politics

Tokyo urges Seoul not to erect wartime forced labor statues

45 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

45 Comments
Login to comment

"If the South Korean government fails to take action, it would mean that it has abandoned its international responsibility,"

Is this the pot calling the kettle black? People in glass houses should not throw stones!

-4 ( +15 / -19 )

They sure know how to get under their skin and won’t let up. Compensation will be requested in this form of extortion.

6 ( +18 / -12 )

The policy is in response to a South Korean civic group's plan to erect such statues in front of the Japanese Embassy in Seoul and the Japanese Consulate General in Busan in commemoration of Koreans forced into labor for Japan during its 1910-1945 colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula.

From what I understand, this is a private civic group with no ties to the government, so the government is not really in any position to tell them what to do. Its not like the Uyoku Dantai in Japan which are in fact linked to the LDP

-7 ( +11 / -18 )

Korea is so petulant. Japan should just ignore the whole thing.

9 ( +17 / -8 )

Japan has made it a media habit of calling out Germany's crimes against humanity while habitually trying to hide its own. Now Japan is trying to force South Korea from building statues to Korean forced laborers under Japanese rule.

Quote:

In fact the Abe regime is abandoning its international responsibilities by interfering in the domestic affairs of South Korea. In doing so, the Abe Regime does not get it: South Korea is no longe a poor little country easily intimidated by Japan.

Building those statures, South Korea. Build them big and tall.

.

-8 ( +11 / -19 )

needs to abide by international regulations that oblige the protection of the dignity of diplomatic representative offices,"

These jokers seriously need to keep their mouths shut. Nada.  Statements like this will have the complete opposite effect! Ridiculous. Its not rocket science either. They are either completely incompetent and clueless, or they are deliberately provoking the Korean right wingers , who are also by the way nutjobs. Diplomacy, your doing it wrong man!

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

Actually, statues to forced labor should be erected in front of companies that benefited from the forced labor. Aso’s company, for one, Mitubishi for another.

Also, it is open and quite common knowledge in northern Kyushu that the pottery for which it is famous was started by kidnapped and forced labor from Korea. A statue commemorating those events would be appropriate.

9 ( +15 / -6 )

Statues outside these buildings in japan is a bit extreme, just a plaque at the main entrance explaining factually what happened.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

The worst diplomatic skills of Japan is ever seen! That just made China, North Korea happy but seems Abe doesn't cares at all.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Seoul should also tell Tokyo to close Yasukuni Shrine for good.

-6 ( +7 / -13 )

Yasukuni is not in front of ROK embassy nor any other diplomatic representative offices.

The statues Japan is demanding to be removed is like a rally staged in front of those offices in which the host country is obliged to protect the dignity.

The statues are erected on public street in which the government controls, ROK has no excuse not to remove them.

0 ( +12 / -12 )

Why the hell does there have to be statues to commemorate everything

3 ( +8 / -5 )

@Aly RustomToday

this is a private civic group with no ties to the government, so the government is not really in any position to tell them what to do.

The article doesn't mention about the name of civic group so how would you know they have no ties to ROK gov? As far as I know, the civic group responsible for existing CW statues in Seoul and in Busan, namely, The Korean Council for the Women Drafted for Military Sexual Slavery by Japan, is connected to not only ROK gov but also to NK.

Its not like the Uyoku Dantai in Japan which are in fact linked to the LDP

Not sure how you got this idea. For example, JP police guards are allocated surrounding Chinese embassy with 24x7 surveillance and temporary barricade so that Uyoku Dantai cannot come near its perimeter. There is no way that JP gov would allow anyone to build offensive statues right in front of any countries' embassies, so what we simply cannot understand is why ROK gov think 'private civic' can be used as an excuse.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

Why the hell does there have to be statues to commemorate everything

Lest we forget.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

Seoul can do as it pleases on this issue, especially since it is to bring to light atrocities committed during war, and use them as symbols to never forget or repeat. Japan's idea of "forgetting by throwing money at it" and demanding it never be mentioned again and be forgotten should be a crime in and of itself, not national policy!

Triring: "Yasukuni is not in front of ROK embassy nor any other diplomatic representative offices."

