The president Moon Jae In's last resistance to the relocation of the president's office.cloud over election pledges.
2022-03-22
Category:South Korea I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
The issue of relocating Cheong Wa Dae
They seem to be at odds over the relocation of the presidential office in South Korea.Yoon Seok-yeol, who is scheduled to become the next president in the presidential election, will not work at Cheong Wa Dae.He promised to relocate.The current Moon Jae In administration has made moving stop.Specifically, the government was about to start the relocation work after obtaining approval for the reserve fund expenditure at a Cabinet meeting scheduled for March ２２, but it seems that it is not possible to obtain the reserve fund budget.The current presidential office Cheong Wa Dae said, "It is impossible to move the presidential office before the new administration takes office."Yoon Seok-yeol said, "If Moon Jae In refuses to cooperate on the most representative transition tasks, there is no way to enforce them."
Uncooperative for relocation Moon Jae In
Yoon Seok-yeol and the party "the power of the people" expressed their anger at President Moon, who said they could not agree to move the Ministry of National Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff due to security instability."The situation in which the president cannot enter the office and cannot be properly guarded will cause the security crisis of the Republic of Korea. Cheong Wa Dae's refusal to compile a budget on the grounds of a security vacuum is nothing more than a hindrance to the inauguration of the new government."
Is this a big problem in itself
After all, it seems that the plan to relocate Cheong Wa Dae on May １０, when the administration takes office, was unreasonable.Moon Jae In The administration seems to say that it is impossible to transfer security and Cheong Wa Dae functions by that date, and whether it is correct or not, the relocation of Cheong Wa Dae should have been done at the right time after taking office.In other words, the first item in the election pledge has already been nullified by the ruling party.At least where the presidential office is held is not a matter, and it seems to be nothing more than a dispute that lacks substance.
POINT Mr. Yoon Seok-yeol also seems to have been a bit slow to read.The current president is a Democrat with ５８ percent of the seats in the National Assembly.I don't think I can get their help.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
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.
An Jung-geun's son An Jun-seong, who assassinated Ito Hirobumi. The reconciliation that took place at the Gyeongseong Chosun Hotel and the man named Kim Gu who could not be forgiven
I think everyone knows about Ito Hirobumi. He was assassinated at Harbin Station on October 26, 1909, the year before the Japan-Korea Annexation. The man who carried out the assassination was An Jung-geun. He is still a hero in Korea. On October 15, 1939, a certain person visited a temple called Hakubunji Temple in Korea, which no longer exists, to offer a memorial service. It was An Jung-geun's son, An Jun-seong. He visited as part of a Korean Peninsula Manchuria ship inspection team from Shanghai. The purpose was to offer a memorial service for Ito Hirobumi, who was murdered by his father, An Jung-geun.
The memorial service began at 11:00 and An Jung-geun's memorial tablet was placed next to Ito Hirobumi's portrait. An Jun-seong offered a memorial service for his father An Jung-geun and Ito Hirobumi, and Komada, who recited a sutra, handed An Jung-geun's memorial tablet to him and advised him to mourn the souls of the two men forever.
Afterwards, An Toshio told a reporter who had come to interview him. He lost his father at a young age and neglected to perform the rituals for 30 years. He now prays for the repose of Prince Ito's soul and is happy to receive his father's memorial tablet.
■english subtitles available
The next day, on the 16th, An Toshio headed to the Gyeongseong Chosun Hotel. He was there to meet someone. The person he was meeting was Ito Bunkichi, the son of Ito Hirobumi. In response to An Toshio's request to apologize to Ito Bunkichi, Ito Bunkichi replied: "Our father has already become a god, a Buddha, and returned to the sky." What do we need to apologize for now? Let's be sincere and serve our country instead.
Then, on the following day, the 17th, Ito Bunkichi and An Toshio visited Hakubunji Temple and performed an exchange memorial service for each other's fathers. In Korea, it is firmly believed that Ito Hirobumi was a proponent of the Seikanron, which is Japan's conquest and rule of Korea. Why does it have to be this way? It is thought that Koreans mistakenly believe that Ito was a proponent of the Japan-Korea Annexation because Ito was the governor-general of the Government-General of Korea. However, Ito Hirobumi was opposed to the Japan-Korea Annexation throughout.
