Most Hated Country - Japan

Guess which country is the most hated in the Top Tens' list of most hated country ? -- Japan

Guess which country voted the most for the list? -- South Korea (64%)

According to the admin of The Top Tens, the votes for the list are from the following countries:
1) South Korea: 64.00%
2) Japan: 28.30%
3) United States: 3.66%
4) Canada: 0.51%
5) China: 0.48%
6) Australia: 0.44%
7) United Kingdom: 0.27%
8) Philippines: 0.19%
9) Unknown: 0.15%
10) New Zealand: 0.13%

What does this tell you?

It's not the world's top ten, but it's Korea's top ten list !

It also tells you how anti-Japan propaganda is spread in Korea.

This kind of emotional reaction is harmful in general, but especially so when it's politically used, which has been the case for years. And it is based on Korea's biased view on the history.
Sadly, decades of anti-Japan education by South Korea has spread in the country to the extent that the majority doesn't even know their own history.

For such a long time in the history, Korea was often a vassal state of China, paying annual tribute to and getting protection from China when needed. Yet when the western countries came to colonize the last few remaining un-colonized countries in Asia, namely Japan, Korea and China in the late 19th century, Korea was not modernized enough to be able to fight against the West. Seeing the threat of Western colonization, Japan did its best to modernize itself, and tried to convince Korea to do the same. Yet, looking up at China, down on Japan, Korea did not take the path of modernization.

When Donghak Peasant Revolution happened in 1894, China, regarding Korea as its tributary nation, intervened militarily, and Japan also sent army, which led to Japanese-Sino War. The aim of Japan was to maintain Korea’s independence, and the first thing Japan demanded to China after winning the war was Korea’s autonomy, which it gained. However, the situation of Korea remained vulnerable, and with the end of Japanese-Russo war, the Empire of Korea became a protectorate of Japan in 1905. In 1910, with the strong support of Korea’s major party “Il-Ching Fe”and of over one million Korean people, Korea was annexed by Japan. Roosevelt publicly stated “Korean Peninsula is Japanese”, and British also said “We’ve wanted annexation”.  At that time, no major countries was against the annexation. British newspaper used the term annexation, not colonization.

Japan took the assimilation policy which aimed at bringing up the living standard and culture of Korea to the level of Japan, and this contrasted sharply with the western colonization policy which only pursued its own benefits. Japan prioritized the improvement of the infrastructure of Korea, and invested hugely, even having deficit balance.

Alleyne Ireland, a British administrative scholar, published a book called "The New Korea" in 1926, describing the policies and measures taken by the Japanese occupational government in Korea at the time of annexation between 1910-1945. In his 300-page book, Ireland described that Japanese administration in Korea ensured education for all Koreans, dramatically improved public health eradicating epidemics, and brought about significant economic development.

Ireland wrote: "The Japanese administration in Korea has done more to advance the interests of Korea than any other government has done to advance the interests of any country in the world within the period... That Korean agricultural exports should have increased in little more than a decade by more than 1,000%, industrial exports by more than 3,000%, fishery exports by nearly 3,000%..... would, if Korea were a self-governing country instead of a Japanese colonial dependency, be hailed throughout the Western world as an astounding example of national progress" (page 288).  

  

I suspect none of the above is known in Korea, since the only thing they learn is “Japan was evil and did horrible things to Korea”, and the voice of Koreans who lived during those periods is silenced.

Greater East Asia War / WWII: Background (1)

From today, I will post series of brief accounts on the Asian part of the World War II; namely, the Great East Asian War as called by Japan, and the Pacific War as called by the US (1941-1945). I will cover the background, the war, and the implication today, but first of all, it is important to understand the background to understand this war.

Background (1):

Western colonization since the 16^th century

The Western countries started colonizing different parts of the world since the 16th century. In Asia, for example, the following countries were colonized:

1510       India by Portugal

1511       Malacca (Malaysia) by Portugal

1571       Philippines by Spain

1602       Indonesia by Dutch

1624       Taiwan by Dutch

1641       Ceylon (Sri Lanka) by Dutch

1645       Malacca by Dutch

              Sumatra by Britain

17^th C     Mongol by Russia

1786       Penang (Malaysia) by Britain

1815       Ceylon by Britain

1819       Singapore by Britain

1824       Malacca by Britain

1824       Sumatra by Dutch

1826       Burma by Britain

1842       Hong Kong by Britain

1849       Macau by Portugal 　　　

1860       Kowloon　九竜 (China) by Britain

　　　　　　 Primorye（China） by Russia

1863       Cambodia by France

1877       India by Britain

1881       Part of Ili district and Zaisan Nor district (China) by Russia

1885       Vietnam by France

1886       Burma by Britain

1893       Laos by France 

1896       Malaya by Britain 

1897       Hawaii by USA

1898       Philippines by USA

1898       China：Jiaozhou Bay 膠州湾　by Germany, Port Arthur 旅順 and Dalian 大連 by Russia, Weihai 威海衛 and Kowloon peninsula 九竜半島 by Britain

1899       Kwangchowan 広州湾 (China) by French

1909       Malay by Britain

1911       Tuva by Russia

By mid 19^th century, the West colonized almost all areas in Africa, Latin America, Asia and the Pacific, and only the Far East remained un-colonized. British and French started dividing China, and the West’s interest focused on which countries would get Japan, Korea and China. (Thailand was not colonized for it was between French and British colonies, and for other reasons).

Abe Shinzo is a revisionist who can't face the history ?

Is Japan's Prime Minister Abe Shinzo a revisionist, who can't face the history, as the Washington post claims?

With regards to annexation of Korea, Mr. Abe mentioned in the parliament that "the definition of what constitutes aggression has yet to be established in academia or in the international community." Washington Post then writes, "Japan occupied Korea. It occupied Manchuria... It committed aggression. Why... are facts so difficult for some in Japan to acknowledge?"

Imperialist Japan went into war to invade and committed atrocities - is this the whole truth of the story, as commonly held?

General Douglas MacArthur in 1951 at the US senate testified as follows: 

"There is practically nothing indigenous to Japan except the silk worm. They lack cotton, they lack wool, they lack petroleum products, they lack tin, they lack rubber, they lack a great many other things, all of which was in the Asiatic basin. They feared that if those supplies were cut off, there would be 10 to 12 million people unoccupied in Japan. Their purpose, therefore, in going to war was largely dictated by security."

And indeed the US and the allies cut off the supply channels, and Japan was left with small amount of oil reserve.

Alleyne Ireland, an American administrative scholar, published a book called "The New Korea" in 1926, describing the policies and measures taken by the Japanese occupational government in Korea at the time of annexation between 1910-1945. In his 300-page book, Ireland described that Japanese administration in Korea ensured education for all Koreans, dramatically improved public health eradicating epidemics, and brought about significant economic development. 

Ireland wrote: "The Japanese administration in Korea has done more to advance the interests of Korea than any other government has done to advance the interests of any country in the world within the period... That Korean agricultural exports should have increased in little more than a decade by more than 1,000%, industrial exports by more than 3,000%, fishery exports by nearly 3,000%..... would, if Korea were a self-governing country instead of a Japanese colonial dependency, be hailed throughout the Western world as an astounding example of national progress" (page 288).

Both MacArthur's and Ireland's statements give very different, and objective, outlooks on what Japan did.

68 years after the end of the WWII, it is high time to come out of the "winners' view" set by the Tokyo Tribunal. 

Mr. Abe is facing the history.