Korea-Japan Trade War and Security Repercussions

[Arumdaum]

https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/geopolit ... tself-foot
https://www.undispatch.com/japan-and-so ... lications/
http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_ ... 99616.html
http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20190725000414

This has been going on for a while and you can probably find several articles on it.

For about a month, Korea and Japan have been engaged in a trade war, again from issues stemming back to WWII. Back in June, the Korean Supreme Court ruled that forced laborers during WWII could sue Japanese corporations they were conscripted to work for, such as Mitsubishi and Japan Iron and Steel Co., and ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in a case lasting a decade.

Prime Minister Abe's government told the corporations to ignore the court ruling, arguing that everything relating to the colonial era was settled in the 1965 Normalization Agreement under the dictatorship of Park Chung-hee, a former officer of the Imperial Japanese Army. Korea's position is that while it ruled that the Korean government can no longer seek claims from Japan, that the agreement never applied to individuals making claims. In response, the Korean government announced that it would seize assets of these companies in order to enforce the court ruling. In turn, Japan removed Korea from its trade whitelist and restricted the export of key chemicals required to produce semiconductors, which is Korea's largest export. The value of the won has since dropped a decent amount. As trade restrictions are not allowed by the WTO apart from security reasons, Japan's official argument has been that the restrictions are due to the possibility that Japanese exports to South Korea could end up in North Korea, where it may be used to build weapons, thus posing a security risk. However, this is a pretty shaky argument most recognize that the real reason for Japan's trade restrictions are due to the court ruling.

This has resulted in a boycott of Japanese products in Korea that most people in the country are participating in and Korea in turn removing Japan from its own trade whitelist. Furthermore, Korea has chosen not to renew its participation in GSOMIA, an intelligence sharing agreement between Korea and Japan which was heavily encouraged by the US. The US strongly seeks to deepen ties between SK and Japan to use them as a balance against China, but to the chagrin of many Koreans, generally always takes the side of Japan in disputes.

--

Personally, I take the side of Korea. In 1965, Japan refused to acknowledge that the money and loans (provided at preferential rates) were reparations, arguing that it was simply economic aid. Furthermore, there is nothing the current Moon administration can do to overrule the Supreme Court due to the system of separation of powers in place. If Japan refuses to allow its corporations to provide compensation to living forced laborers for the forced labor provided for those corporations, then it'll become even more difficult to resolve once all those laborers, now very elderly, pass away.

While Korea has taken a lot of shit from the US for withdrawing from GSOMIA, I don't think it changes much. GSOMIA was in place for less than three years, and from what I've read there were several problems in its implementation anyway. Furthermore, I don't see why SK should be sharing sensitive intelligence with Japan if Japan is placing trade restrictions on inputs critical for the Korean economy for reasons of security risk, even though it seems more like Trump placing trade restrictions on Canada after declaring them a national security risk, despite that not really being the case.

[Loben The 2nd]

Japan has a right to protect its company's from economic harm via lawsuits.

[Thepeopl]

It is very asian not wanting to loose face by acknowledging past mistakes.

SK could have been satisfied with the compromise of 1965. But I do sympathize with Korea.
The victims never were acknowledged by their wrongdoers. And never received any apology.

It will be a great incentive for Korean industry to produce their own fluorinated polyimide, hydrogen fluoride and resists.

[Napkizemlja]

Tbh the Koreans are in the right here.

[Thepeopl]

From my understandind despite the attrocities the Japnese comiteed in Korea they also build a lot of infrastructure there like schools, roads and an economy. Korean national indenitity is also new and developed only in the last 100 years. Korea is something like Belgium or Ukraine. The Korean president was also serving in the Japanese army, which is another proof.

Wow!! So wrong...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Korea

[GlobalControl]

https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/geopolitics/article/3016980/japan-south-korea-trade-war-has-tokyo-shot-itself-foot
https://www.undispatch.com/japan-and-so ... lications/
http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_ ... 99616.html
http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20190725000414

This has been going on for a while and you can probably find several articles on it.

For about a month, Korea and Japan have been engaged in a trade war, again from issues stemming back to WWII. Back in June, the Korean Supreme Court ruled that forced laborers during WWII could sue Japanese corporations they were conscripted to work for, such as Mitsubishi and Japan Iron and Steel Co., and ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in a case lasting a decade.

