今話題の例の報告書の要旨を訳してみました。

日本軍による慰安婦強制の事実が無かったことが明らかにされました。

また、韓国政府による元慰安婦達への脅迫の事実が指摘されました。

結論(抜粋)
アジア女性基金は、元慰安婦達に償い助けるための、日本政府の真実の努力だ。
多くの他国の政府は同基金を受け入れ協力している。

日本政府は、対日講和条約や日韓関係正常化などによって、慰安婦問題を既に解決済みとする、法的に信頼できる立場を得ている。

日本の首相から元慰安婦に対する謝罪の手紙は、全ての元慰安婦達に対して謝罪の意を表明している。
それでも不十分だとする批判者たちは、なぜ不十分なのか理由を明示していない。

日本軍はおそらく、ほとんどの徴募を直接に実行はしなかっただろう。とくに朝鮮半島ではそうだった

安倍政権の主張の大部分は、多くの慰安婦の勧誘が軍隊による強制ではなく、民間の業者による詐欺や家族への脅しによって行われた、朝鮮半島での状況を根拠にしている。

慰安婦に関する議論で、これまで見落とされてきた問題は、元慰安婦達がアジア女性基金から補償や援助を受ける際に、自分の意思で自由に決定出来たかどうかだ。
韓国においてはアジア女性基金からの援助を受けない様に脅迫が行われていたようだ。
韓国自身の基金による元慰安婦達への援助は一見寛大に見えるが、韓国政府はこの基金や他の手段を用いてアジア女性基金から援助を受けようとする韓国女性達へ脅迫を行っていた。
韓国の報道機関は、アジア女性基金が非公式なため殆どの元慰安婦達が援助を拒絶し、そのため援助を受ける女性が”極少数”だと断言し、アジア女性基金の評判を度々落としてきた。
韓国の報道機関も韓国政府と同様に、元慰安婦達に対する脅迫を否定し続けている。

最後に、アジア女性基金や、韓国や台湾の政府基金は、合計しても、わずか500人ほどの元慰安婦達からの反応しか得られなかった。
慰安婦としての過去を公表することの社会的な汚名が妨げとなっているようだ。

Conclusions (an extract)

The Asian Women's Fund appears to have been a genuine effort by the Japanese government to compensate and assist former comfort women.
As discussed, several governments appeared to have accepted this by cooperating with the Asian Women's Fund.

The Japanese government appears to have a credible legal position based on the Japanese Peace Treaty, Japan's reparations agreements with several countries, and the language of the South Korea-Japan normalization treaty of 1965.

The Prime Ministers' letters state that the Prime Minister is speaking in The letters "as Prime Minister of Japan." The letters, all of which are identical in language, use the words "apology" and "apologies" and addresses these to all comfort women rather than just the recipients of the letters. Critics state that these are inadequate, but they have not detailed their reasons for considering the statements inadequate.

Japanese military may not have directly carried out the majority of recruitment,
especially in Korea.

The Abe government and the Committee to Consider Japan's Future Historical Education seem to base their position largely on the situation in Korea where it appears that the majority of the recruitment of comfort women seemed to have been done by civilian recruiters who used deception and pressure on families rather than physical coercion.

An overlooked issue in much of the discussion of comfort women is whether former comfort women in allied and occupied countries had adequate freedom to decide whether to accept compensation and/or assistance from the Asian Women's Fund. It appears that they were intimidated in South Korea not to accept assistance from the Asian Women's Fund.
Despite the financial generosity of the South Korean government's own fund for former comfort women, the South Korean government and NGOs used it and other means as instruments of pressure and intimidation against Korean women who otherwise would have sought assistance from the Asian Women's Fund in 1997.South Korean press reports on the comfort women issue often denigrate the Asian Women's Fund by asserting that only a "small number" of women came forward to accept the Fund's assistance because most former comfort women rejected the Fund because of its "unofficial" status. The press as well as the South Korean government continue to avoid acknowledging South Korea's intimidation of its own comfort women in the episode of 1997.

Finally, the records of the Asian Women's Fund and the government funds in South Korea and Taiwan suggest that no program of compensation/assistance likely would have drawn responses from former comfort women much beyond the approximately 500 that came forward in response to these funds. It appears that the social stigma of revealing one's past as a former comfort woman remained a deterrent to many women who could have stepped forward.

産経新聞
http://www.sankei.co.jp/kokusai/usa/070412/usa070412000.htm

米議会調査局報告書原文
http://japanfocus.org/data/CRS%20CW%20Report%20April%2007.pdf