Leaders Participate in the Olympic Opening Ceremony - Prime Minister Abe Participated for the Athletes and Moon Jae - in Used for Political Use
2021-07-12
Category:Japanese comfort woman problem I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Former Prime Minister Abe participated in the opening ceremony despite opposition.
At the time of the Pyeongchang Olympics held in South Korea, Moon Jae-in had already spoken out about the invalidity of the comfort women agreement, and in Japan, there was much domestic public opinion against Prime Minister Abe's participation in the opening ceremony of the Games. However, it was thought that Prime Minister Abe would not participate, but Prime Minister Abe announced his intention to participate. The reason was that ``I had to participate as the country's top leader in order to encourage the Japanese national team players.''
South Korea intends to participate in the opening ceremony and do business with us
I have seen Moon Jae-in in this sense, and he is truly a disappointing person. The South Korean athlete did not even know whether his country would participate in the Tokyo Olympics until just before the Olympics, and his argument that he might boycott was so lame that it was dismissed by the IOC. As for Moon Jae-in's participation in the opening ceremony, it appears that he was trying to make a deal until the very end, unilaterally offering a deal in exchange for a summit meeting.
Who is using the Olympics for politics?
South Korea has been the most sensitive to the political use of the Olympics, and appears to have criticized Japan at every turn at the national level. From the perspective of Japan, the South Korean athletes who play the leading role in sports tournaments are nowhere to be seen, and it appears that Moon Jae-in, far from using the Olympics for politics, seems to think that the Olympics themselves are a political venue.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Legality of Japanese Annexation of Korea The Supreme Court's decision on recruitment is based on the unilateral recognition of torts under Japanese rule. There are two main points in the judgment of the Supreme Court of Korea. One is the issue of the Japan-Korea Claims Agreement. The second is the recognition of torts under Japanese rule, which was the premise of the decision.
The waiver of claims in post-war processing was under the San Francisco Peace Treaty. Japan has abandoned its diplomatic protection rights related to claims. Countries that do not ratify the peace treaty will individually conclude a treaty. Diplomatic protection means that the country does not diplomatically protect the exercise of claims against other countries. A-bomb survivors in Hiroshima have attempted to claim damages against the United States for indiscriminate attacks on civilians as a tort. At this time, the view of the Government of Japan is that the Government of Japan has abandoned its diplomatic protection rights and the government is not involved. However, he replied that the individual's claim was not extinguished. "Yanagi answer". It is the answer of the Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs and the administrative view.
In fact, South Korea has been activating the movement for individual claims by quoting this Yanai answer. Until then, South Korea, on the contrary, interpreted that the individual's claim itself had disappeared (described in the Korean side manual of the 1965 Agreement), and after hearing this Yanai's answer, he knew for the first time that the individual's claim would not be extinguished. It was. Aside from the administrative view of Japan, the legal view was that in 2007 the Supreme Court of Japan stated that it was not subject to protection, including individual jurisdiction. At the same time, the individual's claim right will not be extinguished.
In other words, the problem is that a treaty is a promise between countries, not a contract between individual citizens. Individuals do not lose their claims as individual rights, but the state does not act for them. The Supreme Court of Korea interpreted that the jurisdiction would not be extinguished. The first point is whether or not jurisdiction is included.
Regarding the second tort recognition, when Japan signed the 1965 Agreement, Japan is approaching the conclusion with a consistent view that the annexation of Korea is not an illegal act under international law. The eight articles presented by the South Korean side in the agreement are about claims for the property of natural persons (individuals), but it is written and agreed in the agreement to abandon them. And it is not the concept of compensation, but economic cooperation.
The Japanese annexation of Korea is not illegal because there is no fact that Japan occupied it by force and forcibly concluded it, and it was signed and stamped when the two countries signed the agreement. The letter of the emperor Sunjong's name is written on the power of attorney to delegate full authority to Prime Minister Ye Wanyong, and there is no debate about whether this is a signature, and Sunjong itself is not recognized as an emperor. There is a claim that there is no signature of Gojong, but the universal public law of international law at that time stipulates that the signature of the head of state is not always necessary for concluding a treaty.
