2016-06-15
The appalling nature of the Asahi Shimbun on June 1 was also beyond description.
That the one-party Communist dictators are people who call black white and white black is a state of affairs that the entire world is now being painfully forced to recognize once again through such issues as the South China Sea.
When the Chinese economy was on the brink of collapse as a result of Mao Zedong’s two great policy failures, Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai issued the Japan-China Joint Communiqué and concluded the Treaty of Peace and Friendship with Japan.
At that time, China obtained from Japan the largest amount of aid money in human history and used it to achieve its present economic development.
The following provision is clearly written there.
The Government of the People’s Republic of China declares that, in the interest of the friendship between the peoples of China and Japan, it renounces its demand for war reparations from Japan.
Regarding this matter, the following facts are also recorded in Wikipedia.
Effect of the Japan-China Joint Communiqué
Since the Japan-China Joint Communiqué did not, at least in Japan, take the form of a “treaty,” the question arose as to whether it possessed the status of a legal norm under international law.
By 2007, two cases before the Supreme Court of Japan had disputed the effect of this communiqué.
Nishimatsu Construction Forced Labor Lawsuit
The first concerned whether the right to claim damages arising from the forced removal of Chinese people had been waived under Paragraph 5 of the communiqué, concerning the renunciation of war reparations.
On April 27, 2007, the Supreme Court recognized the legal normative effect under international law of the waiver-of-claims provision in Paragraph 5 of the communiqué, in light of the fact that it constituted, at the very least, a unilateral “declaration” under international law by the Government of the People’s Republic of China, or that the preamble to the Treaty of Peace and Friendship between Japan and the People’s Republic of China stipulated that “…the principles set forth in the Joint Communiqué should be strictly observed,” and also in light of the fact that the Chinese government had treated it as a constitutive provision under international law.
And because the declaration was not concluded with the intention of rejecting the framework of the San Francisco Peace Treaty, the Court interpreted it as having waived the claims held by individuals, including juridical persons.
Perhaps because most subscribers to the Asahi Shimbun know almost none of these clear facts,
what, then, did the evening Kansai edition of the Asahi Shimbun on June 1 write in the large headline on its front page?
It is a fact known to people throughout the world with sound minds that today’s one-party Communist dictators in China arbitrarily push forward all manner of things according to their own convenience.
The Mitsubishi Materials issue described below and the recent Mitsui O.S.K. Lines issue are examples of such Chinese Communist dictators finding fault with and harassing Japan,
and people throughout the world with sound minds also know that this is an outrage they commit because Japan is not a country like the United States.
But for some reason, the Asahi Shimbun alone conveyed through this article a reality that was not so.
It would not be an exaggeration to say that this newspaper company is now a newspaper company that is selling Japan to China.
That is because, unbelievably, they wrote such words in a large headline and wrote to their readers as though Japan were at fault.
Anyone with a sound mind can understand without being told that the truth is that both Mitsui O.S.K. Lines and Mitsubishi Materials reluctantly settled because the other party was a one-party Communist dictatorship.
Yet the Asahi argued, “Acknowledge historical responsibility,” and once again advanced the argument in this matter that Japan was the party at fault.
I am convinced that, as a Japanese citizen and as a Japanese person, this newspaper is now a newspaper company that can no longer be forgiven.
The people who wrote the article were the following.
Editorial committee member Shuichi Yutaka, Nozomu Hayashi, and Daisuke Nishimura in Beijing.
My concern—that the Asahi Shimbun may be a newspaper company that could no longer exist as a media organization if something were exposed by the intelligence services of China or South Korea—has, after reading these articles, turned into conviction.