Does “Regional Revitalization” go well?  I do not know exactly what they are doing?  What crosses my mind are “Yuru-kyara” (heartwarming characters) and promotion videos for “Machi-okoshi” (revitalization of towns).  However, by such means only, how do people who are living in central Tokyo know about people who are living in regional towns? Are there any people in central Tokyo who like to visit regional towns? Does the population in regional towns increase?  Regional revitalization is not an issue of regional towns; rather, it is a national issue. The national government sets up “Headquarter for Revitalization, Town, People and Job” (Headquarter) and local governments are also working out their own plans for revitalization.   For example, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications is promoting a policy which expedites moving the young people to regional towns, naming the policy “Cooperation Units for Regional Revitalization”. It helps people find jobs and houses in regional towns. If they like to start a business there, they shall be also supported financially. Usually, such scheme is implemented for a few years only, but according to the data of the Headquarter, as of the end of June 2015, about 60 percent of the people , especially the young, who have been moved, continue to stay in the same towns.  I think this project is successful since there are actual results already.   Another scheme called Continued Care Retirement Community- (CCRC) was announced by the Expert Committee, according to the data of the Headquarter.. This scheme supports the aged retirees who are living in the Tokyo metropolitan area or big cities when they voluntarily move to regional towns. It is great that the program provides life-supports to the aged even after their relocation. Thus, the aged can stay healthy and keep an active life in their new community. The scheme also aims to maintain a system that will provide medical and personal care to the aged when needed. I think the scheme is helpful and can give a chance to the aged who, after their retirement, are hesitating to decide to live peacefully in regional towns.   Despite a lot of such good programs for regional revitalization, why do I feel a big gap between big cities and regional towns? I am now living in a regional city and I very seldom to go to Tokyo for my job.  During my going to and returning from Tokyo, I feel a big difference in temperature (not in climate but in feeling) between Tokyo and regional towns. Tokyo is an energetic city.  We cannot feel any dullness there, having a lot of visitors for sightseeing and anticipating the Olympic Games five years later. On the other hand, I do not feel in my town, any atmosphere that people like to revitalize their home town.   It is not so effective when programs for regional vitalization or revitalization are worked out by the government alone. It is important that inhabitants of the region are living happily, able to extend their life-span, and invite, by themselves, outsiders move into their region. For example, if regional residents ask advertising agencies in Tokyo to prepare promotion videos for local revitalization and upload these in “YouTube”, they have to pay certain fees to the agencies in Tokyo. That is reversing the logical order of things. This would not be the case, if the residents, themselves, had prepared the promotional materials. The advertising agencies should, at least, return whatever materials have been prepared by the residents. In this case, the residents should customize those programs, which the government has prepared for them to meet the local situation. Vitalization or revitalization starts at the place actually being operated. There are already differences between areas which are being vitalized/revitalized and areas which do not have this program. It may be my selfish supposition that successful regions for revitalization may be those places where are conveniently accessible to/from Tokyo, as a result of the residents’ efforts.   A sense of urgency is required for regional revitalization hereafter.  I am afraid that if regional residents fail to keep up with the current revitalization movement, the  depopulation of their regions would advance immediately.  Regional revitalization will depend on whether the residents of these regions shall take the initiative or not..   (A full-time lecturer, Kyoai Gakuen University)     Translated by Kazuo Kawamura English checked by Mac Maquito   SGRA Kawaraban 464 in Japanese (original)

I remember well about a week when the former President, Lee Myungbak, visited “Takesima-island” in August 2012.  There were three incidents at that time：(1) a visit to “Takeshima” by President, Lee Myungbak; (2) his statement demanding an apology from His Majesty, the Emperor: and (3) a Korean soccer player holding a placard saying “Takeshima belongs to Korea” during the Japan-Korea match at the London Olympic Games. I had the impression that news and public opinion in Japan about Korea changed a lot after these incidents. I also remember well that I was surprised at such a rapid change.  Relationship between Japan and Korea worsened thereafter up to the present day.   Many people asked me if there were no such incidents like the Takeshima visit by President Lee Myungbak, the relationship between Japan and Korea would be different, not like the present. I do not think so. I think there were fundamental issues which both countries have had as pending for a long time and the visit by President, Lee Myungbak was just the turning point. Moreover, I think it is public opinion in Japan, rather than in Korea, that changed a lot. .   Public opinion in Korea has been taking a critical attitude toward the Japanese Government on an issue on the History (historical perceptions) since the founding of the Republic of Korea. It is an old issue. The presence of Korea in Japan was not so significant before the “Korean-wave” and the Japanese media did not report much about news in Korea. Korea was called “NIES” (Newly Industrializing Economies) by the 1990’s and its economic influence was not so strong as we have experienced during the IMF Financial Crisis.   However, the situation changed in the 2000’s by the “Korean-wave” - with the rise of international enterprises like Samsung and the development of internet media. Interest in Korea has increased at the economic and public levels. Volume of information about Korea has also increased drastically. We can say the presence of Korea in Japan increased in the 2000’s because of economic and cultural exchanges between both countries.   As a result, many people have come to know that public opinion in Korea has taken an opposing attitude toward an issue on the History. In Japan, the year 2015 is the 70th year since the end of World War II, but, in Korea, many people do not understand yet the problem in the Colonial Time before the War were solved. Such “time difference” of recognition between both countries about an issue on the History was latent and deepened as the primary factor of conflict in the relations of both countries.   In order to improve such relations between the two countries, various measures are considered. For example, improvement of diplomatic relations at the governmental level, close cooperation at the economic level and increasing exchanges at the public level. But these ideas do not always improve public opinions of both countries. I think it is necessary, in order to improve fundamentally, to have mature discussions on an issue on the History or on relations of both countries before such exchanges.   In Korea, domestic discussion about Japan-Korea relations are not yet mature. Especially, an issue on the History is very delicate and it is difficult to say we had various discussions. So, I think we cannot yet find any settlement of the discussion on how to improve Japan-Korea relations concluding the issue on the History. For example, there is difference of opinions domestically about the concrete demand for Japan’s apology etc.. First of all, it is necessary to have a common discussion base in Korea where we can discuss about the various aspects of Japan-Korea relations. It is necessary also to make efforts to discuss calmly and to find a mutually acceptable common solution by ourselves about the issue on the History.  It is also necessary for Japan to understand how Korea recognizes and interprets the issue on the History and what kind of “time-difference” was brought about between both countries. In Japan nowadays, it is becoming possible to revise the constitution which might be a turning point historically in terms of national security. I think Japan is also in the turning point in its recognition of history or in diplomatic policy. Needless to say, these factors are basic and important problems to decide, as a nation ought to do.  We should not leave the discussion at the political level only, but it is also necessary to have a thorough discussion involving the general public.   After the deterioration of relations between the two countries, there have been anti-Korea demonstrations or “hate-speeches” against Koreans living in Japan. This situation came to the surface after diplomatic problems arose between both countries, but it was mainly a Japanese domestic incident.   Discrimination or violence against nationality or race would be possible not only against Korea but also against other minorities. We are now promoting internationalization and introducing labor from foreign countries. In such circumstances, I think it is necessary to study how we should confront such discrimination which is possible in diversified societies.   Please refer to the public-opinion poll by the Cabinet Office survey about Change of Attitude toward Korea.   (Assistant Lecturer, the Law School, Keio University)     Translated by Kazuo Kawamura English checked by Mac Maquito   SGRA Kawaraban 461 in Japanese (original)

On May 8, 2015, the 5th Japan-Taiwan Asia Future Forum was held under the title “120 years’ Japan-Taiwan Exchange through Japan Study” at National Taiwan University.   When we look back at the Japan-Taiwan relations over the past 120 years, how shall we reconsider our past experience before the War and legacy of the past?  What are  the characteristics present in the process of the reconstruction of Japan-Taiwan relations which met a lot of difficulties? What keywords will be necessary when we view the next 120 years? Basing on such awareness of the issues, we had 13 lectures and paper presentations and also had lively discussions.  Mr. Li Jia Jin, Chairman of the Association of East Asia Relations and Mr. Mikio Numata, Chairman of the Interchange Association, Japan addressed the Forum, which was a great success with more than 200 participants,   The forum was composed of three sessions: “international relations”, “study of languages and literatures” and “change of societies”.  We invited scholars who are active at the forefront in Taiwan, Japan, Korea and China, and they developed hot discussions from their innovative viewpoints.   Keynote speech was made by Mr. Yasuhiro Matsuda, Professor of Institute for Advanced Studies on Asia, The University of Tokyo on the subject of “Japan-Taiwan exchange：characteristics and change of its ‘double structure”’. He mentioned first that the relations of the first 50 years were on a suzerain state and a colony system. He pointed out that the  characteristics of “double structure” developed during the latter 70 years whereby two countries became independent of each other from a viewpoint of a manifestation of independence of Taiwan. The relations of Japan and Taiwan in the colonial period had such “double structure” as “the central government and the government-general” and “the society of Japan and Taiwan”.  He emphasized that it changed after 1952, through several years of transition, to “double structure” of “Japan-China relations on the governmental authorities concerned” and “Japan-Taiwan relations between societies”.  He ended his keynote speech with a question: how does the rise of China affect the Japan-Taiwan relations and it will be a key issue how the Taiwan people understand the independence of Taiwan.   The first session was held on the theme “Japan-Taiwan relations under the change of political circumstances and international relations” by adjunct Professor, Wu Mi Cha,Department of History, National Taiwan University, as Chairperson. We discussed about “120 years’ Japan-Taiwan relations” from three viewpoints; Taiwan, Japan and China. The following three essays were announced in the session: “From “Colonial Mother Country” to “International Relations” – Change in the Cultural Independence in Taiwan and Japan-Taiwan relations – “ by Mr. Li Cheng Ji, Assistant Professor, Department of Literature of Taiwan, National Cheng Kung University; “Japan Study in Taiwan and Taiwan Study in Japan in the early days of the post War by Professor Makoto Kawashima, Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, the University of Tokyo; and“120 years’ Taiwan-Japan relations from the viewpoints of China” read for Wang Jian, Researcher of Institute of Modern History, Chinese Academy of Social Science.   Every essay was exciting and it was an epoch-making event for scholars and researchers of Japan, China and Taiwan to have convened in one place to discuss about “Japan-Taiwan relations”.   The theme of the second session was “Review and View of Japan Study – Language and Literature –“ and was divided into (A) “Literature / Culture” and (B) “Language / Study of Language”. Chairperson of the first session was Professor Fan Shu Wen, Head of Department of Japanese Literature in Japanese Language, National Taiwan University. Three essays were presented: “A Study of Japanese Modern Literature” by Huang Cui E, Assistant Professor, Department of Foreign Language, Fu Jen Catholic University;  “A Study of Japanese Classical Literature in Taiwan – the past, the present and the future“: and “Japan Study in Taiwan – about its thought, culture and history –“ by Lan Hong Yuen, Assistant Professor, College of Humanities and Social Science, National Chiao Tung University. The session was very various. We studied Japanese literature from remote ages to modern ages by “an axis of time” and put our thoughts together by “an axis of field”.   In the (B) session “Language / Study of Language”, Professor Lin Li Ping, Department of Japanese Literature in Japanese Language, National Taiwan University, was the chairperson. Mr. Lai Jin Que, professor, Department of Japanese Literature and Head of Foreign Literature, Soochow University presented his report “Study of Learning Japanese Language in Taiwan on data”.  Ye Shu Hua, Dean of Foreign Language, National Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology, discussed “the present and the prospect of Study of Japanese language in Taiwan – at an international symposium –“(study of Japanese language and learning by Japanese language by use of a keyword, data and symposium).  Professor Shin Chung Kyun, Department of Japanese language and Japanese literature, Chunbuk National University (Korea) made an interesting report under the title “History of the study of Japanese language in Korea –Study of old time Japan in Chosun (old Korea) time and now- “   The third session, “The change of societies in Japan and Taiwan and an aspect of their exchanges”, focused on “the change of societies” and “an aspect of cultural exchange” in the history of Japan-Taiwan exchanges. Three essays were reported under Chairperson, Mr. Zhang Qi Xiong, Associate Research Fellow, Institute of Modern History, Academia Sinica.   Mr. Yukihito Sato, Ph.D. Institute of Developing Economics – JETRO, clarified the dynamism of reproduction of cooperative relationship among enterprises of both countries  from economics viewpoints under the title “Reproduction of trust and cooperation among enterprises in Japan and Taiwan” referring to several examples.   Mr. Zhong Shu Min, Assistant Researcher, Institute of Taiwan History, Academia Sinica, from a viewpoint of identity, reported his reconsideration of an exchange between a Japanese who was born in Taiwan and Taiwan society under an interesting title “Foreign land where I took root becomes my homeland”.   Mr. Wu Rui Ren, Assistant Researcher, Institute of Taiwan History, Academia Sinica, analyzed, from a viewpoint of historical sociology, a phenomenon of linkage of right-wing nationalists of Japan and Taiwan by means of manipulation of historical ideology of realists.   The theme of the last general discussion was “A view on Japan-Taiwan relations of 21st Century”. Under chairperson, Professor Xu Xing-ging, Department of Japanese Literature and Chief of Japan Center, National Taiwan University, six scholars, Fan Shu Wen, Masashi Tujimoto, Yasuhiro Matuda, Makoto Kawashima, Wu Rui Ren and myself who represent each fields, attended.  Each of us spoke about our Japan-Taiwan relations and the way of Japan studies during this 120 years first and indicated a direction hereafter.   Starting from Professor Yasuhiro Matsuda who rated this forum as “High level”, many participants also rated this forum high.   I hope our discussion this time will contribute to build a new “Japan-Taiwan relations”.   As to the result of survey, please refer to http://www.aisf.or.jp/sgra/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/taiwan2015anketo.pdf   As to photos of the forum, please refer to http://www.aisf.or.jp/sgra/photo-gallerly/2015/3236/     （Adjunct Professor, National Taiwan University）   Translated by Kazuo Kawamura English checked by Mac Maquito   SGRA News in Japanese (original)

