Sunday May 27, 2012

JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION

Should the abductee issue be part of the agenda for the six-nation talks on North Korea's nuclear program?

Poll Feb. 09, 2009 - 04:00AM JST ( 13 )

Order by Time Order by Popularity

13 Comments

0

namabiru4meFeb. 09, 2009 - 08:28AM JST

Should the abductee issue be part of the agenda for the six-nation talks on North Korea's nuclear program?

Doesn't the question answer itself? It is a talk on North Korea's nuclear program, not on abductions.
0

smithinjapanFeb. 09, 2009 - 09:23AM JST

namabiru: You would think the question answers itself, but maybe 'nuclear program' doesn't translate well because the Japan-side demands the abduction issue take the stage before anything else.

If they can FINALLY set dates for both this and bilateral talks (ie. abduction and Japan's war-time atrocities) then I will back Japan whole-heartedly. Until then, they are as NKorea oft says; 'unnecessary' in the talks.
0

MzFeb. 09, 2009 - 04:00PM JST

It's completely irrelevant.
0

SuperLibFeb. 09, 2009 - 08:50PM JST

It's not as irrelevant as it seems since it is a stumbling block to Japan giving aid to North Korea or accepting a long-term peace proposal which may be required with the nuclear issue.
0

NeoJamalFeb. 10, 2009 - 07:04AM JST

If they can FINALLY set dates for both this and bilateral talks (ie. abduction and Japan's war-time atrocities) then I will back Japan whole-heartedly. Until then, they are as NKorea oft says; 'unnecessary' in the talks.

But will North Korea allow Japan to enter the dialogue without mentioning the war? I for one think the war is just as irrelevant like the abduction issues but posters here might disagree. I wholeheartedly believe that the double standard imposed by anti-Japan posters on JT would agree sooner that Japanese atrocities will be an inalienable issue to determine whether Japan has the right to enter the 6 nation talks rather than the abduction issue. The most rational defence for these JT posters escape me apart from the obvious answer that, they hate Japan ALOT.
0

Yuki_51Feb. 10, 2009 - 05:29PM JST

The kidnappings are terrible human tragedies for the families involved. Every effort should be made to return any citizens who might still be alive, and to account for those who are not.

But the nuclear issue is much larger. Period. It is enough to hold the knowledge about this issue in the background when negotiating with the DPRK. Forget about it? Of course not. But let it stand in the way of a much bigger issue? No, not that, either. We should not let the perfect become the mortal enemy of the good.

But we should sink any DPRK vessels that appear uninvited or unannounced in our waters -- without hesitation. No chasing. No warning shots. Just sink them immediately upon detection. Let the DPRK wait for the bodies to (they should hope) wash ashore on their own territory someday.

Maybe this is a better activity for the MSDF than going to Somalia, where plenty of others have already volunteered for piracy suppression.
0

jonnyboyFeb. 10, 2009 - 10:02PM JST

the abduction issue seems to be a helpful tactic for bolstering nationalistic support for the government
0

UnagiDonFeb. 11, 2009 - 11:36AM JST

NeoJamal;

Well said, sir.
0

smithinjapanFeb. 11, 2009 - 10:06PM JST

NeoJamal: "But will North Korea allow Japan to enter the dialogue without mentioning the war?"

That should be a given. In fact, NKorea's calls for reparations and what not from Japan for colonization and the massacres on the Korean peninsula and in China, etc., are usually brought up by NKorea in response to Japan demanding clarity in the abduction issue in the six-nation talks. I've never heard NKorea say that Japan doesn't have the right to enter the talks because of what they've done, but I've heard something along the lines of them saying Japan has no right to bring up history in light of what they've done.

Anyway, you're right that both should be off the table in the six-nation talks. Who do you think would be more apt to agree? Japan on giving up the abduction issue as necessary in the six-nation talks, or NKorea responding to it by saying Japan atone for WWII and pre-war atrocities? That's rhetorical.

Let's look at the bottom line here and assume you're right about the double-standards part: Japan can very well be thrown out of these talks if they insist on the abduction issue being a part of them, and talks could still resume. You can say that NKorea should likewise be thrown out of talks for insisting on bringing up Japan's wartime atrocities, but they won't really be all that progressive if NK's not there, will they. (that's a period, not a question mark)
0

smithinjapanFeb. 11, 2009 - 10:18PM JST

Neojamal: Sorry... let me clarify slightly; it should be a given that NK not bring that up in the talks as well as Japan not bringing up abduction. Hope that makes my opinion a little clearer.
0

JoeBigsFeb. 13, 2009 - 07:26AM JST

If North Korea wants Japanese help then North Korea must play ball, period. The war is over and Japan paid a very big price for their mistakes. But Korea has yet to pay for their wrong doings.

How can one talk to a rogue nation? If North Korea wants help then show that they are part of the human race.

BTW since the war ended which of the 2 nations has done more good in the world?
0

likeitisFeb. 13, 2009 - 08:44AM JST

Superlib is correct. But let me put it another way: It shouldn't be relevant, but it is, because Japan thinks it is. I disagree with Japan completely, but what they say has to be dealt with, one way or another.

One way might be for the other 5 nations to show Japan the door.

NeoJamal: I for one think the war is just as irrelevant like the abduction issues but posters here might disagree.

It also depends on what aspect of the war we are talking about. In living memory, Japan subjugated just about all the nations of eastern and southern Asia, and they lied and bullied their behinds off doing it. Could there be a better reason not to trust Japan even today? Its not like they are half as apologetic about the war as Germany.

The changes over the last 60 years are significant, and I am not worried about Japanese Imperialism. But mind you, these are the same people who won't let go of some small islands to sign a peace treaty with Russia. And while we look on N.K. with suspicion, note that they have not been involved in any real military conflict since 1953, only an 8 year difference to Japan. And, both nations still have very significant militaries.

Looking internally at N.K. is our only real reason to worry about them. Looking internally at Japan is our only real reason to trust them. Everything else is not so different really, especially the point about festering over old issues. They are both guilty, but I think N.K. has the better point: WWII might be twice as old as the abduction issue, but its also about 100 times more relevant to N.K.'s desire to possess nukes. Kidnapping a handful of foreign citizens is nothing compared to subjugating entire nations!
0

zurcroniumFeb. 15, 2009 - 10:37AM JST

I understand that the Japanese delegates wear bell bottoms and puca shells to the meetings to let the other five nations know that for Japan, it really is still 1972.