The
Comfort Women
Issue
A
Review of the Facts
andCommon Misunderstandings

Tsutomu Nishioka

Japan Policy InstituteCopyright © 2014 by Tsutomu Nishioka
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any
electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without permission in writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer, who
may quote brief passages in a review. Scanning, uploading, and electronic distribution of this book or the facilitation of such without the permission of the publisher isprohibited. Any member of educational institutions wishing to photocopy part or allof the work for classroom use, or anthology, should send inquiries to Nihon Seisaku
Kenkyū Center (Japan Policy Institute), 302 Kasai building, 2-1-2 Iidabashi, Chiyoda-ku,
Tokyo, 102-0072, Japan, or jpi-info@seisaku-center.net.

2

Contents
Preface … 5
Comfort Women … 6
1. The Allegation That Comfort Women Were Forcibly Recruited By
Government Authorities Is Not True. … 7
2. The International Community’s Erroneous Recognition Of Disproved
Allegations Has Not Yet Been Expunged. … 11
3. The “Kono Statement” Expanded International Misunderstanding.
… 13
4. Post-War Reparations Between Japan And South Korea Are Fully
Resolved. … 18
Digest … 20
About The Author … 24

3

PREFACE

It is a fact that during the war era a large number of Korean women,along with Japanese women, became comfort women and suffered
greatly as a consequence. This was unforgivable from the standpoint oftoday’s values by which Japan as well as South Korea prohibit the comfort women system and prostitution. On the other hand, the allegationthat the “Japanese military forcefully recruited 200,000 Korean womenas sex slaves and slaughtered many of them after the end of the war” is
not true.
Substantive research and debate over the past twenty-two years havevastly improved our knowledge of the comfort women issue. This essay
will address common allegations by illuminating the facts while dispelling falsehoods that are unsupported by the evidence.

5

The Comfort Women
The claim that “the Japanese army mobilized 200,000 Korean women as
sex slaves and slaughtered many of them after the end of the war” is incorrect. This report will clarify common international misunderstandings
regarding the comfort women issue.
It has been alleged that “wartime Japan forced 200,000 Korean women
to serve as ‘comfort women,’ that is to say ‘sex slaves’ in the war zone.
Then immediately after the war, many of the women were massacred.”
Misconceptions such as these are in contradiction to the establishedfacts, yet they are being spread throughout the international community.
South Korean non-government organizations in particular have beenworking aggressively to disseminate such misunderstandings.
Of course, it is a fact that a large number of Korean women, along withJapanese women, became comfort women and suffered greatly as a consequence. This was unforgivable from the standpoint of today’s values
by which Japan as well as South Korea prohibit the comfort women system and prostitution. There are differences also from one country toanother in how history is viewed. In this sense, we do not see it as aproblem that South Korea’s perception of history is different from that ofJapan.
With the above premise in mind, the purpose of this essay is to provide aclear explanation of the facts and how they differ from common misconceptions among non-Japanese who may not be as familiar with thishistory.

6

1. The Allegation That Comfort Women Were Forcibly Recruited By
Government Authorities Is Not True.
First, there are no instances in which Korean women were forcibly recruited by government authorities to become comfort women. Evidence
to verify the allegations of forced recruitment has never been found.
Throughout the 1980’s, the theory that government authorities engaged
in the forced abduction of comfort women was prevalent in academia
and the mass media in Japan as well as South Korea. However, from1992 onward, it was taken up as a diplomatic issue, prompting bona fideresearch and widespread debate to begin. As a consequence, the dominant opinion in Japan as well as among some segments of South Korean
academia has become the realization that “there are no instances where
Korean women were forced to become comfort women by government
officials.”
The prevailing theory in academia and among mass media in Japan andSouth Korea through the 1980’s was that “Korean women were mobilized as comfort women under the Volunteer Corps system.” Influential
media such as the Asahi Shimbun and Mainichi Shimbun, among others,presented it in just this manner.1 This above-mentioned Volunteer Corps
Chōsen O Shiru Jiten (Encyclopedia To Know Korea) (Heibonsha,1986), which was editorially supervised jointly by several academics specializing in Japanese-Korean studies,including Abito Ito, Masuo Omura, Hideki Kajimura, Yukio Takeda, and Soji Takasaki,
defines the term “military comfort women” by explaining that “approximately 200,000
Korean women were mobilized for labor from 1943 on, under the name of Women’s
Volunteer Corps. Of those, 50,000 to 70,000 young, unmarried women were made to become comfort women.” Also see Chōsen-shi (History of Korea) (Yamakawa Shuppansha,
1985), which was written by members of the Korean History Studies Association, a prominent Korean history studies organization in Japan, and edited by Yukio Takeda, in which theauthors state that the Women’s Volunteer Corps Labor Decree was issued in August 1944,
resulting in the mobilization for labor of several hundred thousand of Korean women ranging in age from 12 to 40 years old; among those, several tens of thousands (20,000 to
40,000) of unmarried women were forced to become comfort women. (cont.)
1

