뉴스레터

Moderator: Do Si-hwan, head of Research Center on Japanese Military Comfort Women, Northeast Asian History Foundation

Written by Yun Hyeon-ju

Chung Chin-sung, professor emeritus at the sociology department of Seoul National University

Having graduated from the sociology department of Seoul National University and obtained a master's degree at the university's graduate school, Professor Cheong received her doctorate in sociology at Chicago University. While serving as professor of sociology at Duksung Women's University and Seoul National University since then, she also served as policy advisor for the National Unification Board, co-head of the Korean Council for Women Drafted for Military Sexual Slavery by Japan, director and co-representative of the Korea Center for United Nations Human Rights Policy, and policy advisor of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. She is currently deputy head of the Korea Preparatory Committee of the 2000 Women's International War Crimes Tribunal for Japan's Military Sexual Slavery and a member of the UN Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination. She is the author of “Women of Boundaries”.

Nakahara Michiko, professor emeritus at Waseda University

Having served as the professor of the International Education Center at Waseda University, Nakahara is currently professor emeritus at Waseda University.

She originally majored in Southeast Asian history, but has been performing activities in various organizations after learning about the comfort women issue in Korea and Southeast Asia. She currently represents the Japanese Secretariat of the 2000 Women's International War Crimes Tribunal for Japan's Military Sexual Slavery, and is the co-leader of the Violence Against Women in War Research Action Center and VAWW-NET Japan.

This year marks the 20th year after the 2000 Women's International War Crimes Tribunal for Japan's Military Sexual Slavery (hereafter 2000 Women's International Tribunal). The 2000 Women's International Tribunal, which took place from December 7 to 12, 2000 in Tokyo, was a civil court and joint indictment corps comprised of 10 countries, including Korea, China, Japan, and the Philippines, and raised the issue of the Japanese military's wartime sexual violence in Asia to the international community. It was a civil court and therefore not legally binding, but the victims testified regarding the Japanese soldiers' cruelties, and Emperor Hirohito and the Japanese government were convicted. Twenty years later, however, the Japanese military comfort women issue remains unresolved. On October 22, the Foundation invited the two people who took part in the historic court at the time—professor emeritus Nakahara Michiko of Waseda University and professor emeritus Chung Chin-sung of Seoul National University—to listen to what the court concluded.

Q

Before beginning the interview, let me first convey my gratitude to both of you. I believe that your devotion to the research into the Japanese military comfort women, which is a tricky issue, made a great contribution to historical truth and justice and to the development of human rights issues. What made you begin studying the Japanese military comfort women issue?

A- Nakahara Michiko

Having majored in Southeast Asian history, I was entirely oblivious when it came to women's problems. I first came to know of the existence of the Japanese military comfort women when Korean women began to speak out about the problem. The truth about the comfort women was a major shock to me at the time. The shock seemed all the greater because I had not known of even the presence of such a problem. I could not imagine that Japan had committed such atrocities against women in Japan's occupied territory as well as in Joseon and Southeast Asia. As Korean women set out to look into the problem, I saw the people supporting their cause join forces and began to think that I should study the Japanese military comfort women issue to uncover the truth.

A- Chung Chin-sung

The comfort women issue was brought to light with the meeting of the unfaltering search efforts by an individual researcher named Yun Chung-ok and the women's movement in Korea that began to develop in the 1980s. Having taken great interest in social movements, I had very naturally come in contact with this issue as a historical sociologist and as a female sociologist. In November of 1990 when the Korean Council for Women Drafted for Military Sexual Slavery by Japan (hereafter Korean Council for Women) was formed, Ms. Yun Chung-ok moved to the council as representative and I took over the Korea Chongshindae's Institute. Taking the helm at the institute, I began work to put together testimonies, and 30 years have passed since then.

Q

It is no exaggeration to say that interest in the Japanese military comfort women and many people's efforts to search for the truth have resulted in the formation of the 2000 Women's International War Crimes Tribunal. How did the tribunal begin?

A- Chung Chin-sung

When the "Gay J. McDougall report" was drawn up in 1998 and discussion was under way on how to solve the problem, VAWW-NET Japan proposed the civil court. At the time, we could not take any forcible measures, although the UN would release a report; so we tried to make do with what we could, and that was the civil court.

Toward that end, however, a lot of problems needed to be resolved. Where to hold the court was the primary problem. There had been opinions that the court should be held in Korea, the most affected country, but in the end the court was held in Tokyo. That is because arguments prevailed that the court should open in Tokyo since it was to complete the unfinished Tokyo court. Moreover, such difficult problems as whether to indict the Japanese emperor and issues with language were resolved one by one, resulting in the opening of the 2000 Women's International War Crimes Tribunal.

Q

There are some main actors who cannot be counted out when it comes to discussing the 2000 Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal. Representing them would likely be journalist Matsui Yayori of the Asahi Shimbun and Professor Yun Chung-ok, who represents the Korean Council for Women. Please tell us some of your special memories about them.

