Let's not forget about the internment of Japanese citizens during WWII. Techinically, the US apologized, but could have done much better.

Agreed. The "comfort women", and their families, deserve reparations.

It's unlikely to happen, though, because they weren't "true Japanese".

Good points, Samhita. But the "comfort women" (WWII sexual slaves) deserve an apology, public recognition and reparations. Hell, they deserve a lot more than that, but I'm not sure what else can be given at this point. Is anyone who took direct part still alive to be tried?

It's a tough question, though. Certainly the U.S. has committed many atrocities and then promptly forgotten about them and denied them. There's no doubt that we should also be called on our shit, including genocide, racial injustice and sexually based injustice. But do we also want to make a rule that only those who are morally "pure" can stand up against injustice? It's a complex issue and I'm not really sure how I feel. I'd be really interested in hearing more of your personal thoughts, Samhita, if you happen to get the chance!

Maybe the US could apologize for the comfort women used by US soldiers stationed there after the war? Just a thought, since they seem to be in a mood for apologies.

I agree that these women deserve an apology! I just do not think that by the US forcing Japan to give one is going to be really what these women are looking for or deserve. Japan has to own up and appologize for the horrible acts they forced these women into before and during WWII on their own.

Yes, good point Marle. And to Cara, yeah I hear what you are saying. I don't necessarily think we need to be morally pure to call people out, I just notice an undo focus on atrocities in other places, whilst ignoring the ones done at home. For me it is just the hypocrisy of it.

I completely and totally believe that these women deserve a public apology and a settlement their grandkids can live off, lol.

Thanks for the clarification, Samhita. I see better where you're coming from now and I definitely agree.

Marle's comment deserves a post of its own. I've read that the US military basically had the Japanese continue the "comfort women" system pretty much as it was, for many months, for use by American troops. I can't find anything about that right now - we don't like to publicize our war crimes either...

I agree with the post. and I also have question. I've heard of the slavery reperations in the US. The thing I don't get is, how would they conduct something like that. How would they conduct reperations to the "comfort women" of Japan. I was reading on the net about it and I'm sorta lost.

I hate the idea of reparations when the people who suffered are no longer alive. At the very least, the kids should be alive and have some memory of a parent who suffered greatly for the harm done.

Many comfort women, however, are still alive, and their children are certainly around.

I also dislike reparations because they don't get to the real issue of ensuring that this does not happen again. Women, particularly, suffer during war. The Japanese government would be better off issuing binding declarations and laws to ensure the safety of women in times going forward, instead of giving unearned wealth to those who were never harmed by those practices.

This is extremely hard to believe as the U.S. military allowed the system of comfort women to continue according to the Associated Press (http://tinyurl.com/2tb3n6). We should set the precedent and begin by apologizing for our role as well. The recent airing of the CIA's dirty laundry has shown that it's okay for the federal government to apologize for its mistakes.

"How would they conduct reperations to the "comfort women" of Japan."

The way they would do that is by first acknowledging and taking responsibility for the mistreatment of women by the Japanese military. The next step would be to compensate the victims in the form of money, land, goods, or services. For example, the Japanese government could fund support groups and therapy for former comfort women.

Since the powerful are evidently determined to continue to commit these kinds of crimes, I suppose the odd apology for ugly behaviour in the past is as much as can be expected.

Maybe Santayana should have said: "The history we wish to repeat must first be forgotten". It sure seems to be the operative principle in global affairs, and maybe that's why apologies for the past are so hard to get.

I think we really need to hear less of never before, and more of never again.

I hate the idea of reparations when the people who suffered are no longer alive. At the very least, the kids should be alive and have some memory of a parent who suffered greatly for the harm done.

Right, because the stigma, shame, and ostracization of the comfort women most certainly doesn't have any effect on their distant progeny, oh no.

