Roh wants to wring more money out of Japan (or at least score some cheap political points)

Roh Moo-hyun and his wife sing the national anthem.  Note to Roh's handlers; please give your boy a lighter shade of lipstick.  We don't want any more fights over his bad make-up jobs (hat tip to Oranckay).

Yesterday was Independence Proclamation Day or Samiljeonl (삼일절, March 1) in Korea (holler to the Marmot's Hole for the link).  Inspired by Woodrow Wilson's 14 points, Koreans across the country read a proclamation of Korea's independence from Japan.  The independence movement was crushed and Korea remained a Japanese possession until it was liberated by the allies at the end of world war two.

March 1 is now a major Korean holiday featuring speeches, marches and other remembrances of Korea's colonial past along with warnings against domination by Korea's neighbors.  Some groups also use the date for their own issues, including calls to liberate North Korea.

Stoking the anti-Japanese fire

Korean feelings about the Japanese is similar to how the various factions in Yugoslavia felt about each other.  During quiet times, most young Koreans would say that the past is the past and that they don't hate the Japanese.  But as soon as some conflict arises, the old hatreds come bubbling up from deep in the Korean psyche and its off to the Jap-bashing races.

The Japanese certainly did not help themselves with Koreans in the latest dispute over Dokto.  Sure, they have a claim to the islets but they are in Korean hands now and making an issue of it just before a holiday highlighting Japan's past domination of Korea is just asking for trouble.

What's a patriotic holiday without demogoguery?

President Roh Moo-hyun decided to use the holiday to call on Japan to apologize again for its colonial and militaristic past.  Roh also opened the possibility of trying to wrangle more compensation money from the Japanese despite the fact that Japan already compensated Korea back in the 1960s.

Just to make sure there is no confusion about what Roh said, I will take translations of his quotes from a couple of sources (they can be different).  From the Joongang Ilbo:

"Korea and Japan have a common destiny to open the future of Northeast Asia. But guaranteeing the future of the two countries requires something more than judicial and political advancement of their relationship. What is needed are the sincere efforts of the Japanese government and people. They will have to find out the truth of the past and make apologies and compensation, if necessary...

"I ask Japanese intellectuals, you will have to go forward so that Japan can truly reflect upon what it did and so that the two countries can heal their wounds.  Otherwise, no matter how strong its economic and military power may be, it will be difficult for Japan to become a leader of the world."

From the Chosun Ilbo:

“We need to bring to light the historical truth, apologize and reflect, pay compensation should there be things that need to be compensated, and reconcile.”

This is one of those times I wish I knew more Korean.  The Chosun article states that the statement can be taken to mean that Japan needs to compensate Koreans some more (using we), the Joongang translation seems to have Roh stating directly that the Japanese might need to compensate Koreans more (using they).  I highlighted the relevant pronouns in red in the quotes.

Q: What does Japan owe Korea?   A: Nothing.  They gave at the office

Being an IKK blogger, my gut instinct is to take Korea's side on this matter.  The simple fact is that Japan has already compensated Korea.  The matter was settled by treaty in 1965.

{As a side note, I'm against compensation for historical 'crimes' as a matter of general principle.  As often as not, they represent victor's spoils.  In addition, there are simply too many historical grievances out there which may beg for compensation (I'm still waiting for my compensation check from the US federal government for the invasion and conquest of the South in 1861-1865). UPDATE: It could also be argued that, having been nuked twice, the Japanese have endured enough for their crimes.}

What is the Deal with Roh's statement?

So, if the compensation issue has already been settled, why is Roh bringing it up again?  I see a few possibilities:

1.  He really does want to get more money from Japan (I had to at least put it out there).

2.  After the release of some 1965 treaty-related documents last January, he wants to redirect public anger and possible lawsuits from the Korea to the Japanese government.

3.  With the Norks not giving him any help on the nuke issue and his Son of Sunshine policy going nowhere, he wants rally pubic support with a good old-fashioned Ilbonnom bashing session.  It would certainly be more emotionally satisfying for him than this.

4.  All of the above.

But this would not be a real blog post without a conspiracy theory, so I give you....

5.  Perhaps Roh will use the issue of trying to get more money from Japan as a way of restarting Son of Sunshine.  Here's how it goes:  The North Koreans also want compensation from the Japanese.  Roh could approach the Norks about jointly seeking compensation as a way to having the Koreas work together towards a common goal and iron out their differences on some other issues. Sticking it to the Japanese is a bonus.

It also makes sense from a political positioning standpoint. Cooperating with the Norks on getting money from Japan would neatly tie in with a couple of Korean left-wing themes; 'coming to terms with Korea's colonial past' and 'inter Korean reconciliation.' It would certainly improve his standing with some of his leftist former backers.

Anyway, take that last bit with a kilo of salt.

One legal question I'm unsure of is whether Park Chung-hee took Japan's money on behalf of Korea or South Korea. Since Japan only has relations with the South and the ROK is the legal government of all of Korea (under their own law), it could be argued that Japan's. compensation to South Korea in 1965 covers the North as well. In other words, if Pyongyang wants some Japanese money, they should be asking Seoul instead of Tokyo. Can anyone answer this?

Comments

[Little Kim]

Roh really needs to grow up, Japan don't owe us anything. These people sound like a broken record of baby whining to me.

[Little Kim]

Andy,
I agree with you with Rohs intention of wringing money from the Japanese. Japan owes koreans absolutely nothing. Without Japan's occupation, South Korea would still be a third world country like China.

[Juan]

Hmmm... Little Kim does that mean Jews should thank the Nazis for a different form of population control?

