Occidentalism
Duc, sequere, aut de via decede!

Korea less invaded than countries in Europe

September 1st, 2006 . by Matt

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.


77 Responses to “Korea less invaded than countries in Europe”

  1. comment number 1 by: ponta

    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.

  2. comment number 2 by: YoungRocco

    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.

    People outside want to understand why Korean people, including young people who were born after say, Korean war, always want to identify themselves with victims

    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.

    why they keep holding the hatred against Japan and USA based on the victim mentality? Why?

    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:

    Victim mentality is one where you blame everyone else for what happens in your world.You don’t have to be real victim to hold victim mentality.Blame everything on others is a slogan of victim mentality.

    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.

    Historically Korea was attacked by China several times.
    After WWⅡ、South Korean civilians were killed by their own regime much more than they were by Japan.

    You failed to provide any references or figures for this assertion.

    South Korea was attacked by North Korea and China at Korean War..
    Nonetheless, they show affection toward N Korean and China but take anti-Japan-ism (and anti-Americanism) for granted.

    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.

    Why are Korean politicians unhelpful when Japanese are trying to save those who were kidnapped by N Korea? Why?

    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.

    Why do Koreans object J prime minister visit Yasukuni, when S Korean agents visit North Korean counterpart of Yasukuni? Why?

    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.

  3. comment number 3 by: Mika

    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’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.

  4. comment number 4 by: ponta

    YoungRocco
    Thanks.
    I am afraid you have been evading issues.
    You have not answered my questions.

    (1) What is the moral ground for further apology from Japan to the former comfort women ? (when the head of Japan has already apologized and Germany has never apologized their counterpart.)

    (2)Why do not Korean people t demand apology from Korean government as fiercely as they do to Japan when the reason why the issue of comfort women “was left alone for so many years by the South Korean government” was “many women were mobilized by Korean men.”(page 179

    Just give us the links that show
    (3) Koreans demand apology, further apology and more for the Korean crimes after WWⅡ,similar to the Japan’s crime during colonial period from Korean government as fiercely as when Koreans blame Japan (and USA)
    (4) Koreans criticize anti-Japan-ism so fiercely as Koreans criticise something that sounds like anti-Korea-ism.

    And I showed you why I think Korea holds the victim mentality .

    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

    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.

    You failed to provide any references or figures for this assertion.

    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.

    I am not aware of a law that requires South Korea to stand in on negotiations between Japan and North Korea. If you know of such a law, please cite it.

    Politics goes with or without law.

    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.

    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.

  5. comment number 5 by: YoungRocco

    Mika:

    Thanks for your post. Always glad to respond to new inquiries.

    I’ve never met a Vietnamese person who who openly holds a grudge toward other countries

    I seriously doubt that the number of Vietnamese you’ve met constitutes a representative sample.

    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

    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:

    Throughout the colonization of French Indochina, many groups actively planned terrorist actions against French people living in the area. The French colonists were given the special epithet thực dân (originally meaning colonist, but evolving to refer to the oppressive regime of the French) in Vietnamese; it is still universally used in discussions about the colonial era. After the French were defeated in Vietnam, those who collaborated with them (called tay sai – agents) were vilified. Those who left for France with the French were known as Việt gian (Viet traitors) and had all their property confiscated. Although anti-French feelings in Vietnam have abated, the use of words like thực dân to describe the French is still normal.

    Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francophobia#Asia

    And there you have it.

    Thanks for your questions and comments.

  6. comment number 6 by: YoungRocco

    Mika:

    Ah, and one more thing.

    It would seem that you are right, the Irish don’t…ahem…complain.

    But they do do this:

    The Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA; more commonly referred to as the IRA, the Provos, or by some of its supporters as the army or the ‘RA) is an Irish Republican paramilitary organisation which, until the Belfast Agreement, sought to end Northern Ireland’s status within the United Kingdom and bring about a United Ireland by the use of violence

    I suppose this couldn’t be considered complaining. Unless of course you consider terrorism protest speech.

    Glad to clarify the issue for you.

  7. comment number 7 by: ponta

    The Ministry of Culture and Communication of Vietnam has publicly estimated that the number of innocent victims killed in the provinces like QUANG NGAI, QUANG NAM, and BINH DINH was approximately 5,000 people. It was reported that most Vietnamese people have not forgotten the shock of the
    massacres yet and the mental anguish of the survivors have had serious and had lasting effects

    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,

    South Korean troops committed crimes against Vietnamese people. With humanitarian and peaceful neighbourly traditions, it is Vietnam’s policy to close the past…,”Reuters – January 10, 2000

  8. comment number 8 by: YoungRocco

    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:

    Just how much property and assets do you think Japan and the Japanese left on your beloved pennisula? The treaty also settles

    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)

    So bringing up the SF treaty doesn’t make the Koreas automatically entitled to the Japanese assets for free.

    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)

    Why do you think that happened, instead of the use of the word “compensation

    Hmm….Hmmm….Hmmm…..Actually the word compensate is used in the treaty of San Francisco:

    Japan will promptly enter into negotiations with Allied Powers so desiring, whose present territories were occupied by Japanese forces and damaged by Japan, with a view to assisting to COMPENSATE those countries for the cost of repairing the damage done, by making available the services of the Japanese people in production, salvaging and other work for the Allied Powers in question.

    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.

  9. comment number 9 by: YoungRocco

    UN reports are graded in the following way
    1 commend
    2 welcome
    3 take note with appreciation/interest/gratitude.
    4 take note
    The UN report in question was graded as 4 probably because it did not take into the crucial US report

    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.

  10. comment number 10 by: YoungRocco

    Ponta:

    Hope this post finds you well.

    I have never heard of Korea president apologizing for the massacre. Kim Dae jung apologized the participation of Vitnam but later his side retracted the apology.

    His “side” apologized? You mean his political party?

    How can one person/group retract someone else’s apology?

  11. comment number 11 by: ponta

    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.

    s.

    (1) What is the moral ground for further apology from Japan to the former comfort women ? (when the head of Japan has already apologized and Germany has never apologized their counterpart.)

    (2)Why do not Korean people t demand apology from Korean government as fiercely as they do to Japan when the reason why the issue of comfort women “was left alone for so many years by the South Korean government” was “many women were mobilized by Korean men.”(page 179

    Just give us the links that show
    (3) Koreans demand apology, further apology and more for the Korean crimes after WWⅡ,similar to the Japan’s crime during colonial period from Korean government as fiercely as when Koreans blame Japan (and USA)
    (4) Koreans criticize anti-Japan-ism so fiercely as Koreans criticise something that sounds like anti-Korea-ism.

    (5) Name the incidents in Korea after WW2, where civilians are killed by their own regime.

  12. comment number 12 by: Mika

    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.

  13. comment number 13 by: ponta

    “I’ve overcome my hard feelings towards Japan. It’s often the younger people who are more hostile. They’ve been fed only the worst stories about the colonial period but they don’t know the reality the way we do.

    BBC

    Hildi Kang developed the idea to write Under the Black Umbrella: Voices from Colonial Korea while listening to her Korean father-in-law tell stories of his experiences during the period of Japanese occupation. Missing from these memories were the accounts of Japanese atrocities preserved in the “passionate stories of martyrs” that she had come to expect. In conducting the research that culminated into her book, Kang came to realize that “under the shade cast by the Japanese presence, some people, some of the time, led close to normal lives” (p. 21).

    We can expect that the majority of the people residing on the Korean peninsula during the Japanese occupation would identify with the response that Kang commonly heard when she asked her informants to talk about their experiences: “nothing much happened to me.”

    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.

  14. comment number 14 by: YoungRocco

    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.

  15. comment number 15 by: Rose

    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.

  16. comment number 16 by: tomato

    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…

  17. comment number 17 by: ponta

    YoungRocco
    Thanks.

    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.

    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.

    page 282
    1996年の第52回国連人権委員会(53カ国で構成)には、恒例によって、100以上の決議が次々と提案され、採択されていたっが、このうち人権委が任命した特別報告はクワラスミ報告(決議49号)のほかに、横田洋三教授によるミャンマーの人権状況に羹する報告など三一本とかぞえた。
     従来の例だと投票による採決もないではないが、事前にすりあわせて全員一致(コンセンサス)で採択するのが通例で、その場合、評価の度合いを示す表現として2歓迎(welome)を使う例が多く、1賞賛(commend) 3[評価しつつ留意(take note with appreciation) 4留意(take note) も用いられてきた。形式的には人権委が依嘱した報告所だから、よほどのことがないかぎり否認(reject)にはしない。今回は表9ー2が示すように3(十一本)が最も多く4(十本)、2(8本)とつづく。」

    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

  18. comment number 18 by: YoungRocco

    Ponta:

    Howya doing?

    Long Post. Long Words. Take another look at the post I wrote that cited the U.N. Report:

    The International Commission of Jurists, in its report of a mission on “comfort women” published in 1994, states that the treaties referred to by the Japanese Government never intended to include claims made by individuals for inhumane treatment. It argues that the word “claims” was not intended to cover claims in tort and that the term is not defined in the agreed minutes or the protocols. It also argues that there is nothing in the negotiations which concerns violations of individual rights resulting from war crimes and crimes against humanity. The International Commission of Jurists also holds that, in the case of the Republic of Korea, that the 1965 treaty with Japan relates to reparations paid to the Government and does not include claims of individuals based on damage suffered.

