The South Korean government is responsible for the Korean government's refusal to allow its nationals to repatriate - Japan protected them out of human rights considerations.
2022-11-28
Category:South Korea
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Recruitment through conscription has increased seven times
The issue of forced labor and the issue of residents in Japan are related. Conscription on the Korean Peninsula took place from August 1944 until the end of the war the following year. Until then, Koreans on the Korean peninsula were not subject to conscription or conscription. Employment at Japanese companies is highly sought after, and despite being conscripted, Mitsubishi Mining received seven times as many applications as recruitment.
Status of residents in Japan recognized for human rights considerations
Normally, those living in Japan would be forced to leave because they are foreigners, but the reason why this is not the case is because of the 1965 Japan-Korea Status of Forces Agreement. The South Korean government at the time received a huge amount of aid, but refused to allow its citizens to return home. Since all Koreans in Japan were believed to be slave laborers who had been forcibly taken away from Japan, it would have been inconvenient for a large number of people who had experienced a different reality to return home. Japan restored diplomatic relations out of human rights considerations and guaranteed the Koreans' status in Japan.
Human rights issues are with the Korean government
As was made clear in the Gunkanjima issue, the recruitment at that time was legal recruitment under ILO standards. In terms of human rights issues, it lies with the South Korean government, which has refused to allow large numbers of its own citizens to return and has discarded them. That is a human rights issue. And what is being made a fuss about all this is the issue of conscripted labor.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
[related article]
South Korean President with 28% Approval Rating - Breaks Promises to China if Seeking Relations with Japan - Country that Breaks Promises to Japan if China [Contents]
South Korea's new president with low approval rating
It's advantageous if you don't make achievements
Anti-Japanese Appeal on the Takeshima Issue
China just waits and sees
Change of government will change things
President Yoon Seok-yeol's approval rating is 28% (according to Gallup Korea survey), and he has been facing a tough fight since he took office. Since the administration began as a lame duck in the first place, there is no change in the situation where the government cannot move unless the power of the people wins the 2024 general election.
Looking ahead to 2024, the Democratic Party of Korea, which is the enemy, will be at a disadvantage if President Yoon produces results and achievements. There is no mistake in going on the offensive of not letting the president do anything.
Although President Yoon Seok-yue has appealed for the improvement of Japan-South Korea relations, he is willing to make concessions on the Takeshima issue, such as by conducting marine surveys around Takeshima. Even at this stage, he is ridiculed as a pro-Japanese president or a betrayal president. In any case, from a Japanese point of view, it can only be seen as a double standard.
As for China, as was the case with Moon Jae-in, it seems that they are just watching the future of this administration.
The deployment of THAAD under the Park Geun-hye administration cooled relations between China and South Korea, but under the Moon Jae-in administration, they exchanged promises with China about the three non-compliances, and the current president has declared that he does not know about the three non-compliances.
Right-wing and left-wing South Korea have a unique structure of pro-U.S./pro-Japan and pro-China conflicts, and they seem to understand well that a change in government can lead to a major change in diplomatic policy.
In the first place, isn't there a question in South Korea about where the national ideology of South Korea, which goes back and forth between liberal democracy and socialist dictatorship, lies? On the contrary, they are constantly intimidatingly questioning each other about meaningless alternatives, whether they are pro-Japanese or anti-Japanese.
South Korea, where anti-Japan precedes the national ideology of democracy or socialism. Any problem can be dwarfed by anti-Japan fire, making it a very easy tool to use politically.
Yun Seok - yue's manifesto aims to attract and circulate capital through a free economy.Will the National Assembly become a burden that hinders this?
South Korea is wavering between pro-China and pro-US
Original regime change through social policy
A country that thinks about what is better
Yin Seok-yue promotes free economy
Promoting free competition within the country and moving towards CPTPP
Legal development by the Diet is hopeless
Is South Korea wondering whether it should join China, which has achieved growth in recent years, or join the camp of free nations such as Japan, the United States, and Europe? I guess it's a question of which is better, but it seems like a very polarizing choice.
The Moon Jae-in administration completely abandoned its pride as a democratic country without hesitation and spent five years desperately trying to join China and North Korea, a country that violates human rights at its worst, but unfortunately there was no result. Ta.