Prime Minister Abe's government told the corporations to ignore the court ruling, arguing that everything relating to the colonial era was settled in the 1965 Normalization Agreement under the dictatorship of Park Chung-hee, a former officer of the Imperial Japanese Army. Korea's position is that while it ruled that the Korean government can no longer seek claims from Japan, that the agreement never applied to individuals making claims. In response, the Korean government announced that it would seize assets of these companies in order to enforce the court ruling. In turn, Japan removed Korea from its trade whitelist and restricted the export of key chemicals required to produce semiconductors, which is Korea's largest export. The value of the won has since dropped a decent amount. As trade restrictions are not allowed by the WTO apart from security reasons, Japan's official argument has been that the restrictions are due to the possibility that Japanese exports to South Korea could end up in North Korea, where it may be used to build weapons, thus posing a security risk. However, this is a pretty shaky argument most recognize that the real reason for Japan's trade restrictions are due to the court ruling.

This has resulted in a boycott of Japanese products in Korea that most people in the country are participating in and Korea in turn removing Japan from its own trade whitelist. Furthermore, Korea has chosen not to renew its participation in GSOMIA, an intelligence sharing agreement between Korea and Japan which was heavily encouraged by the US. The US strongly seeks to deepen ties between SK and Japan to use them as a balance against China, but to the chagrin of many Koreans, generally always takes the side of Japan in disputes.

--

Personally, I take the side of Korea. In 1965, Japan refused to acknowledge that the money and loans (provided at preferential rates) were reparations, arguing that it was simply economic aid. Furthermore, there is nothing the current Moon administration can do to overrule the Supreme Court due to the system of separation of powers in place. If Japan refuses to allow its corporations to provide compensation to living forced laborers for the forced labor provided for those corporations, then it'll become even more difficult to resolve once all those laborers, now very elderly, pass away.

While Korea has taken a lot of shit from the US for withdrawing from GSOMIA, I don't think it changes much. GSOMIA was in place for less than three years, and from what I've read there were several problems in its implementation anyway. Furthermore, I don't see why SK should be sharing sensitive intelligence with Japan if Japan is placing trade restrictions on inputs critical for the Korean economy for reasons of security risk, even though it seems more like Trump placing trade restrictions on Canada after declaring them a national security risk, despite that not really being the case.

I side more with Japan, but I can understand the Korean side as well.
Frankly though I don't see why people are suing Japanese corporations in Korea 80 years later. It seems kinda like there isn't really much of a point to it other than just the money, but I can and probably am wrong in that regard, and it could be something like PTSD and some form of justice to the person who sued.

It is a bit unfair to the Japanese, given that being forced to pay reparations to people who won't be alive much longer frankly, but at the same time these corporations did take people as forced laborers and use them throughout the 1930s and on, likely earlier. So there probably should be some reparations paid.

I also don't care if the money was or wasn't labeled reparations, its been like 50 years since the agreement and that sum of money was rendered and it should in some manner count for reparations, at least as far as I think.

From my understandind despite the attrocities the Japnese comiteed in Korea they also build a lot of infrastructure there like schools, roads and an economy. Korean national indenitity is also new and developed only in the last 100 years. Korea is something like Belgium or Ukraine. The Korean president was also serving in the Japanese army, which is another proof.

Wow!! So wrong...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Korea

You seem like a great person to debate with.

That is sarcasm, take it badly if you want.

[The Chuck]

https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/geopolitics/article/3016980/japan-south-korea-trade-war-has-tokyo-shot-itself-foot
https://www.undispatch.com/japan-and-so ... lications/
http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_ ... 99616.html
http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20190725000414

This has been going on for a while and you can probably find several articles on it.

For about a month, Korea and Japan have been engaged in a trade war, again from issues stemming back to WWII. Back in June, the Korean Supreme Court ruled that forced laborers during WWII could sue Japanese corporations they were conscripted to work for, such as Mitsubishi and Japan Iron and Steel Co., and ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in a case lasting a decade.

Prime Minister Abe's government told the corporations to ignore the court ruling, arguing that everything relating to the colonial era was settled in the 1965 Normalization Agreement under the dictatorship of Park Chung-hee, a former officer of the Imperial Japanese Army. Korea's position is that while it ruled that the Korean government can no longer seek claims from Japan, that the agreement never applied to individuals making claims. In response, the Korean government announced that it would seize assets of these companies in order to enforce the court ruling. In turn, Japan removed Korea from its trade whitelist and restricted the export of key chemicals required to produce semiconductors, which is Korea's largest export. The value of the won has since dropped a decent amount. As trade restrictions are not allowed by the WTO apart from security reasons, Japan's official argument has been that the restrictions are due to the possibility that Japanese exports to South Korea could end up in North Korea, where it may be used to build weapons, thus posing a security risk. However, this is a pretty shaky argument most recognize that the real reason for Japan's trade restrictions are due to the court ruling.

