Talk:Foreign relations of Japan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a project to improve all Japan-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Japan-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
Japan To-do:
WikiProject International relations This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, an attempt to provide information in a consistent format for articles about international organizations, diplomats, international meetings, and relations between states.
If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.


I added South Korea as a country having an "anti-Japanese sentiment" and offers this article from South Korea as an evidence.

Koreans Reject Japanese Culture As 'Patriotic Wind' Sweeps Nation

Revth 19:11, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Anti Japanese sentiment in China

It should be noted that some of the anti Japanese sentiment in China exists because history is not taught impartially in China and there is a lot of re hashing of old atrocities, keeping old animosities alive that have been laid to rest in other countries.

China still holds officially sanctioned protests against Japanese atrocities.

Chinese textbooks also use language that is considered unacceptable in Western school books and are written to engender ill feeling rather than to provide an historic view from an open perspective.

Rape and murder brings out such animosity in some people! Nelson Ricardo July 2, 2005 23:43 (UTC)
as of now, the atrocities commited all over asia are remembered not because of some textbook, but many adults today listened to their grandparents 1st hand account, for all of them tend to give the same account of similiar incident whether they were in china or not. just ask Singapore's 1st prime minister, he was almost deadmeat but he manage to escape the round up. the japanese targetted chinese everywhere they can find, it was no different from holocaust (except there were more chinese than jew so we as a race wasn't in as bad a shape). (during WWII) they fear us, (actually it is more like) their troop hate us because "we" resisted them. in their commanders opinion, it didn't matter if we were really part of the resistance, a mistaken killing is better than a mistaken release. the american should know just how fanatic they were during WWII, didn't feel like invading japan like it did with germany. japan of today is very much different, and i hope they will continue their peaceful coexistant; i don't mind if they normalize their military, as long as they stop trying to claim land (it is unconditional surrender and promise to return all land before the conflict, japan somehow manage to claim island a few days before... lol!?), if only as a sign of goodwill for having taken so much and not having to pay compensation (which China have technically accepted, since it is the only way to get japan to recognised them; you would have to blame China if you want to pursuit this? :P) i talk too much, this is my opinion only; i leave u do your own research, understanding each other is the 1st step in fixing the world. Akinkhoo (talk) 02:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] News of relations with other countries

I will try to add more. Ya ya ya ya ya ya 04:06, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Please add more news stories if you find them. Ya ya ya ya ya ya 04:06, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

This article needs referencing. Bobo12345 05:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] what lessons?

While a citation is given, it's in Japanese and I'm not sure what is meant when it's suggested that Japan changed its policy due to 'lessons' from the Gulf War. What exactly are these 'lessons?' No further explanation is given.

"During the Cold War, Japanese foreign policy was not self-assertive, relatively focused on their economic growth. However the end of the Cold War and bitter lessons from the Gulf War changed the policy slowly." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.107.217.63 (talk) 21:34, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Poor Grammer

The grammer in this article is absolutely terrible. Ill try to clean it up, but the entire article needs to be re-done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.73.132.76 (talk) 02:40, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

And you're fairly sure this should be done by someone who can't spell grammar? Chris 03:50, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Grammar as a word does not matter, im talking about basic skills, i did alot of it, you should be thanking me, not insulting me. -"Der Kaiser"

To continue, i cut down on most of the article, this is foreign relations, not countries that can attack Japan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.73.132.76 (talk • contribs)

Comments like that arent very helpful, Chris. Please do not bite the newcomers. ~Rangeley (talk) 21:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Not biting, just pointing out that users shouldn't make grandiose statements like "absolutely terrible" and then have spelling errors in their rather vain postings. New users should be as responsible as anyone posting here. Chris 22:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Did i fix the article? Yes. So shut it.-Der Kaiser

[edit] Harris/Hotta 1857

I stumbled across this interesting link, but it's not quite developed enough for inclusion in the article -- not yet.

The web page identifies a reference source: "Foreign Relations of the U.S., Series 1902, 1879." The "Foreign Relations Series" comprises collections of official papers relating to United States foreign relations, including diplomatic correspondence both to and from foreign governments and their representatives and to and from U.S. representatives abroad. The series is more fully described here. In my view, this potentially illuminating excerpt needs to be placed in a better context. My guess would be that a little more needs to be done by checking this index:

  • Hasse, Adelaide R. Index to United States documents relating to foreign affairs, 1828-1861. Washington, DC: Carnegie Inst., 1914-21. 3v.

I suppose this further research could be incorporated into a number of other related articles, e.g., Townsend Harris, Treaty of Amity and Commerce (United States-Japan), Ii Naosuke, etc.? --Ooperhoofd (talk) 18:22, 15 February 2008 (UTC)