Dokdo, the island of dispute??

[kim0702a]

Seoul and Tokyo are once again battling over the sovereignty of Dokdo. The clash happens almost every year, as politicians and activists on both sides fiercely stake their claims.

Despite the nationalist sentiment which the issue arouses here (and among right-wingers in Japan), the validity of either side`s arguments is often obscured by the passion of the conflict.

The Dokdo dispute is a centuries-long argument between the two countries; each cites historical documents and legal precedent to bolster their cases. For the Koreans, Dokdo is an integral part of the nation`s identity and a symbol of their resistance to past Japanese oppression.

For the Japanese, Takeshima, as they call it, is a piece of land that has been illegally taken away from Tokyo. Especially for the right-wingers, reclaiming Dokdo has been on the agenda since Japan lost the territory it had taken in the previous decades, following its defeat in World War II. They demand that Seoul bring the Dokdo case to the International Court of Justice, which Korea is extremely unlikely to agree to.

In both countries, politicians, academics and civic activists have been quite forceful in making their case. Korea refutes Japan`s arguments with its own legal and historical references, as well as the simple reality on the ground: Seoul physically controls Dokdo. What follows are some of Japan`s main arguments and Korea`s rebuttals:

Japan`s claims

Japan largely bases its legal claims on the Sept. 22, 1905 annexation of Dokdo by Shimane Prefecture. Tokyo asserted that, prior to that, Dokdo was "Terra Nullius," which is Latin for "land belonging to nobody." The concept traces back to the Roman Empire and subsequent legal decrees by European colonizers who usurped vast pieces of territory in their imperialistic expansions.

The term was taken to refer to uninhabited lands or those inhabited by "primitive people." The Terra Nullius concept has been applied to uninhabited areas like eastern Greenland, or inhabited places like Australia, where, despite the presence of Aborigines, British settlers took over the continent and stripped the Aboriginal people of their sovereignty. (Recent court cases in Australia have overturned many Terra Nullius arguments based on land ownership, thereby granting Aborigines some sovereignty.)

Japan appears to be arguing that Dokdo was never claimed by Korea and is therefore up for grabs. The Japanese say that Dokdo was never explicitly recorded as Korean territory in past records and that it is not visible on maps throughout history. The Korean maps and records offered by Seoul as evidence are simply referring to another island and not Dokdo, according to the Japanese.

They further claim that Koreans were never even aware of the existence of Dokdo until recently. Koreans who inhabited Ulleungdo 87 kiliometers away could not have known that Dokdo existed because it is not visible from there. Additionally, Koreans were primitive and lacked the technical skills to build boats hardy enough to navigate the waters between Ulleungdo and Dokdo - something the Japanese say they taught the Koreans when they set out to "modernize the area" during colonization.

Besides their claims regarding international law (the 1905 annexation), Tokyo also says that it had effectively "managed" the islands for centuries.

According to the Japan`s official Ministry of Foreign Affairs stance, "We firmly believe that Japan had established the sovereignty of Takeshima by the beginning of the Edo Period (1603-1867)."

Thus, Tokyo simultaneously asserts that it established sovereignty over Dokdo in the 17th century, and that Dokdo was Terra Nullius, thus justifying the 1905 annexation. Japan`s foreign ministry insists that Korea has been illegally occupying the islets and is violating international law.

Interestingly, the ministry`s 11-point outline of Japan`s claims to Takeshima includes an addendum warning its citizens not to enter Dokdo from the Korean side when traveling as tourists. This, they say, is to avoid giving the "wrong impression" that the Japanese people acknowledge that Dokdo is under Korean jurisdiction.

Korea`s rebuttal

Seoul`s claims to Dokdo date much further back than Tokyo`s. As has been reported by many sources, Korea`s first record of Dokdo dates back to the early 6th century when the Shilla Dynasty incorporated both Ulleungdo and Dokdo into their kingdom. For Korea, Dokdo was, is, and always will be Korean territory.

With regard to Japan`s Terra Nullius argument, Korea has responded by providing numerous maps and documents which show both Ulleungdo and Dokdo as part of Korean territory. To answer Japan`s protestations that many of the maps do not show the precise geographic locations of the islands, Koreans point out that maps drawn at the time (i.e., during the Joseon Dynasty) portrayed islands closer to the mainland to denote territorial ownership rather than exact location.