This has resulted in a boycott of Japanese products in Korea that most people in the country are participating in and Korea in turn removing Japan from its own trade whitelist. Furthermore, Korea has chosen not to renew its participation in GSOMIA, an intelligence sharing agreement between Korea and Japan which was heavily encouraged by the US. The US strongly seeks to deepen ties between SK and Japan to use them as a balance against China, but to the chagrin of many Koreans, generally always takes the side of Japan in disputes.

--

Personally, I take the side of Korea. In 1965, Japan refused to acknowledge that the money and loans (provided at preferential rates) were reparations, arguing that it was simply economic aid. Furthermore, there is nothing the current Moon administration can do to overrule the Supreme Court due to the system of separation of powers in place. If Japan refuses to allow its corporations to provide compensation to living forced laborers for the forced labor provided for those corporations, then it'll become even more difficult to resolve once all those laborers, now very elderly, pass away.

While Korea has taken a lot of shit from the US for withdrawing from GSOMIA, I don't think it changes much. GSOMIA was in place for less than three years, and from what I've read there were several problems in its implementation anyway. Furthermore, I don't see why SK should be sharing sensitive intelligence with Japan if Japan is placing trade restrictions on inputs critical for the Korean economy for reasons of security risk, even though it seems more like Trump placing trade restrictions on Canada after declaring them a national security risk, despite that not really being the case.

I side more with Japan, but I can understand the Korean side as well.
Frankly though I don't see why people are suing Japanese corporations in Korea 80 years later. It seems kinda like there isn't really much of a point to it other than just the money, but I can and probably am wrong in that regard, and it could be something like PTSD and some form of justice to the person who sued.

It is a bit unfair to the Japanese, given that being forced to pay reparations to people who won't be alive much longer frankly, but at the same time these corporations did take people as forced laborers and use them throughout the 1930s and on, likely earlier. So there probably should be some reparations paid.

I also don't care if the money was or wasn't labeled reparations, its been like 50 years since the agreement and that sum of money was rendered and it should in some manner count for reparations, at least as far as I think.

Wow!! So wrong...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Korea

You seem like a great person to debate with.

That is sarcasm, take it badly if you want.

Pride and honor is something that is still held in high regard across most of Asia. The Korea - Japan conflict isn't just about forced labor but also the atrocities committed against Koreans by the Japanese during/around WW2 including the issue of forced conscription of Koreans into the military and the "comfort women battalions" of Asian sex slaves for the Japanese. These scars run deep but I'm certain Korea will hash something out with the Japanese eventually. China and NoKo are to big of a threat to ignore for either of them.

[GlobalControl]

I side more with Japan, but I can understand the Korean side as well.
Frankly though I don't see why people are suing Japanese corporations in Korea 80 years later. It seems kinda like there isn't really much of a point to it other than just the money, but I can and probably am wrong in that regard, and it could be something like PTSD and some form of justice to the person who sued.

It is a bit unfair to the Japanese, given that being forced to pay reparations to people who won't be alive much longer frankly, but at the same time these corporations did take people as forced laborers and use them throughout the 1930s and on, likely earlier. So there probably should be some reparations paid.

I also don't care if the money was or wasn't labeled reparations, its been like 50 years since the agreement and that sum of money was rendered and it should in some manner count for reparations, at least as far as I think.



You seem like a great person to debate with.

That is sarcasm, take it badly if you want.

Pride and honor is something that is still held in high regard across most of Asia. The Korea - Japan conflict isn't just about forced labor but also the atrocities committed against Koreans by the Japanese during/around WW2 including the issue of forced conscription of Koreans into the military and the "comfort women battalions" of Asian sex slaves for the Japanese. These scars run deep but I'm certain Korea will hash something out with the Japanese eventually. China and NoKo are to big of a threat to ignore for either of them.

Such is true, yeah.
Asia is a different beast to that of Europe and so on.
Honor after all doesn't exist on the European continent

Got me here.
And yeah I hope so, I would rather they trade with each other and not stop trading entirely over this. If not for any other reason than to simply trade, then to have a stronger economic tie to one another and be economically able to near out-compete the Chinese and defend against North Korea, which is a threat to both, at least in passing to the Japanese.

