Written on June 2, 2019, this essay exposes the reality of South Korea’s anti-Japan history war centered on a government-affiliated foundation, as well as the existence of groups, researchers, and political figures within Japan who cooperated with its operations.
By addressing in concrete terms South Korea’s propaganda and lobbying activities concerning Takeshima, the comfort women issue, World Heritage registration, United Nations activity, the Matsushita Institute of Government and Management, and even the Kan Statement, it sharply argues the gravity of the history war confronting Japan.

2019-06-02
I hear that people connected with the foundation have been buying up Japanese old maps one after another in Kanda’s secondhand book district.
Fearing that maps proving Takeshima to be Japan’s inherent territory may emerge, they are trying to destroy the evidence.

This is the chapter I published on 2018-09-13 under the title, “WAM was founded to carry on the will of a former Asahi Shimbun reporter who was central to reporting on the comfort women issue and who, after leaving Asahi, was a co-representative of the executive committee of the ‘Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal,’ which found Emperor Showa guilty.”
The following is from an article I found on the internet a little while ago, published on 2015-08-07 under the title, “A weekly magazine makes a major exposé of South Korea’s anti-Japan methods! A list of Japanese traitors receiving money from South Korea as well…”
All emphases in the text other than the headlines are mine.
South Korean Government-Approved List of “Japanese Collaborators”
The Dark Side of the 50th Anniversary of the Normalization of Japan-South Korea Relations
Former NHK director, UN activist, head of the Matsushita Institute of Government and Management, Naoto Kan…
While outwardly preparing events in a friendly mood for the “50th anniversary of the normalization of diplomatic relations,” South Korea is at the same time intensifying anti-Japan activities such as obstructing World Heritage registration.
At the center of its external propaganda activities stands a certain government-affiliated foundation.
Its internal materials contained a list of Japanese to whom money had been given and who had been turned into “cooperators.”
On June 22, fifty years will have passed since the normalization of diplomatic relations through the conclusion of the Japan-South Korea Basic Treaty.
On the South Korean side, moves by both countries toward “that day,” including consideration of Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se’s visit to Japan, are being discussed daily.
But on the other hand, South Korea is energetically expanding its anti-Japan activities.
The most conspicuous example is probably South Korea’s lobbying campaign against the registration of the so-called “Battleship Island” (Hashima coal mine in Nagasaki) as a World Cultural Heritage site.
“In the World Heritage Committee examination to be held in Germany from June 28, approval by more than two-thirds of the twenty-one committee member countries is required.
South Korea is desperately trying to increase the opposition vote.
Foreign Minister Yun visited Germany, the chair country, on June 12 and appealed for opposition.
Senegal, the vice-chair country, which had supposedly expressed support for Japan, appears to have turned to opposition after President Park Geun-hye met President Sall on June 4 and agreed on economic cooperation.” (Foreign desk editor)
Also on June 4.
A South Korean civic group, the “Citizens’ Association with the Grandmothers of the Women’s Volunteer Corps” (Citizens’ Association), visited Nagasaki and planned a performance opposing World Heritage registration by landing on Battleship Island.
In the end, it did not happen because of a boat malfunction, but the opposition movement is intensifying.
What is South Korea aiming at before this “milestone day”?
Our reporting team flew to South Korea.
“Last month, we received support from a certain foundation and created an opportunity to hear testimony from people who had been conscripted to Japan.
Furthermore, the support money for translating complaint documents for lawsuits in Japan was also provided by that foundation.”
The person who answered our magazine’s interview this way in Gwangju, in southwestern South Korea, was Lee Guk-eon, standing representative of the “Citizens’ Association.”
This “foundation” is the Northeast Asian History Foundation.
Regarding the foundation, established in 2006, a Japanese government official confided as follows.
“It is something like the command tower of South Korea’s history war against Japan.”
The trigger for the foundation’s establishment was the passage in 2005 by the Shimane Prefectural Assembly of an ordinance designating February 22 as Takeshima Day.
“South Korea reacted furiously to this.
At the time, President Roh Moo-hyun, who issued a message to the people saying that ‘a harsh diplomatic struggle with Japan may also occur,’ gave a major order: ‘Establish an institution to study policies for countering Japan’s distortion of history and territorial issues.’
As early as the following year, the foundation was established under the Ministry of Education as an organization with the form of a think tank, with a large number of researchers.
In reality, it is not merely a research institution, but a de facto government agency in which staff seconded from the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs handle even policy planning and lobbying activities.” (same source)
The foundation occupies four floors of an office building in central Seoul, and has close to 100 staff members.
Its head, the chairman, is treated as a cabinet-level post, and currently the position is held by Kim Hak-jun, who served as presidential spokesman under the Roh Tae-woo administration (1988–93).
The number-two position, secretary-general, is filled by a vice-minister-class official from the Foreign Ministry, and even the “Ambassador for Naming Issues,” who handles matters such as the naming of the Sea of Japan, is seconded from the Foreign Ministry.
According to the foundation’s 2014 business plan, its budget was about 19.1 billion won (about 2.1 billion yen).
Ninety percent of that is from the South Korean government budget.
In addition to a historical research office dealing with issues such as the comfort women problem, there is a Dokdo Research Institute, a Public Relations and Education Office that works on civic groups, and a Policy Planning Office for developing South Korea’s claims in the international community.
According to an article dated March 18, 2014 in the South Korean newspaper JoongAng Ilbo (Japanese edition), Chairman Kim Hak-jun said in a meeting with reporters regarding the foundation’s activities, “We create scenarios for specific issues and respond proactively.”
Furthermore, the foundation made clear its policy of advancing joint South Korea-China research on the comfort women issue, and in December 2014 signed a memorandum with an archive in Jilin Province, China, that stores materials related to the former Japanese military.
In short, it is moving forward in building an anti-Japan encirclement in tandem with China.
An Emphasis on Propaganda
I visited the building where the foundation is housed.
In the basement there is a “Dokdo Experience Hall,” built at a total cost of 100 million yen.
There is a giant diorama of the islands and a booth where visitors can put on 3D glasses and view stereoscopic images of the islands, clearly intended to indoctrinate visitors with what South Korea unilaterally claims to be the “history of Dokdo.”
“The main themes the foundation raises are the comfort women issue, Dokdo, textbook issues, Yasukuni visits, and the naming issue of the Sea of Japan.
It also handles the issue of the ancient kingdom Goguryeo, which is disputed with China, but with the tightening of South Korea-China relations that issue has faded, and now the foundation is completely targeting Japan.” (Seoul correspondent)
It is fair to say that the foundation’s objective is not pure research but rather an emphasis on external propaganda.
In 2009, it held a “Korea-Netherlands-Germany Sex Slave Exhibition” in The Hague, promoting South Korea’s position on the comfort women issue to European public opinion.
According to Liberal Democratic Party House of Representatives member Shindo Yoshitaka (former Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications), the foundation has already held nearly twenty seminars in Europe on the naming issue of the Sea of Japan.
“They invite researchers from various European countries and develop the South Korean argument that it should be called the ‘East Sea.’
In Europe, where there is insufficient information about the name Sea of Japan, such claims are taking root, and countries such as Austria have begun to appear in which both names are listed together in geography textbooks.” (Representative Shindo)
Looking at the foundation’s movements in Japan, it was engaged in activities going even further than public relations.
“At the commemorative ceremony held this year by Shimane Prefecture on Takeshima Day, researchers from the foundation attended together with officials from the Consulate-General in Hiroshima, and they also visited the prefecture’s Takeshima资料室 to investigate materials.” (Shimane prefectural official)
On the Takeshima issue, they also conceal “inconvenient truths.”
“I hear that people connected with the foundation have been buying up Japanese old maps one after another in Kanda’s secondhand book district.
Fearing that maps proving Takeshima to be Japan’s inherent territory may emerge, they are trying to destroy the evidence.” (aforementioned Representative Shindo)
This is itself a fact that fully demonstrates the true character of a country of “bottomless evil” and “plausible lies.”
Looking more closely, it became clear that part of the foundation’s budget was flowing to astonishing places.
“The foundation supports anti-Japan groups within South Korea such as the Korean Council for the Women Drafted for Military Sexual Slavery by Japan, but not only that.
It is also providing financial assistance to Japanese groups and researchers.” (aforementioned government official)
There is a white paper, published by the foundation in 2012, titled Beyond Conflict Toward Reconciliation: Six Years of Activities and Orientation of the Northeast Asian History Foundation (not for sale).
In it, the groups and individuals the foundation had supported since its establishment were listed by project.
Furthermore, there was also a list of people invited as lecturers to symposia hosted by the foundation, even if they were not directly recipients of financial assistance.
Following this list, one can discern the trajectory by which the foundation — which may as well be called the South Korean government itself — targeted Japanese groups and individuals and worked to acquire them as collaborators.
One of them is Mr. Fukuhara Yuji, an associate professor at the University of Shimane, a prefectural university in Shimane Prefecture, which has jurisdiction over Takeshima.
