[Scene of the Anti-Extradition Movement] Full record of 8 hours of being trapped in the Hong Kong Legislative Council. "The Report" takes you back to the scene Mak Haoli July 4, 2019 07:01:00
香港示威者1日晚間闖入立法會大樓。(攝影：麥浩禮) Hong Kong demonstrators broke into the Legislative Council building on the evening of the 1st. (Photography: Mak Hawley) 香港のデモ参加者が１日の晩、立法会議事堂に突入した。(撮影：麦 浩礼)
“Anti-extradition law” demonstrators stormed the Legislative Council in Hong Kong on the 1st. After a 9-hour stalemate, they broke into and occupied the chamber. The demonstrators graffitied the Hong Kong regional emblem, hung the British Hong Kong flag and read out the four major demands. The police cleared the area in the early morning. All evacuated before. This is the first time in Hong Kong's history that demonstrators have successfully captured the legislature.
The correspondent of "The Report" became one of the few reporters who was "trapped" in the Legislative Council for 8 hours that day, allowing readers to "return to the scene" from a different perspective in addition to the TV footage. The demonstrators went from attacking to attacking everything inside the Legislative Council. what happened.
The correspondent of "The Report" became one of the few reporters who was "trapped" in the Legislative Council for 8 hours that day, allowing readers to "return to the scene" from a different perspective in addition to the TV footage. The demonstrators went from attacking to attacking everything inside the Legislative Council. what happened.
1日，立法會示威者外氣氛肅殺。(攝影：麥浩禮) On the 1st, the atmosphere outside the Legislative Council demonstrators was solemn. (Photography: Mak Hawley) １日、立法会の外の示威者たちの雰囲気は死ぬほど張り詰めていた。(撮影：麦 浩礼)
July 1 marks the 22nd anniversary of the handover and "reunification" of Hong Kong's sovereignty. In the morning, the Hong Kong government and Chinese military and political officials held a celebratory reception and flag-raising ceremony at the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Center, which is only 600 meters away from the government headquarters and the Legislative Council. Some demonstrators advanced towards the venue at 7 a.m. but were stopped by the police. The two sides immediately clashed, and some demonstrators were beaten until their heads were bleeding and injured and they were arrested.
After the ceremony, the demonstrators returned to the Legislative Council demonstration area. Although the MTR closed two MRT stations near the political headquarters at the request of the police, this did not stop more and more people from wearing eye masks and helmets coming to the Legislative Council to support them. A large number of protective equipment and medical supplies were placed at the material station set up by the demonstrators.
With the news that many demonstrators were injured in the morning clashes, the atmosphere in the demonstration area became tense. Many young people wore black masks and held eye protection and helmets. Some demonstrators even wrapped their arms with plastic wrap to prevent them from getting injured. Skin irritation from pepper spray.
When the reporter was observing the surrounding areas around 12 o'clock, he had already received news from the Airdrop function of the Apple mobile phone that the demonstrators were broadcasting or attacking the Legislative Council. There were also demonstrators making appeals to the people outside or attacking the Legislative Council. However, there was no response. Afterwards, reporters entered the Legislative Council through the public entrance, applied for press credentials for the day, and then arrived at the press room on the first floor to work.
衝擊立法會 警方後方上子彈 Attacking the Legislative Council, police loaded bullets in the rear
At 1:10 p.m., there was a sudden commotion among the reporters in the press room. News came that demonstrators were attacking the entrance of the Legislative Council members. The reporters went downstairs and tried to leave the Legislative Council through the public entrance. However, the security of the Legislative Council had locked the door and closed the door. Said, "The door will be closed at any time, and you can't get out now." The reporter saw a large number of police officers rushing towards the entrance of the parliamentarians.
Fortunately, security guards opened the staff passage, allowing reporters to reach the entrance of the parliamentarian passage. What I saw in front of me was that a large number of demonstrators used recycling cages and iron poles to attack the glass on the side of the building facing Tim Mei Road. The police officers present were extremely nervous. They picked up their shields and batons to follow the commander's instructions and formed a defensive formation. They raised their hands and wrote " Stop the attack or use force" is a red flag.
After the pro-democracy congressmen tried to stand in front of the demonstrators and asked them not to attack, but to no avail, police officers carrying tear gas launchers and shotguns loaded with rubber bullets began to arrive at the scene in response to wave after wave of attacks.
警員守著被示威者打破的玻璃缺口。（攝影：麥浩禮） Police officers guard the gap in the glass broken by demonstrators. (Photography: Mak Hawley)
At around 2 p.m., demonstrators successfully pushed a recycling truck into the gap. The police responded with pepper spray and pulled the recycling truck away into the Legislative Council. The demonstrators instead used an iron fence to break through the gap.
A protester threw an unknown white gas spray can into another breach. Several police officers in front who were not wearing gas masks immediately coughed and backed away. Under the constant impact, one of the glass panes was about to break. At the same time, police officers holding shotguns in the rear also began to load their guns, and police officers carrying AR-15 assault rifles capable of firing live ammunition came to the scene for reinforcements.
有警員配備AR-15突擊步槍。（攝影：麥浩禮） 轉移進攻正門 警員憂縱火
Some police officers are equipped with AR-15 assault rifles. (Photo: Mak Ho-lay) Moved the attack to the main entrance, police feared arson
At 4:06 pm, the demonstrators finally succeeded in breaking through the glass and creating a large hole. However, the demonstrators had a tacit understanding and shouted "one two, one two" and retreated. The photographers outside the Legislative Council suddenly stayed in the "front row" to take pictures, while the police officers guarding the front line breathed a sigh of relief. After a while, the police officers used long shields to seal the breach to prevent other debris from being thrown in.
But about an hour later, in the direction of the main entrance of the Legislative Council, in front of the demonstration area, which was commonly known as the "Bad Pot" by the Hong Kong media, a large number of demonstrators began to push down the dividing iron bars and attack the main entrance.
記者從入口側門可見，有示威者推翻鐵台，利用鐵枝等破壞正門玻璃。
The reporter could see from the side door of the entrance that demonstrators overturned the iron platform and used iron branches to damage the glass of the front entrance.
示威者進攻立法會正門。（攝影：麥浩禮） Demonstrators attacked the main entrance of the Legislative Council. (Photography: Mai Haoli)
Since the iron rolling door in front of the Legislative Council had already fallen down, the demonstrators broke through the glass and began to rush into the rolling shutter. The loud noise made the police officers inside anxious, and the commander shouted outside the building, "We have everything ready, as long as anything happens If a person rushes in, he will be arrested one by one."
Reporters at the scene heard the police officers whispering privately, "If you break in, come in quickly so we can come out and beat you." However, some senior police officers pointed out that they were worried that after the roller shutters were opened, demonstrators would throw things into the gap and set fire to it. They asked the police officers at the front to step back and told reporters to avoid standing directly in front.
Police officers guard the roller shutters to protect the Legislative Council building. (Photo: Mak Hawley) The police suddenly retreated without warning, and the demonstrators rushed in and wreaked havoc.
At 7:30, after demonstrators kept attacking the roller shutters, the Legislative Council alarm bell began to ring. At 8:43 pm, the demonstrators successfully pried open the iron gates and stacked iron bars, wooden boards and other debris on top of the roller shutters. After prying open the bottom of the roller shutter, the police officers who were resting behind became very nervous. All the police officers stood up and prepared to face the impact. However, the progress was not as good as the police imagined. During this period, some police officers asked the media present to come forward and take pictures of the damage to the roller shutters.
At 9 p.m., after more than three hours of work, the demonstrators finally managed to pry open most of the roller shutters and threw unknown white cigarette spray cans at the police officers inside. After the police officers retreated a few steps, the commander suddenly ordered all police officers to retreat a few minutes later without informing the reporters present, and to retreat to the upper floors of the Legislative Council building and the government headquarters.
示威者進入立法會大樓。（攝影：麥浩禮） Demonstrators entered the Legislative Council building. (Photography: Mai Haoli)
Five minutes after the police withdrew their guard, the demonstrators successfully broke into the Legislative Council and began to destroy other glass doors in the building to open more channels for demonstrators to enter. After a demonstrator crashed into the entrance of the Legislative Council Library with a railroad car, he escaped through the door again, saying that he wanted to protect the books inside. However, after the demonstrators entered the Legislative Council restaurant, when they took drinks, they put down their money and posted " We won’t take it without asking” slogan.
有示威者在外牆噴上「殺人政權」等字句、破壞立法會的監控鏡頭，並鑿開需以職員卡開啟的大門。
Some demonstrators spray-painted phrases such as "murderous regime" on the outer wall, destroyed surveillance cameras of the Legislative Council, and cut open doors that require staff cards to be opened.
As more and more demonstrators entered the Legislative Council, some demonstrators seen by reporters clearly had a goal to reach. Including the chamber, parliamentary offices and other places. The demonstrators also showed a tendency of "selective destruction", destroying and trampling on the portraits of Chairman Leung Kwan-yin, former Chairman Joseph Tsang, and former Chairman Fan Tsui Lai-tai. However, the portraits of Legislative Council Chairman Shi Wai-yin and Anthony Wong during the British-era Hong Kong era were spared.
Some demonstrators broke into the parliamentarians' lounge and posted the words "indestructible" in front of the cultural relics and souvenirs given by parliamentarians from other countries. However, some demonstrators also smashed televisions, photocopiers, and drinking water facilities in the building, and poured water on electronic equipment. Some offices were also ransacked.
However, when the reporter returned to the press room where the power was partially cut off, the demonstrators did not interfere with the press room in any way. They only blocked the entrance and exit to the press room with iron bars. Some reporters began to evacuate with their equipment, fearing that if demonstrators appeared to stay behind, Journalists will no longer be able to easily leave the Legislative Council.
示威者1日晚間在立法會選擇性破壞，並踐踏現任立法會主席梁君彥畫像，而記者室則被局部斷電（攝影：麥浩禮） Demonstrators selectively vandalized and trampled on the portrait of current Legislative Council Chairman Leung Kwan-yin at the Legislative Council on the evening of the 1st, while the press room was partially cut off (Photo: Mak Hawley)
After the demonstrators broke the lock on the door of the chamber, more than 200 demonstrators poured in. They hung the Hong Kong regional emblem in front of the chamber and defaced the words "People's Republic of China". There were demonstrators outside the "Hong Kong" area. In front of the chairman's seat, the "Hong Kong British Flag" representing Hong Kong in the Hong Kong British era was placed, and then portraits of senior officials handling the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance, including Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, were placed.
After the demonstrators broke the lock on the door of the chamber, more than 200 demonstrators poured in. They hung the Hong Kong regional emblem in front of the chamber and defaced the words "People's Republic of China". There were demonstrators outside the "Hong Kong" area. In front of the chairman's seat, the "Hong Kong British Flag" representing Hong Kong in the Hong Kong British era was placed, and then portraits of senior officials handling the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance, including Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, were placed.
示威者在議事廳香港區徽上塗鴉，並展示港英旗幟。（攝影：麥浩禮）
「要走一起走」示威者拖走「死士」全數撤離 Demonstrators painted graffiti on the Hong Kong emblem in the parliamentary chamber and displayed the British Hong Kong flag. (Photography: Mak Hawley)
However, the strange behavior of the police withdrawing their presence after 10 pm made the demonstrators who remained in the Legislative Council begin to feel uneasy, believing that the police had deliberately withdrawn their presence in preparation for round-ups. Some demonstrators began to leave the Legislative Council building and called on reporters to be careful. The Hong Kong police also announced at 11:20 that the area would be cleared within a short period of time. However, four demonstrators made it clear that they would be "soldiers" and would not leave.
At 12 o'clock in the morning, when most of the demonstrators left and only a few reporters remained, many demonstrators returned to the building and dragged out four demonstrators who refused to leave, saying, "We want to come together, we want to leave together." , and forcibly took them away. At the same time, a large number of police officers approached the Legislative Council building, raised black flags, and threw tear gas at the crowd. Demonstrators outside began to disperse. When the police entered the devastated Legislative Council building, all demonstrators had evacuated.
1日晚間11時多示威者開始離開立法會大樓。（攝影：麥浩禮） Demonstrators began to leave the Legislative Council building at around 11pm on the 1st. (Photography: Mak Hawley)
While the Japanese destroyed sensitive documents at the end of the war, during the first half of 1942 the Imperial Japanese Army relocated many of its records to an underground government storage facility in the Minami Tamagawa suburb of Tokyo. The purpose was to protect the documents from destruction by enemy air raids, but the unintended result was that the records cache of an estimated 7,000 cubic feet (18 million pages) fell intact into American hands. The bulk of these materials, however, predate the 1931–1945 period specified in IWG guidelines.
Elsewhere in the operational areas of the Pacific and Southwest Pacific Theaters, U.S. forces captured hundreds of thousands more pages of Japanese military materials. The U.S. government returned all of these documents to Japan beginning in the late 1950s. Once back in Japanese hands, the Japanese government returned the records to their respective ministries of origin; that is, the Defense Agency received confiscated Imperial Army and Navy documents, the Foreign Ministry diplomatic records, and so forth. Before returning the confiscated documents, 5–15 percent were microfilmed, at the expense of either the U.S. government or private foundations. At least six major collections of Japanese-language materials were microfilmed:
(1) The Archives of the Imperial Japanese Army, Navy, and other government agencies. This collection from the Tamagawa storage complex comprises 163 reels of microfilm, roughly 400,000 pages. Many of the records (57 reels) predate 1931; the material runs to mid-1942. Materials from “other government agencies” are mainly police records of the Interior Ministry. The original military records form the basis of the Defense Agency’s military archives in Tokyo, and are today open to public researchers, although this was not always the case. Microfilm sets are available at the U.S. Library of Congress and the Japan National Diet Library, among other institutions. Non-readers of Japanese may obtain a sense of the collection from James W. Morley, “Check List of Seized Japanese Records in the National Archives,” Far Eastern Quarterly, IX:3 (May 1950). There is an English-language finding aid to the collection, John Young, comp., Checklist of Microfilm Reproductions of Selected Archives of the Japanese Army, Navy, and Other Government Agencies, 1868–1945 (Georgetown University Press, 1959).
On behalf of the IWG, researchers with Japanese language proficiency examined documents in this collection with titles suggestive of possible war crimes. Among those investigated were archives relating to Jewish activity in Manchuria and to maintaining internal security in occupied zones, and a technical report on Soviet chemical warfare. One collection contains Japanese rules and regulations pertaining to prisoners of war captured in the Philippines, but it consists mainly of administrative instructions and has no evidence of war crimes.
(2) The Japan Foreign Ministry Archives are more than 2 million pages on 2,116 reels of microfilm. Included in this set is the complete file of documentary evidence produced for the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal. The originals are available to the public at the Japan Foreign Ministry Archives in Tokyo. A microfilm edition is available at the U.S. Library of Congress and at the Japan National Diet Library.
(3) Another collection is comprised of documents used to support the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey (USSBS), documents related to the Pacific War (1941–1945), and records pertaining to the so-called Fifteen Years War (1931–1945) that U.S. government historians used to write the official account of the war in the Pacific. These Japanese-language documents were discovered in a warehouse in Alexandria, Virginia, in the early 1960s. The originals form the basis of the Japan National Archives in Tokyo and are available to researchers, subject to privacy restrictions. Microfilm copies of the USSBS (46 reels) and the Pacific War (34 reels) are available at the National Archives in College Park, Maryland, while the Fifteen Years War materials (138 reels) are available at the U.S. Library of Congress. The entire microfilm collection is also available in unexpurgated form at Waseda University in Tokyo.
(4) The South Manchurian Railway Company (SMRC) original documents were not returned to Japan, and about 70 percent of all SMRC records remain at the Library of Congress. Others are scattered among six American and forty-four Japanese institutions.17 The Japan National Diet Library has microfilmed the Library of Congress holdings. These materials include Japanese studies of Manchurian terrain, natural resources, geography, geology, and so forth, as well as analytical papers on political and economic affairs.
17. Sadao Asada, ed., Japan & The World, 1853–1952: A Bibliographic Guide to Japanese Scholarship in Foreign Relations (New York: Columbia University Press, 1989), 41–42.
(5) International [Military] Tribunal for the Far East (The Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal) exhibits are indexed. The Library of Congress Law Library has a microfilm copy of “Prosecution documents which were either not offered or were rejected” (1952) and “Rejected defense documents,” produced by Harvard University. In 1975, the National Archives and Records Service (predecessor of NARA) compiled “Preliminary inventory of the records of the International Military Tribunal Far East: record group 230,” a copy of which is available at the Library of Congress as well as at College Park. The documents themselves are found on microfilm in Record Group 331 at College Park.
(6) Japanese documents seized by the Allied Translator and Interpreter Section (ATIS) amounted to 350,000 captured documents of which 18,000 were fully translated. ATIS relied on Japanese-language documentation to produce Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s official report of his wartime operations in the Southwest Pacific. Some 13,800 files of original documents were returned to Japan by MacArthur’s headquarters via the Japanese Demobilization Bureaus, but the disposition of others, such as the original Japanese-language Unit 731 reports of human experimentation that were translated into English, remains unknown. In addition, Japanese-language documents held by the Pacific Military Intelligence Research Service (PACMIRS) were returned to the Japanese government. For the most part, these were operational and technical reports. English-language translations of the originals are available in record group 165 (P-File) at College Park. The U.S. Navy also confiscated thousands of Japanese naval operational documents and reports. These are available on microfilm (about 230 reels) at the Naval Historical Center. The originals of all of the above military documents repose in the Defense Agency archives in Tokyo, Japan.
Topics of Special Interest
特別な関心を呼ぶ問題
In addition to adhering to the IWG’s guidelines when conducting their searches for classified records pertinent to the Disclosure Acts, agencies also paid particular attention to records that might contain information about Japanese atrocities perpetrated on civilians, such as the Rape of Nanking, “comfort women,” the mistreatment of POWs and civilian internees, medical experimentation on humans, Unit 731, and records related to the U.S. decision not to prosecute Emperor Hirohito as a war criminal. It is important to note, however, that during World War II and its immediate aftermath, not all areas of Japanese war criminality were explored in depth. For example, while the “comfort women” issue is of great current importance, the U.S. government did not systematically collect or create records related to the topic during or after the war.18 As a consequence, there are very few documents pertaining to the topic in the archives. The same is true for records related to the Rape of Nanking.
18. In February 1948, the Dutch tried twelve Japanese for the forced prostitution of Dutch women held in internment camps in the Dutch East Indies. Narrelle Morris, review of Yuki Tanaka, Japan’s Comfort Women: Sexual Slavery and Prostitution During World War II and the U.S. Occupation (New York: Routledge, 2002), http://wwwsshe.murdoch.edu.au/intersections/issue9/morris_review.html/.
The atrocities at Nanjing occurred four years before the United States entered the war. At that time, the U.S. government did not have a large military or diplomatic intelligence network in China. A handful of trained military or embassy personnel reported on events, sometimes second-hand; compared with the sensational press coverage, the official U.S. documentation was scant. As a result, with the exception of the records produced during the postwar Class A war crimes trial of the commanding general of Japanese forces deemed responsible for the Rape of Nanking, there are few materials on this subject at the National Archives.
Immediately after the war, American attention focused on the Japanese responsible for the Pearl Harbor attack, those involved in mistreatment of U.S. prisoners of war, and Japanese military and civilian officials implicated in war crimes, including rape (especially of Filipina women) or forced prostitution of Caucasian women. There was also knowledge of the Imperial Japanese Army’s field brothel system, as shown in scattered reports declassified during the 1960s. However, the scope of the brothel network (particularly in China) and the Japanese Army’s official sponsorship of the system were not well understood. Licensed prostitution was legal in prewar Japan, and Allied officials viewed the small part of the overseas system they uncovered as an extension of homeland practices. Prosecuting Japanese soldiers for rape, a notorious crime everywhere the army set foot, took precedence over investigating the circumstances of “comfort women,” who were seen as professional prostitutes, not as unwilling victims coerced into brothels by employees of the Japanese military. For instance, a significant document that linked the Japanese government with the military field brothel system, “Amenities in the Japanese Armed Forces,” was translated in November 1945 by ATIS and declassified in the 1960s.19 Although available to the public for years, it received little attention until the “comfort women” issue focused attention on these wrongdoings in the 1990s.
