Japan should try to mend fences with S. Korea
IOKIBE Makoto / Chairman of Asian Affairs Research Council
October 8, 2019
The Japan-Korea Forum was launched in 1993 to facilitate mutual understanding and improve bilateral relations through exchanges among various experts from Japan and South Korea. The forum held on Cheju Island proposed in 1995 that the two countries jointly host the 2002 Soccer World Cup instead of competing to invite the international event, paving the way for joint hosting. Throughout its quarter-century history, the gathering has cultivated a spirit of being frank and trying to establish relationships based on straight talk.
I joined the forum for the first time in August 2001. Japan-Korea ties had become strained due to issues over Japanese history textbooks and visits to the controversial Yasukuni Shrine by Japanese politicians. I asked Tadashi Yamamoto, chief coordinator for the Japanese side: "Have Japan-Korea ties ever been this bad?" He smiled and replied, "It was far worse before."
In South Korea, the view that Japan committed the worst criminal act by annexing the Korean Peninsula in 1910 still persists. Many people have trouble escaping the notion that Japan was a villain that stole their homeland, even though new chapters in history have unfolded. One of my friends, who is also a scholar, recalls that during the 1960s when he was speaking in Japanese in Seoul, he was met by stern gazes and feared violence.
Around that period, the South Korean government took measures to prevent an explosion of anti-Japanese sentiment. The administration of President Park Chung-hee suppressed massive protests and tried to develop the economy through cooperation with Japan, signing the treaty on basic relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea in 1965. The next two presidents, who came from the military, followed similar paths.
Japanese conservative politicians conscious of Japan's responsibilities in the past, including Prime Minister Eisaku Sato, treated South Korea carefully. Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone made a drastic visit to the neighboring country after he took power and put together an economic cooperation package. Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama and several other premiers officially apologized for Japan's rule of South Korea in the past and set up the Asian Women's Fund to compensate women who worked at Japanese military brothels. However, such overtures won few South Korean hearts and instead tended to raise questions about Japanese sincerity. When people with anti-Japanese views raised their voices, many South Koreans could not ignore them. In Japan, anger against South Korea built up due to its refusal of Japanese support and sincerity, creating an undercurrent that later fed anti-Korea arguments and hate speech.
A fresh step forward in bilateral relations came from President Kim Dae-Jung. The South Korean leader visited Tokyo in 1998 to meet Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi and agreed on future-oriented cooperation between Japan and South Korea. Kim did so as he appreciated Japan's postwar pacifism, democratization and support for developing countries with official aid programs. The president's policy of cultural openness drew the people of the two countries closer. South Korean TV dramas became popular in Japan, and pro-Korean sentiment finally took off nationally.
However, this improvement met a major political blowback. Despite the growing positive sentiment among the people, politicians on both sides took actions insensitive to each other because of domestic reasons. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi repeated visits to Yasukuni Shrine, showing no concerns for the subsequent freezing of ties with China and South Korea. President Lee Myung-bak chose to visit the disputed island of Takeshima, which is claimed by Tokyo but controlled by Seoul, and made provocative remarks on Japan's Emperor. He did so in a bid to shore up his declining support rate, pouring cold water on the pro-South Korean boom in Japan.
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was initially reluctant to sign deals with the South Korean government as he was worried about the possibility of Seoul's nullification of such agreements due to a negative domestic reaction. The premier, nevertheless, tried to make a final settlement on the so-called "comfort women" issue by offering 1 billion yen based on an agreement signed in December 2015 with the administration of President Park Geun-hye. He also signed the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) with Seoul for the exchange of sensitive national security data. These were excellent moves.
Then President Moon Jae-in came to power in May 2017. He initially talked to Japan about a "two-track approach" in which he would pursue to settle both past and current issues. However, he seems to be someone who is fundamentally oriented toward past issues. Moon dissolved the foundation for reconciliation and healing, which was set up based on the 2015 agreement, and refused Japan's efforts to settle the comfort women issue. The Moon administration also maintained an uncompromising attitude toward Japan when the South Korean military demanded that Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force (MSDF) ships refrain from flying the rising sun flag, which is seen by some South Koreans as a symbol of Japan's wartime militarism, at an international naval review event in South Korea. The president's position remained the same when a South Korean destroyer sent fire-control radar signals at Japanese MSDF patrolling aircraft in the Sea of Japan. When the South Korean supreme court ordered Japanese companies to compensate South Korean workers who were mobilized to work at their factories during Japan's colonial rule, the South Korean government didn't move at all, despite Seoul's responsibility to bridge the gap between the top court's judgment and the 1965 Japan-ROK redress agreement, which states that the compensation issue was settled "completely and finally" with the pact.
It is wrong for the people of Japan to ignore the past, but it is more wrong for the people of South Korea to continue to be controlled by the past. Some people in and around the Moon administration appear unable to control an impulse to expose South Koreans who were connected with Japan's past rule -- a drive with a posture of "rooting out all historic evils."
Some South Koreans even allow themselves to take outrageous actions against present-day Japan because of Tokyo's past mistakes. Throughout the postwar period, the Japanese government had endured such actions without resistance. Finally, the Abe administration launched the first counterattack. It was a controlled, weak strike, but it created a large shockwave anyway because it was the first such move by Tokyo since the end of World War II.
Should the administration have done so? Japanese public opinion says yes. However, political decisions should be evaluated mainly by their results and effectiveness. Actions based on the sentiment of inevitability, even with domestic support, mean little if they damage national interests and prevent us from seeing the big picture. And here are the actual results of Tokyo's latest moves: A sharp drop in South Korean tourists to Japan, which once reached 7.5 million a year from a country with a population of 50 million; boycotts of Japanese products with shrinking trade between the two countries; and a
more obstinate Moon administration that discarded such an important agreement as GSOMIA. Is this outcome what the government of Japan wanted? I want a way out based on a major initiative of dialogue and agreement, a positive settlement. Despite our deep anger, we cannot move from our current location and distance ourselves from our neighbor. I also want the Abe administration to play a role of saving the world as a conservative force with dignity. And after all, we should not ruin the ties between the two countries with so many good people.
Makoto Iokibe is Chairman of Asian Affairs Research Council
This article was published in the September 12th, 2019 edition of Mainichi Shimbun.
I joined the forum for the first time in August 2001. Japan-Korea ties had become strained due to issues over Japanese history textbooks and visits to the controversial Yasukuni Shrine by Japanese politicians. I asked Tadashi Yamamoto, chief coordinator for the Japanese side: "Have Japan-Korea ties ever been this bad?" He smiled and replied, "It was far worse before."
In South Korea, the view that Japan committed the worst criminal act by annexing the Korean Peninsula in 1910 still persists. Many people have trouble escaping the notion that Japan was a villain that stole their homeland, even though new chapters in history have unfolded. One of my friends, who is also a scholar, recalls that during the 1960s when he was speaking in Japanese in Seoul, he was met by stern gazes and feared violence.
Around that period, the South Korean government took measures to prevent an explosion of anti-Japanese sentiment. The administration of President Park Chung-hee suppressed massive protests and tried to develop the economy through cooperation with Japan, signing the treaty on basic relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea in 1965. The next two presidents, who came from the military, followed similar paths.
Japanese conservative politicians conscious of Japan's responsibilities in the past, including Prime Minister Eisaku Sato, treated South Korea carefully. Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone made a drastic visit to the neighboring country after he took power and put together an economic cooperation package. Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama and several other premiers officially apologized for Japan's rule of South Korea in the past and set up the Asian Women's Fund to compensate women who worked at Japanese military brothels. However, such overtures won few South Korean hearts and instead tended to raise questions about Japanese sincerity. When people with anti-Japanese views raised their voices, many South Koreans could not ignore them. In Japan, anger against South Korea built up due to its refusal of Japanese support and sincerity, creating an undercurrent that later fed anti-Korea arguments and hate speech.
