[KS] Re: Koreans in Japan

[Dr. John Caruso Jr.]

REPLY sends your message to the whole list
__________________________________________

This report is from March 2000 - does anyone know if the Japanese diet
approved letting Koreans vote in local elections?

John

More political rights for Koreans in Japan

Ethnic Koreans who gained permanent residency status in Japan will enjoy
more political rights, including the right to vote during local elections.
This is what visiting Japanese foreign minister Yohei Kono told the Korean
foreign minister during his visit to Korea.  The right to vote has been
incorporated in a bill which the Japanese parliament will most likely pass
in May.  The visiting Japanese foreign minister also visited an apartment
complex outside Seoul occupied by hundreds of ethnic Koreans who moved into
South Korea from the Russian island of Sakhalin.  The Japanese brought
43,000 of them there to work in coalmines and airstrips during World War II.
The Seoul government began accepting them as citizens in 1992.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Yuh Ji-Yeon" <j-yuh at northwestern.edu>
To: <korean-studies at iic.edu>
Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2000 3:01 PM
Subject: Re: Koreans in Japan


> REPLY sends your message to the whole list
> __________________________________________
>
> koreans in japan often say that 60 percent or more of marriages among
> koreans in japan involve an ethnic korean marrying a japanese. but i
> haven't seen any firm statistics yet.
>
> ji-yeon yuh
>
> At 11:18 ¿ÀÀü 00-09-03 -0400, you wrote:
> >REPLY sends your message to the whole list
> >__________________________________________
> >
> >The subject of intermarriage between Koreans and Japanese is an
> >interesting one.  A few years
> >ago I read an article in a Japanese magazine (Bungei Shunju?
> >--unfortunately I didn't save the
> >reference) on the lives of Koreans in Japan.  Among other interesting
> >claims, the article
> >described intermarriage with Japanese as anything but rare; instead, it
> >was said to be the
> >rule.  The statistical number given was surprisingly high--I seem to
> >recall that it was over
> >50% of recorded marriages.  That number sounds exaggerated, and it may
> >well have been (or my
> >memory of the article may be flawed).  Does anyone have the facts?
> >
> >----------------------
> >Robert Ramsey
> >sr1 at umail.umd.edu
>
>