foreign dispatchesでは、今回は日本の若者について論じています。多くの論者は日本の若者像について誤解に基づいて論じている、というわけです。妥当な論述だと思います。こうした見解がもてるというのはこの方かなり日本人と接触して生の日本を経験されているように見受けられます。中国や韓国、あるいは韓国系のkyopoと言われる人の中には、かなり妄想にみちた日本像があるように思えるのでこうした論述は貴重なものと言えます。
まあ、ギャルサーとかいう若者が（ーーー私はテレビ見ないから知らないーーー）日本の若者を代表しているとはいえませんが、日本の若者の雰囲気をよく伝えているものと思います。
で、これだけ日本に関する記述が適格ならば、韓国に関しての記述も適格といってよいのでしょうか。
日本でもracisｔ的な人は残念ながらいます。これは否定しない。
しかし、私は個人的にはこのどちらかと言えばパッパラパーのような若者に期待しています。
彼らは、あまり既存の価値に敬意をはらっていない。肌の色や国籍による区別よりも個人に着目した評価をする。栃木弁のアクセントが若者の流行のアクセントになったり、ガングロが、あるいは韓流が流行したりする。その流行廃りに深みもなければこれと言った根拠もないだけに、既存の枠組みに対する執着もない。何に対しても「いいんじゃなあああい！！」というニヒリズムにも似た思想を身につけている。人によってはそうした風潮を否定的に評価していますが、私はそう思わない。私自身どちらかといえばニヒリストなのかもしれません。
中国韓国のnationalismをみると、戦前の日本の亜流をみるような奇妙な感覚に襲われます。朝日など、日本の左翼もむしろそうした点もを指摘すべきではないでしょうか？
Sunday, April 30, 2006
Saturday, April 29, 2006
North Korea/Japan/abduction
横田さんがブッシュ大統領と会見し、多少なりの成果を上げている模様。
According to sources at the Japanese Embassy in the United States, the Japanese government used "every conceivable means" to press the U.S. government to arrange a meeting between Yokota's relatives and Bush.yomiuri
日本政府も陰で横田さんと大統領の会見実現に動いていた模様。
"I have just had one of the most moving meetings since I've been the president," Bush said
大統領の感触もよい。
During the recent ministerial talks with North Korea, South Korea raised the issue of returning those South Koreans who went missing during and after the 1950-1953 Korean War. The term "missing people" is thought to be an oblique reference to South Koreans allegedly abducted by North Korea, as well as to prisoners of war captured during the conflict but not repatriated following the July 1953 armisticeyomiuri
あとは北朝鮮に対して強硬にでれない韓国の積極的な協力が必要。
てか、この国は反日となるとやら強制労働だ慰安婦だと騒ぎ立てるのに同民族のしでかした犯罪にはまったく無頓着になるのはなぜかーーー世界には偽善的としか映らないのではないか？
以下のサイトでは北朝鮮問題についてかなり詳細に論じています。
korea
liberator
Conspiracy theory of Pearl Harbor
Roosevelt produced the surprise attack.
(1) Roosevelt had a plan to provoke the war.
(2) Roosevelt had a plan to engage the warーーeven without Perl harbor attack.
....................................................................................
UPDATE
(3) Roosevelt had people provoke the war.
(4) Roosevelt knew that Japanese were coming to attack, but did nothing to prevent it.
(5) Roosevelt had motivation to engage the war.
(Neutrality Acts of 1937
Two Neutrality Acts were passed in 1937 (in January and May) in response to the outbreak of the Spanish Civil War - this was not covered under the early legislation, as it applied only to conflicts between nations rather than within them. Sponsored by the isolationist Republican Senator Arthur H. Vandenberg, it tightened the restrictions on US businesses and private individuals assisting belligerents, even prohibiting travel by U.S. citizens on ships of belligerents. When Japan invaded China in July 1937, starting the Sino-Japanese War (1937-1945), President Roosevelt chose not to invoke the Neutrality Acts by declining to identify the fighting as a state of war. In so doing, he ensured that China's efforts to defend itself would not be hindered by the legislation.Neutrality Acts of 1937/wiki
Counter-argument
Supposing FDR had the plan, it is not clear that he could have executed the plan as described, and it is not clear that he could have select the right sources to judge the situation out of enoumous amount of imformation he received.
Besides, granted this theory is correct, it does not follow Japanese attack at Peral Harbor is justified.
However, this revisionist views at least shows that Pearl Harbor is not as simple as average people tend to think.
(TPR’s Simple History of the Attack on Pearl Harbor - December 7, 1941)
sneaky attack
Update
I was wondering why Japanese stupidly attacked Peal harbor, They were stupid. Here is a part of answer.
(1) Roosevelt had a plan to provoke the war.
Stimson was keeping a diary at this time and the defenders of Roosevelt's innocence have long been frustrated over the following entry from his diary, dealing with the conference of the 25th:
The question was how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into the position of firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves. It was a difficult pro-position.
After discussing the matter, Roosevelt and his closest advisers agreed that:
In spite of the risk involved, however, in letting the Japanese fire the first shot, we realized that in order to have the full support of the American people it was desirable to make sure that the Japanese were the ones to do this so that there should remain no doubt in anyone's mind as to who were the aggressors.link
The Administration continued needlessly to provoke the Japanese government throughout the rest of the year, and on November 26, 1941, delivered a diplomatic ultimatum that no government could possibly accept.link
(2) Roosevelt had a plan to engage the warーーeven without Perl harbor attack.
in April 1941 the U.S., British, and Dutch agreed to take joint military action against Japan if the Japanese sent armed forces beyond the line 100 East and 10 North or 6 North and the Davao-Waigeo line, or threatened British or Dutch possessions in the southwest Pacific or independent countries in that region. The agreements were known as ABCD. Thereafter, Admiral Stark said that war with Japan was not a matter of if, but rather when and where. Roosevelt gave his approval to the attendant war plans in May and June. On December 3, 1941, the Dutch invoked the ABCD agreement, after Japanese forces passed the line 100 East and 10 North, and were thought to be headed toward Dutch territory as well as the Kra Peninsula and Thailand. The U.S. military attache in Melbourne, Australia, Colonel Van S. Merle-Smith, was contacted by the Australians, British, and Dutch and informed that the Dutch were expecting the U.S. Navy to offer assistance. Merle-Smith relayed this information to his superiors by coded message. It should have reached Washington in the early evening of December 4.link
On 7 October 1940, Lieutenant Commander Arthur H. McCollum, head of the Far East desk of the Office of Naval Intelligence, wrote the eight-action memo.
This memo outlined eight different steps the United States could do that he predicted would lead to an attack by Japan on the United States. The day after this memo was giving to Franklin D. Roosevelt, he began to implement these steps. By the time that Japan finally attacked the United States at Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941, all eight steps had occurred (Willy 1). The eight steps consisted of two main subject areas; the first being a sign of United States military preparedness and threat of attack, the second being a forceful control on Japans trade and economy. The main subject area of the eight-action memo was the sign of United States military preparedness and threat of attack. McCollum called for the United States to make arrangements with both Britain (Action A) and Holland (Action B), for the use of military facilities and acquisition of supplies in both Singapore and Indonesia.
He also suggested for the deployment of a division of long-range heavy cruisers (Action D) and two divisions of submarines (Action E) to the Orient. The last key factor McCollum called for was to keep the United States Fleet in the vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands (Action F). Roosevelt personally took charge of Action’s D and E; these actions were called “pop up” cruises. Roosevelt had this to say about the cruises, “’I just want them to keep popping up here and there and keep the Japs guessing (Stinnett 9).’link
Japan had some control over China due to a military operation, which took over part of the country. Thanks to the control, Japan took and used many raw goods from China that were not in abundance in their own homeland. The government of Chiang Kai-shek was completely against Japan, and with economic support from the United States, they were able to deny certain possessions from Japan.link
....................................................................................
UPDATE
The employment of a boycott against a country engaged in war amounts to a direct participation in the conflict, which may, in fact, prove to be as decisive of the result as if the boycotters were themselves belligerents. It is defiant of the theory of neutrality and of the fundamental obligations that the law of nations still imposes upon non-belligerent Powers.
The economic measures taken by America against Japan as also the factum of ABCD encirclement scheme will thus have important bearings on the question of determining the character of any subsequent action by Japan against any of these countries. Of course, whether or not, any such encirclement scheme, military or economic, did exist in reality is a question of fact to be determined on the evidence adduced in the case.
The prosecution characterized the economic blockade against Japan as aiming only at the diminution of military supplies. According to the defense "the blockade affected all types of civilian goods and trade, even food". The defense says: "This was more than the old fashioned encirclement of a nation by ships of overwhelming superiority and refusing to allow commerce to enter or leave. It was the act of all powerful and greatly superior economic states against a confessedly dependent island nation whose existence and economics were predicated upon world commercial relations." I shall revert to this matter while considering the phase of the case relating to the attack on Pearl Harbor.
I believe I have said enough to indicate that in deciding whether or not any particular action of Japan was aggressive we shall have to take into account the antecedent behavior of the other nation concerned including its activity in adverse propaganda and the so-called economic sanction and the likRadhabinod Pal
From the elementary principles of international law it necessarily follows that if a government bans the shipment of arms and munitions of war to one of the parties to an armed conflict and permits it to the other, it intervenes in a conflict in a military sense and makes itself a party to a war, whether declared or undeclared.
The fact that America was helping China in all possible ways during Sino-Japanese hostilities would thus be a pertinent consideration in determining the character of Japan's subsequent action against the USA. The prosecution admits that the United States rendered aid economically and in the form of war materials to China to a degree unprecedented between non-belligerent powers and that some of her nationals fought with the Chinese against the aggression of Japan.Radhabinod Pal
(3) Roosevelt had people provoke the war.
In the October 1962 issue of the United States Naval Institute Proceedings, Rear Admiral Kemp Tolley gave his account of having been the commander of one of the "little ships" hastily ordered out of Manila to monitor the Japanese Navy in early December of 1941.
In the event, neither the Lanikai, nor the other ships ordered out, the Isabel and the Molly Moore, were able to cross the paths of the Japanese. Only after the war did Tolley fully appreciate the role intended for the Lanikai -- that of "live bait."link
Only two of the "small vessels" had been made ready to sail out into the path of the Japanese convoys and invite attack before the Japanese struck at Pearl Harbor. To get this baiting stratagem under way promptly, Roosevelt had Stark suggest to Hart that he might use the converted yacht Isabel, which had been made over into the dispatch boat of the Asiatic fleet and the Japanese had been acquainted with its identity for some time. Hart realized that on this assignment the Isabel was to be bait for a Japanese attack, which displeased him since the vessel was very useful to the fleetlink
(4) Roosevelt knew that Japanese were coming to attack, but did nothing to prevent it.
Flynn was under the impression that the British had first broken the Japanese code and supplied Washington with copies of messages between Tokyo and foreign representatives. He underscored the significance of the fact that Washington was aware that Japan had given its diplomats a November 25th deadline to reach an understanding with the U.S.link
eleven days before Pearl Harbor Roosevelt received a "positive war warning" from Churchill that the Japanese would attack the United States at the end of the first week of Decemberlink
the Dutch had passed on information to Washington about the forthcoming attack and that the Office of Naval Intelligence was also aware that a Japanese carrier task force was steaming toward Hawaii. link
(5) Roosevelt had motivation to engage the war.
Roosevelt's most pressing problem: how to overcome the American public's opposition to involvement in the war that had been going on in Europe for the previous sixteen monthslink
Roosevelt was convinced that the U.S. must fight on Britain's side and that the primary objective remained the defeat of Germany. On September 27, 1940, Germany, Italy, and Japan entered into the Tripartite Pact, which provided that each would declare war on any third party that went to war against one of the three (this did not affect Germany and Japan's relations with the U.S.S.R.). From this date, then, war with Japan meant war with Germany and Italy, and this came to play an increasingly important role in Roosevelt's maneuvers.link
On 5 December 1941 at a Cabinet meeting, Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox said, “Well, you know Mr. President, we know where the Japanese fleet is?” “Yes, I know, …Well, you tell them what it is Frank,” said Roosevelt (Toland 294). Knox became extremely excited with the ok from Roosevelt, and he went to tell the group of where the Japanese were and where they were headed. Just as Knox was about to speak Roosevelt interrupted saying, “ We haven’t got anything like perfect information as to their apparent destination (Toland 294).” link
On 6 December 1941 at a White House dinner Roosevelt was given the first thirteen parts of a fifteen part decoded Japanese diplomatic declaration of war and said, “This means War (Toland 318).”link
He was chiefly concerned with the planning and operation of his New Deal domestic policy down to 1937, even to 1939, but he did not forget armament and possible war, even diverting NRA funds to finance naval expansion, chiefly directed against Japan
Roosevelt's attempt to purge a no longer docile Congress in the election of 1938 proved an ignominious failure, and the New Deal appeared to be in a permanent slump. It obviously had not solved the depression. Nor had the increasing expenditures for armament succeeded in providing full prosperity.