An Jung-geun assassinated Ito Hirobumi without even knowing his face. In his autobiography, he clearly wrote that he did not know Ito's face. Ito was no longer the Prime Minister or the Governor-General at the time. He took responsibility for the failure of the policy of reconciliation with Korea and resigned. An Jung-geun shot and killed Ito Hirobumi at Harbin Station. An Jung-geun was arrested on the spot, and after being sentenced to death in court, he said in prison that he had made a serious mistake.
In 1939, An Jung-geun's son An Jun-seong held a memorial service for Ito at Hakubunji Temple, met with Ito's son Ito Bunkichi at the Chosun Hotel, apologized, and reconciled. Kim Gu, an independence activist, could not forgive this. At the time, Kim Gu was an important member of the anti-Japanese Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea, and the following year in 1940, he became its chairman. An Jun-seong ran a pharmacy in Shanghai, but Kim Gu framed An Jun-seong for the trumped-up charge of selling opium and asked Chiang Kai-shek, the head of the Republic of China at the time, to execute him. It seems that he was quite angry, but what does this mean? Kim Gu was furious that An Jung-geun's son apologized for the murder of his father, Ito Hirobumi, and that he spoke about it in front of the media. An Jung-geun must be a hero. He must be used as a hero for the anti-Japanese independence movement. This was the hope of the forces seeking independence.
In other words, to them, Ito Hirobumi is a proponent of the Japanese-Korean annexation, and should not be the subject of reconciliation. It is not that Koreans have misunderstood somewhere and think that Ito Hirobumi promoted the Japan-Korea annexation, but it is clearly fabricated by the system. The fact that Ito was against the annexation. That An Jung-geun did not even know what Ito looked like. That An Jung-geun said that the assassination was a serious mistake. The fact that the surviving family has already reconciled should not be known in Korea. And it can be said that even today, there are very few Koreans who know this fact. In order to keep An Jung-geun a hero, Ito Hirobumi will forever be a proponent of the Japanese-Korean annexation and an enemy of Korea.
On January 28, 2023, a survey by the Korea Cinema Ticketing Network announced that "Hero," a movie based on An Jung-geun, which was released on December 21 of the previous year, had exceeded 3 million viewers in the 38 days since its release. Three million people is about 5.8% of the population of South Korea.
With only three days left before the South Korean presidential election, what is the contrast between the two manifestos and Japan - South Korea relations?
The Korean presidential election is only three days away.According to the latest opinion polls, the two seem to be at odds with each other's throats.In the past presidential election, it seems that the dominant candidate in the last poll won the election.Generally speaking, voter turnout is not the only way to go up.If the turnout is low, it will benefit the conservatives as well as the current administration.If voter turnout rises, those who are not usually interested in politics will participate in politics, which will be motivated to change the status quo.
Moon Jae In was working hard on how to get floating votes.This is the minimum wage increase and the feminist movement.And, it succeeded in winning floating votes for young people and women.The result is the worst policy, but the 2022 manifesto shows that there are many contrasting and worrying parts.Lee Jae-myung said, "It includes correcting Moon Jae In's mistakes.Specific industrial investments will create jobs, and urban functions would be dispersed as a countermeasure soaring land prices in Seoul.Yoon Seok-yeol, on the other hand, advocates attracting and increasing investment through the free economy.This is in contrast to industrial investment by large governments and job creation by small governments.
Lee Jae-myeong is pro-China and Yoon Seok-yeol is pro-U.S. in terms of diplomacy and defense.Yoon Seok-yeol mentioned the deployment of additional Saad.This means that the agreement with China will be scrapped.This means that China will confront China, but China is likely to impose economic sanctions on the Korean economy, which is highly dependent on China.Lee Jae-myeong did not mention the relationship with Japan, and Yoon demanded an apology and compensation from Japan.Does this mean that Japan-South Korea relations will be included in the U.S.-Japan relationship, rather than immediately restoring Japan-South Korea relations?In any case, if the right wins, there will be room for future negotiations from the Japanese side.However, relations between Japan and South Korea will end again when they demand an apology and compensation for the Japanese Military comfort woman issue.
No matter which candidate wins, I don't think I can expect much about Japan-South Korea relations.
South Korea violates international law of the sea by not allowing the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force the right of innocent passage - The Rising Sun flag is a reminder of the past.
