The IAEA has zero authority about anything.
Of course not, why should they? As far as I understand, they are scientific experts who investigate the safety level of situation and provide the best possible solution. What solution the country is going to take is totally up to its own country (as long as it is following international standards and regulations).
4 ( +5 / -1 )
These standards are not contemplating the continuous disposal along decades in the same spot.
Sounds like you are asking for probatio diabolica. Japan officials had explained the dilution process in accordance with regulatory standards, but you are basically complaining "how can you be so sure there won't be any negative effects in next few decades". Don't tell me other countries don't dump radioactive wastes other than the tritium.
Why this obsession with Korea? The topic is Fukushima.
Did you not see the headline picture? In case you aren't aware, Korea is the one constantly obsessed with Japan. Yes, I'm aware of Japanese fishermen, China, and other Pacific Island nation (wherever that is) but a rally in front of National Assembly in Seoul? Why??
1 ( +1 / -0 )
Looks good enough to me.
*Regarding these radioactive materials, purification using the Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS) and other equipment is conducted prior to discharge into the sea to reduce their concentrations to levels below their regulatory standards, and then, dilution by 100 times or more is conducted together with tritium. Through these procedures, concentrations of radioactive materials that were contained in contaminated water are reduced to less than 1/100 of the regulatory standards when the water is actually discharged.*
*In ALPS treated water after purification using ALPS and other equipment but before dilution, concentrations of many of the contained nuclides other than tritium are reduced to levels below detection limits. There remains the possibility that Cesium 134/137, Cobalt 60, Ruthenium 106, Antimony 125, Strontium 90, Iodine 129, Technetium 99, Carbon 14, etc., may be detected but at concentrations below the regulatory standards.*
The problem here is that the majority of Koreans only want to point a finger at Japan and they don't actually care about actual topics at hand. That's why no Koreans seem to care how much contaminated water their own nuclear power reactors are dumping into their nearby oceans every year. The same logic applies to any disputes between Japan and Korea.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
As far as Japan is concerned, this matter is already settled by 1965 treaty. Hence, Japan has no concern over how Yoon administration scraped up the money for the amount Korean gov initially embezzled from 1965 JP-ROK compensation or how many plaintiffs (dead or alive) accepted/rejected its money or how many Korean activists agreed/disagreed Yoon's countermeasure settlement. They all are Korean domestic problems, NOT Japan's.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
Your initial comment "Japanese history textbook is non-factual and keep showing alternative fact" and later comment "Japan try to make certain event in history becoming softer than it should be" are two different things. I may agree on your later comment to some extent, but it certainly is not up to other nations to decide because that would be interference in the domestic affairs, wouldn't it? For that same reason, Japan never complained about Chinese or Korean history textbooks mainly designed to imprint grudge and hatred against Japan.
3 ( +4 / -1 )
Here is an original source of your wiki reference under "Studies".
In contrast to American and Chinese textbooks Japanese history textbooks offer no strong narrative about the war. This is surprising given that many different war stories circulate in Japan’s public discourse and popular culture: as a war of aggression that did great damage to the peoples; as a war for the liberation of Asia from Western colonialism; as a war fought by heroic but doomed soldiers; as a war that the Japanese people themselves “victims”; and so forth. None of these stories find their way into the Japanese textbooks in undiluted form. Compared to the American and Chinese history textbooks their tone is muted, neutral, and almost bland. Perhaps it is this affectless neutrality that so infuriates not only the Japanese right-wing but also Chinese and Korean critics. The Japanese history textbooks do not tell the stories that they want to hear—or are used to hearing. The Japanese textbooks make no attempt to glorify or justify the war, to portray Japan as the “victim” of outside forces, or to offer an apologia for wartime atrocities. Nor do they absolve the Japanese civilian public of supporting the war effort. If there is an overarching narrative in the Japanese textbooks it is almost a Biblical tale of sin, redemption and recovery.
Not so much comment on Korean textbook other than this.
Coverage of the war is quite limited in Korean textbooks, which focus primarily on the anti-Japanese resistance movements. No mention is made of the war in Europe, reference to the war in China is limited, and no mention is made of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
So tell us, where did you come up with your idea "Japanese history textbook is non-factual and keep showing alternative fact."?
