Newsletter

Editor's Note: On March 26, 2013, the Japanese government announced the 2012 high school textbook screening results. The very next day, on the 27th, the NAHF held an emergent expert panel discussion to analyze these results and suggest for improvement. There was a heated discussion among panelists, including the four experts from the NAHF who spoke on the following topics: 1) the significance of Japan's textbook authorization, and the overview of Korea-related descriptions in the Japanese textbooks; 2) how the Japanese high school textbooks describe Dokdo and how such descriptions have changed; 3) what is taught about Dokdo in the history classrooms of primary and middle schools in Japan; 4) how the Japanese high school textbooks under the revised Course of Study describe 'comfort women.' The NAHF experts's analysis of the screening results and their suggestions for improvement are summarized below.

Japan's Conservative 'Educational Reform' and Textbook Authorization

Written by Seo Jong-jin,
Research Fellow at
NAHF Research
Department

On March 26, 2013, the Japanese ministry of education (MEXT) announced the 2012 high school textbook screening results. The textbooks subject to approval this year were mostly for the middle and upper grades of high school. The textbooks approved this year, in addition to those for the lower grades of high school approved last year, will go through the adoption process and start to be used in school from the next year. A total of 134 textbooks for common subjects were submitted for approval, and 132 of them have been approved. Specifically, 16 history/geography textbooks and 9 civics textbooks were submitted for approval, and all 25 have been approved. This concludes the authorization of primary, middle, and high school textbooks under the revised law governing textbook. Based on the information confirmed by the press report and other such sources, this year's textbook authorization is characterized as follows.

First of all, the textbooks have increased in length but received less comments from the reviewers. This year's textbook authorization was based on a policy against the existing 'Yutori education' policy which reduced the hours and the content of the curriculum in education. MEXT is increasing the hours and the content of the curriculum to address concerns about the decline in the academic ability of Japanese students that resulted from Yutori education. As a result, the textbooks for common subjects approved this year have about 15% more pages, but they have received less review comments. The total number of review comments given during this year's authorization process is said to be 3,035, or 23 on average, which is less than 40, the average number of review comments given to the textbooks currently in use. The decrease in the number of review comments is against the expectation that there will be more review comments because this was the first authorization since the revision of the Course of Study and the content of the textbooks has also increased.

Next, the number of social studies textbooks submitted for approval is decreasing significantly, even though social studies textbooks are hardly disapproved. In the case of history textbooks, in particular, a total of 12 were submitted for approval, and all of them have been approved. As for Japanese history textbooks, Sanseido (三省堂) Publishing did not submit any textbooks for approval, and Tokyo Shoseki (東京書籍) and Pearson Kirihara (桐原書店) have suspended the publication of their existing textbooks, and Jikkyo Shuppan (實敎出版) has published new textbooks. They say that the decreasing number of textbooks is due to the financial difficulties faced by the publishers. In any case, this situation raises concerns because it could help a group of certain textbooks create a monopoly and result in uniformity in the content of the textbooks.

Finally, as for the texts about territorial issues, an increasing number of Japanese textbooks describes Dokdo, and the Japanese government's view is spread and established in the textbooks. This trend has continued throughout the annual textbook authorizations since the revision of the 2008-09 Course of Study and its guidelines. One of the review comments made this year was to revise the textbook description of territorial issues, suggesting that the issue of the Senkaku Islands (尖閣, also known in Chinese as 釣魚島) over which Japan has effective control should not be treated at the same level as the Dokdo issue.

Even though these high school textbook screening results were announced by the second Abe Cabinet launched last December, it is not the incumbent LDP government but the former DPJ government that actually approved the textbooks. Nevertheless, the authorization process was based on the Framework Act on Education, which was revised for the first time in about 60 years by the initiative of the conservative force during the first Abe (安倍晋三) Cabinet in 2006, and on the Course of Study for high school (March 2009) and the Course of Study guidelines (December 2009) announced in accordance with the revised Act. Furthermore, the LDP has come back to power after campaigning for educational reform, including the textbook authorization system, and scoring a landslide victory in the general election. In this respect, we need to keep an eye on textbook authorizations in coming years.

Analysis of the Descriptions of Dokdo in Japanese High School Textbooks Approved in 2013: Japan's Unreasonable Territorial Claims Raise Concerns as They Take Root in the Textbooks

Written by
Yoon Yoo-sook,
Research Fellow at
Dokdo Research
Institute

The results of Japanese high school textbook authorization have been published this year, as were last year. (The authorization process for high school social studies textbooks takes place over a two-year period, unlike that for primary or middle school textbooks). All told, 60 social studies textbooks have been approved, 39 last year plus 21 this year. Of the 21 textbooks approved this year, fifteen describe Dokdo (including map). Of the 60 textbooks approved in 2012/13, 37 (22 in 2012 and 15 in 2013) describe Dokdo (including map). Compared with the textbooks approved in 2006/07, a higher percentage of the approved textbooks describes Dokdo.

According to the 2012 results, of the 39 approved textbooks, four, including World History A, described Dokdo (including map)for the first time. In 2013, of the 21 approved textbooks, three (Japanese History A1, Japanese History B1, and World History B1) inserted maps marked with Dokdo and Dokdo-related descriptions for the first time.

How Dokdo is described in the textbooks approved in 2013 is as follows, by subject.

Two textbooks were approved. In the case of geography, one textbook included far more maps marked with Dokdo than the existing edition did. For instance, in the case of Geography B (Tokyo Shoseki), while existing edition had one map marked with Dokdo, the approved edition inserted as many as nine maps which included Dokdo within the EEZ (Exclusive Economic Zone) of Japan. In the case of Geography A (Teikoku-Shoin (帝國書院)), the description from the existing edition, 'Takeshima is an inherent part of Japanese territory,' was still used and two new maps that included Dokdo within the EEZ of Japan were inserted.

Seven textbooks were approved. The descriptions of Dokdo in the existing six editions were still used in the approved editions. The existing editions included such descriptions as 'regarding Japanese territory, there is an issue with South Korea over Takeshima,' 'South Korea is laying claims to Takeshima,' and 'Takeshima in Shimane Prefecture' (2 textbooks). But as many as three approved editions described Dokdo decidedly as 'Shimane Prefecture Takeshima.'

Ten textbooks were approved. Japanese History A (Jikkyo Shuppan) and Japanese History B (Shimizu Shoin) inserted Dokdo-related maps for the first time.

ne World History B textbook (Tokyo Shoseki) described Dokdo for the first time: 'There are ongoing tensions between Japan and China and Korea over the issues of the excavation of gas fields in the East China Sea and of Takeshima.'

The descriptions of Dokdo in the approved textbooks are characterized as follows. First of all, six textbooks (one Geography A textbook, one Geography B textbook, three Politics/Economy textbooks, one Geography A textbook) described Dokdo as 'Shimane Prefecture Takeshima.' Of them, two textbooks (Geography A, Geography B) added 'inherent Japanese territory' to 'Shimane Prefecture.' Overall, the Japanese government's territorial claims have been reflected in the textbooks more strongly than ever. In the case of the middle school social studies textbooks approved in 2011, four of them (three civics textbooks and one geography textbook) described Dokdo as 'being illegally occupied (by South Korea).' Such description is found in only two (Modern Society by Daiichi Gakushusha (第一學習社), Japanese History B by Meiseisha (明成社)) of the high school textbooks approved in 2012, and none of the textbooks approved this year.