A fresh step forward in bilateral relations came from President Kim Dae-Jung. The South Korean leader visited Tokyo in 1998 to meet Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi and agreed on future-oriented cooperation between Japan and South Korea. Kim did so as he appreciated Japan's postwar pacifism, democratization and support for developing countries with official aid programs. The president's policy of cultural openness drew the people of the two countries closer. South Korean TV dramas became popular in Japan, and pro-Korean sentiment finally took off nationally.
However, this improvement met a major political blowback. Despite the growing positive sentiment among the people, politicians on both sides took actions insensitive to each other because of domestic reasons. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi repeated visits to Yasukuni Shrine, showing no concerns for the subsequent freezing of ties with China and South Korea. President Lee Myung-bak chose to visit the disputed island of Takeshima, which is claimed by Tokyo but controlled by Seoul, and made provocative remarks on Japan's Emperor. He did so in a bid to shore up his declining support rate, pouring cold water on the pro-South Korean boom in Japan.
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was initially reluctant to sign deals with the South Korean government as he was worried about the possibility of Seoul's nullification of such agreements due to a negative domestic reaction. The premier, nevertheless, tried to make a final settlement on the so-called "comfort women" issue by offering 1 billion yen based on an agreement signed in December 2015 with the administration of President Park Geun-hye. He also signed the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) with Seoul for the exchange of sensitive national security data. These were excellent moves.
Then President Moon Jae-in came to power in May 2017. He initially talked to Japan about a "two-track approach" in which he would pursue to settle both past and current issues. However, he seems to be someone who is fundamentally oriented toward past issues. Moon dissolved the foundation for reconciliation and healing, which was set up based on the 2015 agreement, and refused Japan's efforts to settle the comfort women issue. The Moon administration also maintained an uncompromising attitude toward Japan when the South Korean military demanded that Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force (MSDF) ships refrain from flying the rising sun flag, which is seen by some South Koreans as a symbol of Japan's wartime militarism, at an international naval review event in South Korea. The president's position remained the same when a South Korean destroyer sent fire-control radar signals at Japanese MSDF patrolling aircraft in the Sea of Japan. When the South Korean supreme court ordered Japanese companies to compensate South Korean workers who were mobilized to work at their factories during Japan's colonial rule, the South Korean government didn't move at all, despite Seoul's responsibility to bridge the gap between the top court's judgment and the 1965 Japan-ROK redress agreement, which states that the compensation issue was settled "completely and finally" with the pact.
It is wrong for the people of Japan to ignore the past, but it is more wrong for the people of South Korea to continue to be controlled by the past. Some people in and around the Moon administration appear unable to control an impulse to expose South Koreans who were connected with Japan's past rule -- a drive with a posture of "rooting out all historic evils."
Some South Koreans even allow themselves to take outrageous actions against present-day Japan because of Tokyo's past mistakes. Throughout the postwar period, the Japanese government had endured such actions without resistance. Finally, the Abe administration launched the first counterattack. It was a controlled, weak strike, but it created a large shockwave anyway because it was the first such move by Tokyo since the end of World War II.
Should the administration have done so? Japanese public opinion says yes. However, political decisions should be evaluated mainly by their results and effectiveness. Actions based on the sentiment of inevitability, even with domestic support, mean little if they damage national interests and prevent us from seeing the big picture. And here are the actual results of Tokyo's latest moves: A sharp drop in South Korean tourists to Japan, which once reached 7.5 million a year from a country with a population of 50 million; boycotts of Japanese products with shrinking trade between the two countries; and a
more obstinate Moon administration that discarded such an important agreement as GSOMIA. Is this outcome what the government of Japan wanted? I want a way out based on a major initiative of dialogue and agreement, a positive settlement. Despite our deep anger, we cannot move from our current location and distance ourselves from our neighbor. I also want the Abe administration to play a role of saving the world as a conservative force with dignity. And after all, we should not ruin the ties between the two countries with so many good people.
Makoto Iokibe is Chairman of Asian Affairs Research Council
This article was published in the September 12th, 2019 edition of Mainichi Shimbun.
The English-Speaking Union of Japan
政治が止めよ、日韓対立 大きな合意で出口模索を
五百旗頭 真 / アジア調査会会長
2019年 10月 8日
日韓両国の各界識者を集め、相互理解と関係改善を図る日韓フォーラムが生まれたのは、１９９３年であった。９５年の済州島会議では、両国が開催を争っていた２００２年サッカー・ワールドカップ（Ｗ杯）について「日韓共催」を提案し、流れをつくった。四半世紀の歴史を通じて、フォーラムでは言いにくいことを含めて言い合い、その上で関係を模索する気風が築かれた。
私が初めて会議に参加したのは、０１年８月だった。折から教科書問題や靖国参拝問題をめぐって両国関係は悪化していた。私は日本側代表幹事の山本正氏に尋ねた。「これまでも、日韓関係がこんなに悪かったのか」。氏はほほ笑んで答えた。「昔はもっと悪かった」
韓国内では、日韓併合を最悪の犯罪行為とする見方が根深く存在する。日本は祖国を奪った諸悪の根源であるとして、新たな歴史の局面を迎えても容易に抜け出せない人が少なくない。６０年代に、ソウル市内で日本語でしゃべっていると、厳しい視線を感じ、暴行されるのではないかと恐怖を感じた。そう友人の学者は回想する。
その時期、韓国内での反日論の暴発を抑えたのは韓国政府だった。朴正熙（パクチョンヒ）政権は激しい反対運動を制して、日本との協力による経済発展を図り、６５年に日韓基本条約＝１＝を結んだ。その後の軍人出身の大統領２人も同じ路線を続けた。
過去への責任を心に留める佐藤栄作首相ら日本の保守政治家たちも、韓国に丁寧さをもって対した。中曽根康弘首相は就任後に劇的な訪韓を行って経済協力をまとめた。村山富市首相をはじめ何人かの首相は過去の韓国支配につき公的に謝罪し、アジア女性基金を設けて元慰安婦たちへのおわびを行動に表そうとした。だが、それが韓国民を感動させる情景は乏しく、むしろ日本側の誠意を疑うような反応を招きがちだった。反日観の持ち主が大声を上げ、その声が上がると韓国内ではそれを否定できない気分があった。日本の支援と誠意をあだで返す韓国への憤りが日本国内に沈潜し、それが嫌韓論やヘイトスピーチなどの伏線となった。
両国関係の新たな前進をもたらしたのは金大中（キムデジュン）大統領であった。９８年、大統領は東京を訪ねて小渕恵三首相と首脳会談を行い、未来志向の日韓協力に合意した。その理由は、戦後日本の平和主義や民主化、政府開発援助（ＯＤＡ）による途上国への援助に対する再評価にあった。大統領の文化開放政策が両国民を近づけた。韓流ドラマが日本でも人気を集め、国民的な親韓機運がようやく生まれた。
ところが、大きな逆説が生じた。国民レベルでは互いの好感度が徐々に増したのに対し、政治が国内的理由から相手に無神経となった。小泉純一郎首相は靖国参拝を繰り返して、中韓両国との関係冷却化を気に留めなかった。李明博（イミョンバク）大統領は低下した支持率の改善のため反日行動をあえてした。竹島上陸を敢行し、天皇について挑発的な発言を行って、日本国内の韓流ブームに冷水を浴びせた。
