the FACTS
the FACTS
The purpose of this paid public comment is to present historical facts.
At the end of April, an advertisement purporting to tell "The Truth about
Comfort Women" appeared in the Washington Post.
The claims contained in these statements, though, were anything but the
"truth."
Rather than being based on "facts," they appeared, if anything, to be the
products of "faith."
The people of Japan have the highest respect for the United States as a
fellow democratic nation and as a strong and reliable ally. For democracy to
operate effectively, though, the freedom of speech, thought, academic
research, and religion must be guaranteed so that individual citizens can
draw their own appropriate conclusions.
To enable this, people must have access to correct facts, rather than
fallacies, distortions, biases, and factual errors.
This public comment seeks to present a number of historical facts relating
to "comfort women" that have not been adequately brought to light so as to
enable the readers of this respected publication to draw their own
conclusions.
No historical document has ever been found by historians or research
organizations that positively demonstrates that women were forced against
their will into prostitution by the Japanese army. A search of the archives
at the Japan Center for Asian Historical Records, which houses wartime
orders from the government and military leaders, turned up nothing
indicating that women were forcibly rounded up to work as ianfu, or "comfort
women."
On the contrary, many documents were found warning private brokers not to
force women to work against their will.
Army memorandum 2197, issued on March 4, 1938, explicitly prohibits
recruiting methods that fraudulently employ the army’s name or that can be
classified as abduction, warning that those employing such methods have been
punished. A Home Affairs Ministry directive (number 77) issued on February
18, 1938, states that the recruitment of "comfort women" must be in
compliance with international law and prohibits the enslavement or abduction
of women. A directive (number 136) issued on November 8 the same year,
moreover, orders that only women who are 21 years old or over and are
already professionally engaged in the trade may be recruited as "comfort
women." It also requires the approval of the woman’s family or relatives.
A historian who claims that the number of "comfort women" reached 200,000-a
contention frequently quoted in the US media -believes, on the other hand,
that the memorandum offers proof of the army's active involvement.
There are many newspaper articles, moreover, that demonstrate that these
directives were dutifully carried out. The August 31, 1939, issue of Dong-A
Ilbo, published in Korea, reports of brokers who forced women to become
ianfu against their will being punished by the local police, which was under
Japanese jurisdiction at the time. This offers proof that the Japanese
government dealt severely with inhumane crimes against women.
There were admittedly cases, though, of breakdowns in discipline. On the
island of Semarang in the Dutch East Indies (now Indonesia), for instance,
an army unit forcibly rounded up a group of young Dutch women to work at a
"comfort station." The station was shut down under army orders, though, when
this incident came to light, and the responsible officers were punished.
Those involved in this and other war crimes were subsequently tried in Dutch
courts and received heavy sentences, including the death penalty.
House Resolution 121 sponsored by US Representative Mike Honda and other
charges of Japanese maltreatment of "comfort women" are mostly based on
testimonies by former ianfu. In none of their initial statements are there
references to their being coerced to work by the army or other units of the
Japanese government.
Their testimonies have undergone dramatic changes, though, after the start
of the anti-Japanese campaign. Those who testified in a House of
Representatives public hearing first reported that they were whisked away by
brokers, but then later claimed that their abductors wore clothing that
"looked like police uniforms."
The ianfu who were embedded with the Japanese army were not, as is commonly
reported, "sex slaves."
They were working under a system of licensed prostitution that was
commonplace around the world at the time. Many of the women, in fact, earned
incomes far in excess of what were paid to field officers and even
generals(as reported by the United States Office of War Information,
Psychological Warfare Team Attached to U.S. Army Forces, India-Burma
Theater, APO 689), and there are many testimonies attesting to the fact that
they were treated well.
There are records of soldiers being punished for acts of violence against
the women. Many countries set up brothels for their armies, in fact, to
prevent soldiers from committing rape against private citizens. (In 1945,
for instance, Occupation authorities asked the Japanese government to set up
hygienic and safe "comfort stations" to prevent rape by American soldiers.)
Sadly, many women were made to suffer severe hardships during the wretched
era during World War II, and it is with profound regret that we contemplate
this tragic historical reality.
At the same time, we must note that it is a gross and deliberate distortion
of reality to contend that the Japanese army was guilty of "coercing young
women into sexual slavery" in "one of the largest cases of human trafficking
in the 20th century," as the House Resolution claims. After all, two-fifths
of the approximately 20,000 ianfu during the war were Japanese women, as
detailed in an academic paper by historian Ikuhiko Hata.
We are interested, foremost, in sharing the truth with the American public.
Criticism for events that actually occurred must be humbly embraced. But
apologies over unfounded slander and defamation will not only give the
public an erroneous impression of historical reality but could negatively
affect the friendship between the United States and Japan. We ask only that
the Facts be objectively regarded so that we may share a correct perception
of history.
Translation of an article demonstrating that there was no organized or
forced recruitment: Misconceptions about comfort women and the Japanese
Military .
http://www.sdh-fact.com/CL02_1/31_S4.pdf
http://www.ianfu.net/facts/facts.html
The purpose of this paid public comment is to present historical facts.
