Japanese Scholars’ Reply to the American Scholars’ Comfort Women Statement:

Japanese Scholars’ Reply to the American Scholars’ Comfort Women Statement:
In search of a constructive dialogue based upon facts
　　　　　　　　　　　　 August 6, 2015

On May 5th, 2015, one hundred and eighty-seven American-based researchers of Japan issued a statement on the comfort women issue titled, “Open letter in support of historians in Japan” (hereafter, “American scholars’ statement”). It is our understanding that, subsequently, the number of signers increased to some four hundred and sixty people. In response to the challenge proposed by the American scholars’ statement, we Japanese scholars respond with the following views.

<1> Complete agreement that events should be viewed in their historical context, and weighed carefully in the balance

We were struck by this passage from the American scholars’ statement:

“[…] we believe that only careful weighing and contextual evaluation of every trace of the past can produce a just history. Such work must resist national and gender bias, and be free from government manipulation, censorship, and private intimidation.”

　
We are sympathetic to this suggestion, which we believe to be an important, fundamental principle of historical research. It is cause for celebration that researchers in both Japan and the United States are in agreement on this point.
　
That we are attempting a response here is due to our having detected, in the American scholars’ statement, a willingness to deal constructively with historical facts that has previously been lacking in American debate on the comfort women issue.

<2> Who are the “historians in Japan”?

The above-mentioned agreement on a fundamental principle of historical inquiry notwithstanding, there remain aspects of the American scholars’ statement that we find puzzling, or that cause us to harbor grave intellectual reservations.
　
The American scholars’ statement is titled, “Open Letter in Support of Historians in Japan,” and begins:

“The undersigned scholars of Japanese studies express our unity with the many courageous historians in Japan seeking an accurate and just history of World War II in Asia.”

　
It is unclear, however, whom the American scholars mean here by “historians in Japan.” Academic freedom is guaranteed in Japan, which means that there exists a broad diversity of scholars and researchers. According to the explanation provided by the American scholars who compiled the statement, they were influenced by a statement issued in December of 2014 by the Historical Science Society of Japan (Rekishigaku Kenkyūkai, commonly abbreviated as “Rekiken”).

This Rekiken statement includes this assertion: “The forced abduction of comfort women is a fact. Comfort women were sex slaves.” It would seem that this assertion is almost completely different from the current American scholars’ statement, which includes neither the phrase “forced abduction of comfort women,” nor the phrase, “sex slaves.”

Furthermore, Rekiken is a Marxist organization that has opposed the Japanese-American Security Treaty. (See link for their April 1st, 2013 statement. http://rekiken.jp/appeals/appeal20130401.html) Were the American scholars aware of these positions when they signed their May, 2015 open letter?

<3> History must not be used for political purposes

In the American scholars’ statement, Japan’s “comfort women” system is understood to be “one of the most divisive issues” of historical interpretation. The American scholars write:

“Postwar Japan’s history of democracy, civilian control of the military, police restraint, and political tolerance, together with contributions to science and generous aid to other countries, are all things to celebrate as well.”
　 “Yet problems of historical interpretation pose an impediment to celebrating
these achievements. One of the most divisive historical issues is the so-called ‘comfort-women’ system. This issue has become so distorted by nationalist invective in Japan as well as in Korea and China that many scholars, along with journalists
and politicians, have lost sight of the fundamental goal of historical inquiry, which should be to understand the human condition and aspire to improve it.”

We wish to ask the American scholars whether they are seeking unanimity of historical interpretation between the United States and Japan. We ask this because we believe it impossible to achieve unanimity of historical interpretation among differing nations and peoples when that interpretation goes beyond the level of historical fact. This impossibility is self-evident when one considers, for example, the differing historical interpretations of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki between America and Japan.
　
We affirm the American scholars’ statement when it points out the problem of Korean and Chinese nationalistic rhetoric. We, too, oppose nationalistic rhetoric without basis in historical fact when it is deployed by any country.
　
From this perspective, we are compelled to point out that in the United States, too, one is able to find a mistaken understanding of the facts of the comfort women issue. In their statement, the American scholars allow that, “the precise number of ‘comfort women’ […] will probably never be known for certain.” If this is truly the American scholars’ position, then it should be an imperative, based upon this admission of great uncertainty as to the actual number of comfort women, to correct the erroneous passages in the McGraw-Hill textbook without delay.