-1 ( +2 / -3 )
"I asked, 'Then how should I teach them?' In the absence of any answer, saying it is 'impossible' is to cease thought. The role of a teacher is to not run away from the task of continuing to think."
imho, a teacher should only teach facts without any assertion or sentiment and let the children decide how they interpret their own history.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Why is it so difficult for Koreans to understand all historical debts between ROK and Japan were completely settled by 1965 peace treaty? Whether you like it or not, it was a legit international treaty and you can’t simply negate it by manipulating historical interpretations and turning something valid into invalid. Just because ROK government (Park Chung-hee regime) spent away the sum of individual compensation or hid the context of agreement until 2004 or intentionally ignored countless apologies and contributions by Japanese officials, you can’t blindly redirect your grudge with anti-Japan racism instead of rationalize who really should be blamed here.
2 ( +4 / -2 )
"What does the Japanese flag mean to the rest of Asia".
In case you haven’t noticed, Korea don’t represent “rest of Asia”.
Korea started defaming this flag since only a decade ago as one of negative campaigns against Japan and they never complained about it before 2011.
4 ( +7 / -3 )
Looks terrible but this is what’s posted in JP MOFA site.
Hence people are free to use its flag whenever they think the occasion is appropriate.
7 ( +8 / -1 )
When Japanese defendant assets in Korea are seized and sold off, then it surely becomes Japan's problems.
Exactly, I don’t understand why Koreans are still hesitant to do so. I hope Korean gov would stop messing around with clueless proposals and put an end to the relationship once and for all.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
We will you and mainstream Koreans ever understand they all are Korean domestic problems and have nothing to do with Japan?? There is nothing to negotiate and nothing to resolve as far as Japan is concerned. If your people don't like how your government deceived their own people in the past or what they've agreed with Japanese government, go complain your own government. If your government think there is a fraud or Japan is anyhow violating these international agreements, go complain at ICJ. End of story.
Koreans really need to stop this endless apology and money begging approach. Japan will no longer waste any more time with whiny child like we used to. Abe might be gone, but Japan not stupid enough to forget his spirit.
13 ( +15 / -2 )
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this poor French man deserved for what he did. All I'm saying is there are too many reckless foreigners who easily disobey local rules that may lead to serious concequences like this time. I recall there was a similar incident at Niseko not too long ago.
I checked Tomamu website and if those French folks followed the proper guideline, there are only two options (Experts Only Powder Area or Backcountry Tour) but given that gondola and lifts to mountaintop were not available at that time due to its weather condition and they didn't have a guide along with them, I can only assume they decided to do backcountry tour by themselves.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
They apparently were skiing where they were not supposed to.
The avalanche occurred at the Tomamu ski resort in an area that is off-limits to skiers. Signs and netting mark off the boundaries of the ski trails, but the group still went outside the designated zone, according to the officials.
There is a reason for having these off-limit signs and ropes but I’ve unfortunately witnessed many occasions Foreigners just ignore and skiing off-limit areas (such as right under the lift). I don’t mean to generalize but I have my personal experience that I was struck by Foreign snowboarder and he simply said ‘sorry’ then run off. I had to call out for help and my 14 stitches scar on my knee still aches to this day.
-5 ( +3 / -8 )
Resolve the security issue by proving they are not trading with North Korea.
Prove a negative?
To be specific, Japan set three conditions.
1) continued bilateral talks,
2) South Korea’s strengthening of its trade control system and
3) Seoul’s introduction of legislation to prevent exported materials from being used to develop conventional weapons.
If ROK is serious enough to regain their trust back, then they need to convince Japan based on RCA, corrective actions, and preventive actions. That's how it works for business when it comes to a trust issue. Just informing to add 100 resources wouldn't be a solution for what Japan is asking.
7 ( +7 / -0 )
"There isn’t much Beijing can do on the Seoul-Tokyo row," said Yun.
The relationship between Japan and South Korea is overshadowed by the 35 years of brutal colonization by the Japanese -- including the use of sex slaves and forced labour -- that is still bitterly resented today.
As long as ROK upholds this kind of distorted perception over annexation period manifested by anti-Japan policy, there isn’t much Japan can do either.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
Again, read the following reports by UN experts. It aint S Korea breaking promises.
And where in both URLs by so-called “expert” noted that Japan is the one ”breaking promises”?
5 ( +5 / -0 )
I just hope non-Korean folks here are smart enough not to be fooled by SK’s anti-Japan propaganda by now.
