The Media's Role in the Comfort Women Issue
NISHIKAWA Megumi / Journalist
October 13, 2014
Once a year, scholars, politicians and journalists from Japan and South Korea meet for a candid exchange of views on bilateral relations and other issues at the Korea-Japan Forum, which was held in Fukuoka this year for three days in August. This year's Forum was the 22nd of such meetings. I attended the Forum as a member and found it to be a valuable opportunity for non-government dialogue at a time when the relationship between Japan and South Korea is at its nadir.
Why had the relationship deteriorated to such levels? Former politicians and bureaucrats who were responsible for shaping past policy in Japan and South Korea provided a backstage account based on their respective positions. One said the best of intentions had gone unappreciated by the other side, while another spoke of messages expressing displeasure that the other side never understood. As I listened to their comments, I couldn't help thinking that in addition to the missed opportunities and exaggerated mutual expectations, the lack of sensible political leaders on either side had only made matters worse between the two countries.
The role of the media was another topic of discussion. I pointed out that the media had played no small part in precipitating the current situation, and presented the issue of comfort women as an example.
The comfort women issue came to the fore in the early 1990s. In response, the government of Prime Minister Murayama Tomiichi decided to set up an Asian Women's Fund in 1995 to undertake an "Atonement Project." The project included seeking donations from the Japanese people to compensate former comfort women, providing government-funded medical and welfare support for these women, and delivering a letter of apology from the Japanese prime minister.
However, the media reacted in harsh unison, pouring criticism on the government and the Fund. They reasoned that it was the government's job to provide compensation, that to seek donations from the public was to shift attention away from the issue, and accused the government of using the Fund as a cover to elude responsibility.
At the time, I was merely following the headlines. It was several years later, when I was researching the imperial couple's visit to the Netherlands in 2000, that I began my investigations into the Atonement Project.
During World War II when the Japanese army occupied Indonesia - which was a Dutch colony at the time, 130,000 Dutch civilians and POWs were sent to concentration camps and about 200 Dutch women were forced to serve as comfort women. When the Fund was first established, the Atonement Project was intended for three countries and one region – South Korea, the Philippines, Indonesia and Taiwan. However, at the strong urging of the Japanese Ambassador to the Netherlands, the government incorporated the Netherlands into the project in 1998.
Until then, the media had only highlighted the fierce campaigns waged against the Fund by citizens' groups in South Korea. Only through my own investigations did I learn about the many aspects of the issue that had gone unreported. In the Netherlands, 79 surviving women were recognized as former comfort women, of which 77 received compensation from the Fund, which also extended three million yen in medical and welfare support. Only two had rejected the offer. The Fund was also relatively successful in its operations in the Philippines, Taiwan and Indonesia.
In the comfort women issue, the media had been at fault for letting itself be swayed by hardline citizens' groups and non-government organizations (NGOs) demanding unqualified compensation from the Japanese government. It led to biased reporting that was at once argumentative and emotional. The voice of citizens' groups must surely be heard. Yet, the media had stopped at criticizing the government and the Fund, and neglected to report on what the Fund meant for the former comfort women, how the Atonement Project was actually being carried out, and how the women themselves felt about such "atonement."
Onuma Yasuaki, a scholar of international law who was involved in the Asian Women's Fund from its inception to dissolution in 2007, has pointed out that many media organizations and NGOs opted to act only within their traditional role of criticizing government policy, thus avoiding the political responsibility of pursuing maximum results based on limited political resources and options.
Negative reports by the Japanese media regarding the government and the Fund were amplified by the South Korean media, fanning mistrust of Japan among the Korean people. Throughout the controversy, any sense of atonement felt by the Japanese people seldom got through.
Reports on the Fund and its Atonement Project began appearing in Japan during the first administration of Prime Minister Abe Shinzo, around the time the U.S. Congress passed a resolution in July 2007 demanding an apology from the Japanese government to former comfort women. It was reported in the context of: "Japan has done what it can through the Asian Women's Fund." We should recognize the fact that because of the Fund, we were spared from being criticized by the international community for doing nothing to address the issue.
Hadn't the media acted more like a demagogue, instead of seeking and proposing a solution to the issue? We must reconsider the role played by the Japanese media in aggravating the issue of comfort women. And the same applies to the Korean media. Instead of conveying the true wishes of the elderly former comfort women, it focused on the uncompromising campaigns led by citizens' groups and criticized the women who had accepted compensation from the Fund, thus isolating them from society. Why was the Fund's Atonement Project effective in other countries and regions including the Netherlands and the Philippines, and fail only in South Korea? The Korean media, too, has some soul searching to do on this point.
