certainly don't know why they'd feel inferior to China.
Here you go.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
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 )
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 )
You really do remind me of many Koreans whom I interacted back in mid-90s.
The young generation in SK probably knows very little about reparations to the tune of almost 1 billion US $ received from Japan in 1965 by Park Chung Hee
They do. Korea has an excellent history education and Korean kids know why the Japanese Empire lost the war than Japanese children do.
Yeah, I can tell. If Korea has an excellent history education, I'm sure they teach a simple fact that Korea was under Japanese occupation for 35yrs and fought against Allied powers along with Japan during WW2, so I'm interested to hear how does Korea teach their children about "Japanese Empire (along with current ROK and NK) lost the war"?
I don't know why Japan nor SK do not bring this up when negotiating for more comfort women reparations.
Because it wasn't an aid, but simply the return of Korean owned bank savings and assets left behind in Japan.
I'd assume you get this idea from Korean education, otherwise, you should have known better it was Japan who lost all of savings and assets left behind Korea by 1965 treaty. The nature of reparations and what they were sent for are readily available on the net. If Korea wants to negate the personal compensation as a whole, then you have to also negate 1965 treaty which means Korea has to return so much debts plus interest left behind Korea during the annexation period.
Though this unfortunate incident should be put in history books of both nations
It is on Korean history textbooks, while Abe deleted it from Japanese history textbooks.
I'm sure Korean textbook is but only after 1998. Does Korean text book mentioned anything about the personal compensation was included in 1965 treaty but Korean gov spent it away and this information was kept secret until 2005 while CW dispute was fully penetrated across the world? There is nothing to delete in JP textbook because it never was a issue until Korea decided to revise the history by turning "War-time prostitute" into "Sex slavery".
I hope that the SK government and public move on to fix what's wrong now.
The only way they would move away from this is if they defeated Japan in a war and settled it on their own term.
Even though you seem to be so eager to engage in battle with Japan, this is very unrealistic approach. The fundamental problem of Comfort Women issue is that both nations neglected to conduct the factual background investigations for what actually happened and instead took political actions/gestures to cope with the situation. In that sense, we all have to go back and evaluate the credibility of CW testimonies because these testimonies are all Korea has while every historical records and investigation indicated that CW women were nothing but prostitutes.
So much good can come to both countries if the South stops harping about the matter
Actually it is the other way around. So much good can come to Japan if Japan acknowledged its past mistakes and vowed to never to repeat it again.
Japan did acknowledge its past mistakes and vow to never to repeat it again, so how is it the other way around?
At this point, Japan will burn in defeat if this dispute is to be settled by war, because Japanese forgot why they lost the WW2 and are repeating the mistakes from the past while Koreans remember why Japan lost and will duplicate the war scenario to ensure Japan's defeat.
You make it sound as if Korea defeated Japan during WW2. You really need to get out of Korean fantasy.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
some demanding South Korea go to the ICJ but saying it is "not an issue" at all with the Senkakus for the exact same reasons (minus living on them) that SK says Dokdo is theirs.
Not exactly the same since Japan is accepting the compulsory jurisdiction. Have China or Taiwan asked Japan to settle Senkaku Island dispute in ICJ? Hasn't Japan asked Russia to settle Kuril Islands dispute in ICJ before? Look it up.
Regardless, Japan sure did bring this issue to the forefront once again by getting all riled up about it. SK can just laugh as this and the comfort women issue get more press as a result.
Not sure why Koreans think it's completely ok to negate the international agreement.... this is not the first time you know?
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Not all, just two specific nations heavily relying on the anti-Japan sentiment for their political reasons.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
Several of the surviving South Korean comfort women -- currently numbering 37 -- refused to accept the final compensation provided by Japan.
A group of 12 comfort women filed a lawsuit against Seoul last year for signing the agreement without their consent and despite Tokyo's refusal to take legal responsibility.
So based on Korean news article below toward the end of last year, 9 women out of 34 women who accepted the compensation passed away since this article was published but 12 women who declined the compensation are still alive and filed a lawsuit.
A foundation dedicated to supporting South Korean women forced into wartime brothels for the Japanese military said Friday that five more victims have expressed their intent to accept compensation disbursed by the Japanese government, bring the total to 34 out of the 46 women still alive.
I'm curious, what exactly would be "Tokyo's legal responsibility"?
