Ramseyer should also withdraw paper on sex slaves
Professor John Mark Ramseyer of Harvard Law School acknowledged recently his mistake of describing Japan's wartime sex slaves as “voluntary prostitutes.” “I don't have any Korean contracts,” Ramseyer was quoted as saying by fellow Harvard Law School professor Jeannie Suk Gersen. Disclosing an email she received from Ramseyer, the ethnic Korean professor went on to quote him as saying, “I haven't been able to find it. Certainly you're not going to find it.”
Earlier, Ramseyer triggered wrath here by defining the forced sex slavery as contractual between brothel operators and would-be prostitutes in his paper titled “Contracting for Sex in the Pacific War” published by the journal, International Review of Law and Economics.
Global criticism and protests have spread fast against Ramseyer after he was found to have failed to confirm the basic facts and provide evidence for his claim. Rather, he has been desperate to defend himself, citing the need to ensure “academic freedom.” Some 2,400 international economic scholars including Harvard professor Eric Maskin, a Nobel laureate, purportedly signed a statement condemning Ramseyer. They criticized him for having justified the sex trading and human trafficking of women and children.
According to the Feb. 26 edition of The New York Times, the scholars criticized Ramseyer for having utilized game theory with the goal of justifying the disgusting war crimes. It also went on to say that an increasing number of historians have begun to raise their voices calling on Ramseyer to withdraw the paper, as it distorts the history of Japan's wartime misconduct and makes claims identical to Japan's far right wingers.
Now it has become clear that Ramseyer published his report despite it falling short of the basic requirements needed for a paper and notwithstanding his status as professor of the renowned Harvard University. Ramseyer has yet to clarify his stance despite the flurry of criticism.
He should officially withdraw the paper and offer a sincere apology to the victims of wartime sex slavery upon whom he dealt another blow. It is like rubbing salt deep into their wounds. An apology is the only way for him to keep whatever integrity he has left as a scholar.
Looking back on our responses to such an incident, we cannot help but point out the bungling reactions of the government, including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in particular. It is no wonder Japan's right-wing figures have continued to create a stir with their distortions of history regarding Japan's wartime crimes.
Japan has continued its moves to influence international academic circles with its own theories on its past misdeeds committed before and during World War II. In contrast, we have done little toward that end. We have yet to make efforts to globally spread our own research findings into wartime sex slavery. The Ministry of Gender Equality and Family compiled an English book of testimonies from surviving South Korean sex slaves two years ago, but has failed to globally publicize it. It is time for a policy shift on how we deal with the issue to come up with a more proactive approach.