韓国軽視論←韓国人の参加、大歓迎

エコノミスト紙のこの記事は、総じて、冷静に書かれていると思います。
韓国のサイトのは、それと全然違って、下品なプロパガンダみたいだね。

（エコニミストの記事）
History that still hurts
Apr 8th 2005
From The Economist Global Agenda
http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3856623


（それを利用したプロパガンダ by ば韓国中央日報）
エコノミスト誌「日本は歪曲教科書の承認を中断せよ」
http://japanese.joins.com/html/2005/0410/20050410164839200.html


−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−
英国の週刊誌「エコノミスト」最新号（８日付）が、東アジアでの真の同伴者関係を構築するには「日本が歴史歪曲教科書の承認を中断し、日本帝国主義の占領による被害者にもっと賠償せよ」と指摘した。
−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−

それは、ここらあたり↓を指しているようだけど、韓国ではなく中国との関係を述べているようですね。日本と中国の双方にやるべき事があると言っているようです。ともあれ、韓国には関係ないような・・。

However, there has been no official visit to China by the Japanese prime minister, Junichiro Koizumi, since October 2001, and none by the Chinese president to Japan since 1998, when Jiang Zemin went. Overcoming the bitter memories of the 20th century’s wars and building a genuine partnership to ensure they are not repeated will require movement by both sides. Japan could withhold approval from school books that sanitise the awful truth about its wartime record; and it could offer more compensation to the victims of its past occupations. As for the Chinese, it would require a willingness to sanction a joint textbook commission in which historians would be free to examine the two countries’ past, a readiness to give up anti-Japanese propaganda, and a willingness to engage in serious negotiations about disputed waters. Only then might East Asia finally consign its past conflicts to the history books.


−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−
同誌は、日本政府が過去に犯した残虐行為を縮小・歪曲する『新しい歴史教科書』を承認したことについて、韓国と中国が激しく憤慨していることを伝え、日本帝国主義の過去の問題は、現在においても東アジア諸国の関係を阻害する要因だと述べた。
−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−

それは、ここらへん↓かな？原文とは、だいぶ違いますね。

The latest such act of perceived impenitence is the Japanese government’s approval of a set of school books written by nationalist historians, which reportedly omit or gloss over such wartime atrocities as the rape of thousands of “comfort women”, captured and used as sex slaves by the Japanese military. Furthermore, to South Korea’s fury, one of the books asserts Japan’s claim to a group of rocky islets that Korea possesses and calls Dodko, which the Japanese call Takeshima. On Thursday April 7th, South Korea’s foreign minister, Ban Ki-moon, had what officials called a “very frank discussion” (ie, a blazing row) with his Japanese counterpart, Nobutaka Machimura, over the issue, telling him that the books had “greatly enraged” his countrymen.
　 −−−
　 −−−
Rows over the wording of Japanese history books have been flaring up for a quarter of a century, most recently in 2001 when a previous version of the books at the centre of the current controversy was submitted for approval. Then, the Japanese government demanded over 100 revisions to try to answer the accusations of “airbrushing history”. The government points out that Japanese schools are not obliged to use the approved texts and, indeed, many do not. But to the Chinese and South Koreans, that is beside the point. It is un