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.
2022-10-29
Category:South Korea I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
The right of innocent passage is a right granted to United Nations member states
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.
South Korea rejects the Maritime Self-Defense Force because of the Rising Sun flag
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.
Violation of China's territorial waters does not fall under innocent passage
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.
Because it reminds me of the past...?
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.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Anti - Korean sentiment in the world
When comparing data from the BBC on positive and negative impressions of Japan and South Korea, a surprising number of countries have a negative impression of South Korea (Reference wiki)
Japan has been at war with China in the past, so we can predict China's feelings towards Japan, but what exactly is South Korea like? Regarding China's sentiments toward South Korea, relations between China and South Korea deteriorated in 2016 when South Korea decided to deploy THAAD, but even if you look at domestic surveys conducted before then, it appears that China's reputation towards South Korea was quite unfavorable.
2007 "Xinhua News Agency" survey results: South Korea ranks first in "neighbors I don't like"
2007 “Tengai Community” survey results. ``Most hated country'' South Korea ranks first
2009 “Global Network” survey results. 94.6% of respondents said they did not have a favorable impression of South Korea.
It has long been pointed out that anti-Japanese campaigns around the world are a strategy to tarnish Japan's image, given that Japan and South Korea have similar industrial structures in the face of global competition.
But when you look at the data... In the first place, isn't the idea that one benefits by degrading others itself wrong?
communist program quoting the New Deal congratulatory address for Moon Jae In 2021 Independence Day
The Korean version of the New Deal, which will invest 220 trillion won by 2025, is a roadmap for becoming an innovative and inclusive country centered on people and a development strategy for a country that will take a new leap forward. The government has made the Human New Deal another pillar of the Korean version of the New Deal, along with the Digital New Deal and Green New Deal. We will establish a social safety net, such as the abolition of employment insurance and living allowance support standards for all citizens, and lead the transition to digital and green through investment in people.
-------------------
The New Deal is interpreted as a bold intervention by the U.S. government in the market economy during the Great Depression and as a intervention to free competition to rebuild the Great Depression.And what's the Human New Deal?I mean, you're going to intervene there, too.
In his congratulatory speech last year, he said, "The Korean version of the New Deal is a new social contract for co-prosperity, a promise to strengthen employment and social safety nets, increase investment in people, and achieve prosperity and co-prosperity."What is a nation centered on people? Have Korea always been centered on dogs or cats?What's the investment in people? Wasting money is not the investment, is it?
What Moon Jae In is doing is simply government intervention to move toward communism.
The president Moon Jae In's last resistance to the relocation of the president's office.cloud over election pledges.
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."
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."
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.
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.
Promise between Japan and Korea If you read the Korean news, They say that Japan and South Korea are using the Tokyo Olympics for political purposes, but they are not objective.This is because Japan has not done anything this time either.Prime minister Suga has done nothing but say that Moon Jae In will respond politely if she comes to Japan.Japan's attitude has not changed consistently, and the message has been conveyed to South Korea many times.Correction of violations of the 1965 Agreement, which was the basis for the restoration of diplomatic relations.This is all Japan has demanded, so there is no bargaining or anything.It was Moon Jae In who underestimated the issue and played tricks on it.
In addition, there are opinions that Japan and South Korea need to compromise and that the leaders of the two countries need to make a decision, but if Japan obscures the 1965 agreement, it will mean a break in diplomatic relations.The reason is that the agreement, which is a prerequisite for diplomatic relations, should be scrapped.The biggest problem is that the Korean people do not understand this and form public opinion.In other words, Japan will not budge an inch from implementing the 1965 agreement to prevent the South Korean government from breaking off diplomatic relations.In this respect, the act of drawing concessions from Japan itself is far from maintaining diplomatic relations.
Catch - all regulation and its contents Even though South Korea was a white country, I could not understand its meaning.
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
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.
