I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
![The Sino - Japanese issue is an intergovernmental issue. Japan and South Korea are civic issues. The people of Korea, a democratic country, cannot pretend to be innocent.]()
The Sino - Japanese issue is an intergovernmental issue. Japan and South Korea are civic issues. The people of Korea, a democratic country, cannot pretend to be innocent.
The difference between Sino-Japanese relations and Japan-South Korea relations is that Sino-Japanese relations are intergovernmental and Japan-South Korea relations is civic.As with the Takeshima issue, the Senkaku Islands issue is a territorial issue in Sino-Japanese relations.As for anti-Japanese education, both China and Korea have anti-Japanese education, and the two countries in the world are anti-Japanese.Although anti-Japanese, China and South Korea have completely different positions in history.Japan battled with China, and Korea was during the annexation of Japan and Korea, and above all, Japan didn't battle with Korea.
The Japanese do not criticize individual Chinese for the current Sino-Japanese issue.This is because the Chinese do not have the right to vote, and everyone knows that the expansion of the Communist Party of China's Xi Jinping policy is the cause.On the other hand, Japanese comments on Korea have attracted attention to the personality of Koreans.This is because the Japanese understand that the No Japan movement has become a social phenomenon in Korea beyond civic groups and that anti-Japanese education is the foundation of the issue.And most of all, Moon Jae In is a president elected by the people's votes.
It is natural that international relations will change somewhat if the regime changes.However, Moon Jae In hid behind the scenes and used private organizations to carry out anti-Japanese movements in the voice of citizens for political activities and diplomacy.That's all he's done for five years.Has he ever thought about how this would affect him in the future?
China and South Korea are both problematic countries for Japan, but the differences between the two countries need to be observed.
![Kim Koo and Moon Jae In]()
Kim Koo and Moon Jae InKim Koo went to North Korea to oppose trust rule and advocate reunification and independence of the two Koreas, but Kim Il Sung did not seem to deal with him.It was also abandoned by the United States.Moon Jae In is very similar.Moon Jae In names Kim Gu as the most respected politician.Do you mean that the right and left sides of Korea are Lee Seung-man and Kim Gu?Either way, they are anti-Japanese.
![South Korea's Next Presidential Candidate]()
South Korea's Next Presidential Candidate "I Love the Japanese People" and Continuous Anti - Japanese Remarks.
Lee Jae-myung, a candidate running for South Korea's next presidential election, said on November 25th, ``I love the Japanese people and respect their civility,'' and added, ``Japan invaded South Korea and attacked dozens of people. "He has a history of dominating and expropriating Korea for many years." "He is still dreaming of becoming a military power and is provoking that Dokdo, which South Korea effectively controls, is his own territory. He is also clear about historical issues. It doesn't seem like he is sincerely remorseful, so of course I'm worried."
Lee Jae-myung, an anti-Japanese force who said he loves the Japanese people. What followed was a series of incoherent statements.
First of all, he does not seem to understand the root of the current problems in Japan-Korea relations. This is not a historical issue from the beginning. The problem is that South Korea was taking advantage of its position as a friendly country and taking advantage of its position as a white country to divert strategic materials imported from Japan that require strict control to third countries. .
Then there is the issue of the state of the abrogation of the claims agreement, which is the basis of Japan-South Korea diplomatic relations, by reviving individual claims and issuing compensation orders to the Japanese government and Japanese companies in domestic courts. Without understanding that this is not a problem of the past but an ongoing one, saying that we love the Japanese people will not improve Japan-Korea relations.
The five years of Moon Jae-in created an irreparable rift in Japan-Korea relations. Do they think that if the anti-Japanese mood as a national sentiment subsides, things will be manageable on the surface? Japan has given up on relations with South Korea due to anti-Japanese activities since Moon Jae-in took office, and has continued to build relations with other neighboring countries.
Commitments and work with his new partner are occurring one after another. If you don't fully understand these things, you'll just think it's a childish and shallow idea.
