[1] Michael Marek, “Final compensation pending for former Nazi forced laborers. “Deutsche Welle online, 27 Oct. 2005.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Alissa J. Rubin and Elisabeth Penz, “Former forced laborers laud Austrian fund.” Los Angeles Times online, 6 Dec. 2005.

[4] See Michael J. Bazyler, Holocaust justice: the battle for restitution in America's courts. New York University Press, 2003; and Stuart E. Eizenstat, Imperfect justice: looted assets, slave labor, and the unfinished business of World War II. New York: Public Affairs, 2004.

[5] See most recently Jane W. Yamazaki, Japanese apologies for World War II: a rhetorical study. London: Routledge, 2006.

[6] Such continuity is the focus of Wakamiya Yoshibumi, The postwar conservative view of Asia: how the political right has delayed Japan's coming to terms with its history of aggression in Asia. Tokyo: LTCB International Library Foundation, 1998. One chapter is entitled “Why Kishi Nobusuke wasn't hanged as a war criminal.”

[7] Until bringing its position into line with that of the U.S. in 2001, the Japanese government consistently contended that the SFPT and other treaties did not bar individual claims, apparently to preserve the possibility of claims against the Soviet Union by Japanese soldiers who were harshly interned there after the war. See Kinue and Azusa K. Tokudome, “Individual claims: are the positions of the U.S. and Japanese governments in agreement in the American POW forced labor cases?” UCLA Pacific Basin Law Journal 21:1 (Fall 2003); 1-28.

[8] Linda Goetz Holmes, Unjust enrichment: how Japan's companies built postwar fortunes using American POWs. Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 2001; 84.

[9] Ibid.; 91. See also the chapter-length discussions in Sheldon H. Harris, Factories of death: Japanese biological warfare, 1932-1945, and the American cover-up. Routledge: rev. ed., 2002; and Tanaka Yuki, Hidden horrors: Japanese war crimes in World War II. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1996.

[10] Details can be found in Petra Schmidt, ““Japan's wartime compensation: forced labour.” “Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law 2 (2000); 1-54.

[11] Cho Hun-Joo, ““Japan continues to conceal documents on unpaid wages for forced laborers.” “The Dong-A Ilbo online, 23 Jan. 2005 is available

[12] William Underwood, “Chinese forced labor, the Japanese government and the prospects for redress.” Japan Focus, 8 July 2005.

[13] A total of 111 site reports were analyzed in Nishinarita Yutaka, Chugokujin kyosei renko. Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai, 2002. Nishinarita suspects that a full 135 reports may never have been produced, as some sites received workers via intra-company transfers.

[14] See Nishinarita, chapter 8.

[15] “Chingin ‘hokansho’ wo shoji, genkoku Cui-san: ‘kichinto taika harae,’ “Nishinippon Shimbun, 15 July 2004.

[16] Current yen values are calculated by multiplying the wartime base amount by one thousand, following the common practice of the national CFL plaintiffs’ legal team and activists in other redress cases. For simplicity the author then assumes a current yen-dollar rate of 100 to one. See Minami Norio, “Resolving the wartime forced labor compensation question.” See Japan Focus.

[17] Onodera Toshitaka, “Ikensho” brief containing the fund proposal and commentary, submitted at Fukuoka District Court on 21 Sept. 2005. Proposal and commentary available

[18] English translations here and throughout are by the author unless otherwise indicated.

[19] NHK Shuppan Kyokai, Maboroshi no Gaimusho Hokokusho: Chugokujin kyosei renko kyosei rodo no kiroku. Tokyo: 1994, chapter 6. See also Nishinarita, chapter 6.

[20] NHK; 42-43. See also Sugihara Toru, Chugokujin kyosei renko. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 2002; 154.

[21] “Junbi Shomen 5,” brief submitted by lawyers for Mitsubishi Materials at Fukuoka District Court on 21 Sept. 2005. All Mitsubishi quotations are from this 12-page document, which the author can provide upon request.

[22] NHK; 191.

[23] “Junbi Shomen 22,” brief submitted by lawyers for Chinese plaintiffs at Fukuoka District Court on 5 Oct. 2005 in response to Mitsubishi's Junbi Shomen 5. All quotations by plaintiffs’ lawyers are from this 7-page document, which the author can provide upon request.

[24] NHK; 61.

[25] “GHQ ni hokokusho dasazu,” Nishinippon Shimbun, 24 Dec. 2003; “Foreign Ministry dragged feet with GHQ,” Asahi Shimbun online, 25 Dec. 2003.

[26] Yoshida Reiji, “60 years on Japanese debate the Tokyo Tribunal's legitimacy,” Japan Focus, posted on 14 Oct. 2005, is available.

[27] John K. Nelson, “Signs of recovery for Japanese nationalism? The citizen's committee for reclaiming cultural identity through textbook reform.” Pacific Rim Report, No. 15 (Jan. 2001) is available.

[28] Shi Huizhong, “Chinjutsusho” statement submitted at Fukuoka District Court on 21 Sept. 2005.

[29] “Chingin ‘hokansho’ wo shoji, genkoku Cui-san: ‘kichinto taika harae,’ “Nishinippon Shimbun, 15 July 2004.

[30] The Chinese Embassy in Japan announced the new foundation on its homepage last August.

[31] Kang Jian, “Chinjutsusho” statement submitted at Fukuoka District Court on 21 Sept. 2005. Kang was also interviewed at her Beijing office in March 2003.

[32] See James Reilly, ““China's history activists and the war of resistance against Japan: history in the making.” “Asian Survey 44:2 (March/April 2004): 276-294.

[33] Chugokujin Senso Higai Baisho Seikyu Jiken Bengodan, ed., Sajo no shoheki: Chugokujin sengo baisho saiban 10-nen no kiseki. Tokyo: Nippon Hyoronsha, 2005. The book, with a symbolic publication date of August 15, provides an excellent overview of major Chinese claims from 1995-2005.

[34] NHK; 200-201.

[35] See Tessa Morris-Suzuki, “Free speech - silenced voices: the Japanese media, the comfort women tribunal, and the NHK affair.” Japan Focus, 13 Aug. 2005 is available. Also available, by one of the principals involved, is Lisa Yoneyama, ““NHK's censorship of Japanese crimes against humanity.” “Harvard Asia Quarterly, Winter 2002.

[36] “Teacher calls students ‘unpatriotic.’ “The Japan Times online, 18 Dec. 2005.