19. Allied Translator and Interpreter Section, Supreme Command for the Allied Powers, “Amenities in the Japanese Armed Forces,” Research Report 120, 15 Nov. 1945, 9–20, Formerly Security-Classified Intelligence Reference Publications (“P” File) Received from U.S. Military Attachés, Military and Civilian Agencies of the United States, Foreign Governments and Other Sources, 1940–1945, NA, RG 165, Records of the War Department General and Special Staffs, entry 79, box 342.
As for Unit 731, researchers found no new classified evidence related to Gen. Ishii’s experiments or the unit’s treatment of POWs. The small amount of newly released material adds more evidence to the already well-documented facts about Japanese abuse of prisoners. As for the primary question of Unit 731’s alleged experimentation on captured American servicemen, multiple government agencies conducted exhaustive searches in intelligence, military, and diplomatic records but found no definitive evidence. This was not surprising, because repeated Congressional inquiries about Japan’s alleged use of American prisoners in experiments resulted in extensive examination of U.S. Army and other government agency records in the 1970s, 1980s, and again in early 1990s. In other words, Congressional interest in Japanese war crimes, especially those perpetrated against American POWs, had already opened the existing Unit 731 documents in the possession of the U.S. government and made them available to the public.
Finally, allegations arose that the U.S. government engaged in a cover-up to conceal incriminating documents pertaining to war crimes in order not to embarrass the Japanese government. Exhaustive searches by several agencies for classified materials, conducted independently of outside political interference of any sort, followed the guidelines imposed by the IWG. They found no evidence to support such assertions. There were miscarriages of justice—Ishii’s case being the most obvious and disturbing—and the question of Emperor Hirohito’s war responsibility remains a source of controversy in the United States and elsewhere. U.S. government archives, however, yielded no new information on these controversial topics. This result may not satisfy those who insist incriminating or embarrassing documents remain hidden, but disinterested parties will appreciate that the IWG has managed to open the remaining classified files pertinent to Japanese war crimes and to make that evidence available to the public. Archival holdings in Japan, China, and the former Soviet Union also offer the possibility of files that may clarify or lead to reinterpretation of our understanding of Japanese atrocities.
During the search for classified records, it soon became apparent that historians, researchers, and concerned parties have not fully exploited the many records about Japanese war crimes previously declassified and made available at the National Archives. The fault lies less with the public, however, than with the organization of the massive collection. Records came from more than a dozen U.S. government agencies, each of which employed diverse filing systems and exercised multiple functions between 1931 and 2005. This led to a divestiture of central records into smaller agency collections, a standard archival practice that unintentionally complicated the researcher’s task. Captured or seized Imperial Japanese military and naval records are found in at least twelve separate record groups at NARA and fill thousands of boxes. Furthermore, except for the records pertaining to war crimes trials (none of which remains classified), there was no one central finding aid to help researchers navigate the Japanese collection.
Moreover, for whatever reasons, records reasonably expected to be at NARA are not there and turn up in unlikely places. Three important documents, translated from Japanese to English and each more than 100 pages long, detail Unit 731’s clinical observations of the day-by-day spread of various pathogens through the bodies of helpless prisoners whom Japanese doctors subjected to experiments. The U.S. government declassified these key documents, titled “The Report of A” (anthrax), “The Report of G” (glanders), and “The Report of Q” (bubonic plague) in 1960. They are available to the public at the U.S. Library of Congress. With relevant documents interfiled among a dozen record groups and others available—but not at the National Archives—the researcher’s task is a formidable one.
Greg Bradsher’s 1700-page finding aid on the CD that accompanies this volume remedies this problem. His searchable finding aid brings coherence to the collections, enables researchers to consult a single reference to begin their search, and introduces first-time users to the variety of materials available at NARA on Japanese war crimes. The hope of all those involved in this project is that introducing the available material and making it accessible will stimulate new interest in these underused collections and encourage historians, advocates, writers, researchers, and citizens with an interest in these important issues to make use of the collections. Study of the mass of unclassified material will undoubtedly turn up documents relevant to Japanese war crimes and perhaps resolve some outstanding issues.
The huge number of documents declassified under the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act allowed the IWG’s first book on the records, U.S. Intelligence and the Nazis, to take the form of historical case studies based on the newly released documentary material. But the comparatively small number of Japanese documents declassified, coupled with the larger problem of open Japanese records being underused, mandated a different format. Contributors to this volume adopted an approach to make the enormous number of heretofore underused Japanese wartime documents more user friendly. Their purpose throughout the volume is to make us aware of how much is available by introducing these records to readers and explaining where the records are located. Their goal is to stimulate interest in these records in the hope that researchers will be encouraged to exploit them efficiently and produce a fuller record of the Asia-Pacific War.
Daqing Yang’s interim assessment of documentary evidence and Japanese war crimes discusses the destruction of wartime Japanese documents and surveys the changing treatment of Japan’s war crimes in Chinese, English, and Japanese literature. He explains reasons for the heightened interest in crimes committed against POWs, the forced prostitution of “comfort women,” and Unit 731’s nefarious activities. Yang concludes with a plea for sustained and intense international collaboration to improve the level of research on Japanese war crimes.
James Lide summarizes the war-crimes–related materials located in the recently declassified records at NARA. His focus is on the limited number of documents pertinent to war crimes and their often vague or incomplete information. No large corpus of documentation remained classified on the Nanjing massacre, the “comfort women” issue, or Unit 731, although scattered references to bacteriological/chemical warfare and the kidnapping of women and girls by Japanese troops were noted.
NARA staff writers offer starting points for future research. The authors describe in general terms the availability of archival material spanning twelve record groups on the subject of Japanese war crimes, and then illustrate the scope of the collections by highlighting documents pertinent to their three case studies: Japanese treatment of Allied prisoners of war in Manchuria, Unit 731 activities, and Japanese atrocities committed against U.S. airmen on Chichi-Jima in 1945.
Robert Hanyok’s illuminating essay explains the U.S. military communications intelligence system during World War II, noting its successes and limitations. He devotes most of his essay to National Security Agency materials available to the public at NARA and offers an explanation for their organization, detailing different types of records: army, navy, diplomatic, military attaché, and so forth. He pays special attention to communication intelligence attempts to discover the fate of American POWs held by the Japanese. He also describes how eavesdropping on Japanese military and naval radio communications unintentionally produced evidence of Japanese war crimes and hints of the biological and chemical warfare programs.