The reason why tort recognition is the point is that the Korean side ignored the views and interpretations under international law and unilaterally recognized it as tort. Korean civil law stipulates that personal property rights and claims will be extinguished if not exercised for 20 years. In other words, normally, both the recruiter and the comfort woman have passed the extinction prescription of the claim. Looking at the cases of claims related to the claim right at the time of the annexation of Japan and South Korea in South Korea, there are a number of judgments that were dismissed because of the extinction prescription. What happens if the Japanese annexation of Korea becomes an illegal act? The claim right at point 1 does not expire. Since it is a principle of international law that the right to claim under tort has no statute of limitations, the Daiho-in Temple has unfoundedly recognized the annexation of Korea as a tort.
As mentioned above, an individual's claim will not be extinguished only on the premise of tort. The treaty exists as another matter, it is a promise between countries, and the Korean government has a strict obligation to keep the treaty.
Are comfort women women's volunteer corps? If you read the ``Women's Volunteer Labor Ordinance,'' you will see that it is a clear lie.
Below is an excerpt from the Women's Volunteer Corps Labor Order. Only those certified by the National Vocational Ability Declaration Ordinance could join the volunteer corps (Article 3).
Excerpts from the National Vocational Ability Declaration Order, which is the basis for Article 3, are also posted thereafter.
It was a proud profession in which only the most talented women could join the volunteer corps. In South Korea, it is believed that women who were sleeping at train stations were taken away and forced to become comfort women. Apparently they think volunteer corps and comfort women are the same thing. The women's volunteer corps is not such a funny story, but it is a group of female workers who were brought together by imperial edict.
The detailed application details and the local commissioner will check your skills. When people confuse comfort women with the volunteer corps, they have no idea what the volunteer corps is. Incidentally, the Women's Volunteer Corps Labor Order has not been issued on the Korean Peninsula.
[Women's Volunteer Corps Labor Order] Imperial Ordinance No. 519 of 1944
Article 3 Persons who are to engage in volunteer work (hereinafter referred to as volunteers) are women who are registered citizens according to the National Vocational Ability Declaration Ordinance.
Girls other than those falling under the preceding paragraph will only be allowed to serve as members if they volunteer.
Article 4: The period of continued volunteer labor shall be approximately one year, unless there are special circumstances.
If you wish to continue working as a volunteer for more than one year, you must obtain the consent of the volunteer.
Article 5 A person who wishes to receive volunteer labor shall request or apply to the local commissioner as prescribed by the order.
Article 6 Local Commissioner If there is a request or application pursuant to the provisions of the preceding article and it is deemed necessary to dispatch the women's volunteer corps, the municipal mayor (municipal mayor) Heads of other organizations or school principals, including those equivalent to the head of the ward (in the areas where the wards of Tokyo exist, as well as Kyoto City, Osaka City, Nagoya City, Yokohama City, and Kanda City, the ward head, and the same shall apply hereinafter); We will order the members to select those who will serve as members.
Article 7: Persons who receive the orders set forth in the preceding article should select those who should become members of the group, taking into account the person's age, physical condition, family situation, etc., and report this to the local chief.
Article 8: The local commissioner shall select members from among those who have submitted a report pursuant to the provisions of the preceding article, notify the person accordingly in a volunteer labor order, and give instructions on necessary matters regarding volunteer labor. I agree.
[National Vocational Ability Declaration Order] Royal Ordinance No. 5 of 1949
Article 2 The following persons shall be required to report (hereinafter referred to as persons required to report):
A person who has been continuously engaged in an occupation designated by the Minister of Health and Welfare for three months or more in the current place of residence.
A person who has been continuously engaged in the occupation listed in the previous item for more than one year, and who has retired for less than five years.
Those who have graduated from a university, vocational school, vocational school, or any other equivalent school designated by the Minister of Health and Welfare by completing a course designated by the Minister of Health and Welfare.
A person who has completed the prescribed course at a technician training facility designated by the Minister of Health and Welfare.
A person who has passed a certification or examination designated by the Minister of Health and Welfare or a person who has obtained a license designated by the Minister of Health and Welfare.
Other persons designated by the Minister of Health and Welfare.
Article 4 When a citizen becomes a person who is required to file a return, or when a person who is required to file under Article 11 and has not yet filed a return no longer falls under the provisions of the same article, the person who is required to file a return shall report the following matters within 14 days to the employment agency in the place of employment if the person requiring the report is employed, and to the employment agency in the place of residence for other persons. After filing the declaration, if the person requiring the declaration moves to another area, the declaration shall be made in the same manner.
