今更だったんですが、9月にBBC宛に送った反論メールを添削してもらいました。
（BBC宛の反論メールって、何？という方はこちら をご覧ください）
早速、添削したもらった英文をば晒します。（文頭、文末は省きます）
1. Is there evidence of abduction and forced prostitution of Korean women by the Japanese military?
The Shirouma incident relates to the prove confinement, rapes and forced prostitution carried out by the Japanese military.
But the victims of this incident were Dutch women and the place was Indonesia. It doesn’t prove that abduction and forced prostitution of Korean women were carried out in Korean peninsula.
You said “There is evidence.” in the answer. Did you get written proof of the Japanese military’s “comfort woman hunt” in Korea?
If you find that kind of evidence, you should report it to the Japanese government, the South Korean government and the U.S. government, because the U.S. government specifically searched for evidence on “the Comfort Women” allegation. They spent approximately 8 years and $30milion on the reinvestigation but found nothing.
You can read the IWG report on the web. (http://archives.gov/iwg/reports/final-report-2007.pdf)
(I don’t deny ‘the Japanese military involvement’ in the issue that;
*The military surgeons checked up on comfort women’s venereal diseases.
* When comfort women went to occupied areas, the Japanese military treated them as civilians in the military service temporarily, and transported by military vessels.
*The customers were Japanese soldiers.)
2. Historical documents and the testimonies of former comfort women
Ms Lee Ok-soon said “I was kidnapped by two men.” But it’s difficult to prove whether the criminals were Japanese soldiers or not.
By the way, I’ll introduce the documents which were needed to become comfort women at the time.
*The document which was trading with an employment agent
① Prostitute business contract
*The documents which were submitted to the police station controlling the red-light district
② The written consent of the person in parental authority or guardian
③ Seal registration certificate of the person in parental authority or guardian
④ Copy of the family register or copy of ethnic group
⑤ Copy of the document about her advance
⑥ The letter on her background and the reason for becoming a prostitute
⑦ Health certificate (police chief designated doctor issue)
⑧ The application for registration on prostitute list
*The documents for taking a passage as a comfort woman, which were submitted to the police station
⑨ Health certificate
⑩ The written consent of the person in parental authority or guardian
⑪ The application for issuing her identification
* The document for moving to comfort station, which was submitted to the police station
⑫ The application for registration on prostitute list (application for moving)
*The documents which were submitted to the Japanese Consulate in an occupied area of the Japanese military
⑬ The application of special waitress business permission (attached 2 photos)
⑭ The written consent of the person in parental authority or guardian
⑮ Seal registration certificate of the person in parental authority or guardian
⑯ Copy of the family register or copy of ethnic group
If Ms Lee’s testimony is true, she could not become a comfort woman.
Now, you said “The testimony presented in our piece is consistent and clear and is consistent with historical documents from the time.” That means the Coomaraswamy report or the McDougall report?
Ms Coomaraswamy referred to an Australian journalist George Hicks’s book. And Mr Hicks‘s book references with Seiji Yoshida’s novel.
The McDougall report is also unreliable because there is no solid evidence for his description.
Did you know? Yoshida was interviewed by a magazine company and they pressed him for an answer.
He testified “If I wrote what I experience, the book would not be sold well.” “It is same as you news media people are doing.” He suddenly took a defiant attitude toward the interviewer.
If you have the historical documents which can prove their testimony, such as eyewitness note something like that, you should report to the Japanese government, the South Korean government and the U.S. government, please.
3. The process of making Kono statement
In March 1993, South Korean President Kim Yong-Sam stated in his speech, “We’ve decided not ask Japan for further compensation as long as we got official apology.”
Then the Japanese government negotiated about the working of the Kono statement which was the official apology from Japanese government.
The South Korean government requested correction on 11 points in which the Japanese government agreed 10 out of 11 requested changes including word “force” or “forcible” abduction.
This statement was what the Korean government requested and approved.
The Japanese government announced this statement in August 1993.
Right after the release of this Kono statement, the South Korean government went back on their word and started demanding another apology and round of compensation.
The Japanese government wanted to move ahead and keep the past in the past that was the reason for issuing the apology in the Kono statement although we had a treaty in 1965 between South Korea and Japan to finalize any further claim, but as you can see, that did not work.
So, the Kono statement was the product of compromise.
That’s why the statement did explicitly apologise.
4. Harassment from the comfort women support group to compensation recipients
The South Korean government welcomed an apology from Japanese government and compensation provision by the Asian Female Fund at first. But the South Korean government was opposed by the comfort women support group, and also refused provision from the fund. On the other hand the South Korean government provided former comfort women with living support money, once they had vowed to reject the compensation from Japan.
Actually 7 former comfort women received the reparation from Japan, but they were threatened and slandered by the comfort women support group.
By the way, the survivors of comfort women are almost forced to attend the protest demonstration every Wednesday in front of the Japanese Embassy in Seoul.
I wonder whether or not the comfort women support group has the mind to support and relieve for the old ladies.