Greg Bradsher’s two chapters are part of his larger study to be published separately. His first essay explains the wartime system for gathering documentation concerning alleged Japanese war crimes. Through the experience of the Southwest Pacific Area’s ATIS, he shows how the system developed and expanded, how it exploited captured Japanese documents, and how this material was employed during war crimes trials. His second essay examines the disposition of Japanese-language records in U.S. control. He describes the process for returning the confiscated or captured records, the extensive interagency cooperation to establish a policy for the return of records to Japan, and Congressional approval for the restitution of documents. Together with his finding aid on the enclosed CD, Bradsher has given unparalleled ease of access to those interested in serious historical research of U.S. records on Japan.
The book concludes with a chapter by Michael Petersen on the topic of U.S. use of former Japanese enemies for intelligence purposes. Petersen’s chapter, based on recently declassified CIA material, provides an example of the kind of historical interpretation that can arise from a study of the new and previously released materials. The work of the IWG has made it possible for the public to access a wide variety of documents related to Japanese war crimes committed in Asia and the Pacific. Subsequent investigation and study of these materials will provide a clearer appreciation of the claims and allegations surrounding Japanese war crimes. Noteworthy is the fact that the previously declassified documents corroborate much that is already known about Japan’s wartime record. Furthermore, the material goes beyond the subject of war crimes and provides a wealth of historical information about the Axis nations. The range of Japanese-related documents, U.S. government as well as translated and original Japanese documents, merits extensive exploitation by academics, researchers, writers, veterans, and others interested in history. The files are filled with stories waiting to be told.
About the Contributor
Edward Drea graduated from Canisius College in Buffalo, New York. After military service in Japan and Vietnam, he received his M.A. in international relations from Sophia University in Tokyo, Japan, and his Ph.D. in Modern Japanese History from the University of Kansas. He taught at the U.S. Army Command & General Staff College and the U.S. Army War College and was Chief, Research and Analysis Division, at the U.S. Army Center of Military History in Washington, D.C. His published works include MacArthur's ULTRA: Codebreaking and the War Against Japan, 1942-1945 and In the Service of the Emperor: Essays on the Imperial Japanese Army.
Nazi War Crimes Interagency Working Group ナチ戦争犯罪省庁横断調査団
Japanese Interim Report 日本に関する暫定報告
An Interim Report to Congress 議会への暫定報告
Foreword 前書き
The Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group (IWG) submits this report in response to two statutory requirements: (1) The Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act of 1998 (P.L.105-246), which established the Nazi War Criminal Records Interagency Working Group (IWG) to oversee the declassification and release of U. S. Government records containing information on Nazi crimes during World War II, including those of Germany's ally, Japan; and (2) The Japanese Imperial Government Disclosure Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-567), which specifically added declassification and release of American records related to Japanese crimes during World War II. Section 2(c)(3) of the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act required that appropriate committees of the Senate and the House be informed of the activities of the IWG and Federal agencies in identifying and declassifying records under the Act. The first report under that Act, submitted on October 27, 1999, dealt with the Government's efforts related to the identification and declassification of records related to Nazi war crimes in the European Theater in World War II. This report augments that first report and informs the Congress of the Government's efforts in identifying and declassifying records related to crimes committed by Japan.
The statutory requirement fulfilled by this report is that contained in Section 802(c) of the Japanese Imperial Government Disclosure Act (P.L. 106-567), which was signed on December 27, 2000.
This provision requires that:
Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Interagency Group shall, to the greatest extent possible consistent with Section 803-- 1. Locate, identify, inventory, recommend for declassification, and make available to the public at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), all classified Japanese Imperial Government records of the United States;
2. Coordinate with agencies and take such actions as necessary to expedite the release of such records to the public; and
3. Submit a report to Congress, including the Committee on Government Reform and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on the Judiciary and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate, describing all such records, the disposition of such records, and the activities of the Interagency Group and agencies under this section.
The following interim report fulfills these requirements by describing the IWG's effort to survey agency records and identify and declassify Japanese war crimes records. This is an interim report. It does not present an account of final findings and does not attempt to assess the historical significance of the declassified records.
Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group, March 2002
Highlights of Declassification to Date これまでの機密解除の注目点
The following are brief descriptions of records related to Japanese war crimes that have been located, identified, and declassified (or otherwise noted) in accordance with the Act.
Several folders (declassified in 1997 but apparently unused by researchers) relating to pre-trial collection of reports and evidence compiled by American and Allied sources in various theaters of the Asia-Pacific War for possible prosecution of Japanese war crimes and atrocities. These include:
・Brief U.S. report, New Guinea, April 1944, of the rescue of an American nurse, said to have been transported from the Philippines to New Guinea for purposes of prostitution; nineteen other American nurses were alleged to be in the same situation with Japanese forces in and around Hollandia.
・References in intelligence summaries by the Royal Netherlands Navy to abusive conditions in POW camps in Java. One summary states that a hospital in Java was closed in 1943 and converted to a Japanese brothel, "surrounded with barbed wire" and guarded by a Japanese policeman.
・Report by the Chinese Ministry of War (received by U.S. Military Intelligence in July 1944), on Japan's use of chemical warfare in China, 1937-1942, giving dates, places, and casualty statistics. (All reports, RG 125, Box 4)
・Eyewitness account by second generation Japanese born in Singapore, of the torture and murder of a captured American airman by a Colonel Tsuji and subsequent cannibalism of his preserved body parts. Same informant, in course of interview by Southeast Asia Translation and Interrogation Center under the supervision of the OWI, New Delhi, claimed "rape and pillage" were common among front-line soldiers fighting in China and attested to the establishment by the Japanese army of occupation in Malaysia of "licensed public comfort houses," a practice which did not prevent abuse and rape of Malaysian women.
・Testimony by American Field Service ambulance driver of Japanese disregard of Red Cross emblems and of the killing of eight British doctors near the China-Burma border.
・Report by an American sergeant of cannibalism by Japanese troops on Leyte; his patrol had found flesh removed from butchered Japanese bodies. U.S. officer attested to finding a Japanese body with a missing heart.
・Lengthy U.S. intelligence report on the destruction of Manila and other atrocities based on testimony from ecclesiastical, civilian, and military witnesses. Information was kept confidential at the time to prevent retaliation against other priests in Southeast Asia.
・Interrogation of a Japanese POW, described as "well-educated" and "most reliable," alleging Japanese military decapitation of Chinese POWs. Same prisoner "emphasized" that the emperor personally presided at meetings of the Imperial General Headquarters, which were held within the Palace Grounds and included the Army General Staff and Naval General Staff.
In May 2003, the Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagecy Working Group (IWG) began a systematic survey of the approximately 100,000 pages declassified and released under the Japanese Imperial Government Disclosure Act (JIGDA). In particular, the survey focused on identifying documents pertaining to the following issues:
・Development and use of Japanese biological and chemical weapons during the war, particularly the work of Gen. Ishii Shirō and biological warfare experiments conducted by Unit 731
This chapter summarizes the findings of this survey, provides an overall assessment of the records released under JIGDA, and highlights some of the more important documents relating to the issues listed above.
The records released by the IWG under JIGDA fall into two broad categories: those that were already in the custody of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), and those still held by other government agencies. Although the vast majorityof World War II-era files had long since been declassified and open to researchers, some records that had been transferred to NARA in the past could not be publicly released under existing declassification regulations. These records, for the most part, contained information on U.S. intelligence-gathering methods or, in some cases, identified former agents and informants. Some files included documents from Allied governments that could not be released without the permission of the originating countries.
Some of the NARA collections initially reviewed under the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act contained materials potentially relating to Japanese war crimes. For example, intelligence records from the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) included many files from OSS stations in China and Southeast Asia. Likewise, some of the U.S. Army’s Investigative Records Repository (IRR) files contained records on leading Japanese politicians and military figures, including several convicted war criminals.
During its review of NARA holdings, the IWG also identified a collection of Navy Judge Advocate General files dealing with war crimes investigations in the South Pacific. Though these records were actually released in 1997, they have not yet been widely used by researchers.
The second category of records released under JIGDA comprises records still held by government agencies. The largest group of these records consists of a series of FBI case files containing intelligence reports on Japan before and during the war, counterintelligence records relating to Japanese espionage, and postwar files on suspected American traitors and collaborators. Newly released U.S. Department of State materials include records dealing with postwar discussions between the United States and its former wartime allies regarding clemency proceedings for convicted Japanese war criminals. In addition, the new State Department records also contain a large volume of more recent materials concerning groups of former POWs, civilian internees, and “comfort women,” and their efforts to claim compensation from the Japanese government in the 1980s and 1990s. Finally, the National Security Agency released a collection of intelligence intercept files dating August–December 1945 to complement earlier intercept materials already transferred to NARA.
The records declassified under JIGDA include a range of materials covering many aspects of the Pacific conflict and postwar relations between the United States and Japan. In general, however, only a small portion of these records specifically pertains to Japanese war crimes. With the exception of a few files described in more detail below, most of the materials were not created in the context of any kind of war crimes investigation. Moreover, the majority of documents that do contain information on Japanese war crimes include only brief and often general references buried within longer reports. While the new documents certainly supplement the existing historical record, and in some cases provide additional details on events already known to historians, these records are not likely to lead to any significant reinterpretations regarding the nature of Japanese war crimes.
Researchers should not assume that all documents released under the Disclosure Acts constitute new sources. Since reports were often shared among different government agencies, some of the records declassified under the acts may have already been available in existing collections at NARA or other repositories. For example, many of the declassified records from the State Department Special War Problems Division files consist of copies of OSS reports that have long been open to researchers working with the original OSS records. Likewise, some of the British intelligence records released by the IWG may have been available at the BritishNational Archives. In other cases, while the declassified records themselves may now be available for the first time, the relevant information they contain may have been previously available in other sources.
Nonetheless, the materials released under JIGDA provide some new information relating to Japanese war crimes or, at the very least, will serve to draw more attention to documentation already available on these issues. In addition to scattered reports on individual Japanese atrocities, primarily in China, the newly declassified records will be most useful for additional details regarding Japanese treatment of Allied POWs and civilian internees. The released documents include interviews with former civilian internees and escaped POWs describing general conditions in various camps operated by the Japanese throughout its occupied territories. There are also some records relating to camps in Japan itself, though far fewer than those dealing with other parts of the Pacific Theatre.
The declassified records also include some new documents relating to Japanese biological and chemical warfare. For the most part, these consist of intelligence reports on suspected Japanese use of chemical and biological weapons in China. There are also several technical studies assessing Japanese chemical weapons captured by Allied forces toward the end of the war. However, only a handful of the new materials contains any details on the biological warfare experiments conducted by Gen. Ishii and Unit 731.
There is relatively little documentation in the newly released records regarding the various Japanese war crimes trials conducted at the end of the war. Though there are some individual records that generally describe Allied efforts to collect war crimes evidence, few of the new documents contain any significant details. However, newly released State Department records include several valuable documents that help illuminate postwar policies regarding clemency granted to convicted Japanese war criminals in the 1950s. In addition to records documenting discussions between Japan and the United States regarding procedural issues, the new State Department materials also include memos relating to conversations between the United States and its wartime allies.
The new IWG records will be least useful for researchers exploring the Japanese military’s use of “comfort women” during the war. Other than a handful of documents that record individual accounts of Japanese troops kidnapping women and girls, none of the declassified materials contains any references to this issue. However, more recent State Department records released by the IWG contain a collection of news clippings and press summaries from the 1980s and 1990s, some of which discuss compensation claims pressed by groups representing former victims of Japanese enforced prostitution. Though these materials are not new records in the strictest sense, they provide some insight into how contemporary Japanese society has come to wrestle with the “comfort women” issue.
The survey of declassified IWG material aimed to provide a systematic and thorough review of all records likely to contain new information on Japanese war crimes. The specific methodology used to identify such records varied according to the nature of the document collection. In some cases, the total volume of records released in response to JIGDA was small enough that every document could be examined. Such collections included materials from the State Department, CIA, National Security Agency (NSA,) Air Force, Navy, and Office of the Pardon Attorney.
However, the process of reviewing other newly released records unavoidably involved using indices and guides to focus on the most potentially useful documents. This was especially true in surveying the huge number of recently declassified OSS records, which were not easily segregated into files dealing with Europe and those pertaining to the Pacific Theatre. Moreover, their volume (over 1 million pages) precluded any effort to examine every document. Investigating these documents proved to be especially challenging because the order of the records is not linked to subject matter or country. Accordingly, the only way to examine this collection is by using a rough index prepared by NARA that provides general information on subjects and geography. The survey targeted all documents listed under geographical headings such as Japan, China, Burma, Chinkiang, Chongqing, Korea, Indochina, Kunming, Malaysia, and other sites in the Far East. In addition, records listed under a variety of relevant subject headings were also examined. These included documents relating to chemical warfare, toxins and biological warfare, POWs, and war crimes.
This approach unavoidably entailed examining large numbers of documents unrelated to Japanese war crimes. Only a few documents listed as dealing with sites in the Far East include information on Japanese atrocities. Likewise, many of the records pertaining to POWs or war crimes deal solely with the European Theatre, while some of the chemical and biological warfare records actually relate to U.S. programs. Nonetheless, this strategy offered the best hope for locating most documents from this collection that contained references to Japanese war crimes
The survey followed a similar methodology whether dealing with whole record series that had been previously withheld in full or with sets of individual documents that had been withheld from previously open record series. In the second case, these declassified records have been refiled in their original folders found in a variety of OSS collections. Accordingly, the survey of the previously partially opened records also targeted all declassified records that originated from OSS stations based in China and other parts of southeast Asia, including Burma, Chinkiang, Chongqing, Hsian, Kandy, Kunming, Shanghai, and Singapore. In addition, the survey used indices prepared by NARA staff that provided general descriptions of the refiled documents and examined any records listed as pertaining to the Far East or war crimes issues. Again, this approach involved reviewing many nonrelevant documents with the aim of locating as much Japanese war crimes material as possible.
