politics

U.S. seeks to ease dispute between S Korea, Japan

60 Comments
By MANDEL NGAN

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

© 2019 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

60 Comments
Login to comment

Actually Mike Pompeo is calling on Japan to attend a three-way meeting to resolve this export control fiasco, but Japan refuses to, because it knows Japan will be double teamed by the US and Korea to get the export control lifted.

https://www.agriculture.com/markets/newswire/update-4-skorea-steps-up-effort-to-get-us-help-in-export-row-with-japan

A former Japanese ambassador to the United States, Ichiro Fujisaki, questioned the need for U.S. mediation.

"I don't think we need the United States to mediate, just like Japan would not mediate U.S.-Mexico ties or U.S.-Canada relations," Fujisaki told Reuters on Wednesday.

"This is an issue to be solved between Japan and South Korea."

-23 ( +8 / -31 )

Kang told Pompeo that Japan's trade restrictions "not only harm South Korean companies but disturb the global supply system," the South Korean foreign ministry said.

Complaining to the US, which is a real trade war with China about global effects, is pissing into the wind. This is not a trade issue anyway, it's a security issue. No US or Japanese ships have been found breaking the UN sanctions to aid NK. Can SK say the same?

"It is undesirable in light of the friendly and cooperative relations between South Korea and Japan and trilateral cooperation among South Korea, the United States and Japan," it said in a statement.

Is SK so dense as to not see just how "unfriendly and uncooperative" they have been towards Japan at every turn on every issue? SK needs to clean house and terminate the use of anti-Japan sentiment as a political tool. They can start by correcting their historical revisionism and hate filled education. SK, especially the Moon administration brought this on themselves, and running home crying to daddy isn't going to help. They need to start acting like a mature civilized country that honors it's word.

22 ( +31 / -9 )

The US is not going to going to go to bat for South Korea. Why should it? South Korea has been unilaterally working to break apart the US-JPN-SK military alliance. US and Japanese ships are not breaking the UN sanctions on NK. But SK ships are. It's a pretty good bet that it's the US that has gathered the evidence and suggested to Japan that SK can not be trusted.

19 ( +28 / -9 )

before talks can progress I think you need to explain to the petulant child nation Korea that 1) it is 2019 not 1948 and 2) they already agreed to reparations and received sorry money for the WWII crimes, and they also agreed not make it a negotiation issue anymore.

Move on Korea, you need Japan more than Japan needs you

22 ( +28 / -6 )

The Korean government should not intervene to help these two companies. Leave them alone. They will eventually shift the cost to their customers. Once people not just in South Korea, but around the world start complaining why is the cost of their smartphones and electronic appliances so high, they can then point to Japan and blame them for disrupting the supply chain. That would be a bad PR for them. Either way, SK needs to stop subsidizing these monopolies and let them take care of themselves, if they can't stay competitive without the government help, then let them fail. If Samsung was an American company, it would've probably been broken into smaller companies by now, like they did with Standard Oil, which had about 90 percent of the market. Samsung, SK and Hyndai account for something like 80 percent of SK's economy. That is a major red flag. The only reason these companies have been able to sustain themselves as monopoly is because the government is helping them.

-17 ( +5 / -22 )

Kang told Pompeo that Japan's trade restrictions "not only harm South Korean companies but disturb the global supply system," the South Korean foreign ministry said.

Kang needs to be reminded that South Korean court rulings that Japanese firms must compensate forced laborers from Japan's 1910-1945 rule of the peninsula not only harm South Korean companies but also disturb the global supply system.

21 ( +24 / -3 )

Key statement: "Two South Korean companies alone, Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix, account for almost two-thirds of global chip production." This is why the U.S. entered the dispute as quickly as it did. Read between the lines of diplomatic language and you see that the U.S. is not happy with Japan and Abe.

-20 ( +4 / -24 )

It's not disputing. It's a decision of Japanese government as an independent country. And most Japanese people support it.

17 ( +20 / -3 )

The diplomatic solution is pretty clear: Seoul agrees to take the Forced labour issue to arbitration and implements the 2015 comfort woman accord, Japan, in return, lifts its export restrictions. This is what Washington is telling Seoul now.

16 ( +19 / -3 )

Its Koreas fault. They started it, by imposing unjust penalties on Nippon Steel. Pompeo and Trump will take Japans side.

16 ( +22 / -6 )

Its Koreas fault. They started it,

Japan started it by invading Korea.

-21 ( +4 / -25 )

Korean politicians have been weaponizing the comfort women and forced labor issues far too long, usually to distract attention from their own corruption and ineptitude. Soon, everyone from those WWII generations will be dead. Maybe then we can be released from their nightmares and learn to get along. Japan should hold their ground on the export issue, and the US should pressure Korea to cease their endless provocations.

17 ( +18 / -1 )

Its Koreas fault. They started it,

Japan started it by invading Korea.

Who 'started it' a over a hundred years in the past shouldn't matter anymore. Japan took it's toys and went home over 70 years ago. Korea keeps it going and gasps in surprise when Japan gets tired of it.

19 ( +21 / -2 )

Samit BasuToday  07:10 am JST

Japan will be double teamed by the US and Korea

Such an overstatement of S. Korea's involvement. The opposite will happen.

You're simply ignoring the fact that Japan removed S. Korea from the white list with blessing from the US in the first place.

Japan has calculated this move to the very last decimal before doing it, with all possible scenarios covered. If you're ignoring that aspect to try and play on S. Korea's tenacious victimhood mentality you can only go so far before you realise this is a bold yet fully warranted move by Japan to force S. Korea to make good on the 'firendship', or get penalised.

20 ( +20 / -0 )

@Dango bong

they already agreed to reparations and received sorry money for the WWII crimes, and they also agreed not make it a negotiation issue anymore.

Reparations? It is a common misunderstanding of Japaneses. The Japanese government didn't want to acknowledge any wrongdoing in S. Korea during the WWII, and the foolish Japanese officials tried their best to omit 'reparation' or 'compensation' in the 1965 treaty.

Products of Japan and the services of Japanese people, free of charge, the total value of which will be so much in yen as shall be equivalent to three hundred million United States dollars ($300,000,000), at present computed at one hundred and eight billion yen (\108,000,000,000), within a period of ten years of the date on which the present Agreement enters into force.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Agreement_Between_Japan_and_the_Republic_of_Korea_Concerning_the_Settlement_of_Problems_in_Regard_to_Property_and_Claims_and_Economic_Cooperation

In the contract document, the Japaneses government gave the money 'free of charge', not for reparation or compensation. Thus, the S. Korean supreme court ordered the Japanese companies to compensate for the victims, as they have never compensated. This is the basic interpretation of the S. Korean civil laws and the 1965 treaty.

If the Japanese officials had inserted the word 'compensation' or 'reparation' just once in the document, the fuss today would have never happened.

-18 ( +5 / -23 )

S. Korea can fix this very quickly.

The ball is in their court, problems can go away if they follow the agreements previously signed, paid, apology given on several occasions 1965 including 2015.

S. Korea has benefited greatly from Japan and they never acknowledged that fact. They have a trade in their favor of 24 billion a year, you got $600 billion in total last 50 years and still the greed and bias, the hate is ever deep against Japan.

Being nice and giving S. Korea so many favors, technology, economic, security help if another war against North happens and what we get in return is the middle finger! More comfort women statues built, trying to change name of Japan Sea, occupied illegally Japanese Island, radar lock on which they lied about, force labor issues which should have been handle already!

18 ( +21 / -3 )

What a farce this South Korean government is.

19 ( +22 / -3 )

Finally! About time Japan began to finally counter years of S.Korea's constant Japan Bashing and victimhood vitriol while reneging on mutually agreed international accords. While there at it, they should force Korea's hand to finally agree to resolve the Takeshima/Dokdo Island dispute at the ICJ so all pending disputes between Japan and Korea can be finally cleared so they can both start a new chapter of "real" friendship and mutual cooperation.

16 ( +20 / -4 )

IloveCoffeeToday  07:44 am JST

The Korean government should not intervene to help these two companies. Leave them alone. They will eventually shift the cost to their customers. Once people not just in South Korea, but around the world start complaining why is the cost of their smartphones and electronic appliances so high, they can then point to Japan and blame them for disrupting the supply chain.

You contradicted youself there. On one hand you're saying the S. Korean government shouldn't subsidise those companies and therefore driving their end-user retail prices up, yet claim Japan's supply "disruption" would?

I don't think you understand what Japan removing S. Korea from the white list means. The effect is longer lead times, up to 90 days for supply. That's all. If S. Korean companies want to source those materials from elsewhere that's their choice. This will not increase the end-user costs, unless the S. Korean companies choose a more expensive, different supplier.... ie: it would be their fault, not Japan's.

In effect, the end user will choose another company's gadget rather than Samsung due to lack of supply. I don't think anyone will lament that eventuality. There are so many other options around.

14 ( +15 / -1 )

@extanker

Who 'started it' a over a hundred years in the past shouldn't matter anymore. Japan took it's toys and went home over 70 years ago.

The victims still survive today. It is not the past, but today's suffering. It took 3 decades for the surviving victims to get the final decision from the S. Korean court while many plaintiffs passed away during the lawsuits.

-21 ( +3 / -24 )

@SJ

S. Korean government should pay the victims and distribute the money as they agreed in the 1965 aggrement.

All this problems can go away if S. Korea follows the agreement they signed and accepted, money was given including 50 apologizes from several Japanese PM.

19 ( +21 / -2 )

Its Koreas fault. They started it, by imposing unjust penalties on Nippon Steel. Pompeo and Trump will take Japans side.

So you agree that the J Govt's official justification for the measure ("it's because of national security concerns, and NOT in retaliation for Korea's actions against Nippon Steel") is false?

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

@AlexBecu

S. Korean government should pay the victims and distribute the money as they agreed in the 1965 aggrement.

Can you provide any document or reference showing that they agreed in 1965? You need a contract document, not your imagine or belief, to appeal in any court in the world.

-13 ( +4 / -17 )

Not so fast. You guys working on weekdays or not? I know this will also be disabled intentionally before I join.

But I ve got my work to do

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I have Japanese and Korean friends.

Wish they could get along beyond typical Asian politeness. I have no clue how to help them figure out their historical differences. They have to figure it out between themselves. All I can do is listen both and not take sides.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

"Kang told Pompeo that Japan's trade restrictions "not only harm South Korean companies but disturb the global supply system," the South Korean foreign ministry said."

quercetumToday  07:50 am JST

Kang needs to be reminded that South Korean court rulings that Japanese firms must compensate forced laborers from Japan's 1910-1945 rule of the peninsula not only harm South Korean companies but also disturb the global supply system.

Excellent point. It clarifies the hypocritical stance of the S. Korean government, and doesn't even mention the security risk S. Korea is in relation to NK (Japan's official reasoning). To say that Japan was forced to take action is an understatement.

S. Korea cannot - and will not be allowed to - upset anything outside of their own borders. That is a fact. That they think they can get away with such actions with Japan is unbelievably naive and shortsighted. The S. Korean government must be desperate.

16 ( +17 / -1 )

@SJ

Read it yourself and find out the truth.

If S. Korea was in the right like you believe, they wouldn't have a problem to bring in a 3rd party to the settle the issue but S. Korea refuses! They would lose!

You skipped the 2015 aggrement, that was just a few years ago. It was called Final and Irreversible. Money paid, apology given... than they say it's not good enough, it doesn't count, we want a new deal, can we get more?

Follow the aggrements you signed and this problems will go away. Simple

16 ( +18 / -2 )

@Hillclimber

Excellent point. It clarifies the hypocritical stance of the S. Korean government, and doesn't even mention the security risk 

Is there any evidence for the security risk? The Japanese government has never stated what it is. Only tabloid-like Japanese newspapers and TVs, apparently controlled by Abe, showed so-called evidence which was actually based an exaggerated Korean newspaper article (Chosun Ilbo). Chosun Ilbo is infamous for false reports. You may listen what a Japanese politician is mentioning. http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=001&oid=214&aid=0000962869

-16 ( +2 / -18 )

SJToday  09:49 am JST

@AlexBecu

S. Korean government should pay the victims and distribute the money as they agreed in the 1965 aggrement.

Can you provide any document or reference showing that they agreed in 1965? You need a contract document, not your imagine or belief, to appeal in any court in the world.

