hankyoreh

Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asian and Oceanian Affairs Bureau Director-General Kenji Kanasugi (front) enters the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) to discuss South Korea-Japan relations with MOFA Northeast Asia Bureau Director Kim Yong-gil on Mar. 14.

Amid a chill in South Korea-Japan relations over a South Korean Supreme Court ruling on compensation for forced labor conscription during the Japanese occupation, the two sides agreed during director general-level foreign ministry discussions on Mar. 14 that further deterioration of the situation through economic retaliation and other means would be best avoided.

South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) Northeast Asia Bureau Director-General Kim Yong-gil and Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs Asian and Oceanian Affairs Bureau Director-General Kenji Kanasugi held discussions for an hour and 45 minutes on pressing matters in South Korea-Japan relations at the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Seoul that afternoon. The two also held “frank discussions” on the recent mention of “economic retaliation” by Japanese government authorities, a MOFA official reported.

According to an official in the South Korean foreign ministry, Kim stressed during the meeting that it was “not desirable for Japan to tie the forced conscription compensation ruling with bilateral relations as a whole” and urged Tokyo to “respond cautiously to avoid negatively impacting South Korea-Japan relations.” The official also reported Kim as “clearly communicating the inappropriateness of [Japan’s] response measures, stating in particular that it was not desirable to have the issue played up in the media.”

“They agreed to cooperate and work on ensuring that these things do not happen between foreign affairs authorities,” the official said.

On Mar. 12, Japanese Deputy Prime Minister commented, “I think there are various possible retaliatory measures [in response to the ruling] beyond tariffs, including suspension of wire transfers and visa issuance.”

But the two sides appeared to be continuing on different paths regarding a solution to the forced labor conscription issue. Kanasugi urged Seoul to agree to the “diplomatic discussions” requested on Jan. 9 in accordance with Article 3-1 of the South Korea-Japan Claims Settlement Agreement of 1965, while Kim reiterated that Seoul was “examining things closely while considering the different elements,” sources said. The Kyodo News agency reported Japan as requesting that South Korea establish measures to avoid disadvantageous treatment toward Japanese businesses in connection with the forced labor conscription issue. Japan also reportedly voiced concerns about a statue depicting a conscripted laborer that was raised near its consulate in Busan.

Japanese companies have also joined the voices expressing concern and caution over economic retribution – which they see as having the potential to harm their economic gains in South Korea. At 7.53 million people, South Korea accounted for the second-largest number of tourists visiting Japan last year after China (8.3 million). The Nikkei newspaper reported on Mar. 14 that a halt to visa issuance to South Koreans could lead to a sharp decrease in tourism. With South Korea’s trade deficit with Japan last year amounting to around US$24 billion and 85% of Japan businesses in South Korea generating a surplus, Japanese companies stand to suffer a substantial blow if increased tariffs on South Korean imports stir up trade frictions.

As Japanese companies including Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal and Mitsubishi continue to refuse to pay damages in the wake of court rulings siding with conscription victims, the survivors have been debating when to go ahead with procedures to forcibly dispose of the companies’ assets in South Korea.

“I don’t have anything to tell you at the moment [about the schedule for asset disposal],” said attorney Im Jae-seong, who is representing victims in their legal action against Nippon Steel, in a Mar. 14 telephone interview with Hankyoreh.

“We will announce everything all at once later on,” Im added.

Lee Sang-gap, an attorney representing victims in a conscription-related case against Mitsubishi, said, “We are examining whether it would be possible to resolve other issues together so that we aren’t having procedures where only the victims with finalized rulings in their favor are compensated.”

“The Japanese government’s response has been to talk about ‘retaliatory tariffs’ and damage South Korea-Japan relations as a whole in areas that have nothing to do with companies that are guilty of war crimes,” Lee said.

By Park Min-hee and Ko Han-sol, staff reporters, and Cho Ki-weon, Tokyo correspondent

Please direct comments or questions to [english@hani.co.kr]