Published on September 5, 2019.
Based on an article by Abiru Rui in the Sankei Shimbun, this essay examines Korean anti-Japanese sentiment, the comfort women issue, the wartime labor issue, the history of Taekwondo, and the problem of the Neighboring Countries Clause in Japan’s textbook screening standards.
It argues that Japan’s long-standing reluctance to challenge Korea’s historical distortions has allowed falsehoods to spread as if they were historical facts, and insists that Japan must now confront the distorted past thoroughly.

September 5, 2019.
South Korea’s abnormal anti-Japanese behavior, which seeks to reject even Japanese products, words of Japanese origin, and plants of Japanese origin, was encouraged by South Korea, which beautifies and embellishes its own history, and by Japan’s past attitude of refraining from objecting out of deference to that South Korea.
The following is from an article by Abiru Rui published in today’s Sankei Shimbun under the title “The Deterioration of Japan-South Korea Relations: Delete the Neighboring Countries Clause.”
As I have repeatedly stated, he is one of the finest active reporters of our time.
Many of the recent frictions between Japan and South Korea may stem from the fact that both sides do not know the true history.
In particular, South Korea’s abnormal anti-Japanese behavior, which seeks to reject even Japanese products, words of Japanese origin, and plants of Japanese origin, was probably encouraged by South Korea, which beautifies and embellishes its own history, and by Japan’s past attitude of refraining from objecting out of deference to that South Korea.
Falsehoods walk alone.
When I read the following words by Matsumoto Koji, a former official of the Ministry of International Trade and Industry, now the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, who also served as counselor at the Japanese Embassy in South Korea and professor at the Graduate School of Saitama University, in the September issue of the monthly magazine WiLL, the scales fell from my eyes.
“People speak of being future-oriented, but what Japan needs now is to be thoroughly past-oriented. We must determine the true nature of the distorted past, put an end to a state in which lies swagger about openly, and make it possible to engage in free and vigorous debate.”
Whenever political issues arose between Japan and South Korea over the comfort women issue, the textbook issue, and so forth, the Japanese government tried to settle matters vaguely before thoroughly investigating and trying to learn the facts in a “past-oriented” manner.
As a result, falsehoods such as the forced abduction and sexual enslavement of comfort women walked alone, as if they were historical facts.
In his book The Origins of Korean “Anti-Japanese Nationalism,” Matsumoto attempts to break with this false past on the basis of an enormous body of materials and literature.
For details, I would like readers to consult the original book, but for example, he poses the following question.
“To begin with, I cannot help but wonder why the true nature of Taekwondo is not discussed in Japan.”
According to the book, the first generation of Taekwondo instructors were karate practitioners who had trained in prewar Japan, and at first they put up signs at their own dojos reading karate, karate written with the characters for “Chinese hand,” and kenpo.
The word Taekwondo began to be used from the mid-1950s, and it was only after that that it began to call itself a martial art unique to Korea.
Matsumoto writes.
“In Japanese society, there unquestionably exists a psychology of pandering to Korea, or if that sounds too harsh, of going along with Korea. Are people afraid that saying the reality of Korea’s national martial art is actually karate would be misused as a ‘superiority-based view of history’?”
Because Japan holds back when the other party is South Korea, South Korea rewrites history one thing after another.
The so-called wartime labor issue is the same.
This is, of course, primarily a South Korean problem, but the Japanese side is also at fault, because whenever someone makes a strong argument against South Korea, there are Japanese who immediately label it hate speech or discrimination and try to defend South Korea.
An opportunity to correct bad practices.
The current deterioration in Japan-South Korea relations may be said to be a good opportunity to correct such bad practices.
“In the handling of modern and contemporary historical events involving neighboring Asian countries, necessary consideration must be given from the standpoint of international understanding and international cooperation.”
This “Neighboring Countries Clause” is included in Japan’s textbook screening standards, but since 74 years have passed since the war, should it not be deleted at this point?
Regarding this clause, Inada Tomomi, Special Adviser to the President of the Liberal Democratic Party, also called in February of this year for South Korea to be excluded from the scope of the clause, and it would be good to proceed with consideration of either deleting the clause or excluding South Korea from it.
Originally, the Neighboring Countries Clause was born from a false report.
It began when China and South Korea reacted fiercely to simultaneous false reports by the mass media that the Ministry of Education, now the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, had forced the word “aggression” to be rewritten as “advance” in textbook screening, reports which the Sankei Shimbun corrected.
Not only was the starting point mistaken, but afterward it was also used by China and South Korea as a tool to suppress Japanese diplomacy and education.
Since South Korea’s anti-Japanese stance does not change even with the clause in place, it is meaningless.
Editorial writer and political news department senior editor.