politics

South Korean political parties back Moon in Japan trade row

35 Comments
By KIM TONG-HYUNG

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 This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.


35 Comments
Login to comment

They don’t really have a choice unless they want to be found flotting in the Kang river or “get suicided”. Just like the Korean politician who refused to follow Moon’s propaganda against Japan.

RIP poor man, at least you showed integrity.

12 ( +16 / -4 )

Japan is hopeless in press freedom.

http://justice.skr.jp/moon/moon.html

More entertaining is that some Korean newspaper also copies the Japanese newspaper.

-21 ( +4 / -25 )

"The government doesn't have concrete plans and is just appealing to the emotions of our people with words. 

That's their norm. Emocracy is what they are all about

16 ( +21 / -5 )

I am just not surprised anymore. Japan it appears doesn't want to even meet with these people unless a real adult discussion of the issue is considered by SK.

What is next, S Korea? Get the high profile Kpop artists on stage to promote further hatred towards Japan?

Amazing display of silliness.

13 ( +18 / -5 )

Korea looks like a one party state. All parties must hate Japan . Opposing the Moon government on this would lead to a politician being thrown in prison or assasinated, as Hachidori states.

What is next, S Korea? Get the high profile Kpop artists on stage to promote further hatred towards Japan?

Next? If you watched the news, you will have seen hatred of Japan has been promoted for a long time by K-Pop stars. Recently one was celebrating the Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks, wearing a t-shirt with the bomb images. Sick.

14 ( +17 / -3 )

No one and no mass media can oppose Moon in S Korea. Yes sir rate for Moon is almost 100% there. He looks like dictator Kim. People can't choose different better ways.

14 ( +17 / -3 )

Wat choice exactly did these people have?

What a joke of a government and the anti-Japan crowd that blindly supports it.

13 ( +17 / -4 )

South Korean President Moon Jae-in though his own actions created a dishonest prerequisite for an unprincipled escalation of Japan South Korean histrionic grievances to deceitfully disseminate the consequences of his own political and economic failures.

Political parties, enthusiastically, gladly will walk South Korean President Moon Jae-in and ultimately launch him off the plank.

President Moon Jae-in is the harbinger of his own downfall. His poisonous ideologue has reached the very anarchic political conclusion Moon Jae-in thought impossible.

Resign from office for your Country's future economic and political prosperity.

12 ( +15 / -3 )

The meeting came amid growing concerns in South Korea that Japan's trade curbs, which could possibly be expanded to hundreds of trade items in coming weeks, would rattle its export-dependent economy.

No doubt it will. If we were seeing some realistic reconciliatory moves by SK then they could have avoided it. But they are sticking to their usual behavior. Knock them off the White list.

South Korean political leaders urged Japan to immediately withdraw the measures they described as "unjust economic retaliation" that would seriously harm bilateral relations and cooperation.

And here is the proof. SK still continues to recognize how unjust they have been towards Japan at every turn, and unilaterally damaging "bilateral relations and cooperation". The Moon administration brought this on South Korea. The only way that SK can regain Japan's trust is to earn it. But they aren't prepared to lift a finger, instead making things worse and worse.

11 ( +14 / -3 )

Seoul has accused Tokyo of weaponizing trade to retaliate against South Korean court rulings calling for Japanese companies to compensate aging South Korean plaintiffs for forced labor during World War II, and plans to file a complaint with the World Trade Organization.

This is a good point. Why did Japan do this in the first place, if not to punish Korea for demanding compensation for war crimes?

The timing is odd to say the least...

-14 ( +3 / -17 )

South Korean President Moon Jae-in failure to recognise the fundamental shift in political attitudes in Japan population.

Especially its youth, and the conscious belief in a constitution that is dedicated to peace, and the denunciation of war also the means to procure weapons of mass destruction.

No the reality is that South Korean President Moon Jae-in will cosy up and shake the hand, appease a Pyongyang Dictatorship that will.

12 ( +14 / -2 )

I can see so many S. Korean visiting Fukuoka where I live, more than hundred every single day. I just can imagine the gap between the government and the people. Every govt. there is radically anti-Japan and disclosed of corruption and crimes at the end. Why those guys use the anti-Japan slogans? It's for their survive ways when the wind are against them. What a shame those leaders who can't create a better nation for themselves.

