TV & Radio
Japan's Abe sticks to comments on 'comfort women'
Premier denies coercion in World War-II era brothels, even as he berates North Korea over kidnappings of Japanese citizens.
By Bruce Wallace, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
March 18, 2007
TOKYO — Anyone struggling to understand the Japanese government's position on the morality of kidnapping people, taking them to another country and forcing them to work against their will can be excused for being confused by the declarations coming out of Tokyo these days.
On one hand, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe seems prepared to risk his country's reputation by saying that the Japanese military did not coerce the tens of thousands of women from other Asian countries cast into sexual slavery during World War II.
Yet his government cannot contain its fury over North Korea's failure to "sincerely" face up to its role in kidnapping a handful of Japanese civilians during the Cold War and forcing them to teach Japanese customs and language to North Korean spies.
There is no hint here of any awareness of the irony.
There has been almost no outcry in Japan against Abe's assertion that there is no evidence to implicate the Japanese military in the well-documented system of organized brothels in areas under its control. Major media organizations support Abe's position and have encouraged him to stick by it.
In a sign that it feels no heat at home, the Abe Cabinet issued a statement Friday reiterating that government archives contain no evidence of official military involvement in recruiting what the Japanese euphemistically call "comfort women."
Contrast that with the national anguish over the 17 Japanese allegedly kidnapped by North Korea and who Tokyo says may still be alive. One of the abductees, Megumi Yokota, who was kidnapped at age 13 three decades ago, has become an icon of Japanese victimhood, and Abe has never missed a chance to affix his career to her tragedy. Last week, his government launched a $1-million TV ad campaign extolling its determination to free her and the other abductees.
"The Japanese people have little awareness about human rights," says Yoshimi Yoshiaki, a Chuo University professor and co-chairman of the Center for Research and Documentation on Japan's War Responsibility. He has received many requests about the center's scholarship since the controversy broke — all form abroad. "There was no interest in Japan," he says.
"The Japanese become very emotional about the abductees because the victims are Japanese, but they don't feel so close to other Asian women, whose suffering they see as something in the past," Yoshiaki says. "What Abe is demanding from North Korea, an apology and punishment for the people who did it, should be the same standard he applies on comfort women."
But Abe has opted to play the lawyer rather than the moralist on the so-called comfort women. Despite the testimony of women who were victims of the brothels, Abe says there is no paper trail showing coercion in the narrow sense of soldiers breaking into homes and abducting women into forced prostitution. Any such suggestion is a "complete fabrication," he told parliament.
How, critics ask, could a prime minister who came to office vowing to create a "beautiful Japan" that spoke with credibility on global affairs, end up squabbling over details with now-octogenarian women about the degree of coercion that was used to conscript them into a network of serial rape?
Some say it is rooted in his government's falling poll numbers, which has left him vulnerable to attack from the nationalist wing of his party. These conservatives once saw Abe as their champion but accuse him of going soft since becoming prime minister.
Others argue he was merely speaking his mind, noting his record of criticizing what he described as Japan's masochistic culture of endlessly apologizing for World War II and its related crimes.
It's unclear whether Abe knows, or worries, about the damage his obfuscation has done to Japan's image abroad. He has dismissed criticism as Japan-bashing spawned by a misrepresentation of his position by foreign media.
But the sex slavery issue comes at what was supposed to be a shining period of breakthroughs for Japanese diplomacy: a visit by Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao to repair Japan's shaky relations with its Asian rival, and a trip to Washington at the end of April to draw attention to the robust health of the alliance with Japan's one indispensable partner.
Eager to keep warming relations on track, the Chinese government has been muted in its criticism of Abe's statements about the wartime brothels. But the Washington visit seems certain to be dogged by protests by women's groups and to attract sharp questions about whether the United State's firmest ally in Asia is backsliding on a central moral question.
And it will come as Congress considers a resolution introduced by California Democrat Mike Honda of San Jose calling on Tokyo to issue a formal, unconditional apology over the comfort women. Abe has dismissed the Honda resolution as "not based on objective facts" and said his government would not apologize again, whether the resolution passed or not, a statement that cut the legs from under Japan's best supporters in Washington.
"There is no difference of opinion on the issue in the United States," said Thomas Schieffer, the U.S. ambassador to Japan, who said he took the word of the women who recently testified to Congress about their enforced prostitution under Japanese occupation.
"They were raped by the Japanese military," Schieffer said. "I think that happened. And I think it was a regrettable, terrible thing that it happened."
Playing to emotions
Abe's dilemma is that although legalistic hair-splitting about responsibility may play well in Tokyo's political backrooms or with conservative academics, it is volatile material abroad, where Japan's former victims and its current friends alike demand that Japanese prime ministers deliver an unambiguous moral condemnation of the sexual slavery.