When war broke out in Europe in early September, 1939, this gave Roosevelt an ominous impulse and continuous inspiration. The war had hardly begun when, on September 11th, Roosevelt wrote Churchill, then only First Lord of the Admiralty, suggesting that they work together through a secret system of communication: "What I want you and the Prime Minister to know is that I shall at all times welcome it, if you will keep me in touch personally with anything you want me to know about.link
So far as the economic background of Pearl Harbor is concerned, the responsibility was almost solely that of Roosevelt, whether we consider the effort to save and prolong his political career by creating a military economy to replace the New Deal or his use of economic and financial methods to produce the economic strangulation of Japan and force her into warlink
(Neutrality Acts of 1937
Two Neutrality Acts were passed in 1937 (in January and May) in response to the outbreak of the Spanish Civil War - this was not covered under the early legislation, as it applied only to conflicts between nations rather than within them. Sponsored by the isolationist Republican Senator Arthur H. Vandenberg, it tightened the restrictions on US businesses and private individuals assisting belligerents, even prohibiting travel by U.S. citizens on ships of belligerents. When Japan invaded China in July 1937, starting the Sino-Japanese War (1937-1945), President Roosevelt chose not to invoke the Neutrality Acts by declining to identify the fighting as a state of war. In so doing, he ensured that China's efforts to defend itself would not be hindered by the legislation.Neutrality Acts of 1937/wiki
Counter-argument
Wohlstetter was not interested in assigning blame for the disaster. Rather, it was her thesis that "The United States was not caught napping... We just expected wrong." Pearl Harbor was "a failure of strategic analysis" and "a failure to anticipate effectively." Yes, in retrospect, the record indicated that Washington might well have warned Kimmel and Short. But what we had here was a "national failure to anticipate" that the Japanese would actually attack Hawaii, instead of some other targetlink
Supposing FDR had the plan, it is not clear that he could have executed the plan as described, and it is not clear that he could have select the right sources to judge the situation out of enoumous amount of imformation he received.
Besides, granted this theory is correct, it does not follow Japanese attack at Peral Harbor is justified.
However, this revisionist views at least shows that Pearl Harbor is not as simple as average people tend to think.
(TPR’s Simple History of the Attack on Pearl Harbor - December 7, 1941)
sneaky attack
Sonagi from United States
Posted December 9, 2006 at 6:26 am | Permalink
See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor_advance-knowledge_debate
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/pearl/www.geocities.com/Pentagon/631 5/pearl.html
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1145527
Obviously, the last source, NPR, is the most credible and balanced.Marmot
Update
I was wondering why Japanese stupidly attacked Peal harbor, They were stupid. Here is a part of answer.
...Yamamoto Isoroku, ...expressed hope thata shattering opening blow against the Pacific Fleet would render both the U.S. navy and the American people "s o dispirited they will not be able to recover." Coonel Tsuji masanobu, who planned the brilliant assault on Singapore, recalled similarly that "our candid ideas a the time were that the Americans, being merchants, would not continue for long with an unprofitable war, whereas we ourselves if we fught ounly the Anglo-Saxon nations[and not the U.S.S.R. as well] could cary on a protracted war." page 36 War without mercy
Friday, April 28, 2006
ブログ・コメント欄から。
Asia pageアジアンページからです。「ベトナムの処女の女性が韓国人男性と結婚熱望！！」という記事を書いた朝鮮日報に対して、韓国人市民団体がベトナム女性を侮蔑している、という非難している、ということについて、でも、ベトナムにも責任あるんじゃない？という論調の内容で書かれています。
個人的に言えば、市民団体がいうような記事だったとすれば、品のない記事自体は非難されて然るべきだと思います。もっともある国の女性が他国に結婚相手を求める事自体は、当該ブロガーが言うように、求められる国に責任があるわけではありません。
面白いのは、ベトナム人労働者に対する不当な扱いや、ベトナム戦争での虐殺と相まって、こうした事件は日本との関係で韓国の立場を弱める、という読者の投稿があったそうです。
まあ、私はそうは思いません。日本との関係は日本との関係で、日本を非難して、お祭りさわぎするのと同程度に自分の国民、あるいは政府に対してねちこくしつこく、まだ、まだ、誠実さに欠ける、なんと残忍な国民だ！などと何十年も責め立て続けられるならば、道義的に一貫していると言えるからです。
韓国の立場を弱くするということに過敏に反応されたのが、kushibo氏です。彼の韓国に対する愛情は敬服に値します。
kushibo
で、皮肉なのか、「韓国は平和を愛する国である、自国しか侵略しない」と述べておられます。で、ベトナム虐殺あるいは慰安婦についても韓国人自身の手で調査し、また金大中は謝罪している、というわけです。
朝日をはじめとする多くのメディアや市民が嫌という程、日本人の犯した虐殺や暴行をかき立てるのと比べてどうか、・・・今の段階では、まあ、くらべものにならないでしょうね、たぶん。
しかし、これからわかりません。国会議事堂で総理官邸で指切ったり泣き叫んだりしてくれるものと信じます。ところでそのkushibo氏のコメント欄にsonagi氏という方が、
韓国はそもそも大国に挟まれて侵略できなかっただけであり、一度だけ中国を侵略したときのことを今でも自慢しているじゃないんの？とつっこみを入れています。
そうだったんですね。やっぱブログっておもしろいですね。いろんな発見がある。
個人的に言えば、市民団体がいうような記事だったとすれば、品のない記事自体は非難されて然るべきだと思います。もっともある国の女性が他国に結婚相手を求める事自体は、当該ブロガーが言うように、求められる国に責任があるわけではありません。
面白いのは、ベトナム人労働者に対する不当な扱いや、ベトナム戦争での虐殺と相まって、こうした事件は日本との関係で韓国の立場を弱める、という読者の投稿があったそうです。
まあ、私はそうは思いません。日本との関係は日本との関係で、日本を非難して、お祭りさわぎするのと同程度に自分の国民、あるいは政府に対してねちこくしつこく、まだ、まだ、誠実さに欠ける、なんと残忍な国民だ！などと何十年も責め立て続けられるならば、道義的に一貫していると言えるからです。
韓国の立場を弱くするということに過敏に反応されたのが、kushibo氏です。彼の韓国に対する愛情は敬服に値します。
kushibo
で、皮肉なのか、「韓国は平和を愛する国である、自国しか侵略しない」と述べておられます。で、ベトナム虐殺あるいは慰安婦についても韓国人自身の手で調査し、また金大中は謝罪している、というわけです。
朝日をはじめとする多くのメディアや市民が嫌という程、日本人の犯した虐殺や暴行をかき立てるのと比べてどうか、・・・今の段階では、まあ、くらべものにならないでしょうね、たぶん。
しかし、これからわかりません。国会議事堂で総理官邸で指切ったり泣き叫んだりしてくれるものと信じます。ところでそのkushibo氏のコメント欄にsonagi氏という方が、
韓国はそもそも大国に挟まれて侵略できなかっただけであり、一度だけ中国を侵略したときのことを今でも自慢しているじゃないんの？とつっこみを入れています。
Korea actually did invade, conquer, and steal land about 2,000 years ago when Korea was Goguryeo and China was Tang. Koreans seem to be proud of that single, ancient example of Korean imperialism, too. At the base of the Tangun shrine on Kanghwa Island, vendors hawk buttons displaying a map of Goguyeo with the words "Tangun's territory is our territory!"
Koreans bragging about never having invaded another country, besides being historically inaccurate, ignore the reality that since the formation of the three kingdoms, Korea has never had the means to enlarge its territory through war.
Post a Comment
そうだったんですね。やっぱブログっておもしろいですね。いろんな発見がある。
Some facts about mobilization of koreans under Japanese law.
A
year.....the number of Korean residents in Japan.........comment
1910...790... annexastion
1920...30.189
1930...29.8091
1938...799.878...recruited by civilians (contract)
purpose
........1)the need to moblize people to the work place neccessary for military purpose such as mines.(many Korean people had worked at the constructions site or some places like that,and the places like a coal mine shaft had been avoided) .
........2)make immigration procedure easier
..................recruieted 150000
..................nonrecruited and the families 440000
(The number of illegal immigrants discovered from 1939 to 1942: 22800
The number of illegaly immingrants sent back to Korea from 1939 to 1942: 19250)
1942...1625.024.... recruited by government(contract/some claims it was forced in substance)
1944...1936.843....forced moblization
.....................(from 1942 to 1944 52000 Korean workers mobilized)
.....................(violation would be punished)*1
1945...2.000.000*2 Japan lost the war,Korea got the independence.
..........................total mobilized 435,608
..........................workers 322890
..........................soldier 488933
..........................military related 63785
1946...647.006* 3 (about 140000 returned)
1947...598.507* 4 (about 82900 returened)
1948 seju island incident 済州島４．３事件
1950 Korean war (朝鮮戦争)
1953 556,090 truce
1959 61840 (as of September)
Notes.
*1
Some claims the living conditions was horrible.
Others say it was not so bad.It is true in some case the work was hard,but instead,salary was higher than average wokers.For instance,in the official document,one Korean person reported the salary was 140 yen a month when the starting salary for a policeman was 45 yen and average salary for the first and the second class soldier was less than 10 yen.
*2 There is no accurate record,so the number is estimated.But Nishioka and Pak cite the similar number.
*3 This is from Pak's book.Nishioka said there is no accurate record in this period.
B
Korean residents in Japan in April 1959
before 1938... 100,294
1939~1943... 36,157
1944~45... 75,476 (1939~1945 total 4,0461)
unknown ... 75,476
1946~59 .... 4,414
born in japan ... 386,888
total 607,533
male:femal =62:38 (over 16 age in 1945)
estimated forcedly mobilized Korean people :25085
∴ 6.6% of Korean residents in 1945
C
Survey by hearing out of 1106 people (done by Koreans people)
drafted 0.5%
mobilized 12.8%
before 1939 45 (estimated)
volountary 40%
5.6%
Based on
日韓「歴史問題」の真実 歴史教科書 在日コリアンの歴史
コリアンザーサード
year.....the number of Korean residents in Japan.........comment
1910...790... annexastion
1920...30.189
1930...29.8091
1938...799.878...recruited by civilians (contract)
purpose
........1)the need to moblize people to the work place neccessary for military purpose such as mines.(many Korean people had worked at the constructions site or some places like that,and the places like a coal mine shaft had been avoided) .
........2)make immigration procedure easier
..................recruieted 150000
..................nonrecruited and the families 440000
(The number of illegal immigrants discovered from 1939 to 1942: 22800
The number of illegaly immingrants sent back to Korea from 1939 to 1942: 19250)
1942...1625.024.... recruited by government(contract/some claims it was forced in substance)
1944...1936.843....forced moblization
.....................(from 1942 to 1944 52000 Korean workers mobilized)
.....................(violation would be punished)*1
1945...2.000.000*2 Japan lost the war,Korea got the independence.
..........................total mobilized 435,608
..........................workers 322890
..........................soldier 488933
..........................military related 63785
1946...647.006* 3 (about 140000 returned)
1947...598.507* 4 (about 82900 returened)
1948 seju island incident 済州島４．３事件
1950 Korean war (朝鮮戦争)
1953 556,090 truce
1959 61840 (as of September)
Notes.
*1
Some claims the living conditions was horrible.
Yet it is documented that about 12,000 Koreans were forced to work underground in appalling conditions of penury and malnutrition in collieries belonging to the Aso Mines company, in Japan’s southern island of Kyushu, from the mid-1930s until 1945. The company is still owned by the family, and Aso, 65, was once its president.link
Others say it was not so bad.It is true in some case the work was hard,but instead,salary was higher than average wokers.For instance,in the official document,one Korean person reported the salary was 140 yen a month when the starting salary for a policeman was 45 yen and average salary for the first and the second class soldier was less than 10 yen.
*2 There is no accurate record,so the number is estimated.But Nishioka and Pak cite the similar number.
*3 This is from Pak's book.Nishioka said there is no accurate record in this period.
B
Korean residents in Japan in April 1959
before 1938... 100,294
1939~1943... 36,157
1944~45... 75,476 (1939~1945 total 4,0461)
unknown ... 75,476
1946~59 .... 4,414
born in japan ... 386,888
total 607,533
male:femal =62:38 (over 16 age in 1945)
estimated forcedly mobilized Korean people :25085
∴ 6.6% of Korean residents in 1945
C
Survey by hearing out of 1106 people (done by Koreans people)
drafted 0.5%
mobilized 12.8%
before 1939 45 (estimated)
volountary 40%
5.6%
Based on
日韓「歴史問題」の真実 歴史教科書 在日コリアンの歴史
コリアンザーサード
ところが…、在日コリアンの来歴によると、よく言われる強制連行にあたる徴兵・徴用によって日本列島にやって来た朝鮮人は約13%であることが明らかになります。（リンク先のちょっと下のほうに「アボジ聞かせて あの日のことを」という本からの引用で表が載っています。）
1106人もの方のアンケートであり、大きな誤差は無いでしょう。アンケートを行ったのは在日韓国人の方たちですしデータが日本のいいように捏造されている可能性も無いでしょう。
そして次に法務省編 在留外国人統計（1974年度版）をご覧下さい。
大正1〜昭和19年に新たに朝鮮半島から日本列島にやって来た朝鮮人の数が約82000人です。
この13%が徴用・徴兵で来た人たちと大雑把に計算しても、1万人強です。
徴用や官斡旋が行われだしたのは終戦の何年か前からですからが数は当然減ります。
強制連行が徴用・徴兵を指すものとしても、何百万人もの人を日本軍が無理やり連れてきたというのは誤りでありなのです。現在日本に居住する多くの在日韓国人の渡日理由が強制連行とされることは数があわないのであります。
※ 05/02/11 追記
上記の資料では戦後に朝鮮半島に帰国した朝鮮人はまったく数に入っていないので、何百万人〜という記述は不適当であるというご指摘がありました。よって訂正させていただきます。
（一応上記の法務省の資料ですが、法務省からリンクした資料ではありません。おそらく個人サイトの一ページからでしょうが、この1974年度版の外国人統計を挙げている方が非常に多いので、それなりの信憑性があると判断しこのブログで取り扱うことにしました。）
最後です。アジア歴史資料センターにおいて近代、現代の歴史資料がWeb上で閲覧できます。
左上の「資料の閲覧」からリファレンスコード検索画面まで進んでください。そこに「C01001832500」というコードを打ち込むと、次の画面で「朝鮮工場労務者内地移住幹施に関する件」という項目が出るのでクリックしてください。（閲覧にはDjVuプラグインが必要ですが導入は簡単です。バナーをクリックすればダウンロード画面に飛びます）
時代を感じる書物の表紙が表示されたと思います。これを読んでいくと、日本国内に斡旋する朝鮮人少年労働者に必要な学歴、且つ労働条件や公費負担など細かく決められています。４ページ目に書いてある目的が「本協定ハ内地工場ニ於ケル労務需給ノ調整ト朝鮮ニ於ケル技術水準ノ向上ニ資スルコトヲ以テ目的トス」とあります。日本で得た技術を朝鮮半島で還元させる狙いもあったようです。この資料を読むと、いきなりさらってトラックに詰め込んで…ということが当たり前のように行われていたとは思えないですが、皆さんはどう感じましたでしょうか？
（さらに、同じサイトで「B20020312847」のコードで表示される資料の17ページ目に、朝鮮人の志願兵の数が記載されています。強制じゃ無いんです、志願なんです。昭和18年には30万人もの朝鮮人が旧日本陸軍に入隊志願しています。）
Japan/Nato/SDF
NATO chief hopes for Japan's expanded int'l role
He was apparently referring to Japanese Self-Defense Forces troops' ongoing mission in Iraq to undertake postwar reconstruction work and provide humanitarian assistancemainiciApril 28, 2006
最近のニュースを見ていると世界の方から、日本がアジアやイラクなどに対する軍事的役割をもっと果たすように要求してきているようですね。さて、日本側はその重荷に耐えられるか？
Thursday, April 27, 2006
China/ethonocentrism
State Councilor Tang Jiaxuan added a supplementary explanation the same day, saying Hu's words were directed at future Japanese leaders, meaning would-be prime ministers should not visit the shrine.