According to the list, Mr. Fukuhara, who is also a member of the prefecture’s Takeshima Issues Research Group, received support in 2009 for a study titled “A Study of the History and Current Situation of Fisheries in Shimane Prefecture.”
Further, in the same year, when the first-anniversary commemorative academic conference of the Dokdo Research Institute under the foundation was held in Seoul, he attended and even gave a research presentation.
“It is true that in Shimane Prefecture’s research group as well, his behavior, such as listing both Takeshima and Dokdo together, became an issue.
Mr. Fukuhara repeatedly makes statements beneficial to South Korea, arguing that rather than resolving the territorial issue of Takeshima, priority should be given to the fisheries issues of the Oki fishermen who used to fish around Takeshima.
It is a problem that cannot be overlooked that a teacher at a prefectural university obtained such funding.” (aforementioned Shimane prefectural official)
How does the man himself explain it?
I visited Mr. Fukuhara.
“I received funding from the foundation and conducted research for a year.
I think it was around 600,000 to 700,000 yen in Japanese currency.
I studied fisheries issues because I thought it might be worthwhile to introduce the perspective of daily life and the private sector.
The true joy of scholarship lies in making discoveries from new perspectives.”
— Is there not a problem in receiving funding from a South Korean government-affiliated foundation whose purpose is propaganda?
“It is regrettable to be seen as receiving politically colored funds.
Basically, scholars do not stand on the side of any country; they clarify what is not understood academically.
Even if the Institute for Japanese Studies at Seoul National University were seeking to increase pro-Korean scholars, if I could receive research funding and conduct research freely, I would apply.”
Cooperation with the Matsushita Institute of Government and Management
The name of a museum in Nishi-Waseda, Tokyo, also appeared on the list.
It was the “Women’s Active Museum on War and Peace” (wam).
The amount is not clear from the list, but it says that in 2008 the foundation supported the production of a comfort women map.
wam was established to carry on the will of Matsui Yayori (died 2002), a former Asahi Shimbun reporter who was central to reporting on the comfort women issue and who, after leaving Asahi, also served as co-representative of the executive committee of the “Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal,” which found Emperor Showa guilty.
Its current director is Ikeda Eriko, a former NHK director, and the museum is also known for having close ties with the Korean Council, including frequently co-hosting symposia with it.
When I visited Ms. Ikeda, she refused an in-person interview and said that I should send my questions in writing.
When I sent detailed questions, I received an email stating that the interview would be refused for reasons including that “our understanding of the Northeast Asian History Foundation differs.”
Among the people on the foundation’s list, the name most internationally well known is probably that of former attorney Totsuka Etsuro.
“In 1992, he petitioned the United Nations Commission on Human Rights to take up the comfort women issue and was the first to advance the claim that the comfort women were ‘sex slaves.’
He is fluent in English and is very familiar with the organizations of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.
His activities on the UN stage began even before South Korea raised the comfort women issue in the international community, and it may be said that he created the groundwork for Japan to receive unwarranted criticism.” (former Foreign Ministry official)

According to the list, in 2010 support was provided for Mr. Totsuka’s study titled “A Reexamination of the Process of Japan’s Annexation of Korea.”
In a paper he published the same year under the title “The Starting Point of the 100 Years Since the ‘Annexation of Korea’ and International Law,” he wrote, “I would like to express my gratitude for the grant for this study from the Northeast Asian History Foundation.”
In response to our magazine’s request for an interview, Mr. Totsuka sent an answer by email.
Although he said, “I do not feel inclined to accept an interview,” he nevertheless asserted the following.
“When a matter becomes so large that it can be called a serious human rights violation, there are cases in which neither the Japanese government nor society can solve it by themselves.
In such a case, it is possible to seek mediation from the United Nations and thereby promote a resolution.
In the long run, that ultimately becomes beneficial to Japan, but from a short-term perspective, or from the Japanese side alone, it can appear to be ‘anti-Japan.’”
And on top of that, he readily acknowledged receiving support from the foundation.
“In South Korea, as you point out, I also received grants from the Northeast Asian History Foundation, and in addition I was assisted by Seoul National University.
(omitted) However, I have always been careful only about the fact that I cannot accept support from perpetrators, or from organizations whose ethics have been questioned.”
The foundation’s targets are not only researchers and civic groups.
Its white paper says the following.
“In 2010, Japan’s politics underwent a period of upheaval as power changed from the Liberal Democratic Party government to the Democratic Party government.
