The Japanese government officially denied the claim of “forced recruitment” in the comfort women issue at the United Nations. This article argues that Asahi Shimbun should issue a full-page apology in major newspapers worldwide for decades of misinformation that damaged Japan’s honor and spirit over the past seventy years.

2016-02-01

I am firmly convinced that Asahi Shimbun, for the sake of Japan and the Japanese people, should have taken out full-page apology advertisements in major newspapers around the world.
Unless they do so, they—and the so-called cultural figures who sympathized with them—must understand that nothing but the harshest punishment from King Enma awaits them.

Before King Enma, the countless great figures Japan has produced throughout history will never forgive them.
Among them, I am convinced that Nobunaga and Hideyoshi would unquestionably strike them down.

There is no need to elaborate on how deeply they have wounded the beauty of Japan and the soul of the Japanese people.
The seventy years since the war have reached a level that is simply unforgivable.

(The bold emphasis in the original text, except for the headline, is mine.)

---

Comfort Women Issue: Forced Recruitment Denied at the United Nations
Government to Correct Misunderstanding Next Month

The Japanese government will report at the 63rd session of the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, to be held in Geneva starting February 15, that “among the materials discovered by the Japanese government, no evidence was found confirming so-called ‘forced recruitment’ by the military or authorities” regarding the comfort women issue.

The committee published the report submitted by the government on its website by the 30th.

This marks the first time the Japanese government has denied the forced recruitment theory of the comfort women issue at this committee.

It can be seen as an effort by the government to disseminate accurate information at the United Nations, which had been used to spread incorrect perceptions of the comfort women issue.

The government’s report was a response to questions submitted by the committee in August of last year.

At the outset, the response explained that “at the end of last year, the governments of Japan and South Korea confirmed that the comfort women issue had been resolved finally and irreversibly.”

The Japanese government then stated that “since the early 1990s, when the comfort women issue was taken up as a political issue in Japan–South Korea relations, a full-scale investigation into the factual circumstances was conducted.”
This included examining related documents from relevant ministries, materials at the U.S. National Archives, and interviews with concerned parties.
As a result, the government explained that forced recruitment “could not be confirmed.”

Regarding compensation for former comfort women in countries such as China and East Timor, who were not covered by the Asian Women’s Fund, and the intention to prosecute alleged perpetrators, the government responded that it had “no such intention.”
When asked whether it intended to restore descriptions of the comfort women issue in textbooks, the government replied that “Japan does not have a state-designated textbook system, and therefore the government is not in a position to answer regarding specific descriptions.”

The government had also submitted a report in September 2014, but it was limited to explanations of the Asian Women’s Fund and apologies by successive prime ministers, and did not show an intention to correct mistaken perceptions.

This time, the response appears to have been made in light of the fact that overseas media coverage has not changed despite the Japan–South Korea agreement.

The government also judged that the content of the response was based on factual relations and did not violate the Japan–South Korea agreement’s provision that “both sides will refrain from mutually accusing or criticizing each other in international society.”

Following this article, today’s front page of the Sankei Shimbun carried a contribution by Yoshiko Sakurai that truly deserves to be called a “just argument.”

That essay will be introduced in the following chapters.