Secondly, Dokdo is being given more and more space in the textbooks as it appears in related maps and pictures, and EEZ maps. Thirdly, this year, the Geography A textbook by Teikoku-Shoin stated: 'Shimane Prefecture Takeshima is an inherent part of Japanese territory which had been governed by the Japanese government under international law since the Meiji Restoration, but South Korea unilaterally occupied it after World War II.' The territorial claims in this statement seem to be based on Japan's move in 1905 to place Dokdo under the jurisdiction of Shimane Prefecture.

The increasing number of textbooks that include the statement 'Dokdo is an inherent part of Japanese territory' reflects the territory education that has been strengthened since 2001 and the Course of Study and its guidelines revised in 2009. It shows that the statement of Japan's unreasonable territorial claims has taken root in the Japanese high school geography and civics textbooks.

What Is Taught About Dokdo: A Comparative Analysis between the Japanese and the Korean Textbooks for Primary and Middle Schools

Written by
Kim Young-soo,
Research Fellow at
Dokdo Research
Institute

In the primary school 'Social Studies' textbook. Japan made a clear visual presentation of Dokdo as being Japanese territory. When teaching that Dokdo was Japanese territory, Japan put this South Korean islet on equal terms with the four islands in the Southern Kurils in dispute with Russia (known in Japan as the Northern Territories). This means that Japan has established Dokdo of Korea as a disputed territory on a par with those areas in dispute with China and Russia. Furthermore, Japan is teaching its primary school students that pre-modern Japan saw and used Dokdo as a fishing ground, and that the occupation of Dokdo by modern-day South Korea is illegal under international law.

In the middle school 'History' textbook, Japan explained that Dokdo was 'in dispute with South Korea over sovereignty and this issue remains unresolved," and established Dokdo as a disputed territory on a par with the Southern Kurils. Japan expanded the coverage of Dokdo to include history as well as geography and civics. Furthermore, in its middle school textbooks, Japan taught the doctrine of inherent Japanese territory and the exercise of administrative power as a nation. Japan emphasized in the textbooks that the occupation of Dokdo by South Korea was illegal and that South Korea's claim of effective control over Dokdo was negated. Japan also highlighted the 'amicable resolution' of the Dokdo issue by the International Court of Justice, and is also using Dokdo to paint South Korea as a 'bad country that does not respect international law.'

In education on Dokdo, Japan highlighted visual aspects for primary school and logical aspects for middle school. Japan's Dokdo education is focused primarily on modern and contemporary history. Japan taught about Dokdo in the history textbooks while establishing the islet as a disputed territory between South Korea and Japan. This means that Japan has highlighted Dokdo education as a current issue between South Korea Japan without repenting of its colonial rule over Korea.
By comparison, in the primary school 'Society' textbook, South Korea listed historical facts related to Dokdo, including general Isabu, Book of Geography of the Annals of King Sejong, Ahn Yong-bok, Imperial Decree No. 41, and Japan's illegal disseisin of Dokdo during the Russo-Japanese War. This means that the history book of South Korea described Dokdo based on the doctrine of inherent Korean territory.
The Korean middle school 'History' textbook independently described Dokdo and its related materials during the modern and contemporary periods. Overall, 'History (Vol. 2)' described the history of Korea's possession of Dokdo, and Japan's territorial claims over Dokdo. However, the middle school History (Vol. 2) textbook needs to be more logical in explaining administrative jurisdiction in relation to South Korea's sovereignty over Dokdo.

In its primary and middle school textbooks, South Korea stressed historical facts related to Dokdo. The focus of Dodko education in South Korea is placed on pre-modern and modern history. The purpose of Dokdo education is to help the students accurately and systematically understand the evidence that Dokdo is Korean territory in terms of history, geography, and international law, thereby inspiring them with the determination to defend our territory and with democratic citizenship befitting forward-looking ROK-Japan relations. In Dokdo education in South Korea, it should be ensured that the students explore geographical-historical facts about Dokdo, and develop the ability to refute Japan's territorial claims over Dokdo based on critical thinking, present robust evidence, and explain that Dokdo is Korean territory. Most importantly, it is necessary to point out the limitations in Japan's logic and explain in detail Korea's logic. It can be done by presenting the historical records related to the doctrine of inherent territory of pre-modern Korea and modern Korea's administrative jurisdiction over Ulleungdo and Dokdo, and comparing side by side the historical records of Korea's and Japan's territorial claims over Dokdo.