The new president, Yun Seok-Yeol, has the exact opposite policy, aiming for Korea to be a member of the Japan-U.S. and liberal camp. This seems to be the composition of the right-wing and left-wing forces in South Korea.
The left tends to seek the enhancement of social institutions, while the right tends to seek free competition and liberal democracy. This is a question of the balance between social welfare and liberal economics, and a debate about competition versus distribution. This is an issue to be debated within a democratic country, and can be said to be a universal frame.
America's two-party system is very easy to understand. Republicans and Democrats can be broadly divided on the question of whether taxes should be primarily used for public welfare, or whether they should reduce taxes in the first place and increase competitiveness in a free economy. It is also expressed in the framework of big government and small government.
The choice of domestic social policy is not a question of which country will benefit you by following, but rather a matter of foreign policy. Prior to Japan's annexation of South Korea, there was intense conflict between pro-Russian and pro-Japanese factions on the Korean peninsula. Is nothing different from that era? Another characteristic of South Korea is that its foreign policy is also its domestic policy.
Looking at Yun Seok-Yue's manifesto from the perspective of economic policy, his economic policy is to bring back the capital that fled South Korea under the Moon Jae-in administration.
In particular, the focus is not on where to focus investment and foster industry, but rather the policy appears to be aimed at attracting investors by abolishing regulations and promoting a free economy and free competition.
It appears that the plan is to aim to join the CPTPP and other liberal nation frameworks based on this liberal economic frame, but in order to realize this, it will be necessary to obstruct the various free competitions that exist within Korea. Legislation must be put in place to abolish the regulations that apply.
This is the job of the National Diet, the legislative branch, but the opposition Democratic Party of Japan still holds nearly 60% of the seats. In other words, there are many hurdles for the time being in the economic policy advocated by Yun Seok-Yeol and cooperation with liberal countries. In other words, we will have to wait for the 2024 general election.
The difference between Japan and South Korea in terms of the friendship that Oh Sun - hwa talks about.If you're a friend, give it to me.This is the Korean style.
Wu Shanhua, a professor at Takushoku University's School of International Studies, said that when she first came to Japan to study, she struggled because she couldn't understand Japanese culture. She says that in South Korea, the culture is that you shouldn't differentiate between your friend's things and your own things.
During class, I open my friend's pencil case, use it, and then put it back. They end up using not only stationery, but also things in their bags, sweets, food, and even money if they are left on the table. It seems that the person being used is happy and thinks that the person who is being used thinks of them as a friend.
Of course, Japan does not have such a culture. No matter how much time passes, my friend asked Wu Shanhua at the time, ``I forgot her pen, can you lend it to me?'' When I get it back, I always say thank you. No matter how much time passes, Wu Shanhua will not accept her as a friend. Apparently, there was a time when she worried that they wouldn't accept her because she was a foreigner.
She believed that sharing your things with others was a sign of friendship, so her sensibilities seemed to be completely different from those in Japan.
Another Korean who came to Japan and returned to Korea after two and a half years after having such an experience apparently published a book about Japanese culture in Korea. His anti-Japanese book, which describes Japan as a country of crazy people, has sold 3 million copies and has become a model that is often cited by Japanese culture researchers at universities and other institutions. That's it.
What is your friend's property is yours. This is regardless of the size of the amount. They say that even if it's a large amount of money, you can only be a friend if you pay to help. As a result, the custom of filing lawsuits has become commonplace in recent years, making South Korea a fraud country. Furthermore, it is unclear how far the money was taken from him as a friend, and where the fraud began. In other words, it is not returned while being shared. This has become the norm, but in light of the law, it appears to have resulted in a series of fraudulent acts.
With this in mind, Wu Shanhua says she is also knowledgeable about diplomatic issues. Koreans think that since Japan is an economically developed country, it is natural to provide money for free. I don't use the word "thank you" at this time, and since Japan has many islands, I wonder if it's a friend to make a fuss about just one island. Wouldn't it be possible to have a friendly relationship if Japan gave as much as Shikoku to South Korea? In fact, she explains, there is at least an underlying feeling.
The differences between Japan and South Korea, which include the actual experiences of Ms. Oh Sunhwa, who actually lives in Japan, are surprising, but if you refer to them, you will be able to see some things.
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.