Meeting with South Korean parliamentarians and Foreign Minister Hayashi. Is it meaningful to deal with mere performance diplomacy?
2022-04-26
Category:South Korea I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
An unprecedented response between members of the Diet and government ministers
Foreign Minister Hayashi met at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the morning of the ２５th with the "policy consultation delegation" sent by South Korean President-elect Yoon Seok-you to Japan. There have been criticisms within the Liberal Democratic Party of having a meeting between a mere parliamentary group that has not yet been established as a government and Japanese government ministers. Since it is unknown whether they are really delegations, will the Foreign Minister visit all of them when a foreign member visits Japan? And since I had an interview with the members of the Diet, there is no reason why Yoon Seok-you would not have an interview after taking office as president.
Interview in a state of violation of international law
Currently, the Japanese government is in a position not to negotiate unless the Korean government corrects the state of violation of international law, and the state of violation of international law has not changed yet. After that, They had a meeting with former Minister of Finance Fukushiro Nukaga of the Liberal Democratic Party and former Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology Nakagawa of the Constitutional Democratic Party, who are the chairman of the Japan-Korea Parliamentary Union, at a hotel in Tokyo for about an hour and a half. One of the points that should be evaluated is that the Korean parliamentarians should return to the Japan-Korea relations at the time of the １９９８ Japan-Korea Joint Declaration. In １９９８, it became a joint declaration that embodied the ideal way of exchange between Japan and South Korea from the １９６５ Japan-Korea Basic Treaty, such as the opening of Japanese culture in South Korea and the resolution of the problem of fishing rights in Takeshima. Even if it is simply said to improve Japan-South Korea relations, it is commendable that they have discussed them many times and have shown specific target points because the Korean side has destroyed everything for their own convenience. However, even if it returned to the time of the Japan-Korea Joint Declaration, this declaration was virtually invalidated by the National Assembly of South Korea in less than two years. How can we prevent it from being invalidated again even if it returns in １９９８? That point is missing.
Do you make another promise with a country that does not keep your promise?
I think that the problem that South Korea does not keep its promise is that the country itself does not have a structure to keep its promise. Even if the president of that era considers the times and makes a promise with Japan through diplomatic immunity, Korean parliamentarians who have an anti-Japanese structure and an anti-Japanese constitution will invalidate them with the power of the legislature. Is the Kishida administration rushing for easy diplomatic achievements as it has no diplomatic achievements so far? Foreign Minister Hayashi is in a good mood playing the piano in the United Kingdom. Will he repeat the Japan-Korea relations that he has repeated over and over again?
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
The ''North-South division issue'' and the future aimed at by Kim Gu - Lee Jae-myung's assertion is an unrealizable hypothesis.
South Korean Democratic Party members Moon Jae-in and Lee Jae-myung cite Kim Gu as the politician they most respect. Kim Gu was a person who served as the president of the provisional government of the Republic of Korea. He rejected the postwar state of US-Soviet trust between North and South Korea and proposed a plan to unify the peninsula among the Korean people, but this idea was rejected by Kim Il-sung of North Korea. It was an unrealizable idea that would be denied by the United States as well. After a political dispute, Syngman Rhee, who was recommended by the United States, became president, and Kim Gu was subsequently assassinated.
Lee Jae-myung recently told a US senator that the North and South were divided because of the US. I guess he is trying to say that if he had done what Kim Gu said at that time, there would have been no Korean War or division between North and South. However, there is absolutely no basis for this "if". At that time, there were no people in Japan or abroad who supported this idea.
Kim Gu's ideas did not produce any results in the environment of the time. Based on this premise, there are no objective facts in history; all that exists is the existence of South Korea and North Korea since the founding of the nation more than 70 years ago. North Korea established the current state of North Korea without paying any attention to Kim Gu's claims.
In other words, it is logically impossible to trace back to Kim Gu's assertion what the basis for the unification of North and South is advocated by the No. 1 and No. 2 members of the Democratic Party of Japan. They are the most pro-North Korean and pro-China faction in the South Korean National Assembly. Even now, that claim is not appreciated at all by North Korea, the United States, or even China.
Candidate Lee Jae - myung said that America was to blame for the division of the Korean peninsula - a victim mentality lacking in historical understanding.
What is this person saying? South Korean presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung told U.S. Senator Jon Ossoff that the Korean peninsula was divided without Japan being divided. It is America's fault that the Korean peninsula was divided into north and south. On top of that, it's a statement that says Japan should have been divided.
Losing a war does not always result in division. The former East and West Germany was divided into East and West by the socialist Soviet Union and liberal countries. Since the Soviet Union was largely responsible for Germany's defeat, the Soviet Union gained control of Eastern Europe, and Germany itself was divided into East and West. In multilateral wars, when the victorious nations were unable to come to terms on their merits and interests, the method of partition was adopted. Germany is a perfect example.
So what about Japan? Although it is still a multilateral war, Japan has won against all Western countries except the United States. Only America lost. The Soviet Union had nothing to do with the Japan-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact. The Soviet Union entered the war on August 9, 1945, just before the end of the war. How could the Soviet Union claim its interests against the United States?
So why did the Soviet Union claim interests in the Korean Peninsula? This is said to have been determined by the Yalta Secret Treaty, which determined the division along the 38th parallel. The question is at what point in time should a return to the status quo be made, based on the principle of restoration to its original state in post-war settlements. At the Yalta Conference, Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin discussed how to deal with the aftermath of World War II.
