“Japan, US, South Korea Joint Symposium” to condemn the comfort women issue held: Part 2

Part II: Study Reports
After the keynote lectures, the following six researchers from Japan, South Korea and the United States reported issues over comfort women from respective standpoints: Mr. Lew Seok-choon, ex-Professor at Yonse University; Mr. Fukui Yoshitaka, Professor at Aoyama University; Mr. Kim Byeong-heon, director of the Korean History Textbook Research Center; Mr. Lee Wooyoun, researcher at the Naksongdae Economic Research Institute; Mr. Matsuki Kunitoshi, director of the Korean Modern History Research Center; and Mr. Jason Morgan, Associate Professor at Reitaku University. The summary of their reports are as follows:
1. Mr. Lew Seok-choon: “Lecture at Yonse University and defamatory criminal charge”
I mandatorily retired from Yonsei University in 2020. In 2019, a year prior to my retirement, a lecture I gave during class got into trouble and I was indicted by the prosecution and demanded of one year and a half imprisonment. Fact was that when I talked about the latest academic theory related to comfort women, one of my students recorded it without my permission and later provided it to mass medium and eventually they filed a lawsuit claiming that my statement was false and defamatory.
In January 2024, the fourth year after the incident, the verdict was returned at the first court, and I won the case except regarding one point. Regarding the first point of the indictment facts that “Professor Lew’s statement that the Japanese military comfort women were a kind of prostitutes damages the honor of former comfort women,” it was judged that the statement does not constitute defamation in view of academic freedom.
In addition, I pointed out that “among the leaders of the Korean Council for the Women Drafted there are many leaders of Integrated Progress Party which was ordered to dissolve in 2014 because it was an illegal party engaged in activities subject to North Korea.” I was sued because this constitutes defamation against the Korean Council, and this was included among indictment facts. However, the judge recognized my statement as fact, and I was judged not guilty on this account.
However, the other indictment fact regarding the statement I made during class that “The Korean Council educated former comfort women into making a false statement,” the prosecutor’s claim was accepted and the verdict of the payment of 2 million won (roughly 220,000 yen) fine was returned.
I stated, “In the process of the Korean Council for the Women Drafted for Sexual Slavery meddling in the comfort women movement, memory of former comfort women was distorted” and I have appealed to a higher court for disagreement. At present, in the second trial, I am refuting the verdict, based on the following research papers and evidence.
1) In Mr. Lee Young-heon’s book Anti-Japanese Ethnicism, it is described in detail how statements by former comfort women changed toward stating “they were forcibly taken” as the Korean Council’s movement developed.
2) Internet medium Media Watch also refers to changes in their statements.
3) Professor Park Yu-ha of Sejoung University in her book Comfort Women of the Empire also mentions the changes in former comfort women’s statements and says that the Korean Council turned the very memory of comfort women into the concept of sexual slaves.
4) The paper by Dr. Kim Jeongran of Ewha Women’s University titled “Study on the Development of Japanese Military Comfort Women Movement and Awareness Issue; Focusing the Korean Council Activities” says, “(Statements in the collection of statements published by the Korean Council) can be recomposed, catering to the social expectation” and denies their credibility.
5) The book The Comfort Women Hoax coauthored by Mr. Ramseyer and Mr. Jason Morgan clearly states, “The Korean Council has control over comfort women who speak to the public. This control power is possible because the Council runs the ‘Soothing House,’ where former comfort women live together and lead a daily life.” It is clearly stated, “Comfort women who make undesirable statements against the Council cannot enter the living space.”
In fact, during the comfort women movement, 33 comfort women who dislike the Korean Council alleging forced abduction and demanding the compensation from the Japanese Government independently established “Society of Mugunfa (meaning a rose of Sharon)” (At present, their activity is suspended owing to the death of the leader.)

And the most important evidence of all is the description in the book Twenty Years History of The Korean Council for the Women Drafted for Military Sexual Slavery by Japan published by the Council itself that “the way victims search for their own firm voices and create their language is exactly the most important change brought about by having incessantly fought in the form of Wednesday demonstrations.” In other words, they themselves admit that being influenced by their movement, comfort women’s statements changed, which they feel proud of.
Finally, there is decisive evidence. The Hankyoreh (major leftist newspaper), dated May 8, 2020, reported a statement made by self-proclaimed comfort woman Lee Yong Soo. She made a speech at the United States Congress and was famous for her “hugging” performance when President Trump visited South Korea. The newspaper reported her statement: “I stated exactly what I was told to say in the public. And yet, I have complained to the Korean Council about why the Council will not protect me.”
A comfort woman herself said, “I stated exactly what I was told to say.” Nothing is more evident than this. Then, what part of my statement do they say is false?
2. Mr. Fukui Yoshitaka: “The problem of the facts and value judgement about the comfort women; from a viewpoint of economic analysis”
How can economic analysis contribute to historical issues? Through Ramseyer papers, I would like to state my view. Usually, in history study in human sciences, history is often seen as a grand “story.” While there is historians’ assessment that colonial control is evil, an individual entity or identity is often neglected.
On the other hand, economics, especially economics in the United States, is close to natural science and researchers do not evaluate but are required to understand the fact correctly and interpret reasonably why the thing turned out the way it did. “Fact” how an individual at a certain time pursued his or her own happiness under the environment the person was put in and how far one can realize that happiness must be analyzed in cool and objective manners.