I cannot stand this willful refusal to acknowledge and consider the perpetuity of an atrocity's effects. Comfort women's children are the children of comfort women. Comfort women's grandchildren are the grandchildren of comfort women, and on and on and on. When a people has been dehumanized, the humanity of their progeny is not a foregone conclusion, I'm afraid, which is why the descendants of the violently dehumanized black American slave are still denied full recognition of our humanity to this day.

Denying the ongoing effects of a people's history doesn't make those effects go away.

Oenophile - reparations say "We're sorry".

The past cannot be changed, but acknowledging wrong-doing is a vital process in healing.

In the modern world, the currency is money.

By offering money as part of an apology, the government would be showing their true remorse isn't just lip-service.

The descendants of "comfort-women" deserve a fiscal acknowledgment of their mothers' trauma.

From 1992, the Prime Minister of Japan:

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

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 would like to consider sincerely in what way we can express our feelings to those who suffered such hardship

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."

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

I say, before you complain, find one country, any country, anywhere in the world, which has apologised 4 times for any act it committed, no matter how heinous. Find another country with a pacifist constitution.

Number 2's comment is particularly disgusting.

The descendants of "comfort-women" deserve a fiscal acknowledgment of their mothers' trauma.

No, they don't.

1. The government does not have any money. It is always derived from the taxpayers. This system amounts to the government-sanctioned theft from the innocent to the progeny of those who are innocent and harmed.

2. You aren't owed "fiscal acknowledgment" of anything, let alone something that never happened to you. You are owed either recompense or an apology, but the former is not a requirement of the latter.

Giving money to anyone but the comfort women is complete crap.

The argument for reparations for slaves is nothing but a victimised money-grab. Let's be honest here. Should I get reparations because my female ancestors were discriminated against? I'm Irish, in part - I want reparations!

Eventually, you would distribute money from the few who cannot find a trace of discrimination in their family tree, regardless of their present circumstances, to those who can prove some harm faced by their ancestors, regardless of whether or not it has caused present financial distress. Thievery by government fiat does not make it any less so.

Nothing against compensating comfort women, slaves, or those who are on the bad end of discrimination; but anyone who thinks their far-distant descendants deserve, by virtue of birth, to live the high life off of taxpayers is just inventing another form of aristocracy, albeit one based on long-forgotten suffering and not long-forgotten wars.

Oenophile wrote: "I also dislike reparations because they don't get to the real issue of ensuring that this does not happen again.

I'm not a fan of reparations, but reparations say more than "I'm sorry".

Imagine a world where reparations become expected after civil rights violation and the price of reparations are steep. This would function to discourage future abuses of civil rights if governments are forced to reckon with the real possibility that they will pay (literally) for their abuses.

Point well taken, Samhita, but I have trouble calling out Rep. Lantos specifically, as I suspect the emotional motivation for his sponsorship of this bill and issue is his history not as an American, but as a Holocaust survivor (the only one currently serving in US Congress).

Oenophile - I don't think you grasp the distinction between some sort of professional shyster trying to make a quick buck (as you seem to imagine), and the gravitas that only an apology with fiscal reparation carries.

Putting one's money where one's mouth is speaks louder than any other message in a capitalist culture.

"anyone who thinks their far-distant descendants deserve, by virtue of birth, to live the high life off of taxpayers is just inventing another form of aristocracy"

And the straw man rears his ugly head!

Reparations do not need to take the form of monetary compensations. As I noted in my comment, they can also take the form of social services. Giving reparations in the form of health care and education benefits would hardly constitute 'living the high life' as you put it.

Nothing against compensating comfort women, slaves, or those who are on the bad end of discrimination; but anyone who thinks their far-distant descendants deserve, by virtue of birth, to live the high life off of taxpayers is just inventing another form of aristocracy...

Yet, by virtue of birth, white men still benefit from the spoils that were won at the expense of the disadvantaged, how ever far removed from the present, spoils that they only maintain at the expense of the descendants of those same disadvantaged people. I don't see oenophile decrying the unfairness of that, though.

