South Korea suspends loudspeaker announcements against the North
South Korea's presidential office says the country's military suspended loudspeaker broadcasts against North Korea along the inter-Korean border on Wednesday.
The move came about a year after the South Korean military started the broadcasts near the Demilitarized Zone in June of last year in response to the North's repeated launches across the border of trash-carrying balloons.
The presidential office said President Lee Jae-myung ordered the suspension. It also said, "The measure reflects the government's commitment to restoring trust in inter-Korean relations and establishing peace on the Korean Peninsula."
It added that the president took the step to implement the things he pledged during the presidential election campaign.
Lee, who took office last week, is taking a conciliatory stance toward Pyongyang, in contrast to the previous administration. He has vowed to open channels of communication with the North and work toward peace on the Korean Peninsula through dialogue and cooperation.
The new South Korean government also asked private organizations to suspend their anti-Pyongyang leaflet campaigns.
South Korean media outlets reported that a series of measures are apparently being taken to build an atmosphere conducive to holding dialogues with North Korea.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Japan Times
7 hours ago
- Japan Times
Cultural anxiety and Japan's immigration pains
Hello Kitty seems an unlikely trigger for an immigration debate. But that's what happened in Japan this week when Megumi Hayashibara, a prominent voice actress behind icons from Kitty to the long-running anime franchise "Evangelion's" Rei Ayanami, took to her blog to discuss the growing population of outsiders. She called for a crackdown on rule-breaking foreigners and criticized overseas students on free scholarships while locals pay for their education. The thrust of her post was a call for readers to vote. But her most cutting remark was a fear that local habits and Japaneseness itself might be lost if current trends continue, like the native crayfish endangered by an "invasive species' of crustacean threatening its natural habitat. (After online outrage, Hayashibara deleted the reference to crayfish.) While it's hardly the protests in Los Angeles, her comments show how immigration is becoming a heated topic in a country where it has only recently become a feature. And it's one that authorities should not ignore, as politicians elsewhere were content to do until fringe groups become seen as the only ones with the answers. I wrote in 2022 about how Tokyo, long stereotyped as being closed to immigration, was accepting more foreign nationals than many realized. That trend continues, with immigrants nearly doubling in the past decade and a record 10% jump in 2024. It's less the absolute level as the pace of change: Foreign residents have gone from less than 1% to more than 3% of the population in the past three decades and will reach around 10% in 2050. Criticism is fueled by the mistakes of Western nations and promoted by influencers who conflate Japan with other countries. Tokyo's strategy has been far subtler than many nations now struggling with anti-immigration populism, but it's no less vulnerable to the YouTube algorithm: A quick search for "Japan immigration issues' immediately turns up videos by the likes of the ubiquitous Hiroyuki Nishimura, the message-board entrepreneur with millions of followers and a controversial take on everything. These videos have titles like "Why should Japanese have to provide for foreigners?,' "Japan is defenseless' and "Japan will no longer be a country for Japanese!' What they ignore is that Japan doesn't have a vast force of idle foreign residents who are burdening the state. It accepts few asylum seekers, has been selective about the nationalities it attracts and has functioning border control. The number of illegal residents is a quarter of three decades ago, despite the increase in foreign nationals; the number of foreign-committed crimes shows a similar downtrend. Copy-pasted arguments from other countries don't apply here. But there are also areas of legitimate concern where authorities have not kept pace. From worries that short-term stayers are exploiting Japan's generous medical insurance system, to a bizarre loophole allowing tourists to easily get Japanese drivers' licenses, there's a worry that the country's hospitality is being exploited. The declining domestic population is complicating things. Working-age locals fell by 224,000 last year. This simultaneously lifts the need for foreigners to supplement the labor force, while heightening concerns about Japanese being "replaced' in their own country. The truth of Hayashibara's comments lies in the fact that the thing many love about Japanese society — the "it just works' nature of public life, from mass transit to health care to the low crime rate — is deeply dependent on everyone following the rules. Newcomers are often irked by all the procedures, from putting out garbage to talking on the subway. But these are necessary for residents, in particular those in cities stacked cheek-by-jowl, to coexist in harmony. Hayashibara's complaints about bad manners will be familiar to those who live in Japan, foreign or local; everyday annoyances have increased since the borders were reopened after COVID-19. In a Justice Ministry survey, nearly 78% said they most wanted foreign residents to follow local rules and customs. The government hasn't kept up with the times. Only now is Tokyo discussing simple issues, such as stopping tourists with unpaid medical debt from returning or rejecting visa extensions for those who haven't paid health care. I recently noted Japan doesn't track how easy it is for foreigners to buy property. A highly followed story since then concerns a Tokyo building where foreign ownership is seemingly seeking to force out residents to operate an illegal Airbnb. Politicians are reacting, slowly. Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has pledged the country "will accept foreigners who follow the rules' while cautioning that those who don't "will be dealt with strictly.' Longtime ruling party leadership candidate Taro Kono has recently been burnishing his credentials by criticizing illegal immigration. It's all the growing pains of a changing nation. Talk of "invasive species' is unhelpful at best. But Japan also shouldn't repeat the mistakes of countries that dismissed citizens' concerns about immigration and ghettoization, only to watch them turn to fringe politicians when no one else would listen. The way to stave off the rise of populist talking heads is to address these worries and enforce a sense of fairness and equal treatment. After all, what else would Kitty want? Gearoid Reidy is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Japan and the Koreas.
Japan Times
7 hours ago
- Japan Times
Japan to move up auctions for imported rice
The Japanese government will move forward the first round of annual auctions for rice imported under a minimum market access agreement as part of efforts to stabilize rice prices, agriculture minister Shinjiro Koizumi said Thursday. This year's first auction for rice as staple food will take place on June 27 instead of the usual September, Koizumi told reporters, adding that delivery would be possible in September. Japan imports up to 100,000 tons of rice as staple food under the minimum access agreement, which is sold through several batches of auctions. The June auction is expected to cover 30,000 tons, with additional auctions scheduled monthly, ahead of the usual timeline. Higher rice prices have become a serious concern for consumers and policymakers ahead of key elections in Tokyo and the Upper House in the parliament. The government has been releasing rice from its emergency stockpile in an effort to stabilize prices, and consumers have been standing in long queues to buy it at less than half the average supermarket price. About 800,000 metric tons out of the 900,000-ton stockpile has already been earmarked for sale by August, and Koizumi had said the government would utilize imports if needed to keep supplying the grain to the market.
Japan Times
7 hours ago
- Japan Times
India should join the Global Combat Air Program — but not just yet
As the world learns to navigate an era of volatile American politics, global defense partnerships are being reshaped. Donald Trump's chaotic return to the White House has called into question America' reliability as a security guarantor and U.S. allies are seeking new forms of international cooperation. An ambitious expression of this shift is the Global Combat Air Program, a joint effort between Japan, the United Kingdom and Italy to develop a next-generation fighter jet by 2035. GCAP is more than just a weapons platform. It is a statement of strategic autonomy, industrial innovation and trilateral cooperation among democracies that are, each in their own way, redefining their role on the global stage. And now, as reports emerge that Japan and India have discussed possible Indian participation in GCAP, the project stands at a potential inflection point. The idea of including India — one of the world's fastest-growing economies and an increasingly assertive geopolitical actor — makes strategic sense. But it also presents diplomatic and practical challenges that cannot be ignored. As with many promising international endeavors, timing is everything. Opening for Japan-India ties India's inclusion in GCAP could offer a breakthrough in Japan-India relations. Over the past two decades, the Asian nations have built a robust security partnership. From the 2008 Joint Declaration on Security Cooperation to more recent agreements on defense-equipment acquisitions and the sharing of sensitive security information, Tokyo and New Delhi have grown comfortable with each other in the defense realm. Joint military exercises are now routine and there is a shared interest in counterbalancing China's growing influence in the Indo-Pacific. Yet this bilateral relationship has stalled in recent years. Prime Minister Narendra Modi's failure to visit Japan in 2024 broke an established pattern, and with India now positioning itself as the de facto leader of the Global South, Japan may be losing relative importance in New Delhi's strategic calculus. Including India in GCAP could re-energize this relationship by offering a high-stakes, high-visibility partnership that aligns with India's long-term security and technological ambitions. For Japan, whose defense industry has long struggled under strict export controls, GCAP represents a rare opportunity to lead in a collaborative international project. Since Japan revised its arms transfer policy in 2014, and especially after its 2024 decision to allow exports of finished defense products under GCAP, it has cautiously moved toward becoming a more active player in global defense markets. Including India could bring financial investment, manufacturing capacity and political clout to the initiative. Lessons of the past However, the road to integrating India into such a high-technology, multinational defense program is strewn with potential pitfalls. Japan — and its British and Italian partners — must approach the issue with cautious optimism rather than uncritical enthusiasm. India's track record in defense negotiations is complex, often fraught with delays, policy reversals and insistent demands for domestic production and technology transfer. A previous fighter-jet purchase by New Delhi stands as a cautionary tale. After years of negotiations, India abandoned its Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft tender competition, which intended to supply its air force with 126 fighters. It ultimately settled for 36 jets under new terms with the winner, Dassault of France — hardly a model of streamlined procurement. Japan has its own bitter experience. Talks over the amphibious U.S.-2 search and rescue aircraft, once hailed as a landmark opportunity for Japanese defense exports, fizzled after years of talks due to cost concerns. And in the economic sphere, skeptics can point to India's withdrawal from the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) in 2019 — despite Tokyo's encouragement — citing unresolved trade imbalances and geopolitical concerns. These cases point to a broader reality: India negotiates hard, takes its time and rarely yields on its demands for strategic autonomy. This negotiating culture, while entirely within India's rights as a sovereign nation, may be fundamentally at odds with the pace and structure of GCAP, which is already a delicate balancing act among three countries with differing defense needs and industrial capacities. A future invitation The GCAP's schedule is ambitious. Japan aims to replace its aging F-2 fighters by 2035 and any delay in production or development could leave a gap in national defense readiness. Integrating a new partner like India at this stage — especially one likely to demand significant changes to project structure, technology-sharing agreements and production timelines — could threaten that schedule. Moreover, the three current partners are still ironing out key elements, including industrial roles and manufacturing bases. The recently created GCAP International Government Organisation (GIGO), headquartered in the U.K. but headed by former Japanese Vice Defense Minister Masami Oka, is just beginning to establish the governance structure for this complex collaboration. To bring India into the project now would almost certainly add complications. A protracted negotiation could not only jeopardize the project timeline but also fray relations among the current trio. Worse still, if talks were to collapse — as happened with RCEP or the U.S.-2 — the diplomatic fallout could damage the Japan-India relationship rather than enhance it. That's why timing is key. While India should be considered a prospective partner, this should be done at a later, more stable stage in the GCAP's development. Once the project has passed the foundational design and industrial division phases — perhaps around 2027 or 2028 — it may be more feasible to expand the partnership. At that point, India's involvement could be structured in a modular way, perhaps focusing on production, systems integration or joint exports to third countries rather than full-scale co-development from the ground up. The broader strategic picture Inviting India to join GCAP — eventually — would send a powerful message about the resilience and adaptability of democratic defense partnerships. It would align with the growing convergence between India and the West, particularly as China's influence looms large and the United States vacillates between engagement and retrenchment. That said, this must be done with the clarity that strategic alignment cannot come at the cost of operational failure. GCAP is too important and too delicate to risk being overwhelmed by difficult negotiations or mismatched expectations. The priority now must be maintaining GCAP's momentum and cohesion. Tokyo, London and Rome should continue quiet consultations with New Delhi, keeping the option open and signaling a willingness to explore future cooperation. India, with its ambition, industrial potential and rising global stature is a natural candidate for eventual participation in a program like GCAP — but not just yet. Tomoko Kiyota is an associate professor at Nagasaki University.