Against Mr. Ramseyer’s papers, some refuted that “comfort women cannot have understood a complicated contract.” However, there is no need to think so straightforwardly. Every information regarding contract is aggregated in “market value.” When we ordinary people make a big purchase like buying a house, we do not check all the complicated conditions written in the contract. Even so, we make a contract because we can roughly judge whether it is reasonable or not, based on “market value.” In the same manner, comfort women made a contract based on the “market price” in the legally established prostitution market at the time. Unlike other social sciences, in view of economics, apart from the process how they came to be prostitutes, the important point is whether the goal those women set up by themselves was finally achieved.
It often happens that what looks like difference in value judgement turns out to be difference in recognition of fact. If one understands that comfort women were mere prostitutes, there will be hardly any argument that the comfort women issue is totally impermissible. Regarding this, Ramseyer papers indicate the following points:
 The comfort women system was an extension of the domestic prostitution system at that time.
 Actions taken by those concerned were objective and reasonable.
Let me add that these were analyzed within the framework of economics and in Ramseyer papers, the followings are outside the field they cover:
 To decide whether right or wrong regarding the prostitution system including the comfort women system
 To decide whether right or wrong regarding Japan’s colonial rule.
As the truth about the comfort women came to be revealed by Ramseyer papers and many other research papers and writings, those asserters of the theory of forcibly abducted comfort women were in a predicament and their assertions fell back to claiming that “prostitution itself was bad.” Above all, they assert that comfort women in the battleground were most awfully treated. Mr. Yoshimi Yoshiaki, Professor Emeritus at Chuo University is a typical example of such asserters.
It is true that among Japanese leaders during the pre-war period, there existed powerful criticism against the prostitution system from the humanitarian viewpoint. Shibusawa Eiichi requested the abolition of the licensed prostitution, and it is also true that the military was considerate of such argument and was extremely careful and deliberate when it came to dealing with comfort women.
Even so, the comfort women system in wartime was necessary measures to prevent soldiers from committing rapes, which the Army feared led to people’s repulsion in the battleground and it was easily anticipated that if prostitution itself should be legally prohibited, prostitution would surely go underground, and women’s human rights would be far more damaged under foul conditions without the protection of law. This is easily understandable if we look at the domestic situation after anti-Prostitution Law was enacted.
Currently, it is a global trend to refrain from evaluating sexual services. In Western and American academic papers, the term “sex worker” came to be used, instead of “prostitute” which has a negative sense. Regarding “unethical” act without victims, it is a global trend not to make the act criminal and it is better to legalize it and prevent underground business from prospering. Therefore, we should bear it in mind that “good” intention sometimes results in a serious problem.
Then, are those self-proclaimed former comfort women telling “a lie”? Regarding this, a therapy called “memory recovery” can be helpful. This is the therapy that once became sensational in the United States, claiming “it can recover the forgotten past.” In fact, the “recovered memory” was not the recalled fact but the “patient” was merely impressed with fabricated past. There occurred one after another case of a father who was falsely accused of “sexual abuse” by his own daughter and judged guilty, which was false verdict in fact. Former comfort women do not intentionally tell a lie, but possibly their memory itself was remade.
From what I have stated so far, I can make the following conclusions regarding how we should deal with the comfort women issue from now on.
 If we put forward “the right historical view,” there are respective views and so we can hardly expect any constructive discussion. Therefore, it is important for us to focus on the fact recognition, apart from judging whether it is right or wrong regarding the prostitution system or the colonial control.
 Universal argument is necessary that Japanese comfort women system was not peculiar in comparison with the European and American prostitution systems. As to the assertion that the environment surrounding comfort women was especially foul, we should point out the truth that since those women went to the battleground for high profit realizing risks involved in the work, they were not forced to go to battleground or treated badly.
 The recognition that comfort women were prostitutes should be widely spread. Regarding the change of argument points on the part of assertors of “forced abduction,” we should point out that it is important to respect and understand what those women decided to do of their own free will, under the low economic level of the entire society and with dire poverty of their own within the limited options of choices. This approach will truly amount to paying the due respect to former comfort women.

3. Mr. Kim Byeong-heon: “Judgement document for the comfort women lawsuit against Japan in 2023 and descriptions of the comfort women issue in school textbooks”
Totally false judgement of the comfort women lawsuit
In November 2023, in the appeal court of the lawsuit for the compensation to comfort women entered by former comfort women and bereaved families against the Japanese Government, the plaintiffs won. The Japanese Government did not appeal, asserting “sovereign immunity” and the verdict became valid. However, this judgement is a serious misjudgment citing the indictment fact which does not agree with historical fact and contradicts theoretically. Let us closely look into it.
[Judgement document: regarding the position of the plaintiffs]:
The plaintiffs are those who are recognized, based on “Comfort Women Victims Act, as having been mobilized from around 1932 to around 1945 by the defendant predecessor Imperial Japan and forced to sexually serve at the Japanese military comfort stations set up in China and Southeast Asis for the defendant’s officers and soldiers and registered as comfort women victims according to the Act aforementioned.
