comfort women studies
Memory of an injustice: The "Comfort Women" and the Legacy of the Tokyo Trial
The Commission compiled a list of 32 violations of laws and customs of war that
warranted criminal punishment at the Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials. Listed at numbers
5 and 6 respectively, “rape” and the “abduction of girls and women for the purpose of
enforced prostitution” appeared high on the list alongside other egregious war crimes
(Sandoz, 2009, pp. 667–68). Ustinia Dolgopol (2011, pp. 248–55) notes that although
rape was mentioned relatively frequently, little information on enforced prostitution was
recorded. The Allies, however, had volumes of evidence about the establishment and
operation of the comfort stations (Dolgopol, 2011, pp. 248–55; Women’s Tribunal
Judgement, 2001, pp. 26–29). Nonetheless, crimes against the comfort women were
never tried at the Tokyo War Crimes Trial.
As part of the terms of surrender, the Tokyo Trial was convened on 3 May 1946 at
Ichigaya Court in Tokyo at the behest of the United States Government. The Tribunal
tried 28 political and military leaders of the Japanese empire (but not the Emperor) for
three main categories of crimes committed in the context of the Asia-Pacific War: crimes
against peace; conventional war crimes; and crimes against humanity. The defendants
included former ministers and prime ministers, ambassadors and high-ranking military
generals. Of those charged, 25 were found guilty; seven sentenced to death by hanging;
one declared insane; and two died before the completion of the Trial.7
Rape was not enumerated as a "crime against humanity" or a "war crime" in the tokyo charter and no rape victims were called to testify. Moreover, sexual enslavement and force prostitution were barely even mentioned during the trial, despite the extensive knowledge and documentation of these crimes. Notwithstanding these omissions,rape was explicitly included as a crime in the Tokyo Indictment, and charges were in fact brought against defendants for war crimes committed during the Nanjing invasionunder the 1907 Hague Convention IV and 1929 Geneva Convention.
The “Rape of Nanjing” was made known to the world through the Tokyo proceedings as witnesses
gave evidence of the horrific atrocities perpetrated against women and girls during the
six-week invasion of the city (Askin, 1997; Brownmiller, 1976; Henry, 2011a). There
were, however, no charges for the mass rapes of approximately 100 Mapanique women
in the Philippines in 1944 (Women’s Tribunal Judgement, 2001, pp. 91–95). Nor were
there any prosecutions for the sexual enslavement of comfort women.
As noted above, the United Nations War
Crimes Commission listed rape and the forced abduction of women and girls into
brothels as crimes worthy of prosecution, and the Allies held an abundance of evidence
regarding these crimes. Moreover, “[t]he amount of evidence of sexual violence
included in the IMTFE Judgment confirms that it was regarded as a serious crime
within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal” (Women’s Tribunal Judgement, 2001, p. 133).
Sexual enslavement failed to reach the court’s agenda for a number of interconnected
reasons, including: the exclusive focus on defendants (as opposed to victims) and on
the charge of waging an aggressive war; the fixation on crimes committed against the
victor nations; the construction of a victim hierarchy based on national identity, race,
class and gender; the paradoxical perceived “inevitability” as well as “unspeakability”
of wartime rape; the status of women and “prostitution” during and after the World
War II period; and the exclusion of matters deemed to be “private” from the public
realm (Henry, 2011a, pp. 28–60).9 Others have also argued that the Allied prosecutors
at the Tokyo Trial did not prosecute sexual enslavement so as to avoid scrutiny of their
own complicity in the comfort stations (Tanaka, 2002, pp. 133–66). At the end of the
War in 1945, US soldiers visited brothels under the auspices of the Recreation and
Amusement Association (RAA) for almost a year, until General MacArthur had them
closed down in 1946 (Tanaka, 2002, pp. 133–66).
Since the 1990s, much effort has been devoted to uncovering the enormity and
extent of wartime sexual violence during World War II – amongst feminist and human
rights activists, non-governmental organisations, academic scholars and journalists.
Consciousness-raising activities, from NGO and other civil society initiatives to United
Nations-sponsored gatherings of women from diverse geographical locations, have shed
light not only on the injustice of the atrocities committed against women, but also on
the gendered injustice of flawed international criminal responses. During the 1990s, for
example, United Nations Special Rapporteur reports were issued regarding Japan’s guilt
and liability, with special reference to the Tokyo Trial’s failure to prosecute sexual
enslavement (Coomaraswamy, 1997; McDougall, 1998). The reports state that the
crimes against the comfort women fall under the international definition of slavery,
which was illegal at the time and explicitly included in the Tokyo Charter. The reports
collectively claim that rape and forced prostitution were war crimes and crimes against
humanity at the time of the Tokyo proceedings.
One novel civil society initiative was the 2000 Women’s International War Crimes
Tribunal (Chinkin, 2001; Knopp, 2011; Sakamoto, 2001). The Women’s Tribunal was
supported by women’s NGOs throughout Asia and instigated by the Violence against
Women in War Network, Japan (VAWW-Net). The Tribunal was established to hear the
testimonies of the suffering and pain endured by the comfort women at the hands of
the Japanese military over 50 years earlier, and to determine the criminal liability of
leading military figures, political officials and the japanese state. The women's tribunal declared the proceedings of the tokyo trial incomplete because the latter had failed to adequately consider sexual enslavement or to prosecute those responsible for these cimes. 64 survivors from 9 different countries took part in the Women's Tribunal proceedings. The findings of the WOmen's Tribunal and the publication of reports facilitated a symbolic acknowledgment of the harm perpetrated against comfort women during world war II and this has helped to transform the collective memory of the comfort women issue.
