Tokyo must regain trust before resenting neighbors
Japan is pushing back hard on Korea's import ban on fisheries products from Fukushima and adjacent prefectures, threatening to bring the case to the World Trade Organization. As most Koreans see it, however, Tokyo's move is little more than the proverbial "audacity of a thief."
An official from the Japanese fisheries agency visited some related offices here Monday, asking for a "scientific basis" on the import ban and calling for its retraction.
Above all, it defies our understanding why Tokyo is taking issue with Seoul's move to protect the health and lives of its own citizens while remaining silent with similar moves taken by the Chinese and Taiwanese governments. Beijing prohibited fisheries imports from eight Japanese prefectures as early as since April 2011.
Discriminating one country from another over the same issue undermines Tokyo's legitimacy when asking for a scientific basis over a ban that other countries have already pushed through.
One also can't help but wonder what the World Trade Organization has to do with import restrictions aimed at protecting the health of a country's own citizens, as this is not an issue of undue discrimination against foreign products or giving unfair advantages to domestic producers. Seoul is advised to bring this issue to the World Health Organization, as Tokyo has not even done its minimal duty of informing its neighbors of what should be warranted information affecting the latter's health.
The Japanese government seems to be trying to redirect the complaints of Japanese fishermen, who have criticized Tokyo's complacency and incompetence to control nuclear contamination, to easy overseas targets like Korea. Otherwise, it is hard to understand why fishermen from Hokkaido, who are not affected at all by the latest import ban, are joining the ranks of protesters against Seoul's move.
Some right-wing media outlets in Japan are even instigating anti-Korean sentiments by carrying reports that Seoul's import ban was timed to hamper Tokyo's efforts to attract the 2020 Summer Olympics. Most Korean media, including this paper, were among the first in the world to celebrate Tokyo's successful bid, whereas some Western papers bluntly continued to focus on Japan's ongoing fiasco in the cleanup of the nuclear disaster and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's misleading statements that Tokyo was in full control of the situation, later contradicted by none other than Japanese experts.
There are suspicions Tokyo's announcement to spend 50 billion yen to construct an "ice wall" to prevent the contamination of groundwater might have been made with the International Olympic Committee in mind, as they were to soon decide on the venue of the 32nd Olympic Games. Reports say up to 64 percent of Japanese people don't trust Abe's assurance.
It is more reasonable, or "scientific," for Tokyo to first explain about the contamination levels of Fukushima and nearby regions as well as the Japanese government's future plans to contain it, before singling out a neighbor over commonsensical measures over the concerns of health.
Tokyo needs to be in the shoes of its nearest neighbor in which even the domestic fishing industry is reeling under the impact of the troubles it has caused. Koreans hopes that Japan is not strong to the weak and weak to the strong.
Japan is pushing back hard on Korea's import ban on fisheries products from Fukushima and adjacent prefectures, threatening to bring the case to the World Trade Organization. As most Koreans see it, however, Tokyo's move is little more than the proverbial "audacity of a thief."
An official from the Japanese fisheries agency visited some related offices here Monday, asking for a "scientific basis" on the import ban and calling for its retraction.
Above all, it defies our understanding why Tokyo is taking issue with Seoul's move to protect the health and lives of its own citizens while remaining silent with similar moves taken by the Chinese and Taiwanese governments. Beijing prohibited fisheries imports from eight Japanese prefectures as early as since April 2011.
Discriminating one country from another over the same issue undermines Tokyo's legitimacy when asking for a scientific basis over a ban that other countries have already pushed through.
One also can't help but wonder what the World Trade Organization has to do with import restrictions aimed at protecting the health of a country's own citizens, as this is not an issue of undue discrimination against foreign products or giving unfair advantages to domestic producers. Seoul is advised to bring this issue to the World Health Organization, as Tokyo has not even done its minimal duty of informing its neighbors of what should be warranted information affecting the latter's health.
The Japanese government seems to be trying to redirect the complaints of Japanese fishermen, who have criticized Tokyo's complacency and incompetence to control nuclear contamination, to easy overseas targets like Korea. Otherwise, it is hard to understand why fishermen from Hokkaido, who are not affected at all by the latest import ban, are joining the ranks of protesters against Seoul's move.
Some right-wing media outlets in Japan are even instigating anti-Korean sentiments by carrying reports that Seoul's import ban was timed to hamper Tokyo's efforts to attract the 2020 Summer Olympics. Most Korean media, including this paper, were among the first in the world to celebrate Tokyo's successful bid, whereas some Western papers bluntly continued to focus on Japan's ongoing fiasco in the cleanup of the nuclear disaster and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's misleading statements that Tokyo was in full control of the situation, later contradicted by none other than Japanese experts.
There are suspicions Tokyo's announcement to spend 50 billion yen to construct an "ice wall" to prevent the contamination of groundwater might have been made with the International Olympic Committee in mind, as they were to soon decide on the venue of the 32nd Olympic Games. Reports say up to 64 percent of Japanese people don't trust Abe's assurance.
It is more reasonable, or "scientific," for Tokyo to first explain about the contamination levels of Fukushima and nearby regions as well as the Japanese government's future plans to contain it, before singling out a neighbor over commonsensical measures over the concerns of health.
Tokyo needs to be in the shoes of its nearest neighbor in which even the domestic fishing industry is reeling under the impact of the troubles it has caused. Koreans hopes that Japan is not strong to the weak and weak to the strong.