    The Special Rapporteur is of the view that neither the San Francisco Peace Treaty nor the bilateral treaties were concerned with human rights violations in general or military sexual slavery in particular. The “intent” of the parties did not cover the specific claims made by “comfort women” and the treaties were not concerned with human rights violations of women during the conduct of the war by Japan. It is, therefore, the conclusion of the Special Rapporteur that the treaties do not cover the claims raised by former military sexual slaves and that the Government of Japan remains legally responsible for the consequent violations of international humanitarian law.

    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:

    BTW you were right about UN, it was not UN, it was ICJ. It was my mistake. I apologize.)

    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.

  19. comment number 19 by: ponta

    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

    Here is the logical breakdown:

    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.

    Young Rocco: Korean Comfort Women have legal standing to demand redress.

    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 .

    1 The High Contracting Parties confirm that 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, including those stipulated in Article IV(a) of the Peace Treaty with Japan signed at the city of San Francisco on September 8, 1951, have been settled completely and finally(Agreement Between Japan and the Republic of Korea Concerning the Settlement of Problems in Regard to Property and Claims and Economic Cooperation)

    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.:

    1991년, 정부는 전국 읍면동에 공문을 보내 “위안부에 대해서는 비밀을 보장해 줄테니 창피해 하지 말고, 신고하라”는 취지의 공문을 보냈고, 이에 따라 신고자는 총 200명 정도였던 것으로 알려져 있다. 이들 중 지금 남아 있는 사람들은 125명 정도이며, 이 125명 중 진짜 “일본군위안부”라고 자기들끼리 확인한 노인들은 33명이다. 이 모임은 약칭 “무궁화회 할머니회”로 불린다. 이 할머니 대표가 바로 일본 대법원에서 진짜로 확인된 ´심미자´(82세) 할머니이며, 2005.4.13. 오전과 오후에 걸쳐, 필자가 여러 시간에 걸쳐 인터뷰를 했다.
    이 곳은 관광하러 한국에 온 일본인들의 관광 코스로 되어 있고, 국내외로부터 성금이 답지된다고 한다. 먼저 나눔의 집을 지어달라 호소했던 할머니들은 운영자측에 대해 많은 불만이 있어 나갔고, 현재 홈페이지에는 10명의 위안부 얼굴들이 나타나 있지만 이들 중 약 5명 정도는 중국에서 온 할머니들이라 한다. 이 중국 할머니들 중 몇 명씩이 하루에 3만원을 받고 수요일 일본대사관 앞 집회에 나간다고 할머니는 말한다.
    2) 몇 명 안 되는 할머니들을 앵벌이로 삼아 국제 망신을 시키고 다닌다. 우리는 돈을 바라지 않는다. 우리가 바라는 것은 명예다. 우리를 이용하여 국제 모금을 하는 것은 우리를 두 번 모욕 주는 행위다.
    또 우리 정부와 시민단체 등이 툭하면 위안부 할머니들을 내세워 일본을 비판하고 일본에게 배상할 것을 요구하고 있으나 정작 정부와 시민단체 등이 위안부할머니에게 해준 일이 별로 없다고 지적하고 오히려 일본인들이 위안부 할머니들의 건강과 소송문제, 또 장례식 등까지 세세한 부분에 대해 지속적인 관심과 보살핌을 펴왔음을 역설적으로 전했다.

    이와 관련 2004년 위안부 할머니중 한명인 박봉순할머니가 사망했을 때 장례식장에 한국인은 거의 없고 일본인들이 몇명 모여서 장례를 치뤘는데 화장비도 일본인들이 내고 유골을 운반할 때도 무궁화회 회장인 심미자 할머니가 먼길을 걸으면서 홀로 운반해야 했다는 가슴 아픈 일화를 소개했다. 봉사단체 관계자는 보이지 않았다면서 위안부봉사단체의 허구성을 통열히 비판했다.

    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.

    Don’t be so sloppy, Ponta. (You confused the UN and ICJ)

    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.)

    I invite you to look at some of the other discussions I’m in involved in.

    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.

  20. comment number 20 by: ponta

    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

  21. comment number 21 by: tomato

    >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.

  22. comment number 22 by: sqz

    tomato

    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.

    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。

  23. comment number 23 by: ponta

    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.

  24. comment number 24 by: nigelboy

    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

    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.

  25. comment number 25 by: ponta

    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.

  26. comment number 26 by: YoungRocco

    Ponta et al.

    How are you guys doing?

    I thought you guys might be interested in reading this…

    http://www.japanfocus.org/products/details/2218

    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?

  27. comment number 27 by: ponta

    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.