Newsletter

30 Years after Becoming Publicized, Shifting Perspectives on Wartime Sexual Violence in World History

  August 14th of this year marked the 11th World Memorial Day for the Japanese military ‘comfort women’, designated by the Asia Solidarity Conference for the resolution of the Japanese military ‘comfort women’ issue, as well as the 6th Memorial Day for the Japanese military ‘comfort women’ victims designated by the South Korean government. On August 14, 1991, South Korean victim Kim Haksoon gave her first public testimony, firmly establishing the ‘comfort women’ issue as a matter of war crimes and colonial rule responsibility. Since then, women from war-affected regions caused by Japan, including South Korea, Taiwan, North Korea, China, the Netherlands, and Indonesia, have come forward as survivors of these atrocities. Furthermore, the issue of sexual violence during the Yugoslav War and Rwandan Genocide since 1990 has become interconnected with the ‘comfort women’ issue, being ‘recognized’ as a war crime. In addition, discussions have also included instances of sexual violence by Nazi Germany during World War II and sexual violence around US military bases after the end of the war. About this, global scholars have evaluated that the testimonies of ‘comfort women’ victims have led to a complete restructuring of the global historical perception of wartime sexual violence, focusing on the experiences of the victims.

  Moreover, when the issue of Japanese military comfort women was a focal point of international public discussion, it seemed as though a resolution might be imminent. In 1993, the Japanese government released the Kono Statement, admitting that the Japanese military and government were directly or indirectly involved in the establishment of comfort facilities and the mobilization of ‘comfort women’. They also promised to make significant efforts to restore the honor of Asian women who had ‘suffered against their will’. In August 1995, Prime Minister Murayama Tomiichi issued a statement apologizing for Japan’s past invasion and colonial rule of Asia. Both South Korea and Japan also had a bond of sympathy in acknowledging the need for national efforts toward truth ascertainment, commemorative projects, and educational activities for future generations.

A Reexamination of the Historical Reality and Nature of the Japanese Military ‘Comfort Women’ issue is Needed

  As of 2023, what is the current status of the Japanese military 'comfort women' issue? There are more than 150 memorial monuments established both domestically and internationally, and related museums have been established in countries such as South Korea, Japan, China, and Germany. Students in elementary, middle, and high school

learn about the history of Japanese military ‘comfort women’ as described in textbooks. While survivors are now rarely seen in person anymore, the stories etched by victims are accumulated in various spaces and written records. Given this situation, we should

be now building a life that takes precautions against and prevents both wartime and everyday sexual violence in an environment where we can easily access various records of victims’ memories. This is because ‘preventing recurrence’ by respecting human rights and realizing peace is ultimately what victims desire, and it is what citizens who have participated in resolving this issue hope for.

  However, the reality falls short of our expectations. 30 years of our hard work is being overshadowed by black-and-white debates, political controversy, evasions of responsibility, and historical denial. Where and how did these headwinds come from? Clarifying historical responsibility and resolving the issues must always include truth ascertainment. This is because we can share what needs to be apologized for and how to eliminate structures that reproduce violence when confronted with the layered suffering of victims that manifest within specific historical structures. How well do we genuinely comprehend the historical reality of the Japanese military 'comfort women' issue and its fundamental essence? We have convened this international academic conference to evaluate our accomplishments and shortcomings from the last thirty years while delving into this subject.

The Reason We Need to Examine the Nation’s Sexual Governance System with Expanding Temporal and Spatial Dimensions.

  The historical uniqueness of the Japanese military ‘comfort women’ system is generally understood to lie in its organized and systematic nature of sexual violence under the state’s authority. Unlike other instances of wartime sexual violence, the mobilization, transportation, placement, and management of ‘comfort women’ were systematically carried out within the Japanese military and government’s planning, collaboration, and a specific wartime manual. As a result, the Japanese military ‘comfort women’ system is recognized as one of the largest human trafficking systems of the 20th century, institutionally rooted in Japan’s state-controlled prostitution system that was implemented under political influence since the late 19th century. These historical features mean that to properly understand and address the issue of ‘comfort women’, we must identify the state-controlled prostitution system of the Japanese imperial power, which varied by period, region, and political context, and then review how these sexual governance policies led to the Japanese military ‘comfort women’ system during the Asia-Pacific war era.

  However, historical discussions surrounding the actual conditions and nature of the ‘comfort women’ have tended to be confined within the time and space of the Second World War, Japan's battlefield, and occupied territories. Less attention has been paid to comfort facilities established in colonies, leased territory, and mandated areas that Japan had previously politically controlled. These regions were under Japanese jurisdiction and had been subject to Japan's sexual governance policies even before the war period. Given that Japan's domination of these regions originally began through military occupation, the history of the Japanese military ‘comfort women’, ‘a system of sexual governance of soldiers for the national interests’, can only be properly understood by expanding temporal and spatial dimensions.

  Furthermore, given that no imperialist country of the day was free from the issue of sexual governance for imperialistic expansion, it is necessary to expand the historical perspective beyond the Asia-Pacific region to Western societies. ‘Sexual governance policies for national interests’ were used by imperialist countries to expand imperialism and wage war by referring to each other’s policies, controlling each other through international agreement, or creating a logic of evading responsibilities. The reason this academic conference includes the examples of western sexual governance policies and those of the German military in World War II as its theme is to illuminate the intrinsic nature of the ‘comfort women’ issue. That is to say, it was necessary to highlight the national responsibility inherent in the issue and to examine the background and responsibility behind the fact that Japanese military ‘comfort women’ crimes were not punished in the war crime trials led by the Allies after the end of World War II.