Why do high-ranking Chinese government officials make such peremptory remarks about Japan?
Hsu Se-kai, head of the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office and a professor specializing in Japan-China affairs who formerly taught at a Japanese university, said China would never use the same language when speaking to the United States.
"Ethnocentrism could be behind such remarks." he said. "Chinese people believe China is the center of the world and look down on their neighbors. That's why they talk down to others."
"The recent visit to Beijing by the Japan-China friendship groups was seen [by many Chinese] as paying tribute to China," he said
"Chinese people who are convinced they are superior like to judge history from their historical perspective, but Japan ignores them. That's why they become increasingly uncompromising."Apr. 28, 2006
前回韓国の小中華主義について掲載しましたが、今回は本場中国の中華主義についてです。
中国韓国の伝統ってすごいですね。
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Japan/the U.S/new partnership
With the United States struggling to meet military commitments abroad, and with Japan increasingly asserting military autonomy, American policymakers must shape a new policy that will more equitably distribute security burdens between the two countries.
日米が戦略的にも新しい関係が必要である、と
while U.S. policymakers might advise the Japanese of the uncertain benefits of acquiring their own nuclear weapons relative to the high costs, the United States should not expect to be able to prevent the Japanese from developing such weapons—nor should it try. Finally, the new strategic partnership should culminate with the removal of U.S forces from Japanese soil.The Cato Institute
で、憲法９条に関して干渉すべきでないし、また核保持についてもそれを妨害すべきでない、と。
The new alliance between two normal countries— as opposed to one between a patron and a de facto client—will provide a more durable foundation for addressing the most pressing security challenges in East Asia and beyond.
で、両国は普通のの関係になることは東アジアの安定に資する、と。
米国側の世論がこうなって頂ければ、あとは、日本側にそれに応える準備ができているかどうか、ということですね。
Korea/the explanation of ani-Japanese sentimens.
昨日に引き続き、Foreign Dispatchesからです。とは言ってもコメント欄からです。本題は「ここが変だよ」の録画についての評論ですが、朝鮮の反日の理由がうまく説明されているの掲載します。
小中華主義、および、日本が中国と違って軍事力を行使しないことが明らかだから、という説明です。正しい説明であるにせよ、こうした文化は切なくなりますね。
First, there is a sense of perceived cultural and racial superiority stemming from traditional Korean cosmology. In that great Sinocentric chain of being, Japan was an altogether inferior entity. In it, China was at the top with Korea occupying a middle region, above the "barbarian" peoples among which Japan was also numbered.
So the reversal of fortune, so to speak, where Japan forged ahead in recent history hurts Koreans far more than would have been the case if--say--China had colonized Korea instead. The latter would have been rationalized as merely the "natural order of things," to be only slightly hyperbolic.
Now the point about China brings me to my second reason. Historically, China has inflicted far more atrocities toward Korea than China. Further, the Chinese atrocities were more proximate: see Mao's intervention in the Korean War. So "suffering" alone cannot be the cause of the South Korea's animus toward Japan or South Korea's greater animus toward Japan than China.
My point? Korea is belligerent toward Japan also partly because Japan--unlike, say, China--is not a serious military threat to South Korea for a variety of reasons. Compare South Korea's near-lunatic response to Japan's Dok Do claims to South Korea's more measured and almost docile response to China's claims on Koguryo. South Korea in other words is acting as a bully.]Abiola Lapite
小中華主義、および、日本が中国と違って軍事力を行使しないことが明らかだから、という説明です。正しい説明であるにせよ、こうした文化は切なくなりますね。
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
Japan/the U.S/beef
牛肉輸入禁止に関して、輸入禁止はまだまだになるだろう、という報告です。
香港でも同じように禁輸しているようです。
要するに安全ならば日本は輸入する気持ちはあるわけです。だって吉野家の牛丼安く食べたいですものね。
However, Yamada said it would be hard for the United States to prevent similar incidents completely, since U.S. companies made repeated shipments of banned cattle parts to Hong Kong this year.
Hong Kong this month suspended beef imports from a Cargill processing plant in Kansas after finding bones that the United States had agreed would be removed to reduce the risk of mad cow disease.
Last month Hong Kong had suspended beef imports from another U.S. processing plant
香港でも同じように禁輸しているようです。
If Washington does not tighten feed rules, Yamada said, Japan could still allow beef imports from U.S. companies that can supply beef from cattle tested negative for mad cow disease, such as Creekstone Farms Premium Beef LLC.Tue Apr 25, 2006
要するに安全ならば日本は輸入する気持ちはあるわけです。だって吉野家の牛丼安く食べたいですものね。
Japan/Korea/takeshima--ブログから
日本韓国（中国）の外交関係に関して、極めて明晰な論理展開をされているブログがありました。（日本語の翻訳をされているところをみると、日本語が堪能の方のようです。）
Foreign Dispatches
で、際だった観点を二つばかり。
ご承知のように小泉首相は一つの問題で外交関係を断絶に近い形にするのはよくない、と主張しています。当該ブロガーによると、中国が台湾と、韓国が北朝鮮と話し合いの場を持つのに日本とはそれをしないのはおかしい、というわけです。そして、そのことは小泉首相の主張の正当性を補強するといったようなことがかかれていまずが、なるほど、台湾、北朝鮮まで射程にいれるとたしかにそうですね。
もう一点、靖国参拝に関して、首相はその意図を何度も明確にしており、個人の資格で参拝し、かつ、中国韓国には何度も謝罪しているにもかかわらず、中国韓国は個人の資格での謝罪は十分ではないというのは矛盾している、というわけです。
これも私はいままで気づかなかった点でした。
Foreign Dispatches
で、際だった観点を二つばかり。
ご承知のように小泉首相は一つの問題で外交関係を断絶に近い形にするのはよくない、と主張しています。当該ブロガーによると、中国が台湾と、韓国が北朝鮮と話し合いの場を持つのに日本とはそれをしないのはおかしい、というわけです。そして、そのことは小泉首相の主張の正当性を補強するといったようなことがかかれていまずが、なるほど、台湾、北朝鮮まで射程にいれるとたしかにそうですね。
もう一点、靖国参拝に関して、首相はその意図を何度も明確にしており、個人の資格で参拝し、かつ、中国韓国には何度も謝罪しているにもかかわらず、中国韓国は個人の資格での謝罪は十分ではないというのは矛盾している、というわけです。
これも私はいままで気づかなかった点でした。
Monday, April 24, 2006
Korea/Japan/takeshima
さてオーストラリアのメディアは今回の竹島騒動をどうみたか？
そうそうノムヒョン氏は歴史問題についてはふれずに協力しあおうと提案していたのででしたよね。
で、１９９８年に漁業協定で合意をえたにもかかわらず、日本の漁師さんが韓国人の人からときに暴力までふるわれたーと日本側の漁師さんから訴えがあったわけです。
問題は１７世紀にまでさかのぼる、ここがポイント。
たしかに１９０５年に保護国とする条約を結んでいるから、韓国側は侵略云々いいますけーーーけど、左記のとおり１７世紀からの問題なわけですから、韓国側が主張するように、帝国主義云々とは関係ないですよね。
で、韓国人の反応は大人げない、と日本側はみていると。日本側は靖国問題は情緒的にも国外の人には関係していることを断固拒否している、というわけですけど、靖国に関して勝手な解釈をして情緒を興奮させながらそれをもって国際問題にしてもらっては困りますよね。、
国際法廷に持ち込まれると韓国には不利。
ああやっぱり思惑通り、ノムヒョン氏は国際法を軽視してカッカとするだけの反応をしている、と日本側はみている、というわけです。
韓国圏のブログのコメンターとはひと味違う書き方でちょっとほっとしました。
It seems an age but is actually only three years since President Roh Moo-hyun was inaugurated, offering to work with Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi to put away their countries' historical enmities.
そうそうノムヒョン氏は歴史問題についてはふれずに協力しあおうと提案していたのででしたよね。
Those discussions have been starting and stopping for a decade. The governments did sign an agreement in 1998 to operate a joint fishing zone around the Dokdos but Japanese fishermen claim they have been repeatedly chased out of the area by the Koreans and occasionally physically attacked.
で、１９９８年に漁業協定で合意をえたにもかかわらず、日本の漁師さんが韓国人の人からときに暴力までふるわれたーと日本側の漁師さんから訴えがあったわけです。
The Japanese and Koreans have been claiming ownership since the 17th century
問題は１７世紀にまでさかのぼる、ここがポイント。
Until 1905 the Japanese and Koreans had claimed, but not asserted, ownership. Then Japan annexed Takeshima to Shimane prefecture; later that year it bullied the beleaguered Gojong monarchy into accepting "protectorate" status and in 1910 Tokyo annexed the Korean peninsula.
たしかに１９０５年に保護国とする条約を結んでいるから、韓国側は侵略云々いいますけーーーけど、左記のとおり１７世紀からの問題なわけですから、韓国側が主張するように、帝国主義云々とは関係ないですよね。
Whenever this issue resurfaces, or when Koizumi visits Yasukuni shrine, the public mood, especially in the neighbourhood of the Japanese embassy, approaches hysteria. People have cut off fingers outside the embassy to demonstrate the sincerity of their outrage.
Many Japanese regard this fervour as either juvenile or synthetic. They, on the other hand, stubbornly refuse to acknowledge that Koizumi's visits to Yasukuni are emotionally relevant to anyone outside Japan.
で、韓国人の反応は大人げない、と日本側はみていると。日本側は靖国問題は情緒的にも国外の人には関係していることを断固拒否している、というわけですけど、靖国に関して勝手な解釈をして情緒を興奮させながらそれをもって国際問題にしてもらっては困りますよね。、
Seoul governments have always insisted that even arguing the case with Japan would give Tokyo's claim more validity than it warrants. Despite constant South Korean assertions, however, there is a respectable body of international opinion that Japan's case is at least legally valid.
国際法廷に持ち込まれると韓国には不利。
In Tokyo, meanwhile, officials nodded knowingly when the Roh administration responded just as the memo suggested it would: hotly and with little regard for the niceties of international law
April 24, 2006 The Australian
ああやっぱり思惑通り、ノムヒョン氏は国際法を軽視してカッカとするだけの反応をしている、と日本側はみている、というわけです。
韓国圏のブログのコメンターとはひと味違う書き方でちょっとほっとしました。
Japan/China/Analysis
Qi identified several sentiments among the message-board postings, including fear of resurgent militarism in Japan and a growing confidence about China's emerging economy.
"While taking the form of nationalism, which is easier to get past the government censor, the messages reflected the writers' dissatisfaction that they are kept out of the decision-making process and are not given full access to crucial information," she said.
"The Internet content has calmed down since (the new restraints), but public disappointment in the government must be growing behind the silence,"Qi said. "There is no guarantee for Beijing that the outburst of public anger will be forever directed at Japan."asahi com
東京大学で勉強している中国人が中国人のデモをﾈｯﾄの掲載コメントを通じて分析しています。
１）表向きは反日であること、
２）行間にはしかし、民主主義がないことへの不満があること、
３）ﾈｯﾄ規制はますます激しくなったが、今後民衆の不満はよりつのるだろうということ。
比較的適格ではないですか？
しかし、戦前の日本を考えてみれば、情報を制限されている国の人間というのは、怖い気もしますね。
コメント欄より
I’ll give 2 examples that have nothing to do with the bilateral relationship between the 2.
When the 2 middle school girls were crushed by the tank in 2002, Korea went batshit in an orgy of hate for months on end. Apology after apology was demanded then when received only caused outrage and more demands. It was that way all the way around.
