Japanese 'Comfort Women' and U.S. Military. Prostitutes

－209－ 日本軍「慰安婦」と米軍基地村の「洋公主」 ─ 植民地の遺産と脱植民地の現在性 ─ LEE Na-Young （李 娜榮）／呉 仁済（訳） 1 ．はじめに 「少なくとも自国の娘を 他民族の慰みもの として差し出し，外貨獲得，安保の論理を掲げ ることは無いようみなが努力しなければ」ならない。 （マル誌，1988：112） 」 （強調は筆者， 以下同じ） 「日本帝国主義の挺身隊―すなわち従軍慰安婦は，有史以来人類が犯した10大罪悪のひ とつに数えられるほど残忍な蛮行である。被害者のハルモニたちの証言によると，一日に 最高で60人の飢えたオスを相手にしなければならなかったというからゾッとする。ユダヤ 人収容所のナチスも考えつかなかったほど非人道的な蛮行である。その従軍慰安婦として， 10代前半の少女である国民学校高級班まで連行した事実が当時の学籍簿などで立証されて いるが， 民族に対する侮辱と冒涜 がそれほど骨の髄まで浸透していたというのだろうか。 挺身隊に連れて行かれた国民学校の少女らの学籍簿の記録を見てみよう。体が肥えてはち きれそうで，明朗なので小さく見えるが成熟したところがあり，血色が良く胸板が厚く， 忍耐力が強い等，性奴隷として適格であることを強調している。壬辰倭乱〔文禄・慶長の役〕 以来不変の，彼らの 残忍な民族性の発露 以外の何者でもない。日本総理の謝罪は言うまで もなく，被害者のハルモニたちへの補償だけで済む問題ではないということを言わんとす るこの国民学校生徒の挺身隊の瞳が 民族の良心に銃弾を打ち込んでいる。 （朝鮮日報 ，1992 年1月15 日，イ・ギュテコーナー） 」 「日本軍慰安婦と聞いて最初に思い浮かぶのは，日本軍で性病の広がりを防ぐための『軍 隊による政策的な性病診療』 ，毎日数十名の日本軍を相手にするよう強制されたということ， そして数十年間朝鮮女性に対する拉致と日本軍慰安婦に対する殺人と殴打が，誰に妨害さ れるでもなく行われたという点等である。呆れることに， 解放後このような非人間的な状 況 は，基地村の女性たちに対してもそのまま繰り返された......日本軍慰安婦であった朝鮮 女性が日本軍が移動するアジア全域を引きずり回され 日本軍の性奴隷 として生活したよう に，基地村の女性は米軍の訓練場所が移れば毛布一枚だけを持ってついて回る自分たちを みずから「毛布部隊」と呼ぶ現実がある。 」 （老 ノグンリ 斤里から梅 メヒャンリ 香里まで，2001：316 - 317） 以上の言説は，日本軍「慰安婦」問題と米軍基地村の「洋 ヤンゴンジュ 公主」 （韓国で一般的に使われる， 基地村の性売買に従事する女性への蔑称） 〔公主は姫の意〕問題を切り離して考えることの出来 ない韓国の歴史的現実をよく示している。最初の文章は，民主化運動が盛り上がっていた 1980 年代後半，米軍基地村がアメリカ帝国主義の象徴として注目された当時，代表的な進歩系雑誌 に掲載された「洋公主」に関する記事の一節である。二つ目の文章は，韓国の代表的な保守系 日刊紙の論説委員が，日本軍「慰安婦」問題が社会的なイシューとなった時期に書いた社説の 内容である。最後の文章 は，2000 年代初め，米軍駐屯による歴史的な被害を告発するために結 成された進歩集団が発刊した小冊子の一部である。このように，大韓民国において「慰安婦」 と「洋公主」は歴史的な節目ごとに特定の「記標」 〔記号表現，シニフィアン〕として登場して きた。それぞれ異なる文脈と目的から出発するが，韓国の左派／右派陣営には，女性の身体を 借りて民族の自尊心という名目により日本帝国主義とアメリカ帝国主義の「残忍さ」を告発し ているという相同性が見られる。この時，明示的に表現されるのは「被害者＝女性」であるが， 実質的な語り手は隠された「発話者＝主体＝男性」である。女性の身体は植民地主義と帝国主 義の残忍な行為が行われる場所であり，民族の自尊心を発話する道具となるが，女性の身体そ のものは沈黙させられたまま発話者の主体位置を確認するための象徴としてしか使われない。 ここに，進歩と保守は「女性」という鏡に互いの姿を映し，韓国，アメリカ，そして日本は「民 族主義」という鏡に互いを映し出すことによって，相補的な支持関係を表す。 一定期間日本軍「慰安婦」がそうだったように，韓国人にとって基地村は誰も触れたくない が誰もが知っている「秘密」であった。民族と国家の「恥辱」として無意識の層位に隠されて いた暗い影のような存在である。しかし，日本軍「慰安婦」と米軍基地村の「洋公主」は，時 空を行き交い，記憶と忘却の薄い層位を行き来して浮遊する幽霊のように常にわれわれの周囲 を飛び回り，予想できない日常の中でふと「私」自身と遭遇する。われわれはなぜ語らなかっ たのか，そしてなぜ「ある瞬間」に発話するのか？　いかなる文脈で誰が語るの か？　1980年 中頃，日本軍「慰安婦」問題が公論化される前， 「洋公主」 〔 양공주 〕 「洋セクシ」 〔 양색시 〕 「洋 ガルボ」 〔 양갈보 〕の公式的な用語が慰安婦（ comfort woman ）であったという事実を考えると， なぜ日本軍「慰安婦」はある瞬間に歴史化されたが，米軍基地村の「洋公主」は未だ非可視化 されたまま残されているのだろうか？ 　その過程でわれわれは何を「歴史化」し，何を残存物の まま残しておくのか？　言い換えると，日本軍「慰安婦」と米軍基地村の「洋公主」についてわ れわれが知っていることは一体何であり，真に「知ろうとすること」とはまた何だろうか？　そ してその理由は何か？　このような問いは，必然的に「われわれの記憶にはどのような『歴史』 があるのか」という問いにつながる。失った歴史の残存物の中に残されているものは何なのか？ 本稿は，大韓民国の現在を生きるわれわれ全員の複雑な記憶の層位の中に隠されている女性 の「存在」についての物語である。 「他者」の経験に関するものではなく， 「われわれ」の過去 と現在を構成する象徴であり， 「実際」に機能する日本軍「慰安婦」と基地村「洋公主」の歴史 的な構成方法に関する事柄なので，われわれ自身にまつわる物語である。これまで多くの国内・ 国外のフェミニストは，民族主義とジェンダーの間にある矛盾した関係を告発するとき， 「慰安 婦」と「洋公主」に注目してきた。そうすることで韓国の家父長男性の家父長性が植民性と結 合する時に振るわれた女性への暴力と搾取の構造を明らかにし，隠された男性中心的な民族（主 義）の二面的な顔を明らかにしようとした。何よりも男性中心的な民族主義と帝国主義，植民 地主義の相同性を暴露しようとするフェミニストの企 プロジェクト 画は，真の脱植民地国家に対する問いで あった。筆者はそのようなフェミニストの企画を継承し拡大させながら， 「慰安婦」 と 「洋公主」 の構成条件を検討し，これらの相同性と相違点について分析する。結論的には，大韓民国の「過 去」に記憶を巻き戻し，失ったものと残ったものの絶え間ない対話を追及するこの論文は，ベ ンヤミンの言葉を借りるなら， 「歴史的な唯物主義」に基づくものであるといえる（ Eng and Kazanjian, 2003 : 1） 。失ったものは残ったものと不可分の関係にある。それは歴史の中で消し去 られたわれわれの記憶を紡ぐ作業が，われわれの立つ歴史の「場」への逆説的な「登場 （ emergence ） 」を予告するからである。したがって本稿では，逆説的に登場せざるを得ないもの を辿っていきたい ．米軍基地村の「洋公主」づくり 日帝の植民地遺制を基盤として 日本の植民地支配が終息して以降も，朝鮮半島の女性の身体／セクシュアリティに対する統 制と活用の歴史は断絶することなく継続した。解放直後に始まった南朝鮮の米軍政は，アメリ カ国内の性売買禁止政策とは異なり，米軍兵士の保健と衛生のために性売買を管理・統制 （regulation and control）する政策を採用した。これにより，公娼をはじめ性病感染が疑われる すべての「危険な」女性は性病検査の対象となったが　，初の検査は194 6年3月 に明月館，国一 館などで働くソウル市内の四大券番の妓生を対象とした採血検査だったという。その後，軍政 庁の指示で厚生部が主導してソウル市内の各券番の妓生に対して性病検査が実施さ れ，1947年 になると米軍政は「市民の保健厚生を期して」 「花柳病根絶策」の名分を掲げ，公娼はもちろん 女給妓生まで定期的な検診を実施し，健康証明書を交付して私娼を統制しようとした。したがっ て，妓生，女給，ダンサー，接客婦，ウェイトレスなどすべての「接客業者」は，定期的な検 診と処置の対象となり，健康証明書の発給を勧められ，身体検査で引っかかった者は許可を得 られなかったか，既存の許可権が取り消された。性病に感染したことが判明した女性は，当時 性病感染者の治療を主に担当していた国立性病センター（1947年12月開設）に送られたり，完 治するまで女性監獄に監禁されたりもした。監獄から放免された後も，完治していないことが 疑われる梅毒患者には継続的な治療が強制された。 記憶すべきは，性売買の効率的な管理のために米軍政が日帝当時の公娼地域（集娼地域）を そのまま活用したという事実である。ある報告書は，日帝の登録制性売買のおかげで性売買女 性の居住を「 （米）憲兵隊によって成功裏に保護を受けられる」狭い地域に制限することができ るようになったことで，高い接近性と効率的な統制の可能性が確保されたと指摘している （ Report from Joseph T. Caples, Lt. Col. MC Surgeon, Titled “ Factors Influencing Rates, VD Rates during the Last Six Months of 1948 and Januar y 1947 , ” 2 Februar y, 1949） 。 実際公娼地域は，毎週実施される性病検査を容易にし，究極的には「駐屯部隊において性病を最 小化」させようとした米軍医官の要請にもとづいて 1945年後半 から米軍兵士にとって「出入り許 可区域」 （ on limits ）とされ始めた。また，性病諮問委員会は，士兵〔将校より下位の下士官 ・ 兵卒〕 の性的活動を監視するため， 「士兵サービスクラブが単位地域になるべく近い場所あるいは単位地 域内に設置されること」を勧告したりもした（ Headquarters XXIV Corps, APO 23 , May 11 , 1948） 。 米軍が日帝公娼地域を活用できた背景には，ほとんどの米軍基地が日帝時代に建設された軍 基地にもとづいていたという事情がある。例えば，富 プピョン 平は，194 5年9月に 米軍が進駐し韓国で 初めての基地村がつくられた地域だが，元は日帝が 1930年代に 満州事変を支援するために建設 した兵站基地で，かつ公娼地区でもあった。米軍は，日帝によって建立された大規模な造兵廠 の建物を活用し，補給輸送本部を設置し，南朝鮮駐屯の全米軍部隊への兵站，補給，輸送業務 を担当させた。これは，キャンプ・グラント（ Camp Grant ） ，キャンプ・マーケット（ Camp Market ） ，キャンプ・タイラー（ Camp Tyler ） ，キャンプ・ヘイズ（ Camp Hayes ）などを網羅す る広範な軍事基地であった。米8軍司令部の駐屯により形成された梨 イテウォン 泰院地域もまた日帝司令 部の心臓部であったが，米軍司令部が当時の建物をそのまま使用し，釜山のハヤリア部隊地域 〔 Camp Hialeah 〕も日帝の軍司令部を米軍が代替したものだった。ほとんどの日本軍基地が米軍 基地に変貌を遂げたように，相当数の日帝公娼地域（集娼村）が米軍基地村へと変化した。 龍 ヨンサン 山， 釜山， 玩月洞， 凡 ポムジョンドン 田洞 （米 「ハヤリア」 部隊入口） ， 大 テグ 邱の桃 トウォンドン 源洞 （いわゆる 「チ 小石の庭 ャガルマダン」 ） ， 大 テジョン 田の中 チュンアンドン 央洞（旧貞 チョンドン 洞）など，ほとんどの集娼村は日帝時代に有名な公娼地域であったものが 米軍基地村に活用され， その後韓国国民にとって代表的な性売買地域（集娼村）として機能した。 1947年11月，公娼制が廃止された後，表面上は禁止主義が宣言されたが，事実上性売買は米 軍によって継続的に管理され た。194 8年5月， 米軍は緊急会議を招集し，全国的な性売買がは びこり性病感染率が増加していると主張し，その根本的な原因として公娼制廃止令を挙げた。 彼らは， 「適法な性売買を不法とする法律第7号の執行」が事実上性売買女性の活動を管理・統 制できなくしていると不平をもらした。したがって，性売買女性を対象とした性病検査，感染 者への性病検査，監禁，治療はほとんど米軍が撤収する 1949年まで 続き，米軍のみを相手にす るサービス・クラブ（ ser vice clubs ）とダンスホールもまた，依然として「合法的な」米軍の余 暇施設として，米軍兵士と性売買女性が接触する場所に使用された。 兵士の性欲管理と安寧のために 日帝の植民地支配と米軍政支配が基地村の構築に必要な下部構造を整備したとすれば，朝鮮 戦争は基地村の成長のもととなる肥沃な土壌となった。戦争勃発直後から朝鮮戦争に投入され た外国軍人は，1951年の約20万人から1953年には3 2万5千人に増加した。これに伴い，韓国 政府の立場からは自国の女性の貞操管理という次元で「若い」外国兵の性欲管理が主要な問題 として浮上し，国連軍を率いるアメリカの立場からは戦闘によって疲弊した兵士を慰撫するこ とが戦闘力維持のための必須課題として持ち上がった。これにより韓国政府は，特定の場所に 慰安所を設置し，登録制を実施して性売買女性に強制的に性病検査を受けさせ，許可を受けた 業者と性売買女性から一定の税金を徴収するなど，名実共に「公娼制」が復活した。特に兵士 の性的欲求の解消を通じた軍の士気高揚のため軍慰安所が設置されたが，イ・イムハによると 1950年夏，釜山慰安所 の設置に次いで馬 マサン 山に連合軍慰安所5ヶ所が設置さ れ，1951 年には釜山 だけで慰安所74ヶ所と国連軍用ダンスホール5ヵ所が許可されたという（イ・イムハ，2004 a ） 。 慰安所は，韓国軍が直接介入して設置し民間業者が監督するやり方と，民間業者が最初から進 んで関係当局に申請しそれを政府が許可するやり方の二形態に分けられる －215－ 日本軍「慰安婦」と米軍基地村の「洋公主」 （ LEE ） 朝鮮戦争が終わって軍隊慰安所と「公式的な」軍慰安婦の存在は解体されなければならなかっ たが，韓国政府の望みは性病統制だけでなく，彼女たちに対する効率的な統制であった。特に， 朝鮮民族／外国人（他者） ，性売買女性／一般女性，内国民相手の性売買／外国人相手の性売買 などの多様な境界に対する国家権力と「一般国民」の不安感は，外国人を相手に性売買を行う 女性に対する強力な統制方法についての関心につながっていった。そうしてソウル市内の随所 に広がっている私娼と「洋公主」を一定地域に集結，統制しようとした韓国政府の関心と効率 的な戦闘力向上のため安全なセックスおよび性病防止対策に悩んでいたアメリカ側の利益が一 致し，両国の協議が始まった。 これを受けて性病防止のための＜性病対策委員会＞が韓米間に組織され ，1957年第4次会議 において「慰安婦」女性を一定地域，すなわち国連軍，韓国軍駐屯地およびソウル，釜山，大 邱などに集結させなければならないという意見が提起され，この問題を米8軍と協議すること が決まった。委員会に参席した米経済調整官室（ OEC ） 〔 Office of Economic Coordinator 〕側の 関係者は，この問題を韓国政府が決定して欲しいと提議した。そしてこの決定により，米8軍 ではソウルに接客業所10ヶ所，仁川にダンスホール12ヶ所，釜山にダンスホール2ヶ所など を指定し設置した。これにより ，1957 年保健社会部傘下の性病診療所89ヶ所のうち半分近い 43ヶ所が，米軍基地が集中するソウル，釜山，大邱，坡 パジュ 州，楊 ヤンジュ 州，平 ピョンテク 澤の6地域に設置される。 妓生，酌婦，女給，ダンサー，下女などとともに定期的に性病検診の対象となった洋公主とい う範疇は，今や国家機構によって公式的に「慰安婦」と「米軍同居女」の二つに分類され，他 の性売買女性と区別して統制され始めた。 1957年以降 ，政府の一連の政策によって，洋公主の区画化と隔離，効率的な監視体制が可能 となり，性病診療所が米軍基地周辺に集中し，相対的に自国の兵士の「安全」が確保されたと 判断した米軍当局は，同年米軍の外出と外泊を許可する。米軍の外泊許可は，同 年（1957年） 日本に性売買防止法が制定された事実と無関係ではない。韓国政府は米軍の日本行き性売買の 需要を韓国内に向けるための方法として，慰安婦を相手に啓蒙講演会を開いた。各地の警察幹 部が直接介入して組織し，管理・実行するやり方だったが，主な内容は性病予防と米軍を相手 にするときの正しい態度を身につけるためのものだった。以上のように， 米軍の余暇と休息 （ Rest & Recreation （ or Recuperation ） ）のための安全な空間づくりの土台が用意されると，小さな村 落だった村々は基地村（東 トンドゥチョン 豆川，議 ウィジョンブ 政府など）として急激に栄えることになる。 国家安保と経済発展のために 基地村の本格的な制度化と定着は，朴正煕政権によってもたらされた。朴正煕政権は， 「淪落 行為等防止法」 （1961年11月9日公布。以下，淪防法と略す）とは 無関係に，1961年 観光事業 振興法を制定し，これにもとづいて免税ビールの供給を受けた特殊観光施設業者を公式化する。 また， 「国内の各種行事にともなう多くの外国人来韓に備えて」 淪防法が適用されない 「赤線地帯」 を設定した。私娼根絶の難しさと性売買女性の救済，補導という美名のもと，外国人相手のド ル稼ぎで女性を差し出すことのできる口実を見つけ出し，1962年6月に保社〔保健社会部〕 ，法 務，内務の3部合同で国内の全104ヶ所に特定の淪落地域を設定，淪落行為の取り締まりを免 除する赤線地帯に指定したのである。