Taking this as an opportunity to resolve the issue of historical recognition between Japan and South Korea, the foundation cooperated with Japan’s Matsushita Institute of Government and Management to hold the ‘Korea-Japan Opinion Leaders Symposium.’”
The story that it cooperated with the Matsushita Institute of Government and Management in order to approach the Democratic Party government is also told in an interview with Jeong Jae-jeong, the foundation’s former chairman, published in the South Korean magazine Weekly Chosun (December 20, 2010 issue).
“On July 27, we held in Seoul a symposium attended by parliamentarians from both countries.
On the South Korean side, Chairman Lee Sang-deuk of the Korea-Japan Parliamentarians’ League (the brother of then-President Lee Myung-bak) participated, while on the Japanese side Chairman Watanabe Kozo took part.
I have not spoken about this elsewhere, but we arranged it, and it was set up through the Matsushita Institute of Government and Management.
The Institute is right-wing.
I thought that we had to engage the right wing that moves Japan.
We made contact with the head of the Institute, invited him to South Korea, and had him give a lecture at the foundation.
(omitted) We proposed that, as both sides were reaching the hundredth anniversary, we should make efforts.
There are dozens of Diet members who come from the Institute, and we decided to call those people together for a gathering of Korea-Japan parliamentarians.
We discussed reflections on one hundred years of Korea-Japan history and a future vision.
At that meeting, the topic of Prime Minister Kan’s statement also came up.”
In August of that year, which marked the hundredth anniversary of the annexation of Korea, then Prime Minister Naoto Kan issued the “Kan Statement,” apologizing to South Korea and also going so far as to address the handover of cultural properties such as the Joseon Dynasty Uigwe.
Former Chairman Jeong boasts that he is “proud to have made a certain contribution” to that statement.
“At the time, the Japanese government was facing a politically quite difficult period, with its approval ratings falling ahead of the House of Councillors election, but even so, we persuaded the Japanese government and, as a result, produced the Kan Statement.”
President Park’s Lobbying Toward the United States
Furuyama Kazuhiro, head of the Matsushita Institute of Government and Management, whom former Chairman Jeong named as the starting point of the operation, gave a lecture at the foundation on November 18, 2009.
I asked Mr. Furuyama.
“It is true that I gave the lecture because they said they sincerely wished it for the sake of Japan-South Korea relations, but there was no intention on my part.
It was very distortedly reported in South Korea.
It was used politically, so to speak.
I protested to the foundation, and since then I have cut off relations with it.”
— But you knew the nature of the foundation, did you not?
“I did.
But someone from the foundation came and said they really wanted frank discussion, and so it only became a matter of saying, in that case, let us do it.
I have never cooperated with the foundation in any way.”
What about former Prime Minister Kan, the man of the statement?
When asked about his relationship with the foundation and other matters, he replied in writing with only one sentence: “I do not know.”
When Representative Watanabe Kozo, who was then chairman of the Japan-South Korea Parliamentarians’ League, was interviewed, he answered, “We only spoke consistently with the South Korean side about proceeding with a future-oriented approach,” but a Foreign Ministry official looked back as follows.
“At first glance, it may seem that they were merely invited to Seoul to give lectures and participate in symposia, but the handover of the Joseon Dynasty Uigwe originally came up at the symposium of lawmakers that was held in cooperation with the Matsushita Institute of Government and Management.”
When an interview was requested from the Northeast Asian History Foundation, the answer was, “We cannot respond to anything other than what is posted on our homepage.”
It is Professor Nishioka Tsutomu of Tokyo Christian University who points out the danger of such operations by the foundation.
“In Japan there is a way of thinking that research should proceed on the basis of scholarly conscience, but this foundation acts on the basis of a clear policy to ‘conduct the research necessary to win the history war against Japan.’
It has nothing in common with the leisurely pace of Japan.
The Foreign Ministry says it is advancing the establishment of ‘Japan House’ to promote Japan’s attractions overseas, but merely promoting anime and Japanese food cannot stand up to the ‘history war’ launched by South Korea.”
In an interview with an American newspaper the other day, President Park Geun-hye said concerning negotiations with Japan over the comfort women issue that there had been “considerable progress and they are currently in the final stage.”
It was a remark as if a prospect had been gained of drawing concessions from Japan, but to the Japanese government it came like a bolt from the blue.
President Park’s true intention is seen as “probably lobbying toward the United States in order to create the impression that Japan is going to make concessions.” (Political desk reporter)
Toward June 22, the movements of the South Korean government’s “Japanese collaborators” should also be closely watched.
Shukan Bunshun, June 25, 2015 issue.