national

S Korean group holds 1st talks on wartime labor during Japan's rule

29 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

29 Comments
Login to comment

Enough already

10 ( +18 / -8 )

Which talk is first?

it’s not clear…

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Some lawyers of the plaintiffs, who participated in the Monday meeting, said one or two more meetings could be held later this month, adding that it seems the ministry is trying to gather as many opinions as possible by August.

Don't procrastinate. We don't need a gesture of making an effort.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

First talks? It must be a very new group.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

the public-private body would be established to prevent the liquidation of assets of the two Japanese companies that the plaintiffs have seized. 

The Yoon administration has bigger and more important goals for the country than to keep dragging the WWII issues. Goals that concern the nation's security.

5 ( +11 / -6 )

How about compensating them and we get their semiconductors in return. I can’t get a new cooker for at least two months because of “chip supply”.

-9 ( +3 / -12 )

you could focus on the future instead....

10 ( +14 / -4 )

There is no point in doing this.

If the plaintiffs refuse the government offer of a compensation from a fund by Japanese companies OTHER THAN THE DEFENDANTS(Japanese government is said to be OK with the compensation as long as the money is not from the defendants. Voluntary donations from non-defendant Japanese companies are acceptable with Tokyo), the plaintiffs will refuse and execute the sale of seized assets; they have the court order to do so and there is nothing Yoon administration can do to stop this.

Remember, these plaintiffs aren't in it for the money, but to make a point, and their lawyers aren't "For Profit" lawyers, but the so-called Human Rights Lawyers(Moon Jae In Kind) who are representing the plaintiffs for free.

The plaintiffs and their lawyers already stated they won't take anyone else's money other than the defendant's.

-16 ( +4 / -20 )

No private company should be allowed to destroy lives without compensation being an issue.

-9 ( +5 / -14 )

Wait too these Bozos go to the war shrine

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Time to forgive and forget. Life is too short to waste arguing over events of 80 years ago. Sth Korea and Japan have so much to offer eachother if they cooperate positively for mutual benefit.

2 ( +8 / -6 )

And the Saga will continue

0 ( +2 / -2 )

listening lot opinions and taking the appropriate steps.

For…. 80 years they have been saying that lol. And they keep trying to get the various slave camp locations added to the World Heritage list…

They will meet, the SK Pres will have a slight knock in his numbers, stoke history and blame Japan, Japan goes to Yasukuni, blah blah blah.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

the never ending story...

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

As we can see the close cooperation between Japan and south Korea is not very successful.

Japan should show humiliation and do whatever it takes to burry the hatchet

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

The South Korean Supreme Court has no Jurisdiktion.

Rightly or wrongly the South Korean Government signed a Treaty that stipulates clearly ....

Concerning the Settlement of Problems in Regard to Property and Claims and Economic Cooperation.

The agreement is clearly a lump-sum settlement agreement with respect to claims arising from Japan’s annexation of Korea from 1910 to 1945. Under the agreement, Korea received $300 million from Japan, as full and final settlement for claims between states, claims between one state and the individuals of the other, and claims among the individuals of the states, including those specified in Article IV (a) of the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty. Private companies were also considered individuals for the purposes of the agreement.

Now a there is also a clear route with the ICJ to settle any conflicts under treaty law.

End this nonsense now, or accept the consequences. This Treaty is bullet proof, restoring relations.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

If they ever sort this out, it should be made public to everyone, it should also be taught in schools in Korea and Japan, that they were compensated and that it draws a line under the situation. If any compensation is give to the Korean government to compensate the Koreans it must be made explicit, who it is for, how much. No loans, No grants, No fudging. Get this done, and move on. You probably have more in common now with china on the rise, and North Korea. So if the Japan government and Japanese companies agree to pay something, and draw a line under it, it might just actually be better, than letting this boil fester.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Japan needs to squarely address its history in education.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

South Korea needs to reinstate the "Permanent and Irreversible" 2015 Comfort Women Agreement' that they negotiated with Japan, concluded with fanfare, then unilaterally ripped up. Trust is very easy to throw away, but very difficult to regain once lost.

Japan has accomodated South Korea on all of their demands from apologies to payments, only to have SK move the goal posts each. Moon pushed relations about as low as they could go, and Yoon will have to fight hard to regain Japan's trust, something that is crucial for SK's security.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

funkymofoToday  02:32 pm JST

Japan needs to squarely address its history in education.

When South Korea squarely addresses it's own history in education. Korea was not a victim in the same way other Asian countries were. Korea was part of Imperial Japan and fought on that side.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

The 1965 agreement/treaty, a signed settlement clearly states disputes must be pursued, firstly through diplomatic negotiations, failure to find agreement, the dispute then must be resolved through international arbitration at the ICJ. The SK government refused

SK signed the treaty

The Treaty also stipulates that the Korean government must compensate the alleged Korean victims.

The SK government reengaged. It is a fact.

The 1965 signed treaty quote concluded both the Basic Relations between Japan.

Reengage on the 1965 Treaty, the sanctions could be punitive, including seizure of assets /investments in the SK pension scheme.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Japan needs to squarely address its history in education.

In education, you should not brainwash children with lies piled up over lies.

Anyone knows the experience of Taiwanese wartime labor at exactly the same sites by Sumitomo and Mitsubishi Heavy ? No need to excuse disgusting fake narratives by such Japanese treated Taiwanese differently from Koreans BS...

0 ( +4 / -4 )

OssanAmerica,

We both know Japan's disgusting history of war crimes in SE Asia- it's the Japanese who don't. This needs to be confronted and taught in Japanese schools in order for Japan to come to terms with its past.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

We both know Japan's disgusting history of war crimes in SE Asia- it's the Japanese who don't. This needs to be confronted and taught in Japanese schools in order for Japan to come to terms with its past.

WAR itself is the crime against humanity. FYI... There's no war between Japan and the peninsula before annexation. Read up deep your history books

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

I have, I suggest you do the same.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

@kennyg,

You might looked to start here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

You might looked to start here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes

I said there weren't any wars between Japan and Korea before annexation. Strawman.

“But, at that time, we chose it by ourselves. It is not Japan invaded our land. Our ancestors chose it. If we chose Qing Dynasty that soon perished, we would have had more chaos on the peninsula. If we chose Russia that soon got overturned, we would have had the entire peninsula turned to a communist country. It might not be the best but if we were to chose, I valued choosing Japan as second best.”

President of Korea Chunghee Park

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

I said there weren't any wars between Japan and Korea before annexation.

You introduced an irrelevant point in response to my point about a different issue. I have no idea why you would think that A. it's germaine, or B. it's a strawman argument.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

You introduced an irrelevant point in response to my point about a different issue. I have no idea why you would think that A. it's germaine, or B. it's a strawman argument.

Sure you have no idea

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites