끝나지 않은 합의, 위안부 문제 해결 방안은? - 김은미 교수 대담
To talk more on this issue we have with us Professor Kim Eun-mee, the dean of Ewha Womans University Graduate School. Professor Kim, thank you for joining us.
Thank you for having me.
1 - Not only are you the dean of Ewha Womans University Graduate School, but you were also a key member of the government task force that reviewed the 2015 agreement between South Korea and Japan that tried to controversially settle the two governments' issues over the ‘comfort women’ issue. Can you briefly explain to our viewers what that agreement was, and what the review concluded late last year?
2 - It’s been 8 months since that review came out. What has happened since then?
2a - How was the review viewed by the victims themselves, as well as by the wider public?
3 - Last year, the government passed the bill which said that from now on August 14th will be commemorated as ‘comfort women remembrance day’. What significance do you think that has?
4 - After the review, the Moon administration declared that the 2015 deal between Korea and Japan did not resolve the matter, but at the same time, they would not scrap it or renegotiate it as it was an official agreement between the two nations. It seemed the concern was South Korea’s diplomatic credibility would be damaged if they pulled out. Looking back so far, do you think this was the right choice?
5 - President Moon has said that Tokyo needs to admit its wrongdoings and apologize by its own will. But President Abe and Tokyo have so far steadfastly said that the 2015 deal had settled the matter already. Why does the Japanese government refuse to take this matter any further?
6 - Part of the 2015 deal was for a fund to be set up, so that Tokyo could pay 1 billion yen, that’s about 8.3 million dollars, into it, and help support the victims. What the Moon administration has done is freeze that money from Tokyo, and at the same time come up with its own money to replace it and help the victims. When you came on our program in January you said you viewed this as quite a clever way to balance the need to honour the victims but at the same time, keep hold of the money for possibly further future plans. Would you still agree with that? What can they do with that money?
