“We must not allow one issue to disrupt bilateral relations.”
Minister of Foreign Affairs Cho Tae-yeol announced on the 23rd that the Korean government decided to hold a separate event instead of attending the Sado Mine memorial ceremony held in Japan.
Minister Cho appeared on MBN News Wide that day and said, “I plan to not attend the memorial service and hold a separate schedule for the bereaved families and government agencies to hold a separate memorial service and inspect related facilities and museums.”
Korean officials and bereaved families have already arrived in Japan to attend the memorial service.
The Sado Mine memorial service is one of the follow-up measures agreed upon by the Japanese government with Korea to have Sado Mine, the site of forced conscription of Koreans, listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
However, just before the event, the history of the person who was supposed to attend as a representative of Japan’s visit to Yasukuni Shrine became known.
As criticism grew louder, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs finally announced its decision to not participate the day before the event.
It is pointed out that setbacks are inevitable in the government’s plan to promote improved relations between Korea and Japan, including various cooperation events, ahead of the 60th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Korea and Japan next year.
Minister Cho said, “Both countries should make efforts to ensure that this single issue does not disrupt the overall flow of bilateral relations,” and added, “I plan to continue discussing with Japanese diplomatic authorities in that regard.”
He also said, “Thanks to the improvement in Korea-Japan relations, cooperation between Korea, the United States and Japan has come, so it is an important task that must be strengthened for our security in the future,” and “Japan is well aware of that.”
Regarding the reason for the decision not to participate, he explained, “The differences of opinion between various diplomatic authorities have not been resolved, and since there are only a few hours left, it was not judged that there was enough time to resolve the differences.”
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced through a media notice that it had decided not to attend the ‘Sado Mine Memorial Ceremony’ held on the 24th at the Aikawa Development Center in Sado City.
This decision appears to have been made in response to growing backlash after the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that political affairs officer Akiko Ikuina would attend the memorial service the previous day.
There was criticism that such a person reading a memorial speech at a memorial service attended by the bereaved families of victims of forced labor at Sado Mine was an insult.
Hot news now
What are the historical grievances affecting South Korea and Japan’s diplomatic relations?
Interview between Time.news Editor and Foreign Relations Expert Dr. Hana Kim
Time.news Editor: Good day, Dr. Kim! Thank you for taking the time to speak with us. The recent announcement from South Korean Foreign Minister Cho Tae-yeol about not attending the Sado Mine memorial ceremony in Japan has been making headlines. What are your initial thoughts on this decision?
Dr. Hana Kim: Thank you for having me. This is indeed a significant development. Minister Cho’s decision reflects the ongoing tensions between South Korea and Japan, primarily around historical issues. By opting out of such a poignant event, the South Korean government is signaling its dissatisfaction with Japan’s handling of historical memory, especially concerning forced conscription during the war.
Time.news Editor: That’s an essential point. The Sado Mine has a particular historical context. Can you elaborate on its significance and why this ceremony was such an important moment for both nations?
Dr. Hana Kim: Absolutely. Sado Mine is not just a historical site; it represents a painful chapter in Korea’s past involving forced labor and wartime atrocities. The Japanese government’s proposal to have it recognized as a UNESCO World Heritage Site was seen as a way of acknowledging this history. The memorial ceremony was intended to be a step forward in reconciliation. However, the participation of certain Japanese officials, particularly one with ties to the Yasukuni Shrine, reignited fears about Japan’s perceived reluctance to fully come to terms with its past.
Time.news Editor: It must be challenging to navigate these historical narratives in the pursuit of improved bilateral relations. Minister Cho has emphasized the need to prevent single issues from disrupting overall relations. How feasible is this in reality?
Dr. Hana Kim: That’s an excellent question. In theory, it’s crucial for both parties to focus on broader cooperation and future opportunities, but in practice, historical grievances often overshadow diplomatic negotiations. Cho’s insistence on continuing dialogues with Japanese officials suggests he recognizes this tension. It’s a balancing act: addressing historical issues while also working towards mutual security interests, especially in the context of regional dynamics involving the U.S.
Time.news Editor: Speaking of regional dynamics, you mentioned the significance of cooperation among Korea, Japan, and the U.S. in your statement. How does the state of Korea-Japan relations impact this trilateral security framework?
Dr. Hana Kim: The trilateral security partnership is vital for addressing shared threats, particularly from North Korea. Healthy Korea-Japan relations can enhance cooperation in intelligence sharing, defense strategies, and broader regional stability. When tensions rise due to historical disputes, it complicates these collaborative efforts. Both countries need to understand that their dialogues and cooperation not only benefit bilateral relations but also contribute to a safer Northeast Asia.
Time.news Editor: That’s a compelling perspective. As we head toward the 60th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Korea and Japan, what steps can both nations take to foster a more constructive dialog?
Dr. Hana Kim: First, both nations need to prioritize open communication and trust-building measures. Acknowledgment of historical grievances through educational exchanges or joint memorials could be steps forward. Second, engaging civil society—from historians to activists—can create a more inclusive narrative that resonates with younger generations. Lastly, both governments should frame their discussions around mutual benefits in security and economic cooperation, rather than solely historical grievances.
Time.news Editor: Thank you, Dr. Kim. Your insights are invaluable as we continue to watch this situation unfold. It’s clear there’s much work to do for both nations to mend ties and look toward a more cooperative future.
Dr. Hana Kim: Thank you for the conversation! Yes, historical issues will always be part of the narrative, but there’s hope for a more constructive engagement moving forward.