And no one knows the emotional potency of defending the victims of kidnapping better than Abe, who fashioned his nationalist career on the back of the abductees' media soap opera. Just days before he stumbled into the sexual slavery fiasco, Abe used the weekly newsletter on his website to gush over a song that Noel "Paul" Stookey of Peter, Paul and Mary fame wrote for Megumi Yokota.
"An image of a happy Megumi together with her family floated before my eyes," Abe wrote after hearing Stookey perform the song to Megumi's parents in "a gentle voice one would use when speaking to a small girl."
"How scared and lonely she must have been, separated from her parents," Abe wrote. "How deep and large the emotional scars must be for parents, whose dear child was taken away."
How true. And how extraordinary, critics say, that Abe was unable to conjure the same sympathy and moral outrage over the horrors inflicted on the thousands of women at the hands of the Japanese military.
ゲイタウン「新宿２丁目」石原発言に反発 (日刊スポーツ 2007/03/08)
Gay marriage advocates switch strategies
By RAY HENRY, Associated Press Writer
Sat Mar 17, 2:41 PM ET
Aronda Kirby and Digit Murphy were once married to men, received the tax breaks for married couples and were legally permitted to take family leave if their husbands or children got sick. Both women lost those protections when they came out as lesbians, divorced their husbands and set up a new household together with their six children.
Now, with couples like Murphy and Kirby in mind, some gay rights advocates who previously fought for "marriage or nothing" are shifting strategies. Rather than fighting to legalize marriage for same-sex couples, they're lobbying for the protections marriage provides.
Those who follow the movement say bills taking that approach that were introduced this year in Rhode Island and Washington state could signal a broader change in tactics, although some gay marriage advocates fear it could undercut more than a decade of work.
"We've had all the rights, so we want them back," Murphy said. "We don't care how we get them."
Gay rights proponents have had to accept less than marriage before. Court decisions forced New Jersey and Vermont to adopt civil unions. Connecticut's legislature passed a civil union bill even though many gay rights activists there had pressed for marriage.
"It's very new," said Washington state Sen. Edward Murray, a gay man who represents a heavily gay area in Seattle where his constituents until recently frowned on anything but marriage. "If I had suggested this strategy a year or two years ago, I would have been run out of my district."
Advocates in Rhode Island have introduced bills to legalize gay marriage every year since 1997, but they've gone nowhere. So this year, in addition to filing marriage legislation, they hope to have some success with six new bills that focus on incremental rights rather than the label of marriage.
One would allow same-sex parents to take family leave if their partner or partner's children fall ill. Another bill would give gay men and women the right to plan their partners' funerals.
In Washington, similar rights would be granted under a domestic partnership bill. Gay leaders like Murray adopted the approach after losing a court case they hoped would lead to gay marriage.
Gay marriage advocates in both states say they're still committed to marriage and will still support marriage bills — even if those efforts are likely to fail. They say they are testing whether lawmakers who summarily reject gay marriage will approve rights that enjoy more popular support.
"The holdup is about marriage, not about the protections," said Jenn Steinfeld, who leads the advocacy group Marriage Equality RI. "So we're giving them an opportunity to show us that."
But the shift has critics both in and outside the gay rights movement.
Evan Wolfson, a gay-rights lawyer who heads the national advocacy group Freedom to Marry, says anything short of marriage relegates gays and lesbians to second-class status. He said a two-pronged approach might be temporarily appropriate in some places, but he questioned whether advocates in Rhode Island and Washington pushed hard enough before switching tactics.
"What I am against is us going into the conversation bargaining against ourselves," he said. "You don't even get half a loaf by asking for half a loaf."
Even though civil unions and individual laws can grant gay couples some protection, lawmakers who support them are deliberately setting up a lesser system, he said.
The Rev. Bernard Healey, a lobbyist for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Providence, said the church would oppose any legislation viewed as a gradual step toward marriage — which is exactly what leaders of Marriage Equality RI say they have in mind.
Despite initial victories, including the legalization of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, all but four other states — New York, New Jersey, New Mexico and Rhode Island — have amended their constitutions or passed laws banning gay marriage.
Gay rights advocates in New York are still pushing for a marriage bill because Gov. Elliot Spitzer has said he's supportive. Basic Rights Oregon is pursuing an anti-discrimination law and a civil union system because voters banned gay marriage in 2004.
However, it would be surprising gay marriage legislation gets a floor vote in any state this year, said Carrie Evans, until recently the legislative director for the Human Rights Campaign in Washington, D.C.
"I think with legislators, just like the public, people don't change their minds on marriage equality ... overnight," she said. "Often time, we have to bring people along with us and that may be the incremental approach in some states."
Back in Rhode Island, Aronda Kirby isn't sure she'd remarry, but she wants the same legal options as any heterosexual. And in the meantime, she wants lawmakers to address her here-and-now concerns about taxes, property inheritance and child custody.
"I don't want to waste my energy arguing about the argument," she said. "Just get the rights."
エイズ重点対策進まず 感染・患者は過去最多 (東京 2007/03/18)