Good point Jeremy!

And justicewalks too!

David Schraub, Lantos being a holocaust survivor doesn`t give him the right to distort history or beat other countries with his US stick. Japan has apologised 4 times. Why should they do so again because the US Senate is ignorant of this fact?

From today's Times Online (British paper):

"Shinzo Abe, Japan’s nationalist Prime Minister, provoked an outcry in March when he said there was no proof that the military had forced women into prostitution. He refused to comment yesterday on the resolution, saying that it was a matter for the US Congress.

Mr Abe was forced to back-track from his comments of March during his US visit, saying that he sympathised with the women’s plight. But his position was not helped by 44 Japanese MPs who signed a denial in The Washington Post this month that the Imperial Army had engaged in sexual enslavement of women."

Also, The Asian Womens Fund does not receive any funding from the Japanese government, it is entirely funded by private donations.

So Flashheart, this is an ongoing issue, not done-and-dusted as you would have us believe.

Abe`s comments concern one aspect of a debate about history. As you can see from the text I posted above, Abe`s comments also go against the flow of the last 20 years of Japanese public comments on the issue - those apologies are not exactly equivocal.

Perhaps Anorak is also not aware that both China and Korea signed away their right to reparations in the 70s and 80s. Japan has paid massive public reparations to both countries for war damage, and it is surely a matter of debate as to whether particular groups of affected victims should be compensated outside of that framework.

It is also apparently a matter of opinion as to whether or not descendants of comfort women should receive money.

There is also evidence that many comfort women were simply paid workers. Should they be compensated for doing a job they were not coerced into doing?

Point taken, Flashheart, I am eating my humble pie.

You are right, Flashheart, I didn't know about China and Korea's signing away reparations.
And yes, I guess it does come down to personal opinion as to how and why reparations are made, and to whom.

I for one am of the opinion this issue hasn't been correctly handled yet.

But as Samhita points out in her post, there is an irony to the U.S. telling other countries how to behave regarding warcrimes.

I think there's more than an irony to it. I think it's dangerous in this case. Japan is a pacifist nation, and most Japanese support that position. They also support Japan's history of apologies and reparations. But being forced to repeat the apologies has made many Japanese sick of the process. Abe is Koizumi's successor, and they were elected for non-fascist reasons, but it is easy for them to use this apology-weariness to drive their own political point, which is much more conservative and at odds with the majority of the population. Later this year Abe is going to try to introduce a referendum to reverse a key point of Japan's pacifist constitution. These senate votes will encourage Japanese to reject pacifism, and the world will lose a very special thing - the only openly pacifist nation in the world.

I think it is reckless and stupid of the US to push this issue.

Those are good points, Flashheart.
You've made me think.

the US does indeed also have a problem with not taking responsibility for past actions, but that doesn't mean that the US should approve of other people doing the same thing. I think it's good for japan to be pressured by 3rd parties in this disagreement. It is a real problem in japan, and the new Prime Minister Abe is trying to take the country for a turn further to the right. The conservatives don't feel there will be any ill consequences to their contued denial of reality.

crypticfortune, how is it a "real problem in japan"? I have never met a Japanese person who supports Abe's position on pacifism or the war history. He is going to use these kinds of ill-considered attacks on Japan to force people to the right on the issue. Why should anyone encourage this?

Absolutely right, justicewalks.

What you don't seem to grasp, oenophile, about reparations to the descendents of American slaves and Japanese/Korean comfort women, is that what was stolen from them was of fiscal value.

The labor of American slaves was stolen from them. Their labor created immense value, value that funded private fortunes as well as state infrastructures. Because of the state-mandated practice of slavery, these people were unable to use their labor to create wealth for themselves. They could not earn money, put it away, and leave it to their descendents. They could not invent something, patent it, and reap the rewards. They could not write a book, sell it, and pass the resulting money on to their heirs. Their labor was stolen, and the value it created was used by white people and the government.