Read minutes for 1965 Treaty, which had been kept confidential but finally disclosed by Roh Moo-Hyun administration in 2005 who also declared all the wartime labor issues already settled by the treaty and should be taken care of by SK government itself.

15 ( +17 / -2 )

You skipped the 2015 aggrement, that was just a few years ago. It was called Final and Irreversible. Money paid, apology given... than they say it's not good enough, it doesn't count, we want a new deal, can we get more?

Follow the aggrements you signed and this problems will go away.

I don't know that the problem will go away, but making final agreements and then saying 'but actually...' is a sure way to ruin your ability to negotiate in the future.

When a client tries to do that with my company (and it happens more than you would think), I drop them. I'm not willing to do business with someone with whom a lawsuit trying to sort out the order of stuff because they are wishy-washy would be a nightmare. It's not even worth the risk.

Japan did some wrong. And a proper apology/restitution should be made. But it's up to SK to come up with a proposal on how to solve this problem once and for all now. Last time Japan tried to do that, SK ripped up the agreement with nothing in place. So now SK needs to come up with the replacement.

10 ( +13 / -3 )

Korean politicians have been weaponizing the comfort women and forced labor issues far too long, 

Speaking of the comfort omen, oops, women, Their demonstration nowadays is like shouting " Stop Economic retaliation!!, Lift the export ban!!"  They never let you down.

11 ( +13 / -2 )

@AlexBecu

You skipped the 2015 aggrement, that was just a few years ago. It was called Final and Irreversible.

Again, the 2015 announcement (not agreement) shows how unprofessional Japanese officials are in making a treaty as in 1965. They should have got advice from lawyers when making treaties with other countries. The term like "final and irreversible" is not a legal expression, which means does not make any legal effect or constraint.

https://www.yjil.yale.edu/not-final-and-irreversible-explaining-south-koreas-january-2018-reversal-on-the-comfort-women-agreement/

-12 ( +3 / -15 )

They should have got advice from lawyers when making treaties with other countries.

You really think they got no advice from lawyers? Seriously? I mean, you're trolling us right?

The term like "final and irreversible" is not a legal expression, which means does not make any legal effect or constraint.

Of course not. Even though you are talking like you know what you are talking about, it's quite clear you don't.

1) Clauses likes this are put into contracts as statements of intent. It's very common.

2) You are speaking of contracts, which are put in place as a set of rules for if/when things break down between the parties. It's a pre-agreed upon set of rules. This is not a contract. It's an agreement between two nations. If you get to the point where 'it's not a legal statement' has any relevance, the agreement has already fallen apart.

3) There is no 'law' between two nations. There are agreements, that one or both nations choose to keep or not. If one decides not to, the other can take them to an international court, but there is still no law. If the offending nation does not pay, there is no police force nor court that can force them to. There are only sanctions and war to enforce agreements, and when you are at the point of sanction and war, then whether or not there was an agreement in place is irrelevant.

The fact is, Japan negotiated with SK in good faith to come up with a solution to finish off this issue, and after agreeing upon said solution, SK suddenly decided "wait, we changed our minds".

So SK needs to propose a solution that they will be able to accept internally. The onus is on them.

10 ( +12 / -2 )

Smart people will find smart solutions. Stupid people will find stupid solutions.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

In what other context would anyone advocate not paying workers or slaves back wages??? Does anyone really think their government should be able to sign away their right to wages they earned through work??? Wages are not compensation for hard ship. They are freaking wages and these Japanese companies should have paid them a long, long time ago. Not the government. The COMPANIES that owe the BACK WAGES. How is this hard to understand or accept?

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

In what other context would anyone advocate not paying workers or slaves back wages???

Only the hard-line Japanese right-wingers are advocating against paying anything.

The problem is however that's it's impossible to negotiate with South Korea in good faith, since they have shown they are willing to abandon any agreements they come to. How do you come to an agreement with someone who has proven that their word cannot be trusted?