So, you wouldn't mind if these statues were erected anywhere besides? You are just making excuses. When erected in a park nowhere near an embassy Japan still goes ballistic, like with statues in the US, South Korea, or besides. And I can't believe I even need to say this to you, but Yasukuni houses war criminals, and you are therefore justifying praying to and for the souls of people who committed atrocities, while saying that we should never remember the victims (unless they are Japanese). Well done!

-3 ( +8 / -11 )

Japan better watch it. At this rate with all their demands and threats SK might just march a former sex-slave out to light the Olympic flame and talk about her plight on the world stage. What will Japan do then besides express how regrettable it is?

-6 ( +8 / -14 )

So, you wouldn't mind if these statues were erected anywhere besides? You are just making excuses.

The Japan Government has not made any demand against the SK government beside those statues.

SK government is make the excuses like yourself.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

Two negatives do not make a positive.

I would urge the government of Japan to erect signboards in front of all the statues, declaring Japan's unending and heartfelt apology to the women of all nations who ended up in the brothels of the Imperial armed forces in the 1930s and 40s, with a pledge that even if the statues were to be removed, the signboards will remain.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

wouldn't surprise me if Japan starts calling those forced laborers 'comfort workers'

1 ( +6 / -5 )

I think Japan should stop complaining about other countries internal affairs!

Yes the statues are not good for Japan’s reputation, but it’s their feeling towards you Japan, you can’t change a nation’s feeling with though talk! All in all, you created their hostility towards you by colonizing them in 1915. History is not something that can easily be forgotten!

Just face the truth instead of trying to forget, because they won’t forget, and the world won’t forget.

Japan, you erected a statue of attorney Radhabinod Pal for forgetting your war crimes during the Tokyo War Tribunal! These issues about statues resembling Japanese coercion during the Colony-era backfires you, Japan. Because you’ve erected statues yourself that resembles your glory and other nation’s hardship during your invasions in WW2 and Sino-war.

-2 ( +7 / -9 )

Build those statues SK, build them tall and proud. The world will never forget the atrocious crimes the Japanese committed around Asia-Pacific from 1895-1945.

-5 ( +6 / -11 )

I seem to remember 30 countries voting for the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary and asking Japan to stop taking whales from the Southern Ocean. Japan claimed cultural heritage and ignored all those countries. You can't have it both ways. You also can't buy your way out of history no matter how many politicians you try and pay off.

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

Yet you and others miss the point of the argument that the Japanese government is making by referring to the Geneva convention, so in effect, whether it is a private group or government one, the Japanese argument is that it is against the convention, therefore they should not be erected.

> From what I understand, this is a private civic group with no ties to the government, so the government is not really in any position to tell them what to do. Its not like the Uyoku Dantai in Japan which are in fact linked to the LDP

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Apology. I misread the main aim of the article, thinking it was comfort women, yet again, which it mentions twice. Thus my strange post above.

This time it is to be more statues, symbolizing forced laborers! Oh dear... years of wrangling ahead.

(Yubaru, it is the Vienna Convention.)

1 ( +1 / -0 )

How about South Korea building one such statue which is as big as the Statue of Liberty at very remote and isolated Dokdo island instead ?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Michael JacksonToday  11:12 am JST

Why the hell does there have to be statues to commemorate everything

Since it's being erased from the history books that's necessary to not forget.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

How about South Korea building one such statue which is as big as the Statue of Liberty at very remote and isolated Dokdo island instead ?

Thats a good idea......then Japan can whine about the statue and the fact that it is built on islands that "belong " to Japan in one breath. Saves time. Efficiency wins.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

@Aly Rustom Today 08:02 am JST

From what I understand, this is a private civic group with no ties to the government, so the government is not really in any position to tell them what to do. Its not like the Uyoku Dantai in Japan which are in fact linked to the LDP

This is not true. The statue may be built by a private group, but its placement will almost certainly be on public ground, say a road. To use public ground in such a permanent manner, permission will definitely be required and it may even require an authorization from the government. At this point, the government is no longer a passive, much less helpless party, but an active accomplice as it undertakes an administrative act to permit / authorize the placement of the statue. If we agree that statues in front of embassies are indeed a violation of the Vienna Convention, the government is actively pursuing an international wrong.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

TriringToday  11:05 am JST

Yasukuni is not in front of ROK embassy nor any other diplomatic representative offices.

I hope Japan should know by then that the bad feelings evoked by these da-kine statues on Tokyo is reciprocally proportional to the emotions when South Koreans see Yasukuni Shrine and multiplied 100X when Nippon government officials 'pray' at the Shrine.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Triring: "The Japan Government has not made any demand against the SK government beside those statues."

BS. The government has complained EVERY time a statue goes up ANYWHERE. Hell, the Osaka mayor just cut ties with San Fransisco over the statue they erected, and Japan has sent delegates to demand a US publishing company remove references to sex slaves from THEIR textbooks. So don't give me this "they have not made any demands besides those statues" garbage, because they want the whole issue to go away, be it in South Korea, North Korea, China, the Philippines, Holland, England, Japan, or wherever else the sex slaves were from.

"SK government is make the excuses like yourself."

Wrong -- I'm not the one making excuses here, YOU are. What's more, you deny sexual slavery was in practice and the IJA forced women into it. Or am I wrong and you admit it happened?

-2 ( +7 / -9 )

@smithinjapan Today 03:55 pm JST

The government has complained EVERY time a statue goes up ANYWHERE.

It is the right of people to make a few noises when something happens they do not like. Nevertheless, Japan responds proportionately and within-the-law to such displeasures because they recognize that the opposing action is "at least legal". So, Osaka cuts some symbolic ties with SF, but that's as far as it goes.

As for the book affair, your statement is based on your belief that the lines of text are 100% true. If they are false, or even exaggerated, then they are defamatory (an illegality everywhere, and many places have it as a crime), and due to the wide propagation of this material to relatively young, unschooled, blank-slate minds, it can be viewed as a particularly dangerous defamation. Further, even if the statement WAS 100% true, there is a case to be made that the harms of propagating this material to such young minds exceeds the expectable social benefit. Thus, even if you right that they demanded, it is completely justified.

As for the demand here, the Korean civic group was legal to request permission / authorization. The SK government, however, was legally in the wrong to grant it.

Wrong -- I'm not the one making excuses here, YOU are. What's more, you deny sexual slavery was in practice and the IJA forced women into it. Or am I wrong and you admit it happened?

That's one reason this never ends, people like you spoiling the ROK over the issue. Compared to a historical fact dispute, you might be more interested in noting South Korea's present legal wrong, yet all too many are willing to throw out Law for Women.

2 ( +8 / -6 )

Kabuki Shimazaki: "It is the right of people to make a few noises when something happens they do not like."

Unless it's a sex slave, of course.

"Nevertheless, Japan responds proportionately"

Nope -- they go to other nations and demand that those nations change the printed content of THEIR texts, and we've seen time and again they hold UNESCO hostage and withhold payments if something is recognized that details accounts of Japanese atrocities, like with sex slaves and Nanking. How do you call this "proportionate" and try to justify it.

"If they are false, or even exaggerated, then they are defamatory"

Like denials of sexual slavery and other atrocities, which should be classed under hate speech and considered a crime. But you think "that's different".

"As for the book affair, your statement is based on your belief that the lines of text are 100% true"

Yours that they are 100% false. There is evidence that they are true, and only hot air from politicians and nationalists that it's not. Childish demands that you do what another country says does not help said country's cause.

"Further, even if the statement WAS 100% true, there is a case to be made that the harms of propagating this material to such young minds exceeds the expectable social benefit. "

Only from nationalists who want the truth buried. Did you know that talking about the victims of Nagasaki and Hiroshima makes people's hearts heavy, and makes them feel sad? That does harm to the psyche, my friend, and maybe we should stop talking about those things, too. I mean, you could argue it does less for society than it does harm. Oh, but wait... those cases are "different" too, aren't they? Heck, you guys even like to argue Japan didn't start the war that led to them being bombed, and they did not "attack Pearl Harbor" so much as they were "defending themselves". And of course, you've got nothing to back it up but your own made up history and opinion, but find that more justifiable than the facts and actual concrete evidence.

"As for the demand here, the Korean civic group was legal to request permission / authorization. The SK government, however, was legally in the wrong to grant it."

No, they were not.

"That's one reason this never ends, people like you spoiling the ROK over the issue."

Gosh, I sure am sorry that the people of Korea, who didn't agree with the past government to accept some money on behalf of the victims -- who didn't agree with it -- so that nationalists in Japan and history deniers can go to Yasukuni and pray to their ancestors they stop hearing about the past.

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

"Childish demands that you do what another country says does not help said country's cause."

Sorry, in case that confused you, I meant it does not help the cause of the nation being childish.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

@smithinjapan Today 05:21 pm JST

Frankly, Smith, one of the reasons I've lost any sympathy I had for them is that they went way beyond "a few noises". Or do you consider ~25 years of noises "a few"?

they go to other nations and demand that those nations change the printed content of THEIR texts

Missing from this and the rest of this paragraph is any explanation as to why either action should be considered disproportionate or illegal.

There is evidence that they are true

If even someone like you can only go up to "There is evidence that they are true", then you are tacitly acknowledging the possibility that it is not, at least not completely. And if that's the case, how do you justify the correctness of putting it as if it were indisputable fact in a textbook meant for young, immature minds?

There are days when even the truth is not necessarily a complete defence against something defamatory.

Nagasaki and Hiroshima

I actually can see merit in an argument that Japanese are a bit too weepy over Hiroshima so many years after the event. Nevertheless, if the worst you can say about Hiroshima education is that it makes people sad, then that in itself distinguishes it from the case at hand. Historical evidence gathered over this past 25 years demonstrates that "sex slave" education, certainly in the way and intensity it is conducted, already suffices to push people way beyond being "sad" and into the realm of extremism.

Far better people than me have been trying to define extremism. There is a sense that it exists, somewhere, but defining it so that it is of just the right breadth has proven elusive, and I do not like formulae like saying the "Promotion of Hate" - you should be allowed to hate, and some things deserve hate. At the very least it is nothing you should be legally disadvantaged over.

However, w/o claiming I have the Final Definition for Extremism, I'll say a big red flag is when your position on something causes you to start disregarding other people's legal interests or excusing your own side's failure in maintaining your legal obligations. In this case, despite admitting present Japanese are innocent, nevertheless people can advocate compensation (which comes from these "innocent" people, thus infringing their property rights). Further, even when some kind of extra monetary concession was finally agreed on, people can advocate excusing South Korea for unilaterally abrogating the agreeement (after receiving the concessions).

That's extremism. That simply cannot be healthy.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

Korea must build numerous monuments memorializing the vile horror perpetrated by Japanese people on Korea.

Japanese people want to pretend that they didn’t perform millions of act of rape, sexual assault, murder, torture and depravity on Korea and on Asia.

Monuments and statutes create permanent memorials that allow younger generations to always be aware of the extreme barbarism and inhumanity involved in the Japanese invasion, occupation and sexual crimes committed by millions of Japanese and approved and encouraged by the Japanese leadership.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

These proposed statues are not inside Japan and not inside the Japanese embassey. Therefore, as they are not within Japanese territory, they are not within Japanese jurisdiction.

Japan seems to quote a lot of international

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Japan has the Shrine (Yasukuni) and Korea has statues (colonial atrocities.) dotchimo dotchi iikagen ni shi te ne...

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

et you and others miss the point of the argument that the Japanese government is making by referring to the Geneva convention, so in effect, whether it is a private group or government one, the Japanese argument is that it is against the convention, therefore they should not be erected.

My point is whether or not it is against the convention, if the group that erected it is not linked to the gov, it is pointless to ask the gov to remove it.

This is not true. The statue may be built by a private group, but its placement will almost certainly be on public ground, say a road. To use public ground in such a permanent manner, permission will definitely be required and it may even require an authorization from the government.

Its called freedom of expression- which is what free societies do.

At this point, the government is no longer a passive, much less helpless party, but an active accomplice as it undertakes an administrative act to permit / authorize the placement of the statue.

Again- if a private group wishes to erect a statue they are free to do so. As the Japanese politicians are free to visit Yasukuni in a private manner.

If we agree that statues in front of embassies are indeed a violation of the Vienna Convention, the government is actively pursuing an international wrong.