ここでは龍山駅，永 ヨンドゥンポ 登浦駅，ソウル駅など全国46の性売 買集結地域と，梨泰院，東豆川，議政府など32の基地村が含まれていた。このような特定淪落 地域設定の名分として，政府は淪落地域を一般人居住地域から隔離し，市民の風俗と教育に及 ぼす悪影響を希釈し，淪落女の集団化を誘い，彼女たち自身が抱 ポジュ 主〔女郎屋の主人〕による搾 取を自発的に防御し，効率的な性病管理が可能である点を掲げている。しかし，特殊地域設定 の直前である196 2年4月に ＜人身売買及び他人の売春からの搾取の禁止に関する条約＞〔人身 売買禁止条約〕に署名したという事実は，国家の利益という大前提のもとに行われる女性の性 的労働に対する搾取が犯罪にはならないというアイロニーを示している。結局，悪徳抱主の搾 取からの保護，貯蓄誘導と就業補導など，淪落女性をして「新たな生活」に導くため特定区域 の設定が不可避であったという名分の裏には，国家の経済成長と外貨稼ぎの道具として女性の セクシュアリティを活用するという意思が隠れていたのである。朴正煕政権は「慰安婦」を新 たに「特殊業態婦」と呼び，彼女らの身体の効率的な統制および管理の体系を模索した。これ により＜特殊観光協議会＞と＜韓米親善協議会＞が基地村の性売買を通じた外貨稼ぎの主要な 制度基盤として設置される。前者は観光事業奨励というレベルで，後者は韓米民間人の親善の 促進という美名の下に設立されたが，これらはさまざまな外形上の変化を経て，基地村の性売 買女性に対する統制・管理機能を含めた基地村の「問題」を管理・経営する公的機構として定 着する。 基地村の景気が絶頂だった 1960年代当時 ，登録証のある女性，米軍と正式に結婚した女性以 外に「ヒッパリ」 〔日本語の「引っ張り」に由来〕など，登録のないまま働く女性の数が東豆川 一帯だけでも1万名に肉薄したという。米軍2，3名当り一名の性売買女性がいたという当時の 一般的な算出基準にもとづくと，基地村全体の性売買女性の数は少なくとも2万名に達しただ ろうことが推定される（政府推算1万6千名） 。まして公式的には20歳以下の女性のみが保健 所に登録することができたが，相当数の未成年者が未登録状態のままであったと推測される。 女性が政府指定の場所で性売買を行える条件は，週に一度一般の産婦人科に委託した性病診 療所（または保健所）に行って検診を受け，自身がきれいな「体」で「安全なセックス」を米 軍に提供できることを証明することであった。したがって，彼女らにとって検査証は，常に所 持すべき基本的な身分証と同じであった。検査証を所持していないことが米軍憲兵に見つかる と，憲兵の車に乗せられて警察署に連行され，即決裁判を受けた。検査証を忘れた日には，再 発給のために保健所（韓国）職員に賄賂まで差し出さねばならなかった。時には，性病がある と判断され米軍に目を付けられると，有無を言わさずトラックに乗せられ収容所に連行される こともあった。一時期基地村で性売買を行っていたキム・ヨンジャ氏の証言によると，米軍一 名が性病にかかると，誰から性病が移ったのか追求して回ったという（キム・ヨンジャ， 2005） 。ところがほとんどの米軍の「目」からは，夜に出会った韓国女性の外見を見分けるのは 容易でなかったので，顔の似た複数の女性を疑うことがよくあったし，医務隊出身の軍人は疑 われた女性全員をジープに乗せてモンキー・ハウス〔駐韓米軍を相手にして性病を患った女性 を強制収監した施設〕に送ったという。こうして収容された者は，大韓民国という地で米製品 だらけの米製収容所で米製の薬を投与され，米軍によってきれいな女かそうでないか検査され ることを「恥ずかしくもいぶかしく」思った。そして大韓民国が「淪落行為が法で禁止された国」 であるという事実を知らなかった －217－ 日本軍「慰安婦」と米軍基地村の「洋公主」 （ LEE ） 問題は，そのようにして稼いだお金の多くが，基地村の女性自身のためではなく家族扶養に 充てられたという事実である。貧しい家族の生計のため，兄や弟の学費のため，病床の父母の 薬代のため，その他さまざまな理由で彼女たちが稼いだお金は大韓民国の家父長家族の維持と 再生産のために使われた が，1970 年代当時京 キョンギド 畿道観光運輸課は，京畿地方だけで年間8百万ド ルの外貨が 「洋公主」 の手に入り， 「彼女らが稼ぐドルに頼って暮らす扶養家族数も一日平均4名」 であると公式に認めている 。1970 年代当時米軍の数が45 , 000名余りであることを勘案して推定 される基地村女性の数を20 , 000名余りとすると，少なくとも80 , 000名が「洋公主」の収入源に 直接依存して生計を維持していたと思われる。 植民地と戦争，アメリカによる再植民地化とクーデターなど，ダイナミックな現代史を歩ん だ大韓民国は，国家安保のために駐韓米軍の継続的な駐屯が不可避だったのも事実だが，農業 など生産関連の産業が没落しサービス業に依存する奇形的な産業構造とともに，アメリカによ る援助と米軍基地から流れ出る外貨に絶対的に依存していたので，経済的な側面からも米軍の 存在は絶対的であった。特に， PX 〔軍内の売店〕経済と呼ばれるほど米軍基地から流れ出る米 製物品と米軍関係の経済的効用は，当時の国家の根本的な基盤となるほど重要であった。当時 基地村関係の産業は GNP 全体の25 % を占め，このうち半分が性産業に関わるものだったという （ Moon, 1997） 。実際，1960年代の米軍専用ホールは，1964年に9百7十万ドル以上の利益を上 げたが，それは韓国が稼ぐ外貨（ドル）1億ドルの10 % におよぶものだった。一人当たりの国民 所得が100ドルに満たなかった頃，一ヶ月で120ドルの賃金をもらう米軍士兵の威力は事実上 大きなものだった。そのような基地村経済への依存 は，1970年代，当時のキム・ ハンリョル経 済企画院長が国会質疑の答弁で認めたように，米軍駐屯により得られる外貨は建設，用役，物 品からなる直接軍納〔民間業者が軍に物資を納品すること〕1億ドルと不法 PX 経済などを除い ても，年間1億6 千万ドルに達したという（新東亜，1970．9月号：130） 。そのうち京畿道内の 米軍専用ホール200余りを通じて稼ぎいれる収入だけでも6百万ドルに達したが，政府は基地 村ホールから観光振興という名目で毎月一定額を徴収した。米軍専用ホールは「観光振興法」 によって毎月500ドルを銀行に預金しなければならなかったが，この法定ドルを納められなけ れば当局から許可取消処分を受けもした。 1970年代に入って女性の セクシュアリティが外貨稼ぎの主な資源と国家経済成長の足掛かり として認識されると， 「洋公主」は「民間外交官」 「経済建設のために必要な外貨を獲得するた めに身体を捧げる」 「愛国者」と呼ばれ始めた。特にニクソン・ドクトリン以降米軍撤収が憂慮 されていた時期，韓国政府は基地村の女性を国家安保のための必須の存在として認知し，性的 に接触する米軍に 「民間外交官」 の役割を果たすよう教育した。性病予防教育と簡単な英語講座， 米国式の礼節教育が「教養講座」という美名の下，主に保健所や警察署で行われた。キム・ヨ ンジャは 「洋公主」 が 「愛国者」 と呼ばれていた教養講座を次のように振り返る。 「ふむふむ， えー， あなた方は愛国者です。勇気と誇りをもってドル獲得に寄与することを忘れてはいけません。 えー，私はみなさんのような隠れた愛国者のみなさんに感謝いたす次第です」 （キム・ヨンジャ， 2005） 。 このように，反共―親米主義的な思考回路をもとに西欧流の発展論理を無批判に追求してき た韓国式近代化の歴史の中で，基地村の女性は米軍に「体を売る」汚い「洋ガルボ」として社 会的な蔑視の対象となったが，時には国益に寄与するドル稼ぎの「愛国者」と呼ばれた。韓国 政府は特殊区域の指定，酒類免税，韓米親善協議会，韓米親善郡民協議会，韓国特殊観光協議 会など数々の名目と制度をつくり，女性を継続的に統制し搾取してきたが，公式の歴史の中で は彼女たちの存在は可視化されて来なかった。大韓民国全体が「洋公主」が保証する国家安保 に依存し， 「洋セクシ」が稼いだ金に，あるいは彼女たちの職場と結びついた経済構造に寄生し， 一定程度アメリカの「慰安婦」となって生きてきた歴史は沈黙の記憶の中に埋められるしかな かった。 結論的には，基地村を通じてアメリカは外部に露出することのない孤立した地域で米軍の性 的欲求を安全に解決し，民主主義と自由の守護者というイメージを維持することができたし， 韓国政府は国家経済と安保の保証を得ながら韓国社会全般の性産業の形態，奇形的な産業発展， 家父長的イデオロギーと結びついた基地村の問題を米軍基地だけの問題に還元することで，国 家の問題を地域化，個人化，種別化することに成功した。 4 ．日本軍「慰安婦」と米軍基地村「洋公主」の相同性 では，特定の歴史的な局面において構成され，日本軍「慰安婦」と米軍基地村「洋公主」を 歴史的な連続線上で思考するというのはどういう意味だろうか？　日本軍慰安所と米軍基地村 がもつ制度としての違い，歴史的時空間の違いがあるにも関わらず，筆者はそれらを弁別的主 体として特定の局面にのみそれぞれ停泊させないことによって遂に「見えるもの」があると考 える。 第一に，制度として，日本軍慰安所と米軍基地村は近代以降軍事化された世界秩序の歴史的 断面を表している。 両制度はともに，自国の軍人の士気の高揚，戦闘力の維持，性病の効率的 な防止のために考案されたもので，そのために人種化された他国の女性の身体が動員されたと いう共通点をもつ。シンシア・エンロー（ Enloe ，2000）が指摘 したように，軍事主義は金と武 器だけでは存続できず，特定の性的関係を保障する政策に依存する （253） 。したがって，軍事 主義の企画においてジェンダー関係は男性軍人に対比される対象（性的対象としての他国の女 性）を維持，再生産するように組織されなければならず，それは男性軍人の再生産のための必 須条件となる。 軍社会化された世界秩序の中で，地域と国家内の安保のパラダイムは依然として女性の暴力 の経験を沈黙させる機制として働く。周知の通り国家安保の論理は，朴正煕政権以降，反共・ 規律社会としての大韓民国を支える主要なイデオロギーのひとつであった。それは，第一に米 軍と基地村周辺の韓国国民の暴力に対する女性の抵抗行為を軍事的同盟関係を損なわせる反政 府的行為と判断させ，第二に米軍基地反対運動と基地村性売買反対運動を国家安保を害する反 国家的行為と判断させ，80年～90年代初期まで反基地（村）運動を抑圧する機制となり，第三 にニクソン・ドクトリン当時米軍撤収の危機に直面すると「洋公主」を国家発展に寄与する「愛 国者」と呼ぶ欺瞞的政策が採用された背景となる。 そのような軍事主義的経済は，最近の全地球化されたセックス観光産業の拡大の根幹にもな る。バタチャリヤ（ Bhattachar yya ，2002）の指摘のように，グローバル・セックス労働の枠組 みは冷戦時代に確立し，この時期はグローバルな性的サービスがアメリカ化した商品文化のス タイルを借用した時期でもあ る（121） 。韓国の近代的性売買の根幹が日帝強占期に確立され， それをもとにした基地村と妓生観光の構築，韓国内性産業の拡散，基地村への外国人性労働者 の流入という歴史的な過程を考慮すると，韓国の性売買の歴史において冷戦体制の中の軍事主 義的経済の影響力は決して無視してはならないだろう。とりわけ近年全地球的な生産関係の再 組織化は，単位国家と民族的境界を越えて廉価で代替可能な労働力のプールを創出し，超国家 的な性産業に流入する人々の数を増加させて来た。このような状況で富国（ richer nations ）の 軍事的権力が貧しく従属的な地域に居座ると，その軍人の存在は地域経済を変化させ （ Bhattachar yya ，2002：121） ，同時に異国的な（ exotic ）他国の女性への男性の接近度を高める ばかりでなく，そのような幻想の主体を再生産する機能を果た す。2010年現在 ，平澤の米軍基 地内に多数のフィリピン人性売買女性が存在するという事実は，国家の従属性と女性のセクシュ アリティの関係の中に記入される異国的なファンタジーがどのように第三の国家（駐屯国）に おいて具現されるのかを赤裸々に物語っている。 何より，朝鮮半島は冷戦体制が唯一存続している地域で，冷戦時代のパラダイムが依然とし て有効な場所である。 「銃口」を突きつけている外部の「敵」が明らかな状況で， 名もない「人間」 の犠牲は常に国家安保の名のもとに正当化される。問題は，そのような犠牲の時期にも完全に 消滅する名前と思い出される名前に二分されるという点である。国家安保のため壮烈に戦死し た国軍兵士は記憶されるべき名前だが，国家安保のために動員される身体としての女性は消さ れなければならない名前となる。 第二に，慰安婦制度や基地村制度は，被殖民地，地域男性の意図的／非意図的な共謀があっ たために可能だったシステムである。 まず，すでに少し言及したように，日本軍慰安所に朝鮮 女性が大規模に強制動員されえた背景には，伝統的な儒教・家父長社会において「嫁入り前の」 朝鮮の処女の性的純血が疑いの余地無く「事実」として認識されたという点である。何よりも 実際に朝鮮人男性の共謀がなければ，かくも多くの朝鮮女性が「挺身隊」という美名の下で組 織的に動員されえただろうか（日帝強占期の公娼制を維持できた大規模な人身売買の体系をは じめ慰安婦動員を仲介するときに朝鮮男性が介入したという事実は，生存者の証言や多数の歴 史的資料からすでに確認されている）？まして「慰安婦」の動員に関わった韓国内の男性によ る証言の不在， 「慰安婦」問題自体に関する韓国社会の長い沈黙，公論化されて以降も継続する 民族の「羞恥」という強力な言説が物語るものは何だろうか？ 米軍の休息と娯楽のための空間として，基地村もまた韓米両国の同盟の中で建設されたが， 韓国国民の「日常の承認（ daily acceptance ） 」 （67）がなければ維持されるのは困難であっただ ろう。米軍政下で米軍兵士クラブを運営した者は韓国人男性であり，その後確立された基地村 の性売買を経営し管理する者もまた韓国人であった。彼らの経営手法が， チョン・ジンソン （2003） が明らかにした日帝時代の企業慰安所の形態と類似しているという点もまた驚くべき事実では ない。性売買の抱主やクラブの事業主のみならず，不動産業者，地域の公務員と警察，周辺の 商人もみな日常の中で米軍の存在を「当然のもの」として受け入れた。しかし， 皮肉にもその「当 然のもの」は社会的な「害毒」をもたらす「性病保菌者」として， 「隔離」の対象である「洋公主」 という非正常な存在と同時性をもっている －220－ 立命館言語文化研究23巻2号 「若者と子どもたちに害毒をもたらすので，彼女らを防止できないのであれば，いっその こと隅に追いやって」隔離しなければならない（韓国日報，1955年12月12日） 。 「特殊地帯を設置し設定する問題は内務部との意見の食い違いによって遅れていはいる が，米軍の娯楽施設の指定要求は第一に衛生的で，第二に保健上支障を来たさない施設を 指定することだというのに， 売春女性の性病保菌問題が大きな難題であるという（朝鮮日報， 1958年2月2日） 。 このようにつくられた米軍基地村という「正常」でない状況は， 「正常性というカモフラージュ （ camouflage of normalcy ） 」 （ Enloe ，2000：66）によって隠されてきた。基地村の構成的な「非 正常性」は，第一に，基地村経済（米軍の存在）を通じて得る日常の中の物質的利益とともに， より大きくは国家的利益の計算を通じて隠されてきた。第二に，非正常性の民族的羞恥は，韓 国内に存在する「女性」への男性中心的な規範と結びついて「正常化」される。すなわち，米 軍の存在が汚い女性の身体を通じてのみ維持されうる（私が実際やっていけるのは，あの汚い 洋カルボのおかげである）という「認定不可能な」非正常性は，性的規律の対象として男／女 を区別し， 民族的範疇においてそれらを位階化することによって正常化されるのである。しかし， 非／正常性が常に存在するという事実だけで， 「正常性」は民族的不安を通じて暫定的に縫合さ れているに過ぎないという逆説を表している。エンローが看破したように，いかに軍基地が地 域のカモフラージュを獲得するかという問題についての理解は，国際的軍事同盟が維持される 方法についての理解の本質であり，それを維持させる「正常性」は既存の男性性／女性性に関 する思考に依存す る（67） 。そのため「慰安婦」と「洋公主」は，はじめから男性間関係を形成 し維持し再生産する構造の中に置かれ深く根づいており，ジェンダー関係の（再）構築と不可 分の関係にある。 第三に，両問題は，民族主義の高揚のためのアリバイとして動員される女性の「凄惨な」経 験という側面において相同性をもつ。 これこそが， 「慰安婦」と「洋公主」の身体がなぜ大韓民 国の国民の無知と関心，沈黙と暴露の不連続線上に置かれるのかを説明してくれる。被植民者 の去勢された男性（性）＝無能な国家と民族を象徴する記標としての「慰安婦」 ，羨望と屈辱の 空間としての基地村，卑屈な韓国男性の二重性を顕現する存在としての「洋公主」は隠される べき民族の羞恥であると同時に国家の自主権，民族の自尊心，植民地主義と帝国主義の残忍さ を告発する記標として選択されてきた。このうち「ユン・グミ事件」は， 「洋公主」の現存が韓 国社会で公認された初の事件として記録されるべきものである。当時米軍によって凄惨に殺害 された「洋公主」の身体は，主権を侵奪された祖国と同一視され，基地村は奪われた民族の領 土として召喚された。こうして， 生前ただの一度も 「真の」 民族の一員になれなかった 「汚い」 「洋 カルボ」は，死後はじめて「民族の魂」として昇華した。アメリカ帝国主義の「犠牲」となっ た女性の身体は，その後反帝，反米民族主義運動を後押しする触媒として機能した。このよう に「慰安婦」と「洋公主」という存在の「公認」が，韓国の民主化と民族主義意識が高揚した 1990年代という時代的同時性をもつという点は，偶然というよりは必然であると思われる。 もちろん，民族のパラダイムは，植民地主義と帝国主義による女性の性的搾取の問題を読み 取らせるという長所がある。なかんずく韓国で民族主義の言説は，政府の対日，対米交渉時に 相当なレバレッジ効果〔てこの原理〕を生み出してきたし，十分に脱植民地化されていない国 家に対する根本的な問いへと転換されうるという点で意味がある。実質的に市民社会の強力な 抵抗が政府に交渉力を付与し，対日，対米従属関係において民族の自尊心を律する道具的な機 能も果たす。しかし，それは当面の国家（政府）の利益に合致するときにのみ選択的に使用さ れるという限界があり，民族とジェンダーの二重の関係について説明することはできない。ま して韓国の植民地の歴史と植民地性の克服の問題を内部から省察するよりは，日本による過去 「清算」 ，あるいは駐韓米軍撤収の観点にのみ還元することで， 「韓国男性の主体の位置は消え去 ると同時に曖昧になる」 （ Yang ，1998：168） 。この不透明さこそ隠された主体の位置を確認し， 安定化するのに寄与する。 民族主義は，文化的な再現体系（ systems of cultural representation ）であると同時に社会的な 差異がつくられ遂行される歴史的実践（ historical practices ）である（ McClintock ，1996：260） 。 民族主義はしばしば暴力的で，常に性別化された社会的競争を通じて人々のアイデンティティ を構成する（260） 。なぜならば民族は，民族国家の資源への接近を制限もし，正当化もする文 化的な再現をめぐる競合体系（ contested system ）だからである。 そのため， 性的に侵害された女性という象徴を通じて， 国家の自主権と民族の自尊心を主張し， 日帝侵略と米軍駐屯の問題を提起しようとした男性（集団） （ら）の「慰安婦」 「洋公主」言説 からわれわれが読み取るべきは，民族主義と女性の矛盾した関係だけでなく，暴力の技術と政 治的な権力の関係がどのように具体的に女性の身体を通じて具現され，維持されるのかについ ての洞察である。 結論的には，日本軍「慰安婦」と米軍基地村の「洋公主」問題は，国家と女性の二重の関係 を物語っている。どんな形であれ継続すべき国家間関係の中で，優先的に考慮すべき事柄，排 除されたり沈黙されるべき事柄にジェンダーがどのように介入したのかを示しているのである。 国家の必要性にもとづいて女性の身体／セクシュアリティが動員されたが，非難の対象，沈黙 の主な対象は女性であり，国家は時々偽善的な代弁者，事後の保護者として登場する。 かくし てわれわれは，植民地主義と帝国主義が被植民地／他国女性の身体／セクシュアリティを活用 する方法とともに，民族（主義）がそれを解決できる代案的，抵抗的実体として存在しないと いう悲しい現実を直視することになる。日帝によって「つくられた」慰安婦は，植民地支配の 終息後も継続する植民地性の残存物が重層的に機能した「結果物」であり，植民地支配終息後 の韓日関係の中で依然として清算されていない過去と現在の象徴である。同時に，基地村「洋 公主」は過去を十分に清算できないまま再植民地化を経験し，それを完全に克服できなかった 後期植民地国家の凄絶な現実の証拠となる象徴である。そのため証拠は，実体を「非存在化」 する戦略を通じて削除されてきた。 歴史の中で慰安婦と洋公主は，民族の羞恥だからであろうと，国際関係における外交的な理 由からであろうと，国防と経済開発の目的であろうと隠されるべき非存在であったが，かろう じて明らかになる，あるいは明らかにせざるをえない彼女らの「実存性」は，非存在化という 戦略が必然的な失敗であることを暴露する。存在の否認，非存在の矛盾した認定が折り重なり 交差する中で， 「慰安婦」または「洋公主」という「女性の身体」は，第一に外部の他者（敵） を確認する機制であり，第二に内部の境界を（再）構成する機制として活用されてきた。日本 やアメリカの立場から見ると，女性の身体は「外部の他者（敵） 」を攻略したり無力にする機制 であり，彼らの内部の男性性を再構築する基盤となる。韓国の立場から見ると，それらの女性 の身体は実質的に両国の関係を持続させる足掛かりとなってきたが，時に日本軍と米軍の「残 忍さ」の証拠となり，日本帝国主義，アメリカ帝国主義の不道徳さに対比される韓国民族の道 徳的な優位を確認したり， 「強い民族＝男性性」を再構築するために動員される。何よりも他国 によって性的侵奪を受けた「貞操を捨てた女性」は「正しい女性」に対する反対抗的なリファ レンス（ reference ） 〔参照点〕として機能し，効果的に女性を分ける境界線となる。 「慰安婦」 や「洋公主」は，民族国家の設立過程で望ましい「女性」をつくるための規制的（ regulator y ） フレームとして機能したに過ぎず， 物的存在と身体としての女性の経験は削除される。そのため， 実在した物的存在としての「女性」 （慰安婦であれ洋公主であれ）は，大韓民国の歴史と現在に おいて非存在として幽霊のように彷徨するが，適切な時期に動員される「記標」はむしろ実存 性を獲得するのである。 このような存在／非存在の交差過程における逆説は，男性（男性により代弁される国家）同 士の葛藤・対話において主体にも客体にもなれないまま，それらの関係の「場」となったり主 張の材料として活用される「女性の身体」ではなく，女性（ジェンダー関係）不在の男性同士 の関係，国家間の関係が成立しえないということを暴露するという点である。結論的には，ジェ ンダー関係を通じて縫合された大文字の歴史，国際関係，国家安保と経済成長，民族の自尊心 という言説の脆さがみずから内部崩壊する地点を指し示すという点において， 「慰安婦」と「洋 公主」言説の構成体系は相同性をもつのである 5 ．脱植民地の可能性のために：解決されない諸争点 第一に，戦時性暴力との関係性と差別性の問題 である。すでに指摘したように，慰安婦と基 地村の制度は，女性個人と性購買者の個別の取引関係ではなく，国家の男性代理人同士が女性 の身体／性を交換する体系である。それらは，もちろん戦時下で行われる他国による占領国の 女性に対する組織的な強姦と性的搾取の問題に関連するが，慎重に分離すべき必要性も提起さ れる。まず， 「慰安婦」制度は，植民地状態で被植民地女性に対する性的暴力の問題であり，帝 国の拡張に動員された被植民地女性の身体／セクシュアリティの問題なので，一般的な戦時女 性暴力の問題とは弁別される （チョン・ジンソ ン，2003） 。基地村もまた，終戦ではない休戦体 制の下で，同盟国の兵士の性的欲求の解消とそれにもとづいて確固とした同盟関係を築くため に駐屯地女性の身体／セクシュアリティが動員されたという特徴をもつ。もちろん，戦時慰安 所と米軍基地村の構成的な特徴に関してはより多くの実証的研究が必要だが，優先的に筆者は （広義の） 「戦時体制」において国家の利益のために動員され交換される女性 の問題として， 「慰 安婦」と「洋公主」問題を読み解きたい。もちろんここには，女性同士の人種および階級の差 異の問題が記述されなければならないだろう。 「慰安婦」と「洋公主」の問題は，国家間，植民・ 被植民地の権力の位階秩序において特定の人種（民族）の女性に対して行われる性的蹂躙の問 題なので，人種差別の問題と切り離すことができず，同じ時空間であってもすべての女性が同 じく経験する問題ではないので， 階級の問題でもある。社会的な階層分化が停滞していた日帝期 階層と地域にかかわらず多くの朝鮮女性が日本軍「慰安婦」として動員され（チョン・ジンソン， 2001：56） ，朝鮮戦争後多くの女性がただ生存のために基地村で働いたが，どのような文脈にお いても与えられた選択肢が少なく，総体的に性的暴力に脆く，継続的な性的搾取から抜け出し 難い女性は，低所得層，低い階級の女性だからである。このような点から，われわれは階級化 され，性愛化され，人種化された女性の身体（ classed, sexualizedand racialized women ’ s bodies ） が国家間の位階秩序の中でどのように位置づけられるのかという認識論の地図を描けるだろう し，それを通じて既存の秩序に亀裂を入れる抵抗の拠点をつくりだせるだろう。 第二に，性売買（ prostitution ）との関係設定の問題 である。強制性（強制動員，誘い込み， 強制労働，欺き，詐欺など） ，暴力および人権侵害的な要素（賃金搾取を含む） ，男性同士の関 係網の中で取引されたり活用される女性の身体，被害者が被害を打ち明け難いばかりでなく， みずから羞恥心と烙印を抱いて生きていく構造としての男性中心主義的なセクシュアリティの 問題という点などにおいて，日本軍「慰安婦」と基地村「洋公主」は，一般的な「性売買」と 類似の側面をもつ。しかし，性売買との類似点または連続線を強調すると，歴史的な差別性の 問題が無化されるという点ばかりでなく，被害者に責任を転嫁する 男性中心的なセクシュアリ ティの構造 に再び行き着くというジレンマに陥る。特に， 「みずから貞操を捨てた女性」に対す る強力な家父長的パラダイムと実践的構造が常に存在する限り，それらの共通点を指摘するこ とは現実的でも抵抗的でもない。 一般的に韓国社会で通用する「慰安婦」言説は「動員され強要された性奴隷制」という家父 長的なパラダイム， 「踏みにじられた純粋な民族の処女性」という民族主義的パラダイムにもと づいており，その根底で強力に働いているのは強制性と任意性にもとづく性売買に関する認識 枠組みである。自発性にもとづく性売買女性と区別してこそ耳に届く「慰安婦」言説という逆 説は，性売買が汚く醜いもので，女性の選択にもとづいたものであるという見方を前提として いる。強制性にもとづいてこそ犯罪行為が成立すると考える視点もまた，性売買＝罪や悪とい う認識論とさほど異ならない。このような二分法的な見方が存在する限り，またみずから強制 性を証明できない限り， 「洋公主」が自身の経験を公論化することは難しいだろう。 実際，韓国社会にはこのような観点から日本軍「慰安婦」と米軍基地村「洋公主」を切り離 して，思考してきた。それは，慰安婦運動陣営においても一定期間維持されてきた立場だった。 「慰安婦は，当時の公娼制度下の 日本人売春女性とは異なり ，国家と公権力によって軍隊 から 強制的 に性的慰安を与えることを強要された 性奴隷 であった」 （従軍慰安婦問題第2次 調査発表に対するわれわれの立場） このような主張は， 「慰安婦」言説を構成する男性中心の論理，とりわけ過去を否認する日本 の右派の立場（慰安婦＝売春婦）を否定するためには適切であるかのように見えるが，性売買 の論理の根底にある男性中心の論理を再度認める愚を犯すことになる。それは，性売買女性と そうでない女性，強制的に「やられた」 「かわいそうな」女性とそうでない「不穏な」女性を分 けるという点で強力な家父長制のコードと出会い， 結局「強制的に騙されて連れて来られた女性」 のみが同情の対象となり，そうでない女性の経験は沈黙されるという結果を生んだ。何より 自発／強制の論理に束縛された純粋な被害者／不純な同調者という二分法の問題は，性売買に 従事する女性のみに注目し，それと関わる男性を免責する機制として働くという問題点がある。 男性主体が民族主義と帝国主義（植民地主義）の言説を通じて一度，性売買言説を通じて二度 隠される間に，女性は二重，三重の傷を負ってきた。 「どのように性売買女性となったのか」と いう問いが隠しているものは結局， 「慰安婦」や「洋公主」の後ろ指を差してきた韓国国民の情 緒に共通に流れる家父長的イデオロギーの偽善的な顔であり，植民地主義と帝国主義が発話す る場所である。日本政府が慰安婦問題を取り上げるたびに持ち出す「官憲による強制連行はな かった」という主張（チョン・ジンソ ン，2007：404） ，それを裏付ける公文書の不在に対する 主張，基地村に（韓，米）国が介入していたという公的な証拠が不在であるという主張が，実 際は性売買女性を非難する狭義の自発／強制の概念と相通ずるという点を想起しなければなら ないだろう。 そのため，狭義の強制性を超えた概念の設定が必要であり，最終的に自発／強制という二項 対立的な論理構造にもとづく性売買パラダイムを克服する必要がある。非／自発的に「体を売 る女性」を体系的につくりあげる制度とイデオロギーに対して問題提起するには，条件によっ て制限された選択肢を選択せざるを得ない文脈への理解が先行されなければならない。何より， 自発であれ強制であれ，女性の身体／セクシュアリティが位置する場において行われる搾取と 暴力，抑圧の効果に注目すべきである。このとき，体系的な国家介入の問題，自発的にやめる ことのできない状況的問題，烙印の問題とそれを通じた暫定的あるいは最終的に利益を獲得す る者の問題は必ず問わなければならない事項である。それは，現在も継続している駐屯軍によ る暴力と搾取，清算されていない植民地性と歴史的責任の問題から大韓民国，日本，アメリカ 政府のいずれもが自由でありえないということを告発するのである。 最後に残された問題は，普遍的な人権言説に訴える方法と超国家的にアジェンダ化するとき に直面するジレンマ である。アメリカと国連，そして人権関連の国際機構の実践を批判的に検 討したグルーアル（ Grewal ，1998）は，国際 化という美名の下で行われている実践様式のみな らず，グローバル・フェミニストの活動の中においてすら，人権言説は多様性と多元論に関す る非‐衝突的（ non-conflictual ）モデルに包摂された普遍主義概念にもとづいていると評価した （520） 。したがってグルーアルは，暴力の対象を再現する方法だけでなく，再現する者の主体構 成（ subject-constitution ）の方法もまた探究の対象となるべきであると主張する。これは，特定 の歴史的局面において誰が誰を代弁して語るのか？　どのような文脈で何が聞こえ，何が黙殺 されるのか？　誰が誰の代わりとなり，誰に語る権利，判断する権利を付与するのか？　とい う質問につながり，現実的に「女性問題」を国際的に公論化する方法と密接に関わっている。 現在まで日本軍「慰安婦」運動は，イシューの社会化，歴史化，国際化という点において大 きく貢献してきた。しかし実質的に国内のみならず国際的に，とりわけ国連の人権機構にそれ を知らせアジェンダ化するたびに直面するジレンマは，特定の時空間において恣意的に選択さ れる女性の経験に関する問題であり，それを選択する主体の位置性である。何よりも「普遍的 な女性の経験」 「普遍的な人権言説」によって装飾されてこそ国際社会で訴える力をもつという 点である。 NGO の立場で選択せざるを得ないもっとも効率的な運動方法は聞こえるものを聴け る場所にまで引き連れていくことであるが，問題は特定の事案を構成する歴史的な文脈が削除 されたまま，それを受け入れ公論化「してあげる」主体‐権力の位置性のみがますます足場を 固めていくという点である。その主体‐権力が植民地主義と帝国主義の拡大をリードした国家 であるならば，ますます問題である。このような難題は， 「日系米国国会議員の発議‐米下院の 決定‐日本政府に対する圧力行使」というナラティブの構造 を持った2007 年の米下院の日本軍 「性奴隷制」謝罪決議案の採択過程で克明に現れた。その過程で結果的に浮かび上がったのは， 非西欧国家の抑圧を非難し矯正しようとする（西欧の） 「自由の守護神」 「国際警察」としての アメリカの国家的な位相である。 「植民地の過去の中に囚われている」 韓国女性の 「被害」 経験は， 「近代化され民主的な」 西欧男性と 「伝統的かつ家父長的な」 東洋男性の対話‐対決の場において， アメリカ（西欧）の道徳的位相を高める道具として活用されたのである。このことを通じて逆 説的に明らかとなったのは，基地村「洋公主」が公論化されえない理由である。基地村問題は 実際に「聞くことができ，代わりに語ることのできる」権力の主体がみな関係している現在的 事案であり，したがって真の脱植民地国家への希望をもつことが不可能な企画であることが迂 回的に明らかとなったのである。 そのため，われわれが究極的に問わなければならない問題は，極端な暴力の被害者を再現す る方法が，どのようにそれを再現（しようと）する主体の自己構成様式と結びつくかという点 であり，したがって究極的な分析の対象は被害者の経験ではなく，いかなる方法で，なぜ，誰 が被害者に注目するかである。 歴史を再考するとき常に， ある事柄は説明されないままこぼれ落ち， 記憶の残存物として残る。 それは西欧的な思惟方法と理論的枠組みに傾倒したわれわれの（植民地化された） 「片目」の思 考によるものなのかも知れない。問題は， 説明されるべき当の対象は何層もの層位に囲い込まれ， 中心で安らかに隠れているという点である。他者は常に境界の政治学（包摂と排除）を通じて 区別され，項目化され，見える対象，分析の対象，説明して証明すべき対象として残るが，そ れを行う権力‐主体は特権化された位置で目に見えない透明な存在として残る。今われわれの 問いは， 「慰安婦」 「洋公主」についてのものではなく，彼女らを構成しようとする権力，彼女 らについて沈黙したり語らせたりする権力，彼女らを位置づける権力，彼女らをして「事実」 の証明を要求する権力についてのものでなければならないだろう。明らかにされる「対象」を 通じて発話しようとする隠された欲望を追跡することこそが，性売買言説，植民地言説，民族 主義言説，被害者言説，人権言説などに安楽に寄りかかり隠れている主体の位置性を暴露する 作業となると思われるからである。かくしてわれわれは，大韓民国に残存する植民地性，歴史 的残滓としてのみならず全地球的な資本化の過程の中で継続する植民地主義と帝国主義の問題 を正面から凝視することになるだろう。 ※本文の〔　〕内は訳