For Japan, a US sub pops up under a educational fishing vessel and sinks it killing more Japansese students and citizens—
—-and Japan did not come close to getting within the same time zone of outrage as Korea in 2002.
In fact, when the families came to Hawaii with the press and others, THEY apologized to their Hawaiian/American hosts —- because they were afraid of having been offensive to them in their grief!!!
Talk about night and day….usinKorea
韓国人の二人の少女が戦車にひかれたときと、日本人の教育用の船が米軍の潜水艦の浮上により、沈没し、多くの死傷者がでたときの日本人の反応の違いです。そういえば、そういった事件がありましたね。
ついでにkushibo氏のコメントも
It may be a lot harder for many Koreans to “not make xyz into a bigger issue” because it was their parents and grandparents, uncles, aunts, etc., who were killed, tortured, raped, shot at, had their property stolen by Japanese citizens and authorities in Korea. For the average Japanese, this is not the case at all.
朝鮮戦争で同胞に殺された人々がいるのに、そちらはおかいまいなしですか、なんで？
で、いつも欠けているのは朝鮮人自身の統治下での役割ですね。どうもいかなる証拠を提示しても信じないのかもしれません。要するに現在反日だから、過去も圧倒的にそうだっただろう、と思いこんでいるわけじゃないですかね。
また、budak氏が傑作コメントをよせていますが、そちらもどうぞご覧になってみてくださいね。
China/Japan/analysis
Qi identified several sentiments among the message-board postings, including fear of resurgent militarism in Japan and a growing confidence about China's emerging economy.
"While taking the form of nationalism, which is easier to get past the government censor, the messages reflected the writers' dissatisfaction that they are kept out of the decision-making process and are not given full access to crucial information," she said.
"The Internet content has calmed down since (the new restraints), but public disappointment in the government must be growing behind the silence,"Qi said. "There is no guarantee for Beijing that the outburst of public anger will be forever directed at Japan."asahi com
東京大学で勉強している中国人が中国人のデモをﾈｯﾄの掲載コメントを通じて分析しています。
１）表向きは反日であること、
２）行間にはしかし、民主主義がないことへの不満があること、
３）ﾈｯﾄ規制はますます激しくなったが、今後民衆の不満はよりつのるだろうということ。
比較的適格ではないですか？
しかし、戦前の日本を考えてみれば、情報を制限されている国の人間というのは、怖い気もしますね。
Japan/the U.S.
Japan has offered to pay $2.8 billion. It would also finance loans to the United States worth $3.3 billion, the remainder of its $6.1 billion share. Japan would shoulder 59 percent of the realignment cost
The United States had proposed in an earlier round of negotiations that Japan pay $7.5 billion, or 75 percent, of the cost to relocate Marines. Japan had said it would pay about one-third of that amount.link
７５％払えというの２５％なら払うというのの中間なら５０％くらいですが、そうではなく、６０％で落ち着いたようです。なんだかよくわからん。
update
"Now that we have a final agreement on the realignment of the U.S. military presence (in Japan), I think the foundation for our alliance in the next 20 years is gradually being put in place," Nukaga said
On sharing the cost to relocate U.S. Marines, Chief Cabinet Secretary Shinzo Abe said Monday that Japan agreed to pay almost three-fifths of the cost in order to expedite the reduction of the burdens on the host communities in Okinawa
While Japan has been paying for the construction of U.S. bases in Japan and some other expenses for the stationing of the U.S. troops, it is unprecedented for it to fund such facilities in U.S. territory, a senior Foreign Ministry official said Monday on condition of anonymity.Tuesday April 25,kyodo
同盟関係の絆を深めること、沖縄の負担軽減ということはわかるがいまいち腑に落ちないね。
Sunday, April 23, 2006
Japan/world/
TOKYO - In the latest in a series of initiatives aimed at elevating its international status, a group of Japanese lawmakers is preparing a new landmark law to promote its crusade for the preservation of valuable cultural assets abroad.
For example, two giant statutes of the Buddha at Bamiyan in Afghanistan - dating back to the 6th century - were destroyed bythe Taliban in March 2001. And the National Museum of Iraq was looted as the country was thrown into confusion after the 2003 invasion
atimes
日本が世界へ貢献するため、世界の文化遺産の修復などの作業ができるように法律を整備するという報道です。現状の平和憲法の制限をうけて軍事的な貢献はできなのですから、こうした非軍事的な貢献が必要です。まして、、非個性化あるいは、ある文化基準のおしつけになりがちなグローバリゼイションのただ中にあって、ある文化遺産を修復することは、その文化の個性を尊重することですからとてもいいこだと思います。ぜひ成立させていただきたい。
China/Japan/Friendship
Japanese NGO donates insect-killing lamps to NW China provinceThe lamps, valued at more than 100,000 yuan (12,500 U.S. dollars), will be used in Yangxian County, a large habitat and reserve for the red ibis, an endangered bird under state protection, the Xi'an Evening News reported.people's daily
希少な鳥を保護するため、農薬をつかえない地域へ、日本のNGOが殺虫ランプ？を寄付するそうです。ギスギスした関係が続く中心温まる話しです。
people's dailyが報道しているところをみると彼地でも日本に対する対応の変化があったと考えてよいのでしょうか？単なる希望的観測？
Japan/Illegal immigrant
GLOBALISATION: The plight of illegal immigrants in JapanApril 22, 2006Daily Times
日本における不法移民の問題です。日本だけの問題ではありません。
The challenges so familiar to officials in the US, Europe and Australia are thus relatively new in Japan
１）経済的に安価な労働力が必要である。
２）不法移民は安価な給与で働く。
３）その一方で、不法移民は、社会保険、企業の不正に対して訴える道がない。
４）その結果、不法移民の人権が侵害される。
ではどうするか？
あ）すでにいる不法移民を合法化する。
しかし、日本は急速な異文化の受け入れの準備ができているかどうか？
い）不法なまま社会保障、労働基本権などを保護する。
しかし、それでは結局不法な滞在を黙認することになる。
う）不法移民を雇用している企業を罰する。
しかし、これは企業の死活につながる場合も考えられます。
雇用の必要性が続くのであれば、あ）の路線で制限的に合法化して、その基準を満たさない滞在者を雇用している企業を罰する、つまりう）を併用するというのはどうでしょうか？
それにしても、健康問題など緊急に援助が必要な場合は、不法滞在者でも気軽に相談できる機関が必要だと思います。
ーーー難しい問題です
Japan/Investment
Wondering where Bill Gates, George Soros and the Rockefellers are putting their money these days?
More respondents picked Japan as one of these three, with India running a close second. The United States ranked third, with Eastern Europe - the emerging markets of Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, among others - following closely behind. April 22, 2006
世界の超リッチマンたちは何処に投資しているか？－－－日本だそうです。
でも、私の財布の中身は減るばかり。
Saturday, April 22, 2006
Japan/Korea/takeshima
A lot of pro-Korean commentators say that they believe Takshiima-Dokdo belongs to Korea, in view of history and in view of international law.
What is strange and funny is that none of them recommend Korean people to send it to
International Court of Justice.
If historically and legally the island belongs to Korea,Korean people lose nothing by sending it to I.C.J.
What is I.C.J. for? ----the peaceful settle of the internatinal conflicts.
Japan want it.
Korea rejected it.
Instead they are talking about agressive measures, they are talking about "killing'em all"
Which countries learned from the past?
But anyway, it seems that they agreed.
Japan agreed Saturday to withdraw its plan to conduct a maritime survey near a group of disputed islets in the Sea of Japan, a Japanese official said.
South Korea, in turn, agreed to cancel plans to name seafloor topography near the islets at an international conference scheduled for June in Germany, the official said.
South Korea turned down Japan's proposal to create a system to give each other advance notice when one of them plans to conduct such a maritime survey, according to the official.kyodo
Well,the party is over ....for now.
China/the media
Chinese media whitewashes Hu visittaipeiApri 22
中国のメディアは宝輪功のメンバーが叫びや、詰問についてすべてカットだとそうです。
報道の自由がないところの国民は不幸です。
Japan/Indonesia
インドネシア大使が自国の若者向けに日本について本を出版したそうです。そのなかで日本が米国べったりであることに懸念を表明しつつ次のようなことを述べておられるそうです。
靖国神社に訪問したときそこで、インドネシアの独立が１９４９年であると書かれているのを読んで悲しみを覚えた、日本人はインドネシアの独立は１９４５年と知っているはずじゃないか、と。どういことでしょうか？
日本がスカルノと協力してインドネシアが独立したのが１９４５年。
２００５年になってようやくオランダは１９４５年が独立年であり、オランダ軍によって亡くなった方々に弔意を表した、と。
靖国も靖国なら、２００５年になってようやく認めたオランダもオランダだよね。
Irsan, whose book devote many pages to Japan's colonial rule of Indonesia during World War II, said he felt very sad during his visit to Yasukuni Shrine as he learned that the shrine's war museum says Indonesia became independent in 1949.
"Many Japanese people do know that Indonesia became independent on Aug. 17, 1945. Therefore, it is beyond my understanding why (the shrine) has made such a mistake," Apr. 22, 2006Yomiuri
靖国神社に訪問したときそこで、インドネシアの独立が１９４９年であると書かれているのを読んで悲しみを覚えた、日本人はインドネシアの独立は１９４５年と知っているはずじゃないか、と。どういことでしょうか？
Though Japan captured Java by March 1942, it initially could not find any national leader willing to collaborate with the Japanese government against the Dutch. Eventually the Japanese commander ordered Sukarno’s release from his prison island, and in July 1942, Sukarno arrived in Jakarta. Sukarno and his colleagues collaborated with the Japanese occupiers. In 1945, with the war drawing to a close, Sukarno was made aware of an opportunity to declare independence. In response to lobbying, Japan agreed to allow Sukarno to establish a committee to plan for independence. Sukarno and Mohammad Hatta declared independence on 17 August.wiki
日本がスカルノと協力してインドネシアが独立したのが１９４５年。
Following the defeat of Japan in the World War, the Netherlands' Army, at first backed by the British, attempted to reoccupy their former East Indies colonies. Indonesia's war for independence lasted from 1945 until 27 December 1949
It was not until 16 August 2005 that the Dutch government recognized 1945 as the country's year of independence and expressed regrets over the Indonesian deaths caused by the Netherlands' Army.
wiki
２００５年になってようやくオランダは１９４５年が独立年であり、オランダ軍によって亡くなった方々に弔意を表した、と。
靖国も靖国なら、２００５年になってようやく認めたオランダもオランダだよね。
Remember flying tigers!----???
FIRST COMBAT
The Third A.V.G. squadron moved to Rangoon on December 12, 1941, to join the R.A.F. in the defense of Rangoon. The First and Second squadrons flew from Toungoo to Kunming on the afternoon of the 18th. The first combat for the A.V.G. occurred over southern Yunnan Province on December 20, 1941. In their first combat, a combination of the First and Second Squadrons, shot down nine out of ten Japanese bombers with a loss of one A.V.G. aircraft. The second engagement brought the Third Squadron onto action over Rangoon on December 23, with the R.A.F. flying beside the Tigers. The total haul of Japs was six bombers and four fighters. The R.A.F. lost five planes and pilots and the A.V.G. lost four planes and two pilots.
Then, on Christmas Day, two waves totaling 80 Jap bombers and 48 fighters hit Rangoon. The A.V.G. knocked down 23 of them, the biggest victory of the war, with six more Jap planes believed shot down over the Gulf of Martaban. The A.V.G. suffered not the loss of a single plane.
The 28th brought another heavy enemy attack - 20 bombers and 25 fighters. The A.V.G. got 10 of them with no losses.
The next day, the 29th, the Japs threw 40 bombers and 20 fighters against the Tigers who scored 18 kills with a loss of only a single aircraft.
Now it was the day of New Year's Eve but it dawned with no let up in the Jap assault. 80 planes crowding the skies over Rangoon. The Tigers shot down 15 without the loss of a single aircraft.
In 11 days of fighting, the A.V.G. had officially knocked 75 enemy aircraft out of the skies with an undetermined number of probable kills such as the losses the Japs suffered over the Gulf of Martaban. The A.V.G. losses were two pilots and six aircraft.
Early in January, the Rangoon defense was reinforced by eight planes from the First Squadron and the A.V.G. began their first strafing of the war. Hitting the Jap air base in Thailand, they wiped out a dozen planes on the ground. On January 13, the remainder of the First Squadron joined the other A.V.G. forces at Rangoon and there followed a series of raids on Jap air bases. Ten days later, January 23, after a series of engagements over Kunming and Rangoon, the Japes attacked Rangoon in force again, 72 planes appearing there and the A.V.G. got 21 of them with the loss of only one American pilot. Air battles continued over Rangoon until it finally fell to enemy ground forces at the end of February. During this time, in one strafing raid in Thailand, the A.V.G. knocked out upwards of 60 enemy aircraft on the ground, the biggest ground victory of the war. But advancing Jap ground forces slowly drove the A.V.G. to bases at Magwe in Burma and eventually into the interior of China.
There, the Tigers continued to carry out their final missions, supporting the Chinese ground forces on both eastern and western fronts as well as defending Chinese cities against attacks by the Japanese Air Force.The official home page of "The Flying Tigers"
The AVG was largely the creation of Claire Chennault, retired U.S. Army Air Corps captain who had become military aviation advisor to Chinese generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek in the Sino-Japanese War. On occasion Chennault may have piloted a plane himself, though stories that he was a combat ace are probably apocryphal. Due to poor fighter material, results were not impressive, and when Russian air units were withdrawn from China in 1940, Chiang asked for American squadrons to replace them.
