cases, but of course, this is a lark. Comfort women were badly treated, they often got venereal disease, and they were impoverished. It is unlikely that soldiers treated them well. Ultimately, we don’t know the details. It’s a very hard issue, and absolutely none of the US congress’s business.

(2) should have this official apology given as a public statement presented by the Prime Minister of Japan in his official capacity;

If the previous apologies were not sufficient, then what needs to be said. Why not spell out the exact words that need to be said? Of course, congress can’t do this because they don’t have a clue. They’ve been informed by “experts” but have not in any way attempted to study the issue themselves. Not that they have the time or inclination. They’re Americans and have enough of their own problems to deal with.

(3) should clearly and publicly refute any claims that the sexual enslavement and trafficking of the `comfort women’ for the Japanese Imperial Armed Forces never occurred; and

Again this is facism. Free speech, love it or hate it is a good thing. Is the Japanese government to seek out each and every person who expresses an opinion on the comfort women issue that is not in line with an official position dictated by the US congress and then refute them. Gee, let’s go father than that. Let’s confiscate their books. Let’s put them in jail if they refuse to admit the facts about the comfort women as explained to us by the US congress.

(4) should educate current and future generations about this horrible crime while following the recommendations of the international community with respect to the `comfort women’.

So here we are back to the education issue. I’ve already said enough about this.

One other thing I’ll mention is the sort of abstract way many different problems that arose are all regarded as a monolithic whole. I’m fairly certain the comfort women system was never systematic policy. I’m pretty sure it was piecemeal policy put together by various field commanders. To the extent the government was even cognizant of it, it was to act as an ameliorating force trying to tame it.

I hope this shows more clearly why I find this resolution so horribly flawed. While I have pointed out many problems, if I were to single out the problem that concerns me most, it would be the educational issue. American endorsing centralized education in Japan should be enough to send chill bumps through the even the most jaded Japanese hand.

This entry was posted on Monday, August 6th, 2007 at 9:47 am and is filed under education, nationalism. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

3 Responses to “Comfort women resolution (H. Res. 121) critiqued”

Anon Says:
August 7th, 2007 at 10:20 pm
I fear it is you who is horribly misinformed. You have pointed out the many areas in which you have done no research and have limited understanding.

Three things:

1. You are NOT using the final resolution that was passed. The $200,000/month lobbyists for Japan forced a number of changes. You need to look for the resolution with the EH after it.

2. The so-called apologies that the Embassy likes to list either make no mention of Comfort Women or are not official. Without a Cabinet Decision or approval of the Diet any statement by a PM or Cabinet member is a personal expression. As noted in the Japanese Constitution, it is the Cabinet, not the PM that is the executive power in Japan. The Japanese government has played fast and loose with the legality and language of the apologies to the Comfort Women. Congress caught them.

3. The Comfort Women system was a sophisticated state-managed and coordinated supply system for the Imperial armed forces. The system involved officials of nearly all the government ministries and was managed by the War Ministry. The system included calculations of how long girls of certain ages would last at the front, gynecologists assigned to military units, travel documents, schedules as to how much time different ranks were allowed with the girls, and the list goes on. And yes, there are documents on all these practices and confirming that it was a state sponsored and state sanctioned system. Think, how would a group of illiterate, undocumented peasant girls be allowed on a troop transport from Korea to Taiwan during a time of very tight political control? To be sure, once a system is sanctioned, it is up to the field commanders to improvise.

Indeed, the Imperial government was so used to setting up comfort stations, that they “naturally” assumed that they would be needed for the incoming occupying troops. Thus, before the Occupation began, the government coordinated the establishment of Recreation and Amusement Associations (RAA) which were state-sponsored brothels for the foreigners. It took MacArthur a while to figure it out, but by March 46, he had them shut down.

BTW, talking about the constitutionality of a congressional resolution is just plain silly, no embarrassing.
Matt Dioguardi Says:
August 8th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
Anon,

I sincerely appreciate your detailed criticism. I only want to deal with one aspect of it here, the issue of proof of state involvement.

It certainly seems possible to me that the policy could have been guided by the state. I am only guessing it was piecemeal and that could easily be an error. My point was not to say we should not guess otherwise because there is no proof. My point is that if we want to talk about legally breaking a treaty, we have entered the legal arena. Here we need proof not only of state involvement, but that the state endorsed underage procurement and coercion as a procedure for recruitment.

Perhaps it will help here if I share some notes I had previously wanted to blog here, but never got around to posting. My reason for having not blogged these notes previously was because they were too rough, and I was still looking at other sources. I don’t think there is anything in the Asian Women’s Fund’s information on this issue (link to pdf) that contradicts my claim that there is no proof of state involvement.

Again, to say there is no proof is not to say decisively that there was no state involvement.

If you find anything wrong below, then corrections would be welcome. However, sources would be useful. While my notes below do not include Yuki Tanaka’s sources, I can furnish them upon request.

