What is Kono Statement?

I need to write about Kono Statement, because this is THE cause of global misunderstanding on the comfort women issue. 

Ms. Sakurai Yoshiko, the journalist and the founder of the Japan Institute for National Fundamentals, explains well in her book “Japan, Brush up your Historical Knowledge” （日本よ、歴史力を磨け）, pp. 12-37:

*********

Kono Statement, made by the then Chief Cabinet Secretary Kono Yohei in 1993, acknowledged that the Japanese military “forced” women into prostitution, in response to the Korean government’s request for doing so.

Miyazawa Cabinet at the time researched over 200 official documents, internal and external, yet found not even one document that indicated the “coercion” of comfort women by the Japanese government. Nevertheless, based only on the interviews with some Korean comfort women, Kono acknowledged “coercion” and stated publicly that the Japanese government “coerced” women into prostitution.  

Kono Statement says the following:

“… The Government study has revealed that in many cases they were recruited against their own will, through coaxing, coercion, etc, and that, at times, administrative / military personnel directly took part in the recruitments…”

After issuing the statement, Kono was questioned by journalists at the press conference:

Journalist: “Do you mean that there were facts of coercing women into prostitution?”

Kono: “There were facts – this understanding is ok.”

Journalist: “I understand that there was no official document found, and thus interviews with Korean comfort women were conducted. Wasn’t there any objective evidence found?”

Kono: “Coercion can be physical, or mental. Mental coercion cannot be recorded on the official documents… In either case, it is clear that there were many cases that happened against the women’s will.”

In short, there was no objective evidence.

Then why did Kono issue such false statement to acknowledge the coercion by the government / military, disgracing Japan beyond words?

The then Deputy Cabinet Secretary Ishihara Nobuo confessed later as follows (“The Cost of the Secret Deal: Why the Comfort Women Issue got Complicated“, in Bungei Shunjyu, April, 1997. 文芸春秋、97年4月号、「密約外交の大小―慰安婦問題はなぜこじれたか」):

In view of the political situations at that time, the Korean Government had been strongly requesting the Japanese Government to acknowledge “coercion” to respect the “honor” of the comfort women. The Korean Government selected 16 comfort women, and requested the Japanese Government to listen to their testimonies. The Japanese Government listened to the testimonies; however, the testimonies did not prove the direct coercion by the Japanese military, nor did they have objective rationality. The Japanese Government was not convinced of the “coercion”, yet the atmosphere became such that the government had no choice but to “politically” admit “coercion”. At the same time, the Japanese Government implicitly understood that, as long as the Japanese Government acknowledged “coercion”, the Korean Government would never ever bring up the issue of Comfort Women, and would not request economic compensation.

However, such “implicit understanding” is not documented.

Thus, without fairly analyzing the comfort women’s “testimonies”, the Japanese Government acknowledged “coercion”, in wishful thinking that the matter would settle if it compromised. As a consequence, the Kono Statement is now regarded as the “evidence” of the “coercion”. 14 years later, Kono Statement was used as the evidence for the Resolution on the Comfort Women at the US Congress. The fabrication has led to another fabrication, spreading more fabrications around the world.

*******************

Indeed, the first Abe Cabinet in 1997 approved that “Among the documents that the government discovered, there was no document that directly indicated the coercion (of comfort women) by the military or the government”.

The second Abe Cabinet, under the Chief Cabinet Secretary Suga Yoshihide, indicates that they would re-examine Kono Statement through the well-informed panel.

Kono Statement is thus a groundless statement made by an irresponsible government official who is ignorant of the historical facts. It is absurd that the Japanese Government has held it as an official view until now. This is mainly because: 1) many government officials lack sufficient historical knowledge to counter fabrications, 2) large number of leftist Japanese intellectuals and media (like Asahi), who are anti-Japan and pro-Korea/China, with masochistic historical view, strongly support and disseminate fabrications, and 3) Korea, supported by 2), make this a sensitive political issue.