The clandestine operation was largely organized by Lauchlin Currie, a young economist in the White House, and by Roosevelt intimate Thomas G. Corcoran. (Currie's assistant was John King Fairbank, who later became America's preeminent Asian scholar.) The AVG, financing was handled by China Defense Supplies which was largely Tommy Corcoran's creation, with funding provided by the U.S. government; purchases were then made by the Chinese under the "Cash and Carry" provision of the Neutrality Act of 1939.
The pilots were either currently serving in American armed services or reserve officers; contrary to legend, none were recruited from the ranks of civilian transport pilots or barnstormers. Most histories of the Flying Tigers say that on April 15, 1941 President Roosevelt signed a secret executive order authorising Army Reservists on active duty to resign from the Army Air Corps in order to sign up for the AVG,[1] however Flying Tigers historian Daniel Ford could not find evidence that such an order was ever published[2]. Ford states that the State department in fact blocked the issuing of a passport to a pilot who had a history of volunteering for such service[3], something that would go against the spirit of such order.
The pilots who volunteered were discharged from the American armed services, to fly and fight as mercenaries for the Republic of China Air Force[4]. They were officially employees of a private military contractor, the Central Aircraft Manufacturing Company, which employed them for "training and instruction," and which paid them $600 a month for pilot officer, $675 a month for flight leader (such as Gregory Boyington), and $750 for Squadron leader, though no pilot was recruited at this level. They were orally promised an additional $500 for each enemy aircraft shot down, a promise that was later confirmed by Madame Chiang Kai-shek, who also extended it to aircraft destroyed on the ground.wiki
So in substance, the U.S. attacked Japan without declaration of the War?
Secretary of War Henry S.Stimson's diary of November25, 1941, summarized President Roosevelt to the effect that "the question was how we manuver them [the Japanese] into the postion of firing the first shot without allowing too much danger ourselves"[1] ,Coupled with the fact that there is a good reason to believe that Roosevelt knew Japan would attack Peal Harbor,I think Roosevelt was a smart guy!!!
UPDATE
Of course the law of neutrality does not preclude any government from taking part in a war if it sees fit to do so. It merely requires the observance of candor and decency in international dealings, by inhibiting acts of war under the guise of neutrality. From the elementary principles of international law it necessarily follows that if a government bans the shipment of arms and munitions of war to one of the parties to an armed conflict and permits it to the other, it intervenes in a conflict in a military sense and makes itself a party to a war, whether declared or undeclared.
The fact that America was helping China in all possible ways during Sino-Japanese hostilities would thus be a pertinent consideration in determining the character of Japan's subsequent action against the USA. The prosecution admits that the United States rendered aid economically and in the form of war materials to China to a degree unprecedented between non-belligerent powers and that some of her nationals fought with the Chinese against the aggression of JapanRadhabinod Pal
[1]p662 The making of Modern Japan
* Charles Bond & Terry Anderson - A Flying Tiger's Diary ISBN 0890961786
* Martha Byrd - Chennault: Giving Wings to the Tiger ISBN 0817303227
* Daniel Ford - Flying Tigers: Claire Chennault and the American Volunteer Group ISBN 1560985410
* Frank S. Losonsky - Flying Tiger: A Crew Chief's Story: The War Diary of an AVG Crew Chief ISBN 0764300458
* Frank J. Olynyk - AVG & USAAF (China-Burma-India Theater) Credits for Destruction of Enemy Aircraft in Air to Air Combat, World War 2. Privately published, 1986.
* Robert Lee Scott Jr. - Flying Tiger: Chennault of China ISBN 0837167744
* Erik Shilling - Destiny: A Flying Tigers Rendezvous With Fate ISBN 1882463021
* John Toland - Flying Tigers ISBN 0394904052
* Ralph Vartabedian. 'One Last Combat Victory' Los Angeles Times, 6 July 1991. pg.1
Douglas A. MacArthur testified
There is practically nothing indigenous to Japan except the silk worm.
They lack cotton, thy lack wool, they lack petroleum products they lack tin. they lack rubber, they lack a great many other things, all of which was in the Asian basin.
They feared that if those supplies were cut off, there would be 10 to 12 million people unoccupied in Japan.
Their purpose, therefore, in going to war was largely dictated by security.
----Douglas A. MacArthur in 1951----
(聴聞会の正式な題は「極東の軍事情勢とマッカーサーの解任」（Inquiry Into the Military Situation in the Far East and the Facts Surrounding the Relief of General of the Army Douglas MacArthur from his Assignments in that Area）である。米国立公文書館の上院文書RG46に全文がある。マッカーサー米議会証言録（１）
一九五一年五月三日～五日、米上院軍事・外交合同委員会聴聞会より
(当該文章は近現代史より引用）
Friday, April 21, 2006
Korea/Culture
"These days, deiplomatic frictions is increasing because Japan tresspassed the outskirt of Dokdo.
We'll change the the topic of the coverage.
We'are going to shoot the expresson of Japanese ambassadar.
Well, it seems he does not like the bomb liquor."
-------------------------------------------------------
"The way the bubble splites open suddely resembles the way A-bomb formed the mumushroom at Hirosima when it exploded."Hahahaha!!!!
"So we can also call it "A-bomb beer.Haahaha!!!!
----------------------------------------------------------
The Japanese ambasadar Oshima!!!
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
You can download this from hereorhere
HIs intention is evil.
HIs metaphor is evil.
This program is evil.
I wonder if they know what they are doing.
If they know, ・・・・・・
If they don't know,・・・・・
Follow Up
The event was organized by the Corea Image Communication Institute to provide foreigners with an insight into Korean culture at its most immediateChosun liboby Eroll
Well if it to provide foreigners with an insight into Korean culture at its immediate, sure, people got the insight into Korean culture all right.
Japan/Korea/takeshima
Marmot hallのコメントセクションで眼についたものを掲載しましょう。
なんで調査船を送るのが日本の過去の正当化になるのか、という質問に、それはだね、竹島を日本編入宣言したのは１９０５年で、その年は外交権を韓国は日本に奪われているからね、というような趣旨。
しかし、まず、外交権を日本に譲渡したのは条約に基づくものですね。
で、仮に、それが無効だとしても、竹島が日本の領土だという主張はそれ以前からあるから１９０５年とはそもそも関係ないわけです。
非常に全うな意見ではないですか？竹島問題で日本は外交戦争を仕掛けているわけでもない。
どの国でも他国が悪人とみなすような人をまつる神社はあるのであり、それをとやかく言っているのは中国韓国だけだ、と
そもそも漁業協定を韓国が破ることがなければこうした問題が起きなかった。これが多分一番の基本であり、原点ですね。
上記gbeaver氏に対する反論ですが、靖国は天皇のために犠牲になった人への神社だ、と。ーーーどうでしょうか？先日行ったときにはそうした印象はなかったですね。自衛官がまつられる場合天皇の犠牲になった人とは言い難いでしょう。むしろ日本の戦争で犠牲になったものへの追悼というほうが正確ではないでしょうか。それと小泉以前の首相はほとんどみな参拝してますね。
他のところで天皇が行かなくなったことを靖国神社の問題にしている人がいました。確かに靖国の問題性が故に天皇は参拝しなくなったのでしょうが、Ａ級戦犯が祭られたからというより、政治問題に天皇が巻き込まれるのはまずいからという判断があったのでしょうはないでしょうか？
でまたまた、baduk氏の傑作です。
こういった滑稽な空想は、面白いのですが、空想の方向が韓国＝被害者という図式になっているところがまた面白いですね。
Serious question: can someone explain to me how Japan sending a ship to the disputed EEZ area is a “justification of its past invasions,” as Roh is calling it. I don’t get the logic.
The Japanese claim to Tokto goes back to 1905, citing terra nullius, even though Korea had made a prior claim on the island, and Japan had acknowledged the claim in the 19th century. Japan claimed Tokto in 1905 at a time when, by Tokyo’s design through the Russo-Japanese War and the forcing of Korea to relinquish control of foreign affairs to Tokyo (that’s the history of aggression part), there was little Korea could do about this issue.
Furthermore, the treaty Japan signed at the end of World War II called for it to give up any claims on territory gained through its imperial expansionism.
Thus, any Japanese claim today on Tokto or the surrounding EEZ is, in Seoul’s view, based on Japan’s past imperial aggression. It would be no different from if Tokyo were to send its Coast Guard into the EEZ created by Chejudo or Ullŭngdo.kushibo
なんで調査船を送るのが日本の過去の正当化になるのか、という質問に、それはだね、竹島を日本編入宣言したのは１９０５年で、その年は外交権を韓国は日本に奪われているからね、というような趣旨。
しかし、まず、外交権を日本に譲渡したのは条約に基づくものですね。
で、仮に、それが無効だとしても、竹島が日本の領土だという主張はそれ以前からあるから１９０５年とはそもそも関係ないわけです。
Korea and Japan both claim Dokdo/Takeshima, but Japan has not been threatening diplomatic war, canceling summit meetings, printing Takeshima stamps, or sending a dozen ships and planes out to prevent a survey of the disputed area. Korea has been doing all of that and more.
Almost all countries have shines to people who other people consider evil. The United States honors people who are considered war criminals by other nations. China honors Mao, who killed tens of millions. North Korea honors Kim Il-sung, who killed millions of Koreans. South Korea honors people who the Japanese consider as terrorists, yet it is only Korea and China who are making a big deal out of the Japanese shine visits. The United States, the Philippines, and other countries have not been threatening diplomatic war or canceling summit meetings.
You are the one with blinders on, Kushibo, if you cannot see how Korea overreacts to almost everything that Japan does. Even you BBC article said that Koizumi, not Roh, spent months trying to get Japan-Korea relations back on track. However, no matter what Koizumi does, Koreans will find something to whine about. Koreans love to paint themselves as the victim, and they love to make Japan, the US military, and Apollo Ohno the victimizer.
I cracked up when I read that Roh is considering giving up using “quiet diplomacy” with Japan. Quiet diplomacy? When has Roh ever used quiet diplomacy with Japan? The only kind of diplomacy I have seen Roh use is “hissy-fit diplomacy.”gbeaver
非常に全うな意見ではないですか？竹島問題で日本は外交戦争を仕掛けているわけでもない。
どの国でも他国が悪人とみなすような人をまつる神社はあるのであり、それをとやかく言っているのは中国韓国だけだ、と
Of course, we wouldnt be in this situation if the Korean government had kept its promises about the fishing rights in the first place.Shakuhachi
そもそも漁業協定を韓国が破ることがなければこうした問題が起きなかった。これが多分一番の基本であり、原点ですね。
Do you also believe that countries with maps saying “Sea of Japan” are attempting to “distort history”?
Kushibo wrote: “Korea is in no position but to send out ships and planes to prevent an unwanted incursion into an area it occupies.”
Gerry Writes: Wrong, Kushibo. There are a few things that Korea could do instead of sending out a eighteen or more ships and planes to stop two survey vessels in the area claimed by both Korea and Japan. For one, Korea could simply do what Japan did when Korea surveyed the same area without getting Japan’s permission, which is they could simply protest the survey without using force. Afterall, the two Japanese survey vessels are not going to the area to invade Dokdo, as the Korean media seems to believe.
Yasukuni is not a shrine to Japanese war criminals. It is a shrine to Japan’s war dead, and the Japanese prime minister does not go to the shrine to pay homage to Japanese war criminals. He has said repeatedly that he goes there to pray for peace and the souls of all the dead. Korea, on the other hand, intentionally pays homage to terrorists.
Kushibo Wrote: “Although they are mass killers, that domestic matter is not analogous to the situation at hand.”
Gerry Writes: Aren’t Japanese textbooks and shrine visits also a “domestic matter”? Afterall, Japan is not declaring diplomatic war on Korea for its distorted textbooks and shrine visits.
Kushibo Wrote: “The Japanese claim to Tokto goes back to 1905, citing terra nullius, even though Korea had made a prior claim on the island, and Japan had acknowledged the claim in the 19th century.”
Gerry Writes: You are wrong again, Kushibo. Korea never claimed Dokdo/Takeshima before 1905, and Japan never acknowledged any such fictitious claim.Gbeaver
You are wrong about Yasukuni. It is not a shrine to Japan’s war dead. It is a shrine to those who gave their lives for the Japanese emperor. The two are not the same (except to Japan’s right wing).
And there is a reason that PMs before Koizumi did not go there. Regardless of whether Koizumi is right in doing to Yasukuni, I think it is worth noting that many Japanese are uncomfortable with the idea, too.Haisan
上記gbeaver氏に対する反論ですが、靖国は天皇のために犠牲になった人への神社だ、と。ーーーどうでしょうか？先日行ったときにはそうした印象はなかったですね。自衛官がまつられる場合天皇の犠牲になった人とは言い難いでしょう。むしろ日本の戦争で犠牲になったものへの追悼というほうが正確ではないでしょうか。それと小泉以前の首相はほとんどみな参拝してますね。
他のところで天皇が行かなくなったことを靖国神社の問題にしている人がいました。確かに靖国の問題性が故に天皇は参拝しなくなったのでしょうが、Ａ級戦犯が祭られたからというより、政治問題に天皇が巻き込まれるのはまずいからという判断があったのでしょうはないでしょうか？
でまたまた、baduk氏の傑作です。
The U.S. leave the region and let China-Japan war happen. After all, these two savages are so eager to get at each other’s throats. Why should the U.S. get involved in this cat fight? Just let them destroy each other.