The claim that residents of Ulleungdo were not aware of Dokdo`s existence is also rejected. Contrary to what the Japanese say, one can indeed see the Dokdo islets from Ulleungo at a height of about 120 meters above sea level (this is proven by photographs taken from Ulleungdo). Since Ulleungdo is also a rocky island with an elevation as high as 985 meters, it is highly unlikely that its residents never saw Dokdo.

The notion that Koreans were too primitive to construct boats capable of sailing from Ulleungdo to Dokdo is also easily proven incorrect. Koreans point out that, throughout history (as far back as Shilla), boats had been regularly ferrying back and forth between the Korean peninsula and Ulleungdo. Also, the distance from Ulleungdo to Dokdo is much shorter than from the mainland. The claim that it was ultimately the Japanese who taught Koreans how to build a boat capable of traveling to Dokdo strikes most Koreans as ridiculously chauvinistic. Those Japanese are forgetting the fact that famous Korean seafarers such as Admiral Yi Sun-shin laid waste to the Japanese invading fleets with his own turtle ships, the world`s first armored warships, back in the 16th century. This humiliation of Japan occurred over a hundred years before it claims to have first known of Dokdo`s existence.

As for Tokyo`s insistence that the 1905 annexation was the last legal precedent regarding the matter of sovereignty, Koreans say that it was not a legal agreement, and that Korea`s political weakness at the time prevented it from adequately protesting Japan`s maneuver. Tokyo`s argument is that, since nobody opposed its seizure of Dokdo, that decision remains in force. But it must be noted that Japan basically controlled affairs in Korea to the extent that Korea`s foreign ministry was powerless to register a substantial complaint at the time. Furthermore, the fact that Japan did not bother to notify anybody of its annexation until one year later calls into questions the legality of the annexation, according to the view of most scholars and international legal precedent.

Finally, Koreans point out that Japan is contradicting itself by claiming that it "effectively managed" Dokdo in the 17th century and then declared Dokdo to be Terra Nullius in 1905. If Japan had already believed that it controlled the islets from so long ago, how could it then later claim that Dokdo was "land belonging to nobody"? In any event, evidently seeing the flaw in its logic, Tokyo`s foreign ministry recently omitted any references to Terra Nullius in its official claims. This weakens the argument that the 1905 annexation is Japan`s strongest legal case.

The Cairo Conference

Japan`s claims over Dokdo are also complicated by a very important event that occurred in 1943. The Allied powers during World War II convened in the Egyptian capital to address issues regarding Japan during and after the war. The "Cairo Declaration" was signed on Nov. 22 of that year, and outlined Japan`s fate once the Allies defeated Tokyo. It is a communique that is still recognized by the international community today.

Most pertinent to Korea, a stipulation in the declaration stated that "Japan will be expelled from all territories which she has taken by violence and greed (since the time of the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-95)."

After Japan`s defeat in 1945, the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers, which ruled postwar Japan, decreed that Ulleungdo, Jejudo and Dokdo would be excluded from Japanese territory. SCAP`s order, along with the precedent set by the Cairo Conference, are cited by Koreans to refute any current "legal" argument which Japan makes about Dokdo.

Furthermore, critics of the Japanese position point out that, if Dokdo is universally acknowledged to have been part of territory that was "seized by greed," a successful Japanese legal claim over Dokdo would give the country justification to again seize the entire Korean peninsula. This is a scenario which even the most rabid right-wing Japanese are not envisioning. For Japan to continue claiming territories which it took during its imperial expansion contradicts the terms of the Cairo Conference.

Japan`s Dokdo reality

At the end of the day, Japan`s only hope is to stir the waters enough to make the Dokdo debate an international issue. The goal is to somehow coerce Korea into bringing the dispute to the International Court of Justice. Despite the dubious merits of its case, Tokyo has nothing to lose in bringing the issue to the ICJ. It doesn`t hurt that Japan actually has a judge serving on the ICJ, while Korea is not represented. Seoul has consistently rejected Tokyo`s demands to take the case to the world court. As far as Seoul is concerned, Dokdo is Korean territory and not disputed land - precluding any justification for legal arbitration.

