Press Briefing
Spokesperson and Deputy Minister for Public Relations Cho Tai-young
Mar. 6, 2014 14:30 KST


Good afternoon. Let me start today’s briefing.

Today, I will make one announcement and then take questions you may have.

The government of the Republic of Korea has decided to send Choi Kyung-hwan, floor leader of the ruling Saenuri Party, as special envoy of President Park Geun-hye to the inauguration ceremony of incoming President Michelle Bachelet of Chile, which is set for March 11. Representative Kang Suk-hoon of the Saenuri Party will also join the delegation.

Madame Bachelet, who served as the first-ever female President of Chile from 2006 through 2010, is the first Chilean President to have successfully won a second term.

For your examination, President Bachelet, after making a state visit to the ROK in November 2009, paid another visit to the country in February 2013 in her capacity as Executive Diretor of UN Women to attend the inauguration ceremony of President Park Geun-hye and had a meeting with her.

Ahead of the inauguration ceremony, special envoy Choi will pay courtesy calls on leaders of the new Chilean government, including new President Bachelet and new Senate President Allende, on March 10.

On those occasions, the two sides are expected to discuss ways to deepen and expand friendly and cooperative ties between the two countries.

This is all for my opening statement. I will now take questions you may have.


[Q&A]

Q: At the High-Level Segment of the UN Human Right Council meeting yesterday, Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se delivered strong remarks on the issue of Japan’s wartime sexual slavery victims. Please share with us what, if any, the Japanese government has said in response or to explain its position on the remarks.

A: Do you mean through a diplomatic channel?

Q: Yes.

A: As far as I know, there has been nothing of the kind.

Q: It is afternoon here in Korea and morning in Geneva. Japan has mentioned that it would deliver counter-remarks. What, if any, is the ROK government’s position on this?

A: If a Japanese government exercises a right of reply, an official at the ROK Permanent Mission to the UN Office in Geneva will clearly express the ROK’s position.

Let me stress that through his remarks, Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se made it clear that the issue of sexual slavery victims is one that the Japanese government should resolve as soon as possible. As I have underscored this time and again, this is not the position of the ROK only, but a unified position of the ROK and the other victimized countries as well as the rest of the international community.

The Japanese government should pay heed to this united voice. Instead of exercising the right of reply, it should pay heed to this united voice and take the path toward the resolution of the issue.

Q: I have a further question. You have just mentioned that an official at the ROK Permanent Mission in Geneva will express the ROK’s position again. I would like to know how he/she will do that -- publicly through another speech or through a diplomatic channel.

A: When a delegate exercises a right of reply against remarks by another delegate, the latter delegate can request that he/she be granted a right of reply, which allows him/her to rebut the counter-argument right on the spot.

Q: Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se delivered a speech on the issue of Japan’s sexual slavery victims at the UN Human Rights Council meeting held in Geneva, Switzerland, which reportedly marked the first time for a ROK Foreign Minister to do so. Please tell us whether it was indeed the first time as well as the reason that the Foreign Minister did so himself. Was there any special reason for that, such as the remarks by Japan’s Chief Cabinet Secretary Suga that the background that led to the Kono Statement would be re-examined.

A: I think you asked that question while already knowing the answer to it. In terms of your first question, it did mark the first time for the Foreign Minister of the Republic of Korea to deliver remarks on this issue of military sexual slavery victims at a UN Human Rights Council meeting. As for the background behind making the remarks, I believe you must be better aware of it than I am.

As I said moments ago, the ROK and other countries that fell victim to military sexual slavery, the US Congress, the greater part of the international community and the UN have made it clear that this issue is a grave violation of human rights and of women’s dignity, and have urged the Japanese government to settle the issue as soon as possible.

Nevertheless, judging from its recent words and actions, the Japanese government is instead moving in the opposite direction. As reported by the press, Japan’s high-ranking government official responsible for the education of the country’s next generations mentioned that the issue of military sexual slavery victims is a fabricated story. To my understanding, all such words and actions have led us to sternly raise this issue once again on the international stage.

Q: The bill requiring textbooks of the US State of Virginia to identify the body of water between the Korean Peninsula and Japan as the East Sea as well as the Sea of Japan has passed the state’s General Assembly and now waits to be signed by the Virginia Governor, who has expressed his willingness to sign it. What does the ROK government make of this situation?

A: The ROK government highly commends the efforts of the ethnic Korean communities in the US to spread this dual-name policy, one of the ROK government policies as well as a matter of interest of the ROK nationals. The government will continue to make efforts to raise international awareness on the legitimacy of using the name of the East Sea in close cooperation with civilian groups at home and abroad.

Q: You have just reiterated that the Japanese government should resolve the issue of sexual slavery victims as soon as possible. What does the ROK government think constitutes a resolution to the issue? What elements should be met for something to be considered as such?

A: They have already been made explicit. They are also clearly stated in the reports submitted by UN Special Rapporteurs and positions expressed by relevant countries. I do not see a need to reiterate each and every one of them right here.

For your information, let me quote some parts of the relevant resolution adopted by the US House of Representatives in 2007. The resolution goes as follows: “That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the Government of Japan…

(1) should formally acknowledge, apologize, and accept historical responsibility in a clear and unequivocal manner for its Imperial Armed Forces’ coercion of young women into sexual slavery, known to the world as comfort women, during its colonial and wartime occupation of Asia and the Pacific Islands from the 1930s through the duration of World War II;

(2) would help to resolve recurring questions about the sincerity and status of prior statements if the Prime Minister of Japan were to make such an apology as a public statement in his official capacity;

(3) should clearly and publicly refute any claims that the sexual enslavement and trafficking of the comfort women for the Japanese Imperial Armed Forces never occurred…”

This is part of the content of the resolution.

To add, I do not believe that the ultimate purpose of the ROK and other relevant countries, and international organizations raising this issue is to criticize Japan. I deem that what they want is for Japan to admit to its wrongdoings, work to resolve them and thereby move forward.

As the time is running out for the elderly victims of sexual slavery, government officials and relevant people of Japan should acknowledge their wrongdoings as they are, pay heed to the voice of the ROK and the international community and settle the issue as soon as possible.

Q: I have a question about the issue of sexual slavery victims. Japan’s Abe government is moving to re-examine past apologies. With testimonies by the victims of sexual slavery, the basis of the Kono Statement, covered by some press reports, Japan’s public opinion appears to have abruptly turned in favor of the re-examination.

I guess that from the perspective of the ROK government, the Foreign Minister’s remarks carried significance as an appeal to the international community on the issue of sexual slavery victims. Nonetheless, the testimonies of only 16 sexual slavery victims were used for drawing up the Kono statement. Is the ROK government planning any preemptive measures to counter Japan’s review -- for example, obtaining and presenting to the Japanese side testimonies from other sexual slavery victims? Some Japanese conservatives raise the speculation that the ROK and the Japanese governments, while the Kono Statement was being drawn up, might have agreed not to take issue with it. What does the ROK government make of this view?

A: I have not heard anything about what you said toward the end of your question. Repeating what I said a little ago, the Japanese government, instead of resolving the issue as we have demanded, is moving in the opposite direction. Vivid testimonies by the victims carry truths.

The ROK and other victimized countries as well as the rest of the international community are sternly and in unison calling for the resolution of this issue. We once again urge Japan to pay attention to that voice.

I will conclude today’s briefing. Thank you.


* unofficial translation