But the McGraw-Hill textbook is not the only site for the perpetuation of mistaken information on comfort women numbers. The stelae accompanying the comfort women statues erected throughout the United States also state unequivocally that “two hundred thousand ordinary women were abducted and forced to work for the Japanese military.”

In addition to these falsehoods, in the Coomaraswamy Report filed with the United Nations, as well as in United States House of Representatives Resolution No. 121, the Japanese military stands accused, not only of abducting comfort women, but also of drawing and quartering them, and of slaughtering them en masse in order to cover up the evidence of their crimes. What we are asking for here is simply the correction of statements such as these that are so greatly at odds with fact.
　
We believe it is our mission as scholars to bring facts to light exactly as we find them. We must not allow ourselves to be drawn away from our scholarly preserves and into the realm of politicization, as doing so would hinder the kind of dialogue and cooperation that are necessary for solving the many problems that we now face.

<4> There is no basis for singling Japan out among the twentieth-century history of wartime sexual violence and military prostitution

In their statement, the American scholars conclude that the Japanese military’s comfort woman system was “distin[ct].” Thus,

“Among the many instances of wartime sexual violence and military prostitution in the twentieth century, the ‘comfort women’ system was distinguished by its large scale and systematic management under the military, and by its exploitation of young, poor, and vulnerable women in areas colonized or occupied by Japan.”

　
If the American scholars see the comfort woman system as one of prostitution carried out in the service of an army, then we are in agreement on this point. In order to prevent rape and other sexual violence in theaters of war, and in order also to prevent the spread of sexually transmitted disease, the Japanese military permitted brokers to procure comfort women from Japan as well as the Korean Peninsula, which at the time was part of the home territory of Japan. In addition to granting permission for this to take place, the Japanese military also helped expedite the process of procurement.

We object to the singling out of Japan for special opprobrium on this score, especially when one compares Japan’s actions with those of the Soviet Union’s Red Army, which permitted the rape of the women of defeated populations in Manchuria, Germany, and elsewhere; of the United States military, which used as prostitutes Japanese women provided by the Japanese government under the American Occupation; and of South Korea, which forced its own countrywomen to work as prostitutes for the sake of South Korea’s American allies during and after the Korean War.

Leaving aside for a moment the horrors of raping defeated populations, we feel that the American and South Korean actions described immediately above show just how common and universal was the “exploitation of young, poor, and vulnerable women.”

As a result of the poverty in Japan and on the Korean Peninsula at that time, parents took out loans with prostitute brokers and made their daughters work for these brokers as repayment of those loans. Such tragedies are now regarded as violations of the law. However, one can still find such tragedies occurring with terrible frequency all around the world. Human trafficking is a booming business and is still the result of poverty and famine, such as the case of the North Koreans who flee into China in order to escape the crushing conditions in their home country. As a United Nations report lays out, women in North Korean political prisons are subjected to appalling sexual abuse. Women’s rights continue to be trampled upon, even as we write.
　
We consider it incumbent upon all of us to strive to eliminate such tragedies without any excuse or prevarication. In order to realize this aim, we must examine, from the perspective of women’s rights violations, all of the facts from the past through to the present in an empirical and academic way. We must not allow nationalism or political objectives to distort our view of the facts. ■
◆Drafters
WATANABE Toshio 渡辺　利夫　 Takushoku University　＊Chancellor
NAKANISHI Terumasa 中西　輝政　　 Kyoto University
TAKUBO Tadae 　　　　田久保　忠衛　 Kyorin University