7

system specifically refers to the mobilization of labor by government
authorities under the war-era National General Mobilization Law.
However, after the matter of comfort women became a diplomatic issue
in 1992, the Japanese government began a thorough investigation including examination of pre-war documents, sparking an intense debate
in academia and among opinion-leading forums in Japan. As a result, thetheory that comfort women were mobilized under the Volunteer Corps
system was disavowed. There are absolutely no facts to support theallegation.
Grounds proffered in support of the allegation consisted of the testimony
of a person by the name of Seiji Yoshida, who said, “I conducted theforceful recruitment of comfort women like a slave hunt on South
Korea’s Jeju Island based on orders from the Army to recruit Volunteer
Corps members.”2 However, in the process of debate and as the investigation proceeded, it was revealed that there was absolutely no evidenceor other testimony to support his claim while many local inhabitants ofJeju Island insisted that there had been no such activities,3 leading to
the conclusion that “this claim has too many problems to be employed
as a fact.”4
The Asahi Shimbun, in its January 11, 1992 edition, reported as an explanation of the term
“military comfort women” that “as the Pacific War began, Japan forcibly took away Korean
women under the name of a Volunteer Corps,” while the Mainichi Shimbun, in its March 5,
1992 edition, also reported the same explanation that “primarily from the Korean peninsula
during the Second World War, approximately 100,000 to 200,000 women ranging in age
from teenagers up to 40 years old were gathered under the name Volunteer Corps.”
See Watashi No Sensō Hanzai: Chōsen-jin No Kyōsei Renkō (My War Crimes: Forceful
Recruitment of Koreans), by Seiji Yoshida (San’ichi Shobo, 1983). Mr. Yoshida wrote in thebook’s forward that “For three years from 1942 to the end of the war, as head of a mobilization section of Yamaguchi Prefecture’s Labor Dedication to the Nation Association, I
conducted ‘slave hunts’ while engaged in the business of requisitioning Koreans.”
2

3 See Ianfu To Senjō No Sei (Comfort Women and Sex in the War Zone), by Ikuhiko Hata
(Shinchosha, 1999), pages 229-248 (Chapter 7: Yoshida Seiji No Tsukuribanashi [Seiji
Yoshida’s Fictitious Story]).
4