Remember that this got started due to the Japanese politicians A. visiting Yasukuni and B. denying the whole comfort woman thing and saying that they were just prostitutes. Japan could have laid this to rest a long time ago. They chose to poke at these scabs again

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

@Aly Rustom Today 08:45 am JST

My point is whether or not it is against the convention, if the group that erected it is not linked to the gov, it is pointless to ask the gov to remove it.

The principle that internal law cannot be an excuse to not honor international commitments is positively reiterated in the VCLT, the Vienna Convention concerning treaties. Since you are nolo contendere as to whether it is against the convention, we can immediately start studying the scenario that it is (which I support BTW). In this case, from an international law perspective, Korea is obliged to remove those statues, EVEN IF THAT MEANS VIOLATING ITS DOMESTIC LAW. Maybe the Korean court will order the Korean government to pay the group for "illegally" removing the statues, but that's none of the rest of the world's business.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The principle that internal law cannot be an excuse to not honor international commitments is positively reiterated in the VCLT, the Vienna Convention concerning treaties.

You should be saying that to Japan as Japan has a habit of not honoring and ignoring international commitments; But then cry foul over some statues?

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Since you are nolo contendere as to whether it is against the convention

I never said that. Don't put words in my mouth. I personally don't think its against the convention at all.

we can immediately start studying the scenario that it is (which I support BTW).

Ok. Lets see. The Japanese government's claim is

they violate the terms of the Vienna Convention, which requires the host state to prevent any disturbance of the peace at a diplomatic mission or impairment of its dignity.

Ok. How many demonstrations by right wing japanese ultranationalists have taken place in front of the Chinese, Russian, and Korean (N,S) embassies? Quite a lot, I'll tell you. So IF the SK government has a responsibility to remove the statues, the Japanese goverment has a responsibilty to arrest and charge ANY Japanese national demonstrating in the vicinity of ANY embassy or diplomatic mission in Japan.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

@Aly Rustom Today 12:55 pm JST

I don't put words in your mouth. I just make a reading of your words "whether or not it is against the convention“. At the very least, at that point, you are not arguing that it is "not against" the convention, is it? That's nolo contendere.

arrest and charge ANY Japanese national demonstrating in the vicinity of ANY embassy or diplomatic mission in Japan.

It is your right to choose who to hate, but it should not lead to you to extremism (see my Jan. 18 06:16 pm JST). Since you want them arrested and charged (I teleologically interpret your line to infer you want them convicted as well), and you couldn't even begin to identify any part of criminal law they broke, what you are asking is for a conviction despite a lack of the legality requirement. I am just stunned at your sheer disregard of your opposition's legal rights.

Compare that to what I said. I specifically said that the Korean civic group's request for permission / authorization was legal (in Jan. 18 04:15 pm JST). I just said the Korean government should have refused & should take down any that are built anyway to comply with its international law obligations. At no time did I propose that the Korean civic group be arrested or disadvantaged in any way and I even suggest that they may be recompensed if someone indeed feels their rights as protected by the domestic law are infringed.

What IS a colorable argument is if the Chinese, Russian and Koreans feel that the demonstrations are a disturbance to their embassy's peace or impairs its dignity, they can demand Japan take action to remove the protesters, and Japan is obliged to clear them out. But clearing are not arrests, let alone charge or conviction.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

At the very least, at that point, you are not arguing that it is "not against" the convention, is it?

No. I'm saying the argument is moot.

It is your right to choose who to hate, but it should not lead to you to extremism

The demonstrations in front of the embassies get pretty extreme. Check them out on Youtube. Uyoku are pretty extreme.

and you couldn't even begin to identify any part of criminal law they broke, what you are asking is for a conviction despite a lack of the legality requirement. I am just stunned at your sheer disregard of your opposition's legal rights.

Using the exact same logic that you use to claim that the statues are illegal. If the statues are illegal then demonstrating in front of an embassy is also illegal, and if it is the perpetrators need to be arrested.

and you couldn't even begin to identify any part of criminal law they broke

right here-

which requires the host state to prevent any disturbance of the peace at a diplomatic mission or impairment of its dignity

They disturbed the peace at a diplomatic mission. That's the law they broke. And if you see that as not breaking the law you have no leg to stand on when complaining about the statues.

I am just stunned at your sheer disregard of your opposition's legal rights.