Korea? It all depends how Koreans react. Korea will not be able to stand neutral when these two big guys fight it out. Korea will side with one of the two.
Japan just made a big mistake. Japan pushed Korea to Chinese side. Unless Japan undo what it just did, Korea will help China to destroy Japan.budak
こういった滑稽な空想は、面白いのですが、空想の方向が韓国＝被害者という図式になっているところがまた面白いですね。
Japan/Afganistan/Iraq
TOKYO - Japan's Cabinet on Friday approved a six-month extension of its non-combat support for the U.S.-led anti-terrorism campaign in AfghanistanJapan has also deployed about 600 troops in southern Iraq on a non-combat, humanitarian mission under another law passed in 2003.
The Iraq mission - Japan's largest overseas military dispatch since World War II - has been unpopular among the public Apr. 21, 2006MiamiHerald
日本は平和憲法のもとアフガニスタンとイラクに人道的な見地から非戦闘員を送っており、それでも憲法９条に反するのでは？という声が多い、というわけです。
靖国にいくと、あるいは、調査船を出すと、拡張主義の始まりだとか、そんなことばからり言っている国がありますが、それは極めてずるいやり方でしょう。勿論過去の清算の問題があれば、それについて論じるのもやぶさかではありませんが、現在の政治的問題を無理矢理そうした問題に絡ませて論じるのは卑怯なやり方のように思えます。
Thursday, April 20, 2006
Japan/Korea/takeshima---Kill'em all!!!
Protesters burn anti-Japanese pickets during a rally demanding Japan abandon a planChosunもう少し様子を見てからにしようと思いましたが、まあ、一応この段階での経過報告.。問題は、
１）領土問題が存在する。
２）韓国は数度同様な調査をしている。
３）にも関わらず日本が同様なことをすると、この大騒ぎ、ということになるでしょうか。
韓国は１）を否定するのですが、それはやっぱ無理でしょう。
（因みにflying yangbangは韓国人の配偶者をもつアメリカ人の領土問題に関する分析で比較的冷静で参考になります。）
本件に関して、韓国の識者は、
A survey vessel is not classified as a civilian vessel like a fishing boat, but as a government ship. If it is seized by our maritime police, Japan would immediately refer us to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. Should that happen, the Dokdo islets and nearby seas would become a conflict area in the eyes of the international community, and chances are that a court ruling would be favorable to Japan. Apr.19,2006Chosu libo
A ministry official says it will not be easy to change the two Japanese names to Korean names. It weakens the argument even further that the Korean government raised no objection over the last 27 years. “The feeling now is that the vested interest has been acknowledged,” the official said.ChosunApr.18,2006
という具合にこれまた冷静なのですが、メディアは大騒ぎーーーお祭り状態みたいな感じですね。
で、国民だけでなく韓国系のアメリカ人の中にも興奮している方がいます。その中で特に傑作なのが、これ。
Now, I see I was wrong! Japan is trying to take other country’s land. By creeping in. And, by force later. The monster is back. And, its first target is Korea!
Kill ‘em all!baduk
Korea is like a woman who has been raped for 35 years by the same man. He now says he is a different man. But, he still keeps the porno tapes(Yaskuni) that he made her watch while he is at it.
He meets her in the public park by chance(Dokdo). He takes off his shirt blaming the weather.baduk
韓国も同様なことをしている調査船をだしたら、皆殺しにしちまえ！！とは！！！空想逞しく、また、怖い話しですね。
で、なぜノムヒョンが強引な手法をとるのか？
South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun, anxious to distract attention from controversy over his efforts at reconciliation with
North Korea, talked tough on Thursday after ordering a flotilla of 18 patrol boats to fend off survey ships that Japan says it's sending to chart the waters around the islands. Asia TimesApr 21, 2006
北朝鮮問題から眼を遠ざけるためですか？
UPDATE
baduk氏の傑作コメントの続きです。
Before going to war with Japan, South Korea will form an alliance with North Korea and China. It will not be Japan against South Korea, but rather Japan against China and Korea.
I do not think the U.S. will fight on the side of Japan.
Russia may join in on China and Korea side. As you said, Japan is a rich country. Russia may like to get a piece of that.budak
日本と戦争する前に韓国は北朝鮮と中国と同盟を組むそうです。あらら、調査船だしたら、北朝鮮と中国、それにロシアまでも同盟国だそうです・・・・・あらあ、こりゃああたいへんだああ。
However, judging from this incident, it is obvious Japan will play dirty. And, it is obvious to me that Japan will not stop at Dokdo. The next target will be Ulengdo and maybe parts of Korea itself.
Impossible? Have you read some literature on Japanese Rightwingers? They want to revive the “Great Japan Empire”, the Rising Sun.budak
で、日本の右翼は大日本帝国を復活させたいそうです・・・どこでお読みになったのかしら。
滑稽というようり、これほどの空想力はちょっと羨ましい気もします。
The U.S/Japan/Military
The United States had proposed in an earlier round that Japan pay 75 percent of the estimated US$10 billion (?8.1 billion) cost of moving the Marines from Okinawa to Guam, a U.S. territory about halfway between Japan and Hawaii.
Japan had said it would pay about a third of that amount, but last week reportedly proposed paying US$3 billion (?2.4 billion) of the cost plus another US$3 billion in loans.
Under a mutual security pact, the United States has about 50,000 troops stationed in Japan. The presence includes more than 10,000 Marines, several air bases and the home port for the Seventh Fleet.
以前も掲載したけど、なんで出ていってもらうのにそんなに金だっせってわけ？それだけ出すなら日本としては核作って自衛力高めたら方がよっぽどコストが少なくすむんじゃないの？
ここらへんの事情に詳しい方教えてください。
China/Japan/Threat
Japan has scrambled fighter jets more than 100 times this year to intercept suspected Chinese spy planes approaching Japanese air space, a top general said Thursday
China has announced double-digit spending increases for its 2.5 million-member military nearly every year since the early 1990s.April 20, 2006
日本は１００回以上も中国のスパイ飛行に対してスクランブルをかけている、と、で、二桁台の軍備の伸びを示しているいる、わけです。これはやはり脅威でしょう。まあ、脅威ばかり煽ってもしょうがないですが、かといって中国の善意を信仰してそれを無視するのも問題があります。
Wednesday, April 19, 2006
China/organ harvesting
HK Patients Told to Go to China for Kidney Transplants While Supplies Plentifulepoch times
中国で宝輪功の信者が虐待を受けた上、その臓器は移植用として商業的に利用されている、という話題は大紀元では前から報道されていました。香港の患者も中国本土に行けば臓器移植できるよ、と言われていることからその報道の真実性の補強証拠になろう、というわけです。。これに関しては David （といっても出人氏ではない）、McNeill氏が、日本人が中国へ臓器移植に行っているということに関してどちらかといえば批判的に報告していました。David
まず、
大紀元の報道が真実ならば、中国は即刻そのようなことはやめるべきなのは当然です。
臓器移植を受けることの可否については、
１）臓器提供に関して法的、道義的な問題があったか、
２）あったとして、被提供者はそれを知っていたか、が問題になると思います。
本件では、１）に関してはまだ、確定的ではありません。
もっとも、ある程度確実な情報があり、それが公知あるいは、何らかの理由でそれを私的に知ることになった段階で提供を受けることはやはり道義的に問題が生じ得るように思います。強いて言えば、利用を受けることによって犯罪を助長するおそれがあることでしょうか。
また、過去に論じたように、医療現場、あるいは、捕虜・囚人やなどは容易に虐待が起きやすいことに鑑みれば、かなり厳しい制限のもとで臓器提供がなされていなければ、倫理的に問題にしてもよいようにも思えます。
もっとも、David氏が主に韓国人読者むけの英語メディアでまず中国の問題としてではなく、日本の問題としてこれを取り上げたことはいかがものでしょうか。
、
Korea/Culture?
An anti-Japan protester, Yang Bong-ho, stabs himself in the stomach with a kinfe to commite suicide demanding Japan abandon a plan to conduct a maritime survey near disputed islets, at a park in SeoulASSOCIATED PRESS PHOTOGRAPHS - 19 Apr 01:13PM
Update
Gulf Daily New
Occidentalism
やっぱ、いろんなところで注目されている模様です。
日本の調査船に抗議して、切腹ーーというか、お腹にナイフさしている韓国の方だそうです。
まあ、かつては（2005/3/16）は市議会議員までも「自分の指を切って、血で抗議文を書くつもりだった」と話して、島根県議会にお越しになり、カッターナイフを取り出して警官にとりおささえられたことを思い出します。あまり効果的な抗議運動とはいえませんね。、
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
The U.S./Japan/poilcy
Today Japan is a stable and mature democracy, and latent American and East Asian fears of a resurgent Japan should be calmed by the commitment of the Japanese to the principles enshrined in their constitution. "The pre-World War II era, when an imperial Japan attempted to secure an exclusive economic sphere for itself, is long past," Preble writes. "The Japanese people have demonstrated a consistent aversion to the use of force and an equally strong determination to maintain firm civilian control over the nation's military."April 18, 2006Two Normal Countries: Rethinking the U.S.-Japan Strategic Relationship
米国の研究機関は日本は成熟した民主主義社会であると評価し、米国の軍事的な影響力を弱めて日本に地域における責任をもたせてよい、という意見を述べられているみたっす。
しゃんせいーで～～～～す。
The name-changing under Japanese rule
see also the name changing under the black umbrella
I have found interesting discussion about name-changing under Japanese rule going on on the blogs.
However it is pointed out that before the name-changing, there had been a lot of korean soldiers already. No trouble had been reported, rather what made the army worried was there might be anti-Japanese spies by the Japanese name.[1]
On another blog,a man called Hakasaeng argues:
I should also add that changing one's name was only required for those Koreans living on the Korean Peninsula. Koreans that moved to occupied China or Manchuria were not required to change their names. There was a significant demographic move from Korea to China because, generally speaking, life was better for a Korean living in occupied China than it was for a Korean living in occupied Korea.
The following is the leaflet a commmentator, Mika, has presented.
Mika
My poor translation:
The leaflet explaining the setting up the family name.
1 You need to report your family name until Angust 10.You can not report it after that.You can report the first name anytime.
2 If you don't report untile the time, your family name will be the name of household's head.For instance, the head's name of the household is Kim(金）, your familiy name will be Kim. His wife, 尹-貞姫's(surname-first name) name will be Kim 貞姫.The child of the wife,朴-南祚's name willbe Kim(金）南祚.Don't confuse.
3 Some people cunfuse 氏uji with 姓sei.Uji is the name of the house's head,姓sei is the name of male's blood line.The two are different.
4 Some people think if you set up the family name,you will lose your old surname.But that is mistaken.After setting up the family name, your old surname and the name originated from male's blood will remain in the registration.
5 Some people think that you have to have the same name if you belong to the same tribe of father line,or the same surname.That is mistaken.The family name is the name of the household unit, and it is natural that different household units have different names.
6 Some peole take this name setteing up too seriously, but it is the best you choose the simple name.
7 You have little time,If you have any questions, ask the public office.
Daegu Legal Affairs Bureau.
And the following is a copy of a registration.
The photo is a copy of the family register.
This man, Mr.Yi（李） did not report the family name, hence, his family is registered as Yi(李）in 1940。He lives in Gyeonggi-do.京畿道경기도
He lives in the Peninsula.
And the following is the list of the Governer in pennisula who did't change their name.
李昌根慶尚北道1944．Aug－1945.July
金大羽全羅北道1943．Aug-1946．july慶尚北道1945.july－
孫永穆全羅北道1937．April-1940.Sept江原道1945,july
兪万兼忠清北道1939,April－1940.Sept
鄭僑源忠清北道1945,July－[2]
They were in the Peninsula and they were governers.
So it is not true that name-changing was forced in the Peninsula.
A commenter called Umetaro give other sources.
If this is true, it is reasonable that the name-changing was pressured.
A source by Umetaro reinforces this.
A commenter called Chiamaru raised a doubt.
The point is if the public service was restriceted as described, who pressured Korean people to change names?.
The govement-general promised that there would be no force involved.
The police was against the name-changing.
There were Korean governers who didn't change their names.So it is unreasonable to suppose that the goveners mandate their subordinates, low official to resrict.
Another source by Umetaro might be an hint to the solution.
In 1911 the government general order 124(総督府令第124号) reads; there should be no name in peninsula which was coufusing with Japanese and if the Japanese name is registered, it should be changed to Korean name.
wiki
Besides,slave class (and monks) had no Korean name(姓）dreamtale
Th ese facts also suggest that there were many Korean people who wanted to change/have their names in Japanese style.
The desire to become "Japanese" is evidenced in the following.
Another ethinic korean author seems to simply deny that there was such an pressure.But I'll have to read the book in quesion.I 'll update when I find the book.
.
update;
I've found the book創氏改名の法制度と歴史 by a Korean resident in Japan.He claims that Japanese system of the family name was forced 100%;however,he objects to the idea that the ration, admittance to school etc were rejected if Koreans refused to change the name.
He argues that the idea that there was such a descrimination was based on the book,"g軍国日本朝占３６年史（souel, 柏文社、１９６７）by 文定昌 and the author based his writing on the novel 浪漫時代。[4]
He wrote,
In my interpretaion, what he is saying is tha since it was impossble to survive without rations, and there were students in Korea who did not change their names,it is unlikely that there was this kind of descrimination.
(by the way, My blog is mentioned, and a mistake was pointed out.I stand conrrected.)