First and foremost, Japanese people must wake up to the facts that Japanese government / military never forced women into prostitution during WWII. Then, Japanese should speak up and stop the bloated lie of “200,000 sexual slavery by the Japanese army” that anti-Japan Japanese and Koreans spread so willingly.

It is only then, Japan will be able to restore itself, and make things better. True peace cannot be built on lies.

Responding to the comfort women supporter - US Army Report No.49 and Professor Yoshimi

I've got the first comment from a comfort woman supporter on my blog posting on Texas Daddy video (US Army Report No.49), which was nice because I could learn further and analyze, but as I started to write my response, it got longer and longer... So I've decided to put it as a new posting. I'm still half way or less in my response, but I will put partly here.

First, part of the comment from the supporter:

"What you have here is one document about comfort women in one specific part of the Japanese empire at the time. It does not in any way represent the experiences of all of Japan's comfort women during WWII. 

In fact, it says in this document that "[These 20 comfort women in Burma] lived in near-luxury in Burma in comparison to other places." Meaning that in other places in the Japanese empire, comfort women fared a lot worse. (This document also says that these Korean comfort women were recruited by means of deception and that they did not like their "work".)

In fact, three-quarters of comfort women died during the war. They died due to harsh conditions and (mis)treatment, rampant sexually transmitted diseases, and battlefield losses. Even the ones who survived were left infertile from STD's and traumatized for life.

Are you even aware of the Japanese govt's official position on the comfort women issue?

Until 1992, the Japanese govt had denied that Japanese military had any involvement with comfort women. But in Jan. 1992, a Japanese researcher named Yoshimi discovered documents implicating the Japanese military in setting up and running the comfort women system and published the documents in a major newspaper. The very next day, the Japanese govt admitted responsibility..."

 
Then, part of my response:
********

Thank you for your comment, and I’m sorry for the late response. I appreciate much that you write in detail, but you seem to present commonly-held misconception on the comfort women issue, which I’d like to point out along with my comment. Since it will be long, I will just write partly, and continue writing in my blog.

First, the Japanese Prisoner of War Information Report No.49 dated Oct 1, 1944, is the official document of the US Army written based on the interrogation of 20 Korean comfort women who had been serving the Japanese Army in Burma up until the day they were captured by the US Army. This is the valid, first- or second-degree historical evidence to reveal the actual conditions of the comfort women from that period. The credibility of such document is thus significant.

You mention that “in other places in the Japanese empire, comfort women fared a lot worse”, and “three-quarters of comfort women died during the war. They died due to harsh conditions and mistreatment, rampant sexually transmitted diseases…”, but what is your historical evidence to claim these? Discussion of history must be based on analysis of valid evidence, and not assumption or belief.

As you correctly point out, the Report says that many women were recruited based on deception: “The inducement used by these agents was plenty of money, an opportunity to pay off the family debts, easy work, and the prospect of a new life in a new land, Singapore. On the basis of these false representations many girls enlisted for overseas duty and were rewarded with an advance of a few hundred yen” (p.1).

But note that they were “rewarded with an advance of a few hundred yen”. This was a huge amount, considering that the monthly salary of a first class solider was 10 yen, and the sergeant 30 yen. The Report says that “the contract they signed bound them to Army regulations and to war for the "house master " for a period of from six months to a year depending on the family debt for which they were advanced” (p.1), and “girls who had paid their debt could return home” (p.3). Again, the income these women received was humongous (about 25-75 times that of a soldier), thus some of them did go home. It looks to me that this was rather a fair business deal, not slavery.

The Report also mentions:

“The girls were allowed the prerogative of refusing a customer. This was often done if the person were too drunk” (p.1);

“The health of these girls were good… They were well trained in looking after both themselves and customers in the matter of hygiene. A regular Japanese Army doctor visited the houses once a week and any girl found diseased was given treatment, secluded, and eventually sent to a hospital” (p.4);

“There were numerous instances of proposals of marriage (from soldiers) and in certain cases marriages actually took place” (p.4).