Thus it is eminently reasonable for the descendents of those slaves, who were denied any possibility of benefitting from their ancestors' wealth.

And don't give me that nonsense about governments not having any money, but only taxing. They manage to find the money for every other project they think is worthwhile.

Under your standards, all a country would have to do to duck any fiscal liability for its atrocities would be tie things up in court until all the initially affected parties are dead. Since nations tend to last longer than individuals, that's essentially denying any individual the ability to obtain proper recompense from the state. Which doesn't sound like a libertarian position to me.

Let me add that as a country, we Americans still benefit from the labor stolen from slaves. Been to Providence, Rhode Island? It's a beautiful city. You know what built it? Rum and the slave trade.

anorak, I have commented more on this (and the historical issues about coercion) and also on modern japanese fascism at my blog, here:
http://flashy-san.blogspot.com/2007_03_01_archive.html

You have to scroll down, because I can't seem to link directly to my posts (it's in "On Fascism" and "Should they or shouldn't they?")

if you are so foolish as to read my blog, please be nice - it's not a political blog.

Thanks, Flashheart, I'll take a gander at it right now.
And actually, I am pretty nice. I said it so it must be true. ;o)

EG, while we're pointing out the bleeding obvious to Oenophile, can I ask how the descendants of the first Americans are doing these days?

And how do we think they might be doing if their ancestors didn't have to survive attempted genocide?

Very interesting, Flashheart. I've never been to Japan, but am interested in the country.
Cute turtle too.

Hey, you're an Australian...I'm a N.Z.er.
Words to the effect of "Bonza, mate!"

I was born in NZ, and lived there on and off. I still support the All Blacks (but who wouldn`t?)

Japan is a very interesting place, but now that I`ve been here a year and seen what goes on, I have to say that you can`t trust anything a foreigner says about it. ex-pats here are the most racist, sexist people I have ever met. They are also generally stupid and greedy. So everything you see and hear about Japan needs to be taken with a big pinch of salt (including from me!)

Yet, by virtue of birth, white men still benefit from the spoils that were won at the expense of the disadvantaged, how ever far removed from the present, spoils that they only maintain at the expense of the descendants of those same disadvantaged people. I don't see oenophile decrying the unfairness of that, though.

If we're going to be completely honest about it, we should say SOME generally white people who tend to be male are rich off of this. Our society is bad for EVERYONE who is not a rich white male. But I do not expect reparations because I am a woman, or because my parents grew up poor at the expense of people who were not.

I personally don't think reparations should be made for people who are not DIRECTLY affected by events such as slavery, comfort women, etc. To me, the best way to help those who are indirectly affected by such things is, as someone else already posted, by creating more social programs. That way it seems less like placing blame and more like actual progress.

Yeah man, The AB's are playing Australia on saturday, it's gonna be awesome (who says rugby and feminism don't mix?). After last weekend's amazing clash with the Springboks, this weekend's match should be a ripper!

Anywhoo - I have several friends, both male amd female who've spent time in Japan (mostly teaching English), and I agree with your analysis. There certainly seems to be a certain strain of white expat who are attracted to Japan.

think u might have left out a minor historical event (or 4+, against Japan alone) in your commentary:

"The first use of atomic weapons against human beings occurred on August 6-9 1945, when the United States incinerated the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II, killing an estimated 110,000 Japanese citizens and injuring another 130,000. By 1950 another 230,000 died from injuries and radiation. Earlier in 1945 two fire bombing raids on Tokyo killed 140,000 citizens and injured a million more."

Those are all clearly war crimes for which the U.S. President and military leaders should have been hanged.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/FOE201A.html

Tom Lantos is just a warmonger for the Democrats. His entire act is a charade - this action of his, and everything else his 'rights' committees do only provide cover for his real objectives - increased military spending. He's capitalizing off the extreme suffering of others for his own political gain. Nice guy, Tom Lantos.