You can actually verify yourself with Google Trend. If not, can someone please provide the source to illustrate SK’s resentment toward so-called “war criminal flag” before the racist performance by some SK soccer player in 2011?
10 ( +14 / -4 )
I think most of them just want an honest recognition of history more than anything else.
Can't agree more.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
I don’t understand what’s there to talk about? Japan had already informed three conditions to resolve security concerns by SK’s inadequate export management in order for SK to be enrolled back in Whitelisted countries.
7 ( +8 / -1 )
After so many years, and some being born in Japan so they didn't learn Korean, it takes too much to move back.
Isn't that a fact that ethnic Koreans were given a choice to either stay in Japan or go back to Korea north or south? Isn't that a fact that ethnic Koreans who decided to stay in Japan (including later generations) always have a choice to naturalize? Some being born in Japan so they didn't learn Korean? I highly doubt it. I don't know about Kawasaki but I live nearby Shinjuku where many Zainichi live and I always see Korean youths (most likely 4th or 5th generations) and their family members speaking in Korean language.
Anyway, when Japan invaded Korea and brought people over as slaves it kinda took responsibility, you know? Like 'you broke it, you bought it' logic. If you don't like it, curse your own ancestors for creating the situation...
Oh my, when did Japan invade Korea in the first place?? You are making it sound as if Koreans were taken to Japan by force whilst the historical record indicates Japan was struggling to stop Koreans to smuggle into Japan and even forced to send them back especially toward late 1930s.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
The fact remains you and your ilk on here continue to claim that most or all Japanese are apathetic and apolitical, and afraid to say or do anything in public lest they go against the grain.
I hate to tell you this but I also believe most or all Japanese are apathetic and apolitical. How many times were you disappointed when you try to engage political discussions with your Japanese friends? When was your time to realize the political discussion isn’t appropriate topic to talk to someone new? It is not about right or wrong, I just believe that most of Japanese don’t really care about what’s going on outside of isolated small four islands and things that don’t affect their same repeated ordinary daily life. Yes there are occasions to witness some protests here and there, but do you believe they are the majority of Japanese standard or minority or maybe rather extremists?
1 ( +1 / -0 )
I really wanted see SK gone from GSOMIA but as expected SK backed down by US pressure. Such a coward as always.
12 ( +20 / -8 )
Rightists are too ignorant to understand this and the average Japanese person is too intellectually lazy to sort it out.
Wrong. Koreans are too blinded with anti-Japan hatred to understand Comfort Women system wasn’t illegal at the time of WW2 hence Japan didn’t need to destroy anything.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Which part of “Official recognition of Japanese government” do yo not understand?
2 ( +2 / -0 )
Can you explain how this is a credible source?
Funny, no one seem to care about the credibility of contradictory testimonies by Comfort Women but you are suddenly curious about the credibility of this direct interview with Mr. Matsumoto? How do you define “credible source” then?
-6 ( +2 / -8 )
AgentX, you need to be updated.
2 ( +13 / -11 )
Gee, why do you need to complicate things?
Re-read my previous posts. It gave multiple examples from previous governments all the way back to the 1990s, not just Hatoyama.
Well, you seem to love him very much, I simply wanted to disappoint you he is not a gov official. As per the rest, people can say what they want to say because the freedom of speech is constitutionally protected. The only thing that matters is the official recognition of JP gov and they are all posted and archived in JP MOFA site. So while you are complaining JP gov stances are inconsistent, where in MOFA site stated 1) "Korean individuals have NO the right to make claims" or 2) "the issue of making claims between South Korea and Japan was NOT completely and finally resolved by the two countries’ treaty"?
Obviously you have no idea what 'has gone through several permutations, and the current interpretation is' means, do you? This sure ain't mean that the government's stance has been consistent since 1965.
Of course, there are some undeveloped countries who consistently change their official recognition very often (I don't believe Korea understands the meaning of Succession of states), Japan also need to amend the statement accordingly but the basic principle is still the same. I don't recall Japan made any change upon two points you are complaining about, have they? This is YES/NO question.
In short, what I'm asking you is to simply prove the "change in official recognition of JP gov upon abovesaid two points" (although I still don't understand what you actually want to accomplish by proving so).
12 ( +12 / -0 )
Posted in: Freshly cooked rice everywhere you go