◆Signatories
ANBO Katsuya 　安保　克也 Osaka International University
ANDO Yutaka 　安藤　豊 Hokkaido University of Education
ARAI Kohichi 　新井　弘一 Kyorin University
ARAKI Kazuhiro　荒木　和博 Takushoku University
ASADA Sadao 　麻田　貞雄 Doshisha University
ASANO Kazuo 　浅野　和生 Heisei International University
CHE Kilsong 　崔　吉城 Hiroshima University
EDWARDS Hiromi　　エドワーズ　博美 University of Maryland
ETOH Hiroyuki 　 江藤　裕之 Tohoku University
FIJII Genki 　 藤井　厳喜 Takushoku University
FUJIOKA Nobukatsu 藤岡　信勝 Takushoku University
FUKUCHI Atsushi 福地　惇 Kochi University
FUKUDA Hayaru 福田　逸 Meiji University
FUKUI Yuhzoh 　　　　福井　雄三 Tokyo International University
FURUTA Hiroshi 古田　博司 Tsukuba University
HAKAMADA Shigeki 袴田　茂樹 Niigata Prefectural University
HAMAYA Hidehiro 浜谷　英博 Mie-Chukyo University
HASEGAWA Kohichi 長谷川　公一 Edogawa University
HASEYAMA Takahiko 長谷山　崇彦 Chuo University
HATA Ikuhiko 　　　　秦　郁彦 Nippon University
HIGASHINAKANO Shudo　　東中野　修道　　Asia University
HIGUCHI Tsuneharu 　　 樋口　恒晴 　　Tokiwa University
HiIZUMI Katsuo 　　　　樋泉　克夫 Aichi University
HIRAMA Yohichi 　　　　平間　洋一 National Defense Academy of Japan
ICHIMURA Shin-ichi 市村　真一 Kyoto University
IJIRI Hidenori 　　　　井尻　秀憲 Tokyo University
IMAOKA Hideki 　　　　今岡　日出紀 Shimane Prefectural University
INAMURA Kohboh 稲村　公望 Chuo University
INOUE Masao 　　　　井上　雅夫 Doshisha University
IRIE Takanori 　　　　入江　隆則 Meiji University
ISHIGAKI Kichiyo　　石垣　貴千代 Toyo University
ISHII Nozomu 　　 石井　望　　　　Nagasaki Junshin Catholic University
ISOMAE Syuji 　　　磯前　秀二 Meijo University
ITOH Ken-ichi 　　　伊藤　憲一 Aoyama Gakuin University
ITOH Takashi 　　　伊藤　隆 　　　　Tokyo University
KANAOKA Hideo　　　金岡　秀郎 Akita International University
KANEKO Yoshio 　　　兼子　良夫 Kanagawa University
KATOH Juhachi 　　　加藤　十八 Chukyo Women`s Universitu
KATSUOKA Kanji　　勝岡　寛次 Meisei University
KEINO Yoshio 　　　慶野　義雄 Heisei International University
KIMURA Hiroshi　　　木村　汎 Hokkaido University
KITAMURA Minoru　　北村　稔 Ritsumeikan University
KITAMURA Yoshikazu 北村　良和 Aichi University of Education
KOBORI Kei-ichiro 小堀　桂一郎 Tokyo University
KOIZUMI Toshio 　　　小泉　俊雄 Chiba Institute of Technology
KOYAMA Kazunori　　小山　一乗 Komazawa University
KOYAMA Tsunemi　　小山　常実 Ohtsuki University
KUNO Jun 久野　潤 Osaka International University
KUSAKA Kimindo 日下　公人 Tama University
MABUCHI Mutsuo 馬渕　睦夫 National Defense Academy of Japan
MATSU-URA Mitsunobu 　松浦　光修 Kohgakkan University
MERA Kohichi 　　　　目良　浩一 University of Southern California
MIZUTO Hideaki 水渡　英昭 Tohoku University