Here, the prerequisite to Japanese military comfort women victims is “forced mobilization by Imperial Japan” and both the Korean Council for Justice and the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family clearly indicate “Imperial Japan” as “Japanese military.” However, not one comfort woman was forcibly mobilized by the Japanese military. This means that among 240 Japanese military comfort women victims registered at the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family, none of the victims are applicable to Comfort Women Victims Act.
Therefore, the Comfort Women Victims Act is a law without applicants and the second trial’s verdict in favor of the plaintiffs based on such Act is invalid.
[Judgement document: regarding the purpose of establishing comfort stations]:
1) To boost military morale
2) To prevent fighting spirit from dwindling due to getting infected with venereal disease
3) To prevent military intelligence from leaking through having native women in the colonized regions who do not understand the Japanese language

In the judgement, the above three points were mentioned as the objectives of establishing comfort stations. However, the third point is clearly false. Among Japanese military comfort women, Japanese women were most in number and since customers were Japanese, Korean comfort women were fluent in Japanese. In addition, military officers among customers were strictly held responsible for “counterintelligence” and former comfort women stated that their military customers kept complete silence about affairs within the military.
[Judgement document: regarding the mobilization of comfort women]:
1) System to forcibly mobilize women through violence, intimidation and abduction
2) System to recruit through local volunteers, public officers and schools, etc.
3) System to recruit women through deception, enticing with good employment and good opportunity to earn much money
4) System to consign to recruiting brokers
5) System to mobilize through Women’s Volunteer Corps
The judgement mentioned the above five items as mobilization methods. Now, let us examine them one by one.
System 1) is a serious criminal act. The military engaged in fighting the Second Sino-Japanese War and the Greater East Asian War in war zones cannot have come over to Korea and committed such a crime. (Note 1): As a matter of fact, many cases occurred in which vicious recruiting brokers deceived or abducted women and sold them away to Shanghai and Manchuria and the Japanese police rescued them.
As for System 2), there were no reasons for local volunteers, public officers and schools to recruit women for prostitution.
System 3) was in fact often employed by vicious brokers, but military cannot have done such a misdeed nor had any reason to do so.
System 4) was consignment to recruiting brokers. No broker was allowed to engage in business without official license. Those engaged in illegal recruiting had their license cancelled.
Regarding System 5), comfort women and the Volunteer Corps were completely different and there was no case at all in which comfort women were recruited as Volunteer Corps.
In principle, comfort women were professionals who would earn money in exchange for providing sexual service and as such the target of the master of the comfort station but never that of the Japanese military mobilization. The claim that “the Japanese military forcibly mobilized women to make them “comfort women” never stood true and was a grave blasphemy against the Japanese military.
Japanese military comfort women were professional workers who were granted business license, following strict procedure of submitting necessary papers and earned money as business. Recruiting of those comfort women was within the domain of entrepreneurs of comfort stations. In the newspapers at that time, ads for comfort women were posted under the name of a business company.
To become a Japanese military comfort woman, after concluding contract for prostitution with the entrepreneur, a woman reported to the police station in charge and applied for the identification card (equivalent to visa) and submitted check-up paper at the same time.
At the time of the conclusion of prostitution contract and when she reported to the police station in charge, the agreement by the parental authorities was indispensable and only after receiving the identification paper, she was able to leave Japan for her foreign destination. In addition, on arriving at the destination in foreign land, she had to report to the Consulate Police, submit various papers such as seal certificate, agreement by parental authorities, copied family register, application for business permit, business-person investigation paper and two self-portrait photographs and after being given the business permit, she was able to work as a comfort woman. Without these papers, she was to returni home to Japan.
Thus, Japanese military comfort women were licensed prostitutes who after being permitted by the local police worked as a prostitute under the control and oversight of the Japanese military. Looking at the strict process how they came to work as comfort women, we can easily understand what ridiculous “lies” the mobilization methods mentioned in the judgment were.
[Judgement document: regarding cases of comfort women being shot to death]:
When a comfort woman ran away, the defendant military directly chased her to catch and bring her back to the comfort station or shot her to death.
Another extravagant “lie.” The contractor of a comfort woman was the owner of the comfort station. Japanese military men were mere customers, paying the fixed fee to satisfy their sexual desire. Such military men had no reason to shoot a comfort woman to death. No evidence of “arrest” or “shooting to death” was presented.
I would like to refer to the fact how deplorably untrue statements made by victims in this trial were. The most famous Ms. Lee Yong Soo (the afore-mentioned woman who gave a speech at the United States Congress and passionately hugged President Trump) stated:
Around 1944, I was coaxed by a Japanese man saying, “Just come with me and you can get nice clothes and earn much money” and showing me a pair of leather shoes and a dress and followed him through Daegu, Gyeongju and Pyongan Anju to the Chinese Continent and from there went aboard a ship to a comfort station located at Hsinchu, Taiwan.
Clearly it is true that Ms. Lee Yong Soo was not a Japanese military comfort woman victim due to the following points:
1) She followed not the Japanese military but a Japanese man presenting her with a red dress and a pair of leather shoes.
2) There were not any Japanese comfort stations in Taiwan.