安倍晋三首相は、日韓政府間で合意を結んでも、韓国内に反日論が噴出すると韓国政府が合意をほごにする傾向に警戒的であったが、１５年１２月、朴槿恵（パククネ）政権との合意により１０億円の基金を提供して慰安婦問題への最終的な決着を図った。また、安全保障情報を共有する日韓軍事情報包括保護協定（ＧＳＯＭＩＡ）にも合意した。立派な行動だった。
文在寅（ムンジェイン）大統領は、はじめ日本に対して過去の問題と現在の問題の双方を重視する２トラック・アプローチを語ったが、実際には過去の問題を本源的とする人だったようだ。上記の日韓合意で設立された「和解・癒やし財団」を解散させ、日本の努力で慰安婦問題を決着することを許さなかった。旭日旗やレーダー照射の問題＝２＝でも、日本への非妥協的な対処に終始した。とりわけ元徴用工の問題では、大法院（最高裁）判決と日韓合意の間を埋める任務が韓国政府にあるのに、動かなかった。
日本人が過去を無視するのは間違いであるが、韓国人が過去に支配され続けるのは、それ以上に誤りである。文政権周辺は「積弊史観」に立って、過去の日本支配に関与した韓国人をどこまでも排除しようとする衝動が止まらないようだ。
日本の過去の非ゆえに、現在の日本に対する非道を自らに許す韓国人が今も存在する。日本政府は戦後史を通じて、それに耐え、あらがわずにきた。この度、安倍政権はついに反撃の一発を放った。あまり腰の入らない抑制された一撃であったが、何しろ戦後初なので大きな衝撃となった。
そうすべきだったのか。日本国内の世論はこれを支持している。しかし政治決定においては、結果・効果が最重要だ。やむにやまれぬ心境から国内支持を得て行っても、国益を損ね大局を見失っては国を誤る。実際の結果は、韓国５０００万人の人口中、年間７５０万人の日本旅行者が急減し、日本製品の不買運動が生じて貿易が低下し、文政権がＧＳＯＭＩＡまで破棄して、ますます意固地になる。これが日本政府の望んだことだったのか。どこかで大きな協議と合意による出口、前向きの決着を見いださねばならない。どんなに憤っても、引っ越しできない隣国なのだから。また、安倍政権には「品格ある保守」として、荒れた世界を支える役割を担ってもらいたいから。そして何よりも、両国にはいい人がいっぱいいるのだから。両国関係を破滅させてはいけない。
筆者は、アジア調査会会長。本稿は、２０１９年９月１２日付毎日新聞朝刊に掲載された
私が初めて会議に参加したのは、０１年８月だった。折から教科書問題や靖国参拝問題をめぐって両国関係は悪化していた。私は日本側代表幹事の山本正氏に尋ねた。「これまでも、日韓関係がこんなに悪かったのか」。氏はほほ笑んで答えた。「昔はもっと悪かった」
韓国内では、日韓併合を最悪の犯罪行為とする見方が根深く存在する。日本は祖国を奪った諸悪の根源であるとして、新たな歴史の局面を迎えても容易に抜け出せない人が少なくない。６０年代に、ソウル市内で日本語でしゃべっていると、厳しい視線を感じ、暴行されるのではないかと恐怖を感じた。そう友人の学者は回想する。
その時期、韓国内での反日論の暴発を抑えたのは韓国政府だった。朴正熙（パクチョンヒ）政権は激しい反対運動を制して、日本との協力による経済発展を図り、６５年に日韓基本条約＝１＝を結んだ。その後の軍人出身の大統領２人も同じ路線を続けた。
過去への責任を心に留める佐藤栄作首相ら日本の保守政治家たちも、韓国に丁寧さをもって対した。中曽根康弘首相は就任後に劇的な訪韓を行って経済協力をまとめた。村山富市首相をはじめ何人かの首相は過去の韓国支配につき公的に謝罪し、アジア女性基金を設けて元慰安婦たちへのおわびを行動に表そうとした。だが、それが韓国民を感動させる情景は乏しく、むしろ日本側の誠意を疑うような反応を招きがちだった。反日観の持ち主が大声を上げ、その声が上がると韓国内ではそれを否定できない気分があった。日本の支援と誠意をあだで返す韓国への憤りが日本国内に沈潜し、それが嫌韓論やヘイトスピーチなどの伏線となった。
