Voices
in
Japan

poll

Should the statue of a girl dedicated to the memory of Korean women forced to work in Japanese military wartime brothels be removed from outside the Japanese embassy in Seoul?

103 Comments
© Japan Today

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

103 Comments
Login to comment

It is insulting because it is not true.

-50 ( +7 / -56 )

Yes. It should be moved elsewhere in Seoul, but not directly outside the embassy. Obviously the sex slave system is a horrific war crime and deserves commemoration aplenty, but to have it outside the embassy is to tacitly make it a constant issue in any diplomatic engagement with Japan at all, which helps no one.

21 ( +34 / -12 )

It's not up to us to decide. Koreans should decide this.

24 ( +36 / -13 )

No.

Why can't Japanese diplomats at the embassy endure such a small thing?

15 ( +30 / -16 )

It should stay to remind the politicians of their failures and future failures. If politicians would take responsibility then the statue would not be needed.

I only wish constructing a Sewol ship in front of the Korean embassy would help.

13 ( +17 / -4 )

I voted yes! It should be moved to Yasukuni!

32 ( +41 / -10 )

The Japanese and South Korean Governments made a deal. Part of that deal was moving the statue. South Korea should live up to that part of the deal just like Japan should live up to everything they promised. We can look at problems between the two countries in the past and point out problems of integrity, but if the countries truly want to have a better relationship then both parties need to act with integrity now moving forward. I am not commenting on whether the recent agreement was right. I am saying South Korea should move the statue because they said they would.

-19 ( +11 / -29 )

The Japanese and South Korean Governments made a deal. Part of that deal was moving the statue.

Funny how you know that, yet neither government has said that was part of the deal. Tell me, how did you get this inside information that no one else seems to know about?

25 ( +29 / -4 )

Miyagi Ken - It was not part of the deal at all! It was only after the deal was struck that Japan turned around and said, "we will only give you the cash if you remove the statue!"

16 ( +19 / -4 )

It feels like the Japanese govt is trying to make a deal of "we'll give you money if you never mention what happened again". Koreans shouldn't be forced to forget their history. At the same time, I'm not sure it should be kept outside of the Japanese embassy. There may be other places it could be put to keep the memory alive.

10 ( +12 / -3 )

It was only after the deal was struck that Japan turned around and said, "we will only give you the cash if you remove the statue!"

No they didn't. If you disagree please show any kind of official statement from the government that says this.

9 ( +12 / -3 )

The statue stays

8 ( +16 / -8 )

Statue should stay put!!

Japan has such an incredibly bad record of facing history/facts it NEEDS to learn & acknowledge the truth!

If Japan can properly deal with the sex slave issue & not just say we paid $$ so now we can continue to deny........

If Japan shows some real HONEST sincerity then maybe Seoul could look at moving the statue in say 10-15yrs time, Japan needs to EARN this one, not BUY it!!

14 ( +18 / -5 )

My humble opinion is the statue be relocated as part a process of atonement, reconsolidation and forgiveness. Future generations should not have to carry the burden of historical guilt attributed to the Imperial Japanese military. Professor Park Yu-ha proposes that the governments of Japan and South Korea set up a “council” for discussions, with a fixed deadline to reach an agreement This Statue relocation should be part of those discussions.

-3 ( +7 / -10 )

Yes, move it somewhere else where it has more meaning or is more easily seen by the population. Right in front of the embassy, that's nothing but hatred.

-1 ( +8 / -9 )

The statue is a protest.

That's the sole reason that it exists. It was put up by the group that organizes the weekly protests demanding apology and compensation.

If the apology and compensation are accepted, why the need for ongoing protests?

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Choseon Ilbo

http://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/news/article/Article.aspx?aid=3013314

“The Korean government acknowledged the Japanese government’s concerns over the statute for the security of the embassy,” Yun said. “The Korean government will try to find an appropriate resolution by consulting with concerned civic groups.”

So, the Korean Government has to make an "appropriate resolution", either destroying it or relocating it.

As I understand the statute is on a piece of land that belongs to government, it can be removed at the will of the government.

-13 ( +4 / -16 )

the statue issue is a master stroke by the Koreans, it really shows Japans insecurities about its image abroad and how far there willing to go try and keep that image positive, I say keep it there, your move Japan.

7 ( +11 / -4 )

Maybe millions of Japanse citizens still believe in what Abe and 100+ of these Japan lawmakers support for the past action by their military. In 1937 Japanese soldiers systematically raped, tortured and murdered estimated more than 200000 - 300,000 civilians. This was more than killed in the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined, and more than the combined civilian losses of Britain, France and Belgium in the whole of WWII.