See “Jūgun Ianfu” O Meguru Sanjū No Uso To Shinjitsu (30 Lies and Truths about

8The investigation also confirmed that the objective of the Women’s
Volunteer Corps system was to mobilize a female workforce for the defense industry, which was completely unrelated to comfort women. No
evidentiary materials have been found to back up the contention thatgovernment authorities engaged in the mobilization of comfort women.
As a result of deliberations such as the foregoing, the opinion held byacademia and mass media in Japan today is that “there is no evidence
that government officials forcefully recruited Korean women as comfort
women.” There is a consensus on this point.
Japanese historian Ikuhiko Hata, Ph.D., for example, asserts that “there
was never any procurement of comfort women on the Korean peninsulathrough forceful recruitment by government authorities.5” Yoshiaki
Yoshimi and Haruki Wada, representative of historians who view theJapanese government’s responsibility more critically, also express similar views in their following statements. Yoshimi says that “government
authorities’ forceful recruitment like a slave hunt in Korea or Taiwan has
not been confirmed. Moreover, it seems that there was no mobilizationof comfort women based on the Women’s Volunteer Labor Decree”;6
Wada states that “certainly documentary materials have not been foundto prove the use of direct coercion by government authorities.”7 With
“Military Comfort Women”), edited by Yoshiaki Yoshimi and Fumiko Kawata (Otsuki
Shoten 1997, page 27, lines 1-5. Yoshiaki Yoshimi was a professor of the Department ofCommerce at Chuo University. Also see his English-language book, Comfort Women:
Sexual Slavery in the Japanese Military During World War II (Columbia University Press,
2002).
In addition, Asahi Shimbun, which first positively reported the Yoshida testimony in many
editions of its newspaper, came to accept the result of the debate and reported in its March
31, 1997 edition, that “no evidence has emerged to prove Yoshida’s claim; thus the authenticity of the claim cannot be confirmed.”5

Ibid. footnote 3. Page 192, upper column, lines 17-19.

6Ibid. footnote 4. Page 24, lines 3-4.

7

See Asian Women’s Fund News, issue no. 8, March 5, 1997, page 3, left column, lines

9

respect to the results of its own investigation, the Japanese government
said, “Among the materials uncovered by the government, there are norecords directly showing so-called forceful recruitment by either thearmy or government authorities.” 8
And yet in South Korea there continue to be strong voices of opinion
insisting that there was forceful recruitment of comfort women by government authorities and that the debunked Yoshida testimony is a fact.9
On the other hand, as a result of the bona fide research, in some quartersof South Korean academia there is an emerging trend of opinion that
there was no forced recruitment. For example, Ahn Byeong-jik, Ph.D,
Professor Emeritus of Seoul University, who participated in the hearing-interviews of former comfort women, stated on a South Korean
television program, “Despite testimony by some former comfort women
about forceful recruitment, there is not even one tangible piece of objective data in either South Korea or Japan to prove it. In South Korea there
are brothels and numerous entities like comfort women. There should be
a study into the reasons for this phenomenon. Surely this phenomenon
15-17. In 1997, Tokyo University Professor Haruki Wada was one of the advocates forcreation of the Asian Women’s Fund, which was set up for the purpose of apologizing to andcompensating former comfort women.
See Paper Answering the Question Raised by Kiyomi Tsujimoto, Member of the Lower
House of the Japanese Diet, by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, March 16, 2007. http://www.
shugiin.go.jp/internet/itdb_shitsumon.nsf/html/shitsumon/b166266.htm

8

A leading South Korean newspaper, The Chosoun Ilbo, in its August 3, 2012 editorial entitled “Prime Minister Noda - Go and Show the United Nations that Comfort Women Never
Existed,” presents the debunked Yoshida testimony as fact and criticizes Japan in the following quote:9“For three years beginning in 1942, Seiji Yoshida, former head of a mobilization section of Yamaguchi Prefecture’s Labor Dedication to the Nation Association, testified
that ‘Korean women were mobilized as comfort women’ and said, ‘I left Shimonoseki
and arrived at Jeju Island on May 14, 1943, and hunted women.’ Yoshida also testified
that ‘matters related to comfort women were all classified as military secrets. At present, when the world is coming together as one, the crime of forceful recruitment of sex
slaves by Japan has been publicly recognized as one of the ugliest historical cases inmodern history.’”

