Japan's emperor says he will honor Japanese POWs who were held in Mongolia
Naruhito, marking the 80th anniversary of the end of WWII, has been visiting some of the places where the bloodiest battles and bombings occurred, including Iwo Jima, Okinawa and Hiroshima. It's part of his effort at atonement and remembrance of the tragedy of war fought in the name of his grandfather, Emperor Hirohito.
'I will pay tribute to the Japanese people who unwillingly died in the distant land away from home, and think of their hardships,' Naruhito said at a news conference ahead of his July 6-13 trip to Mongolia. His Harvard-educated former diplomat wife, Empress Masako, will accompany him.
Just before the end of the hostilities in 1945, the Soviet Union had declared war on Japan, taking most of about 575,000 Japanese POWs to Siberia. But around 12,000 to 14,000 of them were taken to Mongolia, which was fighting alongside the Soviets against Japan.
Most of the POWs were put to hard labor and construction work for the Mongolian government's headquarters, a state university and a theater that are still preserved in the capital Ulaanbaatar. The prisoners toiled under harsh conditions and scarce food. Japanese records show about 1,700 of them died in Mongolia.
'As we mark the 80th anniversary of the end of the war this year, we should never forget the pain and sorrow of the people,' Naruhito said. 'I believe it is important to not forget those who died, deepen understanding of the wartime past and to nurture the peace-loving heart.'
Naruhito has repeatedly stressed the importance of telling the war's tragedy to younger generations, pledging to contribute to efforts to promote the understanding of history and the determination for peace.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
32 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Top EU officials head to Moldova for key summit ahead of a pivotal parliamentary election
BUCHAREST, Romania (AP) — The European Union's top officials will travel to Moldova's capital on Friday for a key bilateral summit to strengthen ties months before the EU candidate member holds a pivotal parliamentary election. Moldova's pro-Western President Maia Sandu and Prime Minister Dorin Recean will host the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Council President António Costa in Chisinau. Talks will focus on EU membership, security and trade. The leaders are expected to issue a joint statement afterward. Brussels agreed to open accession negotiations with Moldova for EU membership last year after granting official candidate status in June 2022, the same day as neighboring Ukraine. Some observers say Hungary's opposition to Ukraine's EU membership could hamper Moldova's progress, since both countries' applications are being processed concurrently. 'Moldova is now at the most advanced stage of European integration in its modern history,' said Daniel Voda, Moldova's government spokesperson. 'The path toward the EU has become clear, irreversible, and politically embraced at the highest level.' Brussels is keen to reaffirm its commitment to Moldova joining the 27-nation bloc with the approach of a parliamentary election Sep. 28. Allegations continue to circulate about Russia conducting a 'hybrid war' against the former Soviet republic by interfering in elections and spreading disinformation. Moldova's pro-Western government led by the Party of Action and Solidarity, or PAS, has been in power since 2021. Moldova watchers have warned the upcoming parliamentary vote is in Moscow's crosshairs. The summit's agenda states EU leaders will reiterate their 'unwavering commitment' to Moldova's sovereignty and security in the face of 'Russia's continued hybrid attacks.' Moscow has denied meddling in Moldova. Radu Magdin, a political analyst at Smartlink Communications, said the joint summit is 'of top symbolic importance' and could bolster support for PAS in the upcoming elections. 'The elections are pivotal, as a PAS government majority or a PAS-led coalition can be more credible for Brussels in terms of genuine intention of reform,' he said. 'The main threats to Moldova's accession process is any EU state opposition to Ukraine's entry.' Moldova's membership in the EU is conditional on the country enacting reforms in policy areas, known as chapters, in areas such as the rule of law, fundamental rights and economic reforms, a process that will likely take years. To support such reforms, Brussels is providing Moldova with up to 1.9 billion euros (about $2.2 billion) between 2025 and 2027. 'EU accession is not just a destination,' said Voda, the government spokesperson. 'It's a profound change for the benefit of the people.' President Sandu was reelected in a heated election last year that saw her beat a Russia-friendly opponent in an election cycle beleaguered by claims of Russian interference and voter fraud. Moldovans last year also voted narrowly in favor of securing the country's EU path. ___ McGrath reported from Sighisoara, Romania.