Non-visualized Legitimate Sexual Governance System and Violence, and the Issue of Japanese Military ‘Comfort Women’

  In the first part, we examined the sexual governance system in modern Japan, Asia’s only imperialist country, which has been seeking to expand its territory to the continent since the late 19th century, and the actual conditions of victims. Nina Takemoto (Gender Research Institute at Ochanomizu University) presented on the topic <Sex and Power from Karayuki-San> examining Japanese women sent to the continent under Japan’s expansion policies from the late 19th century. In 2021, Ramseyer, a professor from Harvard University, published an article, <Contracting for Sex in the Pacific War> in an academic journal that emphasized the voluntariness of ‘comfort women’ and denied Japan’s national responsibility, sparking controversy. At the moment, the instance he cited to emphasize the ‘voluntariness of the comfort women’ in this article was the Japanese Karayuki-San. However, the presenter criticized that Karayuki-San was supplied and managed by Japanese men who went to the continent, and the Japanese government abandoned its protective responsibility for its women, Karayuki-San.

  Yoko Hayashi (Gender Diversity Center, Nagoya University, who presented <Western Sexual Governance Policies Seen in Modern Japan>, pointed out that the world-historical scale of wartime sexual violence by the Japanese military stems from the nature of Japan’s modern state-controlled prostitution system formed under pressure from the Western countries. As a late imperialist country, Japan was unable to critically assess the oppression of women inherent in imperialism or the state-controlled prostitution system while referring to the sexual governance policies of earlier imperial powers.

  Park Jeong-ae insisted that Imperial Japan’s state-controlled prostitution system, which was operated with discrimination within Japan’s mainland and its dominance, should be understood in the context of the discriminatory circumstances within regions through her presentation named <Japan’s Sexual Governance Policies in Joseon and ‘Managed Women’>. Although the nature of the Japanese military ‘comfort women’ system was more similar to that of the colonial system rather than that of the state-controlled prostitution system in Japan’s mainland, public discourse has focused on emphasizing the characteristics of the ‘comfort women’ system without understanding the colonial system. Consequently, this has led to historical deniers invoking the state-controlled

prostitution system to deny the comfort women’s suffering.

  Regina Muhlhauser (Hamburg Foundation for the Support of Academy and Culture) compared the wartime sexual violence system of the Nazi German defense forces and that of the Japanese army through her presentation named <Nazi German Defense Forces’ Brothels and Japanese Military Comfort Facilities: Similarities and Differences in Military Prostitution and Military Sexual Slavery Systems of World War II>. Both the German and Japanese militaries used ‘uncontrollable male sexual desire’ as the pretext for their policies while implementing sexual governance policies. In addition, both recruited and targeted women based on nationalism, gender bias, and racial discrimination. While there were differences in how they were implemented in terms of their specific societies and national ideologies, the point was that both countries’ sexual governance policies were fundamentally based on nationalism, gender discrimination, and racial discrimination. This leads to the assertion that resolving the issue can only be achieved through acknowledging historical national responsibility, social democratization, and the eradication of various discriminatory structures.

Overcoming the Perceptual Disconnect and Criticizing Ongoing Violence

In the second part, the aim was to critically examine the discussions within the public discourse that only partially recognize the violence system that has persisted across interconnected time and space. Jang Su-hee (Dong-A University) titled her presentation <About the Natural: ‘Culture’ in Peacetime and ‘Violence’ in Wartime>, seeking to deconstruct the world and history that are layered with wars and violence. She emphasized the need to confront the interconnected global system of violence that obscures the recognition of the Japanese military ‘comfort women’ issue as a clearly defined crime of responsibility.

  Baek Jae-ye (University of Massachusetts) deliberated on the topic <Expansion and Omission: Reflections and Recommendations for Wartime Sexual Violence Research>, examining the problems of recent research on wartime sexual violence. She argued that we cannot achieve the goal of preventing repeated perpetration and providing redress and justice for victims through wartime sexual violence research that emasculates the context of each region’s politics and history.

  Yuki Fujime (Osaka University), who critically examined Japanese research and practice, pointed out that the recognition of the historical nature of the Japanese military ‘comfort women’ has been distorted in response to historical denialism and within the current strategies for practical action. The difference between ‘state-controlled prostitution’ and the overemphasis on ‘illegality’ in the issue of ‘comfort women’ is not only historically incorrect but also leads to the hierarchization of victims. She also argued that looking at the Japanese military comfort women issue in conjunction with sexual violence cases in various countries’ militaries is asserting Japan’s responsibility. About this, researchers stated that it is necessary to confront the historical reality and work collaboratively beyond national boundaries.

  Yuki Fujime’s final point is the one that reflects the purpose of this international academic conference. Currently, efforts towards resolving the Japanese military ‘comfort women’ issue seem to face significant barriers due to the attacks of historical denialism and the strained relations between Korea and Japan. Relevant research appears to be stagnant, and unable to progress. To have a productive discussion on the issue of Japanese military comfort women while respecting the outcomes of previous research and practices, there is a need for introspection on the past processes and a broader expansion of discussion topics. We found the fact that each research and awareness of the issue intertwine with one another, centered around the Japanese military ‘comfort women’ issue through the presentations and discussions. Beginning with this academic conference, ‘knowledge’ of the historical reality will be further shared, and supranational cooperation will continue.