This is all very well-worded and interesting, but the real message seems to be: "Increased democracy in Britain is bad for business".
1 ( +3 / -2 )
This just in today, with the Koreans' perspective:
'The Supreme Court also challenged the Japanese view that the 1965 agreement invalidated all compensation claims of individual Korean victims. The court rightly pointed out that the agreement was not about Japan's compensation of Koreans for its wrongdoings during the colonial era.
The agreement, it said, was designed to settle debts and claims between the two countries on the government and private levels. The agreement defines its nature by stating that it was intended to "settle problems regarding the property of both countries and their peoples and the claims between both countries and between their peoples." '
So the scope was limited. Also:
'The top court also refuted the argument of the two Japanese corporations that they were not obliged to pay reparations because they were different entities from the wartime companies that forced Koreans to work for them.'
'Following the court's ruling, the Tokyo government reiterated its position that the 1965 agreement resolved all compensation claims of Korean forced laborers. It made it clear that it had no intention of helping the plaintiffs collect reparations.
To further pursue their claims, the plaintiffs need support from the Seoul government. Yet the government suggested that it would not take up the cases and take diplomatic action against the Tokyo government on behalf of the plaintiffs because its official stance is that the 1965 agreement covers compensation for forced Korean laborers.'
So there you have it. Court's on their side, but not the Japanese government - or their own government.
0 ( +0 / -0 )