Study on Recognition of Israel’s responsibility

First Draft

By Shahira Samy1,

Introduction:

This study discusses recognition of Israel’s responsibility vis-à-vis Palestinian refugees. In so doing it relies on examination of recognition / acceptance of responsibility/ apology processes in precedent cases in international practice. Particularly, two cases are invoked: The case of the Korean and ???? The objective in examining the precedents is to develop delivery scenarios and propose language options for a statement of recognition of responsibility from Israel.

Precedents of state recognition/ apology:

"We want our experience to be written in history so that the next generation and people in other countries will know what happened to us and for us to be given justice. The Japanese government has to admit to what the Japanese soldiers did, we need an apology and compensation from the Japanese government".

A former Korean ‘comfort woman’

Background:

One of the most compelling examples of sexual slavery and the denial of justice to victims was the system of institutionalized sexual slavery used by the Japanese Imperial Army before and during World War II and subsequent denials of responsibility for the system by the Japanese government. The women forced into sexual servitude were euphemistically known as "comfort women". In Korea they call them halmoni or grandmothers – In , they are known as "comfort women", a hated euphemism for their forced role of providing "comfort" to marauding Japanese troops in military brothels. Sex slaves is another term associated with them. Up to 200,000 "comfort women" were sexually enslaved by the Japanese Imperial Army from around 1932 to the end of World War II. Sixty years after the end of World War II, survivors of the sexual slavery system have been denied justice – they are still calling and waiting for full reparations.

The existence of the comfort women operation (jugun ianfu) was first exposed in 1948 when Batavia (now Jakarta) hosted public trials concerning the sexual internment of Dutch women. The issue remained dormant since then and only started drawing public attention following publication of the first books about "comfort women" in the mid 1970s. In 1982 eight Japanese intellectuals issued a public statement calling on the government to recognize past injustices and apologize to Korean "comfort women". In 1984 a major Japanese newspaper addressed the issue

1 Dr. Shahira Samy is Jarvis Doctorow Junior Research Fellow in International Relations and Conflict Resolution in the Middle East, St Edmund Hall & the Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Oxford.

1 for the first time. In 1990, Professor Yun Chung-ok published the findings from her ten years of research in a Korean newspaper.

Only in 1990 did a Japanese official in the person of Prime Minister Miyazawa Kichi offere an unofficial apology for the acts perpetrated by the military against the comfort women. More recently, the Japanese Diet, although refusing to issue an apology, has allocated money to administer a fund for Asian women. The form and source of such redress, however, raised important questions. More controversial than Japan’s refusal to apologize was its approach to monetary redress. Japan established the Asian Women’s Fund to aid comfort women in need and support projects addressing contemporary women’s issues. The fund purports to represent the Japanese people’s ‘feelings of apology and remorse’ by allowing them to contribute directly. The fund is financed by private donations and the government only pays administrative fees.

This attempt of redress was met by criticism. Comfort women and advocacy organizations argue that this is not redress in the form of reparations, for atonement can only be achieved through money paid by the government in the form of personal compensation, along with a formal apology from the Diet. They maintain that the Asian Women’s Fund is a welfare system because individual payments are based on socio-economic needs rather than moral restitution. Such payments add to the overall sense that Japan is failing to take responsibility for its actions.

It took changing attitudes towards women’s rights, as well as campaigns by women, to turn the comfort women issue into a larger one over women’s rights. At some point in 1990, Emperor expressed ‘intense sorrow’ at the wrongs inflicted on Korea. Korean activists however did not regard this as atonement for the lack of adequate apology.. Meanwhile, in June 1990, the Japanese foreign ministry denied any government responsibility for the sexual slavery of Korean women. No public apology, disclosure, memorial or compensation was forthcoming.. Many women refused the payments, seeing them as an attempt by Japan to evade its responsibility. Only about 260 former sex slaves received money - 2 million yen (£10,110) each. The fund was discontinued in 2007, and no plans have been announced for a replacement. To this day, the Diet has not issued an official apology.

Elements of the reparations process:

The nature of the injustice /harm

The injustice calling for redress is sexual violence.

Establishing the evidence and the basis for reparations

When a state commits a serious violation of international law against its nationals or the nationals of other states, including, by subjecting an estimated 200,000 women to a system of sexual slavery, it has an obvious moral obligation to provide reparations to survivors to address the crimes in order to help them rebuild their lives. Japan has accepted that is has a moral responsibility for the sexual slavery system it conducted in World War II and has taken limited steps to address it.

2 The issue of reparations, is, however, is not confined to moral obligations. Under international law, a state that commits serious crimes including war crimes and crimes against humanity of rape and sexual slavery, has a legal obligation to provide full reparations.

There apparently is ample evidence that the "comfort women" system violated international law, including prohibitions against slavery, war crimes and crimes against humanity. These laws existed at the time the system was in operation.

Much evidence exists detailing the official sanctioning of the "comfort women" system by the Japanese government. Reports and regulations include rules on: inspection of facilities, venereal examinations, schedules for use of the "brothels" by officers or lower ranking soldiers and rates they had to pay. As the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women stated in her 1996 report:

"These regulations are some of the most incriminating of the documents to have survived the war. Not only do they reveal beyond doubt the extent to which the Japanese forces took direct responsibility for the comfort stations and were intimately connected with all aspects of their organization, but they also clearly indicate how legitimized and established an institution the stations had become."

Documents recovered disclose that military control of the "comfort women" system was organised at the highest level. Official directives expose the role of the War Ministry and military in the ‘recruitment’ process and detailed reports reveal that civilian recruiters were also subject to military control.

Diaries and memoirs of former Japanese soldiers published after World War II mentioned "comfort" facilities in places occupied by Japan but official war histories did not.

Demands of the Comfort women

Increased empowerment of women led to women’s organisations particularly in Japan and in countries that were affected by the sexual slavery system uniting to demand the Japanese government acknowledge the crime of military sexual slavery. Prominent female politicians in Japan also began to raise the issue in the Diet.

In Seoul in August 1991 Kim Hak-soon became the first survivor to speak publicly of her ordeal. Many of the surviving "comfort women" now organize regular demonstrations and participate in local, national and international conferences. They have addressed UN bodies and pursued litigation in Japan and the USA. One demonstration has been held every Wednesday since 8 January 1992 outside the Japanese embassy in Seoul. Survivors and their supporters vow to continue the demonstration until the issue of sexual slavery is finally settled by the government of Japan

The "comfort women" and their supporters have also filed ten complaints in Japanese courts, six of which have been dismissed by the Supreme Court, exhausting all domestic remedies.

3

In the absence of any serious attempt by the government of Japan to establish the truth of what occurred before and during the Second World War, the Women’s International War-Crimes Tribunal on Japan’s Military Sexual Slavery in in December 2000 attempted to provide an extensive report on the system of sexual slavery used by Japan during this period. This people’s tribunal was organized by Asian women and human rights organizations to hear cases of sexual slavery and other crimes involving sexual violence. The government of Japan declined to participate. It drew on over a decade of sustained activism by groups based in affected countries as well as international initiatives, including at the UN. Based on detailed testimonies and consultation with survivors, the Tribunal recommended:

"The Government of Japan must provide each of the following remedial measures:

1. Acknowledge fully its responsibility and liability for the establishment of the "comfort system" and that this system was in violation of international law. 2. Issue a full and frank apology, taking legal responsibility and giving guarantees of non-repetition. 3. Compensate the victims and survivors and those entitled to recover as a result of the violations declared herein through the government and in amounts adequate to redress the harm and deter its future occurrence. 4. Establish a mechanism for the thorough investigation into the system of military sexual slavery, for public access and historical preservation of the materials. 5. Consider, in consultation with the survivors, the establishment of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission that will create a historical record of the gender based crimes committed during the war, transition, and occupation. 6. Recognize and honour the victims and survivors through the creation of memorials, a museum and a library dedicated to their memory and the promise of "never again". 7. Sponsor both formal and informal educational initiatives, including meaningful inclusion in textbooks at all levels and support for scholars and writers, to ensure the education of the population and, particularly, the youth and future generations concerning the violations committed and the harm suffered. 8. Support training in the relation between the military slave system and gender inequality and the prerequisites for realizing gender equality and respect for the equality of all the peoples of the region. 9. Repatriate survivors who wish to be repatriated. 10. Disclose all documents or other material in its possession with regard to the "comfort stations". 11. Identify and punish principal perpetrators involved in the establishment and recruitment of the "comfort stations". 12. Locate and return the remains of the deceased upon the request of family members or close associates."