Megumi Nishikawa is contributing editor of Mainichi Shimbun newspaper.
Why had the relationship deteriorated to such levels? Former politicians and bureaucrats who were responsible for shaping past policy in Japan and South Korea provided a backstage account based on their respective positions. One said the best of intentions had gone unappreciated by the other side, while another spoke of messages expressing displeasure that the other side never understood. As I listened to their comments, I couldn't help thinking that in addition to the missed opportunities and exaggerated mutual expectations, the lack of sensible political leaders on either side had only made matters worse between the two countries.
The role of the media was another topic of discussion. I pointed out that the media had played no small part in precipitating the current situation, and presented the issue of comfort women as an example.
The comfort women issue came to the fore in the early 1990s. In response, the government of Prime Minister Murayama Tomiichi decided to set up an Asian Women's Fund in 1995 to undertake an "Atonement Project." The project included seeking donations from the Japanese people to compensate former comfort women, providing government-funded medical and welfare support for these women, and delivering a letter of apology from the Japanese prime minister.
However, the media reacted in harsh unison, pouring criticism on the government and the Fund. They reasoned that it was the government's job to provide compensation, that to seek donations from the public was to shift attention away from the issue, and accused the government of using the Fund as a cover to elude responsibility.
At the time, I was merely following the headlines. It was several years later, when I was researching the imperial couple's visit to the Netherlands in 2000, that I began my investigations into the Atonement Project.
During World War II when the Japanese army occupied Indonesia - which was a Dutch colony at the time, 130,000 Dutch civilians and POWs were sent to concentration camps and about 200 Dutch women were forced to serve as comfort women. When the Fund was first established, the Atonement Project was intended for three countries and one region – South Korea, the Philippines, Indonesia and Taiwan. However, at the strong urging of the Japanese Ambassador to the Netherlands, the government incorporated the Netherlands into the project in 1998.
Until then, the media had only highlighted the fierce campaigns waged against the Fund by citizens' groups in South Korea. Only through my own investigations did I learn about the many aspects of the issue that had gone unreported. In the Netherlands, 79 surviving women were recognized as former comfort women, of which 77 received compensation from the Fund, which also extended three million yen in medical and welfare support. Only two had rejected the offer. The Fund was also relatively successful in its operations in the Philippines, Taiwan and Indonesia.
In the comfort women issue, the media had been at fault for letting itself be swayed by hardline citizens' groups and non-government organizations (NGOs) demanding unqualified compensation from the Japanese government. It led to biased reporting that was at once argumentative and emotional. The voice of citizens' groups must surely be heard. Yet, the media had stopped at criticizing the government and the Fund, and neglected to report on what the Fund meant for the former comfort women, how the Atonement Project was actually being carried out, and how the women themselves felt about such "atonement."
Onuma Yasuaki, a scholar of international law who was involved in the Asian Women's Fund from its inception to dissolution in 2007, has pointed out that many media organizations and NGOs opted to act only within their traditional role of criticizing government policy, thus avoiding the political responsibility of pursuing maximum results based on limited political resources and options.
Negative reports by the Japanese media regarding the government and the Fund were amplified by the South Korean media, fanning mistrust of Japan among the Korean people. Throughout the controversy, any sense of atonement felt by the Japanese people seldom got through.
Reports on the Fund and its Atonement Project began appearing in Japan during the first administration of Prime Minister Abe Shinzo, around the time the U.S. Congress passed a resolution in July 2007 demanding an apology from the Japanese government to former comfort women. It was reported in the context of: "Japan has done what it can through the Asian Women's Fund." We should recognize the fact that because of the Fund, we were spared from being criticized by the international community for doing nothing to address the issue.
Hadn't the media acted more like a demagogue, instead of seeking and proposing a solution to the issue? We must reconsider the role played by the Japanese media in aggravating the issue of comfort women. And the same applies to the Korean media. Instead of conveying the true wishes of the elderly former comfort women, it focused on the uncompromising campaigns led by citizens' groups and criticized the women who had accepted compensation from the Fund, thus isolating them from society. Why was the Fund's Atonement Project effective in other countries and regions including the Netherlands and the Philippines, and fail only in South Korea? The Korean media, too, has some soul searching to do on this point.
Megumi Nishikawa is contributing editor of Mainichi Shimbun newspaper.