The 'sanitised narrative' of Hiroshima's atomic bombing

The 'sanitised narrative' of Hiroshima's atomic bombing By Rupert Wingfield-Hayes BBC News 4 August 2015 From the section Asia Jump media playerMedia player helpOut of media player. Press enter to return or tab to continue. Media caption Hiroshima survivor Keiko Ogura recalls the horror of what she saw The US has always insisted that the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were necessary to end World War Two. But it is a narrative that has little emphasis on the terrible human cost. I met a remarkable young man in Hiroshima the other day. His name is Jamal Maddox and he is a student at Princeton University in America. Jamal had just toured the peace museum and met with an elderly hibakusha, a survivor of the bombing. Standing near the famous A-Bomb Dome, I asked Jamal whether his visit to Hiroshima had changed the way he views America's use of the atom bomb on the city 70 years ago. He considered the question for a long time. "It's a difficult question," he finally said. "I think we as a society need to revisit this point in history and ask ourselves how America came to a point where it was okay to destroy entire cities, to firebomb entire cities. "I think that's what's really necessary if we are going to really make sense of what happened on that day." Damage in Hiroshima, 1945 A conventional view in the US is that while terrible, the use of the bomb brought an end to the war It isn't the sort of thing you often hear said by Americans about Hiroshima. The first President George Bush famously said that issuing an apology for Hiroshima would be "rank revisionism" and he would never do it. The conventional wisdom in the United States is that the dropping of atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki ended the war, and because of that it was justified - end of story. Is that really the end of the story? It's certainly a convenient one. But it is one that was constructed after the war, by America's leaders, to justify what they had done. And what they had done was, by any measure, horrendous. Damage from US bombing of Tokyo (1945) Tokyo had already been devastated by waves of US firebombing It didn't start on 6 August. It had started months before with the fire bombing of Tokyo. On 9 March 1945, 25 sq km (9.7 sq miles) of Tokyo were destroyed in a huge firestorm. The death toll was as large, or even larger, than the first day at Hiroshima. From April to July the relentless bombing continued in other parts of Japan. Then came Hiroshima. 'There was no sound at all' Keiko Ogura had just celebrated her eighth birthday. Her home was on the northern edge of Hiroshima behind a low hill. At 08:10 on 6 August, she was out on the street in front of the house. Picture of a model showing the target of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima The bomb was set to explode 500m (0.3 miles) above the ground for maximum destructive effect "I was surrounded by a tremendous flash and blast at the same time," she says. "I couldn't breathe. I was knocked to the ground and became unconscious. When I awoke I thought it was already night because I could not see anything, there was no sound at all." What Keiko witnessed in the following hours is hard to comprehend. By mid-morning, survivors of the blast began pouring out of the city looking for help. Many were in a terrible state. "Most of the people who were fleeing tried to go to the hillside. There was a Shinto shrine near our house so many came here," she says. "Their skin was peeling off and hanging. At first I saw some and I thought they were holding a rag or something, but really it was skin peeling off. I noticed their burned hair. There was a very bad smell." Jump media playerMedia player helpOut of media player. Press enter to return or tab to continue. Media caption Witness: World's first atomic bomb attack A deliberate civilian target Eighteen-year-old Shizuko Abe was staggering out of the city, the whole right side of her body burned, her skin hanging off. Now 88, she still bears the terrible imprint of the bomb on her face and hands. Yoshie Amaha, a patient at the Tokyo Imperial University Hospital, displaying injuries suffered as a result of the atomic bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima on the 6 August 1945. Many of those who did not die from the initial impact of the bomb were left with horrific injuries "I was burned badly on my right side and my left hand was also burned from the bomb. Fire was coming closer… We were told to run to rivers when hit by air raids so people jumped into the rivers. "So many bodies were floating in the river that I could not even see the water," she says. Somehow, despite the agony, she staggered to a medical station. "They did not even have any dressing for the wounds. Many injured people lay their bodies down under the roof, so I found a place there as well to lie down. People around me were calling out 'Mother it hurts, Father it hurts'. "When I stopped hearing that, I realised they had died right next to me." Crew of the Enola Gay in a military parade in New York, April 1946 The crew of the Enola Gay were treated as heroes for dropping an A-bomb on the heavily populated city Hiroshima was not a military target. The crew of the Enola Gay did not aim at the docks, or large industrial facilities. Their target was the geographical centre of the city. The bomb was set to explode 500m (0.3 miles) above the ground for maximum destructive effect. On the ground many survived the initial blast, but were trapped in the wreckage of their homes under wooden beams and heavy tiled roofs. Then the fires began. Ms Abe remembers hearing the cries for help from beneath the debris as the flames swept forward. "They were such sad voices calling out for help. Even 70 years later, I can still hear them calling out for help," she says. Children in Hiroshima, Japan, wearing masks to combat the odour of death after the city was destroyed by the first atom bomb, October 1945. Children who survived Hiroshima's bombing wear masks to cope with the smell of tens of thousands of corpses No-one is sure how many died on that first day. Estimates start at 70,000. More than eight out of 10 were civilians. If you look up "Hiroshima in colour" online, you will find some remarkable film that is now kept in the US national archives. A US military team and Japanese camera crew shot more than 20 hours of film in March 1946. It is the most complete and detailed visual record of the after effects of the first atomic attack. There is high-quality colour footage of the horrific scarring caused by flash burns from the bomb. There are injuries that had never been seen before. 'They should not thank the bomb' What is all the more remarkable is that the film was not seen in public until the early 1980s. It was marked secret and suppressed by the US government for more than 30 years. Instead, Americans were told a sanitised narrative of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki: that a great scientific endeavour had brought quick victory, and saved hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides. A victim of the atomic bomb blast over Hiroshima, in a makeshift hospital in a bank building (Sept 1945) Radiation poisoning, a previously unknown condition, would claim thousands more victims in the weeks after the bombing Decades later when Ms Ogura travelled to the Washington DC to see the unveiling of the Enola Gay at the Smithsonian Museum, she was astonished to find this version of history still holding sway. "Many American people said to me, '"Congratulations, you could come here thanks to the bombing! Without the bombing you would have to do hara-kiri, you know, commit suicide'." "That is a very awful excuse. We do not blame the Americans, but they should not say that thanks to the bomb so many people could survive." A lifetime of radiation secrecy The atomic bombing has left one final legacy that sets it apart from all the other horrors of World War II. In the weeks after the bombing otherwise healthy people began dying of a strange new illness. First they lost their appetite, then they began to run a high fever. Finally strange red blotches began appearing under their skin. No-one knew it at the time, but these people were dying from radiation poisoning. To this day many hibakusha keep their pasts a secret, afraid that their families will be discriminated against because of the fear of radiation. "I had bad burns and looked deformed so I could not keep it secret," says Ms Abe. "My children were discriminated against. They were called 'A-bomb children'." Tears fill her eyes as she describes what happened to them. Jump media playerMedia player helpOut of media player. Press enter to return or tab to continue. Media caption Rupert Wingfield-Hayes takes a trip on the tram that survived the Hiroshima bombing "They told me they had to choose a different route to come home from school because they were bullied and chased by the other children. I felt the pain my children had to go through because of their mother, because of me." Even today some hide the fact that a grandparent is an A-bomb survivor, afraid their children may find it difficult to find a husband or wife. The human cost It is said that those who don't know their own history are condemned to repeat it. Japanese leaders are rightly criticised for their continued attempts to whitewash Japan's WWII crimes in China, Korea and South East Asia. A file photo dated September 1945 of the remains of the Prefectural Industry Promotion Building after the bombing of Hiroshima, which was later preserved as the Hiroshima Peace Memorial, Atomic Bomb Dome or Genbaku Dome One of the very few buildings that survived the blast was the Prefectural Industry Promotion Building Picture of the A-bomb Dome in Hiroshima Today it is known as the A-bomb Dome, a peace memorial to the bombing It is also true that terror bombing was not invented by the United States. The Nazis unleashed it at Guernica in 1937 and again on British cities in 1940. The Japanese bombed Chongqing for six years. The British destroyed Dresden and many other German cities. But no other bombing campaign in WW2 was as intense in the destruction of civilian lives as the US bombing of Japan in 1945. Between 300,000 and 900,000 people died. As Jamal Maddox put it to me so well, how was it that the country that entered the war to save civilisation ended it by slaughtering hundreds of thousands of civilians?

ATOMIC BOMBING OF HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI WAS AN ILLEGAL ACT IN VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.

【英文】 PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW - ATOMIC BOMBING OF HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI WAS AN ILLEGAL ACT IN VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW. The Japanese Government presented a letter of protest as stated below, to the Government of the United States through the Government of Switzerland on August 10, 1945. August 10, 1945 A New-Type, Cruel Bomb Ignoring International law; Imperial Govern-ment Protest to the Government of the United States. With regard to the attack by a new-type bomb on the city of Hiroshima by a B-29 bomber on the 6th inst. the Imperial Government filed the following protest on the 10th inst. to the Government of the United States through the Government of Switzerland, and gave instructions to the Japanese Minister to Switzerland, Kase, to make the explanation of explanation of the same effect to the Inter-national Committee of Red Cross. Protest against the Attack of a New-Type Bomb by American Airplane: On the 6th of this month, an airplane of the United States dropped a new-type bomb on the urban district of the city of Hiroshima, and it killed and wounded a large number of the citizens and destroyed the bulk of the city. The city of Hiroshima is an crdinary local city which is not provided with any military defensive preparations or establishments, and the whole city has not a character of a military objective. In the statement on the aerial bom-bardment in this case, the United States President “Truman” asserts that they will destroy docks, factories and transport facilities. However, since the bomb in this case, dropped by a parachute, explodes in the air and extends the destructive effect to quite a wide sphere, it is clear to be quite impossible in technique to limit the effect of attack thereby to such specific objectives as mentioned above; and the above efficiency of the bomb in this case is already known to the United States. In the light of the actual state of damage, the damaged district covers a wide area, and those who were in the district were all killed indiscriminately by bomb-shell blast and radiant heat without dis-tinction of combatant or non-combatant or of age or sex. The damaged sphere is general and immense, and judging from the most cruel one that ever existed. It is a fundamental principle of international law in time of war that a belligerent has not an unlimited right in chosing the means of injuring the enemy, and should not use such weapons, projectiles, and other material as cause unnecessary pain; and these are each expressly stipulated in the annex of the Convention respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and artices 22 and 23(e) of the Regulations respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land. Since the beginning of the present World War, the Government of the United States has declared repeatedly that the use of poison or other inhumane methods of warfare has been regarded as illegal by the pubic opin-ion in civilized countries, and that the United States would not use these methods of warfare unless the other countries used these first. However, the bomb in this case, which the United States used this time, exceeds by far the indiscriminate and cruel character of efficiency, the poison and other weapons the use of which has been prohibited hitherto because of such an efficiency. Disregarding a fundamental principle of international law and humanity, the United States has already made indiscriminate aerial bombardments on cities of the Empire in very wide areas, and it has already killed and injured a large number of old people, children, and women and collapsed or burned down shrines, temples, schools, hospital and ordinary private houses. Also, the United States has used the new bomb in this case which has indiscriminate and cruel character beyond comparison with all weapons and projectile of the past. This is a new offence against the civilization of mankind. The Imperial Government impeaches the Government of the United States in its own name and the name of all mankind and of civilization, and demands strongly that the Government of the United States give up the use of such an inhumane weapon instantly. Note: Japan Branch of the International Law Association, Japanese Annual of International Law, 8, pp.251-2. (Tokyo: 1964) 米機の新型爆弾による攻撃に対する抗議文】 今月６日、米国航空機は、広島市の市街地区に対し新型爆弾を投下し、瞬時にして多数の市民を殺傷し同市の大半を潰滅させました。 広島市は、何ら特殊の軍事的防衛機能や、そのための施設を施していない普通の一地方都市です。 同市全体を、ひとつの軍事目標にするような性質を持つ町ではありません。 本件爆撃に関する声明において、米国トルーマン大統領は、「われらは船渠（せんきょ）工場および交通施設を破壊した」と言っています。 しかしこの爆弾は、落下傘を付けて投下され、空中で炸裂し、極めて広い範囲への破壊的効力を及ぼすものです。 つまり、この爆弾で、この投下方法を用いるとき、攻撃の効果を右のような特定目標に限定することは、物理的に全然不可能なことは明白です。 そして本件爆弾が、どのような性能を持つものであるかは、米国側は、すでに承知しているものです。 実際の被害状況は、広範囲にわたって交戦者、非交戦者の別なく、男女老幼を問わず、すべて爆風および幅射熱によって無差別に殺傷されました。 その被害範囲は広く、かつ甚大であるだけでなく、個々の傷害状況を見ても、「惨虐」なるものです。 およそ交戦者は、害敵手段の選択について、無制限の権利を有するものではありません。 不必要の苦痛を与えるような兵器、投射物その他を使用してはならないことは、戦時国際法の根本原則です。 そのことは、戦時国際法であるハーグ陸戦条約規則第２２条、及び第２３条（ホ）号に明定されています。 米国政府はこのたびの世界大戦勃発以来、再三にわたって、 「毒ガスその他の非人道的戦争方法の使用は文明社会の世論によって不法であり、相手国が先に使用しない限り、これを使用することはない」と声明しています。 しかし、米国が今回使用した本件爆弾は、その性能の無差別かつ惨虐性において、従来かかる性能を有するが故に使用を禁止せられをる毒ガスその他の兵器よりも、はるかに凌駕するものです。 米国は国際法および人道の根本原則を無視して、すでに広範囲にわたって日本の大都市に対して、無差別爆撃を実施しています。 多数の老幼婦女子を殺傷しています。 神社や仏閣、学校や病院、一般の民家などを倒壊または焼失させています。 そしてさらにいま、新奇にして、かつ従来のいかなる兵器、投射物とも比べ物にならない無差別性、惨虐性をもつ本件爆弾を使用したのです。 これは、人類文化に対する新たな罪悪です。 日本政府は、ここに自からの名において、かつまた、全人類、および文明の名において、米国政府を糾弾します。 そして即時、かかる非人道的兵器の使用を放棄すべきことを厳重に要求します。 昭和２０年８月１１日

Five myths about the atomic bomb

Five myths about the atomic bomb By Gregg Herken July 31  Gregg Herken is an emeritus professor of U.S. diplomatic history at the University of California and the author of “The Winning Weapon: The Atomic Bomb in the Cold War” and “Brotherhood of the Bomb: The Tangled Lives and Loyalties of Robert Oppenheimer, Ernest Lawrence, and Edward Teller.” As a Smithsonian curator in 1995, he participated in early planning for the National Air and Space Museum’s Enola Gay exhibit. On Aug. 6, 1945, the United States dropped an atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. Another bomb fell Aug. 9 on Nagasaki. Decades later, controversy and misinformation still surround the decision to use nuclear weapons during World War II. The 70th anniversary of the event presents an opportunity to set the record straight on five widely held myths about the bomb. 1. The bomb ended the war. The notion that the atomic bombs caused the Japanese surrender on Aug. 15, 1945, has been, for many Americans and virtually all U.S. history textbooks, the default understanding of how and why the war ended. But minutes of the meetings of the Japanese government reveal a more complex story. The latest and best scholarship on the surrender, based on Japanese records, concludes that the Soviet Union’s unexpected entry into the war against Japan on Aug. 8 was probably an even greater shock to Tokyo than the atomic bombing of Hiroshima two days earlier. Until then, the Japanese had been hoping that the Russians — who had previously signed a nonaggression pact with Japan — might be intermediaries in negotiating an end to the war . As historian Tsuyoshi Hasegawa writes in his book “Racing the Enemy,” “Indeed, Soviet attack, not the Hiroshima bomb, convinced political leaders to end the war.” The two events together — plus the dropping of the second atomic bomb on Aug. 9 — were decisive in making the case for surrender. 2. The bomb saved half a million American lives. Footage from the Enola Gay and Hiroshima Play Video4:45 Archive footage from the plane that dropped ‘Little Boy’ on the Japanese city of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945 and the aftermath of that detonation. (Internet Archive) In his postwar memoirs, former president Harry Truman recalled how military leaders had told him that a half-million Americans might be killed in an invasion of Japan. This figure has become canonical among those seeking to justify the bombing. But it is not supported by military estimates of the time. As Stanford historian Barton Bernstein has noted, the U.S. Joint War Plans Committee predicted in mid-June 1945 that the invasion of Japan, set to begin Nov. 1, would result in 193,000 U.S. casualties, including 40,000 deaths. But, as Truman also observed after the war, if he had not used the atomic bomb when it was ready and GIs had died on the invasion beaches, he would have faced the righteous wrath of the American people. 3. The only alternative to the bomb was an invasion of Japan. The decision to use nuclear weapons is usually presented as either/or: either drop the bomb or land on the beaches. But beyond simply continuing the conventional bombing and naval blockade of Japan, there were two other options recognized at the time. The first was a demonstration of the atomic bomb prior to or instead of its military use: exploding the bomb on an uninhabited island or in the desert, in front of invited observers from Japan and other countries; or using it to blow the top off Mount Fuji, outside Tokyo. The demonstration option was rejected for practical reasons. There were only two bombs available in August 1945, and the demonstration bomb might turn out to be a dud. The second alternative was accepting a conditional surrender by Japan. The United States knew from intercepted communications that the Japanese were most concerned that Emperor Hirohito not be treated as a war criminal. The “emperor clause” was the final obstacle to Japan’s capitulation. (President Franklin Roosevelt had insisted upon unconditional surrender, and Truman reiterated that demand after Roosevelt’s death in mid-April 1945.) Although the United States ultimately got Japan’s unconditional surrender, the emperor clause was, in effect, granted after the fact. “I have no desire whatever to debase [Hirohito] in the eyes of his own people,” Gen. Douglas MacArthur, supreme commander of the Allied powers in Japan after the war, assured Tokyo’s diplomats following the surrender. Footage of Nagasaki after the atomic bomb Play Video2:26 Archive footage taken of the Japanese city of Nagasaki after it was destroyed by the atomic bomb ‘Fat Man’ on August 9, 1945. (Internet Archive) 4. The Japanese were warned before the bomb was dropped. The United States had dropped leaflets over many Japanese cities, urging civilians to flee, before hitting them with conventional bombs. After the Potsdam Declaration of July 26, 1945, which called on the Japanese to surrender, leaflets warned of “prompt and utter destruction” unless Japan heeded that order. In a radio address, Truman also told of a coming “rain of ruin from the air, the like of which has never been seen on this Earth.” These actions have led many to believe that civilians were meaningfully warned of the pending nuclear attack. Indeed, a common refrain in letters to the editor and debates about the bomb is: “The Japanese were warned.” But there was never any specific warning to the cities that had been chosen as targets for the atomic bomb prior to the weapon’s first use. The omission was deliberate: The United States feared that the Japanese, being forewarned, would shoot down the planes carrying the bombs. And since Japanese cities were already being destroyed by incendiary and high-explosive bombs on a regular basis — nearly 100,000 people were killed the previous March in the firebombing of Tokyo — there was no reason to believe that either the Potsdam Declaration or Truman’s speech would receive special notice. 5. The bomb was timed to gain a diplomatic advantage over Russia and proved a “master card” in early Cold War politics. This claim has been a staple of revisionist historiography, which argues that U.S. policymakers hoped the bomb might end the war against Japan before the Soviet entry into the conflict gave the Russians a significant role in a postwar peace settlement. Using the bomb would also impress the Russians with the power of the new weapon, which the United States had alone. In reality, military planning, not diplomatic advantage, dictated the timing of the atomic attacks. The bombs were ordered to be dropped “as soon as made ready.” Postwar political considerations did affect the choice of targets for the atomic bombs. Secretary of War Henry Stimson ordered that the historically and culturally significant city of Kyoto be stricken from the target list. (Stimson was personally familiar with Kyoto; he and his wife had spent part of their honeymoon there.) Truman agreed, according to Stimson, on the grounds that “the bitterness which would be caused by such a wanton act might make it impossible during the long postwar period to reconcile the Japanese to us in that area rather than to the Russians.” Like Stimson, Truman’s secretary of state, James Byrnes, hoped that the bomb might prove to be a “master card” in subsequent diplomatic dealings with the Soviet Union — but both were disappointed. In September 1945, Byrnes returned from the first postwar meeting of foreign ministers, in London, lamenting that the Russians were “stubborn, obstinate, and they don’t scare.”

The Scars of War: Vietnam Comfort Women

http://megalodon.jp/2016-0102-2146-38/www.nationofchange.org/2015/04/09/the-scars-of-war-vietnam-comfort-women/ The Scars of War: Vietnam Comfort Women comfortwomen4815 Unfortunately, many governments have drawn a line of distinction between the comfort women of World War II and the prostitutes in the wars that followed. Published: April 9, 2015 | Authors: Lolita Di | NationofChange | Blog Post While there has been light shed on the issue of comfort women used by the Japanese Imperial Army during the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937-1945) and World War II, not much has been discussed about the use of Vietnamese comfort women by South Korea. During the Vietnam War (late 1960’s – early 1970’s) South Korea sent troops to Vietnam in an attempt to keep South Vietnam free from communism. It was reported later that many South Korean troops raped Vietnamese women and committed atrocities such as massacring farmers and aged people, and many others were forced into working as prostitutes for the South Korean soldiers. Many of these women would then later become pregnant and after these mixed Korean-Vietnamese children were born they were shunned by Vietnamese society and their soldier fathers returned to South Korea never to be seen or heard from again. The plight of these women was lost to history and not discussed until the late 1990’s when many of the victims began to speak out against the Vietnam and South Korean governments and demand recognition and compensation. To date the South Korean government has done little to acknowledge the issue but has continued to pursue further financial compensation from Japan for their own comfort women survivors and some say that their actions have become hypocritical and they are using the issue as their own political tool. In fact, South Korea orchestrated with Korean-American’s politically-driven campaign in the U.S. continent against Japan. Acknowledgement and Compensation of Comfort Women In 1973 Japanese author Kakou Senada published the first account of comfort women titled Military Comfort Women which detailed the Japanese army’s involvement in establishing comfort stations. The book was roundly criticized and attacked as being false, but it led to research into the issue. The Kono Statement of 1993, which was released by then Chief Cabinet Secretary of Japan, Yohei Kono acknowledged the involvement of the military in the establishment of comfort stations and the coercion of the comfort women. As a result, Japan set up the Asian Women’s Fund to compensate the victims of this practice partly funded by the Japanese government. Korea had also demanded compensation from the government and received $800 million in aid and loan packages over ten years. The South Korean government has been publicly supportive of the thousands of comfort women taken from their country and homes during the wars, even going after Japan for a second compensation. But history has shown that the Korean government was complicit in the use of comfort women. Korea’s Use of Comfort Women In large part due to testimony from survivors of the comfort station system, we now know that Korea established their own comfort women system during the Korean War (1950-1953). The Korean military set up two types of comfort stations—U.N. Comfort Stations for U.N. soldiers and Special Comfort Stations for Korean soldiers. Many Korean women were forced to work in these comfort stations and many of those women were married and had children to support. Husbands were drafted into service and they had no other means to support their families. In many cases these comfort women were trucked to the front lines to service South Korean soldiers. During the Vietnam War, South Korea sent troops to aid the anti-communist forces and while establishing their own comfort stations. Initially, South Korean soldiers raped many Vietnamese women then both the South Korean and Vietnamese military began to force Vietnamese women to work in comfort stations. In many cases children were produced as a result of the rapes and forced into sexual slavery as Vietnam comfort women. These children are referred to as lai Daihan. The term is specific to children born of a South Korean father and a Vietnamese mother. It is unclear how many of these children were born, but estimates range in the tens of thousands. Unfortunately these children were ostracized by the Vietnamese and stigmatized because they were a product of rape and forced sexual encounters. South Korea had set up a multi-operation comfort system for soldiers so they could use these women. The first was a “special comfort unit” named ‘T’uksu Wiandae’, and it operated from multiple stations. The second operations were mobile units for use in various locations. These mobile units visited the barracks of the soldiers. The third operation were prostitutes who worked in private brothels that were hired by the military. The women that were kidnapped and forced into this issue were from all over Asia. The story of the Vietnam comfort women and their shunned children only came to light in the 1990s and 2000s as South Korea had increasing financial investments in Vietnam. But even though South Korea has demanded compensation from Japan—twice—for the Korean survivors of the comfort stations and has publicly supported these women, they have yet to acknowledge their own establishment of comfort stations, both in their own country during the Korean War and the use of them with Vietnamese women during the Vietnam War. In addition to the establishment of comfort stations in Vietnam and the rampant rape of Vietnamese women, the South Korean military was also responsible for some other war crimes in the country. One particular incident involved the massacre of unarmed Vietnamese civilians, mostly women and children, at Phong Ni and Phong Nhat in 1968. Additionally, the Korean government publicly admonished the United States military for producing and then leaving behind many children during the Korean War, but they have continued to ignore the children produced through rape and sexual slavery of Vietnam comfort women. But the Vietnamese are not unaware of the horrible treatment of these children. The term lai Daihan translates to Daihan, the Vietnamese word for Korea, and lai which implies contempt for that mixed blood. Nationalism and racism is common among the people of Southeast Asia and this has fueled the shunning of these children both by the Vietnamese and the Koreans. The Legacy of The Vietnam Comfort Women and Their Children While Korea continues to go after Japan and use the comfort women issue as a political tool they still ignore the victims of their own past crimes during conflicts within the region. Former South Korean soldiers and civilian workers stationed in Vietnam during the war have continued to deny the existence of their children as has the government of South Korea. Some estimates put the number of Vietnamese comfort women at around 5,000 to 30,000 but no one knows an exact number. And they cannot be easily verified because of the secretive nature of the government. The issue has largely remained a secret and information from the Vietnam War period has been hard to come by, though there is documentation that the Viet Cong did report to the Korean military on the huge numbers of rapes and kidnappings of Vietnamese comfort women by Korean troops during the war. With more and more Korean survivors, among others, coming forward and giving testimony to what they suffered, the hope is that the truth about Vietnamese comfort women and their children will eventually come to light. Kim Bok-dong, a Korean survivor of the Japanese comfort stations, along with the Korean Council for Military Sexual Slavery(Women Drafted) , who have helped protests every Wednesday in front of the Japanese embassy in Seoul, recently met with victims of sexual slavery and violence committed by South Korean soldiers in Vietnam. The council members want the issue of all comfort women brought to light, in addition to recognition by the governments who allowed and encouraged the practice. In 2001 at a summit meeting with the Vietnamese government, Kim Dae-jung, then South Korean president, expressed regret for the abuses committed by South Korean soldiers against the Vietnamese during the war, but many say the statement didn’t go far enough. Kim Bok-dong said after the meeting with Vietnamese survivors, “The government should resolve the wrongdoing its countrymen committed. It cannot ignore these acts.” But while statues have been erected to commemorate the lives and suffering of comfort women at the hands of the Japanese and protest have been held to pressure Japan to take official responsibility for their actions, the plight of comfort women used by South Korea, both during the Korean War and Vietnam War has largely gone ignored. The United States government has gotten involved in pressuring Japan, as has the U.N. Human Rights Commission, but the former comfort women from the Korean and Vietnam wars are seeking Korea to also step up and take responsibility for their own actions, even as they call loudly for Japan to do the same. Vietnamese Comfort Women and the U.S. Military Prostitution was big business during the Vietnam War and many American servicemen took advantage of this service. Thousands of women worked out of camps and bars that sprung up around U.S. military bases. Many of these women got pregnant and the resulting children—some estimates put the number around 50,000—were shunned and ostracized, much like the children of mixed Korean and Vietnamese descent. These children are called ‘bui doi‘ which translates to “dirt of life.” The women, too, were shunned and forced to live a life of poverty. Considering the history of comfort women used by both the Japanese and Korean military, and the coercion of many Korean women into forced prostitution, one wonders how many of these prostitutes were also coerced. It may not have been done by the Vietnamese government directly, but if prostitution is illegal in the country, then the government turned a blind eye. It is believed they may have even encouraged the practice to generate income. Many of the thousands of women working as prostitutes during the Vietnam War were held against their will by pimps and lured with the promise of good-paying, respectable jobs so they could support their families in a country torn apart by war. They would never see most of the money, if any, paid to their pimps or the bar owners by the American soldiers. In some cases women were injected with silicone to make them more shapely so that the American soldiers would feel more “at home” with the Asian women. While the U.S. military did not officially condone the practice of prostitution around military bases, they didn’t do anything to stop it, either. In many cases, soldiers on leave would go to surrounding countries where a similar set-up existed, such as in Thailand. Many of these hubs of prostitution were referred to as ‘rest & recreation’ sites. So even among the U.S. military, the practice was unofficially encouraged. If the men were kept happy, they followed orders and stayed in line. And there were many instances of rape by soldiers during the war, among the other atrocities committed against the civilian population. It seems there has always been the misguided perception that allowing prostitution or establishing comfort stations would reduce rape, but that is a fallacy, as is the idea that the spread of sexually transmitted disease can somehow be controlled. Governments also turn a blind eye and even encourage prostitution with the belief that it can elevate the socioeconomic status of the country. By permitting either system, governments allow the rape, abuse, and exploitation of women. Unfortunately, many governments have drawn a line of distinction between the comfort women of World War II and the prostitutes in the wars that followed. They cite that fact that prostitutes were paid, so they couldn’t possibly have been forced. Whether forced through kidnapping, lured with the promise of a job, or coerced due to financial constraints, it is still exploitation of women. What these governments refuse to acknowledge is that the women who worked as prostitutes were cheated out of any money and many were forced and held against their will. While many have pressured the Japanese government to acknowledge and atone for their use of comfort women, many of these same governments should acknowledge their roles in the exploitation of these women. It’s time for Korea, Vietnam, and the United States to take responsibility for their actions and their encouragement of abuse.

慰安婦はドルを稼ぐ愛国者

韓国軍慰安婦

'Mythology' of 1945 A-bombs

INTERVIEW: U.S. history professor highlights 'mythology' of 1945 A-bombs June 02, 2015 （インタビュー　核といのちを考える）米国で原爆神話に挑む　ピーター・カズニックさん 2015年6月2日05時00分

Koreans pimps exploited Korean women for Sex Slaves for the military service men.

挺身隊対策協が儲けは不順（不純）な慰安婦賭け、 チュンダンシキョヤウィアンブ 問題を韓米日安保協力体制を破るために悪用している チ・マンウォン博士 ¦ j-m-y8282＠hanmail.net

정대협이 벌이는 불순한 위안부 놀음, 중단시켜야 위안부 문제를 한미일 안보협력 체제를 깨기 위해 악용하고 있다 지만원 박사 | j-m-y8282@hanmail.net 폰트키우기 폰트줄이기 프린트하기 메일보내기 신고하기 승인 2015.05.23 23:01:55 트위터 페이스북 네이버 구글 msn 카카오톡 카카오스토리 '해방전후사의 재인식' 제1권 434-476쪽에는 샌프란시스코주립대학의 소정희 교수의 귀한 논문이 실려 있다. 아래에 요지를 소개한다. 식민통치의 마지막 10년(1935-45)은 조선의 산업혁명 시기였다. 농민들은 토지로부터 추방되고, 노동계급이 태동하고, 인구의 유동성이 증대하고, 도시 사회가 폭넓게 확산되고, 여성계에서는 소위 신여성에 대한 선망이 확산됐던 그런 시기였다. 1917년 이광수의 소설 '무정'이 연재되었다. 이 소설은 신문명의 보급서였다. 서구의 신문명이 유입되고, 개화사상이 확산되고, 신청년과 신여성을 연애의 표상으로 삼은 신소설이었다. 1935년 심훈의 상록수는 답답하고 고리타분한 농촌을 계몽하기 위한 계몽서였다. 당시의 농촌 사람들의 생각이 얼마나 고루하고 원시적이었는가를 적나라하게 묘사했다. 위안부 역시 이러한 개화기 시대의 산물이었던 것이다. 190명의 위안부를 조사했더니 88%에 해당하는 168명이 바로 탈농촌 시기인 1937-44년 사이에 위안부가 되었다. 도시를 흠모하는 일종의 골드러시가 한창이었던 시절에 가정을 뛰쳐나온 여식들이 인신매매단의 좋은 먹이감이 된 것이다. 181명의 위안부를 조사한 결과 그중 4분의 1 이상이 이미 가족과 떨어져 식모, 공장 노동자, 식당 및 기생집 접대부 등으로 일하고 있다가 위안부가 되었고, 66% 정도가 만주, 대만, 중국 등으로 이송되어 갔다. 위안부로 가게 된 경우는 가정을 이미 탈출해 있던 여성에게만 해당되는 것이 아니었다. 가정에서 부모나 오빠들로부터 폭력을 당하고 있던 어린 여식들이 폭력을 피해 달아났다가 곧장 인신매매단의 덫에 걸려들기도 했고, 배움의 신기루를 찾아 넓어진 세상으로 도망쳐 나온다는 것이 곧 인신매매단의 희생양이 되어 위안부의 길로 들어서기도 했다. 당시 인신매매단의 앞잡이는 대부분 조선인들이었고, 군대 위안부를 경영하는 사람들 속에는 조선인들도 꽤 있었다. 위안부로 가는 길은 두 가지 경로였다. 가정-노동시장-위안부업소로 가는 과정이 있었고, 곧바로 가정-위안부업소로 가는 과정이 있었다. 이런 과정을 촉진한 매개체가 인신매매단이었으며, 인신매매단에 걸려들 수 있었던 환경은 곧 여성에 대한 가정폭력과 학대 그리고 배움에 대한 선망을 무조건 억압하는 무지몽매한 조선 가정의 여성비하 문화 때문이었다. 소정희 교수는 가정에서 곧바로 위안부라는 구덩이로 떨어진 한 많은 위안부 6명의 케이스를 정대협 자료에서 쉽게 찾아냈다. 이러함에도 정대협은 이 사실을 알면서도 위안부 문제를 정치 문제로 부각시키기 위해 사회에 그릇된 인식을 확산시켰다. 정신대의 주장에 의하면 모든 위안부는 가정에 있던 조신한 여식들이었는데, 어느 날 갑자기 일본 순사들이 들이닥쳐 강제로 붙잡아다가 일본군이 운영하는 유곽에 집어 넣었다는 것이다. 소정희 교수에 의하면 이는 사실이 아니다. 소정희 교수가 조사한 6명의 위안부 사례는 이를 이해하는데 생생한 자료가 된다. 이하 소정희 교수의 사례를 요약 소개한다. 조선의 부모가 딸들을 위안부로 내몬 대표적 사례 1) 문필기 : 정대협이 매주 주한 일본대사관 앞에서 주최하는 시위에 늘 참가하는 여성이다. 그녀는 18세가 되던 해인 1943년 후반부터 2년 동안 만주의 군위안소에서 일했다. 1945년 해방을 맞아 평양-개성-서울을 거쳐 고향으로 갔지만, 이내 고향을 떠나 진주-목포-광주-전주를 떠돌며 독신으로 살았다고 한다. 그녀는 1925년, 경남 진양군에서 2남 9녀를 둔 구멍가게에서 태어났다. 어렸을 때 가장 하고 싶은 것이 공부였다. 아버지는 "가시내가 공부하면 여우 밖에 될게 없다"며 화를 냈다. 어머니가 몰래 쌀 한 말을 팔아 보통학교에 넣어주었다. 일주일 안 돼서 아버지가 딸을 교실에서 끌어내고 책을 불태워 버렸다. 그래도 화가 풀리지 않아 딸을 죽어라 패고 집에서 쫓아내 버렸다. 큰 집에 가 있다가 다시는 공부를 하지 않겠다는 약속을 한 후 집으로 돌아왔다. 공부 못한 것이 한이 된 상태에서 9살부터 집에서 살림하고, 밭일도 하고, 목화밭을 매고, 물레질도 했다. 구멍가게에서 파는 고구마도 쪘다. 농사일을 할 때마다 밥을 해서 들로 날랐다. 그러던 1943년 가을 어느 날, 마을에 사는 일본 앞잡이 노릇을 하는 50대 아저씨가 공부도 하고 돈도 벌 수 있는 곳으로 보내주겠다 해서 따라 나섰다. 18세 였다. 그 남자와 일본인 순사가 그녀를 곧장 차에 태워 부산으로 데려갔다. 긴 머리를 자르고 치마저고리를 벗기고 원피스를 입혔다. 그리고 다른 네 명의 여인들과 함께 곧장 만주로 이송됐다. 이 이야기를 포함해 아래의 모든 이야기들은 정대협이 엮은 '증언집'에 수록돼 있다. 이 여인이 매주 수요일 12시에 일본대사관 앞에 나와, 일본이 자기를 강제로 연행해 가서 위안부로 삼았다며 사죄와 피해 배상을 요구하고 있는 것이다. 이 위안부 놀음은 간첩의 처이자 정대협의 상임대표인 윤미향이 꾸려가고 있다. 문제는 이 여인에 있는 게 아니라 정대협에 있다. 2) 이상옥 : 이 위안부의 아버지는 경상북도 달성군 달성면 면장이었다. 머슴을 두고 농사를 짓는 부농이기도 했다. 9살에 학교에 들어갔지만 오빠가 "계집애를 학교에 보내서 어디다 쓰느냐"며 학교를 못 가게 하고, 책을 아궁이에 넣어 태워 버렸다. 그래도 학교에 가려 하자 죽인다고 협박했다. 옆집 언니가 학교에 다니는 게 너무 부러운 나머지 그해 어머니에게도 알리지 않고 서울로 도망갔다. 고모가 학교를 보내주었지만 오빠가 고모에게 집요한 압력을 넣었다. 고모집을 나와 소리개라는 집에 들어갔다. 9명의 처녀들이 있었는데 그들은 모두 그들의 아버지에 의해 팔려왔다고 했다. 15세인 그녀가 가장 어렸다. 이 여인들이 가는 곳으로 따라가 보니, 시모노세끼 였다. 그들을 인솔한 군속이 열 명의 처녀들을 넘긴 곳은 바로 조선인 부부가 운영하는 군 유곽이었다. 그들은 이들 처녀들과는 아무 관계없이 돈을 주고 받았다. 이 여인은 일본말을 한다는 것 때문에 일본 군병원에 일하면서 봉급도 받았다. 일본 군의관이 그녀를 가엽게 여겨 조선으로 돌려보내려 했지만 그날 폭격을 맞아 허사가 됐다. 이 여인 역시 여성에 대한 가정 폭력으로 인해 유곽으로 떠밀린 케이스 였다. 3) 이득남 : 이 위안부는 1918년생이다. 그녀는 1939년부터 3년은 중국에서, 또 다른 3년은 수마트라에서 위안부 생활을 했다. 학교에 가고 싶었지만 아버지는 주정꾼이자 노름꾼으로 이유 없이 마구 때렸다. "집에 있는 것이 죽기보다 싫었다" 17세에 시집을 가라 했지만 그녀는 이를 팔려가는 것으로 생각했다. 이웃 친구와 함께 봉급을 받을 수 있는 직장을 찾기 위해 기차를 타고 인천 방직공장으로 갔다. 그게 위안부로 가는 길이었다. 4) 김옥실 : 이 위안부는 1926년 평양시내에서 10리 되는 촌에서 태어났다. 현재는 김은례로 알려져 있다. 그녀의 아버지 역시 공부하려는 딸에게 가혹한 매질을 했다. 11세 때, 동네친구 하나가 한글도 가르쳐주고 노래도 배워준다는 데가 있다 해서 같이 가서 며칠 있다가 아버지에 들통이 났다. "에미나이 세끼가 글 배워서 어디에 쓰갔네, 연애편지질이나 하려구 그러나!" 매를 든 아버지가 무서워 할머니 뒤에 숨었지만 다리몽둥이를 부러트린다며 때렸다. 그 후 아버지가 보기 싫어 집을 나왔다. 하루는 아주머니들로부터 평양에서는 기생이 최고라는 말을 들었다. 고운 옷 입고, 고운 가마 타고 다닌다는 기생이 되고 싶어 기생집으로 가서 양녀가 됐다. 불과 일주일 만에 아버지에 들켰다. "이 에미나이가 조상 망신, 동네 망신은 다 시키고 돌아 다닌다"며 매를 맞고 집으로 압송돼 왔다. 다시 양말공장으로 뛰쳐 나갔다. 거기에서 3년, 담배공장에서 4년 일하다가 드디어 인신매매 단에 걸려들었다. 5) 배족간 : 이 위안부는 1922년생이다. 이 여인은 자살까지도 기도했을 정도로 어머니로부터 모진 학대를 받았다. 광목공장에서 일하게 해주겠다는 동네 구장의 거짓말에 속아 집을 나간 것이 곧 중국행이 되었다. 중국의 여러 위안소들을 떠돌았다. 1946년 집으로 돌아왔지만 어머니는 냉담했다. 어머니가 임종할 때 딸을 찾았지만 그녀는 가지 않았다. 6) 송신도 : 이 위안부는 1922년 생으로 어머니로부터 모진 학대를 받았다. 16세 때부터 먹고 살기 위해 수많은 잡직들을 전전하다가 좋은 직장 구해주겠다는 이웃의 꼬임에 빠져 중국으로 갔다가 1938년부터 1945년까지 위안부 생활을 했다. 일본인 병사가 결혼하자고 하여 일본으로 동행했지만, 그는 일본에 도착하자마자 그녀를 버렸다. 정치 목적을 위해 위안부 악용하는 정대협 이미지위에 마우스를 올려 보세요!

Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the Big Historical Lie

Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the Big Historical Lie Posted on August 6, 2013 by orwellwasright | 21 Comments

We are told repeatedly that, without the use of weapons which current Hiroshima Mayor Kazumi Matsui refers to as the “ultimate inhumane weapon and an absolute evil”, Japan would never have surrendered. We are told that President Truman was troubled by the mounting Allied casualties, and that the Joint Chiefs had told him to expect 1,000,000 dead Americans in the pending attack on the Japanese home islands. Yet this figure is a complete fabrication, invented by Secretary of War Stimson. No such claim was made by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Truman himself, in different statements, asserted “thousands of lives would be saved,” and “a quarter of a million of the flower of our young manhood was worth a couple of Japanese cities,” and also “I thought 200,000 of our young men would be saved by making that decision.” None of these statements were based on any evidence. The alleged indefatigably of the Japanese military and their unwillingness to surrender is also a proven myth. By the summer of 1945 their position was hopeless and numerous attempts to surrender had already been made. Brigadier Gen. Carter W. Clarke stated: “We brought them down to an abject surrender through the accelerated sinking of their merchant marine and hunger alone, and when we didn’t need to do it, and we knew we didn’t need to do it, and they knew that we knew we didn’t need to do it, we used them as an experiment for two atomic bombs.” Truman knew weeks before the Potsdam Conference, which began in July, 1945, that the Japanese were making overtures to surrender, the only condition being the retention of the Emperor. But Truman was determined to test the new bombs. In the words of General Douglas McArthur: ”The war might have ended weeks earlier, he said, if the United States had agreed, as it later did anyway, to the retention of the institution of the emperor.” In the event, the US agreed to the terms of the Japanese surrender anyway – but not until they had tested their new weapons and caused the deaths of 100,000s of innocent civilians. In reality, most of the military top brass were disgusted at the decision to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki and understood completely that it served no military purpose whatsoever. Admiral William D. Leahy, the President’s Chief of Staff said, “The use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender.” This view was reiterated by Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, who said, “The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace… The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military standpoint, in the defeat of Japan.” So what is the truth about the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Why, when intelligence agencies knew months in advance that contingency plans for a large-scale invasion were completely unnecessary and that Japan desperately sought peace, did they, as Admiral Leahy put it, adopt “an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages”? There are two main reasons. Firstly, the Russians had entered the Japanese war and were making striking advances through Manchuria, decimating the already weakened Japanese army. Indeed, their role was pivotal – as Air Force General Claire Chennault stated: “Russia’s entry into the Japanese war was the decisive factor in speeding its end and would have been so even if no atomic bombs had been dropped.” The last thing the American leadership wanted was for Russia to receive equal spoils of war and emerge from the war as a superpower equal to the US. In this sense, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are more accurately perceived as the opening salvos of the Cold War, rather than the final shots fired in the Second World War – the Cold War was, after all, defined essentially as a balance of nuclear powers; realpolitik and the primacy of power where the arms race and military insanity took supremacy over diplomacy. The other, far more sinister reason, was one of scientific curiosity. After making such a huge investment in the Manhattan Project (2 billion in 1940) and with three bombs completed, there was little to no desire to shelve the weapons. The fissionable material in the Hiroshima bomb was uranium, while the Nagasaki bomb was plutonium, and subsequently there was intense scientific curiosity as to the different effects these bombs would produce. As the US Army director of the project, General Leslie Groves pondered: “what would happen if an entire city was leveled by a single uranium bomb?” “What about a plutonium bomb?” For the science experiment to go ahead, surrender was not an option.

Gang Rapes and Beatings, Brothels Filled with Teenage Prostitutes -- The Depths of American Brutality in Vietnam

Gang Rapes and Beatings, Brothels Filled with Teenage Prostitutes -- The Depths of American Brutality in Vietnam A powerful excerpt from Nick Turse's new book, 'Kill Anything That Moves' exposes the horrors committed by the U.S. By Nick Turse / Metropolitan Books January 19, 2013

The disdainful attitude that led American troops to gleefully cut off ears and run down pedestrians by the roadside was even stronger when it came to a group that, for the young soldiers, was doubly “other”: Vietnamese women. As a result, sexual violence and sexual exploitation became an omnipresent part of the American War. With their husbands or fathers away at war or dead because of it, without other employment prospects and desperate to provide for their families, many women found that catering to the desires of U.S. soldiers was their only option. By 1966, as the feminist scholar Susan Brownmiller observed, the 1st Cavalry Division, the 1st Infantry Division, and the 4th Infantry Division had all already “established official military brothels within the perimeter of their basecamps.” At the 1st Infantry Division base at Lai Khe, refugee women—recruited by the South Vietnamese province chief and channeled into their jobs by the mayor of the town—worked in sixty curtained cubicles kept under military police guard. Jim Soular of the 1st Cavalry Division recalled the setup at his unit’s compound, known as Sin City.

You had to go through a checkpoint gate, but once you were in there you could do anything. There were all kinds of prostitutes and booze. The [U.S.] army was definitely in control of this thing. The bars had little rooms in the back where you could go with the prostitutes. I know they were checked by the doctors once a week for venereal diseases.

At Dong Tam, the 9th Infantry Division camp, the sign on a large building next to the headquarters read “Steam Bath and Massage.” The troops knew it by a different name: “Steam ’n Cream.” The building boasted approximately 140 cubicles filled with Vietnamese women and girls. At another U.S. compound, the prices of sex acts were announced at an official briefing, and, for a time, “little tickets had been printed up . . . blue ones for blow jobs, and white ones for inter-course,” recalled one patron to an army investigator. GIs paid a dollar or so for the former and around two for the latter Everywhere, every kind of sex was for sale. “At the entrance to the MACV compound in Qui Nhon, a six-year-old girl is offering blow jobs,” wrote one journalist sizing up the sex-work scene. “One night early on in my stay,” he reported, I found myself with a thirteen-year-old girl on my lap insisting “we go make lub now” in the bordello her mother had thrown up opposite an American construction site. The bordello is made of sheets of aluminum somehow extricated from a factory just before attaining canhood. You can read the walls of the structure from a distance. They say “Schlitz, Schlitz,” in rows and columns, over and over again. The girl wants $1.25. With some difficulty I refuse. Later in the war, even walking as far as the camp entrance would become unnecessary, as certain bases began allowing prostitutes directly into the barracks. “Hootch maids,” who washed and ironed clothes and cleaned living quarters for U.S. servicemen, were also sometimes sexually exploited. As one maid put it, “American soldiers have much money and it seems that they are sexually hungry all the time. Our poor girls. With money and a little patience, the Americans can get them very easily.” And other women working on bases fell victim to sexual blackmail. One such case was revealed in an army investigation of Mickey Carcille, who ran a camp mess hall that employed Vietnamese women. By threatening to fire them if they did not comply, Carcille forced some of the women to pose for nude photographs and coerced others into having intercourse with him or performing other sex acts. In addition to sexual exploitation, sexual violence was an every-day feature of the American War -- hardly surprising since, as Christian Appy observed, “the model of male sexuality offered as a military ideal in boot camp was directly linked to violence.” From their earliest days in the military, men were bombarded with the language of sexism and misogyny. Male recruits who showed weakness or fatigue were labeled ladies, girls, pussies, or cunts. In basic training, as army draftee Tim O’Brien later wrote in his autobiographical account of the Vietnam War, the message was: “Women are dinks. Women are villains. They are creatures akin to Communists and yellow-skinned people." While it’s often assumed that all sexual assaults took place in the countryside, evidence suggests that men based in rear areas also had ample opportunity to abuse and rape women. For example, on December 27, 1969, Refugio Longoria and James Peterson, who served in the 580th Telephone Operations Company, and one other soldier picked up a nineteen-year-old Vietnamese hootch maid hitching a ride home after a day of work on the gigantic base at Long Binh. They drove her to a secluded spot behind the recreation center and forced her into the back of the truck -- holding her down, gagging, and blindfolding her. They then gang-raped her and dumped her on the side of the road. A doctor’s examination shortly afterward recorded that “her hymen was recently torn. There was fresh blood in her vagina.” On March 19, 1970, a GI at the base at Chu Lai, in Quang Tin Province, drove a jeep in circles while Private First Class Ernest Stepp manhandled and slapped a Vietnamese woman who had rebuffed his sexual advances. According to army documents, with the help of a fellow soldier Stepp tore off the woman’s pants and assaulted her. The driver apparently slowed down the jeep to give the woman’s attackers more time to carry out the assault, and offered his own advice to her: “If you don’t fight so much it won’t be so bad for you.” Again and again, allegations of crimes against women surfaced at U.S. bases and in other rear echelon areas. “Boy did I beat the shit out of a whore. It was really fun,” one GI mused about his trip to the beach resort at Vung Tau. The sheer physical size of American troops -- on average five inches taller and forty-three pounds heavier than Vietnamese soldiers, and even more imposing in comparison to Vietnamese women -- meant that their assaults often inflicted serious injuries. Sometimes, Vietnamese women were simply murdered by angry GIs. One sex worker at a base in Kontum, known as “Linda” to the soldiers there, was gunned down after she laughed at a customer who, according to legal documents, “thought she was going to go out with another G.I.” On March 27, 1970, in Vung Tau, several Vietnamese prostitutes became embroiled in an argument with a soldier over payment. He assaulted a number of them and stabbed one to death. Most rapes and other crimes against Vietnamese women, however, did take place in the field -- in hamlets and villages populated mainly by women and children when the Americans arrived. Rape was a way of asserting dominance, and sometimes a weapon of war, employed in field interrogations of women captives to gain information about enemy troops. Aside from any such considerations, rural women were generally assumed by Americans to be secret saboteurs or the wives and girlfriends of Viet Cong guerrillas, and thus fair game. The reports of sexual assault implicated units up and down the country. A veteran who served with 198th Light Infantry Brigade testified that he knew of ten to fifteen incidents, within a span of just six or seven months, in which soldiers from his unit raped young girls. A soldier who served with the 25th Infantry Division admitted that, in his unit, rape was virtually standard operating procedure. One member of the Americal Division remembered fellow soldiers on patrol through a village suddenly singling out a girl to be raped. “All three grunts grabbed the gook chick and began dragging her into the hootch. I didn’t know what to do,” he recalled. “As a result of this one experience I learned to recognize the sounds of rape at a great distance . . . Over the next two months I would hear this sound on the average of once every third day.” In November 1966, soldiers from the 1st Cavalry Division brazenly kidnapped a young Vietnamese woman named Phan Thi Mao to use as a sexual slave. One unit member testified that, prior to the mission, his patrol leader had explicitly stated, “We would get the woman for the purpose of boom boom, or sexual intercourse, and at the end of five days we would kill her.” The sergeant was true to his word. The woman was kidnapped, raped by four of the patrol members in turn, and murdered the following day. Gang rapes were a horrifyingly common occurrence. One army report detailed the allegations of a Vietnamese woman who said that she was detained by troops from the 173rd Airborne Brigade and then raped by approximately ten soldiers. In another incident, eleven members of one squad from the 23rd Infantry Division raped a Vietnamese girl. As word spread, another squad traveled to the scene to join in. In a third incident, an Americal GI recalled seeing a Vietnamese woman who was hardly able to walk after she had been gang-raped by thirteen soldiers.139 And on Christmas Day 1969, an army criminal investigation revealed, four warrant officers in a helicopter noticed several Vietnamese women in a rice paddy, landed, kidnapped one of them, and committed “lewd and lascivious acts” against her. The traumatic nature of such sexual assaults remains vivid even when they are couched in the formal, bureaucratic language of mili tary records. Court-martial documents indicate, for instance, that after he led his patrol into one village, marine lance corporal Hugh Quigley personally detained a young Vietnamese woman -- because “her age, between 20 and 25, suggested that she was a Vietcong.” The documents tell the story.