The Commission compiled a list of 32 violations of laws and customs of war that
warranted criminal punishment at the Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials. Listed at numbers
5 and 6 respectively, “rape” and the “abduction of girls and women for the purpose of
enforced prostitution” appeared high on the list alongside other egregious war crimes
(Sandoz, 2009, pp. 667–68). Ustinia Dolgopol (2011, pp. 248–55) notes that although
rape was mentioned relatively frequently, little information on enforced prostitution was
recorded. The Allies, however, had volumes of evidence about the establishment and
operation of the comfort stations (Dolgopol, 2011, pp. 248–55; Women’s Tribunal
Judgement, 2001, pp. 26–29). Nonetheless, crimes against the comfort women were
never tried at the Tokyo War Crimes Trial.
As part of the terms of surrender, the Tokyo Trial was convened on 3 May 1946 at
Ichigaya Court in Tokyo at the behest of the United States Government. The Tribunal
tried 28 political and military leaders of the Japanese empire (but not the Emperor) for
three main categories of crimes committed in the context of the Asia-Pacific War: crimes
against peace; conventional war crimes; and crimes against humanity. The defendants
included former ministers and prime ministers, ambassadors and high-ranking military
generals. Of those charged, 25 were found guilty; seven sentenced to death by hanging;
one declared insane; and two died before the completion of the Trial.7
Rape was not enumerated as a "crime against humanity" or a "war crime" in the tokyo charter and no rape victims were called to testify. Moreover, sexual enslavement and force prostitution were barely even mentioned during the trial, despite the extensive knowledge and documentation of these crimes. Notwithstanding these omissions,rape was explicitly included as a crime in the Tokyo Indictment, and charges were in fact brought against defendants for war crimes committed during the Nanjing invasionunder the 1907 Hague Convention IV and 1929 Geneva Convention.
The “Rape of Nanjing” was made known to the world through the Tokyo proceedings as witnesses
gave evidence of the horrific atrocities perpetrated against women and girls during the
six-week invasion of the city (Askin, 1997; Brownmiller, 1976; Henry, 2011a). There
were, however, no charges for the mass rapes of approximately 100 Mapanique women
in the Philippines in 1944 (Women’s Tribunal Judgement, 2001, pp. 91–95). Nor were
there any prosecutions for the sexual enslavement of comfort women.
As noted above, the United Nations War
Crimes Commission listed rape and the forced abduction of women and girls into
brothels as crimes worthy of prosecution, and the Allies held an abundance of evidence
regarding these crimes. Moreover, “[t]he amount of evidence of sexual violence
included in the IMTFE Judgment confirms that it was regarded as a serious crime
within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal” (Women’s Tribunal Judgement, 2001, p. 133).
Sexual enslavement failed to reach the court’s agenda for a number of interconnected
reasons, including: the exclusive focus on defendants (as opposed to victims) and on
the charge of waging an aggressive war; the fixation on crimes committed against the
victor nations; the construction of a victim hierarchy based on national identity, race,
class and gender; the paradoxical perceived “inevitability” as well as “unspeakability”
of wartime rape; the status of women and “prostitution” during and after the World
War II period; and the exclusion of matters deemed to be “private” from the public
realm (Henry, 2011a, pp. 28–60).9 Others have also argued that the Allied prosecutors
at the Tokyo Trial did not prosecute sexual enslavement so as to avoid scrutiny of their
own complicity in the comfort stations (Tanaka, 2002, pp. 133–66). At the end of the
War in 1945, US soldiers visited brothels under the auspices of the Recreation and
Amusement Association (RAA) for almost a year, until General MacArthur had them
closed down in 1946 (Tanaka, 2002, pp. 133–66).
Since the 1990s, much effort has been devoted to uncovering the enormity and
extent of wartime sexual violence during World War II – amongst feminist and human
rights activists, non-governmental organisations, academic scholars and journalists.
Consciousness-raising activities, from NGO and other civil society initiatives to United
Nations-sponsored gatherings of women from diverse geographical locations, have shed
light not only on the injustice of the atrocities committed against women, but also on
the gendered injustice of flawed international criminal responses. During the 1990s, for
example, United Nations Special Rapporteur reports were issued regarding Japan’s guilt
and liability, with special reference to the Tokyo Trial’s failure to prosecute sexual
enslavement (Coomaraswamy, 1997; McDougall, 1998). The reports state that the
crimes against the comfort women fall under the international definition of slavery,
which was illegal at the time and explicitly included in the Tokyo Charter. The reports
collectively claim that rape and forced prostitution were war crimes and crimes against
humanity at the time of the Tokyo proceedings.
One novel civil society initiative was the 2000 Women’s International War Crimes
Tribunal (Chinkin, 2001; Knopp, 2011; Sakamoto, 2001). The Women’s Tribunal was
supported by women’s NGOs throughout Asia and instigated by the Violence against
Women in War Network, Japan (VAWW-Net). The Tribunal was established to hear the
testimonies of the suffering and pain endured by the comfort women at the hands of
the Japanese military over 50 years earlier, and to determine the criminal liability of
leading military figures, political officials and the japanese state. The women's tribunal declared the proceedings of the tokyo trial incomplete because the latter had failed to adequately consider sexual enslavement or to prosecute those responsible for these cimes. 64 survivors from 9 different countries took part in the Women's Tribunal proceedings. The findings of the WOmen's Tribunal and the publication of reports facilitated a symbolic acknowledgment of the harm perpetrated against comfort women during world war II and this has helped to transform the collective memory of the comfort women issue.
还没人赞这篇日记