Seoul`s obstinacy regarding the ICJ demand forces Tokyo to resort to other means. That is why it has done things like declaring "Takeshima Day" in 2005, attempting hydrological surveys in 2006, lobbying international organizations to use "Liancourt Rocks" as the official name for Dokdo, and recently incorporating the Dokdo claim into the curriculum guide for middle school teachers. Rather than deliberately riling Koreans (though that is an inevitable consequence), Tokyo hopes that these kinds of moves will create international sympathy for its cause and create sufficient momentum for taking the case to the ICJ.

That tactic has so far been unsuccessful. Most countries - notably, the United States - refuse to take a stance on the Dokdo debate. This means that Japan`s only recourse is the faint hope that Korea will somehow decide to agree to an ICJ hearing. It should be pointed out that Japan is also embroiled in a territorial dispute with both China and Taiwan over the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyu Islands in Chinese). Japan effectively controls the islands and refuses Chinese and Taiwanese demands to bring the case to the ICJ. Tokyo`s double standard here makes it that much less credible to Koreans.

The concept of "effective control" is important in assessing the Dokdo debate. Korea has been ramping up its efforts to physically control the islets. Some recent initiatives proposed by Seoul include constructing residential facilities for tourists and fishermen who visit the islets (except for the married couple and the 50 policemen stationed there, there is no other housing on Dokdo). Another proposal is to replace the policemen guarding the islets with armed forces, specifically marines.

In property disputes both large and small, an oft-cited line is that "possession is nine-tenths of the law." Originating in England, this states that physical possession supersedes most other arguments in ownership disputes. The concept has been applied in legal cases involving territorial disputes and even the argument over who was the rightful owner of Barry Bond`s 73rd homerun ball (a U.S. court ruled that the then-current possessor of the ball was the owner).

In the case of Dokdo, because Korea physically controls the islets, it cannot be forcibly removed from its control unless the ICJ rules against it. Since no other nation has supported Japan`s case to take the case to international court, Korea`s control over Dokdo is, and will indefinitely remain, the status quo. The only practical way that Japan could take over Dokdo right now would be through war (a war Tokyo would have to start by invading the islets). The reality for Japan is that, barring a complete collapse in the present Korean position, retaking Dokdo will be extremely difficult.

 

[gundamfan]

Something that wasn't pointed out here (and I'm not sure if it's entirely based on fact or just hearsay) is that the reason why this hunk of rock is so important is simply because of the fishing rights/territorial rights. Dokdo/Takeshima/Liancourt Islets would vastly increase the territory of either country (and by extension, fishing rights, etc). Korea wants to hold onto it for cultural reasons, too, I guess, but for Japan it seems to be purely territory-based. Either way, nobody's going to get involved with this playground scuffle between two stubborn kids and the last shovel in the sandbox.

 

[guy]

gundamfan:
The EEZ surrounding the islets is certainly one consideration -- and to that end recognizing the islets as Korean sovereignty would pragmatically be a "fair" way to divide the sea. But there should be no illusion that the primary incentive is nationalistic claim (ie: Japan's vocal minority uses the EEZ as one justification, while Korea's public opinion is, well, the majority opinion).

But don't be quick to assume Japan's interest in the islets indicates a resurgence of its imperialist/military past or that Japan has nothing to lose. Japan has a number of disputed islands (Kuril disputed with Russia, and Senkaku with Taiwan/China), and knows full and well that if those islands were taken over by the Russian or Chinese military, they cannot respond with military force (SF Treaty) and will be forced to bring the dispute to the ICJ. Hence the fight over these islets is one of precedence and preservation (but not expansion) -- if Korea gets the rocks, there's essentially nothing stopping Russia/Taiwan/China from sending military into other islands and making similar claims, overtaking more valuable territory.



Japan is willing to risk it because at this time, most of Korea's counter-arguments (which are covered in OP's post) cannot be and have not been verified by any party (academic, independent, etc), and frankly Japan knows Korea's government is incapable of controlling public reaction (protests, riots, etc), so any international press will draw more negative public opinion against Korea than against Japan. As for the evidence, there are simply too many assumptions; it is at best wishful nationalistic thinking and at worst outright reinterpretation of history:

... Korea`s first record of Dokdo dates back to the early 6th century when the Shilla Dynasty incorporated both Ulleungdo and Dokdo into their kingdom.

Korea has responded by providing numerous maps and documents which show both Ulleungdo and Dokdo as part of Korean territory. ... Koreans point out that maps drawn at the time (i.e., during the Joseon Dynasty) portrayed islands closer to the mainland to denote territorial ownership rather than exact location.

Korean records only indicate two islands, Ulleungdo and Usando (as illustrated in the 1549 map above). Ulleungdo is indeed a Korean island, so the assumption is that the name Usando eventually became the modern Dokdo, hence the argument that Korean maps demonstrate evidence (Korean linguists have doubts on the Usando=Dokdo theory). Compared to modern cartography, Usando more logically refers to present-day Jukdo, a small inhabitable island 2km off the eastern coast of Ulleungdo. Ancient Korean maps are, in this regard, inaccurate not only by relative distance (arguable) but by composition since Usando depicts only one land formation while Dokdo is comprised of two rock formations (not to mention that countless Korean maps mistakenly draw old Usando to the west of Ulleungdo, while Dokdo is irrefutably to the east). Another claim is that Ulleungdo refers to the main Ulleungdo island plus Jukdo drawn together as one island, while Usando refers to the two rocks of Dokdo similarly drawn together as one island, but there are many doubts as the U of Ulleungdo and Usando use (in some references) the same Chinese character and more logically reference only one set of islands, namely Ulleungdo and Jukdo. Again, there is no clear answer though proponents have made their assumptions.

These holes are further corroborated by the lack of definitive references in Korean texts. Usando (or Usanguk-do) is referenced in texts dating back to 1100's, but describe an island with soil and trees (one record indicates 11 families that lived on the island) -- and as we all know, Liancourt Rocks is nothing but a volcanic rock formation that cannot sustain life (oddly enough, Koreans are dumping soil on the rocks in an attempt to grow trees). Further cartographic expeditions provide accurate descriptions of modern Jukdo, while there is nothing that describes the rocky formations of Dokdo.

More details are presented here: http://www.occidentalism.org/?p=319

The claim that residents of Ulleungdo were not aware of Dokdo`s existence is also rejected. Contrary to what the Japanese say, one can indeed see the Dokdo islets from Ulleungo at a height of about 120 meters above sea level (this is proven by photographs taken from Ulleungdo). Since Ulleungdo is also a rocky island with an elevation as high as 985 meters, it is highly unlikely that its residents never saw Dokdo.

No one contests the present-day verifiable ability to see Dokdo from Ulleungdo during very good conditions. The question is whether the historical individuals who drew the maps and wrote the records (that constitute Korean evidence) were actually looking at Dokdo, or if they were looking at Jukdo. Both claims are dubious at best since neither can be verified.

The notion that Koreans were too primitive to construct boats capable of sailing from Ulleungdo to Dokdo is also easily proven incorrect. ... [T]he distance from Ulleungdo to Dokdo is much shorter than from the mainland.

I have not heard such a claim. The distance from the peninsula to Ulleungdo is 120km, and from Ulleungdo to Dokdo is another 90km. There is nothing that disproves Koreans' maritime ability to cover that distance. However in a 1531 record, an survey crew recorded being able to travel to both Ulleungdo and Usando in two days in good conditions -- not unreasonable given Korea's technology of the time. But reaching Dokdo, another 90km away, would require at least another day, and no indication of this was made. Usando simply has not been demonstrated to be referring to present-day Dokdo.

As for Tokyo`s insistence that the 1905 annexation was the last legal precedent regarding the matter of sovereignty, Koreans say that it was not a legal agreement, and that Korea`s political weakness at the time prevented it from adequately protesting Japan`s maneuver. Tokyo`s argument is that, since nobody opposed its seizure of Dokdo, that decision remains in force.

It is arguable that Korea could not protest the annexation at the time, but there are conflicting claims as to whether or not a majority of Koreans even wanted to protest the annexation of the islets. This also disregards the fact that there was also no post-war international opposition to the claim: the Rusk documents did not recognize Korea's sovereignty over the islets. Yes the Rusk documents were simply confidential memorandums and not official evidence, but it corroborates the western opinion over the islets' sovereignty (ie: "no official decision" aka "disputed"). Conveniently, pro-Koreans choose to ignore the Rusk documents, instead focusing their efforts on attacking Rusk's credentials, as well as debunking other documents (or simply sections of) that do not support the claim.





All other arguments are nothing more than the manipulation from both countries of obscure evidence. Pro-Koreans would have you believe that all of their evidence is indeed factual, and that the sheer quantity of it demonstrates proof in itself. Experts and academics are at odds over the credibility of such arguments (there are both Japanese academics that support Korea and Korean academics that support Japan). Peculiar enough, many Korean are quick to call those professors "traitors" as well as dismissing entire Universities as "hotbeds of pro-Japanese activity". And Japanese? Well, frankly most Japanese don't give a damn.

To sum it up: Korea has lots of evidence, but the vast majority of it is weak and unverifiable (and littered with loopholes and some instances of Korea's own unlawful behavior). Japan has strong legal evidence with its 1905 convention, but it is the only credible evidence and could easily be dismissed by a third party, especially international opinion concerning Japan's imperialist past.

But what good-will Koreans might have from the international community is being thrown away by their senseless protesting: Korea has an excellent opportunity to act more mature than Japan over the claims, especially in conjunction with the upcoming US presidential elections where international policy will shape Obama and McCain's candidacies. But Korea's derisive behavior risks scaring off diplomatic relations (US beef notwithstanding) with countries that might perceive the Korean government as "too immature to deal with", while Japan and China continue to provide incentives with their economy.





Apologies for the long post. If you've made it all the way here after reading everything, you deserve a cookie. That's right, go get one. I promise I won't tell anybody. :goodboy:

 

[d2p4show]

Im sorry but Dokdo is definately a Korean Territory.
Japans argument is totally rootless and pointless.
Japan is known for defrauding the history.
Because Japan once overtook Korea doesnt mean the island belongs to them.
Their ancient culture and language are influenced vastly by the old Korean Dynasties, as like how Korea has received many of its cultures from China.
Simply looking at the Japanese Language explains that Japan has received, Not spread their cultures as they claim.
While Korea also used to use Chinese Characters, King Se-Jong the Great has created the Korean Letters which wasn't passed on to Japan.
Also there are many historical evidents that Japan was actually overtook by the Baek Jae Kingdom.

But again, Japan has envaded Korea as they have received the industrial revolution & advanced weapons before Korea have.
And since then, they have been defrauding the history because they simply couldn't stand the fact that the country once they overtook had a longer history than them.

 

[guy]

Japanese history clearly shows a lot of tributary culturalization from the mainland, but ancient archeological artefacts do demonstrate that a native indigenous culture did in fact exist and flourished independent of control from the mainland and/or peninsula.

To think that Japan owes all its history to China and Korea is utter bias that is nothing but propaganda masquerading as "education". Yes, Japan owes a large amount of its mobilization to the mainland (from the inception of Buddhism to the modeling of the imperial state based on China's own imperial court), but if you truly study the histories you will understand Japan's "flavor" of politics and culture is unique and cannot be found in China or Korea (again, owing to native elements such as Shintoism). If you need irrefutable proof, look at the architectural design of Japan's temples and shrines -- you cannot find anything like it in China or Korea. As for letters, you cannot disregard the kana scripts, or the fact that Japan utilizes a grammar and vocabulary that is distinct from both Mandarin and Korean.

You might also reconsider the idea of Japanese being implicitly hostile. Japan (before it was "Modern Japan", ie: Yamato) has historically been a relatively weak country owing its survival in the East Asian sphere due to its island geography. But being the eastern-most country, it was one of the first targets of the expansionist western powers. One perspective is that Japan could have faced decimation on two fronts (caught in the middle of a war between mainland/peninsula and the west), and in realizing its isolation sakoku policy would not be effective, decided it was important to adopt western militarism (seeing as it was the west that first attacked the east, not vice versa) in order to survive.

I do not say this to justify Japan's war crimes. But it is important to be objective about historical claims, otherwise people end up making baseless racist remarks.




Or are you saying you're justified in making racist remarks? Would you rather invite North Korea to fire nuclear missiles at Japan?

 

[d2p4show]

Exactly.
"decided it was important to adopt western militarism (seeing as it was the west that first attacked the east, not vice versa) in order to survive"
This is the point. You might use the word "survive" but to many, that word is incongruous. (So to survive, Japan's sneaky attack to Pearl Harbor was inevitable?)

Japanese War Crimes were inhumane. They weren't just there to survive. They were there to kill the most savage & disturbing way.

And this is my point.
Yea sure, neighboring countries might fight each other. But the way Japanese carried it out was very cruel & nasty.
And yes(Again), in history, these events can happen. Such as the Holocaust.

However, unlike the Germans the mighty Japan never apologizes nor repent.
The Prime Minister of that Country pays respect to those Class-A War Criminals and the Country doesn't even teach their kids the right history.

"I do not say this to justify Japan's war crimes."
Hence you should acknowledge the fact, that claiming other countries territory as its own is resulted from "these" mind-sets of Japanese people.

While you might think I am making baseless remarks without historical claims, but please watch your mouth.
There are still many Elderly Korean Women who suffers from the wartime-brothel.

So how is Japan going to include the claim that Dokdo is their territory in the text-books while they exclude all the dirty wrong-doings?

O, and for the nuclear part. I dont really care if Japan gets nuked again. Its not my business. However, unlike the first time if Japanese "listens" to the warnings they might have less casualties than the 1945.


Here are some pictures that the Japanese text-book should include if they want to dare claim Dokdo.

 

[shindb81]

While I do not agree with everything guy has said, there is no productivity in being emotional. Really, I don't think anybody will disagree with you there that Japanese were hostile and cruel during the war years.
There is a point in that Japan turned to Western militarism for survival. At the time, the Western world has already set its minds on colonizing all of Asia just as it did in Africa. Japan's victory over Russia in the Russo-Japanese war forced the Western powers to recognize Japan for the first time as one of the world powers, so Japan was able to escape the fate that waited other Asian nations. But then, Japan went further and colonized other Asian countries itself. Such was the mindset of all world powers at the time.
However, no matter what time it is (no pun intended), the wartime atrocities committed by Japanese military IS inhumane as you put it.

That Japanese never apologize or repent is a popular idea, but it is not true.
Extreme right wings are at work in any country, unfortunately, and they're doing their part in Japan as well.
All this I am saying, as guy was saying also, is not to justify Japan's war crimes.
And as guy was saying, it is important to be objective and consider all facts.

Regarding the elderly women who have suffered as comfort women, I feel the same rage as you do, d2p4show. And I have seen all of the pictures you posted before.
I also feel strongly that Japanese textbook need to teach more about the war than how they are doing it now.

I just don't see how you jumped from discussion of dokdo/takeshima to Korean cultural supremacy theory. If you do want to discuss something productive, like how Japanese textbook should change, instead of appealing to emotion to spread animosity, you should start a new thread.

Just for your information, Korean and Japanese are widely considered to belong to the Altaic language, alongside Molgolic, Turkic, and Tungusic.
Japan, in incorporating Chinese culture, sent scholars to the Tang Dynasty until the Dynasty fell apart in the early 10th Century, and since then largely developed its own culture.
I say largely, but of course, there are lots of evidence that Japanese art is very much influenced by Korean art. But I am strongly against any claim that one culture is somehow inferior to another. Such ethnocentric views connect either directly or indirectly to racism, and are no different from the war-time Japanese totalitarian ideas.

But, if you say you don't care if Japan gets nuked again...I guess then this is the end of discussion. There is no more to say.

 

[guy]

However, unlike the Germans the mighty Japan never apologizes nor repent.
The Prime Minister of that Country pays respect to those Class-A War Criminals and the Country doesn't even teach their kids the right history.
[...]
Hence you should acknowledge the fact, that claiming other countries territory as its own is resulted from "these" mind-sets of Japanese people.