The right of innocent passage is a right granted to United Nations member states
South Korea rejects the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force because of the Rising Sun flag
Violation of China's territorial waters does not fall under innocent passage
Because it reminds me of the past...?
International law of the sea provides ships with the right of innocent passage. Even if ships are within the territorial waters of a coastal state, they may pass without obtaining prior permission from the coastal state, provided that the navigation is not considered harmful as stipulated in Article 19-2 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Thing. In this case, you will need to display the flag of your affiliation. It is a national flag or military ensign.
When considering the Rising Sun flag issue in terms of the meaning of this treaty, South Korea does not recognize the right of innocent passage to the Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force, even though it has ratified the International Convention on the Law of the Sea. In other words, it is a violation of international law. On the other hand, Japan recognizes the right of innocent passage for Korean ships. The reason is that Japan has ratified the International Convention on the Law of the Sea.
In response to a question in the Diet about the relationship between Chinese ships repeatedly invading territorial waters around the Senkaku Islands and the right of innocent passage, the government decided in June 2021 that this does not constitute innocent passage as recognized under international law. expresses an opinion. The reason for this is that China claims sovereignty over the Senkaku Islands, which are part of Japan's territory, and that violating its territorial waters does not constitute innocent passage, but on the contrary, it is a violation of international law.
Has the South Korean government ever issued an official opinion regarding the Rising Sun flag and the right of innocent passage for Japanese ships, including those of the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force? It should be released. Saying that you don't like it because it reminds you of the past is no basis for denying the right of innocent passage. This is because there is no such thing in Article 19-2 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which states that navigation is considered harmful.
Yun Seok - yue's manifesto aims to attract and circulate capital through a free economy.Will the National Assembly become a burden that hinders this?
South Korea is wavering between pro-China and pro-US
Original regime change through social policy
A country that thinks about what is better
Yin Seok-yue promotes free economy
Promoting free competition within the country and moving towards CPTPP
Legal development by the Diet is hopeless
Is South Korea wondering whether it should join China, which has achieved growth in recent years, or join the camp of free nations such as Japan, the United States, and Europe? I guess it's a question of which is better, but it seems like a very polarizing choice.
The Moon Jae-in administration completely abandoned its pride as a democratic country without hesitation and spent five years desperately trying to join China and North Korea, a country that violates human rights at its worst, but unfortunately there was no result. Ta.
The new president, Yun Seok-Yeol, has the exact opposite policy, aiming for Korea to be a member of the Japan-U.S. and liberal camp. This seems to be the composition of the right-wing and left-wing forces in South Korea.
The left tends to seek the enhancement of social institutions, while the right tends to seek free competition and liberal democracy. This is a question of the balance between social welfare and liberal economics, and a debate about competition versus distribution. This is an issue to be debated within a democratic country, and can be said to be a universal frame.
America's two-party system is very easy to understand. Republicans and Democrats can be broadly divided on the question of whether taxes should be primarily used for public welfare, or whether they should reduce taxes in the first place and increase competitiveness in a free economy. It is also expressed in the framework of big government and small government.
The choice of domestic social policy is not a question of which country will benefit you by following, but rather a matter of foreign policy. Prior to Japan's annexation of South Korea, there was intense conflict between pro-Russian and pro-Japanese factions on the Korean peninsula. Is nothing different from that era? Another characteristic of South Korea is that its foreign policy is also its domestic policy.
Looking at Yun Seok-Yue's manifesto from the perspective of economic policy, his economic policy is to bring back the capital that fled South Korea under the Moon Jae-in administration.
In particular, the focus is not on where to focus investment and foster industry, but rather the policy appears to be aimed at attracting investors by abolishing regulations and promoting a free economy and free competition.
It appears that the plan is to aim to join the CPTPP and other liberal nation frameworks based on this liberal economic frame, but in order to realize this, it will be necessary to obstruct the various free competitions that exist within Korea. Legislation must be put in place to abolish the regulations that apply.
This is the job of the National Diet, the legislative branch, but the opposition Democratic Party of Japan still holds nearly 60% of the seats. In other words, there are many hurdles for the time being in the economic policy advocated by Yun Seok-Yeol and cooperation with liberal countries. In other words, we will have to wait for the 2024 general election.
