cific war continues to be a matter of debate in feminist circles, seven decades on. At the end of 2015, the governments of Japan and South Korea attempted a bilateral resolution on the issue of wartime military sexual slavery. The agreement proposed that the Japanese government would provide support to the elderly survivors through a fund to be administered by the South Korean government.
This attempted resolution was roundly criticised, not least by the survivors themselves. The two governments had failed to consult survivors, the major stakeholders, thereby displaying ignorance of the principles of restorative justice. The agreement also failed to include survivors from countries other than South Korea. It is thanks to transnational feminist activism — bringing together networks of activists from throughout Asia and the Pacific — that this issue has stayed at the forefront of international attention seven decades after the war.
In the months since the initial announcement of the agreement, there has been little progress in resolving this issue. The latest election in July 2016 gave the Liberal Democratic Party control of the upper house for the first time since 1989, providing Abe with more scope to pursue his conservative agenda.
Three years on from Abe’s womenomics speech, the flawed bilateral Japan–South Korea agreement reveals the need for more thorough integration of feminist perspectives not only in Japan’s domestic policies but also in its international relations.