First, Germany's war crimes were the result of Hitler and his regime. That objective knowledge allows people to rationalize German history because, quite frankly, Hitler is dead (and neo-nazis are a vast minority). What you are doing is blaming one point of Japanese history on the entire Japanese race, past present and future, based on Korea's popular anti-Japanese propaganda.

Second, you have to be careful with Korean media and its portrayal of Japan. "Victim mentality" causes the media present only the negative news about Japan, overhyping those key events, when in reality the ultra-right wing makes up a very small percentage of modern Japanese demographics.

(Korean media is not innocent of superlatives like the Japan/Germany comparison, such as comparing the burning of Namdaemun monument to 9/11, even Auschwitz, Cambodia, Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Please, the fire was an accident and nobody was killed. The loss of a national monument is still terrible, but it is no secret that such reporting is just a nationalist agenda, as if Koreans are the most victimized race in all the history of the world.)

I have offered a rationalization for why Japan believes Dokdo/Takeshima is disputed with regards to preservation of diplomacy, and you have chosen to ignore it and instead focus on your prejudices as Japan continuing its imperialist past. "It is easier just to blame Japan for everything."

While you might think I am making baseless remarks without historical claims, but please watch your mouth. There are still many Elderly Korean Women who suffers from the wartime-brothel.

It should be noted that Korea is also (partly) responsible for wartime comfort women. But instead of finding the responsible individuals, Korea education would rather blame everything on "the Japanese". If you are concerned of the well-being of victims, you should help them seek out the truth, because to victims of any crime, the truth is more important than the easy answer. Sure Japan needs to revise its textbooks, but so do many other countries that say Japan alone was responsible for everything.

O, and for the nuclear part. I dont really care if Japan gets nuked again. Its not my business.

I think it is your business. If Japan were attacked, it would result in war in East Asia all over again. And I can guarantee you it will mean more blood spilled on both sides.





In any case, I do not support Japan's militarist past, and I do not support Yasukuni (I think Japan needs a different apolitical way to honor its dead). I even agree that Japanese education needs revision (but from my experience, it teaches the right things, just not with enough emphasis). However I personally will not tolerate blind racism and ignorance, and I will stand up for Japan in that regard.

Here's the real question: Do you want people to know the truth? Or do you want people to hate Japan? Because judging from this and the vast majority of pro-Korean commentary, it looks overwhelmingly like the latter.

 

[buttobi]

Just for information I post two links to Japanese anti-Korea propaganda sites. The first one is being run by an ultra-right wing organization.

There seem to be two facts in every issue in question, pro-Japan and pro-Korea. :attention:

http://aikokuseigijuku.com/kankoku.html
http://www.geocities.com/deepredpigment/krwn.html

 

[21515]

The peaceful relationship between the Republic of Korea and Japan is getting worse and worse and the enmity of Korean people towards Japan is increasing rapidly and broadly.

It is all because of the fact that Japan has fabricated the true history of between Korea and Japan, moreover, they are insisting that DokDo belongs to them, which is a ridiculous falsehood, and belong to Republic of Korea, since the fact that the DokDo island have belonged to Korea over thousand years, is clearly proved, and proving by many history records that can be found in Korea, China, and even in Japan which is insisting island of another country.

It is predicted that they are focusing on these islands in order to get the natural resources which japan doesn't has and which are really valuable for future(=Hydrate), under the sea around that islands, and now, their filthy avarice has put them in hot seat and Republic of Korea will never allow their disgusting greed to take away part of Korea's territory.

Japan is now even playing in more dirty way in that they are using the power of media to the world, so people in the world will get the wrong idea of this issue and believe the irreverent assertion of Japan.

If you know and see what Japan has done in history of the World, Korea, China in WW2, you will believe me, that they always have been the dirty aggressor, no appolgy, will not mind manipulating the world to get what they want and will not stop until they get!!

I want to assure you that DokDo is manifestly the islands of Korea. DokDo has been part of Korea; DokDo is part of Korea, and DokDo will be part of Korea for the sake of the truth, history, heart and will of Korean People.


