Executive Summary
This report analyzes how the comfort women issue has deviated from genuine human rights protection and been exploited as a political tool. The issue is sustained through three patterns of political exploitation (domestic political use, diplomatic leverage, and international image manipulation), resulting in three serious consequences (ignoring victims’ will, confusion over legal responsibility and facts, and unjust international pressure).
This structure abandons the victims who should be rescued, renders international agreements meaningless, and undermines regional stability. The comfort women issue is not merely a Japan-Korea historical dispute but has become a dangerous precedent for the “weaponization” of human rights issues that threatens the entire international community.
1. Introduction: The Problem of Politicizing Human Rights
Human rights are universal values that should be protected beyond political positions. However, when human rights issues are used as diplomatic “weapons,” the original purpose of rescuing victims becomes secondary to the pursuit of political interests.
The comfort women issue is an example of this dangerous trend. Why hasn’t an event from over 70 years ago been “resolved” to this day? Despite Japan’s multiple apologies and compensations, why does the issue never end?
The answer is clear: If the issue were resolved, its value as a political card would be lost.
Part I: Three Patterns of Political Exploitation
2. Pattern 1: Domestic Political Use
2.1 As a Tool for Manipulating Approval Ratings
Successive South Korean administrations have repeatedly brought up historical issues when their approval ratings decline. This is not coincidental but an established political strategy.
Concrete Examples:
- When a regime’s approval ratings reach crisis levels, the “comfort women issue” or “forced labor issue” suddenly resurfaces
- Effective in diverting public attention from domestic economic problems or scandals
- Temporarily achieves national unity by stirring anti-Japanese sentiment
2.2 As a Means of Political Unity
Creating an “external enemy” is one of the oldest political tactics. In South Korea, Japan has been forced to play this role continuously.
- A structure has been established where ruling and opposition parties compete in anti-Japanese sentiment
- Being labeled “pro-Japan” ends political careers
- Proposing rational Japan policy becomes a political risk
2.3 Resetting with Each Change of Government
Each time South Korea’s government changes, the previous administration’s agreements with Japan are negated. This fundamentally destroys the credibility of international agreements.
The Fate of the 2015 Japan-Korea Agreement:
- Park Geun-hye administration: Agreed as “final and irreversible resolution”
- Moon Jae-in administration: Effectively abandoned the agreement, dissolved the foundation
- New regimes assert legitimacy by criticizing previous administrations
3. Pattern 2: Use in Diplomatic Negotiations
3.1 Endless “Moving Goalposts”
The more sincerely Japan responds, the more new demands emerge. This is not negotiation but unilateral repetition of demands.
Pattern:
- South Korea presents demands
- Japan makes concessions and responds
- South Korea criticizes as “insufficient”
- Presents higher demands
- Returns to step 1
Concrete Examples:
- 1993: Kono Statement apologizes → Insufficient
- 1995: Asian Women’s Fund established → Rejected
- 2015: Japan-Korea Agreement, 1 billion yen contributed → Agreement abandoned
3.2 “Moral Superiority” as a Weapon
The position of “victim” provides absolute superiority in negotiations. Any demand is justified as a “victim’s right,” forcing Japan into a defensive position.
- If Japan argues back → “Not reflecting”
- If Japan concedes → “Natural obligation”
- Equal negotiation cannot be established
3.3 Linking to Other Diplomatic Issues
Historical issues are used as a means to hold unrelated economic cooperation and security cooperation hostage.
- Currency swap requests
- Sharing security information (GSOMIA)
- Economic cooperation projects
These issues are treated as exchanges for “sincerity” on historical matters.
4. Pattern 3: International Image Manipulation
4.1 Global Propaganda Activities
South Korea systematically conducts campaigns worldwide to damage Japan’s image.
Strategic Placement of Comfort Women Statues:
- Major U.S. cities (Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, etc.)
- Near the UN Human Rights Council
- Worldwide locations including Germany, Philippines, Australia
The placement locations are not coincidental. Areas with significant political influence are strategically selected.
4.2 The “Sex Slave” Label
Calling comfort women “sex slaves” creates a sensational image. This word choice is deliberate.
