뉴스레터

The following is a summarized version of "Assessment of the Rally for the Korean and Japanese Citizens' Joint Declaration Marking the Centennial of Japan's Forced Annexation of Korea: Efforts by Korea and Japanese Civil Societies to Overcome Colonialism", a paper presented by Visiting Professor Odagawa Koh [小田川 興] of Waseda University at the Agenda Development Conference for the planning of the 4th International NGOs Conference on History and Peace (hereafter, "International NGOs Conference) in 2011. Along with "And a path, at last, opened by a big river" by President Kim Yeong-ho of Yuhan University featured on the last issue of our newsletter (December 2010 Issue), the following paper will provide valuable insight into the significance and future of the "Joint Declaration by Korean and Japanese Intellectuals", the product of the joint effort by the civil societies of Korea and Japan. _Editor's Note

The year 2010 was the 45th anniversary of the normalization of Korea-Japan relations. With the popularity of Korean pop culture in Japan and the expansion of economic ties, some 5 million Koreans and Japanese visit one another's country every year. In the meantime, however, the Dokdo issue, history textbook controversies, and other inflammatory issues continue to endanger Korea-Japan relations. This is because the "linkage between mature civil societies" is still inadequate despite that fact that nearly half a century has passed since the normalization of relations.

We can get to the heart of the matter if we look at the issue of Japanese military "comfort women". Korea and Japan became a part of the U.S.-led anti-communist alliance against the former Soviet Union and China during the Cold War. Those who had contributed to Japan's aggression prior to Korea's liberation and those with strong anti-communist leanings came into power in both Korea and Japan, and these leaders moved to sweep the "negative legacies" of colonialism under the carpet in the name of solidarity. However, the "Pandora's box" opened when the Cold War came to a close. In August 1991 in Seoul, the late Kim Hak-sun publicly revealed that she had been a Japanese military "comfort woman". In Korean society, which had overcome dictatorial rule and was democratizing, the "comfort women" became a symbol of the "power of civil society" and the demand for reparations for the human rights abuses that the victims of oppressive colonial rule had suffered.

With the political participation of the middle class, Korean civil society quickly grew in size and influence. It was with the Kim Dae-jung administration that Korea's democratization went into full swing. President Kim Yeong-ho (Yuhan University), who had served as the Minister of Commerce, Industry & Energy under Kim Dae-jung, proposed a "Asian Citizens' Community" under the slogan "Civil Asia". This proposal reflected the Korean civil society's ability to develop an overarching framework, buttressed by Korea's dramatic economic growth. Upon President Kim Yeong-ho's invitation, I took part in a consultation with Professor Emeritus Wada Haruki [和田春樹] of Tokyo University and Editor Okamoto Atsushi of Sekai and witnessed the "flow of history" in President Kim Yeong-ho's earnest proposal.

What the differences between Korea and Japan tell us

The author presenting his paper at the
Agenda Development Conference
(second from the right under the banner)

In Korea, scholars of all political spectrums—from conservatives to liberals—signed the "Joint Declaration by Korean and Japanese Intellectuals" (hereafter "Joint Declaration"). Signatories also included the presidents, chief editors, and other executives of major newspapers. In Japan, on the other hand, it was impossible from the get-go to expect any conservative opinion leaders to sign the Joint Declaration. Executives at major newspapers refused participation. It showed how the rift between Korea and Japan are still deep and wide. It also revealed the deep division between the conservatives and liberals in Japan. The only noteworthy signatory on the Japanese side was Mitani Taichiro [三谷太一郞], who had served as the inaugural co-chair of the Korea-Japan Committee for Joint History Research (hereafter, "Committee for Joint History Research") along with Professor Cho Dong-geol, who also signed the declaration.

What we have to keep in mind about Japan is the existence of a deep-rooted conservative faction that considers Japan's annexation of Korea a natural outcome of the conditions of the times and turns a blind eye to the injustice of the annexation. We must also note that because of Japanese education, which depicts Korea as being inferior to Japan, the Japanese people come to develop a prejudice against Korea about which they may not even be aware.

The Joint Declaration also showed us the gap in the extent of social openness and the understanding of mutual growth in Korea and Japan. In Korea, the issuance of the Joint Declaration was held at the Seoul Press Center to highlight the openness and international nature of the Joint Declaration. At the press conference that was held in Japan in July, a Korean reporter from Yonhap News Agency asked why there did not seem to be much support for the Joint Declaration in Japan. I believe the most significant reason is that Japan is not yet a "society that is open" to the world.

In regards to the damage inflicted by colonialism, the Joint Declaration states, "An apology must be sought for wrongdoing, forgiveness must be extended, pain must be healed, and damage must be compensated." I was concerned over the missing subjects in the clauses pertaining to the apology and compensation. It worried me that there would only be "beautiful words" without follow-up action.

