I found an article a long time ago on Korea-Japan relations and I’ve been curious ever since on the Korea-Japan Normalization Treaty of 1965, which was mentioned in the article. Apparently, according to this treaty, Seoul demanded $364 million compensation for individuals who died or were used as laborers during Japanese colonization. The Korean government received $800 million of grants and loans as reparations from Japan. Korea’s president agreed that after this payment, citizens would no longer make individual claims against Japanese government. The issue is that President Park Chung-hee only paid $251 million to families killed by Japanese and 6.6 billion won to those whose property was destroyed… South Koreans conscripted into the Japanese military/labor force received compensation. This also means that none of the comfort women were compensated.
President Park Chung-hee decided to use the money, then, for public service projects—the construction of industries and transportation between Seoul and Busan.
The topic of comfort women is still a huge debate in politics, however. An article released on December 09, 2007 writes about how there is a new movement within the European Parliament to demand Japan to compensate and officially apologize to comfort women.
Here is the link to the article:
http://www.korea.net/news/news/newsView.asp?serial_no=20071209003&part=103&SearchDay=&page=1
However, I’m stuck on the Korea-Japan Normalization Treaty of 1965. Even though none of the monetary compensation reached the Korean comfort women, I can understand Japan’s “stubbornness” on this matter… Korea (or at least Park Chung-hee) had already agreed that individual’s no longer had a “right” to press charges against the Japanese government for what had happened… I feel like the Treaty was a stupid move on Korea’s part. Doesn’t this mean that it’s Park Chung-hee’s fault for agreeing to such conditions and not using the money to compensate all of the harmed individuals (even if it meant using it for “better” purposes)?
I’m confused. This treaty confuses me because I feel like it gives Japan a “right” to ignore the past, as if this treaty means that Japan is rid of all guilt. Am I missing something—can someone explain??
2 comments:
Well, the problem with the issue of comfort women was that it didn't become an issue until the early 1990s, when comfort women started to speak out about what happened to them. Many did not know about the comfort women before this because the women were shamed and feared being outcasted. So, some could argue that the comfort women issue does not apply to the Normalization Treaty. Japan also set up a fund for comfort women reparations, however the money was from private citizens and not the government, so a lot of comfort women refused that money because they felt that the Japanese government still hadn't acknowledged the comfort women. The stance of the Japanese Prime Minister about comfort women is that it didn't happen. So, I think that comfort women are more looking for a legitimization of their struggle more than anything. I think they feel that the Normalization Treaty doesn't apply under these circumstances.
Yes, japanese government accepted the comfort women were existing and they have some funds for Asian women. but still some people do not want to accept this. i read an article that former prime minister Abe said before that comfort women were not existing.
and I was reading sarah's comment and i didnt know that many women rejected to get money from japan. this is a big issue we have to discuss.
Post a Comment