Professor Tsutomu Nishioka demonstrated as early as the 1990s that the Asahi Shimbun’s reporting on so-called “comfort women” was false. His work has protected the honor and truth of Japan and its people across generations. This article introduces his Sankei Shimbun “Seiron” essay, revealing the hidden realities of South Korean politics, radical leftist ideology, and the media narratives that misled Japan for decades.

As a person who has protected the honor and truth of the Japanese state and the Japanese people, past, present, and future, the greatest commendation possible.
2016-12-01
The following is from the essay published today in the “Seiron” column of the Sankei Shimbun by Professor Tsutomu Nishioka of Tokyo Christian University, who had already perfectly proven in the 1990s, through articles in monthly journals, that the Asahi Shimbun’s reporting on wartime comfort women was false.
As a person who has protected the honor and truth of the Japanese state and the Japanese people, past, present, and future, I am convinced that the nation should bestow upon him the greatest commendation possible.
Know the enemy and know yourself, and you will not be endangered in a hundred battles.
Those who subscribe to the Asahi Shimbun, in reality, know nothing about the actual state of South Korea. This is because the Asahi Shimbun does not inform them. The same is probably true not only of the Asahi Shimbun but also of the Mainichi Shimbun and others.
As already noted, until August of the year before last, the Asahi Shimbun had dominated Japan. This is also proven by the fact that newspapers such as the New York Times and the Washington Post continued to publish articles in line with the editorials of the Asahi Shimbun. That is why Japan has been taken advantage of by South Korea.
If one reads the following essay by Mr. Nishioka, all subscribers will come to know perfectly that the Asahi Shimbun is a newspaper that has continued to conceal the reality of South Korea.
Emphasis within the text, except for the headings, is mine.
Maintaining the conservative policies of the Park administration is essential.
South Korean President Park Geun-hye issued a statement suggesting resignation midway through her term. However, the forces leading the anti-Park demonstrations and the opposition parties dismiss this as nothing more than a delaying tactic and continue movements demanding her resignation and pursuing impeachment, and political turmoil continues.
Pro–North Korea radical left forces aiming for “revolution.”
In this column dated November 23, I pointed out that the ringleaders of the anti-Park demonstrations are pro–North Korea radical left forces, that they are not taking issue with the Choi Soon-sil scandal, but are aiming for a “revolution” that denies South Korea’s liberal democratic system, and that the opposition parties are riding on that momentum.
The essence of the problem lies in distinguishing between President Park’s scandal and the correct policies that the Park administration has carried out—strengthening the ROK–U.S. alliance, deciding on the deployment of the high-altitude missile defense system (THAAD), dissolving extreme leftist parties aiming at violent revolution, correcting left-leaning textbooks, and efforts to liberalize North Korea—and whether it is possible to create a next conservative administration that will inherit the latter.
The outcome is still unknown.
If it fails, even the worst-case scenario must be assumed, in which the entire Korean Peninsula falls into the hands of anti-Japanese forces possessing nuclear weapons.
First, I will introduce how opposition leaders during this period have repeatedly made radical statements aiming for “revolution.”
At the anti-Park demonstration on November 26, Moon Jae-in, a leading opposition presidential candidate with high approval ratings, stated as follows.
“We will carry out a nationwide resignation movement together with the people until the president declares her unconditional resignation. We must go beyond the president’s resignation, change the era, and fundamentally transform the nation all at once.”
In addition, Park Won-soon, the mayor of Seoul and one of the leading opposition candidates, made the following radical remarks.
“Did we gather holding candles merely to bring down President Park alone. Did we not gather to purge all at once the privileged corrupt forces, pro-Japanese forces, the forces that betrayed President Park (referring to non-Park ruling party lawmakers and conservative newspapers that originally supported President Park but betrayed her after reading public opinion), the Saenuri Party (the ruling party), and the collusive political and economic forces. It is not enough for President Park to step down. We must create a new world, a new nation.”
A dangerous mode of thinking has permeated all sectors.
Why, then, are “pro-Japanese forces” being targeted for liquidation here.
That is the secret behind why radical leftists are exerting power in South Korea.
I have repeatedly argued that the root cause of South Korea’s dysfunction lies in the self-deprecating view of history based on pro–North Korean nationalism that spread rapidly in the 1980s.
Professor Lee Young-hoon of Seoul National University summarizes that view of history as follows.
“The Yi Dynasty of Joseon, which possessed a beautiful culture like a jewel, was invaded by Japan, a robber. After that came an era in which pro-Japanese collaborators, traitors to the nation, ran rampant. Liberation from Japan was an event in which another occupying force, the United States, entered. Then the pro-Japanese collaborators were the first to transform themselves into pro-American servileists. The division of the nation and the tragic Korean War were also the fault of these traitors. The subsequent Rhee Syng-man administration and the Park Chung-hee administration of the 1960s and 1970s were also histories of betrayal ruled by them. Even though economic development was carried out, the essential spirit was lost. In history, thus, justice was defeated.”
The dangerous mode of thinking that President Park, the Saenuri Party, and conservative newspapers such as the Chosun Ilbo are all “pro-Japanese collaborators who have transformed themselves into pro-American servileists” and therefore must be purged has even now deeply permeated all sectors and strata of South Korean society.
That is precisely why the Park administration was forced to use the “drastic medicine” of restoring state control over history textbooks in order to correct a distorted view of history.
A president who protects “liberal democracy.”
President Park issued her statement at this timing because she felt a sense of crisis over radical leftists seizing power.
President Park offered a deep apology for having lost the trust of the people, and after explaining that she had not pursued personal gain or harbored private intentions, she stated, “I entrust the issue of my advancement or retreat, including the shortening of my presidential term, to the decision of the National Assembly. If the ruling and opposition parties discuss and present a plan that minimizes confusion and vacuum in state affairs and allows for a stable transfer of power, I will step down from the presidency in accordance with that schedule and the rule of law.”
In response, opposition leaders made clear their position that this was “unacceptable” and that they would proceed with impeachment as planned.
However, the opposition alone does not reach the required 200 votes for impeachment.
At least 28 non-Park ruling party lawmakers must vote in favor.
The approximately 50 ruling party lawmakers who had indicated before the statement that they would support impeachment are now being forced to make a momentous decision.
Conservatives holding demonstrations calling to “protect the Park administration” had, even before the statement, urged non-Park lawmakers to reconsider, arguing that “pursuing impeachment without uncovering the truth will lead to the self-destruction of conservative forces.”
The phrase in President Park’s statement, “step down in accordance with the rule of law,” means shortening the term by amending the constitution, and arguments have also emerged that the ruling party should act for that purpose.
Before the statement, President Park’s approval rating was 4 percent, while opposition to impeachment stood at 20 percent.
This entire group consists of conservatives.
The focal point is whether ruling party lawmakers can return to an evaluation of the Park administration that criticizes the scandal but maintains and develops its policies, and whether they can put forward a sound next presidential candidate who will protect the liberal democratic system.