[Juan]

Hello Andy, I've been a great fan of "The Marmot's Hole" and got introduced to your great blog through his. I've looked over your stuff and have to say that you have a new fan :-)

I agree with you on the monetary repayment part. I just don't think the Korean goverment should touch that issue. That is something the direct victims of that era should takeup with the Japanese court. (Though looking at the reality and precedents in the Japanese courts, this is extremely unlikely to go in favour of the victims.)
But I have to say I would love to see Japan go the full length in its "sincere" apologies the way Germany has gone with its "crime against humanity." Though I doubt it will ever happen with Japan.
As the ancient proverb goes in Korea "A word well put repays even the greatest of debts."

[oranckay]

Hi Andy!
I'm not being sarcastic, I'm genuinely curious: what do you think about various forms of compensation for Nazi crimes and compensation to Japanese Americans for internment and having their property stolen from them?

[Andy (AKA: The Yangban)]

Hi there, Oranckay,

That is a question is a post by itself and one I don't want to write, so I'll give you my Reader's Digest condensed reply:

I don't know the particulars of the German cases but I would certainly oppose compensation or other forms of reparations if they were imposed by the victors (Like I said, I don't know the particulars.). If the Germans decide to give some money out of the goodness of their hearts, well God bless them.

With private companies, I would oppose imposing compensation unless what they did was negligent or illegal by the standards of the time.

As for the Japanese 'interns,' I don't think the government should have provided compensation for the internment itself. It set a bad precedent for others with real or imagined grievances against the government (like Southerners). On the other hand, they should be compensated for their financial loses (including the lost fruits of their labor) in keeping with the 'takings clause' of the Constitution.

Sounds like a tortured line of reasoning, doesn't it? But that legal stuff usually is.

[usinkorea]

The Nazi and Jew comparison doesn't hold water. Trying to say disagreeing with a statement that Japan doesn't owe Korea anything is the same as saying the Nazis owed the Jews nothing doesn't work. Korea was a nation, the Jews were an ethnic group. Korea was colonized, the Jews were rounded up and slaughtered. And let's be real, if Germany had not slaughtered the Jews on epic scale ----- millions ----- what would the victorious parties after WWII forced Germany to pay individual victims who were Jews? How much if, say, the Jews had not died in gas chambers but in ways Koreans died under the Japanese and on a scale similar to the Koreans?

The two examples are not the same and shouldn't be considered together.

On the progress vs compensation argument. It is unquestionable Japan in Korea brought economic and technological progress. However, when I balance things out, it doesn't justify colonization. Japan should have been made to compensate Korea to some extent. And they did.

But, taking historical arguments up in contemporay politics is too much a waste of time to me, because too much of the history is written on what is going on now.

For example, a Korean prof in the US told us once that Sokuram (the wonderful Buddhist statute in the man-made cave) was restored by the Japanese during the period in which Japan was taking over Korea. He said that the site had was largely forgotten or in pitiful shape before, and Koreans couldn't avoid facts like that. And he was no apologist for Japan. When he talked about one of the rail-lines built by Japan, he pointed out that the lines were not connected major population areas, but they were connected Cholla's agricultural products to ports on the west coast to bring it to Japan. How much does it matter that the same rail line could be used by an independant Korea to export products to build the Korean economy?

These are interesting questions to think about, but they are too politically charged and by that I mean our contemporary world politics does too much damage to the historical reality. It is one reason in my official studies, I began avoiding contemporary issues back when I was a 3rd year undergraduate. I don't trust myself enough to do the history justice.....

[usinkorea]

I forgot my main point......I think the Flying Yangban should lower the amount of salt grains he advises when considering the North Korea protection angle.

I don't think Roh's people were considering how to make NK like them. I DO think that partly behind Roh's statement is the desire to see Japan cut a major compensation package with North Korea like it seemed to be heading to do before the nuke crisis sprang back up. SK wants to build the North up for its own reasons. Arguing the Park Chung Hee signed agreement doesn't extend to NK and putting pressure on Japan concerning "making things right" with "THE Koreans" is trying to push Japan toward that goal.

I also think part of Roh's reasoning for being so bold now is how much heat NK is taking from Japan on the kidnapping issue and the bones affair. Roh has successfully put Japan on the defensive as far as the media and public at large goes. NK can breate a little easier. (if just a little easier).

Roh's statement to Japan was just a more striking example of the kinds of actions the SK government has taken against the US in the public sphere when it has deemed "pressure" by the US on NK too dangerous.

[urinity]

Countries like India, Indonesia, and Phillipine all had "paid" millions of money to achieve independence from their suzerains. Without the San Francisco Treaty, Korea also had a duty to pay 800 million dollars (valued in 1965), or whatever they come to agree, to Japan for railroads, ports, hospitals, factories, paved roads, buildings, schools, and many other public/personal belongings left in the penninsula.

Simply put, Koreans didn't become independent from Japan. Korea was liberated by the US. No independence war/movement had took place whatsoever. I think Japan was a generous suzerain at least for giving 65 millions to Korea. It's more like Korea got free 865 millions (plus 120 mil from US?). Miracle of Han river? Go figure.

And yes. The proceeding records from the treaty states that the compensation Pak took included the meney for NK. This, I supporse, will be "reveal" to SK publics in a few months.

[shakuhachi]

Japan is not obligated to pay North Korea anything, as Japan does not recognise North Korea. This is spelled out in 'Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea'

http://wikisource.org/wiki/Treaty_on_Basic_Relations_between_Japan_and_the_Republic_of_Korea
---------------------------------------------------
Article III

It is confirmed that the Government of the Republic of Korea is the only lawful Government in Korea as specified in the Resolution 195 (III) of the United Nations General Assembly.
---------------------------------------------------
That being said, if the Korea's were to reunify Japan would front up with a lot of ODA.

[hamid]

slt ca va bien je suis hamid