Chinese men were used for bayonet practice and in decapitation contests and many thousands women were raped. Many Japanese soldiers went beyond rape to disembowel women, slice off their breasts, nail them alive to walls. Fathers were forced to rape their daughters, and sons their mothers, as other family members watched. Not only did live burials, castration, the carving of organs, and the roasting of people become routine, but more diabolical tortures were practiced. So sickening was the spectacle that even the Nazis in the city were horrified. No wonder these lawmakers still go to Yasukuni.

The real message of the war criminals being enshrined at Yakasuni is that no matter what you do, no matter how much suffering you inflict, if you have Japanese blood in your veins you are ok. On the other hand if you are foreigner, no matter how much they have suffered it is not important, you are not Japanese. Considering the suffering inflicted on neighboring Asian countries by Japan is it so hard to call them the 'invasions' that they are rather than 'advances'? If Hiroshima and Nagasaki are crimes then surely Japan's wartime actions are also crimes, why is it so easy for Japanese people to acknowledge A-bomb victims and so hard t acknowledge Asian victims of Japan's wartime aggression? Simple, The A-bomb victims were Japanese and therefore important and the others were foreign and therefore less than human and unimportant. That is the underlying fact that is hard to move beyond that for Japan.

22 ( +24 / -3 )

Should Israel put a statue of the holocaust victim in front of the Embassy of the US in Israel? Should France put a paint of the mutilated men in front of the Embassy of England? Should Japan put two sculptures of the Atomic Bombs in front of the US Embassy in Japan? Should Pakistan put a picture of the people and solders killed in front of the Indian Embassy and vice versa? Should each Latin American Country put some sort of sculpture or statue in front of the Spain Embassies?

....and so on.

-4 ( +10 / -13 )

@Daniel Neagari

If that is the case, why don't we see German Chancellor Merkel and 100+ of the top German government representatives visiting Nazi Cemetery? They had similar results from the war, but why is there such a difference in behavior of German politicians compare to Japanese politicians?

12 ( +15 / -4 )

why is there such a difference in behavior of German politicians compare to Japanese politicians?

because you can not see things objectively.

-24 ( +2 / -24 )

tinawatanabeJAN. 04, 2016 - 03:38PM JST because you can not see things objectively.

Why don't you explain. We are listening.

18 ( +16 / -0 )

@sfjp A cemetery is a place were people go put their deaths on the ground. A Shrine (which I assume you are referring to), is a place where you honor the spirit of a deity as a whole. The death can be brought there, but once in the Shrine the spirit and remnants become one with the deity and the shrine they are in.

The Yasukuni Shrine is a place were you honor the spirit of Japan. That the spirit have some bad points of black spots (what ever you want) is normal. Nothing is perfect.

I think that is the part that many (if not all) get lost, people think that a deity (a god) has to be perfect, that is not true. Everything is imperfect even gods.

-11 ( +2 / -12 )

@Daniel Neagari

These Japanese politicians who insist that they are only paying tribute to those who died for their country when they visit Yasukuni are not telling the truth. If that’s all they wanted to do, they could walk five minutes down to Chidorigafuchi National Cemetery. Emperor Hirohito stopped visiting Yasukuni after 1978 because the shrine had been tainted by the presence of the Class A war criminals. His son, current Emperor Akihito, has maintained the imperial embargo on visits. Yasukuni is not about dignified homage, it is about scoring political points and drawing attention to revisionist history. The only thing that Japan’s modern reactionaries regret about the war is defeat, and they are still fighting an uphill battle against Japanese public opinion to justify wartime Japan’s “noble mission.” No amount of sanitizing will change that. The only way to end the controversy is to impose a moratorium on visits to Yasukuni by any serving Cabinet minister. If Abe is truly looking for a new beginning for Japan’s relations with its neighbors, that’s where he should start.

15 ( +16 / -2 )

I don't think it should be removed, but I also don't think the statue should be used as a needless prop to further anti Japan hatred and sentiments as the anti Japan nationalists have attempted in faraway places like the United States. Unfortunate some U.S. cities have jumped on the anti Japan bandwagon with erecting these statues.

Thankfully countries like Singapore have common sense and pretty much told them to go take a hike when they tried to erect a statue there.

HUGE difference between honest commemoration of a painful event, and using such history to further needless anti Japanese rhetoric that distorts the truth about what Japan did and didn't do in terms of apologizing and compensating.

-10 ( +2 / -11 )

@sfjp

You are talking of politics... I am not. I think the reason you attack me or tinawatanabe is because you are not able to comprehend what I am trying to explain?

The main reason why the Emperor is not going to Yasukuni is in fact political.

-11 ( +3 / -13 )

sfjp330JAN. 04, 2016 - 03:32PM JST

why is there such a difference in behavior of German politicians compare to Japanese politicians?

Interesting question.

First, Korea was a member of Axis like Italy or Austria. Does Italy demand apologies from Germany when real member of Allies such as UK and French put it at low profile? Korea is a lot louder in demanding apologies from Japan than the real member of Allies like US or the Philippines.

Second, the apology issue was settled "comprehensively and finally" in 1965. As soon as the 1965 treaty was ratified in Korean Congress, Koreans started to undermine the treaty.

Now, as soon as the deal in December 2015 was agreed, Koreans started to call it void. They say there was no agreement on the statute.

Germans have better neighbors. That explains the difference in behavior of politicians of Germany and Japan.

-8 ( +6 / -13 )

CH3CHO JAN. 04, 2016 - 04:03PM JST Second, the apology issue was settled "comprehensively and finally" in 1965. As soon as the 1965 treaty was ratified in Korean Congress, Koreans started to undermine the treaty.

What is your point? Show me where? The comfort women issue was not raised by South Korea for individuals who suffered under Japanese colonization as it negotiated a treaty with Japan in 1965.

5 ( +6 / -2 )

No, it should be made bigger.

Conspiracy Theories: "It should be moved to the red light district in Korea."

Why? The Japanese businessmen on sex tours would still complain about having to see it, saying the Japanese were never involved in the sex trade.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

sfjp330JAN. 04, 2016 - 04:21PM JST

Show me where?

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Agreement_Between_Japan_and_the_Republic_of_Korea_Concerning_the_Settlement_of_Problems_in_Regard_to_Property_and_Claims_and_Economic_Cooperation

Article II 3 As a condition to comply with the provisions of paragraph 2 above, no claims shall be made with respect to the measures relating to the property, rights, and interests of either High Contracting Party and its people which were brought under the control of the other High Contracting Party on the date of the signing of the present Agreement, or to all the claims of either High Contracting Party and its people arising from the causes which occurred prior to that date.

Whatever happened before August 1945 was settled in 1965 and no claim should be made of it.

The comfort women issue was not raised by South Korea.

That does not matter, as long as the abuse of comfort women occurred before the end of WW2 in August 1945.

WW2 with regard to Japan was settled by San Francisco Peace Treaty in 1951 which waives compensation claims against Japan. The Treaty also requires Japan to conclude essentially the same treaties with other countries. Korea Japan Basic Treaty of 1965 is one of such treaties that waived compensation claims against Japan.

-3 ( +7 / -9 )

Should Israel put a statue of the holocaust victim in front of the Embassy of the US in Israel? Should France put a paint of the mutilated men in front of the Embassy of England? Should Japan put two sculptures of the Atomic Bombs in front of the US Embassy in Japan? Should Pakistan put a picture of the people and solders killed in front of the Indian Embassy and vice versa? Should each Latin American Country put some sort of sculpture or statue in front of the Spain Embassies?

Yeah they should perhaps IF these bits of history are being whitewashed or something, hint THEY ARE NOT, that is the difference

You are talking of politics... I am not

Only if you are talking about when YOU visit yasukuni, when J-politicians go they are CLEARLY going for political reasons, for whitewashing & for war criminal worship, hence the problem they create.

They most certainly are NOT going to worship your average Tanaka san! You believe that & I have a rice field for sale you can build your home in!

4 ( +5 / -2 )

@GW

How do you know? Do you read minds? If so... Wow the Great GW

-1 ( +4 / -4 )

Smith San larger after a process of reconciliation and forgiveness, just not outside the Embassy of Japan...

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Why can't Japan simply admit what they did in the war? They raped and murdered their way across Asia with the dreams of the East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. Caught up in the same social Darwinism their ally Hitler was; believing themselves to be the "SUPERIOR" Asian. Well, guess what, you lost. You are not superior. You were crushed because you were weaker (just like Hitler in Germany). But all the war is to Japan is Hiroshima and Nagasaki. You fail to remember Comfort Women, murders in Nanking, Manila, Singapore, Hong Kong, Pearl Harbor, Bataan, and on and on. You lost, admit and move on, for crying out loud.

By not admitting and being honest with the past, your neighbors look at you and think that, in Japan's heart of hearts, you would like to try that again.

11 ( +13 / -3 )

After reading through all the comments, I forgot what the story was about. Such random answers and thoughts. Talk about off topic!

-13 ( +1 / -13 )

Tired of WhinersJAN. 04, 2016 - 05:44PM JST

Why can't Japan simply admit what they did in the war?

Why cannot you admit Japan had admitted decades ago?

-10 ( +3 / -12 )

How do you know? Do you read minds? If so...

With J-politicians its so obvious no reading of minds needed, just ask the Emperor HE see's just like me & anyone else who can see the obvious.

Wow the Great GW

Your welcome !!! :)

4 ( +5 / -2 )

You mean half-hearted apologies that no one except Japan bought? That is why; no one believed it. Rather like this deal, it is announced and then your Prime Minister sends his wife to pay her respects to war criminals. You can keep the 1 billion yen, let Korea keep the statue until Japan REALLY acknowledges what they DID! Only cowards hide behind subterfuge.

8 ( +11 / -4 )

If Abé-chan insists upon it being moved, put it in front of his residence...

8 ( +8 / -1 )

If the issue has been resolved to the satisfaction of the SK government, then the statue should be moved. If Japan really has set the statue's removal as a condition, then it should be moved. The statue is not some innocuous place in the city, it was only erected 5 years ago in front of the embassy and is obviously just meant to be provocative. It being provocative in itself is not a bad thing, but if the two countries are hoping to move forward together, moving such an obstacle shouldn't be that big a deal. The statue itself has no history, it's a very recent addition and I'm sure the SK government would've have acted a lot more quickly to remove any similar statue outside the American or British embassies.

If the protesters are unsatisfied with the deal and want to continue protesting, they should obviously remain free to do so, regardless of what Japan wants. The statue is not necessary for that.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

If those girls/women had been tortured and beaten then a horror would have emerged which would have shocked the world. But when truth emerges, women who have been raped would admit that it was not the worst happening in their lives by a long way. So with all my understanding of the degredation of it all, I think too much is being made of it. What about all the real sexual atrocities committed by Russian soldiers as they invaded Germany and other countries.

-18 ( +0 / -16 )

yes, dear korean people, please learn how to forgive

-11 ( +4 / -14 )

Should Israel put a statue of the holocaust victim in front of the Embassy of the US in Israel?

Statues of victims should be erected wherever there are deniers of human tragedies such as the one regarding Korean comfort women.

The statue should stay as long as there is living memory. It is incumbent upon Japan to help put that memory to rest.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

Since when a country sign a peace treaty, accept apologies, receive compensations and later on claims compensations were not inclusive of something – in this case the forced prostitution / sexual abuses? Does every single war abuse require a special compensation whit its own label? I think compensations come with some sort of declaration referring to all war atrocities. Is it that the issue wasn't explicitly mentioned in the peace treaty so it had to be brought up two decades later just to piss everyone off? Is it because some stupid Japanese politician said some prostitutes were not forced to work (which might be true but silly to say)?

Ultimately the question is:

What do you honestly think has been the major source of troubles in East Asia relations? Japan revisionism or Korean/Chinese political exploitation of historical issues for propaganda?

-7 ( +1 / -7 )

Disillusioned- The article I read said it was a part of the deal. If it is not a part of the deal then Korea still needs to do what it said it would do. If it is not a part of the deal then there is more to consider. Like I said, Japan needs to live up to their part of the deal as well. Integrity is important.

(Integrity is also important in reporting but not all sites are quite as well researched as JT)

-12 ( +0 / -12 )

Never ending story. Tit for tat games.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Abe is treating this as blackmail.

"We paid the money, so burn the photographs already!"

His statements on the issue wander all over the place. In 2007 he denied that this issue ever took place. Now, by offering to pay money, he's admitting that it did.

The point is not to escape punishment or shame, but to a) put right what was done and b) to make sure it never happens again.

10 ( +11 / -2 )

In 2007 he denied that this issue ever took place. Now, by offering to pay money, he's admitting that it did.

He only admitted "involvement" with forced (if any) comfort women. It is not Japan that forced (if any) maybe pimps. Abe's move was a political compromise to put this case to end. This is settled case long time ago. You don't even know double jeorpardy.

-22 ( +0 / -21 )

Abe's move was a political compromise to put this case to end.

Which is as good a reason as any. Why maintain the hatred?

This is settled case long time ago. You don't even know double jeorpardy.

