Speaker's proposal raises doubts

Speaker's proposal contains some serious faults

Protesters against Moon Hee-sang proposal Yonhap

By Do Je-hae

The prolonged Korea-Japan standoff is starting to cool after Cheong Wa Dae decided to delay its ending of a military-intelligence sharing pact with Japan.

There has been some residual tit-for-tat between the two after Korea's surprise decision on the temporary maintenance of the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA). But the Moon administration is being cautious, not wanting to disrupt resuming negotiations with Japan, according to a senior diplomatic source. Both countries see the need to place priority on enabling a summit between President Moon Jae-in and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe later this month.

To significantly improve bilateral ties, however, it would be necessary for both sides to come to some level of compromise on the wartime forced labor row ―- a key point of contention. Japan has consistently called on Korea to bring a resolution to the two countries' differences on the 2018 Supreme Court rulings on compensation for Korean victims of forced labor during the 1910-1945 Japanese colonial rule. In October 2018, Korea's highest court ruled that Japanese firms must compensate victims of forced labor. Tokyo has objected to the ruling, stating that the 1965 Korea-Japan normalization treaty settled all matters related to claims concerning the colonial era.

There has been increasing media focus on a compromise package proposed by National Assembly Speaker Moon Hee-sang, which he made public in a lecture at Waseda University in Tokyo last month. This is aimed at compensating the victims through a fund created by both Korean and Japanese firms as well as donations from companies from both countries and the public. Moon is planning to propose a bill possibly as early as the second week of this month.

But there are some glaring problems with the bill. First, it lacks domestic support. Cheong Wa Dae has distanced itself from the proposal, saying the government was not consulted about it. The Moon Jae-in administration had, in June, proposed that Korean and Japanese firms create a fund to pay the compensation, something rejected by the Japanese government. “What is most important is that we need to hear the positions of the victims and we are maintaining contact with them. The speaker's proposal was not coordinated with the government,” a presidential aide said.

There is also opposition from civic groups representing the victims. Last week, representatives from some delivered a letter of protest to the Assembly, saying the proposal goes against the 2018 rulings which underlined the legal responsibility of the Japanese firms for compensation and showed a disregard for the “dignity” of the victims. “According to the Speaker's proposal, the Japanese firms are to voluntarily collect donations, and then add money from Korean firms and the public. That is not at all in adherence to the Supreme Court rulings,” said Lim Jae-sung, a lawyer who has been dealing with the case, during a press conference in front of the National Assembly, Nov. 27.

One of the aspects that has fueled anger among victims is that it lacks respect for their positions. In particular, Moon's plan originally contained the inclusion of money left over from the foundation for victims of sexual slavery during World War II, which was dissolved after the Moon administration decided to close it.

The question of upholding the dignity of the victims has been underlined by some international experts as a key priority in addressing grievances by colonial victims.

“To be honest, more important that appeasing and satisfying the Japanese and Korean public, everyone needs to listen to the victims while they are still alive. There may never be able to be a true resolution to these issues. Their voices need to be part of the history,” said Alexis Dudden, a professor of history at the University of Connecticut. “With all these issue, only a broader education can truly help by making clear that these peoples' lives mattered. In other words ― and similar to victims of state-sponsored atrocities around the world ― those who suffered want their suffering to be dignified through inclusion in the historical record not erasure in an agreement that declares matters settled.”

Last but not least, the proposal's effectiveness in narrowing differences with Tokyo is in question. Tokyo remains unchanged in its position that it has no responsibility in the forced labor compensation. The Japanese government has blocked the firms from any contact with the victims, making a compromise deal all the more difficult.