By Dorothea Mladenova
Research associate of Japanese studies at East Asian Institute, University of Leipzig

Sept. 28 marked the first anniversary of the installation of the "Statue of Peace" in the Mitte district of Berlin, Germany. The district office recently decided to extend the permit for the statue until Sept. 28 next year, a 180-degree turn from when the statue was installed the previous year. 

At the time, the district ordered the removal of the statue within two weeks at the request of the Japanese Embassy in Berlin. The latter insisted that the "comfort women" issue was a purely bilateral matter between Japan and Korea and that Germany should not get involved in this. This provoked strong opposition from civil society in the German capital. With Japanese women residing in Germany also joining the protest, civic groups urged Mitte to retract its order. The rationale for their opposition to the removal included freedom of artistic expression, Germany’s responsibility toward coming to terms with history given its Nazi war crimes and the need for monuments against sexual violence in public places.

Made by Kim Seo-kyung and Kim Eun-sung, the statue was set up in Berlin thanks to efforts led by a "comfort women" working group under the Korea Verband (Association). They were supported by a multi-ethnic alliance of civil organizations across Berlin. The statue shows a girl sitting on a chair next to an empty chair, on which visitors can sit and become part of the artwork. With about 100 such statues around the world, the piece holds numerous meanings from a number of perspectives.

First, the statue symbolizes women forced into sexual slavery by the imperial Japanese military during the Pacific theater (1941-45) of World War II. Most of the victims came from countries annexed or conquered by imperial Japan, but also from the Netherlands and Japan itself. The girl in the statue wears traditional Korean clothing but the empty seat next to her can be interpreted as a space to imagine fellow victims from other countries.

Germany also has a history of sexual violence during World War II: Systematic sexual enslavement took place in concentration camp brothels to "reward" inmates and in military brothels for German soldiers. There were also rapes against civilians committed both by soldiers of the Axis powers and the Allies. To this day, sexual violence lingers around the world, for example in the Bosnian War (1992-95) or against Yazidi women by the Islamic State since 2014. Educational programs centered on the statue frequently address these issues as global instances of sexual violence.

Second, the statue represents the transnational "comfort women" activism that started with the weekly Wednesday demonstrations in front of the Japanese Embassy in Seoul following the first public testimony of Korean victim Kim Hak-soon in 1991. These actions led to what is nowadays referred to as a "Me-too movement," as more victims were encouraged to break their silence and fight for redress. The activists have always supported women from other countries and denounced violations committed by their own states. They founded the Butterfly Fund, which supports rape victims in Vietnam and Congo. In this way, they have actively contributed to raising awareness of sexual violence across the globe.

Third, the statue symbolizes the endless fight against attempts to silence victims of sexual violence and whitewash history. For years, right wingers and extremists in Japan who follow a historical revisionist agenda have waged "history wars" overseas and applied pressure to have "comfort women" monuments removed (or their installation prevented). They also deny historical facts such as the coerciveness of the recruitment, the involvement of the Japanese military and the estimated number of victims. The Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs is also requesting removal of the statues.

However, sexual violence does not stop at the border; it affects all countries since patriarchal structures pervade all nations to this day. The term "rape culture" exemplifies that sexual violence is not a bygone problem or merely occurs during war but is sadly a reality for many people. Many historical cases worldwide show how such violence takes place systemically during war, indicating a structural problem. Thus the statue must not be exploited by diplomatic feuds, as this distracts attention from the real issue at hand: the fight against sexual violence.

The statue in Berlin has surprisingly taken on new meaning thanks to interactions with the nearby community. The "Comfort Women" working group under the Korea Verband holds chats daily with those passing by the statue while maintaining the monument. The civic group Omas Gegen Rechts (Grannies against the Extreme Right) since October last year has held silent vigils next to the monument. On Feb. 19, this year, the latter group commemorated the victims of the right-wing extremist attack in Hanau there, linking the statue, which represents a non-white girl, with its anti-racist message. Just a month later, a vigil at the statue commemorated the victims of the Atlanta mass shooting. The working group AG Trostfrauen (Comfort Women) also builds networks with the postcolonial movement in Berlin. Such unexpected alliances have localized the statue and turned it into a symbol against racism as well as against sexual violence.

Opponents within the Mitte district assembly insist that the statue is taking a unilateral stance in a conflict between Japan and Korea, thus endangering Japanese-German relations. They further claim that considering the statue a universal monument is inappropriate since it clearly shows a specific nationality.

This contention, however, loses its persuasive power when we ask why the statue of an Asian person that represents a specific incident cannot be seen as a universal representation. If its symbolism is not universal, then what race should a "universal statue" ideally have? To what extent can we raise awareness of sexual violence without mentioning specific incidents and actors? If this contention is about representing other cases of sexual violence in Germany as well like the brothels at concentration camps and military bases of the Nazi regime, then why should the statue be removed for this? Can we not place several statues side by side just as "comfort women" activists have been standing in solidarity with their partners worldwide over the last 30 years?

The "Statue of Peace" in Berlin has earned a wide range of support from civil society in the community. But there seem to be decision makers who wish to get rid of it, most likely because of pressure from Japanese representatives. Meanwhile, the installers have proven that they take the "comfort women" system as a starting point to talk about historical and recent instances of sexual violence and how to deal with it. Examples are their regular educational events with youths or a two-week event against femicide in August this year. The spontaneous interactions of these civic groups have further shown that the statue is inviting efforts to engage with it in a low-key way, hold conversations on the topic and use the statue for actions of a wide variety of concerns in the community. Through these interactions, the statue continuously acquires new local meanings while addressing universal problems.

Dorothea Mladenova sits next to the girl of the "Statue of Peace" in the Mitte district of Berlin. (Dorothea Mladenova)