VS Enforcement

Don't push me, Mike. I need 15 days to think about and write political issues here..........

Now Japanese Government seems to be very sencitive to the word, "Enforcement". Two recent issues related to the perspective of historical facts have us know it.

The first issue is the one which Chinese people, Korean people and American Congress are interested in. The sexual slave in World War II is it.
Some Japanese politcians including the prime minister Abe denied recently that Japanese army and government "enforced" Asian women to be sex workers to Japanese soldiers during World War II.
This opinion made the people above be surprised at it and get angry with it.
But, in Japan, I think most people weren't surprised at it.
It doesn't mean they agree with the opinion. It means they are accustomed to listen to it.

The politicians don't say there were not sex workers to Japanese soldiers. They say Japanese army didn't enforce Chinese and Korean women to do it. What's their point?
They think about this issue like this:
Japanese army invaded the cities in China and Korea. In the cities, there had already been sex workers. They worked originally in their country. Japanese army hired them, and gave sexual services to the soldiers. In short, it was business, not enforcement.
They ask, "Are there any documents to certify the enforcement of Japanese army or government? I know the answer. The answer is Not."

Document. It's the key word.
Their asking is right to some extent.
For historical facts, the existence of documents is important.
In order to understand historical facts, historicians value the documents written soon when the facts happened.

An incident happend one day.(For example, A farmer met Alien.) The article for the fact in newspaper is very important for historical study.(A young farmer in Idaho could contact Alien this morning.) The diary for it written by somebody is also important. (Gash! Tommy was talking with Alien in his farm today. He is heavy!)
Alien's official report is very important.( Project code 1988. Mission: To calculate the farming ability of Earth people. Result: They can make only potatos.)
But, the importance of the book written later about the incidents is seen less. (In this summer, I had a trip for U.S. I met the person who said he had seen Alien in his childhood. He told me that they came to the earth to steal his potatos.)

Historicians think a historical fact or story will change gradually after it happens, depending on the talkers for the fact. So, they value the document written soon when the fact happened.
In this case of sex workers or slaves to Japanese soldiers, there are not this kind of documents. There are just testimonies given by the old women who were sexual slaves during the war, but the value of thier confession is seen low from the view point of historical studies. That's why some Japanese politicians deny the issue even though many people in the world get angry to them.

Testimony. It's the next key word.
It's really valueless? It is always the wrong description different from the real fact, like that Tommy explained Alien's purpose wrong?
There is the place that people value testimony very much. It's the Court.

Most criminals wouldn't make official documents to commit a crime. From the testimony by Tommy, we can know the Alien stealed( or, at least tried to steal) his potatos. But, from the official document written by the Alien, we can't know the fact. To judge this crime, we have to depend on the testimonies by the related people. It is clear that no document doesn't mean no crime.

Back to the sexual slaves problem, we can know the two diffrent viewpoint of the problem. Oviously, Japanese government sees it the problem of Historical Studies. But, Korean, Chinese and American Congress see it the problem of War Crime.
For Japanese government, the opinion of K, C and AC might be too emotional and not logical. But, for Korean, Chinese and American Congress, J's thinking might be cold, too self-defensive or foolish.

In addition to this issue, Japanese government recently erased a description in the textbooks of Japanese history: Japanese government and army enforced the people in Okinawa to commit suicide in the case that they couldn't fight against US army.
Actually, many Okinawa people committed suicide before they were captured by US army. We can know the same kind of story from the movie "Letters from Iwo Jima".
But, Japanese government says that it is not clear whether there was such an enforcement or an order by the government during the war. So, they erase such a discription in textbooks.
For this issue, the value of documents and testimonies are key words again.

In this article, I tried to show the point of the historical and political issues in Japan. Historical Study vs War Crime is the key point.
If I say my opinion, I think the viewpoint of Historical Study is more important. Because the things in the war are just histroy for me. However, over 60 years has passed after the war. If Japanese government thinks Historical Study is important, they should have studied it more earlier.
To be honest, I think they were not interested in these issues for a long time after the war.
So, I think the person over 60 years old can't have the right to insist on the viewpoint of Historical Study.

Fortunately or unfortunately, the prime minister Abe is under 60 years old. He might have the right to say his own opinion for history free. But he has a big problem. His talking is boring. That's why I want to recommend him not to use his right.