[Aclion]

Isn't this something to be adjudicated in the international court?

Also reminder the Japan always has the option of recognizing North Korea.

[Thepeopl]

Wow!! So wrong...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Korea

You seem like a great person to debate with.

That is sarcasm, take it badly if you want.

Why thank you.
I was really baffled by the claim that Korean identity was only 100 years old. And Korea compared to Belgium/ Ukraine. Really blew my mind.
So I didn't trust myself to keep the discussion civilised. That is why the link to wikipedia was what I added.

Koreans do have to thank the Japanese for exploiting their natural resources, this is why koreans where very environment minded when they were independent again.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/geopolitics/article/3016980/japan-south-korea-trade-war-has-tokyo-shot-itself-foot
https://www.undispatch.com/japan-and-so ... lications/
http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_ ... 99616.html
http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20190725000414

This has been going on for a while and you can probably find several articles on it.

For about a month, Korea and Japan have been engaged in a trade war, again from issues stemming back to WWII. Back in June, the Korean Supreme Court ruled that forced laborers during WWII could sue Japanese corporations they were conscripted to work for, such as Mitsubishi and Japan Iron and Steel Co., and ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in a case lasting a decade.

Prime Minister Abe's government told the corporations to ignore the court ruling, arguing that everything relating to the colonial era was settled in the 1965 Normalization Agreement under the dictatorship of Park Chung-hee, a former officer of the Imperial Japanese Army. Korea's position is that while it ruled that the Korean government can no longer seek claims from Japan, that the agreement never applied to individuals making claims. In response, the Korean government announced that it would seize assets of these companies in order to enforce the court ruling. In turn, Japan removed Korea from its trade whitelist and restricted the export of key chemicals required to produce semiconductors, which is Korea's largest export. The value of the won has since dropped a decent amount. As trade restrictions are not allowed by the WTO apart from security reasons, Japan's official argument has been that the restrictions are due to the possibility that Japanese exports to South Korea could end up in North Korea, where it may be used to build weapons, thus posing a security risk. However, this is a pretty shaky argument most recognize that the real reason for Japan's trade restrictions are due to the court ruling.

This has resulted in a boycott of Japanese products in Korea that most people in the country are participating in and Korea in turn removing Japan from its own trade whitelist. Furthermore, Korea has chosen not to renew its participation in GSOMIA, an intelligence sharing agreement between Korea and Japan which was heavily encouraged by the US. The US strongly seeks to deepen ties between SK and Japan to use them as a balance against China, but to the chagrin of many Koreans, generally always takes the side of Japan in disputes.

--

Personally, I take the side of Korea. In 1965, Japan refused to acknowledge that the money and loans (provided at preferential rates) were reparations, arguing that it was simply economic aid. Furthermore, there is nothing the current Moon administration can do to overrule the Supreme Court due to the system of separation of powers in place. If Japan refuses to allow its corporations to provide compensation to living forced laborers for the forced labor provided for those corporations, then it'll become even more difficult to resolve once all those laborers, now very elderly, pass away.

While Korea has taken a lot of shit from the US for withdrawing from GSOMIA, I don't think it changes much. GSOMIA was in place for less than three years, and from what I've read there were several problems in its implementation anyway. Furthermore, I don't see why SK should be sharing sensitive intelligence with Japan if Japan is placing trade restrictions on inputs critical for the Korean economy for reasons of security risk, even though it seems more like Trump placing trade restrictions on Canada after declaring them a national security risk, despite that not really being the case.

The wounds run deep and I feel that although I understand Korea’s sentiments because a lot happened to them during WWII at the hands of the Japanese, I also understand Japan seeking to protect their companies too. I also understand that this is deeper and more complex than just the trade issues. I have no idea as to what can be done.

One thing that must be remembered however is that the Japanese and Koreans of today are not the same as those in WWII.

[Kowani]

https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/geopolitics/article/3016980/japan-south-korea-trade-war-has-tokyo-shot-itself-foot
https://www.undispatch.com/japan-and-so ... lications/
http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_ ... 99616.html
http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20190725000414

This has been going on for a while and you can probably find several articles on it.