One name
Date of birth
Three domicile
Place of residence
Military service related
Academic background
Employed person is his/her occupation name
Place of employment (for those who have two or more places of employment, this is the main place of employment)
If a person is engaged in or has engaged in the occupation set forth in Article 2, paragraph 1, his or her employment history and skill level
For those who fall under Article 2, Item 4, information regarding the course they have completed.
For those who fall under Article 2, item 5, matters related to the examination, certification, or license that they have taken.
Those receiving salary or wages, the amount
Other matters specified by the order.
Article 8: The local commissioner (governor) or director of an employment agency may test the skills and other vocational abilities of the applicant.
Japan's conversational AI robots are amazing! South Korea is developing AI comfort women! ? Japan heading towards the future and South Korea living in the past.
Surprisingly, South Korea seems to be developing AI comfort women in order to preserve the memories of comfort women forever. Japan is developing an interactive android.
At South Korea's AI comfort women, Lee Yong-soo, the symbol of comfort women, is waiting. He is the person who testified before the US House of Representatives and the person who hugged former President Trump when he visited South Korea. It is said that the AI comfort women who have gained eternal life will be able to answer questions from various people.
Characteristics of android ERIKA: Our goal is to bring together all kinds of technologies for the purpose of dialogue and challenge the extent to which dialogue is possible. Using various sensors, it expresses facial expressions and gestures that correspond to the conversation with the other person.
When you first meet, you don't have deep conversations, but as your communication progresses, you start having private conversations. Development that enables long and deep conversations between humans. Rather than a set task that assumes a receptionist at a company, it allows the interviewer to ask in-depth questions and listen attentively.
Characteristics of Android U: ERIKA is designed to communicate using a process similar to humans, while U will communicate and provide services even if it uses a different method than humans. In Internet live broadcasts using U, viewers read and respond to chats from viewers.
At first, a human enters input and responds repeatedly, but it learns the patterns and eventually speaks autonomously.
Features of CommU: Developed with the assumption that multiple people will interact. Enabling social dialogue. When a human participates in a conversation between CommUs, a corresponding conversation occurs.
ibuki's characteristics: Child-like android. By looking like a child and acting like a child, they learn while actively seeking help from those around them.
The usage and purpose of AI technology are too different between Japan and South Korea. Does this mean that Japan is looking toward the future and Korea is living in the past?
The Korean National Police Agency’s landing on Takeshima is a strategy of disruption aimed at the Japan - U.S. - Korea trilateral foreign ministerial talks.
A joint press conference scheduled for November 17th in Washington, D.C., after the trilateral Foreign Ministers' Meeting between Japan, the United States, and South Korea, was canceled at short notice. U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman held a solo press conference on behalf of the three countries. Deputy Secretary of State Sherman said, ``There are bilateral differences between Japan and South Korea that need to be resolved. To that end, we have changed the format of the press conference.''
It is reported that the reason why the Japanese side refused to hold a joint press conference was that Korean National Police Agency Commissioner Kim Chang-ryong landed on Takeshima the day before the talks. Reports in South Korea said things like ``Japan destroyed America's face,'' ``Japan refused the interview without permission,'' and ``Deputy Secretary of State Sherman's solo press conference was a strange sight.''
In the first place, there seems to be no recognition that it was the South Korean side that took the outrageous step of landing on the Takeshima issue, which is a sensitive issue between Japan and South Korea, the day before the Japan-U.S.-Korea meeting. Moreover, the Commissioner of the National Police Agency is the head of the administrative agency.
The South Korean side is at fault in most of the Japan-Korea issues, but the reports published within South Korea only justify themselves.
In the first place, Takeshima is an inherent territory of Japan both historically and under international law. What South Korea should do is not for the Commissioner of the National Police Agency to land on Takeshima, but to go to the International Court of Justice and seek a decision based on international law. It is clear that the landing on Takeshima was carried out to coincide with the trilateral foreign ministerial talks between Japan, the United States, and South Korea.
This is related to the South Korean presidential election to be held in 2022, and is aimed at improving the current government's approval ratings, but the people most likely to be happy about this are China and North Korea. China is wary of Japan, the US, and South Korea getting closer.