14 ( +16 / -2 )

The whole Northeast Asians are supporting Moon to have amicable relationship with Japanese people, and supporting Abe to have amicable relationship with Korean people. Brothers and sisters may argue, but at the end of day, they have to come to table, for a dinner.

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

This is a good point. Why did Japan do this in the first place, if not to punish Korea for demanding compensation for war crimes?

Does anyone think that's not the reason? I'm pretty sure it's about the least-kept secret in all this.

But Japan needs to put a stop to this anti-Japan mongering in South Korea. SK is demanding that Japan do... some unknown thing, and getting angry that Japan isn't doing this unspecificed thing that no one knows what it is.

The problem is that it's impossible to negotiate with Korea in good faith, as last time they did that Korea ripped up the agreement and put nothing else in place. Even now, four years later, they still haven't specified exactly what it is they are demanding.

If Korea isn't happy with the way things are going, Korea needs to figure out what they want and make a clear presentation of those demands.

It's really just sloppy and poor leadership all around in Korea. If they weren't so inept and incompetent they would put together their proposal for ending this situation.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

StrangerlandToday  09:37 am JST

The problem is that it's impossible to negotiate with Korea in good faith, as last time they did that Korea ripped up the agreement and put nothing else in place. Even now, four years later, they still haven't specified exactly what it is they are demanding.

This is from page one in their 'Japanese relations' playbook. Obfuscate, obfuscate, and obfiscate some more.... then complain that your opponent doesn't do more to end the matter. I can't understand why they don't wake up and realise this is actually schoolkid-like 'My teacher sucks' mentality and only serves to fool those foolish enough to ignore the situation as a whole.

And in the article:

Japan's export restriction measures are an unjust economic retaliation that violates the order of free trade

Unjust? It would be if you completely ignore what led to South Korea being removed from the white list in the first place.

Have they ever thought about fixing that with Japan at ground level instead of using the situation as a political ploy to promote victimisation? Of course not. That would be the peaceful thing to do, and South Korea does not want peace with Japan. It's not lucrative enough.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Did any politician, not to mention Abe, say these things to Japanese citizen?

In particular, what was this 3rd one refereed to ?

"We bring together all the powers against Japan".  

"I warn in advance that the Japanese economy will suffer greater damage in the end."

"Admiral Yi Sun-sin repelled a Japanese fleet with only 12 ships during the 1592-98 Japanese invasions of Korea"

Moon is Hot. Earth is cool.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Looks like this row started with South Korean demands that forced laborers from the World War II era be properly compensated. Japan refused, and the SK courts sided with those who had been forced laborers.

Out of curiousity, and not to belittle the suffering of the laborers, but how many of them are still alive, and how much would it have cost Japan to compensate them? It would not surprise me if the total number of survivors, at this time, is very few, which means that compensating them would not have cost very much. Am I missing something?

If Japan had been treated as badly as South Korea was, I do not doubt that there would still today be lingering resentment and even some hatred among Japanese. In other words, if the shoe were on the other foot, how would Japan be reacting today? The Russians are still fuming over their loss in 1905, so why wouldn't SK (and China) resent how they were treated more recently?

A component of this mess seems, to me, to be Japan's unwillingness, and inability, to come to grips with the amazingly inhumane way that conquered peoples were treated by Imperial Japan. This trade war, like the larger trade war between China and the USA, is good for no one, and needs to be ended amicably as soon as possible.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

A component of this mess seems, to me, to be Japan's unwillingness, and inability, to come to grips with the amazingly inhumane way that conquered peoples were treated by Imperial Japan.

This is incorrect. Japan made a good-faith effort to solve this issue, and negotiated an agreement that both parties would be final, to deal with this situation. It included reparations.

Then soon after, Korea ripped up this agreement, and didn't bother to explain what they were demanding in its place.

Four years later, they still have not explained what they are demanding, but in retaliation for Japan not meeting these unknown and unspecified demands, they are starting to retaliate, like with this Mitsubishi lawsuit.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

1glennToday  10:26 am JST

It would not surprise me if the total number of survivors, at this time, is very few, which means that compensating them would not have cost very much. Am I missing something?