Last year, I was given a chance for the first time to give a lecture in our university about the history of Japan-Korea relationship. Our lesson put emphasis on the history of Chosun and Korea starting from the end of Chosun-era to the colonial period, in other words, the modern history of Japan-Korea from the middle of 19thcentury to the middle of 20th century. This period was a turning point for both Japan and Korea in the sense that both countries had to open to the world under the influence of great powers in Europe.  At the same time, this period was the start of the “modern period” in East Asia. The modern period in Japan and Korea was formed through the period of imperialism based on “empires / colonies” and it was a primary factor that gave rise to the spirit of nationalism of both countries in the fields of diplomacy and education. When I was given a chance to give a lesson in our university in Japan, I had a question, which came across in my mind first, what and how university students in Japan know and understand such past history.   When I start my class, I always asked the students first why they receive my lesson. Most students replied that they like to know more about Korea by the reason of such a boom of Korea wave or they have just visited Korea. There were some exchange students who recently visited Korean universities and I wanted to hear impressions of the student life in Korea.   There was one student who received my class lesson from a different viewpoint  He said “I joined this class because I am interested in a phenomenon of ‘hate-speech’ in Japan against foreigners.” According to him, he cannot understand the logic of people who make a ‘hate-speech’ and he likes to study Korea’s modern history by himself.   There was a Korean exchange student, whom. I asked to give me his written impression or question about my lesson. He gave me his written impression saying that he recalled every time the class of “national history” in his high-school time or he was not fully satisfied with my explanation. He seemed to have attended a class for other foreign exchange students about the modern history of East Asia. One day, he appealed to me that the explanation about modern history of Korea at that class was insufficient and he was afraid of giving other exchange students a false impression. I do not say that I cannot understand him but I was a little worried about what makes him so concerned. I tried to relieve him from his doubts by raising the issue of “image of history” which I have emphasized at my first lesson.   A concept of “image of history” is quoted from a book written by Ryuichi Narita, a Japanese historian. Mr. Narita wrote “When we think of history, we select a certain occurrence basing on a certain understanding, and explain and write it having a certain meaning on it. We call it ‘ image of history’ in this book.” (“Modern and Current Japanese History and Historical Science – a rewritten past” Ryuichi Narita) (Chu-ou Shinsho, 21012) page ii) Such explanation about “image of history” is quite normal for the people who study history. (I did not major in history but I majored in literature and thought adjoining history) Ordinary people think that studying history is to study or to remember historical facts. But a concept of “image of history” gives such people different viewpoints. Especially, I think it is useful for university students in terms of flexible thinking. When people face history, it is necessary for them to realize that selecting a certain occurrence should be based on their own viewpoint. And it is necessary also to have certain appropriateness which can persuade others. Those are presuppositions of a concept of “ image of history”.   Such a way of thinking contains a tolerance of different viewpoints. In other words, there exist, to begin with, various viewpoints and understandings for any occurrence in the world. It makes possible by an image for differences. And such an image for any differences does not come from simple and empty situation. It makes possible first by having definite knowledge about a certain occurrence. By such a knowledge, people can image their own viewpoint and their viewpoints become persuasive. I would like my students to understand, even just a little bit, imaginative power which comes from “image of history” and to suspect their attitude which they try to understand their own history and society, which they are taking part in, having their own viewpoint. This is an ultimate objective of my lesson and task hereafter.   It seemed the Korean student, mentioned above, did not satisfy my principle. He might be satisfied if I could explain concretely referring to persuasive historical documents. It might be possible if I could explain using ample volume of knowledge and refined discourse. However, by only my explanation by concrete knowledge, we might not be accepted each other at ultimate level.  I think there exists only “an attitude and a trial which like to understand each other” amid friction of misunderstanding and different opinions.  An attitude which seemed to come from gloomy feeling of this Korean exchange student may be on the stage of such understanding and trial.   There are certain differences in the writings of impression of the first and the second term.  At first, they raised questions about historical facts or they just summarized my lessons. And lastly, they gave their opinions referring to some materials. For example, a student wrote about cruelty under colonial rule. Another student wrote about economic progress in colonial time of Korea referring to statistical materials. It was my pleasure to have seen such change of attitudes that they have tried to write their own viewpoints basing on some materials apart from its historical meaning.   This year is the 70th anniversary for Japan from the Post-war period.  At the same time, it is the 50th anniversary for both Japan and Korea for their normalization of friendship. It is sure scholars of both countries have deepened their understanding through their interchange during this half century. On the other hand, there still exists strong atmosphere of nationalism at the level of ordinary people. When students of both countries have different and various attitudes and imagination having their own “image of history”, social atmosphere may change after 50 or 70 years later. There may be a different atmosphere which accepts different viewpoint with breadth of mind rather than the present nationalistic viewpoint which tries to unify present thought about not only Japan-Korea relation but issues of East Asia.   (Project Researcher, Institute for Advanced Studies on Asia, the University of Tokyo)   Translated by Kazuo Kawamura English checked by Mac Maquito   SGRA Kawaraban 459 in Japanese (original)  

All Japanese friends of mine, who are living overseas and travel to Japan for temporary visit, say that it is very cold in winter and hard to live in Japan. Though they are living in countries or areas colder than Japan, they say that Japanese houses (mainly their parents’ houses) are cold. I had assumed that everybody enjoy “Kotatsu de Mikan“ (taking a tangerine at Japanese foot warmer with a quilt over it). But this was not true. The countries where my friends are living are colder than Japan in winter, but they say whole houses there are kept warm. It is different from Japan where once they go out of a heated room, they have to walk through a cold passage and go to a cold lavatory. I remember it is colder in Beijing, where I have been living, in winter than in Japan, but it is too warm inside the room. In Japan, home appliances are developing day by day and new technologies are being applied one after another. Why are Japanese houses kept cold ?   According to my friend who returned from New York for a temporary visit, the owner of an apartment house has to keep his house over 20℃ as ordained by the state law of New York when outside temperature falls below 10℃ in winter (from October to May). And heating cost is included in the house rent. He praised highly that whole houses are already heated by central heating system when he comes home. I was surprised that such systems are ordained by law. I checked other cold areas neighboring New York and found that there are similar regulations for minimum temperature of houses not only in the states of the east coast of America but in Canada and England also. Such laws are passed considering the health of the population. There is no such regulation in Japan.   I thought I have found a pitfall of Japan where infrastructures are well-regulated and everything are completed. We can see television programs on health every-day and people are actually keenly interested in health issues. But it is still cold in houses in Japan.We hear the news very often that an aged person has died of heart attack in the bathroom or in the changing room. The cause of the heart attack is called “heat-shock” which is a physical condition resulting from a sudden change in temperature which happens when, after soaking in a heated bathtub, the bather goes out to the cold changing room. According to a report of the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, it is estimated that more than 19,000 people have died yearly while taking a bath.   To avoid such accident, Japanese homes in winter should be changed. A thermalization (insulation) of Japanese houses should be required by regulations as in western countries. As costs of light and fuel are high in Japan, devices for controlling home temperature will be necessary. I guess the aged in Japan are hardy and can survive being cold a little. It is meaningless if they do not use heating appliances despite being provided. Above all, differences in temperature among rooms in houses are dangerous. It is important to keep temperature in each room at certain level. They say ”heat-shock” are scarce in Hokkaido where rooms are kept warm.   I think they should bring in easier style of living in winter and improve their styles. By doing so, the aged in Japan can be protected and decrease of population shall be moderated. There are a lot of health freaks in Japan which is said to be an advanced country. It is regrettable to lose a lot of lives too quick in every winter by such accident which can be prevented.   (A full-time lecturer, Kyoai Gakuen University)   Translated by Kazuo Kawamura English checked by Mac Maquito     SGRA Kawaraban 449 in Japanese (original)