Changes in the Description of 'Comfort Women' in the Japanese History Textbooks after the Revised Course of Study: The Description of Forced Mobilization Still Needs to Be Improved

Written by
Seo Hyun-joo,
Research Fellow at
NAHF Research
Department

Of the twelve Japanese History and World History textbooks approved this year, nine described 'comfort women' and three didn't. As for the three that didn't describe 'comfort women,' their existing editions do not include such descriptions, either. Therefore, it's not the case that the descriptions of 'comfort women' have been deleted or weakened. Of the nine textbooks that described 'comfort women,' one was newly compiled and submitted for approval. Therefore, it is not possibile to make a comparison with the existing edition, which doesn't exist. Of the eight textbooks with existing editions, five maintained and three changed their existing descriptions.

In the case of Japanese History A by Shimizu Shoin, the description in the existing edition "there were some women who were taken away as comfort women" has been replaced by "there were some women who were taken away by the Japanese military and became 'comfort women' for the military," specifying that the Japanese military were involved. It is also worth nothing that Japanese History B by Jikkyo Shuppan (High School Japanese History B) used 'The "Comfort Women" Issue in Which the Japanese Military Were Involved' as the second subtitle of the 'Considering Post-War Compensation' section, clearly specifying the involvement of the Japanese military.

That the two textbooks specified the involvement of the Japanese military may be considered an improvement on the descriptions. But the description in Shimizu Shoin's textbook is simply the restoration of what already appeared in the 1997 approved edition: "And there were some women who were taken away as 'comfort women' by the Japanese military." And High School Japanese History B has stated in the text that "under the supervision of the Japanese military, women were mobilized as 'comfort women' and sent to the 'comfort station,' in the establishment of which the Japanese military had been also involved." Therefore, it can be said that the effects of improvement are limited.

Another textbook with changed descriptions is Japanese History A by Yamakawa Shuppansha; "there were also people who went after the military all over the region as so-called comfort women" has been replaced by "And, women from Korea, China, and the Philippines were mobilized (as so-called comfort women) and sent to the 'comfort stations' established in the battlefield." It is worth noting that the countries from which comfort women were mobilized, such as Korea, China, and the Philippines, were specified, and that the expression "who went after the military," which strongly implied that the women's action had been voluntary, disappeared.

But the current controversy regarding the Japanese military sexual slavery is not over whether it is true or not that there were comfort facilities in the battlefield where women served Japanese soldiers, which is accepted as a fact even by rightists of Japan. The more important point is that the Japanese military were involved in the establishment and operation of the comfort stations and that human rights were severely violated as women were mobilized against their will and forced into sexual slavery. From this viewpoint, the descriptions in History A by Yamakawa Shuppansha is still insufficient.

The textbooks approved this year were written under the DPJ government which had been launched with the expectation of resolving the 'comfort women' issue by means of legislation. In other words, they were not much influenced by the policy of the incumbent Abe government which is incessantly implying that they would revise the Kono Statement which admitted to the involvement of the Japanese military and authorities in the issue of 'comfort women,' and to the forced nature of their mobilization and service. In this connection, MEXT Minister Shimomura Hakubun stated at the House of Representatives Budget Committee on April 10 that he would consider revising the textbook authorization system, which suggests the possibility that the Neighboring Country Clause can be revised.

For the right education about the past and present of 'comfort women' for the Japanese military, it is necessary to keep the Kono Statement and the Neighboring Country Clause intact so as to allow the description of 'comfort women' in the textbooks, and also to improve and make more complete the content of the existing descriptions through dialogue with the textbook editors and writers.