- Simplification that ignores the complexity of reality
- Word choice designed to elicit emotional reactions
- Effect of making calm discussion impossible
4.3 International Spread and Neglect of Misinformation
The False Testimony of Seiji Yoshida:
- 1980s: Yoshida testified he “forcibly abducted women in Jeju Island”
- 1990s: Local investigation proved it false
- 2014: Asahi Shimbun officially acknowledged the falsehood and retracted articles
However:
- The image based on false testimony persists in international society
- Corrections don’t spread as widely as original reports
- South Korea is not proactive in corrections
Other Exaggerations:
- “200,000 were forcibly taken” → Unsubstantiated figure
- “Japanese military systematically abducted” → No evidence
4.4 Lobbying in International Organizations
Continuous efforts are made through the UN and international human rights organizations.
- Indirect pressure using NGOs
- One-sided claims in venues where Japan’s rebuttal opportunities are limited
- Structure where only “victims'” testimonies are valued and counter-evidence is difficult
Part II: Three Serious Consequences
5. Consequence 1: Ignoring the Victims’ Will
Ironically, the most neglected in this issue are the victims themselves.
5.1 Forced Rejection of the Asian Women’s Fund
In 1995, Japan established the “Asian Women’s Fund” and began providing compensation to former comfort women.
However:
- South Korean government and support groups pressured them to refuse
- Former comfort women who actually accepted were attacked as “traitors”
- Victims were denied the right to decide for themselves
5.2 Forced Dissolution of the 2015 Agreement Foundation
The “Reconciliation and Healing Foundation” established based on the Japan-Korea agreement was providing support funds to former comfort women.
Moon Jae-in Administration’s Response:
- Unilaterally dissolved the foundation
- Ignored the will of victims receiving support
- Value as a “political symbol” was prioritized over actual relief
5.3 Embezzlement of Donations by Support Groups: The Yoon Mi-hyang Scandal
Most shocking is the fact that the support group claiming to act “for the victims” was actually exploiting them.
Yoon Mi-hyang, Former Representative of the Korean Council (Justice Memory Solidarity):
- Led a comfort women support organization for nearly 30 years
- Privately misappropriated (embezzled) donations collected domestically and internationally
- In 2020, former comfort woman Lee Yong-soo blew the whistle internally
- Opaque use of donations, suspicions of personal real estate purchases
- Support funds for former comfort women were barely reaching them
What This Incident Reveals:
- Behind the justification of “for the victims,” personal enrichment was occurring
- Donations benefited activists, not victims
- The irony of former comfort women themselves exposing the support group
- Proof of a structure where “continuation” of the problem, not “resolution,” generates profit
Lee Yong-soo’s Accusation:
“We have been used. I don’t know where the donations went.”
What more evidence is needed? While shouting “for the victims,” they were actually using victims to profit.
5.4 Time Running Out for Aging Victims
While political exploitation continues, victims are aging and dying.
- Victims dying without receiving actual compensation
- The cruelty of prioritizing “political use” over “resolution”
- Time is not on the victims’ side
- Donations go into support groups’ pockets, not reaching victims
Question to Ask:
Whose movement is this? For the victims, or for politicians and activists?
6. Consequence 2: Confusion Over Legal Responsibility and Facts
6.1 Intentional Ambiguity of Responsibility
The location of responsibility in the comfort women issue is intentionally made ambiguous.
Facts:
- Private agents actually recruited comfort women
- Agents also conducted illegal recruitment (kidnapping, fraud)
- The Japanese military issued directives to crack down on illegal recruitment (1938 Army Ministry directive)
However:
- Agents’ responsibility is not questioned
- Everything is attributed to “Japanese government responsibility”
- Only the incompleteness of enforcement is criticized
Comparison:
Even in modern times, police cannot prevent all crimes. Does the government bear responsibility for all crimes just because enforcement is incomplete?
6.2 Persistence of Misinformation
Even after Yoshida’s testimony was proven false, the image based on it persists in international society.
- Corrections don’t spread as widely as original reports
- Sensational falsehoods remain in memory
- Deliberate failure to spread corrections
6.3 Political Pressure on Academic Research
Objective historical research is labeled “historical revisionism” and suppressed.
Attacks on the Ramseyer Paper:
- In 2020, a Harvard University professor published a paper analyzing the contractual relationship of comfort women
- Political attacks, not academic discussion, were deployed
- Personal attacks on the researcher, not discussion of research content
- A case threatening academic freedom
6.4 Rendering International Agreements Meaningless
The 2015 Japan-Korea Agreement explicitly stated “final and irreversible resolution.”
However:
- It was effectively abandoned with South Korea’s change of government
- Created a precedent where international agreements can be unilaterally abandoned
- Will any country seriously make agreements with South Korea in the future?
- Fundamental collapse of diplomatic trust
7. Consequence 3: Unjust International Pressure
7.1 Japan Criticized Based on One-sided Information
Much of the international community doesn’t know the details of this issue.
What the International Community Doesn’t Know:
- That Japan has apologized and compensated multiple times
- That a “final resolution” was agreed upon in 2015
- That the agreement was unilaterally abandoned
- That Yoshida’s testimony was false
- That recruitment was mainly conducted by private agents
Result:
- Japan is criticized based only on one-sided information
- Japan’s rebuttals are interpreted as “not reflecting”
- Balanced discussion is impossible
7.2 Impact on Modern Japanese People
This issue affects modern Japanese people who bear no historical responsibility.
- Cases of Japanese children overseas being bullied
- Unjust imposition of guilt for being “Japanese”
- Demands for infinite responsibility for events before their birth
7.3 Adverse Effects on Japan-Korea Relations and Regional Security
Japan-Korea confrontation over historical issues obstructs actual security cooperation.
Important Issues Affected:
- North Korea’s nuclear and missile problems
- Response to China’s military rise
- Regional economic cooperation
- Sharing security information (GSOMIA issue)
Who Benefits Most?
North Korea and China benefit most from continued Japan-Korea confrontation.
7.4 Adverse Effects on International Order
The treatment of the comfort women issue creates a dangerous precedent.
- International agreements can be unilaterally abandoned
- Anything is permitted from a “victim’s” position
- Weaponizing human rights issues is justified
If This Pattern Spreads:
- Other countries will also “weaponize” human rights issues
- The value of international agreements will be lost
- Responses to genuine human rights violations will be delayed
Part III: Structural Problems and Path to Resolution
8. Why This Structure Persists
8.1 The Absolute Position of “Victim”
In modern society, “victims” have become entities that cannot be criticized.
- Any claim is justified as a “victim’s voice”
- Criticizing victims is condemned as “secondary harm”
- Emotions prioritized over evidence or logic
- Structure that blocks rational discussion
8.2 Existence of Political Incentives
South Korean politicians have no incentive to “resolve” this issue.
- Showing anti-Japanese posture raises approval ratings
- Moving toward resolution brings criticism of being “pro-Japan”
- Political benefits gained from issue continuation
- The more rational a politician, the stronger the motivation to maintain the problem
8.3 Superficial Understanding of International Society
Many Western countries don’t deeply understand this issue.
- View only through the simple framework of “wartime sexual violence”
- Unaware of complex background and history
- Understand only through the simple schema of “victim vs. perpetrator”
- No motivation to investigate details
8.4 Limits of Japan’s Response
Whatever Japan does, there’s a structure for criticism.
- If apologizing → “Admitted evidence,” further pursued
- If arguing back → Criticized as “not reflecting”
- If conceding → New demands emerge
- If ignoring → Condemned as “running away”
Classic Double Bind:
Cornered into a situation where any choice draws criticism.
9. Path to Resolution: Realistic Recommendations
9.1 To International Society: Establishing Universal Principles
Norms Against Politicizing Human Rights Issues:
- Clearly distinguish human rights protection from diplomatic cards
- Reaffirm the sanctity of international agreements
- Protect the meaning of “final resolution”
- Make judgments based on balanced information
Fair Attitude Toward Historical Issues:
- All countries have past wrongs
- After apologies and compensation, move forward
- Politically exploiting the past obstructs true reconciliation
9.2 Japan’s Strategy: Response Based on Principles and Facts
Principles to Maintain:
- 2015 Agreement is Final Resolution – Don’t change this position
- No New Apologies or Compensations – Don’t allow moving goalposts
- Maintain Composure – Don’t react emotionally
Actions to Take Actively:
- Strengthen Information Dissemination in English
- Clearly explain Japan’s response history
- Correct misinformation based on facts
- Support and disseminate academic research
- Rebuttals Based on Data and Evidence
- With facts and documents, not emotional arguments
- Internationally publicize the falsehood of Yoshida’s testimony
- Publish documents like Japanese military enforcement directives
- Cooperation with Third Countries
- Appeal to America about the importance of regional stability
- Support objective research in academia
- Cooperate with conscientious voices within South Korea
9.3 Cooperation with Conscientious Groups in South Korea
There are voices in South Korea that demand fact-based discussion.