As am I at you suggesting that the statues which acknowledge rape victims is somehow illegal.

Compare that to what I said. I specifically said that the Korean civic group's request for permission / authorization was legal (in Jan. 18 04:15 pm JST).

Then it ends there.

I just said the Korean government should have refused & should take down any that are built anyway to comply with its international law obligations.

They are not violating international law. And if we are going to talk about international law obligations, Japan signed the Treaty against discrimination in the 1990s. They are obligated under international law to pass laws against discrimination which they have not. So right there is a example where Japan does not honor its international law obligations.

Second, the onus is on YOU to prove that a quiet statue creates a " disturbance of the peace at a diplomatic mission or impairment of its dignity"

You have not done that yet. So until Japan does that AND begins to stop the right wing protests in front of the embassies you have no claim on the removal of any statues.

they can demand Japan take action to remove the protesters, and Japan is obliged to clear them out.

There have been PLENTY of formal complaints but the Japanese gov has ignored them.

At the end, it is very troubling that you would find a quiet statue that stands as a reminder of atrocities to be insulting to Japan while having no problem with the right wing elements spilling their hate at embassies in your country.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

This is a about women dignity and respect. This is even about money. They want the sex slave recognition to be at peace. There is no way possible they were not at least some sex slave. And for those victims,Japan should close the deal.

Japaneese don't see them as war sex slave because they were their confort women. But those women did not chose that path even of some did. According to world law, they were war sex slave victims and all victims in the world have the legitimate rights for memorendum statue. Why those women should not be remembered ?

They fight for not to be forgotten like everywhere in the world. French US army sex slave never could even hope for a line in an history book.

Men honor only men martyre but never women sex slavering which is the burden of all women in war. This statue should be in japan in front of the Corea ambassy since this is what corea want for peace.

It will be naturally put at its right place when japan diplomacy will have grown. At this time, Japan will be able to change its constitution to have nuclear weapons because being nuclear request strong diplomacy skills.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@Nadège Moyon

This is a about women dignity and respect. This is even about money. They want the sex slave recognition to be at peace. There is no way possible they were not at least some sex slave. And for those victims,Japan should close the deal.

First of all, this article is not about Comfort Women. It is about conscripted labors which Korean claims as Forced Labors. Second, Comfort Women issue is not just about dignity and respect for women as what Korean claims. They always had been specifically targeting against IAJ during WW2 alone. For example, here is an inscription on the side of San Francisco statue.

This monument bears witness to the suffering of hundreds of thousands of women and girls euphemistically called 'Comfort Women,' who were sexually enslaved by the Japanese Imperial Armed Forces in thirteen Asian-Pacific countries from 1931 to 1945.

If they indeed care about Women's dignity and respect, why do they not inscripting Comfort Women during Korean War and Vietnam War followed after WW2?

Japaneese don't see them as war sex slave because they were their confort women. But those women did not chose that path even of some did. According to world law, they were war sex slave victims and all victims in the world have the legitimate rights for memorendum statue. Why those women should not be remembered?

What is the exact definition of Sex Slave according to the world law? and how does Comfort Women during WW2 differ with any other War-time prostitutes before and after WW2? I don't recall any international laws prohibiting the prostitution system 75yrs ago. I hope you do realize that the term of Comfort Women had been used before and after WW2 up until Vietnam War so whether you like it or not it is the correct terminology. On the other hand, the term of Sex Slavery came in after 2000 without the clear definition so that they can turn the discussion with emotional/sympathetic base rather than historical/factual base.

They fight for not to be forgotten like everywhere in the world. French US army sex slave never could even hope for a line in an history book.

I don't think any countries would including ROK, so why should Japan be only one?

Men honor only men martyre but never women sex slavering which is the burden of all women in war. This statue should be in japan in front of the Corea ambassy since this is what corea want for peace.

Non-sense. Korea had been teaching ultra-nationalism and anti-Japan sentiments since ever WW2 ended and almost entire Koreans are completely brainwashed with the same consensus that Japan is an absolute evil period. What they simply want is a vengeance rather than peace or truth. So just because Japan lost WW2 (not to mention that Korea was aggressor along with Japan during WW2), why should Japan need to continue putting up with never-ending betrayals?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites