Evidence dossier: what can these sources tell us?

Source A — Japanese government statement (1993): The Kōno Statement acknowledged that the Japanese military was involved, directly or indirectly, in the establishment and management of comfort stations and the transfer of women. It said recruitment was conducted mainly by private recruiters, but in many cases against women’s will, through coaxing, coercion and other means. It expressed apologies and remorse. The statement followed a government investigation that included interviews with former comfort women. Source B — Survivor testimony: In a 1991 public testimony, Korean survivor Kim Hak-sun described being taken to a military comfort station during the war and forced to provide sexual services to soldiers. Her testimony helped bring public attention to survivors’ experiences. Like all testimony, it is one person’s account and should be read alongside other evidence, not treated as representative of every survivor. Source C — Historical context: From the early 1930s until Japan’s defeat in 1945, the military comfort-station system operated in areas occupied or controlled by Japan. Women and girls from Korea, China, the Philippines, Indonesia, Taiwan and other places were subjected to it. Recruitment and confinement differed across places and individuals. The total number is uncertain because records are incomplete and historians use different methods; estimates commonly range from tens of thousands to around 200,000. Source D — Historians’ method: Relevant evidence includes survivor testimony, military and government records, court documents, contemporary diaries and newspapers, and later official inquiries. Records may be missing, destroyed, incomplete or shaped by the purpose of the person or institution that created them. Later testimony can be affected by time, trauma, memory and the conditions in which people were able to speak. These considerations do not, by themselves, make testimony unreliable.

Historical analysis