EDITORIAL: What legacy do Japan, South Korea want to leave for future?
August 17, 2019
The root of current conflict lie in issues related to the troubled history between the two countries.
The Moon administration has effectively eviscerated a bilateral agreement on the thorny issue of “comfort women,” many of whom were from the Korean Peninsula and forced to provide sex to wartime Japanese soldiers.
Delivering an additional blow to the bilateral relationship, the South Korean Supreme Court last autumn ordered Japanese companies to pay compensation to Koreans brought to work at Japanese mines, factories and dockyards during World War II.
It was the first in a series of rulings that are at odds with Seoul’s traditional position on the issue.
The ruling was based on the assumption that Japan’s annexation of the Korean Peninsula under the 1910 Japan-Korea Treaty was unlawful.
After the end of the war, the two countries got embroiled in a dispute over the legal status of the annexation in the process leading to the 1965 treaty that established a formal diplomatic relationship between the two countries. The two sides settled the question with an ambiguous declaration that the 1910 treaty was “already null and void.”
MOON MUST HONOR BILATERAL PACTS
The top court ruling incurred the wrath of the Japanese government because, by proclaiming the 1910 treaty to be illegal, the decision could expand the scope of compensation indefinitely.
Even though it has said it respects the court’s decision, the Moon administration understands that the ruling is inconsistent with the South Korean government’s traditional position on the issue.
The situation will not improve if Seoul continues dragging its feet on clarifying its own position.
In the Aug. 15 address, Moon also stated: “Together with Japan, we have tried to practically assuage the suffering of victims from the Japanese colonial period. We have consistently maintained the position that we should learn from history and steadily work together.”
The process of healing he referred to was supported by diplomatic wisdom the two countries developed together in the postwar period.
Even though the treaty to normalize the diplomatic relations left some ambiguity concerning the annexation treaty, politicians on both sides have consistently endeavored to prevent the issue from straining bilateral ties.
From this viewpoint, we urge Moon to take positive actions now to help restore trust between Tokyo and Seoul.
First, he should appreciate and honor the 2015 bilateral agreement on the comfort women issue negotiated by the leaders of the two countries to settle the issue “finally and irreversibly.”
The Moon administration’s argument that the agreement negotiated by then South Korean President Park Geun-hye is flawed does not justify its nullification. If a country breaks such a formal agreement with another, mutual trust cannot be maintained.
The Moon administration should reflect on the fact that by denying the diplomatic achievement of the previous conservative government it has only caused Seoul’s relations with Tokyo to deteriorate sharply and put itself in a diplomatic quandary.
（社説）日本と韓国を考える 次代へ渡す互恵関係維持を
2019年8月17日
いまの日韓の対立の発端は、歴史問題である。
両国間の慰安婦合意を文政権が骨抜きにしたうえ、戦時中の元徴用工らについて韓国大法院（最高裁）が日本企業に賠償を命じる判決を出した。
判決は、日本による２０世紀初めの韓国併合自体が不法だったとの前提で導かれた。併合をめぐっては１９６０年代に至る国交正常化の交渉でも対立し、最終的に「もはや無効」という玉虫色で決着させた経緯がある。
■文政権は合意尊重を
日本政府が反発するのは今になって併合を不法とするなら、賠償の範囲が際限なく広がりかねないためだ。
文政権も司法の判断を尊重するとしつつ、これまでの行政府の見解と相いれない部分があることは認識している。ただ、いつまでも判断を持ち越すなら、状況は改善しないだろう。
演説で文氏はこうも語った。韓国は植民地支配の被害者らに対し、「日本とともに苦痛を実質的に癒やそうとし、歴史をかがみとして固く手をつなごうとの立場を堅持してきた」と。
まさにこの歩みこそ、両国が編み出してきた外交の知恵だったはずだ。国交正常化の協定があいまいさを残していたとしても、それを後世の政治が不断の努力で補ってきたのである。
その意味で文氏には今こそ行動を求めたい。まずは慰安婦合意を再評価し、尊重すべきである。合意は朴槿恵（パククネ）・前政権が結んだといっても、いったん国家間で交わされた約束が反故（ほご）にされるなら、信頼は保てない。
保守政権の実績を否定したことで、結果的に対日関係の悪化を招き、自らを苦しめていることを省みる必要がある。
文氏の演説とは裏腹に、光復節では安倍政権を糾弾する集会が韓国各地で開かれた。日本というより、政権に問題があるとの見方が強まっている。
August 17, 2019
The root of current conflict lie in issues related to the troubled history between the two countries.
