South Korea has always opposed registration as a World Heritage Site. The meaning of culture is different from the rest of the world.
2023-09-24
Category:South Korea I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
People from all over the world come to Japan for a variety of reasons, including culture, history, anime and manga, cat cafes, maid cafes, traditional Japanese food, and other gourmet food. These are evaluated within the framework of culture. If we look at the definition of culture, we find that `culture is a system of ideas and value standards shared within a society, and a unique style possessed by a group.'
Cultural heritage must be something that has survived for a certain period of time, and can be thought of as something that has had a major impact on subsequent eras, and can be considered to be the "culture" of each country. It can be said that it exists within the range of value standards and definitions. Furthermore, Japan has registered ２０ World Cultural Heritage Sites.
In this sense, South Korea is the only country to raise questions about Japan's registration as a World Cultural Heritage Site. This is not a historical issue, but simply a difference in the definition and framework of culture. Can they explain why Auschwitz in Germany and the Colosseum in Italy are world heritage sites? The Colosseum is an arena for killing each other.
If the common concept of ``culture'' in each country is the premise of world cultural heritage, then no Japanese person would object to the fact that Auschwitz and the Colosseum are cultural heritage sites. This is the Japanese way of thinking. In other words, it is different from Korea.
People visiting Japan come to see that there is almost no garbage left on the roads all over the country, and to see that the natural environment is still kept clean in one of the world's most developed countries, which is unique in the world. Although it can be said that this is Japanese culture that cannot be seen, there is no framework or precedent for considering such a culture that spreads throughout the nation as a cultural heritage.
Even if such a cultural framework were to match the world's definition, only South Korea would be opposed to it.
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.
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.
Japan - South Korea relations, in which historical issues arise.Korea is rejecting Japan, which is becoming a historical issue.
What is the Japan-South Korea issue?It's a historical issue.This is a historical issue 77 years ago.The Japanese government established a joint research committee on Japan-South Korea history to make it a historical issue, not a political one, but South Korea rejected it halfway.So what will happen if Japan-South Korea relations are segregated before and after World War II?Japan and South Korea established diplomatic relations in 1965, and there was no public cultural exchange until the Japan-South Korea Joint Declaration in 1998.Japan-South Korea relations ignore the 1965 agreement, the Japan-South Korea Joint Declaration, and various other promises made by Japan and South Korea, and continue to deal with historical issues more than 77 years ago, regardless of culture or economy.
I don't know why Korea, which continues to cry out for historical issues, refuses to accept the Japanese government's attempt to turn it into a historical issue into a historical issue.Korean politicians often use the term "two-track strategy," but it is only a false diplomacy from the perspective of Japan.Japan has already proposed a two-track strategy.It is not the idea of using what is available, but simply separating historical and political issues.
The Japan-South Korea Joint Research Committee on History, which was established under the Koizumi administration, is currently not active at all.How will this solve the historical problem?
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.