After burning one hut and the killing of various animals, the accused with members of the patrol entered a hut where the alleged victim was. The accused, seeing the victim, grabbed for her breast and at the same time attempted to unbutton her blouse. As the victim held her child between the accused and herself, she pulled away. At this time, the accused pulled out his knife and threatened to cut the victim’s throat. The baby was taken from the victim and then the accused took the victim by the shoulders, laid her on the floor and then pulled her blouse above her breast and lowered her pants below her knees. The accused then knelt by the head of the victim, took his penis out of his pants and made the victim commit forced oral copulation on him. After a few minutes of this act the accused then proceeded to have non-consensual intercourse with her . . . The same witnesses who saw the accused commit these alleged acts will testify that the victim was scared and trembling.

Quigley was found guilty of having committed forcible sodomy and rape. Some commanders, like an army colonel who investigated allegations of rape in an infantry battalion, nevertheless sought to cast Vietnamese women as willing participants. Writing about the heavily populated coastal regions of I and II Corps, he conjectured that in those areas “the number of young women far exceeds the number of military age males,” so the local women undoubtedly welcomed the attentions of American troops as a means to “satisfy needs long denied.” Assuming that all Vietnamese women longed for intercourse with armed foreigners marching through their villages, the colonel blithely concluded, “The circumstances are such that rape in contacts between soldiers . . . and village women is unlikely.” The colonel’s theory about universally willing partners becomes even more preposterous when we consider the shockingly violent and sadistic nature of some of the sexual assaults. One marine remembered finding a Vietnamese woman who had been shot and wounded. Severely injured, she begged for water. Instead, her clothes were ripped off. She was stabbed in both breasts, then forced into a spread-eagle position, after which the handle of an entrenching tool -- essentially a short-handled shovel -- was thrust into her vagina. Other women were violated with objects ranging from soda bottles to rifles. Excerpted from KILL ANYTHING THAT MOVES: The Real American War in Vietnam by Nick Turse, published by Metropolitan Books,

The Firebombing of Tokyo

The Firebombing of Tokyo Seventy years ago today, the United States needlessly killed almost 100,000 people in a single air raid over Tokyo. by Rory Fanning

Today marks the seventieth anniversary of the American firebombing of Tokyo, World War II’s deadliest day. More people died that night from napalm bombs than in the atomic strikes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But few in the United States are aware that the attack even took place. The lack of ceremonies or official state apologies for the firebombing is unsurprising considering that many Americans see World War II as the “just war” fought by the “greatest generation.” These labels leave the war and the atrocities Americans committed during it largely untouched by critique. The little that is available to study on the firebombing, at least here in the US, is told from the perspective of American crewmen and brass, through usually biased American military historians. Those seeking better understanding of the March 9 tragedy must wade through reams of history primarily devoted to strategy; the heroics of American soldiers; the awesome power behind the bombs unleashed that day; and a cult-like devotion to the B-29 Superfortress, the plane that dropped the napalm over Tokyo and the atomic bombs, and was the inspiration for George Lucas’s Millennium Falcon. The overriding narrative surrounding the events of March 9, 1945 is that the American pilots and military strategists such as Gen. Curtis LeMay, the architect of the firebombing, had no other option but to carry out the mission. The Americans had “no choice” but to burn to death nearly one hundred thousand Japanese civilians. . World War II was carried out with brutality on all fronts. The Japanese military murdered nearly six million Chinese, Korean, and Filipino civilians by the end of it. However, to argue that Japanese civilians deserved to die — that children deserved to die — at the hands of the US military because their government killed civilians in other Asian countries is an indefensible position, in any moral or ethical framework. LeMay claimed that the Japanese government relied on residential “cottage” war production, thus making the civilians living in Tokyo a legitimate military target. However, by 1944 the Japanese had essentially terminated its home war production. A full 97 percent of the country’s military supplies were protected underground in facilities not vulnerable to air attack the day of the bombing. The Americans knew this. The United States had broken Japan’s Red and Purple cipher machines well before 1945, allowing them access to the most classified enemy intelligence. American generals understood the war would soon be materially impossible for the Japanese. The US Naval blockade had also prevented oil, metal, and other essential goods from entering Japan long before March 9. Japan was so cut off from basic supplies that it was constructing its planes partially out of wood. The Japanese population at this point in the war was most concerned with starvation. The 1945 rice harvest was the worst since 1909. Surveys commissioned by Japan’s government in April 1945 reported the population was “too preoccupied with the problems of food” to worry about fighting a war. Victory for the Allies was guaranteed by the start of the year. The most damning evidence against the firebombing can be traced to August 19, 1945, when Walter Trohan of the Chicago Tribune finally published a piece gracefully titled “Roosevelt Ignored M’Arthur Report on Nip Proposals” that he had been sitting on for seven months. Trohan wrote:

Release of all censorship restrictions in the United States makes it possible to report that the first Japanese peace bid was relayed to the White House seven months ago…. The Jap offer, based on five separate overtures, was relayed to the White House by Gen. MacArthur in a 40-page communication, [who] urged negotiations on the basis of the Jap overtures…. The offer, as relayed by MacArthur, contemplated abject surrender of everything but the person of the Emperor. President Roosevelt dismissed the general’s communication, which was studded with solemn references to the deity, after a casual reading with the remark, “MacArthur is our greatest general and our poorest politician.”

The MacArthur report was not even taken to Yalta. In January 1945 — two days before Franklin Roosevelt was to meet with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Soviet leader Joseph Stalin in Yalta — the Japanese were offering surrender terms almost identical to what was accepted by the Americans on the USS Missouri in the Japan Bay on September 2, 1945. The Japanese population was famished, the country’s war machine was out of gas, and the government had capitulated. The Americans were unmoved. The firebombing and the nuclear attacks were heartlessly carried out. If anyone is guilty of disregarding the “context” of the firebombing of Tokyo, it’s the sycophantic and biased American historians who deride these critical facts. So why did the Americans continue to raid and terrorize the Japanese civilian population knowing the war could have been over? Many argue that the Americans were flexing their muscles for Russia in anticipation of the ensuing Cold War. Countless pages have been written about this. But what is too often overlooked is the racism of the day. It is America’s racism that best explains the extent of the firebombing and the nuclear attacks. The racist mindset that all too many Americans were comfortable with in the Jim Crow era easily bled onto the Japanese. The horror stories of the almost two hundred thousand Japanese Americans who lost their livelihoods as a result of Roosevelt’s internment camps are just one example of how Americans saw not only the Japanese but Japanese-Americans. The firebombing of Japan was about testing new technologies on a civilian population. Significant funds had gone into the development of American military technology — 36 billion in 2015 dollars funded the creation of the atomic bomb. Napalm was new as well. The firebombing of Tokyo marked the first time it was used on a dense civilian population. The Americans wanted to assay their new inventions on a group of people who they thought were less than human. LeMay famously remarked, “Killing Japanese didn’t bother me very much at that time… I suppose if I had lost the war, I would have been tried as a war criminal.” LeMay later leveraged his war credentials and racism to earn a spot on segregationist Gov. George Wallace’s 1968 presidential ticket. Terms like “greatest generation” betray Americans by keeping them willfully disconnected from their past. These labels flatten complex legacies, and prevent a thorough questioning of power. Why did no one from the greatest generation stop these needless bombings? How can a country whose leaders constantly invoke its “exceptionalism” regularly fall back on the platitude “All sides were committing atrocities so why focus on the Americans?” These are the questions our high school textbooks need to be asking. .

Allied soldiers 'raped one million Germans after the end of Second World War'

New book alleges Allied soldiers 'raped one million Germans after the end of Second World War' 'When The Soldiers Came' claims Allied troops raped one million women Children, men and young boys were also abused by soldiers, it claims Until now it was thought only the Stalin's Red Army raped German women But author insists she has spoken to some who can attest to the abuse There was a misconception all women traded sex for coveted goods But western soldiers took advantage of power to rape, says the author By ALLAN HALL IN BERLIN FOR THE DAILY MAIL PUBLISHED: 01:23 GMT, 2 March 2015 | UPDATED: 15:06 GMT, 2 March 2015 Postwar Rape: Were Americans As Bad as the Soviets? By Klaus Wiegrefe March 02, 2015 – 06:36 PM

The soldiers didn't give up easily though. They began searching all the houses in the area and ultimately found the two women in a neighbor's closet shortly before midnight. The men pulled them out and threw them onto two beds. The crime the six soldiers ultimately committed took place in March, 1945, shortly before the end of World War II. The girl cried for help: "Mama. Mama." But none arrived. Hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of German women experienced a similar fate at the time. Often, such gang rapes were blamed on Soviet troops in Germany's east. But this case was different. The rapists were soldiers from the United States of America and the crime took place in Sprendlingen, a village near the Rhine River in the west. By the end of the war, some 1.6 million American troops had advanced deep into Germany, ultimately meeting the advancing Soviets at the Elbe River. In the US, those who freed Europe from the plague of the Nazis came to be known as the "Greatest Generation." And Germans too developed a positive image of their occupiers: cool soldiers who handed out chewing gum to the children and wowed the German fräuleins with jazz and nylons. But is that image consistent with reality? German historian Miriam Gebhardt, well known in Germany for her book about leading feminist Alice Schwarzer and the feminist movement, has now published a new volume casting doubt on the accepted version of America's role in German postwar history. Reports from the Catholic Archive The work, which came out in German on Monday, takes a closer look at the rape of German women by all four victorious powers at the end of World War II. In particular, though, her views on the behavior of American GIs are likely to raise eyebrows. Gebhardt believes that members of the US military raped as many as 190,000 German women by the time West Germany regained sovereignty in 1955, with most of the assaults taking place in the months immediately following the US invasion of Nazi Germany. The author bases her claims in large part on reports kept by Bavarian priests in the summer of 1945. The Archbishop of Munich and Freising had asked Catholic clergy to keep records on the allied advance and the Archdiocese published excerpts from its archive a few years ago. Michael Merxmüller, a priest in the village of Ramsau near Berchtesgaden, wrote on July 20, 1945, for example: "Eight girls and women raped, some of them in front of their parents." Father Andreas Weingand, from Haag an der Amper, a tiny village located just north of where the Munich airport is today, wrote on July 25, 1945: "The saddest event during the advance were three rapes, one on a married woman, one on a single woman and one on a spotless girl of 16-and-a-half. They were committed by heavily drunken Americans." Father Alois Schiml from Moosburg wrote on Aug. 1, 1945: "By order of the military government, a list of all residents and their ages must be nailed to the door of each house. The results of this decree are not difficult to imagine. ... Seventeen girls or women ... were brought to the hospital, having been sexually abused once or several times." The youngest victim mentioned in the reports is a seven-year-old child. The oldest, a woman of 69. Macho Fantasies The reports led book author Gebhardt to compare the behavior of the US army with the violent excesses perpetrated by the Red Army in the eastern half of the country, where brutality, gang rapes and incidents of looting have dominated the public perception of the Soviet occupation. Gebhardt, however, says that the rapes committed in Upper Bavaria show that things weren't much different in postwar Germany's south and west. The historian also believes that similar motives were at work. Just like their Red Army counterparts, the US soldiers, she believes, were horrified by the crimes committed by the Germans, embittered by their pointless and deadly efforts to defend the country to the very end, and furious at the relatively high degree of prosperity in the country. Furthermore, propaganda at the time conveyed the idea that German women were attracted to American GIs, further fueling macho fantasies. Gebhardt's ideas are firmly rooted in the current academic mainstream. In the wake of the torture scandal at Abu Ghraib and other war crimes committed by US soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, many historians are taking a more critical look at the behavior of the American military during the days immediately preceding and following the end of World War II in Germany. Studies in recent years have shed light on incidents involving GIs plundering churches, murdering Italian civilians, killing German prisoners of war and raping women, even as they advanced across France. Despite such findings, the Americans are still considered to have been relatively disciplined compared to the Red Army and the French military -- conventional wisdom that Gebhardt is hoping to challenge. Still, all of the reports compiled by the Catholic Church in Bavaria only add up to a few hundred cases. Furthermore, the clergymen often praised the "very correct and respectable" behavior of the US troops. Their reports make it seem as though sexual abuse committed by the Americans was more the exception than the rule. How, then, did the historian arrive at her shocking figure of 190,000 rapes? Sufficient Evidence? The total is not the result of deep research in archives across the country. Rather, it is an extrapolation. Gebhardt makes the assumption that 5 percent of the "war children" born to unmarried women in West Germany and West Berlin by the mid-1950s were the product of rape. That makes for a total of 1,900 children of American fathers. Gebhardt further assumes that on average, there are 100 incidents of rape for each birth. The result she arrives at is thus 190,000 victims. Such a total, though, hardly seems plausible. Were the number really that high, it is almost certain that there would be more reports on rape in the files of hospitals or health authorities, or that there would be more eyewitness reports. Gebhardt is unable to present such evidence in sufficient quantity. Another estimate, stemming from US criminology professor Robert Lilly, who examined rape cases prosecuted by American military courts, arrived at a number of 11,000 serious sexual assaults committed by November, 1945 -- a disgusting number in its own right. But Gebhardt is certainly correct on one point: For far too long, historical research has been dominated by the idea that rapes committed by GIs were implausible because German women wanted to jump into bed with them anyway. How, though, is one to interpret the complaint filed by a hotelier in Munich on May 31, 1945? She reports that US soldiers had commandeered a few rooms and that four women were "running around completely naked" and were "exchanged several times." Was it really voluntary? Even if it isn't likely that the Americans committed 190,000 sexual crimes, it remains true that for postwar victims of rape -- which was undeniably a mass phenomenon at the end of World War II, there is "no culture of memory, no public recognition, much less an apology" from the perpetrators, Gebhardt notes. And today, 70 years after the end of the war, it unfortunately doesn't look as though that situation will soon change.