Before the ripples of "comfort women" get pacified, an once-a-year revision of history textbooks in Japan aroused another outcry for "reveal the truth" in countries like China, South Korea, other Asian countries, Europe and North America.
On the 1st April New York Times publshed an article by Mr. Norimitsu Onishi titled as "Japan's Textbooks Reflect Revised History" (link as follows). In this article, Mr. Onishi pointed out that by revising the history textbooks Japanese government does not only try to deny its military atrocity in other Asian countries, but also seek to find scapegoats (i.e. American army) for the cruel and immoral conducts of Japanese soldiers on their own soil - Okinawa.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/world/asia/01japan.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin
To pave the way for re-establishment of military force, the Abe led government is prepared to go as far as it can to deny since long established historical facts, regardless the Kono statement in 1993 and written records on/related WWII history by Japanese politicians (such as autobiography of ex-prime minister Nakasone) and prominent historians.
From a personal point of view, I'm currently living in Japan and I have good Japanese friends, appreciate Japanese culture/life philosophy and respect Japanese people. However, I cannot agree with the current Japanese policy and feel very disappointed with Japanese political leaders.
I believe that a country unable to face its past cannot find its way into the future. A nation without courrage to repent for the crimes commited by its ancestors will not earn respect from other peoples. It is true that the past should not be a burden for the living ones, and yet the strength of a people only comes from the understanding of its own history, but not the denial...
More readings:
http://chineseinvancouver.blogspot.com/2007/03/another-denial-japan-changes-textbook.html
❤❤❤ 搬家公告 ❤❤❤
8 years ago
by Email
3 comments:
BACKGROUND OF 'COMFORT WOMEN' ISSUE / Kono's statement on 'comfort women' created misunderstanding
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/20070402dy01.htm
I'm glad to see a comment on this article, no matter it stands pro or against the original one. It shows that people do care and do ponder over the issues involved.
After reading the provided article in Yomiuri, I'd like to point out the following for everyone to reflect:
1. The current Japanese government argues the "comfort women" were not recruited under "forceful recruitment". My questions are:
- Was it MORALLY CORRECT for Japanese military to find a justification for recruiting women into army brothels at first place regardless out of force or not?
- If army brothels were considered as necessary for Japanese soldiers' "well-being", why not recruit Japanese womem, who would definitely understand Japanese guys better than Korean or Chinese speaking foreign laguages etc.
- Let's imagine how it was like during the WWII. Japanese armies invaded Asian countries and occupies their territories. Under such a circumstances, would women in occupied countries have freedom to refuse something they were unwilling to do?
2. In the comfort women case (war crime), many proofs or historical documents must have been destroyed at the end of the war so that people involved would not be blamed or trialed for their crimes. Therefore, it is indeed difficult to reconstruct the history itself with hard evidence. In this case, why cann't we take the testimony from those women who have lived the experience of "comfort women" as living historical document? You might want to argue that those women could "lie", but can all those who have come forward from different countries lie about this embarassing experience? It's like taking the witness stand in a rape trial. The whole process does a huge damage on women to the extent that men can seldom understand.
3. Kono Statement was issued in 1993. According to the article in Yomiuri, the statement was made under international pressure, but not based on historical research and studies.
I personally find it hard to believe. For it suggests that Japanese government then LIED
about its own history so as to please the international society. A politician might lie for his political career, but what can take a GOVERNMENT to lie COLLECTIVELY must be at a huge stake. It's about the credibility of a country.
If that was the case, I suggest that we might just want to be more reserved & cautious about any statement made by Japanese government. For it might just a convenient LIE to serve government's political agenda.
Post a Comment