Saturday, August 28, 2010

Gulf seen between Japan, S. Korea over 'transfer' of cultural artifacts+ - Big Hollywood

Gulf seen between Japan, S. Korea over 'transfer' of cultural artifacts+ - Big Hollywood


Gulf seen between Japan, S. Korea over 'transfer' of cultural artifacts+ - Big Hollywood

Posted: 15 Aug 2010 06:44 AM PDT

artifacts+ (AP) - TOKYO, Aug. 15 (Kyodo)—Despite Prime Minister Naoto Kan's promise last week to "transfer" to South Korea artifacts originating from Korea, there are big differences in opinion over the matter between the two countries which could become a new diplomatic flashpoint, according to experts.

Kan issued a statement last Tuesday, in which he apologized for Japan's past colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula and promised to transfer archives originating from the peninsula "that were brought to Japan during the period of Japan's rule through the Japanese colonial government of Korea" and are still kept by the government.

Based on the statement released ahead of the Aug. 29 centenary of Japan's annexation of the peninsula, the government has begun arrangements for such a transfer, including work to identify relevant artifacts, compile a list and draft a treaty governing the matter, government sources said.

The archives to be handed over will include the Royal Protocols of the Joseon Dynasty, but they are likely to be a "small portion" of the vast artifacts kept in the country, one of the sources said.

That is because Tokyo takes the position that Seoul's right to claim them has disappeared with the conclusion of an agreement in 1965 along with that of the Treaty on Basic Relations which normalized ties between the two countries.

But in South Korea, people generally view such artifacts as having been stolen by the Japanese during the colonization period, and calls are growing there for the return of many of them, the experts said.

There exists a gap in perception between the governments of Japan and South Korea, the former of which views the proposed transfer as a "goodwill" gesture, according to the sources.

In arranging the transfer, Tokyo plans to look into archives at the Imperial Household Agency and other facilities, including the Tokyo National Museum, according to sources familiar with the matter.

In the statement, Kan attached the additional condition that the archives to be transferred to South Korea must be in possession of the Japanese government. That was because "privately held cultural artifacts, which amount to an enormous number, would otherwise be subject to the handover," a senior Foreign Ministry official said.

The Royal Protocols of the Joseon Dynasty, called the Joseon Wangsil Uigwe, are stored at the agency and consist of 167 volumes. Of those, 163 were moved from the colonial government to the agency's forerunner body during the Taisho period (1912-1926), with the remaining four volumes purchased from the private sector.

South Korea's National Research Institute of Cultural Heritage says at least 61,000 cultural items were moved to Japan after the 1910 annexation of the peninsula.

If mishandled, the matter could set off criticism from South Korea that Japan is not being sincerely remorseful despite Kan's expression of "deep remorse" and "heartfelt apology" in the statement, observers say.

On the other hand, voices could arise within Japan that the government is conceding too much if Japan decides to transfer more artifacts to South Korea than people here consider appropriate, they say.

In an agreement forged in accessory to the 1965 treaty, Japan and South Korea confirmed that in exchange for Tokyo's provision to Seoul of $300 million in grants and $200 million in loans, problems concerning property, rights, interests and claims between the two countries were settled "completely and finally."

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: "Peace Envoy" Blair Gets an Easy Ride in the Independent.

0 comments:

Post a Comment