Repercussions of Dec. 28 accord

By Tong Kim

The Dec. 28 agreement between South Korea and Japan to end the decades-long issue of comfort women should only be the beginning of a resolution, not the “final and irreversible” resolution. In Seoul, survivors of Japan’s wartime sex slavery and representatives of the relevant civic organizations called it “a diplomatic humiliation,” and the major opposition party said it was “void” because the legislature was not consulted.

A few dozen survivors, most of whom are in their 80s, complained that they had not been informed about the deal before it was announced. One survivor, 88, shouted at Lim Sung-nam, Seoul’s vice foreign minister, who was visiting a sharing home for survivors to explain the deal, “What country do you belong to? Why are you going to kill us twice? Could you not tell us what kind of a deal you were making with the Japanese?”

In a joint press conference in Seoul, Japanese foreign minister Fumio Kishida conveyed Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s “most sincere apologies and remorse” to those women who were forced to serve as sex slaves in brothels set up and run by the Japanese army during World War II. Japan also offered one billion yen ($8.3 million) toward a foundation to be established in Korea to help the victims.

Abe has long been reluctant to face the truth of Japan’s involvement in the enslavement of an estimated 200,000 women, mostly from Korea. He even tried to deny it. He never apologized to the comfort women directly himself. The South Korean public does not trust him and questions the sincerity of his latest apology. Some victims demanded a direct apology from the Japanese emperor, if the prime minister would not make a direct apology to them.

Missing parts from the controversial accord include the lack of mentioning Japan’s legal responsibility for the systematic sexual enslavement of the so-called comfort women, and no agreement on how to treat the issue in history books. Many Koreans are concerned with the larger meaning of history: lessons from history should be taught to future generations to prevent a repeat of the tragic history.

Japan maintained its insistence that the 1965 treaty of normalization, under which Japan paid Korea $800 million in grants and loans and ended all Japanese legal obligations to accept any further claims from Korea regarding any damage inflicted on Korea.

South Korea claimed that the normalization treaty did not apply to the legitimate claims of the comfort women, because the humanitarian issue involving the mental and physical wounds suffered by the comfort women was never discussed during treaty negotiations. Japan did not back down, and its offer of the financial contribution is interpreted as a government donation, not a legal reparation.

Abe has pledged to end the history issue so that Japan’s future generations will not have to keep apologizing for what their ancestors did. After last week’s accord, he said he would not apologize again for the same issue, stressing the finality and irreversibility of the deal. He even warned that if Korea failed to honor the accord, “it will lose its status as a member of the international community.”

It is not hard to see Abe’s motivation to reach agreement with Korea this time. He knew the issue of comfort women was a shameful stigma for Japan that has to be removed for Japan to advance its international leadership in this age of women’s universal rights. The Japanese press underscored Japan’s gains, quoting their foreign minister as saying, “The only loss is 1 billion yen, but it’s worthy of the ascendance of Japan’s leadership in the world arena.”

Minister Yun said that South Korea would “refrain from criticizing and blaming” Japan in the international community including the United Nations. He also said his government would try through consultations with the organizations concerned to move a statue of a girl, which stands as a symbol of comfort women in front of the Japanese Embassy in Seoul.

The Japanese press also reported that the contribution of 1 billion yen was a price for the agreement that South Korea would remove the statue. With the report angering many critics, both governments said there was no such agreement. The statue was built with funds raised privately and the Seoul government had no role in it. It would be unlikely that the government can relocate it against the adamant opposition of victims and their supporters.

Opposition party leader Moon Jae-in proposed that the deal should be renegotiated and that South Korea should reject the Japanese financial offer and start a fund- raising campaign for $10 million to support the comfort women. Moon is promoting a legislative resolution calling for the dismissal of Foreign Minister Yun.

President Park Geun-hye’s office defends the accord as the best it could have achieved, saying that if the accord was not accepted, there would be no chance to resolve the 50-year-old issue during the lifetime of the aging victims, who say Japan wants to see them all die.

The Korean press is generally skeptical of the government’s deal, and some of them, including The Korea Times, are calling for the president to meet directly with the victims and seek their understanding and cooperation. Cautious of the hurt feelings of the victims, Park does not say much about a likely meeting with Abe expected to be the next step of restoring relations with Japan.

Washington immediately welcomed the breakthrough to the thorny issue between the two of its allies in the face of an increasingly rising China and a continuing North Korean nuclear and missile program. U.S. officials have often expressed concerns about the diplomatic strains between Seoul and Tokyo.

Meanwhile, Beijing suspects the accord was reached under American pressure, to exploit Japan’s vulnerabilities with regard to atrocities committed by Tokyo’s imperial troops during the war. North Korea has made similar claims against Japan. Due to the issue of abductees, there was no progress in normalization talks between Pyongyang and Tokyo. As long as North Korea exists, it will never give up its claims until resolved.

Abe is wrong if he thinks the latest accord will end the disputes over Japan’s shameful past. What’s your take?

Tong Kim is a Washington correspondent and

columnist for The Korea Times. He is also a fellow

at the Institute of Korean-American Studies.