Ms. Lee Yong Soo also testified that she was raped by the defendant military man aboard the ship on the way and at the comfort station she was held in custody and was sexually abused every day by several of the defendant military men and even underwent electric torture using the telephone wire. Her assertions were groundless and in the Collection of Testimonies published by the Korean Council for the Women Drafted, she stated that she was put to electric torture by the comfort station owner.
Thus, even though the statements presented by the plaintiffs had nothing to do with the alleged forced mobilization by the Japanese military, the Korean court acknowledged the plaintiffs to be “forcibly mobilized victims” and ruled the Japanese Government guilty. Simply shameful, indeed!
Korean school textbooks imbuing the Korean minds with hatred against Japan
The South Korean school textbooks abound in false descriptions of forced mobilization, sexual violence, murder, etc. of comfort women by the Japanese military. First, let us look at the elementary school textbooks. At present, eleven authorized textbooks are published and examples of typical descriptions related to comfort women are:
 “Imperial Japan staged a war of incursion, forcibly captured many women and made them sexual slaves. Japanese military comfort women suffered numerous pains and damages during the war and even after the independence, they were not able to receive the due apology.” (Future N Company, Elementary School Social Studies 5-2)
 “Japanese military comfort women refer to women who were forcibly mobilized to the battleground by the Japanese Army and the Japanese Government and fell a victim to sexual violence and violation of human rights.” (Ice Cream Media, Elementary School Social Studies 5-2)
 “What are Japanese military comfort women? Japanese military comfort women were those who were forcibly mobilized to the battleground by the Japanese Government and the Japanese Army and underwent continuous sexual violence and human rights violation.” (Genius Textbook, Elementary School Social Studies 5-2)
All these descriptions are “lies.” They teach small children distorted and fabricated history.
Now, let us look at high school textbooks. Currently, nine certified textbooks are published as South Korean History.
 “The most inhuman and unethical act Imperial Japan committed carrying out the invasive war was forced mobilization of women to war zone.” (Liber School Company)
 “The Japanese Army forcibly took away hundreds of thousands of young women in Korea, China, Southeast Asia and elsewhere as Japanese military comfort women and forced them into the life of sexual slavery.” (Liber School Company)
 “With Japanese authorities involved, the Japanese military abducted and kidnapped many women and mobilized them as Japanese military comfort women.” (Liber School Company)
 “In 1944 Female Volunteer Workers Act was promulgated and women aged 12 to 40 were mobilized as logistics supports. [Note 2: Within Japan, Female Volunteer Workers Act targeting single women aged 12 to 40 was promulgated in August 1944 and women of the target age were mobilized and worked at factories. However, in the Korean Peninsula, Female Volunteer Workers Act was never issued until the end of the War. About 2,000 women worked as “Volunteer Corps” of their own free will and women were never to be adopted unless they were certified as “equipped with the required skills.”] Many of those women who were forcibly recruited under the name of Volunteer Corps were taken to serve as Japanese military ‘comfort women.’ Japanese military comfort women had their human rights violated under the poor environment and some died due to illness or cruel violence.” (Liber School Company)
 “Imperial Japan set up military comfort stations and mobilized women from South Korea and other colonial and occupied regions as Japanese military comfort women and forced them to live a miserable life until Japan lost the war.” (Dong-a Publisher)
 “Victims were forced to live in pains uncurable for their lifetime under beating, torture and sexual violence and some were even killed by the Japanese military trying to conceal inhuman, unethical crimes.” (Dong-a Publisher)
However, all these comfort women-related stories cited in textbooks and in the judgement document of the comfort women trials were fallacies. The comfort women issue first emerged in Japan and then in South Korea, the Korean Council for Justice pushed poor, old former comfort women to the front, deceiving the South Koreans, which is an international farce of fraud. However, textbooks and the judicial branch, both of which should hold trust the supreme value, deceive the entire nation by spreading lies told by fraudulent parties as if they were historical facts.
We cannot leave such unhappy reality as it is. That is because we cannot convey the untruth to the next generation to be trusted with future and growth. United, I am confident, we, pursuers of historical truth in South Korea and in Japan, can achieve this assignment. Let us fight together to destroy comfort women deceivers completely.
4. Mr. Lee Wooyoun: “Reporting trend of Korean media about the comfort women issue; Focus on Park Yu-ha’s case and the academic riot against Ramseyer”
I report the recent trend related to the comfort women issue, based on reporting by major media about the book Comfort Women of the Empire written by Yonse University Professor Park Yu-ha and Professor Ramseyer’s papers.
Ms. Park Yu-ha was exposed to massive bashing by many reporting media over her book. Mass media not only reported that she was sued and indicted but also wrote about her in disrespectful and contemptuous manners.
However, Ms. Park Yu-ha luckily had several occasions to express herself through the media, unlike other researchers who revealed the truth about the comfort women issue. For instance, she contributed an article to the Hankyoreh Newspaper dated January 23, 2014:
“Clearly, the mobilization of Korean comfort women was not ‘physically forced abduction, dragged by military men’ but within the framework of ‘human trafficking.’ In fact, in the academic circle, discussion over the assertion that ‘military forcibly took them’ ceased any longer. Discussion led by those scholars eager to prove Japan’s forcibility and consequent legal responsibility merely argued that it was Japan’s state responsibility for they used Japanese military ships in transporting women, or they acquiesced the operation knowing that women were deceived into the position, which amounts to crime.”