Nowhere in the Report has it mentioned that women died due to mistreatment, as you claim. Quite the opposite. The Report says that 800 comfort women were sent to Burma, and it’s sensible to assume that these women operated under the same management and treatment. You mention that this is just one document about comfort women in one specific part of the Japanese empire. However, the Army operates in a highly disciplined manner, with the same rules wherever it goes. Why would the Army pay humongous salary and take good care of comfort women in Burma, and “abuse, mistreat and kill” comfort women in other countries? It does not make sense.

In fact, the soldiers who violated the military rule and forced Dutch women to become comfort women in Indonesia were severely punished by the Japanese Army Headquarters once found, and the comfort station was immediately closed. This clearly demonstrates that the Japanese Army did not tolerate abduction / mistreatment of women.

You mention that, in 1992, professor Yoshimi “discovered documents implicating the Japanese military in setting up and running the comfort women system and published the documents in a major newspaper”.

Here, we need to make the point of argument clear: Yes, the Japanese military established and managed the comfort women system, mainly to prevent rapes in the local communities in the battle field. It was very important for Japanese military to respect the local community and not to cause anti-Japan sentiment because the goal of the war was to achieve peaceful and prosperous Greater East Asia, getting rid of the Western colonial powers from the region. That is why Japanese military recruited their own prostitutes, brought them to the battlefield, and managed the comfort stations in a disciplined manner.

In fact, the armies in other countries, such as the US, France, Germany, Italy, etc, tacitly or openly managed comfort stations in the battle field (http://note.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/detail/n203527). The tragedy is where such system was not established, as in the case of Korean army in the Vietnam war. The Korean soldiers abducted or raped a large number of Vietnamese women, leaving behind 5,000 – 30,000 Lai Dai Han, mixed-blood children. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lai_%C4%90%E1%BA%A1i_H%C3%A0n.

Thus, the point of argument is not whether the Japanese army managed the comfort stations or not, but whether the Japanese army “forced” women into prostitution or not, and the answer is NO.

In fact, the document that professor Yoshimi discovered in 1992 was the Japanese government’s order to ban and punish the crooked dealers who engaged in human trafficking / abduction of women (such trafficking had been traditionally a social problem in Korea and the police was clamping down on them under the Japanese administration). However, Asahi, the infamous anti-Japan pro-Korea newspaper, published a distorted article about it, widely claiming “Japanese involvement in comfort women system” to make the comfort women issue and amplify it. (This is how Asahi newspaper has been “making” historical issues, misleading the public. Beware if you are reading it!).

In June this year, professor Yoshimi was invited as a speaker at a symposium on comfort women organized by VAWWRAC. In the Q&A session, many questions were raised for him. I will introduce a few below: (Source: Seiron, Oct 2013, by Otaka Miki) 

Participant: “Is there anybody who witnessed the abduction of these women by the Japanese army?”

Prof. Yoshimi: “If we understand abduction as taking by force, there is a case of a village in China. There is also a case of a Dutch woman abducted in Indonesia…” [Prof. Yoshimi never mentioned of Korean women. Why doesn’t he if so many Koreans were abducted?] 

Participant: “At that time, 80% of the police in Korea were Koreans. How was abduction of Korean women possible?”

Prof. Yoshimi: “Er… If the recruiters were Koreans, their responsibility must have been pursued…” [He is not answering the question]

Participant: “How much income were the comfort women receiving?”

Prof. Yoshimi: “I don’t know. I think the soldiers were paying money, but the brokers were managing it, and some of it would go to comfort women, but some fees were subtracted….” [His answer is not clear, but he admits that the ones who managed the comfort stations were not the Japanese army but the brokers]

I will discuss Kono statement, etc, etc, in my blog next time.

In fact, the Japanese government has been the major source of creating the problem, because of their irresponsible statements without knowing the historical facts. I will write more.

Again, thank you for commenting on my blog, and thank you for reading.

 
***********