10

did not happen just because of some form of coercion.”10
2. The International Community’s Erroneous Recognition Of
Disproved Allegations Has Not Yet Been Expunged.
Second, the above-mentioned results of bona fide research and debate inJapan have not become known in the international community, includingthat “there were no instances of forced recruitment of Korean women as
comfort women by government authorities.” At the same time the clearly
discredited allegation that “government authorities forcefully abductedcomfort women” is still widely believed and thus the issue has become
distorted.
The Coomaraswamy Report submitted to the UN Human Rights
Commission in 1996 promoted the spread of misunderstanding in theinternational community by its statement, “200,000 Korean women wereforcefully recruited to battlefields as comfort women, that is to say ‘sex
slaves.’ ” Ms. Coomaraswamy, who was appointed by the Commission
as a special rapporteur into the issue of violence against women, concluded the report after conducting research in Japan, South Korea andNorth Korea for her investigation. In that report she defined comfort
women as “military sexual slaves” and demanded that the Japanese
government admit legal responsibility, compensate the victims andpunish those held accountable. The report claims that, based on the
National General Mobilization Law, the Japanese military conductedlarge-scale, forceful and violent recruitment like a slave hunt, proceeding further with the following text:“… the Japanese military resorted to violence, undisguised force
10
See News Focus, a program of South Korea’s Munhwa Broadcasting Corporation (MBC),
broadcast on December 6, 2006. Reference to the remark by Professor Ahn Byeong-jik may
also be found on pages 99-106 of Shimpan Yoku Wakaru Ianfu Mondai (New Edition: The
Comfort Women Issue Made Comprehensible), by Tsutomu Nishioka (Soshisha, 2012).

11and raids which involved the slaughter of family members who tried toprevent the abduction of their daughters. These methods were facilitatedby the strengthening of the National General Mobilization Law, which
had been passed in 1938 but was only used for the forcible recruitment
of Koreans from 1942 onwards. ( G. Hicks, “The Comfort Women: Sex
Slaves of the Japanese Imperial Forces,” Heinemann Asia, Singapore,
1995, p. 25.) The testimonies of many former military sexual slaves
bear witness to the widespread use of violence and coercion in the recruitment process. Moreover, the wartime experiences of one raider,
Yoshida Seiji, are recorded in his book, in which he confesses to having
been part of slave raids in which, among other Koreans, as many as
1,000 women were obtained for “comfort women” duties under the
National Labour Service Association as part of the National General
Mobilization Law. (Yoshida Seiji, My War Crimes: the Forced Draft of
Koreans, Tokyo, 1983.)”11
Yet, use of the National General Mobilization Law for the recruitment of
comfort women and the testimony of Seiji Yoshida, both listed as grounds
for her premise, have been proven to be untrue. The report cites what is
asserted to be historical background in forty-four paragraphs, including
quotations from other reports; there are eleven purported evidentiary
facts offered in support that are cited in footnotes. Of the eleven footnotes, the sources of ten are from G. Hicks, Comfort Women: Sex Slavesof the Japanese Imperial Force (Heinemann Asia, Singapore, 1995), andone is the Seiji Yoshida testimony. In addition, the G. Hicks book alsorelies on the Yoshida testimony as fact, demonstrating a low level of
See E/CN.4/1996/53/Add.1.,4 January 1996, Addendum Report of the Special Rapporteur
on Violence Against Women, its Causes and Consequences, Ms. Radhika Coomaraswamy,
in accordance with Commission on Human Rights Resolution 1994/45, Report on theMission to the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea and Japan on
the Issue of Military Sexual Slavery in Wartime, at Paragraph 29. http://www.unhchr.ch/11

Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/0/6ad5f3990967f3e802566d600575fcb?Opendocument

12

verification and entirely failing to reflect the results of the research anddebate in Japan.
Since 2007, resolutions seeking to place responsibility on the Japanese
government for the comfort women issue have been adopted by theUnited States Congress, the European Union Parliament and others, but
all of them used as their principal basis the Coomaraswamy Report,
which ultimately was formed on the fictional assumption of forced recruitment of comfort women by government authorities.
Related to these disproved allegations, another unfounded rumor is circulating in some parts of the international community that Japanesemilitary forces slaughtered numerous Korean comfort women in the immediate aftermath of the war.12 This allegation is absolutely groundless.
Had there been any such case, certainly it would have been prosecuted asa war crime by the Allied Forces, and yet there is not a single such case.
3. The “Kono Statement” Expanded International Misunderstanding.
Third, the expression of apology to former comfort women in the 1993
statement of Chief Cabinet Minister Yohei Kono, followed by declarations of the same meaning by successive Japanese Prime Ministers, wasan acknowledgement of moral responsibility based on current values. It
was not an admission of “legal liability” within the framework of thewartime era in which prostitution was legal. However, chiefly because of
the failure of the Japanese government and mass media to perform their
12 House Resolution 121 (Comfort Women Resolution), adopted by the United States Houseof Representatives in 2007, includes in its statement of justification, “Whereas the ‘comfort
women’ system of forced military prostitution by the Government of Japan, consideredunprecedented in its cruelty and magnitude, included gang rape, forced abortions, humiliation, and sexual violence resulting in mutilation, death or eventual suicide in one of thelargest cases of human trafficking in the 20th century.” In the quote, the words “mutilation”
and “death” suggest a massacre by Japanese armed forces. Furthermore, South Korean cartoonists submitted a caricature of the Japanese military slaughtering comfort women to a
cartoon exhibit held in France in January 2014.

13

responsibility to adequately inform the international community, the reality is that the misunderstanding spread further, as if the Japanese
government had admitted the forceful recruitment of Koreans by government authorities.
Japanese government diplomacy on the comfort women issue has been a
succession of failures. The issue was taken up in January 1992 at a summit meeting with South Korean President Roh Tae-woo upon the visit ofPrime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa to South Korea. At that time, when
Japanese and South Korean mass media widely reported Japan had not
acknowledged its responsibility for government authorities’ forceful recruitment of comfort women, Prime Minister Miyazawa apologizedrepeatedly for a total of eight times. One year later President Roh Taewoo visited Japan and stated, “(the comfort women issue) actually was
first brought up by representatives of the Japanese news media, thereby
inflaming anti-Japanese sentiment among our people, infuriating them.”13
These apologies are the origin of the misunderstanding. The reason theycaused misunderstanding is as follows. The Japanese government issued
statements of apology, but it did not acknowledge as fact the allegationthat Koreans were forcefully recruited as comfort women by government authorities. Nevertheless, the apologies gave rise to themisunderstanding that forceful recruitment by government authorities
had actually happened. As explained above, subsequent research and debate disproved the claim that Koreans had been forcefully recruited bygovernment authorities to be comfort women. At the same time, theJapanese government did not make any effort to dispel the misunderstanding that its own apologies had created and furthered the
misconception when Chief Cabinet Minister Yohei Kono issued hisstatement in August 1993. In point of fact, the South Korean governmentof the time conveyed its wishes that, if the Japanese government would
See Bungei Shunju, the monthly magazine published by Bungei Shunju publishing company, March 1993 issue.
13

14

clearly express its remorse, the South Korean government intended to
put an end to this issue; the Japanese government responded to the overture by issuing the Kono Statement. For this reason the document
employed many ambiguous expressions rather than providing an orderly
account of the facts.
Just before the release of the Kono Statement, the Japanese government
conducted a series of investigatory hearings with former comfort women
living in South Korea. The contents of the investigation were sequestered, but in 2013 the sloppiness of the investigation became apparent
through the release of internal government documents. Testimony was
taken from sixteen former comfort women during the investigation, but
no effort was made to authenticate their testimony or question contradictory points. Among the sixteen interviewees, six individuals, or forty
percent, said that they had been comfort women in areas that were notbattlefields: two in Osaka and one in Kumamoto on the Japanese mainland and three who were in Japanese-administered Taiwan.14
Even now there are many observers who assume that the Japanese government acknowledged the forceful recruitment of comfort women when
it issued the Kono Statement. However, this is erroneous. On the recruitment of comfort women, the statement says as follows:15“The recruitment of comfort women was conducted mainly by private recruiters who acted in response to requests of the military. The
Government study also revealed that in many cases they were recruited against their own will, through coaxing, coercion, etc., andthat, at times, administrative/military personnel directly took part in
14 See Seiron, a monthly magazine published by the Sankei Shimbun, December 2013 issue,
in which is published nearly the full text of the report, Kankoku-jin Ianfu Jūroku-nin Kara
No Kikitori-chōsa Hōkoku (Hearing Investigation Report on 16 South Korean Former
Comfort Women), together with a detailed commentary by Tsutomu Nishioka.
15 See Statement by Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono on the results of the study on theissue of “comfort women”: http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/women/fund/state9308.html

15

the recruitments. They were compelled to live at comfort stations
under a coercive atmosphere.”
As to the origin of those comfort women who were transferred to
the war areas, excluding those from Japan, those from the Korean
Peninsula accounted for a large part. The Korean Peninsula wasunder Japanese rule in those days, and their recruitment, transfer,control, etc. were conducted generally against their will throughcoaxing, coercion, etc.”
In the case of women who were in the position of having to sell sex tosoldiers even though it was not their intention, clearly they were made to
do so “against their will.” The Kono Statement took a position with regard to these matters to express strong sympathy for these women
although the cause for their recruitment was not force used by government authorities, but instead poverty, exacerbated by the intervention ofprivate recruiters. That is the meaning of the part of the statement that
reads, “The recruitment of comfort women was conducted mainly by
private recruiters who acted in response to requests of the military.”In the statement, the wording that “at times, administrative/military personnel directly took part in the recruitments” is the passage that moststrongly invites misinterpretation. Japanese government officials incharge at the time, when asked about the meaning of this particular partof the statement, responded that it derives from a “war crimes” case inIndonesia where some Japanese Army units forced Dutch women in a
prisoner-of-war camp to work in a brothel for some months.16 After the
war that incident was submitted to the War Crimes Tribunal conducted
16 See Rekishi Kyokasho E No Gimon (Questions about History Textbooks), edited by the
Nihon No Zento To Rekishi Kyōka-sho O Kangaeru Wakate Giin No Kai (Group of Young
Diet Members to Think About Japan’s Future and Its History Education), Tendensha, 1997,
pages 146-154, referring to the statement of Yoshinobu Higashi, Counselor, Division ofExternal Affairs, Prime Minister’s Office, at a meeting of the Liberal Democratic Party’s(LDP) Group of Young Diet Members to Think About Japan’s Future and its History
Education at LDP Headquarters in Tokyo.

16

by the Netherlands, at which the judgment was taken against certain
Japanese military officers and civilians who were sentenced to death andexecuted. Examination of the quotes in the Kono Statement shows
clearly that the expression “administrative/military personnel directly
took part in the recruitments” was never used to refer to the paragraph on
recruitment of comfort women on the Korean peninsula. Accordingly, inthe statement the Japanese government did not acknowledge that “government authorities forcefully recruited Korean women as comfort
women.” At the time, this misunderstanding had already begun to spread
as a result of Prime Minister Miyazawa’s apologies. The Japanese government further contributed to the international community’s
misunderstanding when it issued the Kono Statement with its vague andambiguous expressions. On that point, the Japanese government’s responsibility is very great.
On the other hand, the part of the statement (below) that refers to moral
responsibility for infringing upon women’s dignity has been and continues to be the position of the Japanese government since the statement
was issued, including in the 2nd Abe Administration.
“This was an act, with the involvement of the military authoritiesof the day, that severely injured the honor and dignity of many
women. The Government of Japan would like to take this opportunity once again to extend its sincere apologies and remorse to all
those, irrespective of place of origin, who suffered immeasurable
pain and incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort
women.”The Japanese government should continue to strongly emphasize this
aspect of its unchanged moral apology and sense of remorse while making an effort to correct the widespread international misunderstanding ofother facts.