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Man Sues Trump Admin To Keep 70 Million-Year-Old Tyrannosaurus Skull
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A Texas man is suing the Trump administration over its attempts to seize his 70 million-year-old Tyrannosaurus bataar skull. Robert M. Lavinsky bought the ancient fossil from a Gem & Mineral and Fossil Show dealer in 2005. It is now stored in Texas. However, he has been under investigation since 2014 by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), both of which allege the skull is stolen property. Lavinsky is suing the agencies, with a complaint filed on Wednesday stating: "The Government's demand for forfeiture of Plaintiff's personal property constitutes a concrete and particularized injury." DHS and attorneys for Lavinsky have been contacted via email outside business hours for comment. The skull and jawbone of a Tyrannosaurus bataar skeleton is displayed during a ceremony of its repatriation to Mongolia, in New York, Monday, May 6, 2013. This is not the skull owned by Robert Lavinsky.... The skull and jawbone of a Tyrannosaurus bataar skeleton is displayed during a ceremony of its repatriation to Mongolia, in New York, Monday, May 6, 2013. This is not the skull owned by Robert Lavinsky. More Richard Drew/AP Photo Why It Matters The Trump administration, particularly DHS, is already being sued by several groups of Attorneys General, citizens, and people who have been detained by ICE as part of the government's hardline immigration agenda. This is another lawsuit to add to its extensive legal schedule. Unlike other cases against the federal government, however, this suit is not related to specific Trump administration policies, as it relates to DHS activity that was initiated during the Obama era. What To Know According to Lavinsky's court filing, an investigation into the skull began in 2014, two years after the government launched an inquiry into the store owners who sold Lavinsky the bataar skull. The skull originated from Mongolia, and according to the US government, "under U.S. law, generally, paleontological artifacts of Mongolian origin are considered to be stolen property and vertebrate paleontological artifacts of Chinese origin are considered to be stolen property." The government then said Lavinsky had broken the law by requesting the skull be imported into the U.S., and said it would "initiate legal action to compel the production of and/or seizure and forfeiture of" the item, says the filing. Lavinsky and his legal team argue he did not import the skull, but rather bought it when it was already in the United States. This new suit arose because the government froze Lavinsky's ownership rights over the skull in 2014. In 2017, James Godwin, the owner of the store that sold Lavinsky the skull, sued the government, saying it had gone beyond its statute of limitations in the case of the skull. Per Lavinsky's filing: "The Court found that the Government discovered facts showing Dr. Godwin's Bataar skull existed in the United States and was in Dr. Godwin's possession when it received the July 2012 Production [of records exchanged between Godwin and the government regarding the skull.]" The filing went on to say: "Notably, the Court adopted the 'known or should have known' standard for the running of 5-year statute of limitations under 19 U.S.C. § 1621 for civil forfeiture claims... The Government failed to timely file its request for forfeiture." Despite this ruling, Lavinsky's ownership rights remain in question. He says he wants to donate the skull to Wyoming Dinosaur Center & Dig Sites in Thermopolis, but is unable to do so because he worries that if he tried to donate the skull the government would seize it. What People Are Saying Robert Lavinsky's Filing states: "Plaintiff Dr. Robert M. Lavinsky requests that the Court declare that the Government is barred by the statute of limitations to pursue any forfeiture claims of Dr. Lavinsky's Bataar Skull and declare that Dr. Lavinsky has unencumbered ownership and clear title of the Bataar Skull, and for all such other and further relief, at law and in equity, to which he must be justly entitled." What Happens Next Lavinsky has requested a declaratory injunction from the government, for them to state that he is the owner of the skull so that he can donate it to the center in Wyoming.
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
American bombs in Iran also reverberate in China and North Korea
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — President Donald Trump campaigned on keeping the United States out of foreign wars, but it didn't take long to convince him to come to the direct aid of Israel, hitting Iranian nuclear targets with bunker-buster bombs dropped by B-2 stealth bombers and Tomahawk cruise missiles fired from a submarine. Beyond the attack's immediate impact on helping bring the 12-day war to a close, experts say Trump's decision to use force against another country also will certainly be reverberating in the Asia-Pacific, Washington's priority theater. 'Trump's strikes on Iran show that he's not afraid to use military force — this would send a clear message to North Korea, and even to China and Russia, about Trump's style,' said Duyeon Kim, a senior analyst at the Center for a New American Security based in Seoul, South Korea. 'Before the strikes, Pyongyang and Beijing might have assumed that Trump is risk averse, particularly based on his behavior his first presidency despite some tough talk," Kim said. China, North Korea and Russia all condemn US strike Ten days into the war between Israel and Iran, Trump made the risky decision to step in, hitting three nuclear sites with American firepower on June 22 in a bid to destroy the country's nuclear program at a time while negotiations between Washington and Tehran were still ongoing. The attacks prompted a pro forma Iranian retaliatory strike the following day on a U.S. base in nearby Qatar, which caused no casualties, and both Iran and Israel then agreed to a ceasefire on June 24. North Korea, China and Russia all were quick to condemn the American attack, with Russian President Vladimir Putin calling it 'unprovoked aggression,' China's Foreign Ministry saying it violated international law and 'exacerbated tensions in the Middle East,' and North Korea's Foreign Ministry maintaining it 'trampled down the territorial integrity and security interests of a sovereign state.' While the strikes were a clear tactical success, the jury is still out on whether they will have a more broad strategic benefit to Washington's goals in the Middle East or convince Iran it needs to work harder than ever to develop a nuclear deterrent, possibly pulling the U.S. back into a longer-term conflict. US allies could see attack as positive sign for deterrence If the attack remains a one-off strike, U.S. allies in the Asia-Pacific region likely will see the decision to become involved as a positive sign from Trump's administration, said Euan Graham, a senior defense analyst with the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. 'The U.S. strike on Iran will be regarded as net plus by Pacific allies if it is seen to reinforce red lines, restore deterrence and is of limited duration, so as not to pull the administration off-course from its stated priorities in the Indo-Pacific,' he said. 'China will take note that Trump is prepared to use force, at least opportunistically.' In China, many who have seen Trump as having a 'no-war mentality' will reassess that in the wake of the attacks, which were partially aimed at forcing Iran's hand in nuclear program negotiations, said Zhao Minghao, an international relations professor at China's Fudan University in Shanghai. 'The way the U.S. used power with its air attacks against Iran is something China needs to pay attention to,' he said. 'How Trump used power to force negotiations has a significance for how China and the U.S. will interact in the future.' But, he said, Washington should not think it can employ the same strategy with Beijing. 'If a conflict breaks out between China and the U.S., it may be difficult for the U.S. to withdraw as soon as possible, let alone withdraw unscathed,' he said. China and North Korea present different challenges Indeed, China and North Korea present very different challenges than Iran. First and foremost, both already have nuclear weapons, raising the stakes of possible retaliation considerably in the event of any attack. There also is no Asian equivalent of Israel, whose relentless attacks on Iranian missile defenses in the opening days of the war paved the way for the B-2 bombers to fly in and out without a shot being fired at them. Still, the possibility of the U.S. becoming involved in a conflict involving either China or North Korea is a very real one, and Beijing and Pyongyang will almost certainly try to assess what the notoriously unpredictable Trump would do. North Korea will likely be 'quite alarmed' at what Israel, with a relatively small but high-quality force, has been able to achieve over Iran, said Joseph Dempsey, a defense expert with the International Institute for Strategic Studies. At the same time, it likely will be seen internally as justification for its own nuclear weapons program, 'If Iran did have deployable nuclear weapons would this have occurred?' Dempsey said. 'Probably not.' The U.S. decision to attack while still in talks with Iran will also not go unnoticed, said Hong Min, a senior analyst at South Korea's Institute for National Unification. 'North Korea may conclude that dialogue, if done carelessly, could backfire by giving the United States a pretext for possible aggression,' he said. 'Instead of provoking the Trump administration, North Korea is more likely to take an even more passive stance toward negotiations with Washington, instead focusing on strengthening its internal military buildup and pursuing closer ties with Russia, narrowing the prospects for future talks," he said. China and Taiwan will draw lessons China will look at the attacks through the visor of Taiwan, the self-governing democratic island off its coast that China claims as its own territory and President Xi Jinping has not ruled out taking by force. The U.S. supplies Taiwan with weapons and is one of its most important allies, though Washington's official policy on whether it would come to Taiwan's aid in the case of a conflict with China is known as 'strategic ambiguity," meaning not committing to how it would respond. Militarily, the strike on Iran raises the question of whether the U.S. might show less restraint than has been expected by China in its response and hit targets on the Chinese mainland in the event of an invasion of Taiwan, said Drew Thompson, senior fellow with the Singapore-based think tank RSIS Rajaratnam School of International Studies. It will also certainly underscore for Beijing the 'difficulty of predicting Trump's actions,' he said. "The U.S. airstrike on Iran's nuclear facilities caught many by surprise," Thompson said. "I think it demonstrated a tolerance and acceptance of risk in the Trump administration that is perhaps surprising.' It also gives rise to a concern that Taiwan's President Lai Ching-te, who in recent speeches has increased warnings about the threat from China, may be further emboldened in his rhetoric, said Lyle Goldstein, director of the Asia Program at the Washington-based foreign policy think tank Defense Priorities. Already, Lai's words have prompted China to accuse him of pursuing Taiwanese independence, which is a red line for Beijing. Goldstein said he worried Taiwan may try to take advantage of the American 'use of force against Iran to increase its deterrent situation versus the mainland.' 'President Lai's series of recent speeches appear almost designed to set up a new cross-strait crisis, perhaps in the hopes of building more support in Washington and elsewhere around the Pacific,' said Goldstein, who also is director of the China Initiative at Brown University's Watson Institute.
