This passage organizes the debate over ancient Wa involvement in the southern Korean Peninsula through documentary and archaeological materials such as Mimana, Mimana Nihon-fu, the Gwanggaeto Stele, keyhole-shaped tombs, and magatama, while criticizing both the contradictions of Korean nationalist historiography and the masochistic view of history that spread through postwar Japanese academia.
It argues that the Korean side has rejected passages derived from the Nihon Shoki when inconvenient while selectively using what serves its own narrative, and that it has dismissed empirical research concerning Mimana Nihon-fu and Wa-related remains for political reasons.
It further contends that postwar Japanese academia came under the influence of anti-Japan thought and placed political sensitivity above historical verification, and calls on readers to recognize this with anger and clarity.

2019-03-03
For all that, one cannot but be appalled by the conduct of the Koreans.
At the same time, readers too are bound to learn with anger that the postwar academic world has been dominated by a masochistic view of history and anti-Japan thought.

Mimana, 663, was a region in the southern Korean Peninsula that existed in ancient times.

Overview.
The prevailing view is that it included the area centered on Geumgwan Gaya, which succeeded Guya Han of the entry on the Wa people in the Wei History, Account of the Eastern Barbarians in the Records of the Three Kingdoms, that is, the northernmost point of Wa on the Korean Peninsula.
It also included Byeonjin and Byeonhan among the Samhan, part of Jinhan, and part of Mahan, including what is now South Jeolla Province.
There is also a theory that it refers specifically to Geumgwan Gaya, present-day Gimhae in South Gyeongsang Province, among the states of Mimana.

In the region that later became Guya Han, Geumgwan Gaya, and then Mimana, during the middle Yayoi period, in the fourth and third centuries BCE, Yayoi pottery of a style entirely different from the preceding pottery began to increase rapidly, and this is seen as the result of Wa people advancing into the region that would later be connected to Mimana.
After the Second World War, the Mimana question gradually came to be avoided for political reasons, but because the theory that the Gwanggaeto Stele had been altered by the Japanese military, in which it is written that Wa made Silla and Baekje its subjects, was denied and the value of the source became clear, and because a number of keyhole-shaped tombs unique to Japan began to be discovered in the southern Korean Peninsula, various views have in recent years been put forward recognizing the existence of governing authority, military command authority, and taxation authority by the Yamato court itself or by groups deeply connected with it.

Omitted in the middle.

The Japanese historian Takashi Yoshida criticizes the widespread acceptance of Tanaka’s theory that the Nihon Shoki used the term Mimana as a general name for the Kara states, and argues that the use of Mimana in the Nihon Shoki, just as “Yamato” refers at once to Yamato Province and to the whole of Wa, referred at once to Mimana Gaya, that is, Geumgwan Gaya, and to the whole political sphere centered on Mimana Gaya.

Omitted in the middle.

Mimana Nihon-fu.
See also “Mimana Nihon-fu.”

From around the 1960s, nationalist historiography spread across the Korean Peninsula, and as a reaction against positivism, claims were made that the direct rule of Mimana by the Yamato kingship described in the Kojiki and Nihon Shoki had been exaggerated.
In 1983, Professor Kang In-gu of Yeungnam University published a measured drawing stating that Tomb No. 1 at Songhak-dong in South Gyeongsang Province, with a mound length of 66 meters, was a keyhole-shaped tomb, but later investigations led Korean researchers to propose the view that Songhak-dong Tomb No. 1 was not a keyhole-shaped tomb at all, but merely three round tombs from different construction periods that had accidentally overlapped.
However, there is suspicion that Songhak-dong Tomb No. 1 underwent alteration work in order to erase traces of Japan.
In this regard, it has been pointed out that while photographs taken in 1996 show it as a keyhole-shaped tomb, photographs taken in 2012 show it as three mounds.
In the southwestern Korean Peninsula, discoveries of keyhole-shaped tombs have followed one after another, and so far it has been confirmed that there are eleven in South Jeolla Province and two in North Jeolla Province.
Moreover, all of the keyhole-shaped tombs on the Korean Peninsula were established in the extremely limited period from the latter half of the fifth century to the middle of the sixth century, and are found in the western part of the Mimana region and at the southern tip of the peninsula, regions that existed before Baekje moved southward and expanded by annexation, and they are known to be accompanied by Wa-related artifacts such as cylindrical haniwa, shell products from the southern islands, and stone chambers painted inside with red pigment.