A- Nakahara Michiko

Ms. Yun Chung-ok and Matsui Yayori represented Korea and Japan when the 2000 Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal was founded. In my opinion, they have something in common: very quick determination. I visited Ms. Yun to discuss erecting a memorial stone on Miyako Island for the comfort women about 12 years ago, but she agreed to erect the monument without a moment of discussion. Then two months later, I received a call asking, “Has it been built?” I told her, “I’m still collecting money.” Ms. Matsui has constantly raised her voice about the comfort women issue. In June 1990 when the issue erupted, the Japanese government resolutely stated, “The comfort women were taken by private businessmen. They have nothing to do with government and state.” Ms. Matsui thereafter raised objections to the comfort women issue from beginning to end, and took the lead in the search for the truth. It was her proposal to bring the comfort women issue to trial. Back then, Japanese feminists ran away, uttering such quite philosophical remarks as, “Can people judge people?” Yet Ms. Matsui insisted on the trial, saying, “At issue is the crimes of Japan committed against Asian women.” Her remarks sparked the beginning of the organization “WAWW-NET Japan”. WAWW-Net Japan is a women’s movement opposing wartime violence against women, and was created from the belief that a trial would not be possible without the organization. I am currently the co-representative of WAWW-Net Japan.

Q

It can be said that one of the significances of the 2000 Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal was to publicize the comfort women issue. What do you think caused the issue to become widely known internationally?

A- Chung Chin-sung

I believe that bringing the comfort women issue to UN human rights organizations served as an occasion to internationalize the issue. The Korean Council for Women had been created, but at the time the Japanese government was stubbornly denying the comfort women themselves. Having thought to try using UN human rights organizations, we thus visited the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities (later changed to the UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights) in August of 1992. The sub-commission was comprised of civilian members. At the time, we endeavored to inform each member of the comfort women issue, and Gay J. McDougall consequently took over the issue; the Gay J. McDougall report came out in 1998. The most important thing here was to conceptualize the comfort women issue as a wartime sexual violence issue in the human rights sub-commission.

Q

After comfort woman Kim Hak-sun’s first testimony, an international conference on “war and violence against women” was held in Tokyo in 1997. Ustina Dolgopol, a scholar of international law in Australia who had been invited to the conference, raised an objection, saying that the comfort women issue, which should have been discussed in the Tokyo trial, was never discussed. What do you think about the view that this prompted the 2000 Women’s International Tribunal to come to be?

A- Nakahara Michiko

Korean women’s enthusiastic activity in the UN led to the Coomaraswamy report and the MacDougall report being published in 1996 and 1998, respectively. The two reports meant a lot, and we tried to enlighten Japanese women using them. As part of such efforts, the international conference on war and women took place in Japan in 1997. Through the conference we clearly publicized how wartime sexual violence against women was perpetrated worldwide. Before the conference, we had confined the comfort women issue to Japan and Korea. But testimony by women from all over the world, including former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, East Timor, Burma, Afghanistan, and the Philippines, served as a momentum to leave the perception that “war and violence against women” is the problem of women all over the world. At the time, Professor Ustina Dolgopol delivered an impressive lecture. What was most impressive in her lecture was regarding the trial in Japan after the country’s surrender. It was the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, the so-called Tokyo trial, during which Japan was judged for its war crimes; but the verdict was devoid of the two most important things. One was the failure to clarify the responsibility of the Japanese emperor, the sole ruler, and the other was violence against women. There were data, evidence, and witnesses involved with the comfort women issue, and we made thorough preparations to clarify this, but Japan was never judged about this problem.

Q

You could ponder many things when looking back on the 2000 Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal. Is there anything that you feel was missing?

A- Nakahara Michiko

Important things were accomplished in the 2000 Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal, but there were things that we could not judge in the tribunal. One of them was the colonial rule. To our regret, Japanese society hardly knows how important the colonial rule is in Japan’s modern history. Yet what is even more important is that Japan’s postwar education does not teach students the fact that Japan engaged in such colonial rule. Some college students were not even aware of the word colony. I think that this has been caused by the profound mistake of our history researchers. I have retired from the university, but will continue to speak out about the colonial rule through various movements.

Q

You seem to mean that you will ask Japanese society to open their eyes regarding the colonial rule. Are you doing any work for that now? Or is anything planned?

A- Nakahara Michiko

The 2000 Women’s International Tribunal could not deal with the colonial rule. Of course, colonial rule happened, and the comfort women issue arose under the colonial rule. The fact is that there was a trial about the comfort women issue, but the crime of colonial rule itself was not judged. This is the greatest shortcoming involving the 2000 Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal, and I feel a sense of frustration about it. I am therefore relieving my frustration in other ways. I have been actively taking part in a movement called “Seed of Hope” since several years ago. This is a project encouraging Japanese and Korean students to meet, where we sent Waseda University students to Korea. I thought that it would be best to let young people meet young people and listen to them. That is because hearing from aged people does not tend to reach the heart. In that sense, “Seed of Hope” is a very good project. I hope that this project will continue to encourage young people from Korea and Japan to meet and learn about the colonial rule and history.