In addition, many views were expressed, supporting Ms. Park Yu-ha. For example, the editorial of the Dong-a Ilbo (East Asia Daily) dated December 8, 2015, asserted, “Leaving the evaluation of Comfort Women of the Empire to discussion among the academic circle and civil society, it is appropriate to carefully decide the legal procedure against Professor Park.”
The Dong-a Ilbo of May 14, 2020 wrote in the column criticizing the Korean Council for Women Drafted (Korean Council for Justice) titled “Can justice and memory be monopolized”:
“Regarding the issue of comfort women victims, the body (Council for Justice) has become so powerful that no one can say objection to it. While belonging to the leftist group armed with anti-Japanese ethnicism and feminism, the Council seems to monopolize justice and memory as in the case of the state-designated school textbook.”
South Korean intellectuals issued a statement in protest against the indictment of Ms. Park Yu-ha in which it is asserted that “although this book’s assertion leaves something to be argued, the reasonable way to address the comfort women issue is that various voices in civil society are freely expressed and right rivalry should be allowed.”
In the trial held in October 2023, the Supreme Court revoked the High Court’s guilty ruling against Ms. Park Yu-ha and sent the case back to High Court. In April 2024, in the remanded trial High Court judged Ms. Park Yu-ha not guilty and finally Ms. Park was confirmed not guilty. These facts were favorably reported by leading media like the Chosun Ilbo and the South Korean Economy as “it was a rational judgement protecting freedom of study.”
Now, I examine how media reported Ramseyer papers. The South Korean media reported, in detail, the assertions by those attacking Ramseyer papers and their demand for the removal of the papers. They even reported responses on the part of China, North Korea and Al Jazeera. For example, the Dong-a Ilbo dated March 2, 2021 reported under the title “North Korea criticizes Ramseyer, distorter of comfort women, as ‘sham professor’:
“Professor Ramseyer came to Japan immediately after he was born in the United States and lived in Japan until he was 18 years old, going to school supported by Mitsubishi, Japanese war criminal company, and even now under the sponsorship of Mitsubishi, he maintains the professorship at Harvard University. The Japanese military sexual slavery crime is unprecedented anywhere in the world, anytime in human history, the ugliest, ultra-sized inhuman crime, and South Korean civil groups along with their counterparts in the United States, Japan and Germany are asking for the withdrawal of his papers and apology.”
Criticism against Professor Ramseyer goes farther beyond the comfort women to his past papers: “Problem of social capital and opportunist leadership: Cases of Koreans living in Japan” and “Politics and organized crime of Japan’s social outcasts: the effect of the termination of payment of ethnical subsidy.”
In addition, distorted reporting that Professor Ramseyer “confessed the absence of comfort women’s prostitution contract” (SBS, May 5, 2021) or fabricated personal attacks on Mr. Ramseyer such as “Furious Ramseyer threatens South Korean professor” (SBS, May 5, 2021) were made.
Moreover, major South Korean broadcasting station MBC reported with the title “Ramseyer, now the speaker for the Rights, backed by Japanese ultra-rightist money”:
“’Japan Conference’ aiming militarism, ‘Moralogy Foundation’ playing the major role in the Conference and ‘Japan Civilization Study Forum’ supported by the Foundation and there comes Ramseyer along the line.”
As for papers American scholars wrote criticizing Mr. Ramseyer, the South Korean media reported them in detail. However, there are hardly any opposite reporting. Professors of Yonsei University and Hanyang University contributed papers stating “criticizing Ramseyer is unproductive” to the U.S. media and the authors of Anti-Japanese Ethnicism announced a statement vindicating Mr. Ramseyer, both of which the Chosun Ilbo briefly mentioned. Rather, the South Korean media largely reported criticisms against those vindicators of Ramseyer papers. For instance, the Seoul Economic Paper dated March 4, 2021, reported, “Students of Hanyang University are engaged in the “movement to dismiss the professor who defends Ramseyer.”
As just mentioned, media reporting related to Professor Ramseyer is mostly irresponsible. The Dong-a Ilbo dated February 17, 2021, wrote in an article titled “Harvard University President says, no problem about essays asserting ‘comfort women were prostitutes’—freedom of study,” about the reaction of anti-Japan groups:
“Against this (judging it no problem), VANK (note 1) challengingly asked, ‘Will President Bacow be able to give the same answer if someone studies to vindicate the slavery system imposed on Black people or writes a paper defending the Nazi Germany?’ and said that they sent a letter of protest once again.”
(Note 1) VANK stands for Voluntary Agency Network of Korea, a radical anti-Japan organization within South Korea, founded on January 1, 1999, by Park Ki-Tae. There are over 100,000 members, mainly junior and high school students. They staged “Japan Discount” campaign and at the time of the 2021 Tokyo Olympics, they spread posters of a torch runner wearing a gas mask.
In addition, media reporting pertaining to the event that the academic journal posting Ramseyer paper refused to withdraw his paper is rough and insufficient. Reports by respective media were roughly of the same overall tone:
“The academic journal posting the paper in question has examined the paper over two years and reached the conclusion that the paper shall not be withdrawn, which invited another barrage of criticism. The author of the paper in question now passes as a hero among Japanese rightists.”