Japan doesn't have double jeopardy.

8 ( +8 / -1 )

Why maintain the hatred?

Who is demanding money and apology?

Japan doesn't have double jeopardy.

I think any advanced country has. In Japan, Ichiji Fusairi.

-19 ( +0 / -18 )

Is this what is meant by "Shame Culture"? For the sin itself, no guilt or remorse, but the physical, public reminder of the sin is an utterly intolerable, unbearable burden? "Forgive, but don't forget" it is said... no matter how sincere the apology, genuine the remorse, or strenuous the restitution, the original act cannot be undone. Atone and move on - there is no sense in trying to erase the past. Let her continue to sit there; that little girl has assuredly earned her place.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

It happened, Abe. Deal with it:

According to military documents, Nakasone* ordered his troops in Southeast Asia to “gather the local women (土人女) and make a comfort station.”

The Sankei has made a huge stink over the comfort women issue. The greatest denier of their reporting is Sankei’s former president, Nobutaka Shikanai, who served in the accounting division of the Imperial Japanese Army during the war. He was in charge of staffing and opening “comfort stations.”

He describes his work in “The Secret History After the War” as follows: “When we procured the girls, we had to look at their endurance, how used up they were, whether they were good or not. We had to calculate the alloted time for commissioned officers, commanding officers, grunts, how many minutes. We also had to fix prices according to rank. There was even a prospectus we learned in (military) accounting school.”

There are hundreds of documents showing the Japanese military’s involvement in the comfort stations, as well as recent testimony. There are records from Japan’s postwar Ministry of Justice in which soldiers admitted to having been paid money to keep the crimes quiet as the war ended.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/11/01/national/media-national/uncomfortable-truth-comfort-women/#.VoqA-JaGwXE

*Yes, the Nakasone who was PM of Japan - another LDP member.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

No.

Thus history cannot be denied by Japan AND SK cannot deny Japan has apologized. The statue represents BOTH countries and their continual commitments.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Countries should deal with both the good and evil of their history. Now if I could just get the United States to do it. Starting with our past and present treatment of the American Indians and, Black slavery, the Jim Crow period, a right up to present day treatment of Blacks, every minority, or immigrant group to come to America there are plenty of atrocities that we should deal with right up to present day. Just about every people has something similar in their own history, even if not quite as spectacular. Why are we all so afraid of the dark side of history.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

tinawatanabe: "He only admitted "involvement" with forced (if any) comfort women."

Nope, sorry, tina. He has once again admitted that the Japanese military engaged in sexual slavery, and has offered compensation money. And in some cases, yes, tina, local pimps did sell the women -- but tina, WHOM did they sell them TO?

Next you'll be telling us it wasn't the soldiers' fault the raped the women -- the men were the victims! They didn't buy the women, THEY were raped and the women then stole their money and lived happy, merry lives from all their riches.

7 ( +8 / -2 )

If that was the deal, then that was the deal.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

If relocation to somewhere else helps foster an agreement between the two countries, then I say relocate it. RELOCATE it, not "remove" it. Set it up in a more dignified location than across the street from the gates to a foreign embassy. Set up a nice landscaped memorial area that meets the requests of the Japanese while still honoring those who allegedly served against their will.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

These women were not slaves. Slave do not get pay for services preform. Slave are e.g how the burma railway was built. All those who call it sex slaving have it complete wrong. Evidence show that that avert were place in Korean New paper for women to pay to be comfort women. Some korean women were lease out by their father and the father was pay. The statue has always been a insult to the Korean women who did not and refuse to supply the enemy with any form of comfort. The only reason why the Korean government allow the statue to be erected is because off Propaganda power it has product out weights the truth being able to come to the forefront.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Slave do not get pay for services preform

Some did in the days of the Roman Empire. Pretty common thing in the Ancient world for slaves to be able to earn their own freedom, though not all were granted the privilege.

The real question is could they leave once they'd joined up? If not, even those girls who joined voluntarily in the beginning became sex slaves went they couldn't back out.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

CH3CHOJAN. 04, 2016 - 04:45PM JST Whatever happened before August 1945 was settled in 1965 and no claim should be made of it. Korea Japan Basic Treaty of 1965 is one of such treaties that waived compensation claims against Japan.

There are other lessons to be drawn. Principally, bilateral negotiations of this importance should not be based on loose assumptions and one-sided expectations. The 1965 Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea, which was supposed to resolve all issues and all claims “completely and finally,” clearly failed to do so, at least in the context of the comfort women. Only by moving away from an absolute and legalistic interpretation of the 1965 treaty was Japan able to finally negotiate a resolution to the seemingly intractable comfort women issue that satisfied the South Korean government.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

If that was the deal, then that was the deal.