4 ( +7 / -3 )

After seven decades, Japan still bullying Korea.. sigh

-11 ( +1 / -12 )

Norman GoodmanToday  11:28 am JST

In what other context would anyone advocate not paying workers or slaves back wages??? Does anyone really think their government should be able to sign away their right to wages they earned through work??? Wages are not compensation for hard ship. They are freaking wages and these Japanese companies should have paid them a long, long time ago. Not the government. The COMPANIES that owe the BACK WAGES. How is this hard to understand or accept?

Idea of so-called "Lump-sum agreement between nations" is for letting government to lump all claims together including unsettled wage and represent those at negotiation, which was actually the case in 1965 Treaty. Besides, SK top court verdict was not for Back Wages.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

South Korea is like the teenage kid calling their parents "fascists" because the parents won't lend them the family car and give them free money to go out partying.

It's going bwah-hah-hah because the blame shakedown worked last time but it's not working this time.

Someone mentioned the key minutes to the 1965 treaty were hidden from the Korean people by the Korean government. This, and much more like it, is core to understanding the Korean position. They people were not informed about what went on, they have been misinformed and manipulated for decades about it.

However, in truth, the Korean government probably did the sensible thing at the time - of taking the compensation money and keeping it for governmental use re-developing the nation and building infrastructure - because if it had given it to the people individually - as Japan wanted - many would have just squandered and lost it. Instead, the nation was rebuilt after the US destroyed it all during the Korean war.

If the Korean people have a problem, and claim, it is against their own government and elite.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

In all honesty the two nations need to grow up a little. All nations look at this unrest between SK and Japan and shake their heads. The world and both nations have much bigger issues to worry about and the old saying goes, the work gets done twice as fast with double the workers. Inhibiting cooperation by both sides just makes it harder for everyone to solve the worlds many problems. (list not included).

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Sorry President Moon Jae-in, political brinkmanship is unpredictable, if there is no means to accomplish ones local collective political and economic endeavours, it is time to fold a losing hand.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

The trouble maker creates the problem , then help solve the problem , he created. What a performace.

I will not give up my seat in this drama.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

@showchinmono

Can you provide any document or reference showing that they agreed in 1965? You need a contract document, not your imagine or belief, to appeal in any court in the world.

*Read minutes for 1965 Treaty, which had been kept confidential but finally disclosed by Roh Moo-Hyun administration in 2005 *who also declared all the wartime labor issues already settled by the treaty and should be taken care of by SK government itself.

Your guys even do not know what they agreed on. I asked any document showing what they agreed on.

Roh was indeed sincere to avoid diplomatic conflicts, but he was not at a position to interpret the laws and the treaties. In 2012, the S. Korean supreme court interpreted differently after the 1965 treaty was disclosed. All S. Koreans, including the administration, and those Japaneses and their companies within the S. Korean territory should respect and abide by the court decision. Or, they have to leave S. Korea.

Japan gave the big money "free of charge", not for settling any issue or reparation, but actually it was for reparation. This kind of obfuscation by the Japanese government has caused all problems. We see again the exactly same pattern of obfuscation: Abe and his foreign minister say the export regulation is not to retaliate for the court ruling on the wartime forced labor, but actually it is. This is not confined to S. Korea. Even to the U.S., the same tradition.

After decades of obfuscation, Japan stated today for the first time that bungling within the Foreign Ministry 53 years ago was responsible for Japan's failure to declare war on the United States before launching its attack on Pearl Harbor.

https://www.nytimes.com/1994/11/21/world/japan-admits-it-bungled-notice-of-war-in-41.html

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

@SJ

Refer to Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Not to mention Roh Moo-Hyun was a lawyer( so was Moon), government concludes diplomatic treaty/agreement and the legislative branch puts domestic law in order in accordance with concluded treaty/agreement and the executive branch enforce it.