1 ( +1 / -0 )
I just so happened to walk by in front of APA hotel nearby Shinjuku yesterday and still observed some Chinese groups coming out from the hotel. Considering the mass population of Chinese, I wonder who really gives a damn about all of this.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
@hachikou Regardless of how you interpret these two pages, they only tell "the issue is still controvertial". As long as the issue is still controvertial (unsubstantiated), anyone have every right to debate based on their reasons. So you can't just take one side as "unconditional fact" and bash the opponent without righteous reason, that's violating constitutional rights as far as Japan is concerned. It is quite clear that PRC had been advertising "Nanking Massacre" with the emphasis of two points "the scale of casualty" and "the nature of brutality" that seem to differentiate from any other massacres occurred in known wartime. So you cannot dismiss the number of casualities while discussing "Nanking Massacre" and you should know better if you really know this debate over 15yrs. (To me, it is quite amazing you didn't even know about the joint investigation if you knew the debate for such a long time, well, that unfortunately happens alot) If you still insist on "the massacre was a massacre regardless the number of casualities", then you need to explain why would "Nanking Massacre" so special or significant as compared to any other massacres like Tungchow mutiny otherwise it only makes you a double-standard.
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
Should just build Hirobumi Itoh statue right in front of Korean embassy with some remarks like "The first Japanese Resident General of Korea who strongly supported the sovereignty of the indigenous Korean monarchy yet ironically assassinated by Korean terrorist which accelerated JP-Korea Annexation". At least there are no lies here unlike some Korean statues.
3 ( +5 / -2 )
What various debates and views? Is she talking about the advanced warning theories or Japan's view that it was coerced into attacking? There's no real "debate" about the later outside Japan, and it's a fact that Japan struck first.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe appointment of Tomomi Inada as Minister of Defense is untenable ... Tomomi Inada politically poisonous views will inevitably harm, potentially unraveling ever more fractious relations with US further destabilize any diplomatic measures to smooth over or partially restore unresolved issues with South Korea that have been uncomfortably awkward and clumsy at best. Tomomi Inada doesn't have any resemblance of guilt or a shred of moral responsibility to/of historic reconciliation.
Tell me, how do your abovesid concerns disqualify her role as "Minister of Defense"? What exactly do you mean by "poisonous view" and how would it affect diplomatic relationship with the US? What makes you think Japan even wants to restore relationship with annoying ROK?
-3 ( +0 / -3 )
There are so many here who seem to be sympathetic towards this teacher, but are you really? We all can debate over the court ruling upon her refusal to stand n sing National Anthem whether it was against Constitutional right or not, but do you really think she is fit for her job as a "teacher" who needs to be a guiding light for children? Would you be sending your kids to school where the teacher is refusing to sing your National Anthem? Would you still praise her action as "brave to fight for her constitutinal right"? If there is a teacher in the U.S. who constantly refuse to sing The Star-Spangled Banner (it's much more occational than Japan) just because he/she doesn't like the idea, would you still think it's ok because that's her constitutinal right?
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
@Jack and the Beanstalk
Senkaku became worth stealing in 1969 when the United Nations Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East (ECAFE) identified potential oil and gas reserves in the vicinity of the Senkaku Islands. Taiwan and China only started claiming ownership of the islands afterwards.
2 ( +5 / -3 )
I would not judge what people ought to eat but some uncivilized ritual should be banned...
The controversy over dog meat consumption often centers on the slaughtering methods employed, which include electrocution, strangulation by hanging, and physically beating the dog to death. Some dogs are still alive when they are blow-torched or thrown into boiling water to remove their fur.
They got no respect for what they consume. I hope they learn what "Itadakimasu" means.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
@CH3CHO Like I said, it's a matter of individual interpretation. I will fully respect your opinion and your constitutional right to vote whoever you want (if you are Japanese living in Tokyo), but I will not put her name on my vote slip for sure.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
@CH3CHO Yes, I'm aware of its background. I know her role and mission at that time was to interogate internal reps to reduce a federation budget. Yet, it's entirely up to how individuals interpreted her message. I would not vote someone who had prevously questioned and challenged contributors who worked hard for Japan to become No.1 even if the scale is limited to specific industry. Period.
-4 ( +0 / -4 )
“Independence Day: Resurgence” hits cinemas worldwide from June 22 and opens in Japan on July 8.
Should release it on 4th of July across the world.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Because of the 'net, more propaganda and misinformation from all sides is now instantly disseminated throughout the world.
Apparently not for Chinese and Koreans. As of course, their objective is not about finding out the truth.
-3 ( +0 / -3 )
The main problem regarding Japanese war criminals is that many top WWII criminals had gone scot-free. Basically, only those who were responsible for the attack of Pearl harbor and invasion of the Philippines were punished by the US and the War Crimes Tribunals.
Google search "International Military Tribunal for the Far East" (even Wiki is OK) then try again. If you are refering to the regard "Justice Delfin Jaranilla of the Philippines disagreed with the penalties imposed by the tribunal as being "too lenient, not exemplary and deterrent, and not commensurate with the gravity of the offence or offences committed".", can you also highlight "Pal's dissenting opinion" as well? At any rate, Japan accepted the unconditional surrender so you probably should be accusing associated countries in Tokyo Trial, not only the U.S., if you want to claim the illegitimacy of trial outcomes. Furthermore, you probably should consider the legitimacy of Tokyo Trial itself.
As a result, China, two Koreas, ten SE Asian countries and all British and Anzac POWs have yet to receive any single cent of compensation from Japan for the various war crimes.
Not sure what you mean by "various war crimes", but you should also google search "San Francisco Peace Treaty" along with individual peace treaties with various countries who didn't sign SF peace treaty to understand how WW2 war crimes were settled in various forms with each countries. Remember, if both countries sign the peace treaty, it means it is settled except for some unsettled disputes noted in its treaty itself.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
@tokyo_eiyuu Who are "we"? "the greatest global events fought by the Greatest Generation" sounds much more flippant, arrogant, and biased attitude.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
I wonder how many of commenters here, including myself, are truely entitled to say "should be apologized" "should not be apologized"? A-Bombs and carpet-bombings not only destroyed cities but killed hundreds of thousands of non-combatants and so many of commenters here are trying to justify it by "it should have saved more people" "Japan did far worse atrocities" bs. I personally don't believe "Obama needs to apologize" but I cannot say on victims' behalf even though I know some people who were victimized by it. Let's face it, thousands of powerless and innocent people were wiped out with merciless invention and that was tragic. We should respect the dead and those who suffered by its consequences then move on.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
Really? So, a murderer, in your mind, should not need to apologize if they don't want to?
If you are a family member of murdered victim, do you really appreciate a word of apology from a murderer who seems to be just saying only because you were demanding for it? If I were in that position, I would just wish for his death penalty or painful torture and wouldn't even want to listen to an apology regardless of his sincerity. As some of other commenter was saying, the most of Japanese are not expecting for an apology from the U.S. because that tragic incident is already overdue for most of people who are still alive today. We should learn from it to prevent the similar tragedy in future, but we should not carry grudge over generations. Besides, Japan appreciates the positive relationship with the U.S. established through several decades after WW2. Anyway, "apology" is just a combination of words to express how sorry he is. It should naturally comes when he really is sorry, and it's not something that others should demand for it. That probably is a cultural difference between Japan and these anti-Japan nations.
At any rate, this is a bad analogy because probably neither you nor I never were engaged in combat during WW2.
A kid who commits a crime or harasses another shouldn't apologize?
You mean "A decendent of someone who committed a crime". Should they be apologizing for their ancestors' sin forever and ever? I'm sure every contries have their dark side of history, so how long should it be effective and who should be making this judgement?
0 ( +0 / -0 )
As far as Japan is concerned, Obama's intention to visit Hiroshima is just to gain some points for his Nobel Peace Prize without concrete achievement. I'm not a bomb victim nor relative of any kind, but I believe the most of Japanese are not expecting for an apology from the U.S. If you look around the world, there are only two specific nations constantly demanding for apologies for what had happened (or never happened) such a long time ago. So the question is, why is everyone talking about "Obama should not apologize" while Japan is not even asking for it? Besides, one should apologize only when he/she wants to apologize, not because someone ask for it.
-2 ( +2 / -4 )
Why should Korea remove the statue when it made no promises to do so?
Putting your sophistry aside, the reason is because it is illegal as DieRealityCheck highlighted at Jan.15, 2016 - 01:15AM JST. ROK gov should have removed the statue right when it was built on the public street by civilians without official permit, however, ROK gov had been ignoring to this date unlike the case of Yangju highway incident.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
Former PM Hashimoto did just that. And why museum? Japan's comfort women were no different from other countries brothels.
Do not believe this just because it is what you WANT to believe. No other country has EVER had wartime brothels on the same level as Japan did (i.e. mass rape and torture across many countries). This is undisputed historical fact agreed by even Japanese scholars.
Right back at you! Do not believe this just because it is what you WANT to believe.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-33758721 Have a chat with Mr Matsumoto (who actually fought in World War 2, unlike you or Mr Abe. Then get back to me. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.
His dialogue begins with "So if anyone said that there were no comfort women those were lies" and throughout, so his testimony was based on his false interpretation "Japan is denying the existance of Comfort Women". Yet this BBC article misapplied his testimony and extended one individual experience as a whole "Some are denying that Japan committed war atrocities, including forcing women in China, South Korea and South East Asia to be comfort women, or sex slaves for Japanese soldiers.". If you don't call this a strewman argument, what would you call it?
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Very nice article. Never crossed my mind that Ukraine and Japan had something in common.
It is indeed Japanese tragedy to have a neighbor nation which how this russian professor quoted in the conclusion "a nation suffering from a combination of inferiority complex, extreme national ambition and a sense of victimhood provided a basis for envy and demonisation".
0 ( +1 / -1 )