It’s redundant but the Japanese comfort women who applied from the red-light district in Japan accounted for about 40% of the whole. However Japanese comfort women are ineligible for the Asian Female Fund.
5. Sex crimes by soldiers
I mentioned Sex crimes against Japanese women by the occupation soldiers on my complaint, but you answered that it has no connection to the comfort women issue.
So, former Japanese soldier Mr Matsumoto referred to some Korean comfort women in China but his story was also unrelated to abduction and forced prostitution on them. He saw or heard the sex crimes against Chinese women by his comrades, didn’t he?
His story gives the impression that all Japanese soldiers were rapists. I felt that this was a very unfair misrepresentation.
Speaking of sex crimes by soldiers, former Japanese soldiers are given as an example but what about the U.S. soldiers did to French women after the Normandy Invasion?
The Soviet soldiers raped a lot of local women and girls in the Eastern European countries, Germany and Manchuria.
In Manchuria, the Soviet soldiers confined about 170 Japanese women in rooms, and raped them repeatedly. No longer able to stand the soldiers sexual abuse, 23 women committed mass suicide.
During the Korean War, the South Korean Army forced the North Korean female soldiers and the female partisans who were the POWs, to be “comfort women” for South Korean Army and U.S. forces. In addition to the comfort women of the South Korean Army who were under the army’s direct control.
Furthermore, the South Korean Army also installed comfort stations in Vietnam during the Vietnam War.
Did you know about “Lai dai han”, who were the children of between Korean soldiers and Vietnamese women during the War?
The South Korean government hasn’t apologised or compensated Vietnamese comfort women or Lai dai han yet.
I haven’t the slightest intention of contempt for comfort women because some comfort women took care of wounded Japanese soldiers at times. Then, some comfort women brought the mementoes to the families of the war dead in the days after the War.
They became comfort women because of poverty but they also survived those days gallantly.
I am not going to blame BBC.
I know who should be blamed; the first is Seiji Yoshida who wrote the book, purporting it to be his real-life experience. The second is Asahi Shimbun newspaper publishing company; they didn’t give fair or balanced reporting on the book. Instead they promoted it as representing the truth. The third is the Japanese lawyer Etsuro Totsuka who said exaggeratedly “Comfort women were sex slaves” in the UN. The UN human rights committee reacted positively and adopted the issue immediately.
Then also the Japanese have to blame their own Ministry of Foreign Affairs, for their “letting sleeping dogs lie” attitude. And blame also lies with the Japanese government, their “the kowtow diplomacy” by successive cabinets.
Lastly, the South Korean government must accept some blames; there is no mind to settle the issue because they know the issue is useful for their economic gain and as a diplomatic bargaining chip.
I believe BBC has an interest in seeking the truth.
That’s why I wanted you to penetrate to the substance of the problem.
※文字数の関係上、日本語文を全部載せられないので、こちら から反論文大意ご覧ください。
※また上記英文と日本語大意と多少違いがありますので、その点ご容赦ください。
アイルランドでは慰安婦関連の報道は皆無と言っていいほどで、先生も背景が分からないまま、それでも添削してくれました。
添削前の英文は、ところどころ日本語からほぼ直訳したところもあったので、「？」な箇所もあり、そこは私に確認をとりながら、なんとか訳したといった感じのところもあります。
もし、どなたか「こんな言い方もあるよ」「こう変えた方がわかり易いよ」というのがあったら、教えてください。
まだまだ勉強中の身ですので、アドバイスを頂けるとありがたいです。
さて、今回添削してもらって気が付いた、“認識の違い”・・・。
『慰安婦になるための必要書類 （the documents which were needed to become comfort women）』の所で、先生は【親権者または後見人の承諾書】を不思議がっていました。
「慰安婦になるのは、未成年者なの？だから親権者の承諾書がいるの？」と思ったそうで。
それで、彼女たちは成人に達していた（注：17～18歳以上から30歳くらいまで）と説明すると、成人しているのに、親の承諾書が必要なの？
と驚かれました。
当時日本は家長制度でしたし、家族のための借金をして、我が身を売るというのは自分にとっても、家族にとっても重大なことだったと思います。
“家長”のことは説明できませんでしたが、「我が身を売るのは重大なことだから、親か後見人の承諾が必要だった」と説明し、The written consent of the person in parental authority or guardian に収まりました。
今更ですが、当時日本（もちろん半島も）家長制度があったこと、慰安婦応募時の最低年齢を記した方が良かったかもしれません。
添削してもらって、「あ
toやwithやbyの使い方がいまいちわかってないな。
」とか「theを入れなきゃいけない所が抜けて、いらない所にtheつけてる
」と自分の英文法のあやふやさを自覚しました。まぁ、これは本読んで、文章書いて、身につけていくしかないんですがね。
それと、「あぁ、下手くそな長文反論メールを読んでくれたBBCって凄いわ！」と感謝した次第です。
もちろん、この問題をほとんど知らないのに、快く、根気強く、添削してくれた先生に、ただただ感謝でございます。
人気ブログランキングへ