MOMOCHI Akira 百地　章 Nippon University
MURATA Noboru 村田　昇 Shiga University
NAGOSHI Takeo 　　　　名越　健郎 Takushoku University
NAKAMURA Katsunori 　中村　勝範 Keio University
NAKAYA Noriko 　　　　中屋　紀子 Miyagi University of Education
NISHI Osamu 　 西　修 Komazawa University
NISHIDATE Kazume 西館　数芽 Iwate University
NISHIO Kanji 　　 西尾　幹二 University of Electro-Communications
NISHIOKA Tsutomu 西岡　力 Tokyo Christian University
NITTA Hitoshi 　　　　新田　均 Kohgakkan University
NIWA Fumio 　　　　丹羽　文生 Takushoku University
NIWA Haruki 丹羽　春喜　　　Osaka-gakuin　Universitｙ
NODA Yasuhisa 野田　裕久 Ehime University
OH Sonfa 呉　善花 Takushoku University
OH-HARA Yasuo 大原　康男 Kokugakuin University
OHIWA Yujiro 大岩　裕次郎 Tokyo International University
OHTA Tatsuyuki 太田　辰幸 Toyo University
OKADA-COLLINS Mariko 岡田-ｺﾘﾝｽﾞ マリ子Central Washington University
OKAMOTO Kohji 岡本　幸治 Osaka International University
OSADA Goroh 長田　五郎 Myojo University
OSADA Mitsuo 長田　三男 Waseda University
OYAMA Kazunobu 小山　和伸 Kanagawa University
SAKAI Nobuhiko 酒井　信彦 Tokyo University
SASE Masamori 佐瀬　昌盛 National　Defense　Academy　of　Japan
SHIBA Kimiya 柴　公也 Kumamoto Gakuen University
SHIBATA Norifumi 柴田　徳文 Kokushikan University
SHIBUYA Tsukasa 澁谷　司 Takushoku University
SHIMADA Yohichi 島田　洋一 Fukui Prefectural University
SHIMOJOH Masao 下條　正男 Takushoku University
SUGIHARA Seishiroh 杉原　誠四郎 Josai University
TAKADA Jun 高田　純 Sapporo Medical University
TAKAHARA Akiko 高原　朗子 Kumamoto University
TAKAHASHI Shiroh 高橋　史朗 Meisei University
TAKAI Susumu 高井　晉 National Defense Academy of Japan
TAKAYAMA Masayuki 高山　正之 Teikyo University
TANAKA Hidemichi 田中　英道 Tohoku University
TEI Taikin 　　　　鄭　大均 Tokyo Metropolitan University
TOKUMATSU Nobuo 徳松　信夫 Tokoha University
TOMIOKA Koh-ichiro 冨岡　幸一郎 Kanto Gakuin University
TOYODA Aritsune 豊田　有恒 Shimane Prefectural University
TOYOSHIMA Norio 豊島　典雄 Kyorin University
TUCHIDA Ryuhtaro 土田　龍太郎 Yokyo University
UMEHARA Katsuhiko 梅原　克彦　 Akita International University
UMEZAWA Shohei 梅澤　昇平 Shobi Gakuen University
URABE Kenshi 　　　　占部　賢志 Nakamura Gakuen University
USHIO Masato 　　　　潮　匡人 Takushoku University
WATANABE Shoh-ichi 渡部　昇一 Sophia University
YAGI Hidetsugu 　　　　八木　秀次 Reitaku University
YAMAFUJI Kazuo 山藤　和男 University Electro-Communications
YAMAMOTO Shigeru 山本　茂 Kyushu Women`s College
YAMASHITA Eiji 山下　英次 Osaka City University
YOSHIDA Yoshikatsu 吉田　好克 Miyazaki University
YOSHINAGA　Jun 吉永　潤 Kobe University
YOSHIWARA Tsuneo 吉原　恒雄 Takushoku University

（ 110 persons in all ）