Catch - all regulation and its contents Even though South Korea was a white country, I could not understand its meaning.
2021-07-10
Category:South Korea I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Export control of conventional weapons
The Wassenaar Arrangement is an international agreement regarding the export control of conventional weapons, with which ４２ countries, including Japan and South Korea, have concluded an agreement. Based on this premise, Japan will introduce catch-all regulations, and will notify the Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry and receive permission when exporting cargo or providing technology that may be used for the development of weapons of mass destruction or conventional weapons. I made it mandatory.
Group A: ２６ countries (white countries)
Group B: ６ countries (including South Korea)
Group C: countries that do not fall under A, B, or D
Group D: countries under the UN arms embargo ・Countries of concern designated by regions and exporting countries Determined at the discretion of the exporting country
The above framework is determined at the discretion of the exporting country from the standpoint of national security. For this reason, Japan is constantly calling for a "review of export control operations." South Korea claims that Japan imposed export controls this time, but Japan has simply reviewed its operations, and as long as the prescribed procedures are followed, exports will continue as before. It's been two years and I still don't understand this. On the other hand, if we were a white country without understanding this basic thing, it would be even more frightening. Do they think they were put in Group D? Group D is currently subject to export restrictions from Japan.
Group D consists of １１ countries, including Afghanistan, Central Africa, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, and Iran, a country of concern.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Masatoshi Muto, a former diplomat, says that making concessions to South Korea is a mistake and that South Korea needs a firm response.
Masatoshi Muto on his dealings with South Korea during his time as a diplomat. He says that he made a mistake by listening to everything and requesting as much as possible.
When asked about the anti-Japanese movement taking place in South Korea, Taro Aso, during his time as Prime Minister, asked, ``Does that have something to do with it?'' Japanese people don't care. As a result, the term ``virtual enemy country'' became popular. The view was that South Korea was conducting an anti-Japanese movement due to domestic circumstances.
There is no doubt that South Korea's current enemy is primarily North Korea. The Korean War is not over yet, and there is currently a ceasefire. When we see public opinion in South Korea calling Japan an enemy country while facing each other across the 38th parallel, we can't help but wonder to what extent South Korea is escaping reality.
When considered within the same framework, China is on the side of South Korea's enemy in the Korean War frame. Until now, the South Korean government has not been able to resolve security issues, and has abandoned its military and continued to focus on Japan, which has not fought back, because if it expressed hostility toward North Korea, China, or the United States, it would immediately take retaliatory measures. It's here. This is to gain the public's attention by saying something powerful. In doing so, it is easy to use stories from the past annexation era. Japan understands this environment and has tacitly tolerated South Korea's anti-Japanese movements.
What we need to clarify is that all of these environments are always real problems for South Korea. It seems that as long as Koreans remain anti-Japanese, they can temporarily feel as if their problems are gone. Even now, when the anti-Japan flag goes up, I forget everything due to a spinal reflex.
The preamble of the Constitution lies at the root of South Korea's anti - Japanese sentiment.The reason for affirming anti - Japanese sentiment and excluding pro - Japanese sentiments is found in the
The preamble of the Korean Constitution states that 3.1 the legal system of the provisional government of the Republic of Korea will be inherited. Then, what is the March 1 Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea? It is an organization that called itself the Provisional Government and was established in 1919 as an anti-Japanese force. Looking at the contents of the charter, we see that the oath is strongly anti-Japanese: ``We will fight to the last man to indoctrinate Japan from barbarism.''
The preamble of the constitution describes the principles that govern the entire constitution. The structure of this idea is to inherit the legal structure of the March 1 Charter of the Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea. If we interpret these without contradiction, Article 21 of the latter part of the Korean Constitution states freedom of speech and Article 22 states academic freedom, but if we read it based on the preamble of the Constitution, we can see that 3.1 Legal framework of the provisional government It can also be interpreted as allowing freedom of speech and academics on the premise of inheriting the law. This is actually the case in Korea today.
If you look at the oath of the provisional government quoted in the preamble of the constitution, it clearly states anti-Japanese ideology. In the first place, the constitution should not quote anything or include language that assumes other countries.
In any case, as long as South Korea is under this constitution, anti-Japanese activities are always legitimate, and on the contrary, pro-Japanese activities are criticized as acts that destroy the legal system of the March 1 Provisional Government Charter and the Constitution. If members of the Diet follow the principle of adhering to the Constitution, then anti-Japanese members are conducting legitimate parliamentary activities. This is the main reason why it is said that #anti-Japan is South Korea's national policy.