The English-Speaking Union of Japan
慰安婦問題とメディアの責任
西川 恵 / ジャーナリスト
2014年 10月 13日
日韓の学者、政治家、ジャーナリストらが年１回、両国関係などについて率直に意見を交換する日韓フォーラムが８月、３日間の日程で福岡で開かれた。今年で22回目。私もメンバーとして出席したが、日韓関係が最低レベルに落ち込んでいる中で、フォーラムは貴重な民間対話の場である。
日韓関係はなぜここまで落ち込んだのか。日韓の政策決定にかかわった両国の元政治家や元官僚が、それぞれの立場から当時の内情を明かした。良かれと思ってやったことが相手に正当に評価されなかった、こちらの不満を伝えていたのに相手は理解しなかった…。発言を聞きながら、すれ違いと相手への過剰期待に加え、賢明な政治指導者の不在が両国関係を悪化させたとの感を禁じ得なかった。
メディアの責任も俎上に上った。私は「メディアの責任も小さくない」と慰安婦問題のケースを取り上げた。
慰安婦問題が表面化したのは１９９０年代初め。これを受け、95年、村山政権は「アジア女性基金」を立ち上げ、「償い事業」を行うことを決めた。その内容は次のようなものだった。
一、国民から寄付を募り、慰安婦の人たちに「償い金」を支給する
一、政府拠出金で「医療・福祉支援」を行う
一、日本首相のお詫びの手紙を渡す
しかしメディアは一様に厳しい批判を政府と基金に浴びせた。「償いは政府がやるべきで、国民からの募金は問題のすりかえ」「基金は政府の責任回避のための隠れ蓑」というのがその理由だった。
当時、私は報道を横目で見るだけだった。しかし数年後、天皇、皇后両陛下のオランダ訪問（２０００年）を調べるなかで、基金の「償い事業」を取材するようになった。
第二次大戦中、日本軍がオランダ植民地のインドネシアを占領していた際、13万人のオランダ民間人や戦争捕虜が強制収容所に入れられ、約２００人のオランダ女性が慰安婦にされた。基金の設立当初、「償い事業」の対象は韓国、フィリピン、インドネシア、台湾の３国１地域だった。しかし駐蘭日本大使からの強い要請で、日本政府は98年からオランダも事業対象に組み込んだ。
それまで慰安婦問題というと基金に反対する韓国市民団体の激しい運動だけがメディアでクローズアップされていたで、取材する中で報じられてないことが多々あることを私は知った。オランダでは生存していた79人が元慰安婦と認定され、77人が基金から償い金を受け取り、３００万円の医療・福祉支援が行われていた。拒否したのは２人だけだった。フィリピン、台湾、インドネシアでも基金の事業はそれなりの成功を収めていた。
慰安婦問題でのメディアの責任は、日本政府の全面的な国家補償を求める強硬な市民団体やＮＧＯ（非政府組織）の主張に引っ張られ、理念的、情緒的な報道に偏ったことだ。市民団体の声を伝えることは必要である。しかしメディアは政府と基金を批判することでよしとし、基金の事業が元慰安婦にとってどういう意味をもつのかや、実際の「償い事業」がどのように行われ、元慰安婦がどのように「償い」を受け止めたかを伝えるのを怠った。
設立から解散（07年）までアジア女性基金にかかわった国際法学者の大沼保昭氏は「多くのメディアとＮＧＯは、政府の政策を批判するという伝統的な役割をはたすにとどまり、限られた政治資源と選択肢のもとで最大限なしうることを追求するという政治の責任を引き受けることを回避した」と指摘する。
政府と基金に対する日本のメディアの否定的な報道を韓国メディアが輪をかける形で伝え、韓国で対日不信が膨れ上がるなか、日本国民の償いの気持ちはほとんど伝わらないままで終わった。
日本で基金の「償い事業」が報道されるようになったのは、第一次安倍政権下の07年７月、米下院で慰安婦に対する日本政府の謝罪を求める決議が採択された前後、「日本はアジア女性基金でそれなりのことはやってきた」との脈絡で語られるようになってからだ。実際、基金があったことで「日本は何もしていない」との国際社会からの非難を免れていることを我々は認識するべきだろう。
メディアは問題の解決を探り、提言することをせず、煽る側に回っていたのではないか。慰安婦問題がこじれた一因にメディアの責任を考える必要がある。これは韓国のメディアも同様である。高齢の元慰安婦が何を本当に望んでいるかでなく、強硬な市民団体の運動のみを伝え、女性基金の償い金を受け取った元慰安婦をと批判し、社会的に孤立させた。女性基金の「償い事業」がオランダ、フィリピンなど他の国・地域ではうまくいって、なぜ韓国だけダメだったのか。韓国のメディアは考える必要がある。
（筆者は毎日新聞客員編集委員）
日韓関係はなぜここまで落ち込んだのか。日韓の政策決定にかかわった両国の元政治家や元官僚が、それぞれの立場から当時の内情を明かした。良かれと思ってやったことが相手に正当に評価されなかった、こちらの不満を伝えていたのに相手は理解しなかった…。発言を聞きながら、すれ違いと相手への過剰期待に加え、賢明な政治指導者の不在が両国関係を悪化させたとの感を禁じ得なかった。
メディアの責任も俎上に上った。私は「メディアの責任も小さくない」と慰安婦問題のケースを取り上げた。
慰安婦問題が表面化したのは１９９０年代初め。これを受け、95年、村山政権は「アジア女性基金」を立ち上げ、「償い事業」を行うことを決めた。その内容は次のようなものだった。
一、国民から寄付を募り、慰安婦の人たちに「償い金」を支給する
一、政府拠出金で「医療・福祉支援」を行う
一、日本首相のお詫びの手紙を渡す
しかしメディアは一様に厳しい批判を政府と基金に浴びせた。「償いは政府がやるべきで、国民からの募金は問題のすりかえ」「基金は政府の責任回避のための隠れ蓑」というのがその理由だった。
当時、私は報道を横目で見るだけだった。しかし数年後、天皇、皇后両陛下のオランダ訪問（２０００年）を調べるなかで、基金の「償い事業」を取材するようになった。
第二次大戦中、日本軍がオランダ植民地のインドネシアを占領していた際、13万人のオランダ民間人や戦争捕虜が強制収容所に入れられ、約２００人のオランダ女性が慰安婦にされた。基金の設立当初、「償い事業」の対象は韓国、フィリピン、インドネシア、台湾の３国１地域だった。しかし駐蘭日本大使からの強い要請で、日本政府は98年からオランダも事業対象に組み込んだ。
それまで慰安婦問題というと基金に反対する韓国市民団体の激しい運動だけがメディアでクローズアップされていたで、取材する中で報じられてないことが多々あることを私は知った。オランダでは生存していた79人が元慰安婦と認定され、77人が基金から償い金を受け取り、３００万円の医療・福祉支援が行われていた。拒否したのは２人だけだった。フィリピン、台湾、インドネシアでも基金の事業はそれなりの成功を収めていた。
慰安婦問題でのメディアの責任は、日本政府の全面的な国家補償を求める強硬な市民団体やＮＧＯ（非政府組織）の主張に引っ張られ、理念的、情緒的な報道に偏ったことだ。市民団体の声を伝えることは必要である。しかしメディアは政府と基金を批判することでよしとし、基金の事業が元慰安婦にとってどういう意味をもつのかや、実際の「償い事業」がどのように行われ、元慰安婦がどのように「償い」を受け止めたかを伝えるのを怠った。
設立から解散（07年）までアジア女性基金にかかわった国際法学者の大沼保昭氏は「多くのメディアとＮＧＯは、政府の政策を批判するという伝統的な役割をはたすにとどまり、限られた政治資源と選択肢のもとで最大限なしうることを追求するという政治の責任を引き受けることを回避した」と指摘する。
政府と基金に対する日本のメディアの否定的な報道を韓国メディアが輪をかける形で伝え、韓国で対日不信が膨れ上がるなか、日本国民の償いの気持ちはほとんど伝わらないままで終わった。
日本で基金の「償い事業」が報道されるようになったのは、第一次安倍政権下の07年７月、米下院で慰安婦に対する日本政府の謝罪を求める決議が採択された前後、「日本はアジア女性基金でそれなりのことはやってきた」との脈絡で語られるようになってからだ。実際、基金があったことで「日本は何もしていない」との国際社会からの非難を免れていることを我々は認識するべきだろう。
メディアは問題の解決を探り、提言することをせず、煽る側に回っていたのではないか。慰安婦問題がこじれた一因にメディアの責任を考える必要がある。これは韓国のメディアも同様である。高齢の元慰安婦が何を本当に望んでいるかでなく、強硬な市民団体の運動のみを伝え、女性基金の償い金を受け取った元慰安婦をと批判し、社会的に孤立させた。女性基金の「償い事業」がオランダ、フィリピンなど他の国・地域ではうまくいって、なぜ韓国だけダメだったのか。韓国のメディアは考える必要がある。
（筆者は毎日新聞客員編集委員）
一般社団法人 日本英語交流連盟