ABSTRACT This study compares the political responses of the Republic of Korea and the Republic of China (Taiwan) to the issue of Japanese military “comfort women.” While existing research has primarily examined victims' human rights, Japan's postwar responsibility, and Korea–Japan diplomatic disputes, it has overlooked why two nations with comparable colonial legacies have developed divergent trajectories of memory politics. Addressing this gap, the study analyzes how historical perceptions and domestic political contexts shape the construction and management of the “comfort women” issue within broader domestic and diplomatic arenas. The analysis proceeds along two dimensions: (1) domestic memory politics, focusing on comfort women–related legislation and policies, textbook narratives, and public commemorations; and (2) diplomatic memory politics, focusing on Korea–Japan and Taiwan–Japan relations. Based on government and civil society sources, the study finds that South Korea has institutionalized the “comfort women” issue as a key political and diplomatic agenda, while Taiwan's engagement remains largely symbolic due to domestic political constraints, weaker civic activism, and strategic ties with Japan. This comparative analysis demonstrates that memory politics in East Asia is a dynamic process mediated by political institutions, civil society, and foreign policy strategy, offering broader insights into how states construct and instrumentalize historical memory in international relations.
Cho et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: