Korea less invaded than countries in Europe
I am sure that everyone has heard Koreans say their country has been invaded hundreds or thousands of times when explaining why Koreans are so hostile to outsiders. Robert from the Marmots Hole has linked an article from Andrei Lankov that argues against that line of reasoning.
Well, let’s have a look at the Choson Dynasty period, from 1392 to 1910. The last four decades of these five centuries were turbulent indeed, but what about earlier times? Even a cursory look demonstrates that it was hardly a “time of troubles.” Throughout 1392-1865, Korea fought three wars against foreign invaders, not including some minor border skirmishes with nomads in the north, and Japanese pirates on the coasts. In one case, the war with Japan from 1592-1598, known as “Hideyoshi’s invasion” in the West, and as the “Imjin War” in Korea, was disastrous and the entire country was devastated. As you know, the medieval armies, all those “knights in shining armor,” were not too nice when they encountered the civilian population. The two other conflicts, of 1627 and of 1636, were of much smaller scale _ essentially, two blitzkriegs brilliantly executed by Manchu generals whose cavalry units broke through Korean defenses, approached Seoul, and forced the Korean government to agree to an unfavorable peace.
Let’s compare this with the fate of more or less every European country. Throughout the same period of 1392-1865, almost every country in Europe fought a much greater number of conflicts, and suffered much greater casualties. Let’s have a look at German history. The period under consideration is marked by at least four major military conflicts, each lasting for one or several decades, and resulting in mass death and destruction: the Reformation Wars, the Thirty Years War (1618-1648), the Prussian campaigns of the mid-18th century and the Napoleonic wars. And these are only large-scale wars, each being as significant and bloody as Korea’s war with Japan in 1592-1598 (in all probability, all these conflicts were more destructive than the “Hideyoshi invasion”). Apart from these, there were a number of smaller conflicts, many of which were not small at all _ like the War of the Spanish Succession (1701-1714), or the chain of conflicts that accompanied German unification in the 1850s and 1860s. And, of course, there were countless quarrels between the mini-states which formed the Germany of the era, each such quarrel being a military conflict on its own right, far exceeding Korea’s occasional skirmishes with Japanese raiders.
Is Germany an exception? By no means. This is the fairly typical history of any European country, and against such a background Korean history appears rather quiet. Rather than being a country with a uniquely turbulent history, Korea actually was a country, which enjoyed stability undreamed of in most other parts of the world!
Abiola from Foreign Dispatches has also been saying the same thing for ages.
Not only was Korea less invaded, it is remarkable in the lack of invasions. Like many other things, aspects of Korean history can not be taken at face value. The devil is in the detail.
At least I don’t declare “false” to some-one’s statement when I think I might be mistaken:That sounds cool, but when it turns out I am mistaken for every reader, I look….well…..not cool.
Ponta:
Thanks for your replies. You’ve replied multiple times to my last post, so excuse me if this post is excessively verbose. I shall address your questions and try to alleviate your confusion in a concise manner.
To alleviate your confusion, I’ll have to get to the root of the problem. This requires me referencing your previous posts.
Let’s begin.
This is an easy question to answer. Korea had a very turbulent history during the 20th century. Many young people have relatives were in fact victims of Japanese Occupation, The Korean War and various miltary dictatorships.
The victims young people identify with today are relatives.
I was a bit thrown off by your use of the term “victim mentality” so I asked you to provide a definition. Here was the one you provided:
According to the definition of victim mentality you provided, I would submit that Koreans do not have a victim mentality. Overweening Chaebol influence and corruption, The deplorable treatment of foreign labors, Labor unrest, Educational Reform, etc. These are all problems my country has that are recognized as having domestic origins. I invite you to find mainstream publications that blame these issues on outside influences.
So again I submit that because Koreans do not blame EVERYTHING on others that Koreans do not have a victim mentality.
Phew. This post is getting long, but let’s trudge on.
You failed to provide any references or figures for this assertion.
I believe that the current administration has made grave mistakes in the way it provides aid to North Korea. However, you already know that a soft landing upon reunification is the goal of such aid to North Korea.
Your use of the term “affection” as regards China is a little misplaced. You seem to imply that South Korea is more friendly with China than other pacific powres, but this is not the case. As with other nations, South Korea does robust trade with China, but in actuality has a trade surplus with the communist state. The same cannot be said of either the U.S and Japan contributes far more in foreign aid to China than does Korea.
Considering these facts, I would submit that South Korea is not especially more “China Friendly” than most other Pacific Countries.
I am not aware of a law that requires South Korea to stand in on negotiatios between Japan and North Korea. If you know of such a law, please cite it.
Considering that North Korea is a communist state based on marxist-leninist principles, religion is–in a euphemistic sense–frowned upon. North Korea does not have a Shinto shrine. North Korea does not have a shrine honoring class A War Criminals.
Heh heh, I’m kind of toying with you a bit here, Ponta, but seriously, don’t draw false analogies–they tend to weaken your standing.
Alright, let me post this before the computer has an error or something.
I’ve never met a Vietnamese person who who openly holds a grudge toward other countries for example over one of their most recent wars, and they are still being threaten by land mines. Ireland was also invaded many times over the centuries, and was colonised by a neighbouring power. You don’t see Irish people always acting like whiny little bitches about British people. Can you explain to me how the current victim complex that exists in Korea(”Look what you did to me! Look what you made me do now! …. etc. etc.”) benefits Koreans and it’s society one single inch? I feel it is extremely strange for a country that has risen to such dizzy heights of capitalist splendour since 1953, to exhibit such a bizzare hatred, jealousy and contempt for other country/people. What would they be like if they were still relatively poor.
YoungRocco
Thanks.
I am afraid you have been evading issues.
You have not answered my questions.
And I showed you why I think Korea holds the victim mentality .
True, but that does not means Korea does not have victim mentality with regard to Japan (and USA)
That only shows Korea’s victim mentality is not irrational to the degree that is not fixable.
Your ignorance is not my problem.
Tell me:Are you telling this seriously?
Just the name the incident after WWⅡ you can think of where Koreans civilians were killed by the Korean regime
I am asking this because if you are saying this on the basis of the education you received in Korea, that only show how terribly Korean history is distorted, whitewashed.
Politics goes with or without law.
Shinto enshrine A criminals not because of the crimes they did, but because
the deads are fearful for their religious belief.No body worship the crimes they committed.
There was no war tribunal as to the Korea war. Technically S k is still engaged in the war with N.K.That does not means that there is no war criminals;in fact, as a south Korean historian says, Korea war is the one of the most bloodiest war in the history, killing many civilians.
Now I am not against North Korean people worshiping the war deads, whether they were criminals or not. The war is mad, the war makes people mad:nonetheless, once they are dead, I think they are worth respecting.
The point is that S Korea intervene Japanese domestic issue just because PM visited Yasukuni, but South Korean agents bothered to visit N K shrine, museum or whatever you call, where the war deads are honored.
(By the do you Marx Lenist doctrine? I used to love Marx , Das Capital and Deutsche Ideologies His works was the hope of social reformation all over the world Though the communism has proved to have failed, do not ever confuse Marx’s communism with a thug, terrorist country like North Korea, which South Korea support by the sun shine policy.)
YoungRocco
I think Korea has a great potential.
But as Nou, a native Korean, on this blog, said, that the Korean victim mentality, and hate-Japan governmental policy hampers Korea from globalization, and developing to the full.
If you love Korea, you can make Korean people aware that Korean has committed the similar crimes for which Koreans blame Japan.
So far, (1)you have been blaming Japan unnecessarily while (2)you have been ignoring the Korean crimes, similar to Japanese crime during WWⅡ.
The both (1) and (2) are symptom of the victim mentality we have been talking. And probably ,as Lonkov pointed out, Korean natinalists made used of this mentality and has been distorting history.
It will damage the friendly relationships with Japan (and USA).
It will damage the people who have been victimized by Koreans.
Mika:
Thanks for your post. Always glad to respond to new inquiries.
I seriously doubt that the number of Vietnamese you’ve met constitutes a representative sample.
The Vietnamese won their war with the United States and Cambodia…however…if I remember correctly, they were colonized by France. Here is a little excerpt for your perusal:
And there you have it.
Thanks for your questions and comments.
Mika:
Ah, and one more thing.
It would seem that you are right, the Irish don’t…ahem…complain.
But they do do this:
I suppose this couldn’t be considered complaining. Unless of course you consider terrorism protest speech.
Glad to clarify the issue for you.
I have never heard of Korea president apologizing for the massacre.
Kim Dae jung apologized the participation of Vitnam but later his sideretracted the apology.
And yet,
Tomato:
Hey, glad to see you haven’t waited too long to reply. Let’s see what new issues you’ve brought for me.
Tomato I brought up the San Francisco treaty because you were confused. You claimed:
The only treaties that we had been discussing before this post was the Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea” and the “Agreement on the Settlement of Problem concerning Property and Claims and the Economic Cooperation between the Republic of Korea and Japan. So when you said “the treaty” you must have been referencing one of these two treaties.
However, neither of these two treaties determined Japan’s transfer of pre-war time assets to former occupied countries. The treaty that clearly spelled out that Japan was to leave these assets in said countries was the Treaty of Peace with Japan. (Treaty of San Francisco)
No one said it did. However, clearly the intention of the treaty was to force the defeated imperial power to pay for rebuilding a pacific region devastated by war. You seemed to imply that Korea could/should pay Japan for these assets. I argued that this assertion was illogical because:
A: South Korea was not a signatory of the treaty nor was it a neutral power during the war. So the idea of South Korea being liable for a treaty it was not party to is kind of suspect.
B: Japan lost the war. Japan lost its empire. The idea that Korea should pay Japan for a gamble on imperial expansion that Japan took and lost is strange.
C. You contend that Japan could have claim to lost wartime assets. Can you mention instances in which Japanese citizens claimed rights to those lost assets in Korea? (References would be appreciated)
Hmm….Hmmm….Hmmm…..Actually the word compensate is used in the treaty of San Francisco:
As you can see, the issue of compensation is implied as being one in which Japan transfers money/capital to former occupied countries. Hence the part, “Japan will enter into negotiations[....]with a view to assissting to compensate those countries damaged by Japan.” i.e. Japan compensating allied countries and signatories of the treaty. The idea of Korea compensating Japan considering the intent behind the treaty is strange to say the least.
Lastly, it would appear that you are talking out of both sides of your mouth as it were.[no offense] On the one hand you claim that the treaty signed between Korea and Japan in 1965 settles the issue of compensation. You say the issue is about aid rather than compensation.(You highlight that compensation is not mentioned in the treaty) Then you turnaround and say that in actuality it is about compensation. (But you fail to mention why, if this were the case, Korea was not required to pay anything to Japan.)
Hmm…
Your multiple errors in logic will not hamper you if you abandon the notion that somehow Korea is liable to Japan for factories Japan built on occupied Korean soil.
Hope that helps.
Ponta:
Thanks again for your posts.
I’ve been looking into the alleged “grade 4″ that the U.N. Report received and I have not been able to find it. The only reference you provide is a link to a book on Amazon.com ( A book whose pages cannot be viewed.)
I would also like to point out that the UN grading system that you claim exists could not be found through any of the web’s premiere search engines.
So please provide better references on this alleged grade. (English is one of the official languages of the UN, so this should be easy for you)
As a sidenote, the report that I cited was a report written by the International Comission of Jurists not the United Nations. What the report by the ICJ does is provide support for my assertion that the 1965 treaty between Japan and Korea should exlcude individuals claiming personal damages against Japanese firms and/or individuals.
That should clear things up for you.
And I am more than happy to clear up any other ambiguities you may have.
Ponta:
Hope this post finds you well.
His “side” apologized? You mean his political party?
How can one person/group retract someone else’s apology?
YoungRocco
Thanks
Call UN to ask if there is a grading system I described.
As I told you, your ignorance is not my problem, but yours.
http://vinakorea.com/zboard/zboard.php?id=news&page=1&category=&sn=off&ss=on&sc=on&keyword=&select_arrange=name&desc=asc&no=12
I gave you the link. You can read it , can’t you?
I have asked you questions, you have been ignoring them.
YoungRocco,
It’s natural that old Vietnamese people who were mistreated by France dislike French people, but young Vietnameze people in general don’t hate the present generation of French people at all. Young Irish people in general also do not harbor intense feelings towards the English now. Hating/blaming the present generation of people for their ancestors actions is stupid and it shouldn’t be justified.
“
Reviewed by Mark Caprio
I guess it is Koran nationalist who has been successfully made use of Korean victim mentality and it is them who whitewashed Korean history and politics
Well we can see the victim of them here on this thread.
Ponta:
The weather is getting cold these days. I do hope you’re staying warm.
You claim that this report received a grade of 4 from the UN.
and yet…
Out of a billion pages on the internet not even one mentions UN report grades?
Not one mentions the grades other reports to the UN have received?
Not one even cites the ranking methodology?
Ponta, I do realize that tensions and ego run high on internet discussion boards, but please do not making lying a habit.I know you were probably worried about your image to other posters on this discussion board, but hey, its just a discussion. They’ll be tons of other topics for us to discuss in the future. We will agree on some topics, we’ll disagree on others. We’ll build consensus on some issues and we’ll have our points of departure. Just refrain from becoming tempted to lie.
No worries, dude.
I’m not sure it has been mentioned already in this thread but Wikipedia as it relates to Japan and Korea, has seriously been vandalized by Koreans.
A very good example of this is this.
I hope YoungRocco is not using the articles he has written for Wikipedia to back up his claims here.
I’m pretty much sure that Matt can find familiar IP addresses of Korean posters on wikipedia.com.
ponta, Mika,sqz, Rose, et al.>
I guess they will ever look to the truth…kind of tires me, and hopes for the future seems very dim…
YoungRocco
Thanks.
Unfortunately you set an another example how a Korean person can be a terrible bad loser. I hope you are an exception.
The reader can easily see the following if he/she looks back the argument on this thread.
YoungRocco could not show the case where Koreans blame themselves for the similar crime they committed after WWⅡ as much as they do for the similar crime Japan committed during WWⅡ
He could not show cases where Koreans criticize anti-Japan-ism though he said Koreans do criticize it.(In other words, he liedーーーhence his comment above is understandable as his own habit and temptation to lie. He is projecting his mind here. his ego does not allow him to lose.)
He was wrong about comfort women during WWⅡ.
He was wrong about German apology about comfort women.
He was wrong about the interpretation of the treaty.
It is most likely he did not know the Korean massacre , Korean comfort women after WWⅡ.
He was wrong about Korean apology to Vietnam.(Can he read Korean?ーーI have some doubts)
etc.
He turned out to be wrong on almost every point after he proudly declared an-other’s statement “false!”
And yet I don’t blame him. I rather blame Korean education system he has received..
In Korean education system, history textbook is terribly distorted. Korean massacre either goes unnoticed or mentioned very short while it is filled with the description of anti-Japan-ism and myth of registance
whereby the students are easily misled to the hatred and are filled with narcissism.(what a great, excellent, peaceful people Koreans are, but we are at the risk of being invaded by the evil Japanese)
(see also Stop Teaching Prejudice
Worse yet, the system emphasize the competition rather than understanding. Hence people like YoungRocco try to win the argument rather than understand things deeper.
Still worse yet, they don’t how to argue.
Let’s take the grading system in question for instance.
He raised this issue to refute my claim that the argument by authority is very poor if it is not backed up with substantive argument.
He could not give a substantive argument.
So he tried to attack the credibility of the source.
I showed him the source which a historian whom ICJ used for the investigation of the comfort women, wrote.
YoungRocco could not find the grading system on the net.
Alas ,he ended up blaming me, saying I am a liar.(another example of victim mentality—-blame others for what happened in the world).
Now it is clear that even without the point about the grading system, my point about the argument by authority holds.
Besides, my point about the grading system is true. For the readers who can read Japanese, I copied the part of the book.
I have no reason Hata, whom ICJ trusted, is not telling a truth.
YoungRocco
Do not try to win, try to understand.
Do not hide the mistakes you have made, just admit it. That will give people better impressions than being a bad loser.
(BTW you were right about UN, it was not UN, it was ICJ. It was my mistake. I apologize.)
Look at Nou’s comment. He is ridiculing his own people. Every society has a crazy persons, crazy crimes. but the reader can be assured Korea is self-corrective by looking at Koreans criticizing Koreans.
Unfortunately, you have been ignoring the victims by Koreans just like Korean nationalist who tries to prevent comfort women from receiving the donation probably because they wanted to make Japan apologize more.
I am afraid you are hurting the good image of Korea.
Thanks
Ponta:
Howya doing?
Long Post. Long Words. Take another look at the post I wrote that cited the U.N. Report:
You’ll see that the chief reference I use to make my claim IS IN FACT the report issued by the International Commission of Jurists. Now look again at the post you wrote:
Here is the logical breakdown:
Young Rocco: Korean Comfort Women have legal standing to demand redress.
Ponta et al: But a treaty signed in 1965 between Korea and Japan renounces responsibility by the Japanese Government.
Young Rocco: This is not true, the treaty in question covers property claims against the government of Japan. It does not cover claims of personal damages.
Ponta et al: Yes it Does!
Young Rocco: No it does not. A report written by the International Commission of Jurists(ICJ), after extensive research into the logs and meetings, holds that the treaty of 1965 does not include personal damages or tort claims.
Ponta et al: Some U.N. Report received a 4! (What does this have to do with the holding written by the ICJ)
As I mentioned before, the main authority I cite is an ICJ report on what is covered under the bilateral treaty between Japan and Korea in 1965.
Try again, Ponta.
Don’t be so sloppy, Ponta. (You confused the UN and ICJ)
I know you’ll get it right the next time around.
In the meantime, I invite you to look at some of the other discussions I’m in involved in.
Have a great day.
YoungRocco
Thanks.
But you are just repeating old claims that has been refuted..
(1) I told you that the argument by authority is poor if it is not backed up with substantive argument.
You just cite ICJ, an authority, without giving substantive argument.
It looks poorer if the report is graded the next to lowest and if the report did not refer to the crucial evidence
YoungRocco, there is no logical break down in admitting mistakes. Admitting mistakes rather is to avoid the logical breakdown .
On the other hand it is a logical mistake for to say Korean criticize Anti-Japan-ism but has no evidences for it. It is a logical mistake for you to say Koreans criticise Korean crimes, similar to the crime Japan committed during WWⅡ, but can not cite any evidence.
It is a logical breakdown for you to say Korea admitted the crime while Korea has never apologized the crime they committed during Vietnam War.
Of course, they have. As I told you, in fact the former comfort women sued Japanese government. In it, one of the comfort women demanded the Japanese government to return the money she earned. In her claim it was implied that she earned much more money than an average Japanese could not earn while she was comfort women. You understand what it means, don’t you?
And having legal standing does not mean she can win.
(For your reference, in case of American POW, American court rejected their claim, saying SF treaty took care of it.)
The treaty between Japan and Korea settled the issue .
That is why Korean government as a government did not demand Japan to compensate for the comfort women..
Japanese government responded to the Korean civilian’s claims, and set up the funds. The ICJ evaluated it positively . Japanese Prime minister issued apology to the former comfort women .(For the record, German has never apologized to the former prostitutes they forcibly recruited.)
You have never shown why Japan has moral obligation to make further apology.
On the other hand, Korean government has never apologized to the former comfort women even though one of the reason why the issue are left alone for long time was Korean men were involved in illegal recruiting.
Korean nationalists prevented the former comfort women from receiving the donation the former comfort women desperately needed it.
The former comfort women complains to the Korean government and the associate for the comfort women.:
And Korean government and Korean people have never seriously faced the issue of the comfort women after WWⅡ,during Korean War, during Vietnam War, and forced prostitute’s in 70′S and 80’s ーーーthe victims of Korean pimps, Korean society, Korean government.
And you have not answered my questions.
You have been ignoring the issue just like Korean nationalist who prevented the former comfort women from receiving the donation to keep Japan apologizing.
II am sorry for being sloppy. But I admitted that I made a mistake. I apologized.(The reader might notice the same pattern here Koreans have been doing to Japanese.)
Thank you for the invitation, YoungRocco. I hope you have learned the lesson from this thread, and use the knowledge you have learned in other discussions. It isn’t so difficult to learn from the mistakes you have made, but it is impossible to do so unless you admitted them.
In this thread, we have seen many Koreans hardly admitted the crimes Koreans made after WWⅡ,and consequently the victim are left alone.
They mistakenly think that they have always been victims and they hold the victim mentality where you blame other unnecessarily while ignoring their own mistakes. I think the reader can see it exemplified in this thread.
In the education filled with narcissistic history and descriptions of atrocity by
Japan it is natural that they be ignorant of their own mistake but keep blaming Japan.
In the education where you just memorize what authority says, it seems they have hard time thinking on their own.
This kind of education prevents Korea from seeing the reality, developing to the full. It harms their own victims further.
It is impossble to learn from mistakes unless you admit them.
YoungRocco, I hope you have learned the lesson. and see you on other discussions. Good luck to you.
Some additions.
It might be easier for you to add some more explanations.
As I mentioned before, in the process of concluding the treaty between Japan and Korea, Japan insisted on compensating individually, Korea rejected it, saying that she would take care of it. As a result, the treaty was concluded as such, but it seems Korean government used the money at the time for the economic development.
And the point is Japan responded to the claims by Korean civilians by setting up the funds whatever interpretation you take as to the treaty, and ICJ has evaluated it positively.
And the thread is about Korean victim mentality where you blame others unnecessarily while ignoring your own faults.
Japan apologized and set up funds.
Korea demand more apology while hindering the victim from being saved, ignoring victims after WWⅡ sacrificed by Korea..
Korea blame Japan unnecessarily.
Korea ignore her own faults.
The thread is about Korean mentality.
Nonetheless, you have been only accusing Japan of the mistreatment of comfort women while ignoring Korean crime after WWⅡ
∴Korea still hold victim mentality and it is damaging their own society and the relation with other countries.It is better for her to realize it.
Thanks
>ponta
For some, the truth hurts so much they rather die than admit it. This goes for countries, too.
As the official history of the two Koreas are riddled with lies and half-truths (see Gerry’s posts for a good example), a regime change- a revolution- can only make them accept the truth. So, don’t count on it.
Like I said, it is good to know from the discussions here (is it a discussion? sometimes it looks like just name-calling) what we are up against. The situation in the Far East is terrible with only one country being politically and economically stable- Japan. We don’t have to blame our woes on other nations to keep the regime on-going. We don’t have to hate. So we don’t eat flags and dwell on history.
tomato
そもそも国交回復の為の条約(日本と韓国の場合は日韓基本条約)とは、
その条約で過去の問題のすべてを清算・解決・終了をして、
両国の未来の友好関係を発展的に築き上げよう、という性格のもの。
いちいち「完全かつ最終的に終了した」とか「いかなる主張も出来ない」などという文章を書かなくても、それが目的の条約なのだから当然のこと。
当然であってもわざわざ記述したのだから、それだけ厳格な条約なんだ。
だから、たとえ一般市民が旗を食べたり燃やしたりしても、最低限、政治問題化しないのが両国政府の執るべき選択のはずである。
政治問題化するのは、明確な条約違反だ。
それでも払う必要も無いのに「アジア女性基金」を作って条約違反にならないようにしたというのに、それを拒否をし、「韓国政府が全部使っちゃったから、おかわり頂戴」などと恥も外聞も気にせず平気で言ってくる。
そんなの韓国政府と韓国国民の間の韓国国内問題だろうに、何故日本に抗議するのか理解出来ない。
ただ呆れるばかり。
もう怒る気にもなれない。
Tomato
Yes, for some the truth hurts, especially when it turns out that the whole society where one lives has been whitewashing history.
As you know quite well, Korean history textbook is filled with descriptions of Japanese atrocities when majority of Koreans who directly experienced the colonization say nothing much happened to them when asked to talk about their experience” . It is saturated with registance mythology of resistance that cannot find verification in any archive. It scarcely mentions atrocities Korean people committed. For instance I have a Korean history textbook in 1996, but it did not mention Vietnam War.
It did not mention massacres in Korea before Korean War and the issue of forced prostitutes in Korea after WWⅡ..Worse still, the media around them confirm the belief.
After this education—one might call it brainwashing—it is only natural that Korean young people hold hatred toward Japan and think of their country innocent, and that when the truth comes out, they will be so shocked that it will take time to accept it.
But let’s keep giving them and the readers more persuasive picture.
I think YoungRocco is a polite person; he does not use racial slur, he is willing to discuss. In my opinion, it is just that he just believed uncritically what he was told in his society and he is not used to the debate.
I wish he stopped nitpicking and did not get away from the the topic but anyway , I for one welcome him..
BTW your argument about SF treaty and agreement between J and K was splendid.
I agree sqz.
What YoungRocco fails to accept the fact that the issue of individual compensation was discussed extensively during nearly 4 years of negotiations between Korea and Japan prior to the execution of Basic Treaty of 1965. And as the minutes of these meetings are now being released to the Korean public, it was the was Japan that offered to establish a bilateral research body to pay out these individual claims. However, it was the Korean government that refused stating that they themselves would take the responsibility of doing so as well as for North Korea.
I guess YoungRocco’s point is I CJ concluded that Japan had obligation to compensate and ICJ was an authority on the law, therefore, it is correct
Neither ICJ nor YoungRooco give no substantive argument why.
All ICJ is saying that the treaty should be interpreted in such a way that
The “intent” of the parties did not cover the specific claims made by “comfort women”,
(1) it did not explain why it should be interpreted in that way despite the wording “the problems concerning property, rights, and interests of the two High Contracting Parties and their peoples (including juridical persons) and the claims between the High Contracting Parties and between their peoples,……have been settled completely and finally”
(2) it did not take into the process toward concluding the treaty.
Japan insisted on compensating individually ,but Korea rejected it.
As a side note, the situation is different form Germany. Germany is compensating individually.
(3).if the intent of the parties was as ICJ claims, then nothing prevents for Korean government from concluding new agreement with Japan concerning comfort women. (And the government is for the people.)But Korean govenment did not. Korea knew the problem was settled completely and finally.
Regardless, Japan responded to Korean civilians claims by setting up the funds.
Korean nationalist pressured the former comfort women from receiving the donation.
The former comfort women complains that Koreans did not even pay tribute to the their funeral while they appreciated Japanese helping them in everyday life.
Korea has not faced the issue of Korean forced prostitutes after WWⅡ,
Despite all of these, Korea still keep blaming Japan while ignoring their
faults. It is appalling.
Anyway this discussion help me to sum up my thought on comfort women.
Thanks everyone.
Ponta et al.
How are you guys doing?
I thought you guys might be interested in reading this…
What’s with the whole Anti-China thing going on in Japan? Are people there afraid of China’s rising influence?
I mean, there may be some people in Korea who react negatively to China and Yasukuni but…
Aren’t these folks in Japan taking it a bit far?
YoungRocco
Thanks for the link.
Have you read the news recently?
The article was published before the culprit confessed his motivation.
It turned out he did it because he wanted to become famous. He was a stupid criminal. He deserves sever punishment.
But when the incident happened ,it was speculated at first that he did it to protest against Kato who objected to PM’s visiting yasukuni. Upon this speculation, the Japanese media criticized it.(Asahi is one of them.) Koizumi criticized it. The rightists criticized it. Almost all the Japanese criticized it.
That is what Korea and you lacks when it comes to the crimes and stupidity of Korean irrational ultra-nationalists Either Koreans are silent about it or Koreans approve it. And that is what worries the outsiders.
Thanks you for bringing up the stark contrast between Japan and Korea.
BTW why did you bring this news up on this thread?
This thread is about Korean mistaken belief that Korea has always been victim.
I often encounter Koreans when they think Korea is attacked, they bring up Japanese crimes like 731 troops, Nanjing Massacre, assassination of Min, etc. which are totally irrelevant to the topic.
And here again, you bought up the Japanese crime Japan criticized severely .Your victim mentality, and desire to blame Japan must be running so deep.
As I told you before it is my personal opinion that Korea’s victim mentality is damaging her own nation, but it seems it takes time to realize it. Take your time.