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.
2022-02-21
Category:South Korea
Photo by Unknown Auther (licensed under CC0 1.0 )
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Difference between government and private matter
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 relationship between whether you have the right to vote or not
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.
Korea spread by Moon Jae In
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?
POINT China and South Korea are both problematic countries for Japan, but the differences between the two countries need to be observed.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
minimum wage In Korea, the minimum wage has increased by 35% in four years...
Apartment prices in Seoul have risen 93 percent over the past four years...
If the minimum wage is 8,720 won, is it 6,459 won four years ago?The increase in the minimum wage increases the number of self-employed businesses closing.Decrease in employment...
Usually, Increasing jobs come first.Wouldn't the minimum wage go up for companies to secure employment if the effective recruitment ratio goes up?I can't believe going to raise the minimum wage first.You're a fool.
Japan's minimum wage varies from prefecture to prefecture.Of course, if the minimum wage is raised, the government will carefully observe the price index and economic conditions of each region.It is unthinkable to raise the price by 35 percent across the board.
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.
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.
Death toll from Halloween Shogi chess accident in Seoul rises to 151 - Different countries respond differently to similar accidents.
Deadly accident occurs on Halloween in Seoul
Akashi fireworks festival accident for which police were held responsible
Shanghai accident started with suspicious report
China's return to people's responsibility
How will South Korea sum up this issue
The number of people killed in a shogi accident during Halloween in Seoul has increased to 151. This is the worst accident in terms of man-made disasters. This accident reminds me of the Akashi fireworks festival accident in Japan and the New Year countdown accident on the Shanghai Bund in China. Shogi accidents occur when players are pushed from behind in a crowded crowd, or when they step on someone else's foot and lose their balance. This chain causes a major accident.
This also happened during the Akashi Fireworks Festival, and 11 people died. However, it is impossible for the people who disrupted that arrangement to be held responsible. Problems with the police and security were investigated day after day, and in the end, a civil court ordered Hyogo Prefectural Police and the security company to pay damages. The conclusion is that it was foreseeable and that the necessary measures were not taken. In the criminal trial, one police officer and one security company were sentenced to 2 years and 6 months in prison, and 3 city employees were sentenced to 2 years and 6 months in prison, suspended for 5 years was found guilty.
Next, regarding the incident in Shanghai Bund, I was in Shanghai on the day of the accident. A Chinese person I spoke to the next day asked me, didn't you go to the Bund last night? I found out when I was asked. According to the news reports after the accident, 36 people were said to have died. From then on, it turned out to be a complete lie. On New Year's Eve, Shanghai was in a state of chaos, with people rushing to the point where it was difficult to walk, not only on the Bund, but also everywhere, including the station premises, and it would have been no surprise if an accident occurred anywhere. . If it was an accident during the New Year's countdown on the Bund, it was clear that 36 people would not have been there.
Afterwards, I was looking into how this incident was summarized in China, and came across an article called Expert Opinion. "Increase public awareness of safety, avoid danger, and avoid crowded places." In other words, public responsibility for gathering too much. It was not intended to hold the government or police responsible.
There was clearly a problem with the accident in Seoul, and it was a catastrophe in which many people died. Maybe it's because it happened right after the accident, but when I look at articles from South Korea, there doesn't seem to be any complaints about the lack of police or security. In Japan, a ruling after the accident increased the responsibility of the police and security companies for events where large numbers of people gather, resulting in an increase in the safety of citizens.
Shogi falling accidents occur in various countries, but the way each country views and deals with the problem is completely different. How will South Korea summarize this accident?
South Korea is furious after being told that kimchi originates from China - Do they go crazy when they are forced to do something they always do?
While watching YouTube videos about Sichuan cuisine, I suddenly noticed the controversy surrounding the origin of kimchi, which is based on Sichuan's foamed vegetables. I used to think that Sichuan cuisine was spicy because spices from western countries such as India and Pakistan were introduced, but chili peppers are native to South America, so chili peppers probably didn't exist in China.
There is a theory that it was brought to Japan when guns were introduced, or that it was brought by missionaries, but it seems that it was brought to the Korean peninsula during Hideyoshi's Bunroku and Keicho campaigns. It was the end of the 16th century. So I researched when chili peppers were introduced to Sichuan, and found that it was in the 17th century, at the end of the Ming Dynasty. I'm not sure when chili peppers began to be used in Awa Nai or Korean kimchi, but it would be a mistake to say that the current kimchi made with chili peppers originated in Sichuan Province.
If that's the case, there must be a culture of foamed vegetables using chili peppers all over China, or even on land routes to Beijing. Chinese historical debates tend to be like this. China's 3,000 years will turn into its 4,000 years the next day, but there are no excavations that have spread its culture geographically. It ends with a dot. Culture is transmitted through people as a medium.
Incidentally, as part of its national strategy, China claims that ginseng is many times more superior to Korean ginseng, and supports vast fields of ginseng. This is an economic revitalization project for the underdeveloped and ethnically diverse Yunnan province.
By the way, when I looked into the origin of chili peppers, I found that there is a record that it dates back to 6000 BC in Mexico. A little respect for Mexican chili peppers would end this debate.
