Originally published on February 12, 2020. This article reconstructs a chapter first published on November 9, 2018, and introduces a Sankei Shimbun column by Rui Abiru. Through the issues of former Korean Peninsula workers, comfort women, and Takeshima, it criticizes the South Korean government’s tendency to prioritize national sentiment over international order and agreements, arguing that Japan should not rely on illusions of mutual understanding but should calmly proceed through international legal procedures such as the ICJ and WTO.

February 12, 2020
That is how great the differences are between them and the Japanese in ways of thinking, patterns of behavior, customs, common sense, moral views, values, aesthetic sense, and perception of the world.
I am republishing the chapter I published on November 9, 2018, under the title “‘Was It This Deep-Rooted?’ ‘I Have Come to Know about South Korea That It Was This Hopeless…’,” with paragraphs and typographical errors corrected and emphasis added within the text.
The following is from Rui Abiru’s serialized column published on page 5 of today’s Sankei Shimbun under the title “South Korea Remains Self-Centered.”
South Korea does not change.
Surely, it will probably remain unchanged forever.
Looking at the South Korean government’s messages concerning the issue of the final ruling by South Korea’s Supreme Court ordering Japanese companies to pay compensation in lawsuits over the issue of former workers from the Korean Peninsula, I feel this keenly.
“We are extremely concerned that the Japanese government continues to make remarks that stimulate the feelings of the South Korean people”（South Korean Foreign Ministry official, the 6th）
“We are deeply concerned about the extreme remarks made by the leaders of the Japanese government.
They are neither appropriate nor wise”（Prime Minister Lee Nak-yon, the 7th）
In short, their argument is that Japan should respect the feelings of the South Korean people and give more consideration to South Korea.
As always, it has not even the slightest idea that national sentiment also exists in Japan.
Why do they think that, above international order, promises, and reason, what the South Korean people feel should be given priority above all else?
Why do they believe that Japan must go along with that?
One can only say that this is indeed “a country that traditionally thinks about things in a self-centered way”（a senior official of Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs）.
Making No Effort to Win Public Understanding
I once heard the following episode from a diplomat who had experience stationed in South Korea.
“In South Korea, even when the other party is relatively calm, if you discuss the Takeshima（Okinoshima Town, Shimane Prefecture）issue or the comfort women issue, in the end it always ceases to be a matter of logic, and they start saying things like, ‘Do you have no affection for South Korea?’”
This, too, is incomprehensible.
Why must Japanese people have “affection” for South Korea?
At any rate, it must be the Korean way to think that, if there is affection, it cannot be helped even if the facts are twisted.
Looking back, in May 2017, not long after taking office, President Moon Jae-in brought up national sentiment in the same way regarding the Japan–South Korea agreement confirming the “final and irreversible resolution” of the comfort women issue, and declared:
“The reality is that the great majority of the people cannot emotionally accept the agreement.”
Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha also stated similarly in her meeting with Foreign Minister Taro Kono in December of the same year.
“The South Korean people are not convinced by the Japan–South Korea agreement.”
At that time, Kono rebutted, “It is your job to convince them, not ours,” but in the end, the South Korean government has made no effort whatsoever to win public understanding up to the present.
Proceed Calmly with Procedures
Yasuaki Onuma, a former director of the Asian Women’s Fund who confronted the issue of postwar responsibility during his student days and had long faced South Korea, recalled the following in a roundtable discussion in October 2006.
“What I find extremely unpleasant is the nature of South Korean society, which remains far too unchanged, where it is enough simply to say anti-Japanese things.
（Omission）
Was it this deep-rooted?”
“I have come to know about South Korea that it was this hopeless…”
Also, Aritsune Toyota, a writer who authored books such as South Korea’s Challenge and who was initially pro-Korean, eventually became critical of South Korea, and in The Koreans, with What Face? published four years ago, he dismissed them in this way:
“Rather than thinking of them as fellow earthlings, it is better to think of them as aliens from some distant planet; that way, one will not mistake how to deal with them.”
That is how great the differences are between them and the Japanese in ways of thinking, patterns of behavior, customs, common sense, moral views, values, aesthetic sense, and perception of the world.
With regard to South Korea, Japan should not clumsily seek mutual understanding or confidence-building, but should calmly follow procedures such as filing cases with the International Court of Justice（ICJ）or the World Trade Organization（WTO）.
In that case, the meaning will probably get through to the other party as well.
（Editorial writer and Political News Department editorial board member）