At the end of April, an advertisement purporting to tell "The Truth about
Comfort Women" appeared in the Washington Post.
The claims contained in these statements, though, were anything but the
"truth."
Rather than being based on "facts," they appeared, if anything, to be the
products of "faith."
The people of Japan have the highest respect for the United States as a
fellow democratic nation and as a strong and reliable ally. For democracy to
operate effectively, though, the freedom of speech, thought, academic
research, and religion must be guaranteed so that individual citizens can
draw their own appropriate conclusions.
To enable this, people must have access to correct facts, rather than
fallacies, distortions, biases, and factual errors.
This public comment seeks to present a number of historical facts relating
to "comfort women" that have not been adequately brought to light so as to
enable the readers of this respected publication to draw their own
conclusions.
No historical document has ever been found by historians or research
organizations that positively demonstrates that women were forced against
their will into prostitution by the Japanese army. A search of the archives
at the Japan Center for Asian Historical Records, which houses wartime
orders from the government and military leaders, turned up nothing
indicating that women were forcibly rounded up to work as ianfu, or "comfort
women."
On the contrary, many documents were found warning private brokers not to
force women to work against their will.
Army memorandum 2197, issued on March 4, 1938, explicitly prohibits
recruiting methods that fraudulently employ the army’s name or that can be
classified as abduction, warning that those employing such methods have been
punished. A Home Affairs Ministry directive (number 77) issued on February
18, 1938, states that the recruitment of "comfort women" must be in
compliance with international law and prohibits the enslavement or abduction
of women. A directive (number 136) issued on November 8 the same year,
moreover, orders that only women who are 21 years old or over and are
already professionally engaged in the trade may be recruited as "comfort
women." It also requires the approval of the woman’s family or relatives.
A historian who claims that the number of "comfort women" reached 200,000-a
contention frequently quoted in the US media -believes, on the other hand,
that the memorandum offers proof of the army's active involvement.
There are many newspaper articles, moreover, that demonstrate that these
directives were dutifully carried out. The August 31, 1939, issue of Dong-A
Ilbo, published in Korea, reports of brokers who forced women to become
ianfu against their will being punished by the local police, which was under
Japanese jurisdiction at the time. This offers proof that the Japanese
government dealt severely with inhumane crimes against women.
There were admittedly cases, though, of breakdowns in discipline. On the
island of Semarang in the Dutch East Indies (now Indonesia), for instance,
an army unit forcibly rounded up a group of young Dutch women to work at a
"comfort station." The station was shut down under army orders, though, when
this incident came to light, and the responsible officers were punished.
Those involved in this and other war crimes were subsequently tried in Dutch
courts and received heavy sentences, including the death penalty.
House Resolution 121 sponsored by US Representative Mike Honda and other
charges of Japanese maltreatment of "comfort women" are mostly based on
testimonies by former ianfu. In none of their initial statements are there
references to their being coerced to work by the army or other units of the
Japanese government.
Their testimonies have undergone dramatic changes, though, after the start
of the anti-Japanese campaign. Those who testified in a House of
Representatives public hearing first reported that they were whisked away by
brokers, but then later claimed that their abductors wore clothing that
"looked like police uniforms."
The ianfu who were embedded with the Japanese army were not, as is commonly
reported, "sex slaves."
They were working under a system of licensed prostitution that was
commonplace around the world at the time. Many of the women, in fact, earned
incomes far in excess of what were paid to field officers and even
generals(as reported by the United States Office of War Information,
Psychological Warfare Team Attached to U.S. Army Forces, India-Burma
Theater, APO 689), and there are many testimonies attesting to the fact that
they were treated well.
There are records of soldiers being punished for acts of violence against
the women. Many countries set up brothels for their armies, in fact, to
prevent soldiers from committing rape against private citizens. (In 1945,
for instance, Occupation authorities asked the Japanese government to set up
hygienic and safe "comfort stations" to prevent rape by American soldiers.)
Sadly, many women were made to suffer severe hardships during the wretched
era during World War II, and it is with profound regret that we contemplate
this tragic historical reality.
At the same time, we must note that it is a gross and deliberate distortion
of reality to contend that the Japanese army was guilty of "coercing young
women into sexual slavery" in "one of the largest cases of human trafficking
in the 20th century," as the House Resolution claims. After all, two-fifths
of the approximately 20,000 ianfu during the war were Japanese women, as
detailed in an academic paper by historian Ikuhiko Hata.
We are interested, foremost, in sharing the truth with the American public.
Criticism for events that actually occurred must be humbly embraced. But
apologies over unfounded slander and defamation will not only give the
public an erroneous impression of historical reality but could negatively
affect the friendship between the United States and Japan. We ask only that
the Facts be objectively regarded so that we may share a correct perception
of history.
Translation of an article demonstrating that there was no organized or
forced recruitment: Misconceptions about comfort women and the Japanese
Military .
http://www.sdh-fact.com/CL02_1/31_S4.pdf
http://www.ianfu.net/facts/facts.html