As mentioned so far, responses to Ms. Park Yu-ha and to Mr. Ramseyer are different within South Korea. In the background lies the situation in which the truth about comfort women is not properly reported by the media but only the leftist propaganda permeates the society, rendering former comfort women the symbol of ethnical damages and to denigrate such symbolic comfort women invites public fury.
Ms. Park Yu-ha attacks not former comfort women but the Council for the Women Drafted (Council for Justice) and sticks to using ambiguous expressions such as “prostitution-like raping” or “forced prostitution” regarding comfort women. On the other hand, Mr. Ramseyer clearly states the fact that comfort women were prostitutes. Hence, Ms. Park Yu-ha has many supporters in South Korea, while Mr. Ramseyer has few. Consequently, Ms. Park Yu-ha is granted “freedom of study,” but Mr. Ramseyer is not. This is how things are in South Korea now.
5. Mr. Matsuki Kunitoshi: “Lawsuit against Japan on the comfort women issue; danger of revivals of the individual right for claim which destroy the Japan-Korea relationship
On January 8, 2021, in the trial of lawsuit filed by South Korean former comfort women against the Japanese Government, the Seoul Central District Court ruled that the defendant should pay each of the plaintiffs 100 million won (roughly 11 million yen). In addition, on November 23, 2023, the Seoul High Court ordered the Japanese Government to pay 16 former comfort women and bereaved family members 200 million won (roughly 22 million yen) to each of them.
In either trial, the Japanese Government, based on the “principle of sovereign immunity,” one of international customary laws (a State is exempt from foreign judiciary), thoroughly maintained the position that any trial to judge the Japanese Government does not stand valid and did not appeal. Consequently, this ruling was established within South Korea. One trial after another was won by the plaintiffs and many more self-proclaimed bereaved families of comfort women are going to file a lawsuit against the Japanese Government.
Grounds for the judgment by the Seoul Central District Court and the Seoul High Court are as follows:
1) During the previous war, the Japanese Government forcibly took Korean women and made them sexual slaves in a planned and systematic manner. This constitutes “inhuman, criminal act” violating international law and is not eligible for “sovereign immunity.”
2) Civilians’ claim for damages inflected upon them under Japan’s illegal colonial rule cannot be ceased through negotiations between the Governments. Therefore, claims for damages on the part of former comfort women are not applicable to Agreement on the Settlement of Problems Concerning Property and Claims and on Economic Co-operation between Japan and the Republic of Korea concluded in 1965.
Regarding 1), it has been proved that there was no fact of forced abduction of Korean women by the Japanese Government based on sources provided by the Japanese Government and so has perfectly by the “Japan-South Korea Joint Symposium” held twice in the past. Since no “inhuman criminal act” was committed, the court assertion that this case does not apply to sovereign immunity has no ground at all.
How about 2) in which the Korean court asserts the claims for damages on the part of former comfort women are not applicable to the “Japan-South Korea Agreement on claims and economic cooperation”? The issue of claims between Japan and South Korea was “completely and finally” settled legally and diplomatically by Agreement on the Settlement of Problems Concerning Property and Claims and on Economic Co-operation concluded, accompanying “Treaty on Basic Relations Between Japan and the Republic of Korea.”
In addition, Article II-3 of the Agreement clearly states, regarding claims both sides should abandon: “no contention shall be made with respect to the measures on property, rights and interests of either Contracting Party and its nationals which are within the jurisdiction of the other Contracting Party on the date of the signing of the present Agreement, or with respect to any claims of either Contracting Party and its nationals against the other Contracting Party and its nationals arising from the causes which occurred on or before the said date.” Even if the comfort women issue existed, it was the event before the signing of the Agreement and was duly settled by the Agreement.
It is the general regulation of international law that negotiations between states are totally left to the Government of each State, and “Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties” clearly cites “pacta sunt servanda rule” that agreement between states is binding beyond the domestic three judicial, legislative and administrative branches of the government. Therefore, it is a horrendous act of overstepping on the part of the judicial authority breaking the agreement between the states that the Korean Courts ordered the Japanese Government to pay compensation now, and such rulings are clearly unjust and the violation of international law.
Judgement based on the assumption of “illegal colonial rule”
So far, I have pointed out how self-righteous the South Korean Courts’ judgements are, totally without respect to international law. Fundamentally wrong above all is that the South Korean courts demand compensation against damages inflicted upon civilians by the illegal rule, on the assumption that Japan’s governance was “illegal colonial control.” If their reasoning should be justified, not only the comfort women issue or the forcible mobilized workers issue but everything Japanese people did on the Korean Peninsula during Japan’s governance of it would become the target of claims. The tax money the Korean Governor-General’s Office collected, and profit money Japanese companies obtained in the Korean Peninsula would be regarded as “exploitation” from civilians.
If one ever suffered any disadvantage from Japan during Japan’s governance, countless lawsuits would be filed and the sum of compensations against the Japanese Government and companies would amount to astronomical figures.
However, “Japan’s Annexation of Korea” was the legal event in which the two countries became united into one through the official international treaty, which is acknowledged internationally. Japan’s “governance” was never an illegal colonial rule. Therefore, judgments ordering “Japan to pay for the illegal colonial rule” were far from reasonable from the very beginning. Whatever numerous lawsuits may be filed and judgements to pay compensation may be made, Japan would hardly be bound to accept them.