Update
京城日報 1942.11.13-1942.11.23(昭和17)(Souel Daily 1942)
京城日報 1942.11.13-1942.11.23(昭和17)(Souel Daily 1942)
With the help of the blogger dreammantle and the commenter, I could find this newspaper.The article is about how korean cotten farmers works for the country.
In the first photograph,the article says;
In the second photo,the article says:
There were farmers who did change their names in Japanese style,and who kept their
Korean names.And a corrospondent of Soeul daily kept his Korean name.
And here is a Korean public officer in the peninsula kept his Korean name.
鮮総督府道理事官(a researcher of foreign affairs at Korea governor-general's office )
安炳軾(Korean name)
He was granted a bonus by Tojou Hideki.
Japan center for Asian Historical record
Reference Code: A04018697000
update
[1]
[2]
[3]Kan explains,
I wonder what motivated these Koreans to have "the fervent desire to become “Japanese”in the first place.
[4]
実はこの小説創始改名に関する記述こそが文定昌の著述のベースとでも言うべき重要な参考知ろうになっていると考えられるのである。ｐ２５
配給・入学・役人採用・貨物輸送は創氏が条件
このようなことが朝鮮全土で一律に行われていたとは考えられない。日本人式の氏にしなかったのが２０％いたのであるから、それらの人が配給をもらえなかったり学校に入学できなかったということはないからである。実印についてもしいて改印しなくてよいという通達がでている。ｐ５４
On the name chaging, Dreamtale has an interesting story to tell.
dreamtale
There are some points we should notice.
The family name which is different from Korean name system was introduced because there was a need to be consistent with Japanese civil law in addition to the fact that there were many Koreans who wanted to change their name to Japanese style and the demand matched the idea of Korea-and -Japan- One- body policy.
dream tale
Besides there was no last name for the slaves,the system of whom was abolished by Japanese government.dreamtale
update aug 11 2006
The name changing to Japanese style was not forced.
If you are a man and your name is Kim, and if you have a son and a daugter, your children's last name is Kim.If your daughter marries, your daugher's name will be Kim whatever her husband name is.
Japanese system of familily name was introduced into Korean society.If your family name is Kim, and if you have a son and a daugter, your children's name is Kim.If yor son or daugher marry, it does not mean that their name will be Kim.It might be spouse's famlily name,for, instance, Park.
This system make it possible to adopt a child with a different name.
There are cases in the peninsula in which Koreans did not change their names.(see below)
The procedure to change names.
1. (a)You file your family name to the purblic office or (b)your famlily name will be Korean last name (based on male blood lineage)
2. If you want to change your first name,it takes 50 sen to file your first name.
辻本
京城日報 1942.11.13-1942.11.23
創氏改名の残滓
林、柳、南、桂等の姓を有する者（獄長日記）
I have found interesting discussion about name-changing under Japanese rule going on on the blogs.
there is a book on the name changing under japan.
http://www.hanee.pe.kr/view.php?db=history&page=4&idx=131&keyfield=&key=
it’s a korean link but the image has chinese characters.
the author seems to be very well aware of the matter. i’ve read the excerpt. according to the author, it was the intention of the imperial army (not the police). the army was preparing the conscription of both japanese and koreans. the army wanted to avoid confusion and division by having two different people in the same unit. (language was not a serious matter. many young koreans at that time spoke good japanese.) his assertion is based on a document of Japanese Interior Ministry (Inquiry on the treatment of Koreans and Taiwanese 1945/3/6).Nou-Occidentalism
However it is pointed out that before the name-changing, there had been a lot of korean soldiers already. No trouble had been reported, rather what made the army worried was there might be anti-Japanese spies by the Japanese name.[1]
On another blog,a man called Hakasaeng argues:
If you had any reason to deal with the Japanese government (taxes, education, etc.), you had to have a Japanese name.
The only exceptions I've found to date were those that lived in the countryside, far away from government entities. That would seem to be supported by the 80-20% figure cited in the Japanese wikipedia entry. Many of those in the countryside were tenant farmers and didn't have to pay taxes (they didn't own land) and were largely uneducated or undereducated; therefore, they seldom had a reason to interact with the central government.
Posted by: Haksaeng | April 17, 2006 at 07:26 PM Hakaeseng-Asia pages
I should also add that changing one's name was only required for those Koreans living on the Korean Peninsula. Koreans that moved to occupied China or Manchuria were not required to change their names. There was a significant demographic move from Korea to China because, generally speaking, life was better for a Korean living in occupied China than it was for a Korean living in occupied Korea.
The following is the leaflet a commmentator, Mika, has presented.
「氏設定における御注意」
一、創氏の届出は八月十日迄です。その後の創氏の届出は出来ません。名の変更には期限がありません。
二、八月十日迄に氏の届出をしなかった場合は、戸主の姓をそのまま氏とします。例えば、戸主の姓が金であれば金が氏となり、その妻である尹貞姫は戸主の氏に従い金貞姫となり、子婦朴南祚は金南祚となり、紛雑することがあります。
三、氏と姓を混合する向きがあるでしょうが、氏は家の呼び名であり、姓は男系の血統を表すもので両者の姓質は全然異なるものです。
四、氏を設定すると、従来の姓が無くなるという誤解があるようですが、氏設定後においても姓や本貫はそのまま戸籍に記載されますので問題ありません。
五、門中（父系親族集団）または宗中（同姓同本集団）は、同一の氏を設定しなければならないと考えている人もいるようですが大きな誤解です。氏は家の呼び名であるので、各家で異なる氏を設定するのが当然です。
六、氏の選定について、熟慮中のようですが、考えすぎるとかえって迷うものですから、速やかに簡明なものに決定するのが最も理想的です。
七、期限も迫りました。不審な点は早く府面区または法院へお問い合わせください
大邱地方法院
Mika
My poor translation:
The leaflet explaining the setting up the family name.
1 You need to report your family name until Angust 10.You can not report it after that.You can report the first name anytime.
2 If you don't report untile the time, your family name will be the name of household's head.For instance, the head's name of the household is Kim(金）, your familiy name will be Kim. His wife, 尹-貞姫's(surname-first name) name will be Kim 貞姫.The child of the wife,朴-南祚's name willbe Kim(金）南祚.Don't confuse.
3 Some people cunfuse 氏uji with 姓sei.Uji is the name of the house's head,姓sei is the name of male's blood line.The two are different.
4 Some people think if you set up the family name,you will lose your old surname.But that is mistaken.After setting up the family name, your old surname and the name originated from male's blood will remain in the registration.
5 Some people think that you have to have the same name if you belong to the same tribe of father line,or the same surname.That is mistaken.The family name is the name of the household unit, and it is natural that different household units have different names.
6 Some peole take this name setteing up too seriously, but it is the best you choose the simple name.
7 You have little time,If you have any questions, ask the public office.
Daegu Legal Affairs Bureau.
And the following is a copy of a registration.
The photo is a copy of the family register.
This man, Mr.Yi（李） did not report the family name, hence, his family is registered as Yi(李）in 1940。He lives in Gyeonggi-do.京畿道경기도
He lives in the Peninsula.
And the following is the list of the Governer in pennisula who did't change their name.
李昌根慶尚北道1944．Aug－1945.July
金大羽全羅北道1943．Aug-1946．july慶尚北道1945.july－
孫永穆全羅北道1937．April-1940.Sept江原道1945,july
兪万兼忠清北道1939,April－1940.Sept
鄭僑源忠清北道1945,July－[2]
They were in the Peninsula and they were governers.
So it is not true that name-changing was forced in the Peninsula.
A commenter called Umetaro give other sources.
"Of our fifty informants, only four families refused to change their names. All others complied, for without a Japanese name citizens could not enter schools, get jobs, or obtain ration cards. The government stopped issuing permits and postmen stopped delivering packages to those with Korean names."
-Hildi Kang, Under the Black Umbrella
If this is true, it is reasonable that the name-changing was pressured.
A source by Umetaro reinforces this.
"Official estimates indicate that more then 3.17 million households had new family names in the Japanese style. This number comprised 79.3 percent of the total households in Korea (Asahi Shinbun August 9, 2000. Refer to Chou 1996:60; Shida 1989:175). Those who refused to change their names or failed to register on time encountered overt discrimination such as denied entrance of their children to school and advancement in higher education, and deprivation of job opportunities (Chou 1996: 60)7."
- Kazuko Suzuki, The State and Racialization: The Case of Koreans in Japanlink
A commenter called Chiamaru raised a doubt.
I wonder how people got descrimanation by the local govenment when the governer himself didn't chang his name.
The point is if the public service was restriceted as described, who pressured Korean people to change names?.
The govement-general promised that there would be no force involved.
The police was against the name-changing.
There were Korean governers who didn't change their names.So it is unreasonable to suppose that the goveners mandate their subordinates, low official to resrict.
Another source by Umetaro might be an hint to the solution.
"In 2000, tape recordings were discovered of high-ranking officials of the Japanese Government-General of Korea. According to the tapes, the name-changing campaign was promoted by Koreans who favored the Japanese government. There was a request from Koreans that they wanted to be treated the same as Japanese, and therefore they said, ‘we want to change our names into the Japanese style.’ If they think so, we think it is all right. However, there might be cases that the very end of the system, the name-changing was forced. So we were troubled.
There were more than 200 heads in local provinces, in which about 90 percent were Koreans. These Koreans were most active in the name-changing campaign. It was honorable to let their villagers change their names into the Japanese style. They considered that it was a test of loyalty for the Japanese government. The Japanese police was opposed to Koreans’ namechanging, because it made Koreans invisible and made it difficult for them to identity Koreans (Asahi Shinbun August 8 and 9, 2000)"
- Kazuko Suzuki, The State and Racialization: The Case of Koreans in Japan
In 1911 the government general order 124(総督府令第124号) reads; there should be no name in peninsula which was coufusing with Japanese and if the Japanese name is registered, it should be changed to Korean name.
wiki
Besides,slave class (and monks) had no Korean name(姓）dreamtale
Th ese facts also suggest that there were many Korean people who wanted to change/have their names in Japanese style.
The desire to become "Japanese" is evidenced in the following.
The record of the “vigorous peninsular youth” reads as follows:[3]
The purpose of our travel to the mainland is entirely different from school trips. One purpose is to worship at the Ise shrine and to worship the imperial palace from a distance. Another purpose is to present ourselves to the people of the in-land and achieve an ever stronger unity between the in-land and Korea. …. We prayed for the hallowed divine nation Japan and for its continuing prosperity, and ever more firmly confirmed our desire to repay even a ten-thousandth of the sacred debt of the Emperor’s benevolent gaze that is equally bestowed upon us [isshi dojin]. We worship the east every morning at our training center and each time recite our oath as members of the Imperial nation [kokoku kokumin] as though we stood before the Emperor; in doing so, we strengthened our conviction as subjects [shinmin]. When we respectfully worshiped before the Nijūbashi Bridge, we could only weep tears of gratitude.Toa newspaper/“vigorous peninsular youth”/in the article of Kang Sang Jung
Another ethinic korean author seems to simply deny that there was such an pressure.But I'll have to read the book in quesion.I 'll update when I find the book.
.
update;
I've found the book創氏改名の法制度と歴史 by a Korean resident in Japan.He claims that Japanese system of the family name was forced 100%;however,he objects to the idea that the ration, admittance to school etc were rejected if Koreans refused to change the name.
He argues that the idea that there was such a descrimination was based on the book,"g軍国日本朝占３６年史（souel, 柏文社、１９６７）by 文定昌 and the author based his writing on the novel 浪漫時代。[4]
He wrote,
Since 20% did not change, it was impossible that those people, could not get their ration or could not be addmitted to school.
In my interpretaion, what he is saying is tha since it was impossble to survive without rations, and there were students in Korea who did not change their names,it is unlikely that there was this kind of descrimination.
(by the way, My blog is mentioned, and a mistake was pointed out.I stand conrrected.)
Update
With the help of the blogger dreammantle and the commenter, I could find this newspaper.The article is about how korean cotten farmers works for the country.
In the first photograph,the article says;
六) 忠南道の巻 自由出荷に凱歌 農民への理解と協力
.......北面黄湖里の篤農家張忠源さん(五四)は六人家族の小作農であったが五年前から二町歩の棉作をやり共販日に一千八百三十三斤(価額六百二円二十四銭)宛を出荷、それで田畑を買い今日では立派な自作農として成功している、この人は誰に指導されなくとも棉作に努力、反当り百六十斤の豊作をかち得て今年は三千斤(価額九百九十円)の棉を既に去る十月link
In Gyeonggi Province,....張忠源(Korean name), who had 6 fmiliies, used to be a tenant farmer,but by selling cotton, he made a great success as an independent farmer now.(a rough translation)
In the second photo,the article says:
(九) 全北の巻 供出愈よ活気づく 収穫はまず申分ない
........高敞郡 戦時生産力の飛躍的拡充を狙って高敞郡は道内でも棉作の模範部といわれているが、本年は旱害や水害によって棉の成育はあまりよくなかった、それにも拘らず、光山技手を初め鄭石均氏ら係員は各部連盟理事長と協力、共販出荷への督励に全力を尽して割当てられた共販目標百三十五万斤を突破して棉花高敞の栄誉をかち得ようと、意気込んでいる......鄭特派員記
link
In Chonbuk,......Due to the drought, the growth of cotton was not good.Despite of this,the persons in charge such as 光山(japananese name) and 鄭石均(Korean name),corporating with a chief directer of the union ,did thier best to achieve a quota........A correspondent 鄭(Korean name)(a rough translation)
There were farmers who did change their names in Japanese style,and who kept their
Korean names.And a corrospondent of Soeul daily kept his Korean name.
