[Interview] University of Connecticut professor praises SK Foreign Ministry Task Force efforts on comfort women agreement

Posted on : 2018-01-03 17:26 KST Modified on : 2019-10-19 20:29 KST
Alexis Dudden calls the report “a balanced and thoughtful” contribution
Alexis Dudden
Alexis Dudden

Alexis Dudden is a professor in the Department of History at the College of Liberal Arts & Sciences at the University of Connecticut. Her areas of specialty include modern Korea and Japan, and in 2015 was one of the leaders of a group of scholars who criticized the government of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe for attempting to distort Japan’s history in World War II. Dudden holds a PhD from the University of Chicago and is currently writing a book about Japan’s territorial disputes and the changing meaning of islands in international law.

A leading advocate for international acknowledgment of the historic indignities suffered by comfort women, Dudden was interviewed by e-mail with the Hankyoreh on Dec. 27, following the release of a South Korean Foreign Ministry task force’s report on the December 2015 agreement between the Park Geun-hye administration and the government of Shinzo Abe.

Hanyoreh (Hani): What do you make of the findings and conclusions of the Task Force (TF) report?

Dudden: The Task Force clearly researched whatever available materials they could find to come to the only possible: the survivors were not part of the process. In this regard, the Task Force's report is a balanced and thoughtful contribution to the broader effort to dignify the lives of those who suffered many, many years ago.

Hani: What do you think about the so-called “secret” agreements, or “insufficient victims-centered approach” pointed by TF report?

Dudden: To learn that increasingly higher level meetings determined to handle the issue without the input of victims and their advocates — let alone historians such as Yoshimi Yoshiaki who are most familiar with the Japanese documentary record concerning this era — makes clear that those involved in the "secret negotiations" approached this history without the empathy necessary to make any lasting progress.

In this light, it is truly significant that the Moon administration is confronting these "secret" dealings as an aspect of Korean society. Put differently, when listening to Foreign Minister Kang [Kyung-wha]’s press conference, she is not blaming Japan; rather, she is looking inward—inside Korea—and, in her words, she is "humbly" approaching the problem that some South Koreans did not act in the best interests of their people.

This is not unique in Korean modern history: we have 1905, 1907, 1910, and 1965 among other "secret agreements" with Japan. What is new is the Moon administration's determination to take responsibility for the issue on behalf of Korea in a way that benefits the surviving victims but also hopefully victims of this same history in other countries under Japanese rule and occupation where others suffered as well.

Impacts beyond historical disputes with Japan

Hani: There is expected to be criticism of the TF report on the grounds that it could make other countries more reluctant to negotiate with South Korea. Is this a valid concern?

Dudden: Now is probably the most important time in South Korea's history for other countries to include Seoul in their regional diplomatic strategies. In simplest terms, without including South Korea today as an equal at the negotiating table, there is no chance for a lasting and peaceful solution to the North Korean missile and nuclear conundrum.

Hani: The Moon government will now be caught between opposing public views favoring renegotiating the agreement and implementing it to maintain good relations with Japan. What steps should the Korean government take to resolve the comfort women issue?

Dudden: Indeed, this is difficult for the Moon administration especially because the Abe administration is so dismissive of the victims' legitimate pain. I am not a policy maker, so I really don’t know what to suggest, but several things occur to me: The first is that South Korea could send 10 million US dollars to Japan to get rid of the "money problem" in all of this; this money could be used to create a fund in Japan to educate Japanese about the history of the victims of this terrible system; alternatively, South Korea could simply send the money as a "refund" to make clear that the victims are not interested in the money as so many of their detractors claim.

The second is that South Korea can continue to do what Foreign Minister Kang did and make clear that it appreciates that the Japanese government acknowledged that this history happened - as it did in the December 2015 accord - but that any debate over statues is non-negotiable because these peace statues dignify the lives robbed from so many victims and also make clear that collectively we must work to end future instances of targeted wartime violence against young women, girls and boys.

Third, South Korea can continue to expand its discussion of this history at once by focusing on Korean victims but also working together with advocates of other victimized countries including Japan, Taiwan, China, Indonesia, the Philippines, Guam, Saipan, and so on.

Hani: How likely is the Japanese government to respond through actions such as Prime Minister Abe’s refusal to attend the Pyeongchang Winter Olympics?

Dudden: I truly hope that Prime Minister Abe and Foreign Minister Kono attend the Olympics. Any discussion that they are "too busy" demeans the good that Japan and Japanese offer the world.

Responsibility shifts back to Japanese government

Hani: Will the findings and open release of the TF report make Korea-Japan relations worse in the future? In other words, will the comfort women issue remain a big obstacle in Korea-Japan relations?

Dudden: Seoul has done the right thing for Koreans and for other victims of this history by examining a process that yielded such poor results for the surviving victims. Now, it is Japan's responsibility to accept that the victims of this historical crime must be dignified by the state recognition that their suffering deserves.

The reason that so many advocates focus on the "state" aspect of this problem is that there are some crimes that are so massive and so grievously perpetrated that only a state apparatus can accomplish them. This history is one of them, and so to overcome this past the Japanese state needs to do what other nations have done to acknowledge state-perpetrated crimes (this includes the US with Japanese-American incarceration and England with Kenyan victims of the Mau-Mau uprising among others). If Japan can do this - which is possible even if highly unlikely under the current history denying administration - then Tokyo can steer an integrated and prosperous future for the region.

Hani: What position should the United States take regarding the TF report and the next steps of the South Korean government?

Dudden: The United States should recognize that Seoul has done the right thing, and should continue to emphasize the importance of dignifying the victims of historical sexual slavery. Doing so integrates the region at a time that Washington needs its allies to work together, not fall further apart.

Hani: Any further comments?

Dudden: As a historian, it is interesting to learn that a small number of corrupt officials in both Seoul and Tokyo continue to believe that they can work above or outside the law. This happened for so long so many years ago, but the times have changed. Koreans and Japanese want - and deserve - accountable representation. Too much is at stake to hide behind old habits.

By Yi Yong-in, Washington 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