How can the preamble of the Constitution be consistent with fundamental human rights such as freedom of speech, thought and belief, and academic freedom? There appears to be no case where a legal interpretation has been obtained in the Constitutional Court through a lawsuit or controversy that has raised this point. The Korean government is free to expand its interpretation as much as it wants. This is the case now, as seen in the No Japan movement, where anti-Japanese activities are legitimate activities, and pro-Japanese speech is denounced as ``traitors.'' Is this an exception to basic human rights, with speech affirming the era of Japanese rule being suppressed, or is anti-Japanese a duty of every Korean citizen as written in the Provisional Government's oath?
Provisional Government OathOathTo my 2,000,000 fellow citizens whom I respect and loveMarch 1st year of the Republic of Korea One day, since the Korean nation declared its independence, men and women, young and old, all classes, and all sects, of course, have come together to fight under the inhumane violence of Japan, the Germany of the East. The sympathy of the world is now suddenly focused on our people because they have expressed the character of a nation that is extremely patient with fairness, longs for independence and freedom for its people, and loves truth, justice, and humanity. It was at this time that the government was organized with the mandate of all the people of the country. I hereby swear that this government, together with all the people of this country, will work wholeheartedly to fulfill the great mission of restoring the nation and establishing its identity as a nation, observing the provisions of the provisional constitution and the principles of international society. My fellow countrymen, be inspired. Every drop of blood we shed is the gift of freedom and fortune to our descendants. It is the precious foundation for building God's kingdom. The way of our people will surely edify Japan's wild horses. Our justice truly trumps Japan's violence. My brethren, rise and battleto the last man.
3.1 The provisional government was the result of an anti-Japanese movement that occurred on March 1, 1919 under Japanese rule, and after that, Syngman Rhee established a provisional government in Shanghai, where he was in exile. This provisional government is considered the legitimate root of the Korean government, and Syngman Rhee became the first president of Korea after Japan's defeat. In other words, the Korean government itself is based on anti-Japanese organizations. Therefore, the Constitution will inherit the legal system of the Provisional Government Charter.
It is no wonder why this story has not been reported in Japan, but it seems safe to assume that there are almost no members of the Korean Diet who are not anti-Japanese. On the contrary, he says that it is impossible to become a member of the Diet while advocating pro-Japan policy. Rather than saying, ``Many South Korean parliamentarians are anti-Japanese,'' it seems more accurate to say, ``South Korean parliamentarians exist because they are anti-Japanese.'' South Korea will never become a pro-Japanese country. That future will never come. Will the South Korean government or National Assembly propose a constitutional amendment and delete the text written in the preamble? If that happens, the roots and identity of the Korean government will disappear.
Anti-Japanese activities are legitimate activities that are affirmed by the Korean Constitution. Depending on the interpretation, it can also be considered to be outside the scope of freedom of speech. We need to think about South Korea with this in mind.
The difference between Japan and South Korea in terms of the friendship that Oh Sun - hwa talks about.If you're a friend, give it to me.This is the Korean style.
Wu Shanhua, a professor at Takushoku University's School of International Studies, said that when she first came to Japan to study, she struggled because she couldn't understand Japanese culture. She says that in South Korea, the culture is that you shouldn't differentiate between your friend's things and your own things.
During class, I open my friend's pencil case, use it, and then put it back. They end up using not only stationery, but also things in their bags, sweets, food, and even money if they are left on the table. It seems that the person being used is happy and thinks that the person who is being used thinks of them as a friend.
Of course, Japan does not have such a culture. No matter how much time passes, my friend asked Wu Shanhua at the time, ``I forgot her pen, can you lend it to me?'' When I get it back, I always say thank you. No matter how much time passes, Wu Shanhua will not accept her as a friend. Apparently, there was a time when she worried that they wouldn't accept her because she was a foreigner.
She believed that sharing your things with others was a sign of friendship, so her sensibilities seemed to be completely different from those in Japan.
Another Korean who came to Japan and returned to Korea after two and a half years after having such an experience apparently published a book about Japanese culture in Korea. His anti-Japanese book, which describes Japan as a country of crazy people, has sold 3 million copies and has become a model that is often cited by Japanese culture researchers at universities and other institutions. That's it.
What is your friend's property is yours. This is regardless of the size of the amount. They say that even if it's a large amount of money, you can only be a friend if you pay to help. As a result, the custom of filing lawsuits has become commonplace in recent years, making South Korea a fraud country. Furthermore, it is unclear how far the money was taken from him as a friend, and where the fraud began. In other words, it is not returned while being shared. This has become the norm, but in light of the law, it appears to have resulted in a series of fraudulent acts.
