韓日貿易当局実務会議開催、握手なく固い表情…見解の違いを確認

韓国に弁明する機会を与えてやったのに、「日本からおもてなしを受けなかった」とわざわざ書き込むあたり、朝鮮人はどこまでも朝鮮人なのである。



韓日貿易当局実務会議開催、握手なく固い表情…見解の違いを確認
中央日報
2019年07月12日16時20分
https://japanese.joins.com/article/489/255489.html?servcode=A00§code=A10

日本の経済措置をめぐり、12日に東京で開かれた韓日の1回目の実務会議の雰囲気は冷たかった。韓国産業通商資源部当局者と日本経済産業省関係者それぞれ2人は、握手もなく席に座って会議を進めた。出席者は固い表情で正面だけを凝視した。

経済産業省は10階の小さな事務室を会議場所とし、ホワイトボードに「輸出管理に関する事務的説明会」という説明をプリントしたA4用紙2枚を貼り付けた。正式会議室でもなく、一般の事務用椅子が置かれて会議出席者の名札や飲料もなかった。日本が前面に出す「おもてなし」とは程遠かった。日本側がわざと冷遇をしたといえる。洋服をジャケット正装で臨んだ韓国側とは違い、日本側は半袖シャツ姿だった。

会議場所もみすぼらしかった。テーブルと簡易椅子が片隅に積まれており、床には機資材が破損した跡が残っていた。会議には韓国側からは産業通商資源部のチョン・チャンス貿易安保課長とハン・チョルヒ北東アジア通商課長が、日本側からは経済産業省の岩松潤・貿易管理課長と猪狩克朗・安全保障貿易管理課長が参加した。日本側は会議出席者の発言は公開しなかった。両側が席に座って正面を凝視する様子1分だけを取材陣に公開した。

会議の性格をめぐっても両側の立場は鋭く分かれた。韓国は日本側の輸出規制強化措置における両国間の協議という立場だが、日本側は規制強化措置に対して韓国に説明する「説明会」と主張した。韓国の立場は聞かないという意思を示したといえる。

日本の制服着用の女児に「殴り殺してやらなきゃ」 中国四川省の学校で集団暴行

中国語のSNS上で公開された動画が大きな反響を呼んでいる。中国人の女子中学生か、もしくは高校生とみられる数人が日本の制服に似た服を着た1人の女子を囲み、頬を叩き、足蹴りを繰り返している。動画には攻撃しているうちの1人の声が録音されており、「こんな服を着た人間は殴り殺してやらなきゃ」というセリフが聞き取れる。あまりの事態に警察の捜査が開始された。

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xa6OGynvuI&feature=youtu.be

動画は中国語のポータル「Btime.com」で公開され、この事件が7月8日、四川省達州市にある学校で起きたことがわかると、ユーザーの間には大きな波紋が広がった。

「これは愛国精神じゃない。学校のいじめだ。」

「こんな悪い奴らには罰を与えるべきだ。」

「陰惨ないじめ。未成年児童保護法がいじめた方じゃなくて、いじめられた方を擁護してくれることを祈る。」

治安維持機関は女児をいじめた学生らは拘束されたことを明らかにした。
https://jp.sputniknews.com/life/201907106454931/

トルコの国益はシリア・ダマスカス政権との正常化

Time to reconsider Syria policy
July 04 2019
By YUSUF KANLI
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/opinion/yusuf-kanli/time-to-reconsider-syria-policy-144667

The fundamental duty of senior advisers, particularly those advising top political figures on key foreign and defense policy issues, must be to try to prevent policymakers from making sentimental, emotional and indeed prejudiced decisions. Leaders might have their own perceptions and indeed prejudices, but countries like Turkey that have centuries of state traditions and rich history of political conduct under very tense conditions — rather than individual aspirations, hopes, plans or prejudices and national interests — ought to dominate the decision-making mechanism.

Recently, former Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu has been in efforts to make a comeback. Openly and discreetly he has been criticizing the way the country is being administered, suggesting a reconsideration of some domestic and foreign policy objectives. Issuing memorandums or spreading some new political plans are easier said than done.

Of course, we might have sharp differences of opinion regarding what Turkey’s national interests are or from which perspective the national interests of the country might fit the aspirations of the current political team in office well.

Yet, after so many years of suffering, blood and millions of refugees in Turkey, it must be clear for everyone that it was not Turkey’s national interest at all to build the country’s Syria policy on the sentimental mindset of the Syrian and Turkish leaders or the perception of friendship the premier of the time, Davutoğlu, had.

When Turkey’s Syria policy was replaced with an obsessive “Bashar al-Assad must go” slogan rather than the traditional “elder regional big brother” role that was providing Turkey with impressive mediating capabilities, not only Syria but Turkey lost as well.

Turkey’s national interests required policymakers to take into consideration national security, peace and tranquility of Turkish territories, state of the economy, economic advantages and maintaining robust relations. Turkey’s national interests of course also required proper planning on how to avoid millions of refugees knocking on Turkey’s doors should the problem in Syria be evolved into a civil war. End result? Turkey is now hosting over four million Syrian refugees, and if Idlib explodes – which will explode one day – a further 1.5 to three million refugees will flood to Turkey again.

We might sit back and enjoy ourselves at some splendid cafes or continue seeking solution to the problem through lofty analyses stressing Turkey’s greatness and how well it treated the Syrian refugees and how badly the West behaved on the issue. Well, no complaints regarding that but the problem is there and such arguments cannot provide a solution.

On the contrary, if we continue to ignore the social repercussions of the worsening economy and presence of such a huge number of “privileged” refugees the country has been hosting with very little effort to integrate them, we might have some very serious problems tomorrow.

What’s happening at some social democratic municipalities – which are another farce – must be taken very seriously. Cutting social support programs to the refugees should be considered as a serious warning of an approaching pogrom against the Syrian people who were compelled to leave their homeland for a bit of security and humane living conditions in Turkey.

Those ruling Turkey might not love Syria’s dictator. I am sure many countries do not like the way Turkey is being administered. Neither do they have the right to advise Turks on what kind of a president they should have nor do Turkish leaders have the right to bestow a leader of their liking for the Syrian nation. Turkey’s fundamental national interest requires it to work and find ways of establishing normalcy – at whatever level it might be possible – and resume diplomatic relations with Damascus.

Is it not Turkey’s fundamental interest to work for the protection of national and territorial integrity of Syria; to bring an end to the destabilization of Syria; to help Syria avoid creation of mini states (including a Kurdish one) on its territory; and to arrange a Syria that is safe enough for the return of Syrian refugees – at least a big portion of them – to Syria?

I may add more to this list. But the list begins with normalization with the regime in Damascus not because Turkey loves Assad, but that is a requirement of Turkish national interests.