Yes you are. It is not about which is monetarily cheaper. SK signed a treaty with Japan in 1965 which included payment by Japan that was to go to "individuals who suffered". The SK government never game that money to those individuals. Furthermore SK allowed their judicial system to over ride a Treaty the country signed with another country, something unheard of in the civilized world.

If Japan had been treated as badly as South Korea was,

Korea was not treated anywhere near as badly as other Asian countries. Because Korea was part of Japan since 1910. After WWII they embarked on a path of historical revisionism, convincing the world that they were "invaded" by Japan.

A component of this mess seems, to me, to be Japan's unwillingness, and inability, to come to grips with the amazingly inhumane way that conquered peoples were treated by Imperial Japan.

All the nations that were "inhumanely treated" by Japan in WWII have put the past behind them and support or are allied with Japan. Even China which probably suffered the most goes on and off on anti-Japan sentiment. But South Korea, whose troops invaded other Asian nations as members of the Imperial Japanese military, is a deceitful country having brainwashed it's post WWII generations and continues to perpetually use anti-Japan sentiment as a political and diplomatic tool.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Setting aside their usual bickering, South Korean liberal and conservative parties on Thursday vowed to cooperate to help the Seoul government prevail in an escalating trade row with Japan.

They would, wouldn't they

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Out of curiousity, and not to belittle the suffering of the laborers, but how many of them are still alive, and how much would it have cost Japan to compensate them? It would not surprise me if the total number of survivors, at this time, is very few, which means that compensating them would not have cost very much. Am I missing something?

In Korea as in many other countries, claim rights (note if it is legally proven substantial) are inheritable forever. On top of that, the verdict of top court substantially opened the door for the flood of possible law-suits for compensation from literally everyone (and their descendants )who believe suffered damages by any sort of (not only wartime labor but also anything) Japanese actions during Japan's ruling era.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

@Strangerland

It included reparations.

Nonsensical. Reparation means that the Japanese government admitted wrongdoing in S. Korea during the WWII, and their occupation of Korea was illegal. If so, then Japan should pay money for reparation for the entire descendents of Koreans during the WWII, I mean, the entire population of S. Korea, 50 millions.

This is why the Japanese government hesitates to bring this dispute to ICJ, which will rule whether the Japanese occupation of Korea was legal or illegal.

If S. Korea loses, they should just return money to the Japanese companies. If Japan loses, then they should pay the entire S. Korean people, in theory, but in reality, at least they may have to pay all comfort women, Korean soldiers under Japanese army, Korean victims of atomic bombing, Koreans in the former Soviet, and etc. Not to mention N. Korea.

I am waiting to see what Kono sang will say regarding the ICJ. He looks confident, but really?

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

Nonsensical. Reparation means that the Japanese government admitted wrongdoing in S. Korea during the WWII, and their occupation of Korea was illegal. If so, then Japan should pay money for reparation for the entire descendents of Koreans during the WWII, I mean, the entire population of S. Korea, 50 millions.

It was agreed upon by both nations as a final solution. Korea ripped it up.

Until they provide their new proposal, all they are doing is whining, and deserve everything they get.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

@ Strangerland

Can you read this document in Japanese?

https://www.newsweekjapan.jp/stories/world/2018/12/icj_1.php

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

Yes.

My ability to read Japanese is irrelevant to this:

It was agreed upon by both nations as a final solution. Korea ripped it up.

Until they provide their new proposal, all they are doing is whining, and deserve everything they get.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

SJ can you show me anywhere that Korea has bothered to figure out what exactly it is they are demanding of Japan?

3 ( +5 / -2 )

@SJ Today 07:31 am JST

http://justice.skr.jp/moon/moon.html

Again, you give me so much typing to do... how about from now on instead of just linking you summarize what you think is their logic flow, if only in one or two paragraphs, so we can be convinced you at least partially understood the articles you are invoking beyond a vague sense of "It helps me"?

First, the issue complained about in this link is not press freedom, which would imply Japan put crimps on people expressing a different position. That was not even asserted. Don't project your government's prosecution of a certain Sankei reporter to Japan. It is complaining about the perceived unfairness of the Japanese government's protest and purported bias in Japanese media.

Second, it is a fail. The problem is manifest - the claimants right to claim may not be extinguished, but once President Moon opens his big mouth to essentially press for money on that basis, he is executing diplomatic protection. He is violating the text of the treaty, and also any reasoning that claims the restriction is only on diplomatic protection.

Third, re the media, when taking into account their audiences - laymen quickly reading through the articles, the summarization that the Right to Claim is extinguished, is if perhaps incompletely precise, fair. Most people don't know or care about the distinguishment between a substantive right to claim in domestic law and diplomatic protection rights in international law. They can't claim, that's the point, is all that matters to most people, and the easiest way to understand it is that the Right to Claim ahs been extinguished, which as your own source confesses, WAS the position of South Korea until they realize Japan was really nice.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

If Japan had been treated as badly as South Korea was, I do not doubt that there would still today be lingering resentment and even some hatred among Japanese.

@ 1glenn. Japan had not one but two nuclear bombs dropped on them. Killing hundreds of thousands. I call that being "treated badly." But do you hear Japanese people 75 years later having lingering resentment or always demanding money off USA? No. They moved on.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

any dispute comes down to who needs who more. koreans use japanese computers and cars while japanese use korean.... kimuchi? pretty obvious who wins.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

@SJ Today 10:56 am JST

Well, they certainly don't seem too hesitant this week. And while you can never completely predict the outcome of a court case, for the result you propose to happen, the Court will have to make several weak rulings. Just off the head:

一:The annexation was illegal, despite Korea having signed the treaty and the world recognizing it at the time. Yes I've heard the coercion claim and I've heard the formalism claim, but few treaties are made with parties on truly equal standing and so coercion is literally integral to any treaty. As for the formalism argument, since ministers did sign the annexation, the KIng thing is insignificant. The ICJ will be very slow to make any ruling that weakens the sanctity of treaties and the freedom of countries to enter treaties. Further, Article 4 of the Vienna Convention of Treaties actually suggests that the rules apply only to treaties made after the signing, which implies an intention for all treaties before to just be deemed valid rather than getting into historical fights.

二:Granting the annexation was illegal, that the Japanese entities cannot rely on their government's position. Such a ruling would be rather disastrous for sovereignty.

三:That this even has relevance to the case at hand, since Korea signed the treaty with their understanding that it was illegal. Thus, the correct formulation, as far as South Korea is concerned, is that even if the annexation was illegal, the South Koreans accepted the net transfer of money as settlement of the case.

四:That even if points 1-3 are resolved in favor of South korea, that nothing needs to be done about South Korea's unilateral determination. The long term consequences for deciding that a country's courts can unilaterally decide to neuter a treaty are inestimable.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

> Dango bongToday  11:54 am JST

any dispute comes down to who needs who more. koreans use japanese computers and cars while japanese use korean.... kimuchi? pretty obvious who wins.

Not only that, South Korea's GDP is 1/3rd the size of Japan's and population well under half that of Japan's. It's clear that South Korea needs North Korea more than Japan needs South Korea... at the very least to mount a more sizable opposition to Japan as a united country.

But that will never happen because the US needs bases right on China's doorstep, and a hostile North Korea is the excuse.

Trump might visit NK but he sure isn't there to be friends and foster a relationship. He's there to maintain the status quo.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Strangerland

SJ can you show me anywhere that Korea has bothered to figure out what exactly it is they are demanding of Japan?

S. Korean government demands nothing from the Japanese government.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

@Kazuaki Shimazaki

You can say whatever you want as you will not responsible for it.

As I wrote, let't see what the responsible foreign minister Kono will say regarding bringing the case to the ICJ. My prediction is that he is not so much confident in winning the case. You may see how much I am correct or wrong.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

S. Korean government demands nothing from the Japanese government.

Hence the current mess. They ripped up the agreement made in good faith because they just want to be angry at japan. There is no interest in a resolution. So why should japan give them any preferential treatment on anything? The answer is they shouldn’t, and removing any privileges like with this semiconductor issue, is the right thing to do.

No need to place any sanctions or anything. But zero privileged treatment.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

2019 WORLD PRESS FREEDOM INDEX

Japan ranked in 67th. / S. Korea ranked in 41st / U.S ranked in 47th

Japan, do you believe that you are reading and watching what's real?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

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