This essay criticizes Japan’s diplomatic concessions over wartime labor and World Heritage registration, exposing South Korea’s judicial denial of treaties and historical falsification. It argues that uncompromising adherence to facts is the only effective weapon against such practices.

August 7, 2017.
This continues from the previous chapter.
Professor Munehiro Miwa of Kyushu University points out that many laborers who once returned to Korea in 1945 later attempted to return to Japan again.
Statistical data titled “Illegal Entry of Koreans” from the U.S. National Archives reveals that around 10,000 Koreans were arrested and repatriated for illegal entry into Japan in 1945.
“If slave labor or massacres had truly occurred, there is no way to explain why they would risk illegal reentry to return to Japan,” Miwa states.
Nevertheless, Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs acknowledged as if Japan had abused Korean laborers and even promised to establish an information center to publicize that claim.
World Heritage registration is determined based on recommendations from UNESCO’s advisory body, the International Council on Monuments and Sites.
In May 2015, Japan received full approval for the registration of all 23 facilities across eight prefectures, including Hashima Island.
However, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs began saying that it must also consult South Korea’s intentions.
World Heritage nominations are submitted at each nation’s responsibility and judged solely by ICOMOS.
Despite this, Japan’s foreign ministry deferred to South Korea, and South Korea moved to block Japan’s registration.
Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs conceded and itself wrote that conscripted workers were “forced to work.”
Internationally, this is tantamount to admitting the crime of forced labor, which carries no statute of limitations.
The issues of comfort women and conscripted laborers both originate from Japan’s defeatist diplomacy devoid of national interest.
South Korea advances its pursuit of Japan through distortion, fabrication, and nullification of treaties, and Japan’s foreign ministry must recognize this intent and arm itself theoretically based on facts.
On July 10, 2013, the Seoul High Court ordered Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal to pay 100 million won in wages and damages to four Korean plaintiffs who sued over wartime labor.
Those plaintiffs had previously suffered a complete defeat in Japan.
In October 2003, Japan’s Supreme Court ruled that claims related to conscripted labor had been resolved under the Japan–South Korea Basic Treaty.
Their victory in South Korea resulted from changes in South Korean judicial thinking and attitudes toward Japan.
In the ruling, the court referred to the Emperor as the “Japanese King” and overturned Japan’s judicial judgment based on the following reasoning.
“Japan’s rule over the Korean Peninsula during the Japanese imperial occupation was merely an illegal occupation from a normative perspective, and legal relations arising from Japan’s illegal rule that are incompatible with the constitutional spirit of the Republic of Korea are excluded from validity.”
Thus, contrary to international common sense, the Basic Treaty was denied and Japan lost the case.
Chinese plaintiffs learned from the Korean approach and began filing lawsuits in China.
The leading example is the case involving Mitsubishi Materials.
Facts are the only weapon against nations that falsify history.
Turning a blind eye to facts and compromising out of dishonorable cowardice is unforgivable.