17

4. Post-War Reparations Between Japan And South Korea Are Fully
Resolved.
After the independence of the Republic of Korea, the three successive
governments of Syngman Rhee, Chang Myon and Park Chung-hee undertook the task of normalizing diplomatic relations with the clear
objective of acquiring the maximum amount of reparations from Japan.
Yet, in that process not once did they demand any reparations on accountof comfort women. In that period, when there was still first-hand knowledge of this history, demanding reparations from the Japanese governmenton account of comfort women was not even considered. The 1965
Accords also stated that the post-war process between the two countries
was a matter “completely and finally” resolved. (Agreement Between
Japan and the Republic of Korea Concerning the Settlement of Problems
in Regard to Property and Claims and Economic Cooperation (Article 2,
Paragraph 1).
Based on the 1965 Accords, Japan provided South Korea with monetarycompensation in the form of a grant of 300 million U.S. dollars, together
with loan assistance in the amount of 200 million U.S. dollars. At thetime, given that the total amount of Japan’s foreign reserves amounted to
1.8 billion U.S. dollars, 500 million U.S. dollars paid in equal installments over ten years was not a small amount.
According to the Reparations Rights White Paper published by the South
Korean government, the 500 million U.S. dollars provided by Japan was
calculated to have contributed 20% to South Korea’s economic growthover the “Miracle of the Han River” period from 1966 through 1975. The
South Korean government used that money to build infrastructure suchas highways, dams and ironworks and for such purposes as awards toindependence movement activists of merit as well as scholarships fortheir children. Compensation was awarded to deceased victims who had
18been drafted or volunteered for the military during the war, though nospecial reparations were made to survivors, including the wounded. In
contrast to those who volunteered or were conscripted into the military,
there were no reparations for comfort women who were hired by private
recruiters. This policy judgment was entirely that of the South Korean
government. It was the philosophy of the Park Chung-hee government at
the time that, since the entire nation had suffered from the injury of colonial rule, the majority of funds received from Japan should be used forthe production of assets that would benefit the nation as a whole.
President Roh Tae-woo raised the issue of comfort women at the 1992
Japan-South Korea summit meeting at which Prime Minister Kiichi
Miyazawa responded from a humanitarian standpoint with an apology;
the following year in 1993 Chief Cabinet Minister Yohei Kono isssued astatement confirming the government’s apology. Thereon the Japanese
government, taking responsibility for administration costs, raised donations from the Japanese public of approximately 700 million Japaneseyen (5.7 million U.S. dollars) for distribution to former comfort women.
Yet, after being informed, some of the South Korean former comfort
women rejected the monetary offering and have continued to demandthat the Japanese government give them an official apology together
with reparations from government funds.

The number of former comfort women registered with the South Korean
government is 237, out of which there are 55 survivors as of February
2014. Of those who are registered, 61 women have accepted reparations
from the Japanese public-private partnership Asian Women’s Fund andwere acknowledged with letters of apology from successive Japaneseprime ministers.17
See the Sankei Shimbun, February 8, 2014 edition, newspaper column by Katsuhiro
Kuroda.

17

19

DigestIt is a fact that a large number of Korean women along with Japanesewomen suffered greatly as a consequence of becoming comfort women
during the war era, yet there are also many common false allegations
about this issue. This essay has taken advantage of the objectivity enabled by twenty-two years of substantive research and debate todistinguish the facts from the falsehoods and further international understanding of the issue.
1. The Allegation That Comfort Women Were Forcibly Recruited
By Government Authorities Is Not True.
There were no instances in which Korean women were forcibly recruited by government authorities to become comfort women.
Throughout the 1980’s, the theory that government authorities engaged
in the forced abduction of comfort women was prevalent in academia
and the mass media in Japan as well as in South Korea. However, since
1992 this has been a diplomatic issue, prompting bona fide research into
the facts and a widespread debate. As a consequence of the research, thedominant opinion in Japan as well as among some segments of South
Korean academia has become the realization that “there are no instanceswhere Korean women were forced to become comfort women by public
officials.”
The grounds proffered in support of the false allegations for years reliedon the “testimony” by a person named Seiji Yoshida, who said, “I conducted the forceful recruitment of comfort women like a slave hunt on
South Korea’s Jeju Island based on orders from the Army to recruit Vol20

unteer Corps members.” However, as the investigation proceeded, it
was revealed that there was absolutely no evidence or other testimony tosupport his claims.
2. The International Community’s Erroneous Recognition Has Not
Yet Been Expunged.
The international community has not taken note of the research and debate on this issue, including the conclusion that “there were no instancesof forced recruitment of Korean women as comfort women by government authorities.” At the same time the clearly discredited allegationthat “government authorities forcefully abducted comfort women” isstill widely believed in the international community, and thus the issue
has become distorted.
Unfortunately, the misunderstanding in the international community
was heightened by the Coomaraswamy Report, submitted to the United
Nations Human Rights Commission in 1996. As evidence, the reportrelied upon the testimony of Seiji Yoshida, which had already been
proven to be false. Subsequently, resolutions seeking to place responsibility on the Japanese government for the comfort women issue wereadopted by the United States Congress, the European Parliament andothers, all of which relied on the flawed Coomaraswamy Report as theirbasis.
3. The “Kono Statement” Expanded International Misunderstanding.
The expression of apology to former comfort women in the 1993 statement of Chief Cabinet Minister Yohei Kono, followed by declarations of
the same meaning by successive Japanese Prime Ministers, was an acknowledgment of moral responsibility based on current values.
21

Even now, there are many observers who wrongly assume that the Japanese government acknowledged the forceful recruitment of comfort
women by government authorities in the statement. The section of theKono Statement that most strongly invites this misinterpretation is theclause, “at times, administrative/military personnel directly took part in
the recruitments.” This clause exclusively refers to a specific war crimes
case in Indonesia where some Japanese Army units forced female Dutch
prisoners of war to work in a brothel.
In contrast, the part of the statement that refers to Japan’s moral responsibility for infringing upon women’s dignity applies to all women. It has
been and continues to be the unchanging position of successive Japanese governments, including the current 2nd Abe Administration.
4. Post-War Reparations Between Japan And South Korea Are
Fully Resolved.
Since its independence and establishment as the Republic of Korea, noSouth Korean government has ever demanded reparations for comfort
women in its diplomatic negotiations with Japan. The 1965 Accords negotiated by the two countries state that the post-war process between
Japan and South Korea is a matter “completely and finally” resolved. As
a consequence, Japan provided South Korea with compensation in theform of a grant of 300 million U.S. dollars, together with loan assistancein the amount of 200 million U.S. dollars. The 500 million U.S. dollar
fund provided by Japan contributed to 20% of South Korea’s economic
growth over the period 1966 and 1975.
In 1995, the Asian Women’s Fund was created, with management andadministrative expenses paid by the Japanese government. It raised 700
million Japanese yen from the Japanese public (equivalent to 500 million U.S. dollars), which was offered to former comfort women. Of the237 former comfort women registered with the South Korean govern22

ment, 61 accepted and received reparations from the Fund together withletters of consolation and apology from successive Japanese Prime Ministers.

23About The Author

TSUTOMU NISHIOKA is a professor at Tokyo Christian University,where he has taught since 1991. He is a scholar specializing in Korean
peninsula studies, for which he developed a passion early in his education. He was an exchange student at Yonsei University in the International
Division (1977-78) during undergraduate studies at Tokyo International
Christian University (BA, 1979). While completing his Master Degreein Area Studies at Tsukuba University (MA,1983), he was selected as a
Foreign Ministry Research Fellow for which he was assigned to the Embassy of Japan in Seoul, South Korea, from 1982-84. He is known for
his research and prolific writing on contemporary Korean issues andserved as the Editor in Chief of the foreign affairs journal Gendai Koria(Today’s Korea) from 1990-2000. Among his many books, the following relate closely to his most recent examination of South
Korean-Japanese history and the comfort women issue: Nikkan Gokai
No Shin’en (The Abyss of Japan-South Korean Misunderstanding), Aki
Shobo (1992); Koria Tabū O Toku (Solving the Korea Taboo), Aki
Shobo (2007); Yami Ni Idomu: Rachi, Kiga, Ianfu, Han-Nichi O Dō
Haaku Suru Ka (Deciphering the Darkness: Abductions, Starvation,
Comfort Women and the Anti-Japan Movement), Tokuma Shoten (199899); Nikkan “Rekishi Mondai” No Shinjitsu (The Truth About theJapan-South Korea History Issue), PHP Research Institute (2005); Yoku
Wakaru Ianfu Mondai :Zōho Shimpan (The Comfort Women Issue Decoded, Revised Edition), Soshisha (2012).

24