That's why they started this commotion with the aim of holding talks between the vice ministers of foreign affairs between Japan, the US and South Korea. If you think about it this way, the objectives are completely consistent with what the Moon Jae-in administration has done thus far. And in this case, it can be said that that purpose was clearly demonstrated.
Since the Moon Jae-in administration came into power, the Takeshima issue has become more radical, and issues such as the Rising Sun flag, forced labor, and comfort women have all crossed the line. They are engaging in brinkmanship diplomacy that is on the verge of destroying Japan-South Korea relations.
These can be seen as an appeal to North Korea and China, and also seem to be a love call to be included in the Chinese economic bloc. The South Korean people are enthusiastic about these movements and support Moon Jae-in's popularity.
South Korea wants to join China and North Korea. This has been Moon Jae-in's wish from the beginning. If you look at it that way, everything you've said and done so far makes sense.
North Korea and China are authoritarian countries. Japan and the United States are democratic countries, and South Korea is also supposed to be a democratic country, but I wonder if the social system doesn't matter.The one country that the Moon Jae-in administration wants to get along with after saying goodbye to Japan and the United States is the UN sanctions resolution. One country that continues to suffer is North Korea, and one country that has been criticized by Europe, the United States, and Japan is China, which has been criticized for the Hong Kong issue, the Taiwan Strait issue, and the Uighur issue.
I feel like the future direction of Korea is becoming clearer.
postwar compensation and Roh Moo - hyun Japan is waiting for the old people to die.They say it's time-buying, but it's the other way around.So far, the Korean government has compensated the people several times after the war.Moon Jae In is the one who is trying to buy time just because the current government is fleeing.At the time of 2005, Japanese Military Sexual Slavery was not included, but Japan said it would not recognize government-led coercion, and it goes without saying that the 2015 Japanese Military Sexual Slavery agreement was comprehensive.
-----
In February 2004, the Seoul Administrative Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, demanding that five of the 57 documents related to the Korea-Japan Claim Agreement be released.The trial began in September 2002 when a group of bereaved families of Japanese victims of forced mobilization demanded that the government confirm the details of the Korea-Japan agreement.
As a result, Japan's compensation issue, which was temporarily settled after the signing of the Korea-Japan Claim Agreement in 1965, and compensation in the 1970s, has resurfaced.It's a kind of second round.
At that time, the government appealed on the grounds of its impact on bilateral relations.However, in August 2004, former President Roh Moo Hyun abandoned the appeal after consulting with Cheong Wa Dae, the chief civil society office, and the National Security Council (NSC) at a meeting of senior aides.
After the release of the claim agreement in January 2005, public opinion began that the amount of compensation paid by the government in 1975 was very small compared to that received by Japan.From 1975 to 1977, the Park Chung-hee administration spent 90 percent of its 300 million dollars on economic development and only 10 percent on compensation.Only 8,552 of the estimated 1.03 million victims of forced mobilization benefited.
Accordingly, the Roh Moo Hyun government has prepared follow-up measures.At that time, former President Roh Moo-hyun and Prime Minister Lee Hae-chan set four criteria: (1) support in other ways than legal compensation, (2) support through national compromise and consultation, and (4) support in parliament.To this end, the organization organized is the Public-Private Joint Committee.It consists of 21 people, including 10 private committee members, including Yang Samsung Law Firm Hwa-woo, Prime Minister Lee Hae-chan, and 11 government officials.
On 26 August 2005, the Joint Committee on Civil and Government Affairs announced the results of the following discussions.
(1) Anti-humanitarian illegal activities involving Japanese military forces such as Japanese Military Sexual Slavery, Sakhalin compatriots, and atomic bomb victims are not included in the Korea-Japan Claim Agreement.
(2) The $300 million loan received from Japan reflects the South Korean government's claim to Japan, such as personal property rights (insurance, deposits, etc.), bonds with Japan, and funds related to the resolution of forced mobilization damage.
(3) The South Korean government is morally responsible for using a considerable amount of free money received from Japan to help victims of forced mobilization (the South Korean government calculated $360 million in compensation for forced mobilization out of $1.22 billion requested from Japan in 1961).
(4) While continuing to hold the Japanese government accountable for the issue of Japanese Military Sexual Slavery, it will continue to raise the issue through international organizations.
Source article: 中央日報
