#24: Apology and Atonement (PART 4)

【Victim/Aggressor】
Advancing on its path of apology, the Japanese government of the 1990s swiftly took action. To make atonement to the surviving Comfort Women, the government raised donations from its citizens and set up Asian Women’s Fund (AWF) in 1995. As its primary mission, AWF carried out the Atonement Project for 364 then-surviving and identifiable Comfort Women.

This project delivered a letter of apology from the Prime Minister to each woman together with financial compensation and medical welfare support. All of the approximately 565 million yen (US$5.3 million) from citizen donations were used as compensation, and approximately 750 million yen (US$7.1 million) from government funds went to medical welfare support.
 
The Atonement Project was implemented in five countries, with the Philippines and Netherlands projects completing in 2001, Korea and Taiwan in 2002, and Indonesia in 2007. While we discuss AWF, it’s important to note that the 364 women identified for this project represent a mere 0.2% to 0.7% of the estimated 50 thousand to 200 thousand women who were systematically abused as sex slaves. This minimal coverage is the dire consequence of denials and refusals for half a century. We must remember the other 99% of the heartbroken women who passed away without being healed by this project.
 
Nevertheless, the heartful people of Japan expressed their deepest remorse and enabled this project to come to fruition. The donors’ genuine sincerity is still vividly visible in their touching messages written to the heartbroken women. The words of apology from then-Prime Minister Murayama also resonate with true empathy and compassion from deep within. In that regard, this project was a truly sincere, heart healing atonement to the victims. 
 
Separately, AWF had another crucial mission – to educate the future generations about the past atrocities with unflagging determination to never repeat the same mistake. To that end, AWF collected and organized historical documents relating to the Comfort Women issue. From such effort, AWF published a five-volume compilation of documents and launched a website known as Digital Museum. And with that, declaring its original missions complete, AWF was dissolved in 2007.
 
However, here remains a great big question mark. That is, are compilation of documents and launch of a website sufficient enough to educate the future generations about the past atrocities? Are they adequate enough to ensure that such tragedy will never again fall upon anyone, anywhere? Aren’t the stakes just too high to simply leave a historical lesson of such profound magnitude to documents and a website?
 
Appointed by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, UN Special Rapporteur released a report in 1996. In this report, UN Special Rapporteur states that she is aware of the position of the Government of Japan . . . which states that the application of the term "slavery" . . . is inaccurate in the case of Comfort Women . . . The Special Rapporteur, however, holds the opinion that the practice of Comfort Women should be considered a clear case of sexual slavery and a slavery-like practice in accordance with the approach adopted by relevant international human rights bodies and mechanisms . . . In the light of the above, the Special Rapporteur sees the Fund, as created, as an expression of the Japanese Government's moral concern for the fate of Comfort Women. However, it is a clear statement denying any legal responsibility for the situation of these women.
 
Furthermore, UN Special Rapporteur makes the following recommendations that the Government of Japan should: (a) Acknowledge that the system of comfort stations . . . was a violation of its obligations under international law and accept legal responsibility for that violation; (b) Pay compensation to individual victims; (c) Make a full disclosure of documents and materials in its possession; (d) Make a public apology; (e) Raise awareness of these issues by amending educational curricula to reflect historical realities; and (f) Identify and punish, as far as possible, perpetrators involved in the recruitment and institutionalization of comfort stations.
 
Moreover, in Report of the Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery released in 1997, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights recognizes the positive steps taken so far towards the solution of this issue. [It also] invites Japanese government to continue to cooperate with UN and encourages further efforts towards a constructive dialogue.
 
Considering the above, in the 73 years of postwar era, with how much honesty has the Japanese government confronted its own past atrocities as perpetrator, especially when structuring its peace education for the future generations? And how should peace education be structured to morally convey to the future generations, especially when reflecting its own historical realities as perpetrator?
 
To answer these questions, we look to Germany – the political and military ally of Japan during World War II. In the present-day Germany, warning memorials to warn and educate about the aggression of Nazism are abundant, across the country. These warning memorials include, among others, the historical sites of concentration camps, extermination camps, Holocaust trains, prisoners of war (POW) camps, disabled people’s extermination camps, prisons, persecution facilities, places symbolizing perpetrator’s ideology, and resistance movements against human rights violations. Many such monuments from the Nazi era are preserved, and painfully descriptive warning displays are erected throughout city centers, enabling residents and visitors to remember on a regular basis the history of aggression.
 