Last year, the US congress passed Resolution 121, calling on Tokyo to "formally apologise and accept historical responsibility" for the comfort women issue.

Position of Japanese government

Trace the evolution of the Japanese government, what they have offered, does it constitute a recognition of responsibility and why.

4

Denial

Prior to 1992, the Japanese government had consistently denied its involvement in the establishment and operation of comfort stations and the enslavement of women through coercion and deceit. For example, when the issue was discussed in the (Japanese Parliament) in 1991, the government of Japan denied responsibility for the "comfort women" system by attributing it to private agents.

The Japanese government has maintained on many occasions that the system of sexual slavery it conducted from 1932 to 1945 did not amount to violations of international law at the time it was in operation. It argues that such acts only became crimes under international law after the war. There is, however, compelling evidence that the system violated the international prohibition on slavery and amounted to war crimes and crimes against humanity. The debate on this point is largely academic. The Japanese government has additionally contended that the "comfort women" system did not fit within the definition of slavery at that time: Japan has asserted that rape was not a war crime until 1949 when it was incorporated into the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Last year, Mr Shinzo Abe claimed there is "no evidence" to prove the women were coerced, reversing Japan's position. Amid a political storm and pressure from Japan's US allies, he backtracked in a series of carefully worded statements that took the heat out of the controversy.

String of apologies

In 1991, the historian Yoshiaki Yoshimi discovered incriminating documents in the archives of Japan's Defense Agency. According to Yoshimi they indicated that the military was directly involved in running the brothels. The Asahi Shimbun, a major Japanese national daily newspaper, published these findings as a front-page article "Japanese Army abducted comfort women" on 11 January 1992. This caused a sensation and forced the government, represented by , Koichi Kato, to acknowledge some of the facts the same day. On January 17, 1992 Prime minister presented formal apologies for the suffering of the victims during a trip to South Korea.

Japan officially acknowledged wartime military slavery in a landmark 1993 statement, followed by the offer of compensation from a small private fund, which expired in 2007.

After some government studies into the matter, Yohei Kono, the Chief Cabinet Secretary of the Japanese government, issued a statement on 4 August 1993. By this statement the Japanese government recognized that "Comfort stations were operated in response to the request of the military of the day", that "The Japanese military was directly or indirectly involved in the establishment and management of the comfort stations and the transfer of the women", "The recruitment of the comfort women was conducted mainly by private recruiters who acted in response to the request of the military. The Government study has revealed that in many cases they were recruited against their own will through coaxing and coercion". The government of Japan

5 "sincerely apologize[d] and [expressed its] remorse to all those, irrespective of place of origin, who suffered immeasurable pain and incurable psychological wounds". In the statement, the government of Japan expressed its "firm determination never to repeat the same mistake and that they would engrave such issue through the study and teaching of history".

But the so-called Kono statement has long baited Japanese revisionists, who deny the military was directly involved. "The women were legal prostitutes, earning money for their families," claims the revisionist academic Nobukatsu Fujioka.

The Japanese government has made various apologies since the early 1990s.

One very notable apology was made by Prime Minister in July 1995 in which he specifically mentions the Japanese military’s involvement in crimes against comfort women. Though it has seemingly apologized repeatedly for these offenses, the Japanese government denies legal liability for the creation and maintenance of the system of “comfort stations” and comfort women used during World War II.

The Japanese government has vigorously defended its legal position on this issue and has persistently maintained that all issues of compensation have been settled by postwar peace treaties (including the 1951 San Francisco Treaty of Peace with Japan, and other bi-lateral treaty arrangements between Japan and relevant parties).

See full list of statements of apology below

Compensation through the Asia Women’s Fund:

The Japanese government has set up an Asia Women’s Fund which conveys Japan’s apologies for crimes committed against women during World War II through direct donations from the Japanese public. In 1995 Japan set up an "Asia Women's Fund" for atonement in the form of material compensation and to provide each surviving comfort woman with a signed apology from the then prime minister Tomiichi Murayama, stating "As , I thus extend anew my most sincere apologies and remorse to all the women who underwent immeasurable and painful experiences and suffered incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women."