Japan’s “claims against South Korea” to revive
Now, let us think reversely. If South Korean assertion that civilian claims did not cease is passible, then neither did Japanese civilians’ claims to their properties.
In fact, one of the most important points regarding the “Japan-South Krean Agreement regarding Claims and Economic Co-operation” is that Japan abandoned claims over properties Japan possessed against South Korea.
According to the result of the joint investigation conducted by GHQ (General Headquarters, the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers) that ruled Japan after the war and by the Japanese Government, “Japanese civilians’ properties” left behind in the possession of South Korea in the Korean Peninsula amounted to, at least, 34 billion 300 million yen, equivalent to 6 trillion 517 million yen currently, according to composite wholesale price index.
The United States Forces established military regime in the south of the Korean Peninsula after the war and promulgated Military Regime Order Number 33 in December 1945 and confiscated everything from Japanese state and public properties to Japanese people’s private properties.
Later, the U.S. military transferred these confiscated Japanese properties to South Korean Government in September 1948. However, Japan’s claims to these civilian properties left behind in the Peninsula were still valid after the U.S. Army confiscated them.
It was because Hague Convention respecting to the Laws and Customs of War on Land of 1907 states, regarding military authority over the territory of the hostile state, “Private property cannot be confiscated.” If the U.S. Forces confiscated Japanese private property, that would constitute “war criminal act.” In fact, the U.S. military managed Japanese private properties amid the postwar confusion and in a manner of consignment to the Korean Government and the ownership of these private properties still belongs to Japan.
In the negotiations over seven times between Japan and Korea from 1952 to 1965, at first, Japan maintained the clear position that Japanese properties left behind within Korea belonged to Japan and duly asserted claims.
However, if Japan was to insist on claims one-sidedly, it was clear that South Korean economy would eventually become bankrupt. Consequently, the Japan enormously conceded and abandoned all claims pertaining to private properties through the Japan-South Korea Agreement regarding claims and economic cooperation.
In addition, on the basis of the “Japan-South Korea Agreement concerning claims and economic cooperation,” it was decided that Japan provide three hundred million U.S. dollars in grants (on a non-repayable basis), together with two hundred million U.S. dollars in long-term and low-interest loans and three million U.S. dollars in commercial loans totaling to eight hundred million dollars as economic assistance, which Japan duly carried out in the ensuing years. The amount was equivalent to 40% of the 1.8 billion dollars Japan held in foreign currency at that time and to 2 and half years of the South Korean Government’s budget. Through this scheme, the issue of claims between Japan and South Korea was completely and finally resolved.
However, if civilians’ claims to their properties did not cease, claims to properties left in South Korea are to be revived, which amounts to 6 trillion 517 billion yen in current value.
In addition, the economic aid of non-repayable 300 million yen provided to resolve the issue of claims would have to be repaid with interest. Then, the fruitless quagmire of retrospective battles of lawsuits would go on forever and the Japan-South Korea relationship would end up in total bankruptcy.
Let us Japan and South Korea cooperate and lead the world together
This is not the time for Japan and South Korea to conflict with each other in the midst of ever-growing military threats from hegemonistic and lawless states. Then, what should we do?
Formerly, President Park Geun-hye said, “The relationship between the perpetrator and the victims will never change over a thousand years.” However, looking back over the past millennium, the United States massacred native Indians and European countries put colored peoples’ countries under their colonial control and spared none in their exploitation and usurped everything. A hundred million people were killed under the violent communist revolution and tyranny. In World War I and World War II, numberless people were forced to die in utter disgust. If it is true that hatred lasts one thousand years, the earth would be filled with swirls of hatred with humans trapped in the past and unable to move a step forward. Peace and conciliation will never come to the earth.
However, humans were not that foolish. The human wisdom created international law, liquidated the tragic past totally by treaty, overcame the past grudge and explored a new history.
Japan and South Korea are no exceptions. We have completely liquidated the past of the Japanese rule of the Korean Peninsula based on the Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea and Agreement on the Settlement of Problems concerning Property and Claims and on Economic Co-operation between Japan and the Republic of Korea and together in cooperation built the prosperous countries as we are today. I earnestly hope the Korean people to remember the proud history.
Lastly, I would like to tell the South Koreans the following:
Originally, the comfort women issue was a lie made up by the North Korea-friendly and pro-China leftist powers that had the intention to alienate Japan from South Korea and make us conflict with each other. Being instigated by these leftist powers, if we Japan and South Korea were to be at odds with each other, the two of us cannot cope with Chinese and North Korean military powers and our two democracies will fall together.
As it has been clear through this symposium, there was no forced abduction of comfort women in the first place. Let us stop this barren, useless and even self-destructive conflict once and for all. And let us do our best toward future, hand in hand, Japan and South Korea, economic powers in Far East, together, and protect to the end democracies in East Asia and lead the world in our endeavors.
6. Mr. Jason M. Morgan: “The Comfort Women Hoax—its end and the future issue”
The comfort women issue is simply a hoax set up by the leftist group. At the end of last year, The Comfort Women Hoax co-authored by Professor Ramseyer and me was published. For thirty years until the publication of this book, there have been many leftists “in charge” of “fraud.”