These warning memorials aim to honestly confront the modern German history as perpetrator, to educate the future generations about its own past atrocities as perpetrator, and to ensure that such tragedy will never again fall upon anyone, anywhere. And they’re integrated into history curriculum at schools to also serve the purpose of political education, reflecting the historical realities so as to never again create another horrifying political dynamics.
 
And now let's turn to Japan. Perhaps, the most prominent memorial that immediately comes to mind is Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park. Educating about the nuclear horrors and advocating for world peace, the vibrant message of peace transmitted from this park pummels the visitors’ moral conscience so strikingly from deep within. Nevertheless, the park doesn’t shy away from stating that its mission does not include education for the future generations about modern Japanese history as perpetrator.
 
Among the prominent memorials in Japan – nuclear horrors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, bloody land battles of Okinawa, and multiple air raids obliterating its cities – they present Japan as the helpless victim of war. And it’s this notion of war victim that constitutes the fundamental core of Japan’s peace education for the future generations.
 
Moreover, the historical sites of POW camps, prisons, persecution facilities, chemical weapons manufacturing and testing facilities, places symbolizing perpetrator’s ideology, and resistance movements against human rights violations. Such warning monuments of militarism aren’t preserved, and warning displays are nowhere to be seen in the clean and modern city centers. In fact, warning memorials of any sort are virtually nonexistent throughout the country, thereby residents and visitors deprived of any meaningful moment to remember on a regular basis the history of aggression.
 
Perhaps, if such memorials had been preserved, then the so-called Statue of Peace (a girl symbolizing Comfort Women) and Statue of Forced Laborer may not have invited as much international controversy as they unfortunately do today – on the one hand Korean and Chinese civic groups vowing to put them up at all costs, and on the other hand the Japanese government and civic groups demanding to take them down at all costs.
 
“Nazis were far worse than Militarist Japan, so we can’t compare the two,” some may choose to say. Yet, that argument is as flawed as the small number of conservative Germans who say, “The Soviets were far worse than the Nazis.” And, as we’ve already noted here, even if we only consider the unspeakable despair of the Comfort Women, it’s a harrowing reality that Militarist Japan gruesomely violated the human rights and dignity of so many people during the war.
 
We must not falsely allow ourselves to believe that the weight of human rights abuse is somehow magically reduced so long as we say, “They were worse than us,” or “We weren’t as bad as them,” or “It’s inevitable in times of war.”
 
Demanding peace and opposing war to ensure that such tragedy will never again fall upon anyone, anywhere. Yet, if our peace education narrowly focuses on the modern Japanese history as the helpless war victim, then our future generations will run the risk of brewing a dangerous mindset skewed toward “Prevention of war victimization at all costs.”
 
“Preemptive strikes should be authorized to prevent [myself] from getting victimized. Even war should be permissible to prevent [myself] from getting victimized.” Such ideas of aggression may begin to brew in people’s minds particularly when their emotions are dominated by fear.
 
Today, this pattern is on vivid display as Japanese people are stirred up by the fear of North Korean nuclear missiles – not a few citizens calling to amend Article 9 of the Constitution (outlawing war as a means to settle international disputes, and forbidding maintenance of armed forces with war potential) so Japan can wage wars again. 
 
Here, we’re living through the consequences of Japan’s negligence to educate the future generations about its own past atrocities as perpetrator. And this is precisely the reason why we must honestly confront the past atrocities as perpetrator, especially when structuring our peace education, no matter how painful and uncomfortable it may be to look at them, listen to them, talk about them, and pass them on.
 
My war victimization is your war aggression.
My war aggression is your war victimization.
 
Everyone must honestly confront the heinous and grotesquely repulsive cruelty of war aggression, because everyone deserves to be free from war victimization. Aggression and victimization are inseparably inhumane like the two sides of the same coin. As such, we demand peace and oppose war.
 
And deliberately choosing to educate the future generations with such moral grounding is, indeed, atonement.

Read Next: Apology and Atonement (5)【Honest Peace Education】
Read Previous: Apology and Atonement (3)【Admit It】

Complete Series: Apology and Atonement (1)～(6)
[1]   [2]   [3]   [4]   [5]   [6]   
​
Read Theme: Violence/Peace