With this in mind, Wu Shanhua says she is also knowledgeable about diplomatic issues. Koreans think that since Japan is an economically developed country, it is natural to provide money for free. I don't use the word "thank you" at this time, and since Japan has many islands, I wonder if it's a friend to make a fuss about just one island. Wouldn't it be possible to have a friendly relationship if Japan gave as much as Shikoku to South Korea? In fact, she explains, there is at least an underlying feeling.
The differences between Japan and South Korea, which include the actual experiences of Ms. Oh Sunhwa, who actually lives in Japan, are surprising, but if you refer to them, you will be able to see some things.
South Korean President with 28% Approval Rating - Breaks Promises to China if Seeking Relations with Japan - Country that Breaks Promises to Japan if China [Contents]
South Korea's new president with low approval rating
It's advantageous if you don't make achievements
Anti-Japanese Appeal on the Takeshima Issue
China just waits and sees
Change of government will change things
President Yoon Seok-yeol's approval rating is 28% (according to Gallup Korea survey), and he has been facing a tough fight since he took office. Since the administration began as a lame duck in the first place, there is no change in the situation where the government cannot move unless the power of the people wins the 2024 general election.
Looking ahead to 2024, the Democratic Party of Korea, which is the enemy, will be at a disadvantage if President Yoon produces results and achievements. There is no mistake in going on the offensive of not letting the president do anything.
Although President Yoon Seok-yue has appealed for the improvement of Japan-South Korea relations, he is willing to make concessions on the Takeshima issue, such as by conducting marine surveys around Takeshima. Even at this stage, he is ridiculed as a pro-Japanese president or a betrayal president. In any case, from a Japanese point of view, it can only be seen as a double standard.
As for China, as was the case with Moon Jae-in, it seems that they are just watching the future of this administration.
The deployment of THAAD under the Park Geun-hye administration cooled relations between China and South Korea, but under the Moon Jae-in administration, they exchanged promises with China about the three non-compliances, and the current president has declared that he does not know about the three non-compliances.
Right-wing and left-wing South Korea have a unique structure of pro-U.S./pro-Japan and pro-China conflicts, and they seem to understand well that a change in government can lead to a major change in diplomatic policy.
In the first place, isn't there a question in South Korea about where the national ideology of South Korea, which goes back and forth between liberal democracy and socialist dictatorship, lies? On the contrary, they are constantly intimidatingly questioning each other about meaningless alternatives, whether they are pro-Japanese or anti-Japanese.
South Korea, where anti-Japan precedes the national ideology of democracy or socialism. Any problem can be dwarfed by anti-Japan fire, making it a very easy tool to use politically.
Korean tourists rush to travel to Japan after the visa - free ban is lifted - Where did the No Japan movement disappear?
Diplomatic relations restored despite dislike
South Korean government does not communicate details of restoration of diplomatic relations
Same as Japan-Korea annexation
Korean tourists flock to Japan, which they hate
Many Japanese wonder why they restored diplomatic relations if they hated it so much. Did the South Korean government explain to the people the reason for the restoration of diplomatic relations? There could be many reasons.
(1) We have entered an era in which it is essential to restore diplomatic relations between Japan and South Korea amidst postwar South Korea-US relations and international trends. ? Because it was judged that restoring diplomatic relations with Japan would have great economic benefits for the economy, which had suffered after the Korean War. ?The conditions presented by the Japanese side for the restoration of diplomatic relations were beneficial for Korea's future, and the benefits of concluding the treaty were recognized.
? and ? are the prerequisites for the restoration of diplomatic relations, but ? is something that cannot be explained to the public. As a result, its contents have never been explained to this day. South Korea seems to want to be in the position of reluctantly restoring diplomatic relations, but the content of the agreement was almost like a unilateral contract that contained only the benefits for South Korea. If you think about it, the same thing can be said about the annexation of Japan and Korea.
The background to the annexation of Japan and Korea is as follows:
(1) It became impossible to stop Russia's interests. ? Domestic turmoil made it impossible to collect information. ? I thought it would be beneficial to consider national stability by being incorporated into Japan.
Regarding this, the purpose of the above-mentioned annexation is clearly stated in the imperial admonition issued by the Sun Song Dynasty (the last emperor of the Joseon Dynasty) at the time of the annexation, but the story is that Japan annexed it by force. That's the translation.
As a result, during the annexation era, the Korean peninsula reluctantly accepted modernization, its population grew reluctantly, and it reluctantly went to school, and now it reluctantly negotiates with Japan and reluctantly trades with Japan. And I have no choice but to reluctantly go on a trip to Japan. Is the No Japan movement a movement that tells people not to buy Japanese products if they don't want to? It is understandable in that sense, but the government changed and Koreans reluctantly began traveling to Japan.