Professor Ramseyer published a paper “Contracting for sex in the Pacific War” three years ago. In the paper Professor Ramseyer evidenced that comfort women worked based on contract. Immediately after that, whirlpools of “hate” erupted. I have been in the United States academic circle for many years and the usual bunch of ignorant, dubious scholars came up with one lie-ridden, groundless refutation after another.
Today, I would like to speak about what kind of people they are and what kind of personal contacts they have.
One turning point was the paper “Comfort Women-The North Korea Connection,” co-authored by Professor Ramseyer and Professor Arima Tetsuo (Professor Emeritus at Waseda University). So far, generally, the comfort women issue was a Japan-South Korea issue. However, I have thought the issue is beyond that understanding.
First, I speak about universities in the United States.
The ringleader of scholars criticizing Professor Ramseyer is a woman named Chatani Sayaka. She is a researcher on the Soviet Union and her instructor was ex-Professor Charles Armstrong at Columbia University, who is Asian. He is extremely fond of North Korea and an expert plagiarist, who ended up in losing the job, owing to excessive plagiary.
In addition, a scholar majoring in Japan study is ex-Professor Bruce Cunnings at the University of Chicago. He is a dyed-in-the-wool Communist.
My instructor was Professor Louise Young at the University of Wisconsin. She was an ardent leftist and among the gang who expelled me from the U.S. academic circle. I should owe her certain gratitude in that sense. Her instructor while she was a student was John Dower, who introduced a Communist named E. H. Norman to the United States academic circle. E. H. Norman taught Japanese history from the Marxist standpoint in the United States.
How about Japanese scholars who criticize Ramseyer papers? Professor Nakano Koichi at Sophia University (the person who instructed the production of a comfort women related documentary by students, titled Shusenjo–Main Battlefield) and former Chairman Shi’i of Japanese Communist Pary are in extremely close relationship. Mr. Nakano is “irresistibly in love” with the Communist Party. Incidentally, he is also close to Phyllis Kim, South Korean American activist of the comfort women issue.
A person named Yamaguchi Tomomi, Associate Professor at Montana State University, is also extremely fond of Japanese Communist Party and gave a lecture at the gender equality committee at Japanese Communist Party. She calls me “extreme right,” which makes me feel honored and pleased.
Besides scholars, former House Representative Japanese American Mike Honda worked hard in addressing the comfort women issue, as you know well.
More dangerous in the United States are those Chinese and North Korean followers. A man named Neville Roy Singham and his wife are American national Marxist activists and have their office in Shanghai. Across from their office is the Chinese Communist Party Propaganda Department. The couple receive an enormous sum of money from the Chinese Communist Party and through the organization CODEPINK, the most radical Communist organization within the United States, are said to have given political fund to President Obama behind the scenes. Even The New York Times reported that he is a dangerous figure and that the United States Congress is investigating him.
There is also a Chinese American woman named Julie Tang, former judge in San Francisco. It was thanks to her that a comfort woman statue was built in San Francisco. She is extremely close to the Chinese Communist Party and often contributes to the Chinese Communist Party organ. She works as a speaker for China within the Unites States, making such assertions as “there occurred no massacre of Uighurs” or “China may well invade Taiwan.” There is a photograph of her and self-proclaimed ex-comfort woman Lee Yong Soo together. It was a duet of North Korean fraud (Lee Yong Soo) and Chinese fraud (Julie Tang).
CODEPINK went as far as to the military border crossing performance with former comfort woman from North Korea to South Korea. This is to say that the comfort women issue is not just between Japan and South Korea. Most of American dubious quasi-scholars do no know that Communists and North Korean agents meddle in the comfort women operation and without realizing how much they are used, act just as they are supposed to. Of course, it is true that there are some scholars who are willing to cooperate on their own will.
There is a dangerous woman named Cristine Ahn. She is one of the most enthusiastic promoters of the comfort women issue in the United States and is akin to a spy for North Korea in the United States. She is extremely close to Kim Yong-chol, ex-head of North Korean Governmental Organ, United Front. Kim Yong-chol was also involved in the bombardment of South Korean territory of Yeonpyeong Island in 2010. Thus, the North Korean network permeates through the United States.
In addition, the Chinese Communist Party provides touring program within China in collaboration with CODEPINK. Tour participants are shown to the Comfort Women History Sources Museum at the University of Shanghai. In gist, CODEPINK, organization in the United States, composed of Chinese and North Korean personal network, provides tours related to the comfort women.
Lastly, let me introduce one more person named Russel Lowe. He worked for Senator Dianne Feinstein as a secretary for over twenty years. According to the FBI investigation, he turned out to be a spy for China. There is a photo of him and Mike Honda being interviewed together in South Korea.
Close to Russel Lowe is a woman called FanFan. She is also a Chinese spy and honey-traps a young, hopeful Democratic Congressman. She is also close to those engaged in anti-Japan activities within Japan.
To sum up, Yoon Mee-hyang, an expert fraud good at embezzlement within South Korea on one hand and Chinese and North Korean spies and their connections within the United States on the other, in cooperation with each other, deceive us regarding the comfort women issue in Japan, the United States and South Korea. This is fraud staged by international Communists.