If the government is not at a position to interpret treaties, meaning, it would have no idea what it is doing when concluding international treaties. Perhaps, your country should line up judges at Supreme court and let them sit at the table with foreign countries.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

So many people going to town, calling SK everything from a 'petulent child' to 'schoolyard bully' etc, but none here understand or can suggest a way that a president of a democratic nation can overturn a court's decision. All the Japan lovers here would not be happy for Abe to overturn a Japanese court's decision, so why do you demand Moon overturn a Korean court's decision? 

Judicial system should never be influenced by the ruling political party, much less directly overturn a decision. 

Show me some love and downvote this comment, but at least one of you explain just how your demands to overturn the judicial decision should be carried out?

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

All the Japan lovers here

Are we not allowed to live this beautiful country ?

but at least one of you explain just how your demands to overturn the judicial decision should be carried out?

Certainly not by the manner the South Korean government and by extent some members of its population has been handling the whole ordeal that's for sure.

Japan as they should have already excused themselves on numerous occasions for the atrocities they committed 70 years again and they paid a huge amount of money to compensate for the grief they caused.

If South Korea feels that is not enough so be it but you are not getting anywhere by starting a trade war with Japan, slandering Japan in the mainstream press and organizing anti-Japan rally's.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Are we not allowed to live this beautiful country ?

Such an off-topic comment. You may also make yourself a cup of tea, or exchange your money for goods and services, in case you needed my clarification on that too.

Certainly not by the manner the South Korean government and by extent some members of its population has been handling the whole ordeal that's for sure.

Japan as they should have already excused themselves on numerous occasions for the atrocities they committed 70 years again and they paid a huge amount of money to compensate for the grief they caused.

If South Korea feels that is not enough so be it but you are not getting anywhere by starting a trade war with Japan, slandering Japan in the mainstream press and organizing anti-Japan rally's.

That's a lot of words to say you have zero suggestion as to how the president of a democratic nation can or should overturn a decision by the judiciary. "I don't have an answer" would have been quicker.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Such an off-topic comment

It is you who talked in a demeaning manner about people who choose Japan's side in this situation so you showed your true color.

That's a lot of words to say you have zero suggestion

You posed a question I simply answered that South Korea is certainly not going to get its way by making life difficult for Japan.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

If South Korea feels that is not enough so be it but you are not getting anywhere by starting a trade war with Japan, slandering Japan in the mainstream press and organizing anti-Japan rally's.

@Mr X - I think you should read up on the news for the past 10 days or so, and find out for yourself that Japan made the first move towards a trade war, by making it more difficult for SK to import raw materials to produce high tech products that a country like Japan itself is unable to manufacture. SK's move so far has been reactionary, without making any further moves to escalate the so far one sided trade war.

Also, 'slander in the mainstream press'? Because Japan never does the same? Pull the other one mate.

Regarding the rallies, if a group of South Koreans want to organise an anti-cheesecake rally, it's their freedom as citizens in a free country. Do you want the police to use force to disband the protestors? This isn't Japan with limited press freedom, effectively one ruling party and low citizen participation in politics.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

It is you who talked in a demeaning manner about people who choose Japan's side in this situation so you showed your true color.

My comment was in response to dozens of posters going to town demonising an entire country of 50 million people based on a court's decision made by a few judges. But that's fine in your books is it?

You posed a question I simply answered that South Korea is certainly not going to get its way by making life difficult for Japan.

Again too many words. Try "I still don't have an answer"

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Regarding the rallies, if a group of South Koreans want to organise an anti-cheesecake rally, it's their freedom as citizens in a free country

South Korean people can do how they please but we were talking about how to move things forward and holding anti-Japan rally's certainly is not the correct way according to me.

This isn't Japan with limited press freedom, effectively one ruling party and low citizen participation in politics.

I don't think that comment was really necessary but I leave that for you to decide.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

My comment was in response to dozens of posters going to town demonising an entire country of 50 million people

Absolutely nobody is "demonizing" South Korea we just don't agree with them in this particular matter.

Please don't frame people for what they are not doing

But that's fine in your books is it?

If you check my post history you can clearly see I have expressed my wish to put aside the bickering so Japan and South Korea can work together because I think we could be very good neighbors.

I have absolutely no malicious feeling towards South Korea it's quite the opposite actually.