For about a month, Korea and Japan have been engaged in a trade war, again from issues stemming back to WWII. Back in June, the Korean Supreme Court ruled that forced laborers during WWII could sue Japanese corporations they were conscripted to work for, such as Mitsubishi and Japan Iron and Steel Co., and ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in a case lasting a decade.

Prime Minister Abe's government told the corporations to ignore the court ruling, arguing that everything relating to the colonial era was settled in the 1965 Normalization Agreement under the dictatorship of Park Chung-hee, a former officer of the Imperial Japanese Army. Korea's position is that while it ruled that the Korean government can no longer seek claims from Japan, that the agreement never applied to individuals making claims. In response, the Korean government announced that it would seize assets of these companies in order to enforce the court ruling. In turn, Japan removed Korea from its trade whitelist and restricted the export of key chemicals required to produce semiconductors, which is Korea's largest export. The value of the won has since dropped a decent amount. As trade restrictions are not allowed by the WTO apart from security reasons, Japan's official argument has been that the restrictions are due to the possibility that Japanese exports to South Korea could end up in North Korea, where it may be used to build weapons, thus posing a security risk. However, this is a pretty shaky argument most recognize that the real reason for Japan's trade restrictions are due to the court ruling.

This has resulted in a boycott of Japanese products in Korea that most people in the country are participating in and Korea in turn removing Japan from its own trade whitelist. Furthermore, Korea has chosen not to renew its participation in GSOMIA, an intelligence sharing agreement between Korea and Japan which was heavily encouraged by the US. The US strongly seeks to deepen ties between SK and Japan to use them as a balance against China, but to the chagrin of many Koreans, generally always takes the side of Japan in disputes.

--

Personally, I take the side of Korea. In 1965, Japan refused to acknowledge that the money and loans (provided at preferential rates) were reparations, arguing that it was simply economic aid. Furthermore, there is nothing the current Moon administration can do to overrule the Supreme Court due to the system of separation of powers in place. If Japan refuses to allow its corporations to provide compensation to living forced laborers for the forced labor provided for those corporations, then it'll become even more difficult to resolve once all those laborers, now very elderly, pass away.

While Korea has taken a lot of shit from the US for withdrawing from GSOMIA, I don't think it changes much. GSOMIA was in place for less than three years, and from what I've read there were several problems in its implementation anyway. Furthermore, I don't see why SK should be sharing sensitive intelligence with Japan if Japan is placing trade restrictions on inputs critical for the Korean economy for reasons of security risk, even though it seems more like Trump placing trade restrictions on Canada after declaring them a national security risk, despite that not really being the case.

The wounds run deep and I feel that although I understand Korea’s sentiments because a lot happened to them during WWII at the hands of the Japanese, I also understand Japan seeking to protect their companies too. I also understand that this is deeper and more complex than just the trade issues. I have no idea as to what can be done.

One thing that must be remembered however is that the Japanese and Koreans of today are not the same as those in WWII.

The Koreans suing are literally the people who were in WWII.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

The wounds run deep and I feel that although I understand Korea’s sentiments because a lot happened to them during WWII at the hands of the Japanese, I also understand Japan seeking to protect their companies too. I also understand that this is deeper and more complex than just the trade issues. I have no idea as to what can be done.

One thing that must be remembered however is that the Japanese and Koreans of today are not the same as those in WWII.

The Koreans suing are literally the people who were in WWII.

My statement stands in that those being sued are probably not the same people who were at the head of those companies during WWII.

[Kowani]

The Koreans suing are literally the people who were in WWII.

My statement stands in that those being sued are probably not the same people who were at the head of those companies during WWII.

That’s why they’re suing the corporation, and not the people.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

My statement stands in that those being sued are probably not the same people who were at the head of those companies during WWII.

That’s why they’re suing the corporation, and not the people.

Those corporations and their policies have also probably changed since WWII.

[Kowani]

That’s why they’re suing the corporation, and not the people.

Those corporations and their policies have also probably changed since WWII.

And?

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Those corporations and their policies have also probably changed since WWII.

And?

Seems odd to sue them then for their past.

[US-SSR]

As a practical matter what happens in these kinds of situations is that the ROK will pile up some number of its citizens' claims, press them with the Japanese and arrive at some kind of global settlement. It may be nice to think that the courts of one nation can enforce judgements against the nationals of a different nation but there's nothing in international law that compels that at all.

