Japan - South Korea relations, in which historical issues arise.Korea is rejecting Japan, which is becoming a historical issue.
2022-01-19
Category:South Korea I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Japan-South Korea relations where historical issues overlap everything
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.
Korea refuses to make history a problem
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.
POINT 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?
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Representative Yuko Obuchi appeared at the Japan - Korea summit meeting *A wedge telling South Korea not to forget what she said. A meeting and dinner was held between Prime Minister Kishida and President Yun Seok-Yeol, and a press conference was held without a joint statement.
What has been decided is the resumption of shuttle diplomacy and the lifting of restrictions on three strategic items. In reality, the matter falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, but the actual content is that the leaders met together to confirm the matter.
Regarding the lifting of restrictions on strategic substances, in reality there will be no major changes in distribution from Japan, and the 2019 restrictions will not reduce or stop exports, so nothing will actually change.
In particular, President Yun Seok-Yeol raised the issue of North Korea and showed South Korea's cooperative attitude toward Japan, but this has only confirmed that this is back on track. This is natural since the North Korea issue is being dealt with through the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty and the U.S.-South Korea Security Treaty.
At the very least, future shuttle diplomacy should ask what South Korea can do for Japan, rather than the diplomatic relations that have been the case in the past, where Japan did something unilaterally.
That's what makes for healthy diplomatic relations. I can't think of anything specific that South Korea has done for Japan. No one is looking for diplomatic relations that involve chatting at the table and asking for wads of money under the table.
The next day, the Japanese media focused on the meeting between Suga, president-elect of the Japan-Korea Parliamentary Federation, and President Yun Seok-yeoul, but what I wanted to draw attention to was the woman in the very edge of the photo.
She is Yuko Obuchi, a lawmaker, and the daughter of former Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi. The reason I wondered why she was in this seat was because I remember her not holding any government-related positions.
What really struck me was the 1998 Japan-Korea Joint Declaration. President Yun Seok-Yeol insists that Japan-Korea relations should return to the Japan-Korea Joint Declaration, but the question is how to return. And Japan complies with all of the Japan-Korea Joint Declaration. Returning would be a problem only for the Korean side.
The points of the 1998 Japan-Korea Joint Declaration are as follows.
Japan-Korea Joint DeclarationHolding of the 2002 FIFA World Cup
Promoting Japan-Korea economic cooperation
Opening of Japanese culture in Korea
Fisheries agreement around Takeshima in accordance with the new United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
Response to North Korea issue
The holding of the Japan-Korea World Cup and the influx of Korean Wave content all stemmed from this joint declaration.
The Japan-Korea Joint Declaration was signed by President Kim Dae-jung, but the Japan-Korea World Cup was said to be the worst tournament in FIFA history, and it became unclear whether it was an anti-Japan movement or a soccer tournament.
Less than two years later, the South Korean National Assembly passed a resolution to invalidate this joint declaration. Japanese people must not forget that the area around Takeshima was subsequently filled with Korean fishing boats again, resulting in the current state of Takeshima.
The Japanese representative who concluded this agreement was former Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi. South Korea has completely torn up not only the 1965 Agreement, but also the 1988 Agreement.
Was Representative Yuko Obuchi invited to this meeting as a symbolic icon? In other words, this seems to have driven a wedge that returning to the Japan-South Korea Joint Declaration is the goal of the talks. It's about not forgetting what I said. Does the Korean side actually understand the meaning of this? I don't think they understand.
In conclusion, returning to the Japan-Korea Joint Declaration would be a very high hurdle. This joint declaration was scrapped because of the Takeshima issue. Perhaps the Korean side only understands this declaration as a resumption of cultural exchange.
Korean tourists rush to travel to Japan after the visa - free ban is lifted - Where did the No Japan movement disappear?
Diplomatic relations restored despite dislike
South Korean government does not communicate details of restoration of diplomatic relations
Same as Japan-Korea annexation
Korean tourists flock to Japan, which they hate
Many Japanese wonder why they restored diplomatic relations if they hated it so much. Did the South Korean government explain to the people the reason for the restoration of diplomatic relations? There could be many reasons.