Again too many words. Try "I still don't have an answer"

But I did give you an answer twice even no need for the hostility.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

If you check my post history you can clearly see I have expressed my wish to put aside the bickering so Japan and South Korea can work together because I think we could be very good neighbors.

I have absolutely no malicious feeling towards South Korea it's quite the opposite actually.

Why would I be interested in your post history? I was addressing the group of bashers as a whole, who post based on emotion without understanding of facts.

But I did give you an answer twice even no need for the hostility.

For the 3rd and final time, let me explain to you that in SK the court's decision is independent of the government. We are talking about a court system that impeached a sitting president just a couple of years ago. So all the posters bleeting "the SK government needs to overturn the court's decision" may as well be saying "I want the government of Papua New Guinea to act decisively on this issue now".

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

South Korean people can do how they please but we were talking about how to move things forward and holding anti-Japan rally's certainly is not the correct way according to me.

South Korean people are not one person, but a diverse group and there's 50 million of them. Some of them will hold anti-Japan protests, like some Japanese will hold anti-Korea protests. Many Koreans are pro-Japan, and IIRC SK makes up the 2nd largest international visitors to Japan after China. Uniqlo is a huge brand in SK, perhaps more so than Samsung in Japan (who have had to re-brand to 'Galaxy' due to the reluctance of the Japanese to openly purchase Samsung, a well known Korean brand).

The photo of an 'anti-Japan protest' featured in a recent JT article showed about 13 people. Don't get your knickers in a twist over it.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

Why would I be interested in your post history?

Because you accused me of being okay with people here demonizing South Korea and both declarations are blatant lies

For the 3rd and final time, let me explain to you that in SK the court's decision is independent of the government

That's the procedure in every democratic country but we have an international treaty stating how things should be handled and Japan is willing to keep itself to their end of the deal.

If South Korea doesn't agree fine but you can't force these things through a domestic court ruling you take it up to international level.

And what South Korea is doing now to relay their discontent is not the correct way.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Show me some love and downvote this comment, but at least one of you explain just how your demands to overturn the judicial decision should be carried out?

Or I should have said "who the heck should care about THE country's domestic condition"

That' their business and nothing outsiders, especially High contracting party should care about.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Heckleberry

What could possibly make Japan and the people feel sympathy and feel obliged to obey the verdict of SK top court? Huh? None of those judges lived those Japan-ruling days nor involved in the process of concluding the treaties. Do as much self-righteous selfish interpretation as you like but that's none of Japan's business.

None of Japanese government, the people, even posters here need to provide any idea to help them out of the chaos of Emo(tional) cracy. We all have every grounds to criticize them.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

HeckleberryToday  06:52 pm JST

For the 3rd and final time, let me explain to you that in SK the court's decision is independent of the government.

Well, then the government can just not execute the Court's order. Ultimately, if the Executive doesn't play ball, the Judiciary is powerless. For a purely domestic matter I likely won't recommend this, but it is justifiable when international agreements are involved.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

@Hillclimber

Where's the contradiction? The longer waiting period would mean they would sell less of their products, which will hurt their profits, which means they would either have to raise the cost or just accept smaller profits. The fact that they are supplying this material from Japan means it's their cheapest option, if they choose another supplier, it would have to be more expensive and probably not as good, so again, their profits would be disrupted, and they would have to raise the cost to cover it. The disruption of the supply chain starts from Japan since they imposed those restrictions and disruption the supply to Samsung. Samsung is the largest smartphone company, and they pretty much dominate the smartphone market. Android dominates in Japan. Furthermore, if the biggest smartphone company loses market share, that means less competition, and other smartphone companies would increase their costs as well. Samsung is a big competitor, without them, you would see the cost rising for others too. Like i said, there are no winners in this race, everybody is a loser, including the Japanese manufacturers producing this material. The fact that, the Samsung CEO went straight to Japan to talk to with their business partners tells me that, even without the intervention from the SK govt. the two sides (samsung and their suppliers) will find a way to deal with the situation.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

I used to like Japan quite a lot but not anymore. Japan's warlike and hostile attitude to Korea turns Koreans away from Japan.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

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