The Moon administration has effectively eviscerated a bilateral agreement on the thorny issue of “comfort women,” many of whom were from the Korean Peninsula and forced to provide sex to wartime Japanese soldiers.
Delivering an additional blow to the bilateral relationship, the South Korean Supreme Court last autumn ordered Japanese companies to pay compensation to Koreans brought to work at Japanese mines, factories and dockyards during World War II.
It was the first in a series of rulings that are at odds with Seoul’s traditional position on the issue.
The ruling was based on the assumption that Japan’s annexation of the Korean Peninsula under the 1910 Japan-Korea Treaty was unlawful.
After the end of the war, the two countries got embroiled in a dispute over the legal status of the annexation in the process leading to the 1965 treaty that established a formal diplomatic relationship between the two countries. The two sides settled the question with an ambiguous declaration that the 1910 treaty was “already null and void.”
MOON MUST HONOR BILATERAL PACTS
The top court ruling incurred the wrath of the Japanese government because, by proclaiming the 1910 treaty to be illegal, the decision could expand the scope of compensation indefinitely.
Even though it has said it respects the court’s decision, the Moon administration understands that the ruling is inconsistent with the South Korean government’s traditional position on the issue.
The situation will not improve if Seoul continues dragging its feet on clarifying its own position.
In the Aug. 15 address, Moon also stated: “Together with Japan, we have tried to practically assuage the suffering of victims from the Japanese colonial period. We have consistently maintained the position that we should learn from history and steadily work together.”
The process of healing he referred to was supported by diplomatic wisdom the two countries developed together in the postwar period.
Even though the treaty to normalize the diplomatic relations left some ambiguity concerning the annexation treaty, politicians on both sides have consistently endeavored to prevent the issue from straining bilateral ties.
From this viewpoint, we urge Moon to take positive actions now to help restore trust between Tokyo and Seoul.
First, he should appreciate and honor the 2015 bilateral agreement on the comfort women issue negotiated by the leaders of the two countries to settle the issue “finally and irreversibly.”
The Moon administration’s argument that the agreement negotiated by then South Korean President Park Geun-hye is flawed does not justify its nullification. If a country breaks such a formal agreement with another, mutual trust cannot be maintained.
The Moon administration should reflect on the fact that by denying the diplomatic achievement of the previous conservative government it has only caused Seoul’s relations with Tokyo to deteriorate sharply and put itself in a diplomatic quandary.
（社説）日本と韓国を考える 次代へ渡す互恵関係維持を
2019年8月17日
いまの日韓の対立の発端は、歴史問題である。
両国間の慰安婦合意を文政権が骨抜きにしたうえ、戦時中の元徴用工らについて韓国大法院（最高裁）が日本企業に賠償を命じる判決を出した。
判決は、日本による２０世紀初めの韓国併合自体が不法だったとの前提で導かれた。併合をめぐっては１９６０年代に至る国交正常化の交渉でも対立し、最終的に「もはや無効」という玉虫色で決着させた経緯がある。
■文政権は合意尊重を
日本政府が反発するのは今になって併合を不法とするなら、賠償の範囲が際限なく広がりかねないためだ。
文政権も司法の判断を尊重するとしつつ、これまでの行政府の見解と相いれない部分があることは認識している。ただ、いつまでも判断を持ち越すなら、状況は改善しないだろう。
演説で文氏はこうも語った。韓国は植民地支配の被害者らに対し、「日本とともに苦痛を実質的に癒やそうとし、歴史をかがみとして固く手をつなごうとの立場を堅持してきた」と。
まさにこの歩みこそ、両国が編み出してきた外交の知恵だったはずだ。国交正常化の協定があいまいさを残していたとしても、それを後世の政治が不断の努力で補ってきたのである。
その意味で文氏には今こそ行動を求めたい。まずは慰安婦合意を再評価し、尊重すべきである。合意は朴槿恵（パククネ）・前政権が結んだといっても、いったん国家間で交わされた約束が反故（ほご）にされるなら、信頼は保てない。
保守政権の実績を否定したことで、結果的に対日関係の悪化を招き、自らを苦しめていることを省みる必要がある。
文氏の演説とは裏腹に、光復節では安倍政権を糾弾する集会が韓国各地で開かれた。日本というより、政権に問題があるとの見方が強まっている。