• 565m yen ($4.7m) was raised in donations from the Japanese people, and given to 285 comfort women from Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines, each of whom received about 2m yen ($16,700) • 770m yen ($6.5m) in taxpayers' money was provided to pay for medical fees for these women, and for 79 other women from the Netherlands • 370 million yen ($3.1m) was spent building medical facilities and old peoples' homes in Indonesia, rather than compensating individuals there, and the rest was used for the fund's running costs and other smaller projects

The AWF was perceived as distributing "atonement money", financed by donations from the Japanese public, to individual former "comfort women" together with a letter of apology from the Prime Minister. Applications were sought from women in South

6 Korea, Philippines and Taiwan from 1996 to 2002 and 285 women came forward. The AWF also coordinated medical and welfare support projects financed by disbursements from the Japanese government including a project proposed by the Indonesian government on social welfare service provision for the elderly. The AWF also gave medical and welfare assistance to 79 Dutch women who had been forced into sexual slavery by Japanese troops in Indonesia.

The re-writing of history

In 1996 the Japanese government reported to the UN that as a result of curriculum developments, about 70 per cent of high school history textbooks described the "comfort women" issue and between 1997 and 2001 it reached 100 per cent. However, reports indicate that only one of the updated textbooks approved in April 2005 makes any mention of comfort women and that only in a footnote.

The Minister of Education, Nakayama in 2004 and 2005 expressed approval of this trend and endorsed arguments that the term "wartime comfort woman" (jugun-ianfu) is a post-war invention that has no place in textbooks and leads to a masochistic view of history. Focus on such semantics has been used to divert public attention from the real issue of the existence of military sexual enslavement.

The reparations process and the criteria for reparations:

Actions to date in no way meet the criteria for full reparations outlined above. Many survivors see them as further attempts by the Japanese government to evade its legal responsibility to provide full reparation that arises from the sexual slavery system operated by the Japanese military in violation of international law

Differentiate between their full demands, the perfect reparations package, the role of acknowledgement, responsibility and apology.

The perfect reparations claim, short of wiping off the injustice, ought to include verification of the facts, full and public disclosure of the truth, public apology including acknowledgement of the facts and acceptance of responsibility; bringing to justice persons responsible for the violation; commemorations and tributes to the victims and the inclusion of accurate documentation of the human rights violations in educational materials and historical records.

A responsible state which accepts its legal obligations can provide reparations in a number of ways, including: through the government of the affected state ensuring that victims and survivors can seek reparations before its national courts without obstacles; through establishing administrative mechanisms to distribute relevant monetary and non-monetary reparation (for example, a letter of apology) directly to victims and survivors and to fund projects for other forms of reparations (for example, commemoration, truth commissions or rehabilitation projects). Government representatives can also take specific measures such as full and public apology. The material and symbolic acts of reparation are closely interrelated; neither should be neglected.

7 Not all measures will be appropriate or demanded by the victimized side. The political process is likely to determine the priorities and trade-offs. However, acknolwdegement and accepting responsibility ids to precede any other form of reparations agreed upon for the reparations process to be meanigful and demonstrative of the recognition of responsibility.

The significance of the apology statements:

The goal of an apology is to acknowledge and accept responsibility, restore dignity and thereby facilitate healing and potential reconciliation. For a victim, an apology is often considered to be the key that will unlock the door to healing. An apology that the recipient finds insincere can be a huge blow to an emotionally scarred survivor and re-open wounds. Basic elements that go into making a successful apology are: (to be refined possibly)

• Delivered by an official institution of the state (the parliament) • acknowledgement of the wrong done - naming the offence and describing the impact • accepting responsibility for the wrong • expressing sincere regret and profound remorse • assurance or promise that the wrong done will not recur • Offering compensation and other concrete measures in conjunction.

"Full acceptance of responsibility by the wrongdoer is the hallmark of an apology." Vague generalities are inadequate and may lead to conclusions that perpetrators of the injustice do not recognize their responsibility.

Chronology of apologies:

1 January 1992. Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa "[Concerning the comfort women,] I apologize from the bottom of my heart and feel remorse for those people who suffered indescribable hardships" (Press conference).

17 January 1992. Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa. "What we should not forget about relationship between our nation and your nation is a fact that there was a certain period in the thousands of years of our company when we were the victimizer and you were the victim. I would like to once again express a heartful remorse and apology for the unbearable suffering and sorrow that you experienced during this period because of our nation's act." Recently the issue of the so-called 'wartime comfort women' is being brought up. I think that incidents like this are seriously heartbreaking, and I am truly sorry" (Policy speech at the occasion of the visit to the Republic of Korea..

6 July 1992. Chief Cabinet Secretary Koichi Kato. "The Government again would like to express its sincere apology and remorse to all those who have suffered indescribable hardship as so-called 'wartime comfort women,' irrespective of their nationality or place of birth. With profound remorse and determination that such a mistake must never be repeated, Japan will maintain its stance as a pacifist nation and will endeavor to build up new future-oriented relations with the Republic of Korea and with other countries and regions in Asia. As I listen to many people, I feel truly grieved for this issue. By listening to the opinions of people from various directions, I

8 would like to consider sincerely in what way we can express our feelings to those who suffered such hardship" (Statement by Chief Cabinet Secretary Koichi Kato on the Issue of the so-called "Wartime Comfort Women" from the Korean Peninsula.

4 August 1993. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono. "Undeniably, this was an act, with the involvement of the military authorities of the day, that severely injured the honor and dignity of many women. The Government of Japan would like to take this opportunity once again to extend its sincere apologies and remorse to all those, irrespective of place of origin, who suffered immeasurable pain and incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women" (Statement by the Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono on the result of the study on the issue of "comfort women." .

31 August 1994. Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama. "Japan's actions in a certain period of the past not only claimed numerous victims here in Japan but also left the peoples of neighboring Asia and elsewhere with scars that are painful even today. I am thus taking this opportunity to state my belief, based on my profound remorse for these acts of aggression, colonial rule, and the like caused such unbearable suffering and sorrow for so many people, that Japan's future path should be one of making every effort to build world peace in line with my no-war commitment. It is imperative for us Japanese to look squarely to our history with the peoples of neighboring Asia and elsewhere. Only with solid basis of mutual understanding and confidence that can be build through overcoming the pain on both sides, can we and the peoples of neighboring countries together clear up the future of Asia-Pacific.... On the issue of wartime 'comfort women,' which seriously stained the honor and dignity of many women, I would like to take this opportunity once again to express my profound and sincere remorse and apologies. With regard to this issue as well, I believe that one way of demonstrating such feelings of apologies and remorse is to work to further promote mutual understanding with the countries and areas concerned as well as to face squarely to the past and ensure that it is rightly conveyed to future generations. This initiative, in this sense, has been drawn up consistent with such belief" (Statement by Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama on the "Peace, Friendship, and Exchange Initiative"

07/na/1995. Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama. "The problem of the so-called wartime comfort women is one such scar, which, with the involvement of the Japanese military forces of the time, seriously stained the honor and dignity of many women. This is entirely inexcusable. I offer my profound apology to all those who, as wartime comfort women, suffered emotional and physical wounds that can never be closed" (Statement by Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama on the occasion of the establishment of the "Asian Women's Fund."

23 June 1996. Prime Minister . Hashimoto mentioned the aspects of Japan's colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula such as the forced Japanization of Korean people's name and commented "It is beyond imagination how this injured the hearts of Korean people" Hashimoto also touched on the issue of Korean comfort women and said "Nothing injured the honor and dignity of women more than this and I would like to extend words of deep remorse and the heartfelt apology" (Joint press conference at summit meeting with President Kim Young Sam in South Korea.