Neither side has said that was part of the deal.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

I voted 'yes' because I think arguments for removal narrowly outweigh arguments against.

First, it is not up to me, nor people in Japan to decide, rather people in Korea. However, the question mentions 'should'.

I think nobody should try to make an unpleasant situation worse: having a statue like that outside the Japanese embassy in Korea is plainly antagonistic. It might satisfy some idealogues in Korea (and even in Japan, who want grounds to score future points in a self-righteous tit-for-tat).

Still, there is so much tunnel vision, inward, nostalgic, self-as-victim navel gazing regarding the wartime that still goes on in Japan, that any thing that can draw attention to the wider historical reality is useful. A statue represents Korean collective memory of the wartime which naturally is going to be maintained no matter what anyone on the Japan side says or does (and the Koreans have their own demons to face anyway. The statue in question could be somewhere else and still serve the same purpose.

On that point, a statue in the grounds of the Korean Embassy in Tokyo ... now that would be interesting!

Finally. these two countries need to look forward instead of back. When President Park's generation move on, then people without direct connection to predecessors with memories of either the horror of the war or memories of first-hand accounts of horror of the war and Japanese imperialist era, then things can get batter.

Until that point, lots of people need to be patient, though currently our patience is still being tried.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Neither side has said that was part of the deal. My understanding is that Park promised to work on moving it as part of the deal. It was certainly reported that way in a lot of papers. <http://thediplomat.com/2015/12/the-comfort-women-agreement-a-win-for-traditional-diplomacy/ >

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

My understanding is that Park promised to work on moving it as part of the deal.

Exactly. There was no guarantee made that it would be moved. Only a commitment to see what could be done.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Nope, sorry, tina. He has once again admitted that the Japanese military engaged in sexual slavery

Where? He admitted military involvement only. he did not say involvement in what. English new media changed it.

and has offered compensation money.

The money is to help heal the women. Even SK news paper admit it.

local pimps did sell the women -- but tina, WHOM did they sell them TO?

If you bought a prostitute, are you guilty? Prostitution was not illegal at that time. The reality is that everybody want to make Japan look as bad as possible.

-14 ( +1 / -14 )

Like I said, IF Japan wants the statue moved they need to EARN it, not buy it!!

6 ( +7 / -1 )

IF Japan wants the statue moved they need to EARN it, not buy it!!

It is SK that demanded money. It is reported they demanded 20 Biliion yen. Japan was surprised at that big amount and refused.

-14 ( +0 / -13 )

No. Don't move. Build more. More statues, more educational programs, more films. Keep history alive. Say: never again.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Rather than demand the statue's removal, Abe should go and lay some flowers on it, that would solve a lot of problems in one swoop.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

In 2007 he denied that this issue ever took place. Now, by offering to pay money, he's admitting that it did.

Just so we're all on the same page as far as "this issue" is concerned, here's what Abe actually denied in 2007:

Japan's prime minister, Shinzo Abe, provoked fury yesterday by saying that the so-called "comfort women" were not coerced into becoming sexual slaves of the former Japanese Imperial Army.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1544471/Japanese-PM-denies-wartime-comfort-women-were-forced.html

Back then, Abe denied that the women were coerced into their comfort women roles by the Japanese government. He doesn't deny that they served in those roles. Actually this is very similar to what that South Korean scholar recently got into hot water for suggesting. The IJA became involved in the procurement process after they started hearing that private businessmen in Korea were "acquiring" women for the program under less than honest pretenses.

It is a documented fact that at least SOME of the comfort women were acquired from bordellos. It is ALSO a documented fact that the IJA had to have an Imperial order issued to let them take over procurement for the program after allegations of kidnappings by private businessmen surfaced. Based on this, we can derive that there were professional prostitutes in the comfort women program alongside women who had been kidnapped, but not necessarily kidnapped by the IJA.

I believe it is THIS that Abe was referring to.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Yes, but if and only if they replace it with a bigger statue.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Yes.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

CH3CHO JAN. 04, 2016 - 03:03PM JST Choseon Ilbo

http://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/news/article/Article.aspx?aid=3013314

“The Korean government acknowledged the Japanese government’s concerns over the statute for the security of the embassy,” Yun said. “The Korean government will try to find an appropriate resolution by consulting with concerned civic groups.”