What is most important is how this declaration would be understood by the victims of colonialism. Some Koreans would undoubtedly ask, "Is the word 'sorry' adequate for those victimized by colonial rule? What actions will be undertaken as compensation?" That is, I got the feeling that there would be criticisms that the Joint Declaration was drafted from the standpoint of intellectuals.

Heartfelt apology and compensation to the victims

Press conference for the Joint Declaration
held at the Seoul Press Center

As a reporter at Asahi Shimbun, I interviewed the victims of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who had returned to Korea. The experience moved me, and I have been involved in support activities for Korean A-bomb victims since 1968. And large majority of Korean A-bomb victims I met in Japan thereafter returned to Korea with great resentment against the Japanese government.

I still remember the face of the late Kim Hak-sun, who was the first Japanese military "comfort women" to reveal her painful past as well as the surviving "comfort women" I recently met at the House of Sharing. Given my understanding of the daily suffering the victims are undergoing, I argued for the inclusion in the Joint Declaration of specific proposals for action to address the damages inflicted by colonialism.

Wednesday Demonstration

One of the reasons why we were forced to shy away from including practical and specific action plans in the Joint Declaration was the failure of the Asian Women's Fund. The fund, launched after Prime Minister Murayama's statement in 1994, failed in Korea. The initiative had been rushed. The idea was push it forward when a prime minister—supported by a coalition government comprising the Social Democratic Party, Liberal Democratic Party, and New Party Sakigake from the Social Democratic Party—was in office. Most "comfort women" rejected the fund, stating that they would not accept money from private sources and insisted on official compensation from the Japanese government. However, there were some "comfort women" who had taken the compensation, so the initiative created division among the "comfort women".

Why did this compensation initiative, which even included a letter from the prime minister, end in failure? It is yet another painful reminder that compensation must be heartfelt and genuine enough to move the former "comfort women". Unfortunately, my call to include specific action plans in the Joint Declaration was met with little support. Nevertheless, I did not pull out of the effort. I found it important to get as many Japanese intellectuals as possible to overlook minor differences in outlook and partake in this large-scale movement. I was committed to demonstrating the illegitimacy of the annexation and getting the Diet to quickly pass laws pertaining to postwar compensation and the government to implement related policies. This was especially important in 2010, the centennial of Japan's forced annexation of Korea. Fortunately, likeminded people got together and planned to hold discussions or seminars on the issue of postwar compensation, which would allow us to lay the foundation for our next step forward.

Turning the Joint Declaration into a shared resource for Korean and Japanese civil societies

On August 10, 2010, Prime Minister Kan Naoto [菅直人] issued a statement expressing the following: "…the Korean people of that time were deprived of their country and culture, and their ethnic pride was deeply scarred by the colonial rule which was imposed against their will…For the enormous damage and suffering caused during this colonial rule, I would like to express once again our deep remorse and heartfelt apology."

The latter portion is in line with the statement issued by Prime Minister Murayama in 1995, the 50th anniversary of the end of the Pacific War, and the former portion is a reiteration of Prime Minister Koizumi's DPRK-Japan Pyongyang Declaration issued during the prime minister's visit to North Korea in 2002. However, the first part goes a step further than its predecessor, so Prime Minister Murayama's statement is generally assessed in Japan as "a step forward]".

In July 2009, President Kim Yeong-ho, Professor Emeritus Lee Tae-jin of Seoul National University—the Korean-side initiators of the declaration, and two others visited members of the Democratic Party of Japan, including Arai Satoshi [荒井聰] (who was then the Minister of National Strategy). They asked the members of DPJ to include mention of the "Korean Annexation Treaty" as being "null and void" in Prime Minister Kan Naoto's Statement. President Kim Yeong-ho maintained that "a prime minister's statement that can surpass that of Prime Minister Murayama will create a ripple effect of sincerity". Unfortunately, the request was not incorporated into Prime Minister Kan Naoto's statement. The Korean side assessed that the statement was a "half step forward". But as we had anticipated, the statement was met with harsh criticism.

Some members of DPJ formed a league in support of postwar compensation to victims. Given that Japanese society is reverting back to conservatism, the league wants the DPJ government to propose a relief measure in consideration of the victims' needs and demands. Such a relief measure would bring about the "ripple effect of sincerity" that can bring Korean and Japanese civil societies together, which would be pivotal in the formation of an East Asian Community.

North Korea must be included in this community. There are also many victims of "annexation" in North Korea who have not gotten any compensation for the losses and suffering they endured even after half a century has passed since the end of the Pacific War. More importantly, a true East Asian Community requires the participation of North Korea and its people.

The Joint Declaration was merely the first step. Korean and Japanese intellectuals must continue our efforts to heal the pain suffered by former "comfort women" and other victims of colonialism. In so doing, we will turn the Joint Declaration into a shared resource for Korean and Japanese societies. This is the duty and obligation of Korean and Japanese intellectuals.