The fact that the San Francisco Peace Treaty recognized the return of Taiwan dates back to the Sino-Japanese War. On the Korean Peninsula, Gojong, the Emperor of the Korean Empire, negotiated with Russia to sell the interests of the Korean Peninsula. The Soviet Union built the transcontinental railroad and began colonizing East Asia. The theory is that if Japan had not interfered in the Russo-Japanese War, the Korean Peninsula would have belonged to the Soviet Union. In other words, they are claiming rights dating back to before the Russo-Japanese War.
Why is present-day South Korea a democratic country? This is based on the premise that the Korean Peninsula belonged to Japan, and it was the United States that forced Japan into defeat, so the United States claimed its rights. Therefore, Korea came under the control of GHQ. Based on this premise, the 38th parallel was established as a compromise line with the Soviet Union, dividing the country into north and south.
According to a Korean public opinion poll, the support rates for political parties are 42.4% for both opposition parties, and 39.6% for People's Power.The general election will be held this year.
According to a Korean Realmeter opinion poll conducted in the fourth and fifth weeks of March 2020, the party support rate was 44.6% for the Democratic Party of Korea, and 30.0% for the United Future Party, the predecessor of People's Power. The Realmeter survey results announced on the 15th of this month show that the Democratic Party is 42.4%, and the People's Power is 39.6%.Although the gap has narrowed, the Democratic Party's approval rating has fallen by only 2.2 points. do not have.
In the 2020 survey, 55.7% approved of Moon Jae-in, and in the current survey, 36.3% approved of President Yoon Seok-Yeol. Interpreting these figures literally, expectations for the power of the people in the legislature have increased, but the support rate for the Democratic Party has remained almost unchanged. Both parties are members of the Democratic Party, whose party is led by Lee Jae-myung, who miraculously survived the assassination that everyone thought was a farce and was discharged from the hospital after a long hospitalization. Lee Jae-myung is currently being indicted by prosecutors.
These Democratic Party supporters can be seen as a rock-solid support group that will continue to support any party leader no matter what. Are these people who make a living through trade with China, and whose livelihoods are directly connected to their support for China? South Korea's trade dependence is 81.9% of GDP. The pro-Japanese and pro-American and pro-China and pro-North Korean compositions were one of the themes brought to light by Moon Jae-in, who stirred up the No Japan movement, but the essential issue is the economy. How far has the withdrawal from China's economy progressed?
In the Facebook group of the author who co-authored ``Anti-Japanese Tribalism,'' it is clear that the number of posters and viewers has decreased dramatically since Yun Seok-yeo became president. Is it because the No Japan movement has subsided? In that case, would those people have been better off if the No Japan movement had disappeared? I wonder how many people out there just wish they could drink Japanese beer. In other words, were the pro-Japanese simply rebelling against the intense anti-Japanese movements that were taking place? At least what we can say is that the power of pro-China, pro-North Korean forces does not seem to be weakening.
If we go into the 2024 general election in this state, there is a high possibility that the Democratic Party will once again control the largest number of seats. If this is the case, the Yun Seok-Yue administration will be run in a twisted manner throughout his term. Anti-Japanese issues are also legal issues. South Korea is a country with no anti-Japanese convictions. Since the Democratic Party is the most powerful party in both countries, it is difficult to bring about social change through legislation, and there is a high possibility that an anti-Japanese leftist president will be elected again in the next presidential election.
Death toll from Halloween Shogi chess accident in Seoul rises to 151 - Different countries respond differently to similar accidents.
Deadly accident occurs on Halloween in Seoul
Akashi fireworks festival accident for which police were held responsible
Shanghai accident started with suspicious report
China's return to people's responsibility
How will South Korea sum up this issue
The number of people killed in a shogi accident during Halloween in Seoul has increased to 151. This is the worst accident in terms of man-made disasters. This accident reminds me of the Akashi fireworks festival accident in Japan and the New Year countdown accident on the Shanghai Bund in China. Shogi accidents occur when players are pushed from behind in a crowded crowd, or when they step on someone else's foot and lose their balance. This chain causes a major accident.
This also happened during the Akashi Fireworks Festival, and 11 people died. However, it is impossible for the people who disrupted that arrangement to be held responsible. Problems with the police and security were investigated day after day, and in the end, a civil court ordered Hyogo Prefectural Police and the security company to pay damages. The conclusion is that it was foreseeable and that the necessary measures were not taken. In the criminal trial, one police officer and one security company were sentenced to 2 years and 6 months in prison, and 3 city employees were sentenced to 2 years and 6 months in prison, suspended for 5 years was found guilty.
Next, regarding the incident in Shanghai Bund, I was in Shanghai on the day of the accident. A Chinese person I spoke to the next day asked me, didn't you go to the Bund last night? I found out when I was asked. According to the news reports after the accident, 36 people were said to have died. From then on, it turned out to be a complete lie. On New Year's Eve, Shanghai was in a state of chaos, with people rushing to the point where it was difficult to walk, not only on the Bund, but also everywhere, including the station premises, and it would have been no surprise if an accident occurred anywhere. . If it was an accident during the New Year's countdown on the Bund, it was clear that 36 people would not have been there.
Afterwards, I was looking into how this incident was summarized in China, and came across an article called Expert Opinion. "Increase public awareness of safety, avoid danger, and avoid crowded places." In other words, public responsibility for gathering too much. It was not intended to hold the government or police responsible.
There was clearly a problem with the accident in Seoul, and it was a catastrophe in which many people died. Maybe it's because it happened right after the accident, but when I look at articles from South Korea, there doesn't seem to be any complaints about the lack of police or security. In Japan, a ruling after the accident increased the responsibility of the police and security companies for events where large numbers of people gather, resulting in an increase in the safety of citizens.
Shogi falling accidents occur in various countries, but the way each country views and deals with the problem is completely different. How will South Korea summarize this accident?
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.
