日韓在慰安婦問題上再起爭執(zhí)

A new row has broken out between Tokyo and Seoul after a South Korean minister used the term “sex slaves” to describe women forced to work in military brothels during the second world war.

日本和韓國之間爆發(fā)了新的爭吵，此前韓國一名部長使用“性奴”一詞來描述在二戰(zhàn)期間被迫在日本軍隊妓院工作的女性。

Japan said that use of the phrase by Chung Hyun-back, equalities minister, was “totally unacceptable” and lashed out again on Tuesday after Korea’s foreign minister raised the so-called comfort women issue in a speech at the United Nations.

日本表示，韓國女性家族部部長鄭鉉栢(Chung Hyun-back)的這一用詞“完全不可接受”。在韓國外長在聯(lián)合國(UN)發(fā)表講話、提出所謂的慰安婦問題后，日本在周二再次出言抨擊。

The dispute highlights that Japan and South Korea — the US’s two most important allies in Asia — remain as far apart as ever on the historical facts of what happened to the women despite agreeing a “final and irreversible” settlement of the issue in December 2015.

日韓的這一爭端突顯出，盡管日本和韓國在2015年12月就慰安婦問題達成了“最終和不可逆轉(zhuǎn)”的和解，但美國在亞洲最重要的兩個盟友在有關(guān)這些女性的遭遇的史實上仍存在極大分歧。

Tokyo’s complaints imply the settlement requires not just an end to South Korean criticism of Japan but also acceptance of its presentation of history.

日方抱怨隱含的意思是，和解不僅要求韓國停止對日本的批評，還要接受日本對歷史的表述。

Ms Chung told the UN on Friday it was “important to preserve and commemorate the memories and experiences of the Japanese army’s sex slaves”. Japan’s foreign ministry said the expression “contradicts the facts and should not be used”.

鄭鉉栢上周五在聯(lián)合國表示，“保存和銘記日本軍隊性奴的記憶和經(jīng)歷很重要”。日本外務(wù)省表示，這一表達“與事實不符，不應(yīng)使用”。

The 2015 agreement calls on the two countries to refrain from accusing or criticising each other about the issue, including at the UN. However, the lack of agreement on underlying facts means that almost any comment is taken as a criticism by the other side.

2015年的協(xié)議要求兩國避免在這個問題上互相指責(zé)或批評，包括在聯(lián)合國。然而，對基本事實缺乏共識意味著，一方的幾乎任何言論都會被另一方視為批評。

Japan’s government stands by its 1993 statement that many of the women “were recruited against their own will” and “lived in misery at comfort stations under a coercive atmosphere”. However, it also insists there is no evidence that women were “forcefully taken away” and tries to police discussion, making a formal complaint whenever the Financial Times uses the term “sex slaves”.

日本政府堅持日本在1993年的聲明，即許多女性“在違反本人意愿的情況下被征募”，“在強制氛圍下，在慰安所過著痛苦的生活”。然而，日方也堅稱，沒有證據(jù)表明女性“被強行帶走”。日本政府還試圖對相關(guān)討論進行管控：每當(dāng)英國《金融時報》在相關(guān)報道中使用“性奴”一詞，日方都會作出正式的投訴。

Shinsuke Sugiyama, Japan’s new ambassador to the US, has said one of his top priorities would be to travel the country persuading municipalities to remove statues that commemorate the comfort women.

日本新任駐美大使杉山晉輔(Shinsuke Sugiyama)表示，他的首要任務(wù)之一是在美國巡回訪問，說服各市政府拆除慰安婦紀(jì)念碑。

South Korea is also intolerant of those who question its version of systematic sexual slavery organised by the Japanese military. In October 2017, a professor was convicted of defaming victims after questioning whether all the women were forced into servitude in a case that raised questions about freedom of speech.

韓國也不容那些質(zhì)疑韓方對日本軍隊系統(tǒng)性性奴役行為的陳述的人。一名教授在質(zhì)疑是否所有女性都被強制奴役之后，在2017年10月被判犯有損害名譽罪。此案引發(fā)了有關(guān)言論自由的疑問。

In a 2013 book, Park Yu-ha of Sejong University suggested that some of the women volunteered to work for the Japanese without knowing the exact conditions of their work.

韓國世宗大學(xué)(Sejong University)的樸裕河(Park Yu-ha)在2013年的一本著作中表示，一些女性在對具體工作條件不知情的情況下，自愿為日本工作。

“Professor Park used definitive expressions, and readers could have taken it as a fact that most comfort women voluntarily became comfort women and engaged in prostitution in exchange for financial rewards,” said the court. Prof Park is appealing against the verdict in the supreme court.

“樸教授使用了確定性的表述，讀者可能會將其視作事實，即大多數(shù)慰安婦自愿成為慰安婦，為了金錢回報而從事賣淫活動，”法院表示。目前，樸裕河正就這一判決在韓國最高法院提起上訴。

In 2015, an open letter signed by 187 international scholars said: “The evidence makes clear that large numbers of women were held against their will and subjected to horrific brutality.” The letter stated that some historians disputed how directly the Japanese military was involved and whether women were coerced.

2015年，187名國際學(xué)者發(fā)表署名公開信，稱：“有證據(jù)明確證明，大量婦女在違背本人意愿的情況下被拘，并遭遇可怕暴行。”這封信聲明，一些歷史學(xué)家質(zhì)疑日軍的直接參與程度，以及女性是否遭到強迫。

However, it concluded: “The ‘comfort women’ system was distinguished by its large scale and systematic management under the military, and by its exploitation of young, poor and vulnerable women in areas colonised or occupied by Japan.”

然而，這封信總結(jié)道：“日軍‘慰安婦’體系的突出特點是其規(guī)模之大及軍方對它的系統(tǒng)化管理，還有就是在日本殖民和占領(lǐng)地區(qū)對年輕、貧窮、脆弱婦女的強征行為”。