As other circumstantial evidence indicating the sphere of influence of the Yamato kingship, there are large numbers of jade magatama excavated within the spheres of Silla, Baekje, and Mimana, though rare in the old territories of Goguryeo.
Prewar Japanese archaeologists interpreted these as objects indicating the sphere of influence of the Yamato kingship, but after the war a new interpretation was also proposed that they had been brought from Korea to Japan.
However, since there are no jade production sites on the Korean Peninsula, and in ancient times no jade workshops have been found anywhere in East Asia other than around Itoigawa in Japan, and because the latest chemical composition tests have shown that the magatama excavated on the Korean Peninsula are the same as those from sites around Itoigawa, it became clear that they were exports from Japan.

What immediately crossed my mind when I read this passage was the origin story of the jade at Shoren-in, one of the places I dearly love and probably one of the places I have visited most often in all Japan.

Omitted in the middle.

Interpretations based on Korean nationalist historiography, which denies positivism.
In contemporary South Korea, in order to cultivate ethnic pride, the government and academia together actively promote across the nation a nationalist historiography that willfully distorts sources such as the Kiki, archaeological findings, the Gwanggaeto Stele, and the Book of Song, Account of Wa.
In 1963, Kim Seok-hyeong announced the “Separate States Theory.”
This claimed that the inhabitants of the Samhan migrated to the Japanese archipelago and established separate states according to their places of origin, specifically that Gaya people settled in Hiroshima and Okayama, and Silla in the Tohoku region.
The Mimana Nihon-fu issue was interpreted as a dispute among those separate states.
This theory was criticized as nothing but self-contradiction because, while denying the Nihon Shoki, it nonetheless accepted the Izumo myth, the myth of the descent of the heavenly grandson, and the tradition of Emperor Jimmu’s eastern campaign as historical fact, and from there drew the conclusion that such “separate states” existed within Japan proper.
It received no support at all.

Entering the 1970s, the Japanese researcher Hideo Inoue, who sympathized with that view, argued that “Mimana Nihon-fu” was a term seen in the Baekje Hongi quoted in the Nihon Shoki, and that late-sixth-century Baekje, in trying to win over Wa, the Yamato kingship, against Goguryeo and Silla, merely linked the “Wa” that in the Wei Zhi, that is, the Records of the Three Kingdoms, Account of Han, referred to the states of the southern Korean Peninsula with the Wa polity of the Japanese archipelago, thereby giving no more than the impression that the power of the Yamato kingship had extended to the southern Korean Peninsula from an early time.
He further claimed that the actual text of the Baekje Hongi can be read to show that Mimana Nihon-fu had no direct relation whatsoever to the Yamato kingship.

There can be no room for doubt that this Hideo Inoue too is one of the men being steered by the theory of dividing Japan.

Kim Hyun-gu, a professor at Korea University and a scholar of ancient Japanese history, points out that while the Nihon Shoki says that Wa established Mimana Nihon-fu and, while ruling the southern Korean Peninsula, carried away the cultures of the three kingdoms of Baekje, Goguryeo, and Silla, South Korean middle school and high school history textbooks give no explanation of the international relations through which the cultures of Baekje, Goguryeo, and Silla were transmitted to Japan, and teach only the story that the three kingdoms of Goguryeo, Silla, and Baekje transmitted culture to Japan.
Moreover, the stories said to show that Baekje, Goguryeo, and Silla conveyed their cultures to Japan are all quoted from the Nihon Shoki, because Korea’s oldest historical record is the twelfth-century Samguk Sagi, and there are no ancient Korean historical texts.
And yet, when Japanese scholars cite the Nihon Shoki to argue the Mimana Nihon-fu theory that Wa ruled the southern Korean Peninsula, the Korean academic world rejects it as unacceptable.
He points out that this is an obvious contradiction, and that because of such double standards, Japanese academia may look down on Korean academia.

Interpretations based on Japanese historiography.
In Keyhole-Shaped Tombs and Ancient Japan-Korea Relations, 2002, edited by the Chosen Gakkai, Tadashi Nishitani argued that Baekje officials of Wa descent existed in the Yeongsan River basin, and Yukihisa Yamao cited cases in which powerful Wa men migrated to Baekje and their second-generation offspring by Baekje women became diplomatic envoys, arguing for the existence of such Baekje officials of Wa descent.

The above is from Wikipedia.

For all that, one cannot but be appalled by the conduct of the Koreans.
At the same time, readers too are bound to learn with anger that the postwar academic world has been dominated by a masochistic view of history and anti-Japan thought.