So, the Korean Government has to make an "appropriate resolution", either destroying it or relocating it.

As I understand the statute is on a piece of land that belongs to government, it can be removed at the will of the government.

CH3CHO, why did you take out the word "try"? This is what the article said in entirety.

“The Korean government will try to find an appropriate resolution by consulting with concerned civic groups.”

"Will Try", does not equal to "Guarantee". I notice that you have history of misquoting articles out of context as well as quoting incomplete portions that serves your purpose.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

These kinds of things set a bad precedent. Foreign embassies in any country enjoy certain types of immunity, and that should include immunity from harassment. It's the job of diplomats to keep channels of communication open. One has got to draw the line somewhere, or the next thing you have are mobs burning down the building, like what happened earlier this week to the Saudi Embassy in Iran. A one-hour demonstration might be acceptable if the locals feel the need to protest something, but a permanent fixture on the street outside is taking things a bit too far, IMHO.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

It should be moved. It is a serious issue, but this ist just too hamfisted. Imagine every diplomatic mission in the world surrounded by statues depicting past wrongdoing. Put the statue in a park for crying out loud.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

YES. It's insulting and ridiculous. If everyone acted like South Korea did, we'd never move on from anything. They are a childish, sad people.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

There's a word for what South Korea is doing and it's 嫌がらせ, look it up. Out of all the locations, they put it in front of the Japanese embassy. What a coincidence, right?

Sure, Abe's government doesn't have the moral high ground on this, but let's please not act like the Korean government is actually interested in "justice" for the individuals that were abused. "Comfort women" have become nothing more than political ammunition. I find that kinda sad.

Put it in a park and rename that park to one of the comfort women or whatever. That's a much better way to honor your victims of war.

There would have been a thousand better ways of dealing with this, and the statue idea definitely wasn't one of them. If anything, this just sparked more conflict. (And they knew it would. And there goes the moral high ground)

This was just disrespectful to Japanese people who sincerely want to work with South Korea and to the comfort women themselves. 恥を知れ。

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Park Yu-ha is a professor at the College of Liberal Arts, Sejong University. Her research focuses on Japanese-Korean relations. Her 2013 book Comfort Women of the Empire criticized the Korean interpretation of comfort women. I suggest all should read then comment.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

What took them so long? After all this time what's the point of financial compensation to individuals. what restorative benefit it may have provided has been diminished to virtually nothing by being long overdue. Better to use the compensation money to address current problems.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Better to use the compensation money to address current problems.

It is not compensation money, which SK is not happy about. Japan said the money was to help heal the women.

-11 ( +0 / -10 )

tinawatanabe: "It is not compensation money, which SK is not happy about. Japan said the money was to help heal the women."

Yes, money to heal the wounds inflicted upon them by Japan at that time. In other words, to compensate them for the suffering wrought on them by the IJA. In other words, COMPENSATION money. Call it what you want, tina, won't change the fact that it is indeed compensation money.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

smith - No matter what you say Korean papers are complaining that SK failed to make it compensation money. Their target was 1. compensation money ( which means beigger money) and 2. Japan's legal responsibility( which slso means bigger money)

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

tinawatanabe: ""smith - No matter what you say Korean papers are complaining that SK failed to make it compensation money. Their target was 1. compensation money ( which means beigger money) and 2. Japan's legal responsibility( which slso means bigger money)"

I just think it says mountains about you that you get upset at the idea that it is compensation money -- which it is. Sure, I have no doubt the SK government wanted more, and as I've said I don't think money is the priority and should not be given, but only a sincere, public and official apology is necessary, but they are still getting money, and that money is compensation for the kidnapping, rape, and torture of South Korean women by the IJA, as well as engaging in sexual slavery for those kidnapped and sold by SK's own people. Paint lipstick on the pig if you like, tina, it's still a pig.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

@tinawatanabe Abe was arm twisted by the US to formally apologize to the SK people and govt because US wants to form a military alliance US/SK/JN. Abe unwillingly had to eat his humble pie to make the formal apology as a head of state. No matter you think, like it or not, the whole world knows in WW2, the IJA was the villian and committed the crime against humanity (such as mass killing and comfort women) against her neigboring countries.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Depends. Undoubtedly South Korea wants good relations with Japan for economic and security reasons, but not likely relations will improve unless they remove the statue. Bottom line, they can't have their cake and eat it too.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