両国関係の新たな前進をもたらしたのは金大中（キムデジュン）大統領であった。９８年、大統領は東京を訪ねて小渕恵三首相と首脳会談を行い、未来志向の日韓協力に合意した。その理由は、戦後日本の平和主義や民主化、政府開発援助（ＯＤＡ）による途上国への援助に対する再評価にあった。大統領の文化開放政策が両国民を近づけた。韓流ドラマが日本でも人気を集め、国民的な親韓機運がようやく生まれた。
ところが、大きな逆説が生じた。国民レベルでは互いの好感度が徐々に増したのに対し、政治が国内的理由から相手に無神経となった。小泉純一郎首相は靖国参拝を繰り返して、中韓両国との関係冷却化を気に留めなかった。李明博（イミョンバク）大統領は低下した支持率の改善のため反日行動をあえてした。竹島上陸を敢行し、天皇について挑発的な発言を行って、日本国内の韓流ブームに冷水を浴びせた。
安倍晋三首相は、日韓政府間で合意を結んでも、韓国内に反日論が噴出すると韓国政府が合意をほごにする傾向に警戒的であったが、１５年１２月、朴槿恵（パククネ）政権との合意により１０億円の基金を提供して慰安婦問題への最終的な決着を図った。また、安全保障情報を共有する日韓軍事情報包括保護協定（ＧＳＯＭＩＡ）にも合意した。立派な行動だった。
文在寅（ムンジェイン）大統領は、はじめ日本に対して過去の問題と現在の問題の双方を重視する２トラック・アプローチを語ったが、実際には過去の問題を本源的とする人だったようだ。上記の日韓合意で設立された「和解・癒やし財団」を解散させ、日本の努力で慰安婦問題を決着することを許さなかった。旭日旗やレーダー照射の問題＝２＝でも、日本への非妥協的な対処に終始した。とりわけ元徴用工の問題では、大法院（最高裁）判決と日韓合意の間を埋める任務が韓国政府にあるのに、動かなかった。
日本人が過去を無視するのは間違いであるが、韓国人が過去に支配され続けるのは、それ以上に誤りである。文政権周辺は「積弊史観」に立って、過去の日本支配に関与した韓国人をどこまでも排除しようとする衝動が止まらないようだ。
日本の過去の非ゆえに、現在の日本に対する非道を自らに許す韓国人が今も存在する。日本政府は戦後史を通じて、それに耐え、あらがわずにきた。この度、安倍政権はついに反撃の一発を放った。あまり腰の入らない抑制された一撃であったが、何しろ戦後初なので大きな衝撃となった。
そうすべきだったのか。日本国内の世論はこれを支持している。しかし政治決定においては、結果・効果が最重要だ。やむにやまれぬ心境から国内支持を得て行っても、国益を損ね大局を見失っては国を誤る。実際の結果は、韓国５０００万人の人口中、年間７５０万人の日本旅行者が急減し、日本製品の不買運動が生じて貿易が低下し、文政権がＧＳＯＭＩＡまで破棄して、ますます意固地になる。これが日本政府の望んだことだったのか。どこかで大きな協議と合意による出口、前向きの決着を見いださねばならない。どんなに憤っても、引っ越しできない隣国なのだから。また、安倍政権には「品格ある保守」として、荒れた世界を支える役割を担ってもらいたいから。そして何よりも、両国にはいい人がいっぱいいるのだから。両国関係を破滅させてはいけない。
筆者は、アジア調査会会長。本稿は、２０１９年９月１２日付毎日新聞朝刊に掲載された
一般社団法人 日本英語交流連盟