こんにちは。フォックス淳子＠香港です。
[china 3344] Re: 香港立法会、日本に謝罪要求決議可決
> *****
林さん、こんにちは。林さんが紹介してくださったChristine Loh議員の記事、大変興味深く読ませていただきました。陸女史は、個人的には好きな政治家ではないのですが、非常に冷静で知的な方ですね。環境問題、人権問題などの話になるとすぐ出て来るので、もっと、何と言うか「うるさがたの優等生」的な方だと思っていたんですが、そんな事もなく、この問題でも事実をできるだけ正確に検討した上で発言されていると思います。
最後に「Let's see what reply I get back.」と述べておられるので、恐らく、日本領事宛てに質問状か何かを出したのではないかと思うのですが、これについても、今後何かわかりましたら教えていただけませんか？ ぜひ知りたいです。
＃私もこのメーリングリストに入ってみたいなと一瞬思ったんですが．．．英語の語彙500語ぐらいしかないし、とてもじゃないけど討論に加われそうにないので断念。
> *****
>
> A recurrent complaint by many people in Asia is the "Apology" issue. They say that Japan has either not apologized or only did so reluctantly. The Consul quoted official statements dating back to 1972 of the official wording use in Japan's apology. In the 1972 Communique between Japan and China, Japan acknowledged its conscious responsibility for "the serious damage" caused to the Chinese people "and deeply reproaches itself." In 1995, the then Prime Minister acknowledged "tremendous damage and suffering" to people in Asia, stating that these were "irrefutable facts of history" and expressed "deep remorse and heartfelt apology". In 1998, when Jiang Zemin visited Japan, an apology was also offered.
> As far as reparations are concerned, in the 1972 Communique, China renounced its demand for war reparation and as far as Japan is concerned, that's that. Of course some Koreans are now trying to claim from Japanese companies and we are likely to witness interesting court cases in the coming year or two.
> People continue to question the sincerity of the apology because of such things as the toning down of history books about war time atrocities. In the Consul's letter, he stated that "most history text books ... in Japan, there are descriptions that illustrate that Japan caused serious damage and suffering towards Asian countries." I understand from others that textbooks do not actually describe the war, pillage, rape, torture and massacres as such.
> He concluded his letter by suggesting that continuing calls for apology and reparations is no way to try and be friends. The letter prompted me to respond by asking just that. Is the apology being diluted by such actions as the textbooks? Let's see what reply I get back.
---
Junko FOX
jj251096@hknet.com
[china 3344] Re: 香港立法会、日本に謝罪要求決議可決
> *****
林さん、こんにちは。林さんが紹介してくださったChristine Loh議員の記事、大変興味深く読ませていただきました。陸女史は、個人的には好きな政治家ではないのですが、非常に冷静で知的な方ですね。環境問題、人権問題などの話になるとすぐ出て来るので、もっと、何と言うか「うるさがたの優等生」的な方だと思っていたんですが、そんな事もなく、この問題でも事実をできるだけ正確に検討した上で発言されていると思います。
最後に「Let's see what reply I get back.」と述べておられるので、恐らく、日本領事宛てに質問状か何かを出したのではないかと思うのですが、これについても、今後何かわかりましたら教えていただけませんか？ ぜひ知りたいです。
＃私もこのメーリングリストに入ってみたいなと一瞬思ったんですが．．．英語の語彙500語ぐらいしかないし、とてもじゃないけど討論に加われそうにないので断念。
> *****
>
> A recurrent complaint by many people in Asia is the "Apology" issue. They say that Japan has either not apologized or only did so reluctantly. The Consul quoted official statements dating back to 1972 of the official wording use in Japan's apology. In the 1972 Communique between Japan and China, Japan acknowledged its conscious responsibility for "the serious damage" caused to the Chinese people "and deeply reproaches itself." In 1995, the then Prime Minister acknowledged "tremendous damage and suffering" to people in Asia, stating that these were "irrefutable facts of history" and expressed "deep remorse and heartfelt apology". In 1998, when Jiang Zemin visited Japan, an apology was also offered.
> As far as reparations are concerned, in the 1972 Communique, China renounced its demand for war reparation and as far as Japan is concerned, that's that. Of course some Koreans are now trying to claim from Japanese companies and we are likely to witness interesting court cases in the coming year or two.
> People continue to question the sincerity of the apology because of such things as the toning down of history books about war time atrocities. In the Consul's letter, he stated that "most history text books ... in Japan, there are descriptions that illustrate that Japan caused serious damage and suffering towards Asian countries." I understand from others that textbooks do not actually describe the war, pillage, rape, torture and massacres as such.
> He concluded his letter by suggesting that continuing calls for apology and reparations is no way to try and be friends. The letter prompted me to respond by asking just that. Is the apology being diluted by such actions as the textbooks? Let's see what reply I get back.
---
Junko FOX
jj251096@hknet.com