If these "comfort women" monuments, designed to vilify and blame Japan entirely based upon false information created by the Asahi Shinbun that 200,000 women were kidnapped and used as a political tool rather than for the benefit of women's rights by the world's leader in prostitution South Korea, are to remain, Japan should put up heir own showing Koreans deceiving and buying these women, running some of the Comfort Stations next t the women. A better idea would be monuments of Vietnamese village girls being raped (not employed as prostitutes) by South Korean soldiers being placed everywhere. If South Korea is honest and agreed in good faith to "resolve this issue permanently" then there is no alternative but to remove the monument in Seoul.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Absolutely not. The Holocaust shouldn't be forgotten because Germany has apologized, and the statues reminding of it should never be removed. Anyone who commits a crime and sincerely apologizes may be forgiven, but may never forget what they did. And demanding that S. Korea remove the statue is trying to erase the past, not get over it.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

The statue should be removed. It should never have been erected in front of the Japanese embassy in the first place.

Should we here in the States erect a statue memorializing the Bataan death march in front of the Japanese embassy in Washington D.C.? Should Israel erect a statue memorializing Auschwitz in front of the German embassy in Israel?

Putting the statue in question in front of the Japanese embassy in Korea is intentionally rude and counterproductive.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

1glenn JAN. 07, 2016 - 06:59AM JST Should we here in the States erect a statue memorializing the Bataan death march in front of the Japanese embassy in Washington D.C.? Should Israel erect a statue memorializing Auschwitz in front of the German embassy in Israel?

If you remember few year ago, two Japanese government officials visited Palisades Park, New Jersey, and they wanted local administrators to remove a small monument from a public park. The monument, a brass plaque on a block of stone, was dedicated in 2010 to the memory of so-called comfort women, tens of thousands of women and girls, many Korean and Chinese, who were forced into sexual slavery by Japanese soldiers during WWII. The Japanese authorities wanted Korean memorial removed. The consul general said the Japanese government was willing to plant cherry trees, donate books to the public library and do some things to show that we’re united in this world and not divided. But the offer was contingent on the memorial’s removal. The town officials rejected the request, and the delegation left.

The second delegation arrived few weeks later with four J-government reps. Their approach was less diplomatic. These Japanese politicians, tried and asked that the monument be removed, to convince the Palisades Park authorities that comfort women had never been forcibly conscripted as sex slaves. They said the comfort women were a lie, that they were set up by an outside agency, that they were women who were paid to come and take care of the troops. Downplaying of history still continues.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Downplaying of history still continues.

But is that history what actually happened? The first comfort woman to sue the Japanese government (in her lawsuit deposition) states she was brought to China by her pimp from a Korean school for teaching the art of "entertaining" men (a gwonbeon?). What was she suing the Japanese government for, then? At the time people assumed she had sued because she had been brought to China against her will by the IJA, but her own deposition refuted any responsibility on the part of the Japanese government, yet here she was starting the comfort woman gravy train that continues to this day.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

If it's such a problem, they could always move the embassy.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

At present with 55% of the votes saying 'nay' I propose that we let democratic values decide!

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Japan should grow up and own up to ALL it's war crimes so that the world can move on. The reason why this statue was created bc Abe stirred up the waters by making comments about Comfort Women being not coerced and now he's suddenly making "apologies" while immediately declaring Japan won't be pestered by this issue anymore rather than showing any signs of genuine contrition. This statue isn't government property and created, paid by and maintained by lawful NPO/NGO's.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Japan has zero leverage or right to make such demands. If you're truly sorry, then you won't make such obnoxious demands.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Gotta laugh that the first comment is a flat out denial. All the more reason for the statue to stay. Perhaps the Rape of Nanking should be better be refered to as the Relief of Nanking?

1 ( +5 / -4 )

This statue isn't government property and created, paid by and maintained by lawful NPO/NGO's.

yes, Teitaikyo, which is a North Korean puppet.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

How about they leave the statue, but add in her Korean pimp and Korean family counting their money from selling her to the pimp? If we're going to tell the story and remember, then let's tell the whole story and not try to frame it merely for political purposes. That would provide the most justice for the women and truly make sure it doesn't happen again, by shaming all that had a hand in it, and not just casting out the sins into the Japanese.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

The statue should go definitely.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Should this poll stay up here another day? Would be my next question.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Leave that "Dolly" alone because it has nothing to do with apology. Apology is not a charm.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

They are a childish, sad people.**

Thank you so much for this fair-minded assessment of an entire nation.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Honestly, JP should bring back all of the diplomats from SK back to JP until the statue is moved.

-2 ( +0 / -1 )

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