Examples:
- Empirical research by Professor Lee Young-hoon (Seoul National University Professor Emeritus) and others
- Intellectuals seeking rational Japan-Korea relations
- Realistic voices from the business community
Supporting these voices, not isolating them, is important.
9.4 Strategic Patience: Making Time an Ally
Don’t seek short-term “resolution,” respond with long-term perspective.
Why Time is Needed:
- South Korea’s generational change (younger generation not necessarily anti-Japanese)
- Deepening international understanding
- Aging of parties involved (natural conclusion of issue)
- Deepening economic interdependence
Patience is Not Abandonment:
- While maintaining principles
- While continuing to disseminate facts
- Calmly, but clearly
10. Conclusion: Why This Pattern Must Be Stopped
The Dangerous Precedent Shown by the Comfort Women Issue
The comfort women issue is no longer an individual historical problem. This is an example of the dangerous phenomenon of “weaponizing” human rights issues that the entire international community faces.
The Vicious Cycle of Three Exploitations and Three Consequences
Exploitation Mechanism:
- Domestic political use → Motivation to continue issue for approval ratings
- Diplomatic leverage use → Lose negotiation card if resolved
- International image manipulation → Maintain pressure through one-sided information
Severity of Consequences:
- Ignoring victims’ will → Politics prioritized over relief
- Confusion over legal responsibility → Agreements lose meaning
- Unjust international pressure → Regional destabilization
This vicious cycle must be broken, or the problem will continue forever.
Who Are the Real Victims?
The Greatest Victims:
- Former Comfort Women – Used as political tools, actual relief delayed
- Citizens of Both Japan and Korea – Forced into unnecessary confrontation and hatred
- International Order – Credibility of agreements collapses
- True Human Rights Protection – Serious ongoing human rights violations (Uyghurs, North Korea, etc.) are neglected
If This Pattern Spreads
If the treatment of the comfort women issue becomes a precedent and is imitated worldwide:
- All historical issues will be endlessly revisited
- International agreements become meaningless
- Human rights issues used as diplomatic “weapons”
- Victims who truly need relief are left behind
- Trust and cooperation in international society collapse
What is Now Being Questioned
South Korea is Asked:
Do you truly desire victim relief, or prioritize political interests?
Japan is Asked:
Will you succumb to unjust pressure, or respond resolutely based on principles?
International Society is Asked:
Will you judge based on one-sided information, or seek balanced understanding?
Finally: In the Name of Human Rights
Human rights are not tools for political gain. The greatest human rights violation committed in the name of human rights is the political exploitation of human rights issues.
To truly “resolve” the comfort women issue, this problem must be freed from political cards and handled calmly based on historical facts and legal principles.
And above all, actual relief for victims should be prioritized over political interests.
Without this, the issue will never be “resolved.” And those who continue paying the price are the victims themselves and citizens of both countries forced into unnecessary confrontation.
Appendix: Summary of Key Points
History of Japan’s Response
- 1993 Kono Statement: Japanese government acknowledged involvement and apologized
- 1995 Asian Women’s Fund: Started providing compensation
- 2015 Japan-Korea Agreement: “Final and irreversible resolution,” contributed 1 billion yen
- 2018 Moon Jae-in administration effectively abandoned agreement
Correction of Misinformation
- Seiji Yoshida’s Testimony: Testified “forced abduction” in 1980s → Proven false in 1990s → Asahi Shimbun officially retracted in 2014
- “200,000” Figure: Unsubstantiated (possible confusion with women’s volunteer labor corps)
- “Sex Slave” Expression: Propaganda term ignoring reality
Fundamental Questions to Ask
- Whose movement is this? For victims or for politicians and activists?
- Why do support groups force refusal even when victims wish to accept?
- Why could support group leaders embezzle donations? Who was monitoring?
- Why is it revisited despite agreement as “final resolution”?
- Why isn’t the responsibility of direct perpetrators (agents who conducted illegal recruitment) questioned?
- Why are other countries’ similar acts ignored while only Japan is continuously criticized?
- Why do those claiming “for the victims” cause victims the most suffering?
Core Argument of This Report
The comfort women issue is not human rights protection but political exploitation of human rights.
If this structure is left unchecked, real victims won’t be rescued, international order will collapse, and the value of human rights itself will be damaged.
Now, the conscience and courage of international society are being tested.
This report points out structural problems in the comfort women issue based on facts and logic. The purpose is to achieve true victim relief and sound the alarm about the dangerous trend of politicizing human rights issues.