Notes follow …

In Yuki Tanaka’s Japan’s Comfort Women: Sexual Slavery and Prostitution during World War II and the U.S. Occupation examples are given of what constitutes proof of the military’s involvement.

Again, this proof implicates second tier high ranking officers. As far as I know, it does not implicate high ranking government officials. As far as I know, it does not implicate the top military brass. This would tend to suggest to me that the comfort women system was never a systematic policy of the Japanese government. A guess would be that it was an ad hoc policy carried out by commanders in the field.

If what I have stated above is incorrect, a correction along with a reference source, would be greatly appreciated.

Let’s look at some of the examples of military involvement provided in Tanaka’s book:
Let’s examine this.

There is no proof that the highest level commander of the Shanghai Expeditionary Army knew about the comfort women system. However, according to Tanaka, it would be strange to assume he didn’t know what was going on, and therefore by not stopping it, implicitly approved of it.

Now according to Tanaka there is actually proof that Okamura Yasuji and Okabe Naozaburo the two second-in-commands actually issued orders to establish the comfort women system. Part of this proof is Okamura Yasuji’s own memoirs. Tanaka tells us [page 10]:
Not only do we have this, but Tanaka provides a translated section from the diary of Okabe Naozaburo which reads as follows [page 10]:
I should note that Tanaka discusses pretty extensively the army’s problem with VD and how it was hoped that comfort stations would prevent this, as prostitutes could be examined regularly and would be off limits to non-military personnel. There was also a clear problem with rape that the commanders regarded as serious enough to warrant a comfort women system. Tanaka even suggests that one motivation for the use of comfort women was the tragedy that took place at Nanjing (Wikipedia link).

Okay, so that is one example of the kind of evidence historians like Tanaka use to show that the comfort system was established via direct military request. Let’s look at another example [page 20-21].
What we are getting here are mostly conclusions drawn from inevitably going through several different records and orders. Because of the limited scope of Tanaka’s book he does not go through this in any detail. I’m presuming because it isn’t stated otherwise that there are documents to back all of this up. Note the reference for all the above is secondary work on the subject, Ōbayashi Kiyoshi’s Tamanoi Banka.

Tanaka does provide a selection from the diary of a staff officer of the 10th Army, Major Yamazaki Masao. It reads [page 13]:
Again, as I understand this, second tier officers, but no one at the highest levels. However, it’s very hard to imagine a situation whereby they wouldn’t have known about the system and therefore at a minimum tacitly approved.

Another example listed by Tanaka [page 22]:
Note that the connection with Terauchi would suggest that someone in the government did know what was going on and therefore implicitly endorsed the comfort women system. That is what is intended by drawing Terauchi’s name into this. However, the orders were given by Naozaburo and so there is no proof that Terauchi was involved.

Finally the last example Tanaka gives (emphasis is mine):
Note here there is no documentary evidence, instead a number testimonies which are not given in the book. Interestingly a number of bureaucrats are implicated (by the testimony).

I’d like to point out that what I was primarily looking for were what kind of documents would implicate military or government officials were available. It seems there are clearly diaries and even some military requests that would suggest a comfort system was put into place by different military commanders.

There does not seem to be anything to suggest this was ever policy at the highest levels of government.
ponta Says:
August 10th, 2007 at 4:12 am
It is true that the military was involved in setting up the brothels. The brothel was legal.
And
(1)the military doctors carried out VD test,
(2)the military set up the regulations on the local brothel owners and the local recruiters.,
(3)the military transported the women.
In kato’s words.

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

www.mofa.go.jp/policy/postwar/state9207.html

A historian Hata claims that the system was very similar to the system at Vietnam
hassin.sejp.net/Hata-Ianfu_text.doc

The information in Against Our Will is important because its descriptions of the brothels in Vietnam mirror those patronized by Japanese soldiers.

megalodon.jp/?url=http://sakuratan.ddo.jp/uploader/source/date36985.txt&date=20070409152216

Sure there are differences;since the brothel was legal, Japanese police regulation and arrested illegal agents. The U.S. troop just had the local troop do the dirty jobs, unconcerned about the illegal activities.
www.wm.edu/so/monitor/spring2000/paper6.htm
article.wn.com/view/2007/07/11/Military_Prostitution_and_the_Iraq_Occupation/?template=cheetah-article%2Fdisplayarticle.txt

Hata also claims, as matt says, that there is no systematic order to set up the brothel from the top unlike German forced prostitution.(page 151 慰安婦と戦場の性　秦郁彦）

Japanese government admit the involvement of the Japanese military, and apologized several times.

« Top News in Japan — Monday, August 6, 2007

Fed up with cell phones? »

japan.shadowofiris.com

Sponsored Links

Contact Info

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Asian Blogs

Japan blogs

must read articles

日本語のblogs

Categories

Archives

Search Form

Subscribe

Meta

Comfort women resolution (H. Res. 121) critiqued

January 31, 2007

3 Responses to “Comfort women resolution (H. Res. 121) critiqued”

Leave a Reply