I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
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.
Promise between Japan and KoreaIf 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.
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.
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.