 |
| (Jung Yeon-Je/AFP/Getty Images) |
Anyway, in light of last month's comfort women "resolution" I'm putting links to two good articles assessing where things stand at the moment. The first appears in CFR's Asia Unbound blog where Scott Snyder commends President Park and Prime Minister Abe's "act of political leadership and statesmanship" but then lays out challenges for both governments in maintaining forward momentum. The biggest and most immediate challenge related to satisfying the comfort women themselves, who were shut-out of the process (for not entirely bad reasons contrary to what activists might claim) and the removal of the comfort woman statue in front of the Japanese Embassy in Seoul. The second is from Celeste Arrington who highlights the perspective of the comfort women and their advocacy movement since the 1990s, shedding additional insight on the challenge in satisfying victims' grievances.
"...who were shut-out of the process (for not entirely bad reasons contrary to what activists might claim)..."
ReplyDeleteI wonder if you could elaborate on this? I'm doing research for a blog post, a small part of which is responding to this claim, but I haven't been able to find anything that talks about why they were shut out of the process and why that might not be entirely bad. If you can point me in the right direction or share your own thinking it would be much appreciated.
I don't have a direct government source, but they were shut out of the process conceivably b/c any gesture the ROK government would have attempted to win comfort women survivors' support - but still propose a plan acceptable to Japan - would have been met with opposition. often times with bilateral executive agreements (particularly on security issues), civil society remain outside of the process. it's not "entirely bad" depends on one's perspective and whose interests are being represented. obviously bad for comfort women survivors. but not as bad if you're a proponent of ROK-Japan security relations (i.e. US, Japan, ROK governments)
ReplyDeleteThat was pretty much my read on what happened - that the agreement was more about Japan-ROK relations than necessarily about the comfort women. Though I wish I could find some objective analysis of why the women weren't included and how they can move forward given the women have rejected the deal. Thanks for your reply.
ReplyDelete