In two other cases, the survey used a combined sampling and targeted research approach to review the records. These cases were the collection of FBI case files transferred to NARA and the newly declassified name files from the Army’s Investigative Records Repository. Both collections were too large to review in their entirety and are only partially indexed. The FBI case files, for example, are arranged according to an FBI filing scheme that organizes the records into broad categories (treason, foreign counterintelligence, etc.) and thereafter by individual name. Accordingly, the survey first targeted all files that seemed most likely to contain information on Japanese war crimes and then supplemented this research with a random sampling of the remaining files. Similarly, the newly declassified name files from the Army IRR are organized solely by individual name. In this case, the survey first searched for any new files on known Japanese war criminals and then examined a small group of newly released records in their entirety. This initial effort was followed by a random sampling of a much larger group of files containing information on unknown Japanese individuals to see how many of these contained war crimes information.
Because Gen. Douglas MacArthur actively sought to limit OSS operations in the Far East, OSS records released under the Disclosure Acts include material covering many different aspects of OSS operations in Asia during World War II, but mostly in areas outside of MacArthur’s control. Much of the new material is very general in nature and remained classified up to this point only because the documents include information on intelligence sources and methods. In particular, the U.S. intelligence agencies interviewed hundreds of professionals and missionaries who had visited or lived in China and Japan before the conflict. Their reports typically provide information on industrialfacilities, brief accounts of political figures, or descriptions of local geography, and theylack direct information about Japanese war crimes. These reports remained classified not because they contained sensitive information but because the informants are identified by name. (Before their review under the Disclosure Acts, declassification reviewers had previously withheld whole documents rather than follow the onerous practice of redacting the names.) The newly declassified materials also contain many OSS cables and radio messages sent from OSS field stations in the Far East, but rarely do these documents provide information on war criminality.
Only a few such documents contain any information on Japanese war crimes other than occasional references to Japanese atrocities. For example, a 1944 OSS intelligence report on the Filipino guerrilla movement on Negros Island indicated that Japanese troops were routinely torturing and killing any guerrillas they captured and had begun to retaliate against the civilian population as well.1 Similarly, a June 1945 OSS cable from Hsian noted that Japanese forces had begun shooting all civilians on the roads near Loning after Chinese guerrillas destroyed a bridge.2 One newly declassified document includes information on atrocities that took place after the formal end of the war. An OSS situation report from Nanjing dated September 22, 1945, reported that elements of the Japanese 23rd and 27th Divisions had raped over a thousand women and killed several hundred civilians as they retreated through central China (see facing page).3 In most cases, the documents do not provide any further details beyond these general accounts, though a few identify individual victims.4
2. Cable 32, Lion to Taper, 25 June 1945, NA, RG 226, entry 88, box 113, file 683 (location: 190/5/11/7). 3. Nanking Sitrep, 22 September 1945, no. 32, NA, RG 226, entry 210, box 274, WN 10676, 22.9.45, p.1, last full paragraph (location: 190/64/26/6). 4. See, for example, Z.A. Report 215, 10 May 1945, NA, RG 226, entry 210, box 125, WN 4613 (location: 250/64/23/5). The report is based on the interview of the brother of an OSS operative in Burma who was killed by the Japanese.
The newly released OSS records also include many copies of reports prepared by U.S. Allies during the war. Most of these are from British sources, although there are a few Dutch and French documents as well. Some of these records, which remained classified because they originated from foreign governments, also include information on individual Japanese atrocities. For example, an escaped Malaysian soldier interrogated by the British described the torture and murder of an elderly Dutch couple shortly after the Japanese occupation, while another British interrogation report recounts the execution of several hundred civilians in Malaysia in retaliation for the death of a Japanese officer.5 Similar documents include a British press release from November 1945 that describes the killing of several hundred civilians in the South Andaman Islands only a few days before the Japanese surrender.6
5. Interrogation Report Y196, 15 March 1945, p. 6, and Interrogation Report Y194/2, 15 February 1945, pp. 3 and 5, NA, RG 226, entry 154, box 108, folder: POW INT EIF ((location: 190/8/32/6). 6. Report ZM-5024, p. 3, 8 November 1945, NA, RG 226, entry 108, box 401, file ZM 5000 (location: 190/6/26/5).
APO 290 Daily Intelligence Summary No. 24 22 September 1945
第 290 陸軍野戦郵便局 諜報総合日報 第 24 号 1945 年 9 月 22 日
1. JAPANESE ACTIVITY:
1. 日本軍の活動：
North China: Lt. Gen. SUMITA the Jap Army CG of SHANSI Province sais that the date of the TAIYUAN surrender is not yet set. The Japs are interned in the four places General YEN named. The Japs will turn over all equipment to YEN. SUMITA claims there are 60,000 Jap troops and 20,000 Jap civilians in the vicinity of TAIYUAN. The Jap combat units in SHANSI province named by SUMITA are: 114th Division, including the 83rd and 84th Brigades under Lt. Gen. MIURA, the 3rd IMB under Major Gen. YAMADA; the 106th IIB under ITAZU; the 140th JIB under MOTOIZUMI; and the 56th IIB under HARADA. Lt. Gen. SUMITA is the CO of the 1st Army Headquarters and his Chief of Staff is Major Gen. YAMAOKA. The G-3 is Lt. Col. ITO, the G-4 is Lt. Col. NARITA and the G-2 is IWATA. SUMITA wants to move his men to the coast to safety from the Communists Reds, since the end of hostilities there have been 200 Jap casualties from the Reds. The railroad has been taken over by the Chinese but it is still Jap operated. (Irby, 21 Sept.).
A rumor says that on 20 August, Japs are selling horses and trucks and trucks and throwing ammunition into the river or giving it to guerrillas in TANGSHAN (118-11, 39-38) northeast of TIENTSIN. Some sort of disturbance is expected soon in PEIPING. Plain clothes Japs may aid the Rads. Chinese authorities are discussing the matter with the Japs, who still do not realise the extent of their defeat and talk of returning in 20 years, (CSS, 21 Sept, U/R). The Jap strength in TIENTSIN in officially announced at 20,000. Elements of the 118th Divinion still remain as garrison. (18 Sept, OSS, B-3).
Troops of the Jap 6th Independent Brigade with a crew from NANKING arrived at TATUNG (117-38, 30-52) and they destroyed large quantities of military supplies at ANKING (117-02, 30-31) and trunsported the ramainder to NANKING. (OSS, 17 Sept, B-3).
General YEN HSI SHAN, CG Second War Area keeps one fully armed Jap Division at TAIYUAN and has agents watching the KUOMINTANG. The TAIYUAN surrender is moving slowly. The Japs are taking out confiscated food and supplied and have thoroughly destroyed radar equipment without interference. At YUTOU (112-44, 37-19) the Japs are selling arms to the Reds, (OSS, 21 Sept, C-3).
Central China: In the CHIAN area troops of the 23rd and 27th Jap Divisions raped over 1,000 wonen, killed 106 while resisting, and killed 330 civilians and wounded 100 in withdrawing from the area. (20 Sept, CHIAN Team-Reed).
There is very little in the new OSS records relating to forced prostitution, with the exception of a few documents that report the kidnapping of women and girls. These include a translation of a 1943 Chinese newspaper describing the Japanese occupation in Singapore that reports Japanese forces had taken four hundred Chinese women.31 However, one newly released document, a postwar interrogation report of a Japanese officer in Indochina, contains a brief mention that Japanese soldiers may have threatened local women if they did not agree to become prostitutes for Japanese staff officers.32
31. Report 57663, Chinese Tr. Series No. 3, p. 3, translation of extracts from the Kukong Press, ca. Feb. 1943, NA, RG 226, entry 16, box 694, folder 57659-57667 (location: 190/3/25/5).
What does available documentary evidence reveal about Japan’s war crimes in World War II? How do discoveries of new evidence affect historians’ work? The vast majority of published works on Japanese war crimes tend to fall into several primary categories: (1) Japan’s war atrocities in Asia in general, (2) mistreatment of POWs and civilian laborers, (3) the wartime biological and chemical warfare program, and (4) the forced prostitution of the so-called “comfort women.” Recently, a number of historians have begun to study other criminal activities such as drug trafficking and property theft. Although these categories often overlap, they constitute the bulk of published histories of Japan’s war crimes and each deserves a closer look.
The rape of Chinese women by Japanese soldiers has long been identified with Japan’s war atrocities in China. Reports by American missionaries during the Rape of Nanking in late 1937 provided a glimpse into the extent of sexual violence committed by the Japanese Army. Numerous other incidents in China and later in Southeast Asia further tarnished the reputation of the Japanese forces. The postwar trials, however, largely considered rape to be part of a more general violation of law or inhumane treatment, and not a war crime per se.
Japanese authorities were aware of the problem during the war. In fact, Japanese records show that orders were issued to deal with the problem and that a small number of Japanese soldiers had been tried by Japan’s own military courts during the war for rape or other crimes against civilians.97 In part to reduce local resentment against Japan and in part to prevent the spread of venereal disease among its ranks, the Japanese military contracted private vendors to set up “comfort stations” for the troops as early as 1932. Again, this practice was known to the Allies but no criminal charges were filed at the trials. There was one exception. After Japan occupied the Dutch East Indies (present-day Indonesia), the Japanese military forced many young women—including Dutch as well as Eurasian—into providing sexual service to the Japanese. Those Japanese responsible were punished by the Dutch authorities after the war on account of the abuse of the Dutch women.
In the 1970s, a few writers in Japan began treating the subject as a crime committed by the Imperial Japanese Army.98 It was not until the early 1990s that the case of the military “comfort women” (ianfu) began to attract wide attention, following the first public testimony of a Korean woman who had been forced into military prostitution for the Japanese. Her account galvanized activists around the “comfort women” issue. Most publications on the subject initially appeared in Korean and Japanese. Numerous works have been also published in English.99 Gathering extensive oral histories, Su Zhiliang, a historian from Shanghai, published the most comprehensive work on this topic in China and set up a Center for the Study of Chinese Comfort Women at his university.100 In terms of scope and impact, perhaps no other Japanese war crime has reached the level of international publicity since the 1990s as that of the military “comfort women,” a phenomenon helped by new interest in human rights and standards regarding sexual violence toward women.101
1970 年代には日本国内で二、三の著述家がこの主題を、帝国日本軍の敢行した犯罪として扱い始めた。軍の「慰安婦」が広く注目を引きつけ始めたのはやっと 1990 に入ってからであり、かつて日本軍のための売春を強制された韓国人の女性による最初の証言の後のことだった。彼女の話は「慰安婦」問題をめぐる活動家たちに電撃を与えた。これを主題とした出版の大部分は最初のうち韓国/朝鮮語か日本語でなされた。英語でも数々の著作が出版されてきた。広大な口述史料を収集して、上海の歴史家、蘇智良 Su Zhiliang は、この件に関する最も包括的な著作を中国で出版し、中国慰安婦問題研究中心を自分の大学 [上海師範大学] に設立した。影響の広がりと衝撃の点で、1990 年代以降、軍「慰安婦」ほど国際的な知名度を勝ち得た日本の戦争犯罪はなかったと言ってよいかもしれない。女性に対する性暴力をめぐる人権と人間性の標準への新たな関心に助けられて、それは驚異的な現状となっている。
Initially, the Japanese government denied official involvement in the operation. Yoshimi Yoshiaki, a leading Japanese scholar on Japanese war crimes, made headlines by discovering documents in the Japanese Self-Defense Agency’s library that suggested direct military involvement. He went on to publish them in a collection of primary documents, which included numerous ATIS reports from NARA.102 Under public pressure, the Japanese government admitted its complicity and set up the Asian Women’s Fund (AWF) to compensate former “comfort women” from private sources. AWF established a History Committee in 1996 to gather and examine relevant documents in archives in Japan, the United States, Holland, and Taiwan. Historians hired by the AWF also interviewed former “comfort women” in Indonesia and the Philippines. Their work resulted in a multi-volume collection of documents and a comprehensive bibliography on the subject.103 Many are not fully satisfied, however. As Yoshimi points out, numerous Japanese government documents were either lost or remain classified. Among them are police records belonging to the former Home Ministry that allegedly had been destroyed.104 Private records, such as the journal of army doctor Aso Tetsuo, contributed much to the understanding of conditions in the comfort stations in China, but many others held by the Self-Defense Agency War History Department Library remained closed to the public for privacy reasons.105
Many issues concerning the “comfort women” are still hotly disputed in Japan. The number of women victims remains a subject of disagreement; popular accounts frequently give the figure of 200,000. Takasaki Shōji, an expert on Korean history and chair of the AWF History Committee, emphasized the distinction between the Korean women’s volunteer corps (teishintai), who were sent to work in factories in Japan, and “comfort women.” As he noted, these two terms had been confused by many Korean activists and had led to an inflated estimate of the number of Korean “comfort women.”106 A bigger issue concerns the degrees of coercion and government involvement. Some also question the veracity of the testimony provided by former “comfort women” as well as their motivation to testify in public. Hata Ikuhiko, for one, has taken the lead and published many essays as well as a major work on this subject. Hata essentially equates the “comfort women” system with prostitution and finds similar practices during the war in other countries.107 He has been criticized by other Japanese scholars for downplaying the hardship of the “comfort women.”
