Prime Minister Abe clarified that Japan’s acknowledged military involvement referred solely to management and sanitation—not war crimes. Yet Japan still lacks a system to convey these facts internationally.

2016-02-21

The following continues from the previous section.

[Omitted preceding text]

In this round of historical diplomacy with South Korea, Japan unusually presented its own demands.
Japan required South Korea to explicitly state that the issue was “finally and irreversibly resolved” and to remove the comfort woman statue in front of the Japanese embassy as conditions for the agreement.

Until then, the pattern had been one-sided demands from South Korea, with Japan making compromises—essentially splitting the difference—while trying not to abandon its established position under international law.

In that respect, Abe’s diplomacy was refreshing.

However, by avoiding a direct challenge to the falsehoods at the core of the comfort women issue and opting for diplomatic compromise, the agreement has become extremely unstable.

Moreover, since the agreement includes a clause calling for restraint from mutual criticism in international forums such as the United Nations, it risks making it even more difficult to counter factually incorrect anti-Japanese propaganda—leaving serious long-term consequences.

Abe Administration’s Absence of “Fact-Based Rebuttal”

In the January 2014 general election, the Liberal Democratic Party pledged in its campaign platform to “firmly rebut groundless accusations based on falsehoods and act to restore Japan’s honor and national interests through international outreach.”

During the January 18 session of the House of Councillors Budget Committee referenced earlier, Prime Minister Abe addressed international criticism regarding the comfort women issue, stating:

“It is a fact that there are incorrect slanders. Claims such as ‘200,000 sex slaves’ are not true. The government will clearly demonstrate what is not factual.”
“The military involvement acknowledged in the agreement refers to management and establishment, including sanitation.”
“Our position that the issue was resolved by the Japan–South Korea Claims Agreement remains unchanged.”
“We have not acknowledged anything that constitutes a war crime.”

Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida also stated:

“The term ‘sex slave’ is inappropriate and should not be used. That is Japan’s position, and we are making appropriate representations to overseas media.”

However, regrettably, the government lacks any adequate system to convey these legitimate arguments to the international community.

To begin with, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has still not actively publicized the fact that the testimony by Seiji Yoshida regarding so-called “comfort women hunts” is completely unfounded.

Given that the Abe administration, under the leadership of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, has refrained from fact-based rebuttals on historical issues including the comfort women problem, there is an urgent need for serious consideration of how to rebuild Japan’s international public relations strategy.

To be continued.