9 15 July 1998. Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto. "The Government of Japan, painfully aware of its moral responsibility concerning the issue of so called "wartime comfort women," has been sincerely addressing this issue in close cooperation with the Asian Women's Fund which implements the projects to express the national atonement on this issue. Recognizing that the issue of comfort women, with an involvement of the Japanese military authorities at that time, was a grave affront to the honor and dignity of large numbers of women, I would like to convey to Your Excellency my most sincere apologies and remorse to all the women who underwent immeasurable and painful experiences and suffered incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women.... By the Statement of Prime Minister in 1995, the Government of Japan renewed the feelings of deep remorse and the heartfelt apology for tremendous damage and suffering caused by Japan to the people of many countries including the Netherlands during a certain period in the past. My cabinet has not modified this position at all, and I myself laid a wreath to the Indisch Monument with these feelings on the occasion of my visit to the Netherlands in June last year"

2001. Prime Minister (Also signed by all the prime ministers since 1995, including Ryutaro Hashimoto, Keizo Obuchi, Yoshiro Mori). "As Prime Minister of Japan, I thus extend anew my most sincere apologies and remorse to all the women who underwent immeasurable and painful experiences and suffered incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women. We must not evade the weight of the past, nor should we evade our responsibilities for the future. I believe that our country, painfully aware of its moral responsibilities, with feelings of apology and remorse, should face up squarely to its past history and accurately convey it to future generations"

March 26, 2007. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. "I express my sympathy toward the comfort women and apologize for the situation they found themselves in." "I apologize here and now as prime minister," he said.

Discuss conformity and therefore deficiencies of those statements

Analytical notes:

Although this statement gave the pretense of being an apology, it was very carefully worded, thus admitting an unspecified role in the military brothels, yet rejecting legal responsibility for them. Japan continues to contend the brothels were not a "system" and not a war crime or crime against humanity

The first official apology to "comfort women" was made in January 1992, a few days after Japanese historian Yoshimi revealed irrefutable proof of official involvement in the operation of wartime "comfort stations". Prime Minister Miyazawa apologized to the Korean people during a state visit to South Korea. Individual members of different governments of Japan, including Prime Ministers, have since issued apologies for the "comfort women" system. Japanese commentators have pointed to the number of apologies made for conduct during World War II and talk of "apology fatigue". However many of these apologies have been "damage limitation" triggered by inflammatory statements by Japanese officials. Closer examination of their substance reveals their inadequacy. There has also been uncertainty over whether such statements are made in a personal or official capacity. Survivors still call for an apology from the Japanese National Assembly – the Diet, as the highest organ of state power, representing the Japanese people, and the emperor. Many apologies for crimes committed during World War II have generally expressed remorse for the past, not mentioning the specific violation against the "comfort women".Where "comfort women" have been mentioned in apologies the focus has been on damage to the ‘honour’ and ‘dignity’ of the women.

10 In a letter of apology to the former "comfort women" in 2001, on the occasion of the Asian Women Fund offering "atonement from the Japanese people" Prime Minister Koizumi, followed a formula used by every Prime Minister since 1995, stating: "The issue of comfort women, with an involvement of the Japanese military authorities at that time, was a grave affront to the honor and dignity of large numbers of women. As Prime Minister of Japan, I thus extend anew my most sincere apologies and remorse to all the women who underwent immeasurable and painful experiences and suffered incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women. We must not evade the weight of the past, nor should we evade our responsibilities for the future. I believe that our country, painfully aware of its moral responsibilities, with feelings of apology and remorse, should face up squarely to its past history and accurately convey it to future generations. Furthermore Japan also should take an active part in dealing with violence and other forms of injustice to the honor and dignity of women. Finally, I pray from the bottom of my heart that each of you will find peace for the rest of your lives." Such apologies, whilst a welcome expression of remorse, do not articulate the precise nature of harms done, clearly sidestepping issues of legal obligations arising from violations of international law. Reference only to "military involvement" can be viewed as an attempt to distance the government of Japan from the wrong done. As such these apologies continue to be perceived by some survivors as insincere, at best expressions of general remorse that do not provide the assurances of ‘never again’ that survivors have called for. The apologies issued so far have also consistently been undermined by counter claims, including outright denial that sexual slavery was practiced, contradictory statements and provocative actions by government officials including senior cabinet members. Survivors and representatives of affected states view such apologies as meaningless whilst senior Japanese officials continue to visit the Yasukuni Shrine or officially approve history textbooks that downplay or are silent on the sexual slavery and other atrocities committed by the Japanese military during World War II. Survivors call on the Japanese government to issue a full and frank apology from the highest level that backs up statements of remorse with actual practice.

Echoing the assessment of many survivors, the Special Rapporteur on violence against women stated that the AWF is a: "clear statement denying any legal responsibility" and that "although the Special Rapporteur welcomes the initiative from a moral perspective, it must be understood that it does not vindicate the legal claims of "comfort women" under public international law."

There were further difficulties with the letter of apology signed by the prime minister, which was given to each victim. Copies of the letter were delivered by the Asian Women's Fund rather than by diplomats. Activists in South Korea and Taiwan claimed that the letter was a personal not an official one, and that the money available was from charity funds rather than state compensation. They persuaded more than half the former comfort women in the two countries not to accept the money.

The Japanese government considers that the legal and moral positions in regard to war crimes are separate. Therefore, while maintaining that Japan violated no international law or treaties, Japanese governments have officially recognised the suffering which the Japanese military caused, and numerous apologies have been issued by the Japanese government. For example, Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama, in August 1995, stated that Japan

However, the official apologies are widely viewed as inadequate or only a symbolic exchange by many of the survivors of such crimes or the families of dead victims. On October 2006, while Prime Minister Shinzo Abe expressed an apology for the damage caused by its colonial rule and aggression, more than 80 Japanese lawmakers from his ruling party LDP paid visits to the Yasukuni Shrine. Many people aggrieved by also maintain that no apology has been issued for particular acts or that the Japanese government has merely expressed "regret" or "remorse".On 2 March 2007, the issue was raised again by Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe, in which he denied that the military had forced women into sexual slavery during World War II. He stated, "The fact is, there is no evidence to prove there was coercion." Before he spoke, a group of Liberal Democratic Party lawmakers also sought to revise Yohei Kono's 1993 apology to former comfort women. However, this provoked negative reaction from Asian and Western countries.

The Japanese government officially accepted the requirement for monetary compensation to victims of war crimes, as specified by the Potsdam Declaration. The details of this compensation have been left to

11 bilateral treaties with individual countries, However, in some cases such as with South Korea the compensation was not paid out to victims by their governments, instead being used for civic projects and other works. Due to this, large number of individual victims in Asia received no compensation.

Therefore, the Japanese government's position is that the proper avenues for further claims are the governments of the respective claimants. As a result, every individual compensation claim brought to Japanese court has failed.

Though the organisation was established by the government, legally, it has been created such that it is an independent charity (the fund)

The ministry of foreign affairs lists it under foreign affirs /women’s issues / the asian women’s fund.(shira) 1992, historian Yoshiaki Yoshimi published material based on his research in archives at Japan's National Institute for Defense Studies. Yoshimi claimed that there was a direct link between imperial institutions such as the Kôa-in and "comfort stations". When Yoshimi's findings were published in the Japanese news media on January 12, 1993, they caused a sensation and forced the government, represented by Chief Cabinet Secretary Kato Koichi, to acknowledge some of the facts that same day. On January 17, Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa presented formal apologies for the suffering of the victims, during a trip in South Korea. On July 6 and August 4, the Japanese government issued two statements by which it recognized that "Comfort stations were operated in response to the request of the military of the day", "The Japanese military was, directly or indirectly, involved in the establishment and management of the comfort stations and the transfer of comfort women" and that the women were "recruited in many cases against their own will through coaxing and coercion".

The controversy was re-ignited on March 1, 2007, when Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe mentioned suggestions that a U.S. House of Representatives committee would call on the Japanese Government to "apologize for and acknowledge" the role of the Japanese Imperial military in wartime sex slavery. However, Abe denied that it applied to comfort stations. "There is no evidence to prove there was coercion, nothing to support it."

On April 17, 2007, Yoshimi and another historian, Hirofumi Hayashi, announced the discovery, in the archives of the Tokyo Trials, of seven official documents suggesting that Imperial military forces, such as the Tokeitai(naval secret police), directly coerced women to work in frontline brothels in China, Indochina and Indonesia. These documents were initially made public at the war crimes trial.

On 12 May 2007, journalist Taichiro Kaijimura announced the discovery of 30 Netherland government documents submitted to the Tokyo tribunal as evidence of a forced massed prostitution incident in 1944 in Magelang.

