politics

Japan eases export controls against S Korea ahead of summit

16 Comments
By MARI YAMAGUCHI

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

© Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

16 Comments
Login to comment

"Let the trade war rage." = Let Japan lose some more.

Abe realized, or more likely was clued in that his sanctions were not a great idea. He is now trying to diplomatically slither out of the mess he created.

Please remember that this whole mess started when Abe turned what was a judicial issue into a economic issue. In poetry this is called a metaphysical conceit (opposes forced together by violence, in Samuel Johnson's words). In realpolitik, as in chess, it called a bad move.

And the South Korean Supreme Court's ruling was just. Former slave laborers should be compensated by the companies that enslaved them.

-13 ( +7 / -20 )

See what happens when you act like mature, rational adults, South Korean government?

Despite what the usual crowd on here would still have you believe, this whole nonsense could have been avoided had the South Korean government not ignored Japan's request for clarification for violations of export controls going on for several years.

As we have seen the past few months, the South Korean government realized its petulant, child like tantrums weren't going to work, nor its campaign of slandering Japan in terms of past apologies and compensation. Even the world was like, meh, grow up. Only AFTER the South Korean government finally grew up and started to deal with Japan on a professional and diplomatic level, THEN the Japanese government said, okay, now let's talk. South Korean government caving as usual.

Good for Japan!

10 ( +17 / -7 )

Na giving 1 company 1 material n there goes bla bla bla of SK all this is problem created by moon n he was is n will loose with his sk

6 ( +14 / -8 )

oldman_13

See what happens when you act like mature, rational adults, South Korean government?

This is Abe administration trying to appease Korea in the face of forthcoming GSOMIA termination deadline.

Moon administration already indicated this wasn't enough.

-12 ( +7 / -19 )

Yikes!! Hasn't it dawned on them that the ship's already sailed? Called this ages ago. Now sit back and watch the decline precipitated by one of the worst prime ministers in known history.

-10 ( +7 / -17 )

Despite what the usual crowd on here would still have you believe, this whole nonsense could have been avoided had the South Korean government not ignored Japan's request for clarification for violations of export controls going on for several years.

Usual crowd? It's in the article, not the comments section.

The move was seen as Japanese retaliation for South Korean court rulings ordering Japanese companies to compensate elderly former Korean laborers for abusive treatment during Japan's 1910-1945 colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula.

And if you really want to believe in the fake Abenarratives, there are over 100 materials exported from Japan to South Korea that are classified as sensitive materials used for developing WMD. If S Korea failed to comply with Japan's request for clarification of alleged export violation, then Japan should have restricted all sensitive materials, not just the three items used for semi conductor production. There's no logic whatsoever other than pure tactical retaliatory measure attacking Korea's core industry. Grow up!

-13 ( +6 / -19 )

Samit BasuToday  10:34 am JST

This is Abe administration trying to appease Korea

You couldn't be more wrong, or deluded.

This is Japan appeasing the US. The insisted that whatever happened, the status quo between the three nations must be upheld. The US pressured South Korea to do exactly the same thing. It's not rocket science. The amusing thing is South Korean media propaganda trying to paint Japan as some kind of decrepit, subordinate begging to kiss the boots of its master. But I guess thatt's the only way they can console such heavily damaged South Korean egos (from an absolutely meaningless and backfiring boycott, being told by the US to remain in GSOMIA and complying, having to back down to Japan having realised they can't fool anyone outside their own borders, etc..)

13 ( +18 / -5 )

Tom DoleyToday 02:15 pm JST

If S Korea failed to comply with Japan's request for clarification of alleged export violation, then Japan should have restricted all sensitive materials, not just the three items used for semi conductor production.

Has the concept of proportionate measures ever occurred to you?

12 ( +17 / -5 )

Usual crowd? It's in the article, not the comments section.

The move was seen as Japanese retaliation for South Korean court rulings ordering Japanese companies to compensate elderly former Korean laborers for abusive treatment during Japan's 1910-1945 colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula.

The last time you tried to use a quote from an article to 'prove' your point, it backfired. Then you quote an article again to 'prove' your point, and the same result.

When someone says "the move was seen as....", it is not a factual statement. It is an opinion, nothing more, nothing less. Any well balanced article wouldn't just mention that statement, it would also mention the numerous times the South Korean government ignored Japan's request for clarification about it's export controls.

12 ( +16 / -4 )

A single South Korean company having controls eased is not the same as South Korea having controls eased.

10 ( +14 / -4 )

As a warhead would b useless without chip so just controlling raw material to manufacture it is the best solution

11 ( +14 / -3 )

All Japan's sanctions against SK did was hurt Japanese companies, especially the tourist industry. Minus 500 thousand tourists a month hurts plenty of small businesses. Rule 1 of sanctions is that you don't sanction a country with which you have a huge trade surplus. Even Trump understands this but apparently Abe hasn't a clue.

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

Has the concept of proportionate measures ever occurred to you?

If you want to defend Abenarratives, at least try to ensure it makes sense.

Two of the three export restricted items weren't even included in the list of 156 cases of potential export violations by S Korea. If it was proportional, Japan shouldn't have targeted those two items and at the same time permanently damage Japan's supply industry. Instead, they should have targeted the other materials that were included in the 156 cases. Seriously, really lame excuse.

-12 ( +1 / -13 )

The the thaw in relations to be brief. Brace for another round of the South Korean government whipping up anti-Japanese protests to distract Koreans from the bodies discovered from the Gwangju massacre when the Korean government brutally killed 2000 of its own citizens. Japan will be forced to put the sanctions back on to get the Korean government to ease off again.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

The last time you tried to use a quote from an article to 'prove' your point, it backfired. Then you quote an article again to 'prove' your point, and the same result.

When someone says "the move was seen as....", it is not a factual statement. It is an opinion, nothing more, nothing less. Any well balanced article wouldn't just mention that statement, it would also mention the numerous times the South Korean government ignored Japan's request for clarification about it's export controls.

Backfired? Just like you did the last time, you are making an assumption about an article, and then using that to support your narrative. This time, you are assuming the article is 'unbalanced' just because it didn't include your narrative and using that to accuse me of incorrectly using a quote from the article. It's convoluted.

All I mentioned to you was that it wasn't the 'crowd' that you accused of stating the facts, but the article itself. But, as usual, you then go off tangent and falsely accuse others.

-11 ( +1 / -12 )

A big mistake to "give in" to any "relief" for SK when they have not "rescinded" or "reduced" any of their self-righteous claims against Japan.

There is "truth" and "fairness"... but sometimes "compassion" in light of "false" and "pretentious" "fairness", it is better to stand the ground. It will be much more difficult to "recover" what was given, even though reluctantly. That is "possession" is "power" to any "self-righteous" ownership of anything.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

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