Comfort women statue still a sticking point in S. Korea-Japan agreement

Posted on : 2016-04-28 16:21 KST Modified on : 2019-10-19 20:29 KST
Two sides have divergent views on how to deal with statue, as they move to implement agreement reached on Dec. 28
Minjoo Party of Korea lawmaker Hong Ik-pyo bows to former comfort women while conveying an apology from party leader Kim Jong-in
Minjoo Party of Korea lawmaker Hong Ik-pyo bows to former comfort women while conveying an apology from party leader Kim Jong-in

The governments of South Korea and Japan are at loggerheads about whether the agreement they reached on the comfort women on Dec. 28 of last year addresses the question of removing the statue symbolizing the comfort women from in front of the Japanese embassy in Seoul.

On Apr. 27, Tokyo expressed the official position that the removal of the statue is implied in the agreement. Considering that this directly contradicts remarks President Park Geun-hye made during a luncheon the previous day with newspaper editors-in-chief and newsroom directors that “the removal of the statue was not really even mentioned in the agreement,” it is likely to have considerable ramifications in the future for implementing the agreement and for Japan-South Korea relations. An unexpected obstacle has appeared to block the path of the two governments, which had been planning to speed up implementation of the agreement by establishing a foundation to aid the former comfort women sometime during the first half of the year.

The issue was brought up by Japan’s Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Koichi Haguida, a close associate of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, in response to a question about Park’s comments during the regular press briefing on Wednesday.

“If you’re asking whether this [removing the statue] was a prerequisite for the agreement, we haven’t confirmed all of those details,” Haguida said. “Considering that the larger significance of this agreement is resolving this issue finally and irreversibly and building a new relationship with South Korea instead of kicking this issue on to the next generation, I think this [the removal] is one of those details and that it is included here.”

Hagiuda‘s response implies that the removal of the statue was included in the Dec. 28 agreement and that this issue is effectively a prerequisite for moving forward with implementing the agreement.

Since Haguida was standing in for Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga, the Japanese government’s spokesperson, the Wednesday briefing can be regarded as an event at which the Japanese government expressed its official position.

The South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not make any official response to this during the regular briefing by its spokesperson or in a statement.

“As we have stated repeatedly, since the statue in front of the Japanese Embassy was voluntary erected by the private sector, there is nothing that the government can do about it,” a senior Ministry official said.

This is not the first time that the South Korean and Japanese governments’ views on this issue have diverged so dramatically. Immediately after the agreement was reached, the question of whether the statue would be removed emerged as a key point of dispute in the debate over how to interpret the agreement. In press conferences, Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida repeatedly expressed his understanding that the statue would be relocated.

This not only reflects the ambiguity of the relevant section of the agreement but also demonstrates the fragility of the agreement itself. The language that the two governments agreed upon contains diplomatic ambiguity that can be interpreted in various ways.

The relevant section of the agreement is as follows: “The Government of the ROK acknowledges the fact that the Government of Japan is concerned about the statue built in front of the Embassy of Japan in Seoul from the viewpoint of preventing any disturbance of the peace of the mission or impairment of its dignity, and will strive to solve this issue in an appropriate manner through taking measures such as consulting with related organizations about possible ways of addressing this issue.”

After the controversy, the South Korean and Japanese Foreign Ministries came to a tacit understanding to go no further than acknowledging that the removal of the statue is an issue affecting the two countries’ relations, and for some time, the issue was not addressed publicly.

But after Park categorically said that “the removal of the statue was not really even mentioned in the agreement,” the Japanese government appears to have openly objected to this statement despite the diplomatic risk, out of fear of a backlash from Japanese conservatives.

Despite this, the Japanese Foreign Ministry did its best to minimize the diplomatic fallout of Hagiuda‘s remarks, complaining to the South Korean press on Wednesday night that the remarks were being misrepresented in media reports.

At any rate, this dispute has revealed with relative clarity the true feelings of the South Korean and Japanese governments about the issue of the Dec. 28 agreement and the removal of the statue. To sum up, Seoul wants to implement the agreement and keep the statue, while Japan wants to implement the agreement and remove the statue. Meanwhile, South Korean civic groups including the Korean Council for the Women Drafted for Military Sexual Slavery by Japan (Jeongdaehyeop) are opposed to removing the statue and want the agreement to be nullified.

By Gil Yun-hyung, Tokyo correspondent

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]

 

button that move to original korean article (클릭시 원문으로 이동하는 버튼)

Related stories

Most viewed articles