On 26 June 2007, the U.S. House of representatives Foreign Affairs Committee passed a resolution asking that Japan "should acknowledge, apologize and accept historical responsibility in a clear and unequivocal manner for its military's coercion of women into sexual slavery during the war". On 30 July 2007, the House of Representatives passed the resolution, while Shinzo Abe said this decision was "regrettable"

Of further Relevance:

United Nations Human Rights Commission

On June 22, 1998 Gay J. McDougall, Special Rapporteur to the United Nations Human Rights Commission, released Contemporary Forms of Slavery, a report based on prior UN investigation by Linda Chavez documenting systematic rape, sexual slavery and slavery-like practices in wartime in general but which was mainly aimed at bringing wider attention to the deep harm to human rights caused by Japan's

12 comfort women program during World War II. The report detailed the official Japanese government stance as well as the UN's own legal position.

The 1998 UN report listed their findings regarding Japan's guilt and liability:

• The system of comfort women used by the Japanese government during WWII falls under the international definition of slavery at the time, and slavery (sexual or otherwise) was illegal at the time. The 1926 Slavery Convention embodies one such definition. International prohibition of slavery was included in the Tokyo Charter which was used to make the International Military Tribunal for the Far East • Rape (including forced or coerced prostitution) was a war crime at the time; regardless of whether prostitution was widespread during World War II • Enslavement and other inhumane acts committed by the Japanese government can be considered “crimes against humanity.” In crimes against humanity, the nationality of the victim is irrelevant thus, (it doesn’t matter if the Japanese government was committing crimes against its enemies’ citizens or its own) it is liable for these offenses. • The Japanese government is liable for crimes against humanity because of the considerable scale on which these crimes were committed. • Arguments that the enslaving and raping of comfort women was perfectly legal at the time is similar to an argument that was used and refuted at the Nuremberg Trials.

U.S. Congressional resolution

In 2007 Mike Honda of the House of Representatives proposed House Resolution 121 which stated that Japan should formally acknowledge, apologize, and accept historical responsibility in a clear and unequivocal manner, refute any claims that the issue of comfort women never occurred, and educate current and future generations "about this horrible crime while following the recommendations of the international community with respect to the 'comfort women'."[67] Honda has stated that "the purpose of this resolution is not to bash or humiliate Japan."[68] However, the Japanese embassy in the U.S. stated that the Resolution was erroneous in terms of the facts and that it would be harmful to the friendship between the US and Japan.[69]

Dutch Parliament resolution

The lower house of the Dutch parliament passed a motion unanimously on November 20, 2007 urging Japan to financially compensate the women forced into sex slavery during World War II.

Canadian Lower House resolution

Canada's lower house, the House of Commons, unanimously approved a draft motion on November 28, 2007 that urges the Japanese government to make a "formal and sincere apology" to women who were forced by the Japanese military to provide sex for soldiers during World War II.

13 The text of the motion said the Canadian government should call on the Japanese government "to take full responsibility for the involvement of the Japanese Imperial Forces in the system of forced prostitution, including through a formal and sincere apology expressed in the Diet to all of those who were victims; and to continue to address with those affected in a spirit of reconciliation."

European Parliament resolution

Following a campaign by Amnesty International to press the EU on making a statement about the issue, on 13 December 2007 the European Parliament in Strasbourg passed a resolution calling for the Japanese government to formally acknowledge its historical responsibility over the Comfort Women issue, as well as apologize and compensate victims. called for the Japanese government to "formally acknowledge, apologize and accept historical and legal responsibility, in a clear and unequivocal manner". The resolution also called for the Japanese government to remove legal obstacles to compensation for the victims, and to take steps to educate people about these events.

Proposals of drafts for Israel’s recognition of responsibility d) The study should conclude by proposing language options for a statement of recognition or acknowledgement from Israel, as well as for the modalities of such recognition (an article or a preamble inserted in the Peace Treaty and/or an official oral declaration by Israel's Government etc.). Close coordination with the NSU might be needed more specifically for this last part of the study.

What proposed language options and delivery scenarios could be offered for a statement of recognition of responsibility from Israel?

Different modalities according to which this statement could be delivered.

.

14