Overcoming postwar mind-set

Satoshi Ikeuchi Special to The Yomiuri Shimbun

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe will make a two-day visit to the United States from Thursday, where he will meet with U.S. President George W. Bush. Disturbing arguments that have arisen over one particular issue prior to his visit threaten to unravel his attempt to create a favorable atmosphere on his visit.

The issue was ignited by a resolution submitted to the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee in late January. The proposed resolution denounced the Japanese government's handling of the so-called comfort women during World War II, and called for the government to issue a formal apology over the matter. Abe's comments to reporters about the resolution only stoked the debate.

It is undesirable that the dispute over the comfort women is drawing so much public attention as the prime minister prepares for his talks with Bush. But it also is true that this issue will be a test for Japan's diplomacy. Abe will be tested over whether he can express in his words and deeds that Japan, in principle, shares common values and moral standards with the United States.

From the viewpoint and moral standards of contemporary Japanese society, it is unacceptable, inconceivable and shameful that a number of brothels were run by private operators wherever Imperial Japanese Army troops were stationed, and that the military, government authorities and individual soldiers took them for granted. Lured by promises of good pay, many women from poor families in Japan, its colonies and occupied territories applied to provide services at those facilities, but later found themselves being violently treated and staying under wretched circumstances. There were many women who lost whatever they had and were driven to endure great hardships with Japan's defeat and the confusion that followed the collapse of Japan as an empire.

But claiming that several hundred thousand people were forcibly taken and coerced to prostitute themselves against their will is a far cry from reality. As for the unfamiliar concept of the "sex slave" system, this probably is a sensational analogy derived from slave systems throughout Western history. However, U.S. lawmakers and media treat the seemingly fallacious argument as if it were based on unshakable facts and denounce any remarks which attempt to redress it as a denial of the facts.

Even though the forcible recruitment of women was not systematically implemented, the government should acknowledge its moral responsibility if any single woman victimized by the private operators through fraud, exploitation, violence or other acts of intimidation comes forward to tell her story. The government should do so because the military gave consent to set up brothels for soldiers and had responsibility for overseeing them.

However, the Japanese government has already taken this position. It has apologized and worked to ensure compensation was paid to those women. Even so, U.S. lawmakers are still calling for an apology, and U.S. media have poured scorn on Japan for "denying historical facts."

Intellectual cut and thrust

What seems difficult for outside observers to recognize is the fact that the issue of comfort women not only arises from Japan's wartime past, but from its postwar intellectual history as well. Postwar Japanese intellectuals gave credence to the claims that several hundred thousand women were forcibly recruited under the "sex slave" system, despite the fact that systems to manage prostitution near the battlefront were common in other countries as well, including the system to serve the U.S. Occupation forces in Japan.

In the discursive arena in postwar Japan, self-described "intellectuals" were obsessed with verifying what they saw as the peculiar backwardness and inferiority of the Japanese people, culture and society as a whole. In doing so, they were desperately seeking recognition from "advanced Western nations" or "morally superior Asian people" securing in return their superiority to "ordinary Japanese." It was often presented as an ethical duty to reject any sense of self-esteem as a Japanese, not to mention nationalist sentiments. This was too great a burden on the Japanese as a defeated nation. It is tempting to call it one of the longest sustained sanctions in history, long ago self-imposed.

In this context, the issue of the so-called comfort women was invested with extreme importance as the epitome of Japanese sin from the viewpoint of some and became the focal point of contention, The excessive effort by leftists and liberals in politicizing this issue as one of the few means left to shake conservative dominance, by extending the notion of coercion to the extreme, resulted in alienating a large part of the nation. Their open intention to collude with rising tides of hostile nationalism in Korea and China also hardened the minds of many in Japan. Abe's successful advance in political circles can partly be attributed to his frank, almost contemptuous denouncements of the unusual atmosphere that prevailed in the postwar intellectual arena.

But it must be recognized that Japanese society before and during World War II embraced issues involving human rights and freedom that most Japanese today would never condone. It is also true that the postwar arguments of excessive self-defamation, which in retrospect could be regarded as a sociopathological phenomenon, played a role in negating value, political and social systems of the past, while promoting human rights, disseminating liberal norms and helping democracy take root in postwar Japan. The "departure from the postwar regime" Abe has called for has been long awaited in certain sectors of society. But it also has stirred anxiety that even well-established respect for such values as freedom and human rights--which were nurtured mostly in the postwar period--would be denied.

Abe is quite clear when he points out the distorted dogmas of leftists and liberals that were dominant in postwar thinking. But he becomes ambiguous when he talks about his own conservatism. As the leader of the nation, he should not merely make counterarguments, but rather proactively speak about and represent the values and ideas that are reflected in various aspects of contemporary Japanese society. Central to those values and ideas are concepts of human rights and freedom that are not far from what the U.S. Congress refers to.

I hope Abe takes the opportunity of his visit to the United States to clarify his position. On such an occasion, it would only invite misunderstanding if he became preoccupied with the background behind the contorted arguments and grudges seen in Japan.

Except for a handful of people, even foreign correspondents of major U.S. media organizations in Japan, who are supposed to work as catalysts between Japanese and U.S. public opinion, and U.S. policymakers and analysts known to be well versed in Japanese affairs, have only an elementary command of the Japanese language. They almost exclusively refer to claims by a couple of leftist historians and jump to a verdict of guilty, without taking into consideration a wide range of sources and materials found and debates made by historians from various points along the political spectrum.

Regrettably, this reality cannot be easily changed. As long as freedom of speech is guaranteed in Japan, domestic and foreign forces aiming to bring down the Abe administration should be allowed to selectively choose Abe's remarks and publicize those that will induce criticism overseas.

If the prime minister could show off his ability to persuasively demonstrate values and ideas that Japan and the United States share by putting aside the disadvantages he faces, a "departure from the postwar regime" would certainly be a few steps closer.

Ikeuchi is associate professor at International Research Center for Japanese Studies.