Detailed Contents:

The book reviews all significant documents about the comfort women controversy and presents their transcripts as Exhibits, and concludes as follows:

“As presented in the foregoing, there is overwhelming evidence that indicate that the comfort women were not “sex slaves.” For a long time after the war, nobody made the comfort women as a human rights issue. Only after the writing by Seiji Yoshida who claimed to have abducted many women in Cheju Island of Korea, the issue of comfort women attracted attention of people. His book My War Crimes of 1983 was publicized as a historical documentary, and spread through the powerful Asahi Newspaper of Japan, and had influenced the view of the people in Japan. Yoshida’s book was translated and published in South Korea, and became a source of controversy. But, the credibility of Yoshida’s book was seriously damaged by 1992 through Hata‘s writing reconfirming the lack of credibility asserted by a local news reporter in Cheju Island.

Nonetheless, the leftists in Japan were making the comfort women issue an international scandal. They were successful in persuading United Nation’s Human Rights Council and the Coomaraswamy Report was published in 1996, calling comfort women as “sex slaves.” This message has been transplanted to the United States by anti-Japanese groups, and the House Resolution 121 condemning the Government of Japan was passed in 2007. To these actions the ambiguously worded Kono Statement of 1993 had acted unexpectedly as a strong support for accusing the Government of Japan.

The materials presented in this book, however, challenge to the Sex-Slave Theory vigorously. First, Seiji Yoshida’s book was a fiction rather than description of historical facts. The book’s credibility has lost. Second, even though the Kono Statement has not been revoked, the background study made public in June 2014, revealed that the Government of the Republic of Korea was exchanging communications with the Government of Japan before the Kono Statement was publicly announced in 1993. It became clear that the Statement was not based on the facts revealed during the investigations but was a political compromise for attempting to settle disputes between the two countries even though this objective was not really achieved.

Third, a United States intelligence report written in 1944 during the war presents detailed descriptions about comfort women from Korea. Based on interviews with 20 comfort women, the study concluded that a “comfort girl” is nothing more than a prostitute or “professional camp follower”attached to the Japanese Army. It states that they were having good income and considerable freedom. This conclusion was not challenged by the United States Interagency Working Group report made public in 2007.  The group did not find anything violating human rights of comfort women in their8-year-long investigations.

Thus, the only basis for claiming the comfort women used to be sex slaves is the statements made by those who are now claiming they used to be comfort women before. However, the statements made by them are frequently conflicting with the facts, and are found to be unreliable. Thus, serious scholars donot trust their statements as presented without scrutinize them carefully.

On August 5 and 6, 2014, the hither-to reputable Asahi Newspaper of Japan confessed misreporting concerning comfort women since 1982. Asahi Newspaper kept reporting Seiji Yoshida’s book as based on fact, but now admitted that was a mistake. Asahi also recognized that “Women’s Volunteer Corps” were different from “comfort women” another serious mistake. Even though they must have recognized these mistakes years ago, they did not admit these mistakes until 2014, hiding misreporting for 32 years.

In July 15 & 16, 2014, the representatives of the Government of Japan made a definite statement that “it is not appropriate to call comfort women as sex slaves” at the Human Rights Council Meeting in Geneva, reviewing Japan’s Periodic Report in light of the U.N. guidelines. This statement was confirmed and even strengthened by Japan’s Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Shinsuke Sugiyama at a United Nations meeting in Geneva on February 16, 2016.

Thus, there are so many reasons for asserting that the comfort women were not sex slaves and there is no solid basis for claiming they were.  (p.28)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *