This Sankei Shimbun book review introduces economist Joo Ik-Jong’s groundbreaking 480-page study concluding that most claims surrounding the “comfort women” system—including forced abductions—were fabrications originating in Japan, not Korea. The review highlights how terms such as “jugun-ianfu” (a coined phrase by writer Chida Natsuko) and the false testimonies of Yoshida Seiji shaped the distortion. As firsthand witnesses declined in the 1980s, propaganda flourished. The reviewer warns that anti-Japan factions in both countries are now shifting the target to new claims, including “forced labor” on Hashima (Gunkanjima) and the Sado gold mines. The book reaffirms the need for vigilance against politically motivated historical manipulation.

The following is from today’s book review section of the Sankei Shimbun.
It Was a Fiction Originating in Japan
Written by Joo Ik-Jong (Bungeishunjū, 2,420 yen)

Anti-Japan Tribalism: The Final Conclusion on the “Comfort Women” Issue
This book, written by a Korean scholar who has long researched economic history, analyzes an enormous body of materials and demonstrates that most elements of the comfort women issue—such as forced abductions—were fabrications and distortions.
Although the book exceeds 480 pages including the index, the strong determination of the author can be felt between every line, as if to say, “I will prove this thoroughly.”
Since the arguments of those who have criticized Japan over this issue have always been extremely sloppy, this fact-based book will indeed serve as the “final conclusion.”

I had previously assumed that it was merely a coincidence that the comfort women issue began to be raised in the 1980s, but reading this book reveals that the decline in the number of people—whether soldiers, officials, or brokers—who had direct experience with comfort women in fact created the perfect environment for propaganda.
The book repeatedly cites the work of Nishioka Tsutomu, who has long pointed out that the comfort women issue was actually created on the Japanese side.
I have heard that “jugun-ianfu” (“military comfort women”) was a term coined by writer Chida Natsuko.
There were “comfort women,” but there was no such term as “jugun-ianfu.”
This term, the phrase “sex slaves,” the false testimonies of Yoshida Seiji about “comfort women hunting”—when one considers it carefully, all of these originated in Japan.

I hear that in Korea, opposition parties and others are attempting to pass laws that would prohibit even empirical research on the comfort women issue.
Most ordinary citizens also believe that forced abductions of comfort women were real.
Under such circumstances, advancing the arguments contained in this book must have been extremely difficult, and the author’s determination is worthy of respect.

At the same time, I felt once again that we should be mindful that our “opponents” are preparing yet another goalpost.
Just as doubts about “forced abductions” of comfort women began to spread, new allegations emerged regarding “forced labor” on Hashima (Gunkanjima) and at the Sado gold mines, which Japan is seeking to register as UNESCO World Heritage sites.
For left-wing forces in both Japan and Korea, any topic that can be used to attack Japan and worsen Japan–Korea relations will do.

Reading this book reminded me once again that we must remain vigilant.
Review by Araki Kazuhiro