Japan has been putting up with South Korea for many years, but since it was excluded from the white list, it has created partners other than South Korea. Will South Korea ever return to being our most important neighbor?
![South Korean delegation insists on 'efforts from both countries' - Japan is fulfilling all its promises - South Korea is the one who is not making enough efforts]()
South Korean delegation insists on 'efforts from both countries' - Japan is fulfilling all its promises - South Korea is the one who is not making enough efforts
South Korea says efforts from both Japan and South Korea are necessary
Intentions of both countries passing each other
What is the destination that Korea envisions?
If we misunderstand the Korean issue, the government will tilt
Japan has already apologized many times
Japan fulfills all commitments
What does the effort of both countries mean?
While the recent South Korean delegation's visit to Japan has been reported as if the two countries have once again returned to the direction of improving Japan-Korea relations, the response of the Japanese government, including the prime minister, has been criticized. The South Korean side is keen to improve Japan-Korea relations, and as a result, interviews with the current prime minister, former prime minister, and other ministers were held. The most important point is that a gap that cannot be filled has been identified.
The rift is that while Japan is demanding that South Korea "fulfill its commitments," South Korea has consistently stated that "efforts from both sides are needed." This means that South Korea will not make unilateral concessions. More specifically, before the presidential election, President-elect Yoon Seok-Yeol met with Lee Yong-soo, a self-proclaimed representative of former comfort women, and said, ``We must demand an apology from Japan.'' has promised that he will receive it. That's probably what he's saying.
What kind of efforts does South Korea want from Japan? For example, is the Japanese Prime Minister going to South Korea, meeting with former comfort women, apologizing, and reporting the moving scene as an attempt to settle the matter? However, if South Korea's next government does not understand that this is an unlikely future, improving relations seems a long way off.
If Prime Minister Kishida were to do something like that, the Kishida administration would surely collapse, and even in this meeting with the parliamentary group, there are voices calling for Kishida to be removed from the position of prime minister. There are even voices saying that they will not vote for the Liberal Democratic Party in the next House of Councilors election. Reasons for this include the forced labor judgment and the abrogation of the Japan-Korea comfort women agreement.
Regarding the South Korean delegation's visit to Japan, since it was a group of parliamentarians before the inauguration of the new South Korean government, there were many opinions that Japan should also conduct the visit within the framework of parliamentary exchanges and that the government should not deal with it.
The comfort women agreement states, ``This is an issue that has deeply damaged the honor and dignity of many women, and from this perspective, the Japanese government is acutely aware of its responsibility.'' I would like to express my heartfelt apologies and remorse to the people of... Yun Seok-Yeol seems to think that since he has expressed his apology, it would be okay to apologize face-to-face. However, the agreement states, ``As the Japanese government declares the above and steadily implements the measures in (2) above (establishment of a foundation), this announcement will ensure that this issue will be finalized and irreversible.'' to make sure it is resolved."
The 1965 Claims Agreement, including the issue of forced labor, was already resolved. Japan is simply asking South Korea to faithfully implement these agreements. Japan has fulfilled all of its responsibilities, so all that remains is for South Korea to fulfill its own responsibilities. In other words, it is no longer an issue for both countries to make efforts.
Jeong Jin-seok, head of the South Korean delegation, claps his hands together and says that only by joining hands like this can relations be improved. Hearing these words, I can't help but think that South Korea's next new government may not even understand what the current situation is. This is because the efforts of these two countries resulted in the Claims Agreement in 1965, the Japan-South Korea Joint Declaration in 1998, and the Comfort Women Agreement in 2015, which is exactly the kind of hand-to-hand situation that Chung described. It is South Korea that unilaterally abolished these . Japan must not take a step back from this line.
If we look at Japan-South Korea relations after the restoration of diplomatic relations, South Korea has completely torn up all previous agreements. Is the next agreement really necessary?