Had the US not been debilitated by allowing the Electoral College to install a narcissistic, infantile sociopath in the Oval Office it could conceivably help its two most important allies in Asia resolve their dispute. But in the event, unless there's some personal benefit to Trump in any of this, it won't get involved, instead growing weaker while its adversaries grow stronger and its allies make plans for a world where the US doesn't count.

[Hanafuridake]

South Korea changes its mind too often about preexisting agreements and tears them up when it thinks it can get a better deal. If Abe wasn't known to harbor atrocity denialist conspiracy theories, most people would probably realize how tiresome this is.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

South Korea changes its mind too often about preexisting agreements and tears them up when it thinks it can get a better deal. If Abe wasn't known to harbor atrocity denialist conspiracy theories, most people would probably realize how tiresome this is.

The interesting part is that they’re so close geographically and there’s a lot of travel, business and Koreans working in Japan and vice versa, it would be great if they could bury the hatchet finally.

[Andsed]

This seems like an issue that should be decided in an international court like the UN. But I do find myself with the Koreans here. The Japanese including these companies committed utterly horrific atrocities in Korea and I do understand why they wish to sue them. But on the other hand I do understand Japan wanting to protect their companies here.

[NERVUN]

Personally, I take the side of Korea. In 1965, Japan refused to acknowledge that the money and loans (provided at preferential rates) were reparations, arguing that it was simply economic aid. Furthermore, there is nothing the current Moon administration can do to overrule the Supreme Court due to the system of separation of powers in place.

I have a number of things to do today so I cannot really go into details, I just wanted to address this.

1. This is false. In 1965, Japan offered to pay individual reparations, it was South Korea who insisted that it, and it alone, would take the money as economic aid and handle any and all individual claims. It took the money and ran. Now, it can be argued (Or conveniently forgotten about if you happen to be South Korea), that said money is what allowed South Korea to rebuild after the Korean war and without it, it probably wouldn't have survived, or at least thrived. But Japan DID offer and the treaty is very clear that the money offered is meant to be viewed as such.

2. This is also false, Korea could pass a law and/or amend its constitution to acknowledge this. It's also worth noting that until last year, the Korean courts had previously ruled that yes, the treaty did cover it, and that the statue of limitations had passed anyway. This is a new deal.

Also, SK is hardly the one to piously claim its respecting the constitution when it regularly demands Japan violate its own.

One last point, it's worth noting that after the ruling was handed down and Japan objected, Japan requested talks under the treaty to work this out. Korea ignored the request. Japan then requested arbitration, Korea ignored that too (Which technically it's not supposed to be able to do given the treaty compels BOTH parties to do this). Finally Japan requested third party arbitration, the highest level of dispute resolution in the treaty where both parties would chose neutral parties to judge (One for each country who would then appoint a third by themselves.), again one that under treaty, South Korea and Japan cannot ignore and must abide by... And South Korea ignored that too...

So it's not surprising Japan isn't exactly happy with South Korea.

[GlobalControl]

As a practical matter what happens in these kinds of situations is that the ROK will pile up some number of its citizens' claims, press them with the Japanese and arrive at some kind of global settlement. It may be nice to think that the courts of one nation can enforce judgements against the nationals of a different nation but there's nothing in international law that compels that at all.

Had the US not been debilitated by allowing the Electoral College to install a narcissistic, infantile sociopath in the Oval Office it could conceivably help its two most important allies in Asia resolve their dispute. But in the event, unless there's some personal benefit to Trump in any of this, it won't get involved, instead growing weaker while its adversaries grow stronger and its allies make plans for a world where the US doesn't count.

Can you fuckin' just
dispense, with Trump
He's absolutely irrelevant frankly, and bringing him up in a discussion about Japan and Korea, two nations with long-standing feuds and scars, is sort of asinine. This doesn't involve America at all and it's not that serious either.
Calm your shit.

[New haven america]

From my understandind despite the attrocities the Japnese comiteed in Korea they also build a lot of infrastructure there like schools, roads and an economy. Korean national indenitity is also new and developed only in the last 100 years. Korea is something like Belgium or Ukraine. The Korean president was also serving in the Japanese army, which is another proof.

Korea's existed for longer than Japan and is home to the most widely spoken language isolate in the world.

Korea even ruled over large swaths of China at one point.

[New haven america]

Korea's existed for longer than Japan.

Korean even ruled over large swaths of China at one point.

Uhhh....

Liao....Jin...Qing, weren't Korean. Nor the Yuan.

So where do you think the most of The Kingdoms of Goguryeo or Balhae were located at?