Published: Sat, 9 Dec 2006 18:41:17 +0900

Korean families are now suing the Yasukuni Shrine in Japan in order to remove the names of 21,000 Koreans enshrined there for their war time service to imperial Japan during World War II:

Families of Koreans who died while serving as part of the Japanese military during World War II are planning to sue the group that runs the Yasukuni Shrine, considered a symbol of Japan's war of aggression. The families demanding that memorial tablets of their ancestors and relatives be removed from the shrine.

This is believed to mark the first time Koreans have sued the shrine itself instead of the Japanese government to have family members' memorial tablets removed.

The group "Anti-Yasukuni Joint Action" announced that it is suing on behalf of the 21,000 Koreans memorialized in Yasukuni, and that it plans to file the suit at Tokyo District Court on the anniversary of the March 1 independence campaign of 1919. The group says it is going to announce the move in a press conference on Friday, December 8, the 64th anniversary of the outbreak of the Pacific War.

One of the little known facts of World War II is the number of Koreans that served in the Imperial Japanese military.* Korean scholars today say those who served were forced to fight in the Japanese military against their will.* This is true in some cases but as was evident by the conviction of a number of Koreans for war crimes after World War II many did serve freely.*

So that brings me to the point I want to make, is that if there are Koreans that did serve freely and believed in the Japanese cause, then what's wrong with them being enshrined at Yasukuni?* Isn't that what they would have wanted if they believed enough in the Japanese cause to die for it?* That leads me to my next point of how will a court be able to tell the difference between Koreans who served freely and those who were forced into the military in able to determine who should be removed from the shrine?* Plus can relatives legally speak for what the deceased would have wanted in the first place?* This is also taking for granted that the court can even remove the names because Yasukuni is a private shrine and not funded or operated by the government.

Common sense tells me that if immediate family members to the deceased want the name removed then they should remove it, but for a few families to demand that all 21,000 names be removed from Yasukuni seems like a stretch to me.* Imagine if a few families from an ethnic minority in America sued to have all people of that minority removed from the Vietnam War Memorial?* It wouldn't happen; just like in Japan I don't see court ordering the removal of any names from Yasukuni either.

However, I did find this paragraph from the article very interesting:

The Korean branch of the anti-Yasukuni group plans to hold an "East Asian Peace Festival" next year for human rights and peace activists from Korea, Taiwan, and Japan in Tokyo next year, and organize a scholarly meeting in New York to make the international community aware of "how Yasukuni is against civilization and peace" before taking its case to the UN Human Rights Commission.

What I find it interesting that this Korean group thinks Yasukuni is "against civilization and peace" and is an issue that needs to be taken up with the UN Human Rights Commission, when just 30 miles north of Seoul is a real human rights issue, North Korea that the majority of Koreans like to ignore and cover for as a "special situation".* Maybe Yasukuni is a "special situation" to the Japanese as well?

HT: Japan Probe

Read More...