(1) We have entered an era in which it is essential to restore diplomatic relations between Japan and South Korea amidst postwar South Korea-US relations and international trends. ? Because it was judged that restoring diplomatic relations with Japan would have great economic benefits for the economy, which had suffered after the Korean War. ?The conditions presented by the Japanese side for the restoration of diplomatic relations were beneficial for Korea's future, and the benefits of concluding the treaty were recognized.
? and ? are the prerequisites for the restoration of diplomatic relations, but ? is something that cannot be explained to the public. As a result, its contents have never been explained to this day. South Korea seems to want to be in the position of reluctantly restoring diplomatic relations, but the content of the agreement was almost like a unilateral contract that contained only the benefits for South Korea. If you think about it, the same thing can be said about the annexation of Japan and Korea.
The background to the annexation of Japan and Korea is as follows:
(1) It became impossible to stop Russia's interests. ? Domestic turmoil made it impossible to collect information. ? I thought it would be beneficial to consider national stability by being incorporated into Japan.
Regarding this, the purpose of the above-mentioned annexation is clearly stated in the imperial admonition issued by the Sun Song Dynasty (the last emperor of the Joseon Dynasty) at the time of the annexation, but the story is that Japan annexed it by force. That's the translation.
As a result, during the annexation era, the Korean peninsula reluctantly accepted modernization, its population grew reluctantly, and it reluctantly went to school, and now it reluctantly negotiates with Japan and reluctantly trades with Japan. And I have no choice but to reluctantly go on a trip to Japan. Is the No Japan movement a movement that tells people not to buy Japanese products if they don't want to? It is understandable in that sense, but the government changed and Koreans reluctantly began traveling to Japan.
the next presidential candidate Yoon Seok-yeol: The relationship between Korea and Japan has deteriorated to the worst level since the normalization of diplomatic relations.Diplomacy should be based on pragmatism and realism, but it has come to this point because of its ideological bias of "bamboo spear songs."The Moon administration is trying to sort things out at the end of the administration, but it seems to have failed.
Li Nak-yeon: I can't believe his recognition when I hear he said about bamboo spears.It was shocking that he made such absurd remark that is shallow historical understanding at Yoon Bong-gil Memorial Hall .
Lee Jae-myung: Japan, an aggressor, should have been divided, but Korea, a victim of Japan's invasion, was divided.
The next presidential election will also be a match between Japan and South Korea.For Japan, Yoon Seok-yeol is better for Japan to pursue diplomacy, but I personally think if the other two would be President Japan should recognize as a hostile country beyond anti-Japanese and historical issues.
In the first place, Japan has nothing to do with the Korean presidential election.Korea should Focus on internal affairs.Either way, Japan will only respond accordingly.Because it's a foreign country.
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 South Korean government is lying about holding the Japan - Korea summit meeting - A country that lies about the results of diplomatic negotiations It is full of lies to begin with.
Japan-Korea summit meeting is another lie
Japan reacts to lies
Korea prioritizes pride
What all historical questions have in common
Kim Tae-hyo, First Deputy Director-General of the National Security Office of the South Korean presidential palace, announced that they had agreed to hold a summit meeting in conjunction with the General Debate Address at the United Nations General Assembly, which will be held in New York from the 20th of this month, and that they are coordinating the time. According to the presidential office, the meeting is expected to last about 30 minutes, and the agenda has not yet been decided. Regarding the announcement that Japan had agreed to hold a Japan-South Korea summit, Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirokazu Matsuno said at a press conference on the same day, ``Nothing has been decided at this point.'' What I personally noticed about this issue was the difference in the reactions of the people of the two countries.
Japanese people's reaction is largely a reaction to their government blatantly lying about the content of diplomatic negotiations between countries. Up until now, the American and Japanese governments have often denied that the South Korean government has agreed to diplomatic negotiations, even though they have not, or that they have agreed on the direction of the deal. I have the impression that this is the case again, but what Japanese people react to is the act of lying.
Looking at South Korea's reaction, they told us not to flatter Japan and why they wanted to hold a Japan-Korea summit meeting. Don't embarrass the Korean people. That is the criticism. In other words, even though there are various circumstances surrounding this issue with the Korean government, the people of both countries are focusing on completely different aspects of the same fact.
This problem seems to be related to historical awareness. I can't help but feel that there are completely different emotions about the same fact, or that the facts are changed by those emotions. Not only historical understanding, but even the details of the most recent negotiations between the two countries are being fabricated.
