assumption of the division of
2021-07-04
Category:South Korea I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
A Korean journalist(Shinichi Nabe) explained, "Most Koreans want reunification," adding, "It is true that most Koreans want reunification".Next, "What if Japan were divided into East and West after the war?Don't you want to unify?It's the same as that".I sometimes hear such a remark.
As a Japanese, there are many cases where people are silent about such sudden questions, but they are always simply questions.For example, if Western Japan had repeatedly provoked its allies by communism, dictatorship, and nuclear weapons, the Japanese would not want reunification.The collapse of the system and the opening up of the people are all prerequisites.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
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.
The right of innocent passage is a right granted to United Nations member states
South Korea rejects the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force because of the Rising Sun flag
Violation of China's territorial waters does not fall under innocent passage
Because it reminds me of the past...?
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.
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.
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.
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.
President Yun Seok - Yeol was criticized for not demanding an apology from Japan during Korea Liberation Day! Countries demanding an apology on the day the war ended.
Enthusiasm to repair Japan-Korea relations
A country that expects grudge festival on the day of the end of the war
It is clear that it will change again if the government changes
Promises between Japan and South Korea that have been repeatedly broken
Background of countries that fail to keep their promises
It appears that President Yun Seok-Yeong's speech at Liberation Day is under attack. It is said that he only shouted for freedom 33 times in his speech on Liberation Day, but did not hear a single word demanding an apology on the 77th anniversary of Liberation Day.
In the first place, it can be said that it is abnormal that 77 years have passed and an apology is still being requested at a national ceremony.
Every country holds some type of event on Victory Day or the End of World War Day, but avoid using expressions that suggest that the country is still considered an enemy country. This is a matter of course if there are diplomatic relations, which is international common sense.
Will Israeli President Herzog give a speech on the anniversary of the end of the war, saying that Jews still hold a grudge against Germans? It can be said that this is a completely meaningless political action.
In any case, although President Yun Seok-Yeong's desire to improve Japan-Korea relations is highly commendable, even if we make some kind of promise with him, we have no idea what will happen once his term ends.
In Japan, it has been reported that the agreement between Japan and South Korea was broken during the era of former President Moon Jae-in, but diplomatic relations were restored in 1965, and the Japan-Korea Joint Declaration was issued in 1998, and concrete Japan-Korea exchanges were established. have started, but they are already in an invalid state. The Japan-Korea Joint Declaration collapsed within two years.
In other words, the fact remains that South Korea is not in a position to keep its promises. Therein lies the essential problem. The best-selling book Anti-Japanese Tribalism written by Korean professor Lee Yong-hoon describes anti-Japanese as shamanism that goes beyond logic. It is truly an anti-Japanese religion.
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?
Korea, where the government recognizes history, will not be revised even if new facts are discovered.
History is just a collection of cognition.History of the past is incorporated into history in accordance with the interpretation that it is the same with one sentence, one letter, and one word.It is impossible to prepare enough evidence in history to confirm the facts in the current trial.
History recognized as the past is corrected by newly discovered facts.It is a case in which conflicting statements are found in past views that have been found.Whenever new facts are discovered in historians' quest, historical cognition is corrected.
In Japan, new facts have been discovered and history has been reviewed one after another.U.S. military information such as Hullnotes, which triggered the start of the Pacific War, has been released one after another after the deadline for confidentiality.As a result, the U.S. military's Sea of Japan chart, which is the basis for the start of the war and the dropping of atomic bombs, and the establishment of borders in Sea of Japan after the war, has been discovered and revised.
How do you explain that the photo in the textbook, which was published as a forced work man in Korea, was found to be a Japanese working in a coal mine and canceled it?
King Gojong, for example, is said to have failed to sign the Japan-South Korea annexation treaty.What would happen if King Gojong found a new note saying he was in favor of the annexation treaty?Will Korea correct history?
If the Japanese government is to be found guilty of the Japanese Military Sexual Slavery issue, it must at least present substantiable evidence under current law.It is evidence to support when, who, how, and in what way.There is no such evidence and is sentenced only by testimony.
History is like a creature that is constantly examined, supplemented, and corrected within the bounds of academic freedom.Therefore, it is impossible for the government or the judiciary to determine history.
The "no distortion of history " and "pro-Japanese praise ban " proposed in South Korea are laws that do not change the history of Koreans being enslaved under Japanese rule and prohibit the development of the Korean Peninsula under Japanese rule.
In other words, the legislature is submitting legislation that restricts freedom of speech and suppresses academic freedom.
Historical problems are basically problems between historians.The government of that time cannot recognize history.
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?