And here is a Korean public officer in the peninsula kept his Korean name.
鮮総督府道理事官(a researcher of foreign affairs at Korea governor-general's office )
安炳軾(Korean name)
He was granted a bonus by Tojou Hideki.
Japan center for Asian Historical record
Reference Code: A04018697000
update
One reason Koreans wanted to take on Japanese-style names was because that way, the Chinese could not look down upon and take advanatge of them. The Chinese (who were the majority in Manchuria) had no respect for Koreans who they had regarded as people of the vassal state throughout history. One of the most common tactics by the Chinese at the time was to contract a piece of waste land to the Koreans to cultivate, and once the Koreans had turned it into arable land, scrap the contract and rob the land. The maltreatment of Koreans (then Japanese) in Manchuria and Northeast China by the Chinese was somewhat of an embarassment for the Japanese government whose duty it was to protect the rights and properties of its citizens.two cents at occidentalism
This was an image posted at NAVER by a KOREAN as proof that his/her grandparents did not choose to have a Japanese name.
http://toron.pepper.jp/jp/20cf/touchi/soushi.html
Seems his/her grandparents chose to use their clan name “Lee” as the family name, like Lt. General Hong Sa-ik.
The amendment to the civil law allowing Koreans to take on Japanese names is commonly referred to as 創氏改名. 創氏 means creating a family name (not necessarily Japanese-style), and this was compulsory. 改名 means changing the first name, and this was voluntary. To register a Japanese-style family name, all you had to do was submit the papers to the village ward (面事務所), unlike in Taiwan where you had to prove to the officials that you were fluent in Japanese and had adopted a Japanese lifestyle to be allowed a Japanese name. If you felt odd about having a combination of a Japanese-style family name and a Korean-style first name, you could also change the first name by obtaining permission from the regional legal affairs bureau, and submitting the written proof of permission to the village ward. However, changing the first name was charged 1/2 yen per head, and so only 10% of the Koreans chose (or could afford) to do so. If the Japanese government intended to completely Japanize the Korean names, it would not have charged anything for the first-name change. In the example above, you see that the head of the family did not submit anything, and so the stamp with the name and date written in, “氏ノ届出ヲ為サザルニ因リ昭和拾五年八月拾壱日李 ヲ氏トシタルニ付更生ス (Since no applications have been submitted, Lee has been registered as the family name on August 11, 1940.),” appear on the register. The fact that a stamp was prepared probably means that this was no exceptional case, but that there were plenty of cases like this.
This advertisement calling out to Koreans “Deadline approaching! Do not to miss this opportunity!” was posted in Daegu in 1940, taken from a book published in 2004 by a Korean organization, Institute for Research in Collaborationist Activities. [The Japanese title is 植民地朝鮮と戦争美術 (Colonial Korea and War-time Art).]
http://toron.pepper.jp/jp/20cf/touchi/soushichi.html
What this ad basically says is that:
(1) No application will be accepted after Aug. 10.
(2) If you fail to apply for a family name, then your [Korean-style] clan name will automatically become your new family name.
(3) Do not confuse 氏(family name) with 姓(clan name). A family name is the title of the family, whereas the traditional clan name is the title of the paternal blood clan.
(4) Do not worry, both your clan name and 本貫 (region of clan) will remain on your register.
(5) It seems that some believe that the entire clan must share a common family name. That is not so.
(6) Don’t think too deeply. Simple names usually work quite well.
(7) Deadline approaching. If you have any questions, contact your local ward or legal affairs bureau immediately.
How this ad can be proof of forced name changing is beyond me. But why should you believe me? I’m Japanese.Two cents at Marmot
Two Cents from Japan
Posted December 1, 2006 at 10:53 pm | Permalink
If the name changes were forced, how do you explain the existence of people like韓相龍 and 李埼鎔 (members of the House of Peers of Imperial Japan), 朴春琴 (members House of Representatives of Imperial Japan representing Tokyo), 洪思翊 (Lt. General of the Imperial Army), 白洪錫 (Major General of the Imperial Army), 金錫源 (Colonel of the Imperial Army), and Korean governors in the provinces of Korea such as 孫永穆 (Jeollabuk-do), 兪萬兼 (Chungcheongbuk-do, later Kangwon-to), 金大羽(Gyeongsangbuk-do), and 鄭僑源 (Chungcheongbuk-do). I mean, when you have governors retaining their Korean names, how do you convince the common people to take Japanese names? If somebody did the forcing as the Koreans claim, who were they?
Many Japanese were opposed to allowing Koreans taking on Japanese names. The reason was that they were prejudiced against the Koreans. They wanted to keep the Koreans distinguishable from the Japanese. You can’t tell a Korean with a Japanese name educated to speak Japanese apart from a “proper” Japanese. Some Japanese even claimed that the Koreans you can trust are those who chose to have Korean names.two cents at Marmot
Apparently, it’s Koreans like you and Korean scholars who can’t read the original Japanese documents like the ones below. They are the original laws and amendments concerning the Korean Civil Law (朝鮮民事令). No where does it say to make Koreans adopt Japanese names.
http://www.jacar.go.jp/
Reference codes: A02030160700 [Amending Korea Civil Ordinance (Creating son-in-law and adopted son systems and regulation related to lineage concerning system)], etc.
Try the English search, and type in the key words “Civil Law Korea.” Too bad you can’t read the search results, though. A majority of Korean scholars can’t either. They simply lack the Japanese language skills necessary to study the period and make up stories that suit the present emotional and political situation, taking advantage of the fact that the majority of the Koreans now can’t read Chinese characters and are incapable of reading past records. Since you brought it up, Decree 19 states that the amendments to the Civil Law (defining family unit, divorces, divorces in case where the man has married into his wife’s family, and adoption of males from different clans) will be implemented, and that Korean must create a family name, which will be the title of the basic unit of the family under the Civil Law, within 6 months. Decree 20 says that Koreans cannot use the names of emperors, past or present, and that they will basically have to use their clan name as family name (自己ノ姓以外ノ姓ハ氏トシテ之ヲ用フルコトヲ得ズ ), unless they are creating a completely new family unit. In other words, a Mr. Kim could not register his family name as Pak. Thus, you will see that in the actual implementation, Koreans who failed to register a new family name automatically ended up with their Korean clan name appearing as the family name on their family register. Decree 20 also states that the family name and given names on the register cannot be changed, unless permission is obtained following procedures designated by the Consulate General (氏名ハ之ヲ変更スルコトヲ得ズ但シ正当ノ事由アル 場合ニ於テ朝鮮総督ノ定ムル所ニ依リ許可ヲ受ケタ� ��トキハ此ノ限ニ在ラズ).
If the Japanese wanted to wipe out Korean names, all Koreans who failed to register a family name by the deadline August 10, 1940 would have forcibly been given Japanese names. Instead, the Japanese government simply used the Korean clan name as the new family name. Even the Korean royal family and aristocrats (who had been given the same status under Imperial Japan) continued to use their Korean names. Nearly 80% of the Koreans in Japan kept their Korean names. So, who did the forcing in Korea, where only 1% of the population was Japanese? The Governor-General, Jiro Minami, seems to have thought that giving Koreans a chance to take on Japanese-style names was a morally good act, after all it was the 2600th anniversary of the foundation of Japan and such occasions called for generosity, but even he passed orders strictly forbidding any forcing. two cents at marmot
[1]
「創氏」の目的 宮田氏はこの創氏改名の目的について、内務省機密文書中に次のような文書が見つかったとして、徴兵制の導入が目的だったと主張している。その文書には「もし軍隊中に金某、李某等混じりたりとせばに思いを致さば、その利弊又自ら明らかなるものあり」と創氏改名の成果を謳っているという。
しかし当時は既に支那事変は始まっていた。北支戦線では金錫源少佐が大活躍し、後に中将まで栄進した洪思翊も現役で活躍していた。又志願兵制度が既に始まっており、この前年の昭和一四年には六〇〇人の採用に対し、一万二千人も応募している。軍隊の中に朝鮮姓の人がいても何ら支障がない。むしろ台湾で心配したように、日本式の姓名でありながら、反日的な思想の持ち主がいることの方がよほど危険である。名前を変えたからといって、簡単に心まで変わるものではない。
朝鮮総督府でも、台湾総督府と同じ理由で三橋警務局長は大反対で、南総督から「強制はしない。警察は協力しなくて良い」との言質を取ったと言われる。この事は宮田氏も認めている。徴兵制との関係は考えすぎだと思うsugimoto
[2]
道知事については下記の名前が拾えました。
李昌根慶尚北道１９．８－２０．６
金大羽全羅北道１８．８－２０．６慶尚北道２０．６－
尹泰（木偏に杉）江原道１４．５－１５．９ 伊藤泰（木偏に杉）に創氏改名、忠清北道１５．９－１７．１０
孫永穆全羅北道１２．４－１５．９江原道２０．６－
李聖根忠清南道１４．５－１６．５金川聖に創氏改名
兪万兼忠清北道１４．４－１５．９
鄭僑源忠清北道２０．６－
[3]Kan explains,
Precisely because of this discrimination, the unattainable “ecstatic” desire for an active decision to become “Japanese” grew ever stronger
I wonder what motivated these Koreans to have "the fervent desire to become “Japanese”in the first place.
[4]
実はこの小説創始改名に関する記述こそが文定昌の著述のベースとでも言うべき重要な参考知ろうになっていると考えられるのである。ｐ２５
配給・入学・役人採用・貨物輸送は創氏が条件
このようなことが朝鮮全土で一律に行われていたとは考えられない。日本人式の氏にしなかったのが２０％いたのであるから、それらの人が配給をもらえなかったり学校に入学できなかったということはないからである。実印についてもしいて改印しなくてよいという通達がでている。ｐ５４
On the name chaging, Dreamtale has an interesting story to tell.
dreamtale
There are some points we should notice.
The family name which is different from Korean name system was introduced because there was a need to be consistent with Japanese civil law in addition to the fact that there were many Koreans who wanted to change their name to Japanese style and the demand matched the idea of Korea-and -Japan- One- body policy.
理由
既に述べたるが如く、朝鮮の家には氏なきを以て、今後民法上の「氏」の規定に依らんとすれば、必ず氏を設定せざるべからず
朝鮮人間に内地人流の氏を称へたき希望を抱ける者尠からざる処、今次事変勃発するや、朝鮮人は皇国臣民たる自覚を新にし、期せずして半島到る処に目覚ましき愛国運動を展開し、進んで実質・形式共に完全なる皇国臣民たらんことを熱望して已まざるを以て、茲に、彼等をして形式に於ても可及的皇国臣民化し得る方途を講ずるは、朝鮮統治の根本方針たる内鮮一体の強化滲徹上喫緊の要事に属す。
Besides there was no last name for the slaves,the system of whom was abolished by Japanese government.dreamtale
update aug 11 2006
The name changing to Japanese style was not forced.
If you are a man and your name is Kim, and if you have a son and a daugter, your children's last name is Kim.If your daughter marries, your daugher's name will be Kim whatever her husband name is.
Japanese system of familily name was introduced into Korean society.If your family name is Kim, and if you have a son and a daugter, your children's name is Kim.If yor son or daugher marry, it does not mean that their name will be Kim.It might be spouse's famlily name,for, instance, Park.
This system make it possible to adopt a child with a different name.
There are cases in the peninsula in which Koreans did not change their names.(see below)
The procedure to change names.
1. (a)You file your family name to the purblic office or (b)your famlily name will be Korean last name (based on male blood lineage)
2. If you want to change your first name,it takes 50 sen to file your first name.
辻本
（２） 『韓国巨文島にっぽん村』（中公新書 1994）の142ページに、著者は在郷軍人会の「巨文島分会史」という文献から、この島出身の朝鮮人で1942年以降戦死した次の６名の名前を記している。
李権熙・金村実智夫・草川明輝・二木鐘南・二木長福・金村尚眩
このうちの李権熙は明らかに朝鮮名である。
（３） 『近代庶民生活誌 (４)流言』（三一書房 1985）には憲兵司令部資料(昭和一八年一二月～同二〇年五月)、東京憲兵部資料（昭和一九年一二月～同二〇年五月）など、流言飛語に関して取り調べた資料が集録されている。そのなかで流言飛語を行なったとして検挙されたりした朝鮮人の具体名が出ている。数えてみると全部で49名(他に日本人か朝鮮人か不明が５名ある)であるが、そのうち次の９名は本名（法律上の名前）を日本式の名前に変えていない。
南圭一・趙明鐘・河奉根・林鳳爍・李基世・張仁洙・金達順・朴鄭与・川口龍夫コト呂永根
なお残りの40名のうち２名は、鄭和欽コト日高輝男・金漢寿コト金光秀雄となっており、通名は朝鮮名だが本名は日本名である。他はすべて日本式の名前となっている。
（４） 『慶州ナザレ園』（上坂冬子著 中公文庫 1984）のまえがきのなか（７～８ページ）に、著者は昭和一五年（皇紀2600年 1940）の小学四年生時代の思い出として、クラスメートのなかに朝鮮人２名がいて、そのうちの１名は中山静子と日本式の名前であったが、もう一人は崔順礼という名前を変えなかったと書いている。辻本武
かくて一般農家はこの方針に順応して日毎に効果をあげてはいるが、(鄭特派員記
京城日報 1942.11.13-1942.11.23
鮮の衣食住改善策 / 朴常淳 (京城日報 1935.9.28-1935.10.25 (昭和10))朝鮮日報
創氏改名の残滓
林、柳、南、桂等の姓を有する者（獄長日記）
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)