Warning: I HAVE studied this topic for this region, though my focus was 2001-2005, and I haven't kept up on Korea for about 5 years, at all. (too busy with other things, and the ROK is... eh, not my thing)
Do we have any idea as to the statistics involved?
With Japanese numbers, be careful!(To be fair, this ISN"T JUST JAPAN) If it doesn't cost Japan face to be honest, they will be, generally, though. But some numbers are iffy.
It's only recently that Koreans didn't have to change their name, to a Japanese one, after all.
As for Gaijin (assuming non Japanese, given his implications, but if wrong, wrong): That's fairly new, pre... 2006 or 2009, to qualify as a Japanese citizen, you not only had to have 'blood', but culture. And by blood, born to a Japanese citizen (or claimed by one. I'm sure people can do the research of certain ... situations)
(though Japan even then treated those of blood and BORN in Japan, generally as 'qualified')
Interesting. How long has this gap been present?
A while, and about 2/3rds ARE the illegal labour market, Gaijin's referring to. And some of the numbers are really... interesting. What's really quirky is how Japan does this number, too. As Gaijin was helpful in the date (2014): A gap of about a million two, right? How many of those left later. And by 'gaijin' (using the Japanese word for ...): they mean ANYONE WITHOUT citizenship, period. It gets quirky. A month by month breakdown would be more helpful.
Perhaps. I'm more concerned about Japan missing out on opportunities. (See more at the end of my comment below.)
Um, Gaijin? Japan _wasn't_ trying to do this. It just happened. First nation to ACUTALLY officially try was _CHINA_. (and they're now going ooops.)
The curve in numbers was obvious as early as 1980, if people paid attention.
I do not understand what you are talking about.
If you're talking about the lack of integration of immigrants in Belgium, that's a consequence of Belgian immigration policy. Until very recently, the European Union has had absolutely nothing to do with its member-states' immigration policies regarding non-EU countries, or the integration policies adopted for these communities.
Yep, yep, I am. Europe (and to a lesser extent several Asian nations), have in de facto, practiced no integration attempts for their culture. Immigrants are fine. (legal anyways). This combined with a high rate OF immigration, and a low birthrate spells trouble.
Note: Going to Japan. Japan _requires integration_ (like Korea, too, per 2004 laws). However, Japan does/did (I'm not on scene anymore, so.) nothing to help this along.
Not really. On the most basic level, South Korea officially accepts immigration, not only by ethnic Koreans but by people coming throughout China and Southeast Asia. The result is a
very real shift in the makeup of the Korean population, one that is likely to
continue despite controversy. In Japan, such an outreach towards immigrants is impossible.
Official != reality. And note you linked the controversy, pointing out. Korea, per articles I did research on, changed their laws (so did Japan, too) vis a vis immigration, rather recently, in some ways, in response to the demographic curves. I suspect backlash they didn't expect is going to hit, and hit hard.
South Korea's immigrants come mostly from China and Southeast Asia, the same areas that would be major sources for Japan if that country had opened its doors to substantial immigration. Quite a few of the migrants from China are ethnic Koreans, yes, but when countries shift from net emigration to net immigration the attraction of migrants from diasporas is quite common.
Since they have since 2009 (IIRC): Where are they? I think you also forgot to factor in each nations' reputation there...
Japan also began attracting migrants from its South American diaspora in the 1990s, when it was on the verge of becoming a major destination. When the Great Recession hit, the Japanese government
paid these migrants to leave and never return. That's a fundamental difference from South Korea.
Different economic situations, too. Korea didn't have the same recessions, and same response to them. Apples and peaches, apples and peaches, there.
If these Japanese policies, and attitudes, discouraging migrants continue indefinitely, then it's quite possible that Japan might lose out relative to countries which maintain more open policies. Germany missed out on the main wave of Polish and Baltic immigrants after 2004, despite a very long history of being a destination for immigrants from these regions, simply because Germany opted to keep its labour markets closed to migrants from A8 countries while the United Kingdom had opened them. Japan might one day find that, even if it changes its policies, it won't get many migrants simply because the migration networks which developed while Japan was closed will leave that country out.
See above. Japan IS officially trying to attract migrants.
Not so simple as changing the law, and attitude locally (which concede, to large extent, it hasn't, but it IS changing) Reputations and actual history play a factor, as well as appearances.
For potential migrants from China, or Vietnam, or the Philippines, the choice would seem relatively easy.
"Not the nation til recently (if they even KNOW) didn't let 3rd generation Japanese-Koreans get citizenship, and that 'enslaved' or 'slaughtered' my fellow..."
Note: Denmark has a similar problem in Europe.
>> << (See Scand/World webcomic, has a GREAT scene.)