Do you want more information?
visit here :
http://www.prkorea.com/english/estart.html
http://www.dokdocenter.org/ (Korean)
http://www.geocities.com/mlovmo/
http://www.taiwanbasic.com/tw/dokdo.htm

 

[ooojonooo]

Few thoughts...
1. The actions and words of a few foolish and emotional Koreans should not be used to justify anything. (ie: ridiculous drawings by kids, killing of birds, rumors of nuking, etc. Because honestly, every country has its own share of radical individuals. There is also the mentioned difference in cultural mindset.)
2. The actions of the Japanese military in the PAST should not be used to hate on Japan and call them frauds, dirty, or whatnot. (Yes, it happened. Yes, it should not be forgotten. But do we dwell upon it and use it as grounds to hate a nation for what it's grandparents have done? No. Sure, you can be angry but anything beyond that... The simple truth is hate breeds more hate. What the fuck does that solve?)

I honestly think Japan should take all its "land disputes" to international court and get it over with. Although there probably are some complications that doesn't allow for that to happen, it's just what I think. This whole Dokdo issue, in my opinion, has dragged on too long and it's pretty obvious neither side wants to give in. So why not get it over with in a fashion that will be recognized by everyone? Provided that there will be a few obstinate people who'll refuse even the most truest reasons.
I'm Korean and yes, I do feel anger towards the militarist Japan in the past.
But being prejudice against the Japan of today because of what they did generations ago is extremely stupid and ignorant.
So take that ignorance, make a time machine, go travel to the past, rally the Koreans against the Japanese military and prevent history from ever happening.

 

[d2p4show]

"I just don't see how you jumped from discussion of dokdo/takeshima to Korean cultural supremacy theory. If you do want to discuss something productive, like how Japanese textbook should change, instead of appealing to emotion to spread animosity, you should start a new thread."

Um I dont think I ever said Korean culture was superior than any other nations. I just described how the cultures flowed.
And I have said this because the Japanese textbooks omit alot of these facts.
So THINK, considering these facts how could Japan possibly claim Dokdo?

You want more facts?
Ancient Korean Maps includes not only Ulleungdo and Usando, but also Dokdo.
Yea they might be drawn not exactly where it is but how accurate could they be thousand years ago?
Plus there are numerous facts out there you can just goolge it.(I dont even have to bother to write it in this post)

Japan is trying to claim Dokdo by their 1905 declaration, after they defeated Russia.
Then that makes them occupying the islets for 43 years TOTAL.

For Korea, more than thousand years + past 60 years.

Therefore we can see Japan is claiming Dokdo because they were winning the WARs. Or else they would've claimed it earlier in their history. And their text-books omits these informations.

And plz dont think what I said is based on bias or emtions. All the past history(war-crimes) I stated and which you guys accept does matter.
Why? Because the whole Dokdo dispute has sparked once again due to the fact that Japan will be including this subject in their text-books.

Why dont Japan include their wrong-doings during the war-time in their text-books?
And you expect the Koreans not to be emotional when Japan is trying to claim a Korean Territory while they just simply omit the dirty past?

"Second, you have to be careful with Korean media and its portrayal of Japan. "Victim mentality" causes the media present only the negative news about Japan, overhyping those key events, when in reality the ultra-right wing makes up a very small percentage of modern Japanese demographics."

HAHAHAHA did you said Korean media portrayal of Japan? O, Why? Whats wrong with the media portrayal? Let me tell you this. When my grandmother was in elementary school, the Japanese Pricipal always had his sword in school. Students were forced to use Japanese and if they even spoke a single Korean word they were punished. And you dare think Im hyping?

Ah "Victim Mentality". Nice word. Yes true, Korea does have victim mentality against Japan. Should they not?
In America(USA), African-Americans were slaves for some part of its history. And they have been freed for more than 140 years now. And what do you think a black person would say if a white person claims him as his slave nowadays?

Freed for more than 140 years and they still have "victim mentality".

You said "when in reality the ultra-right wing makes up a very small percentage of modern Japanese demographics". Dont you think your statement is contradicting to your ideas? Based on those few ultra-right wings the whole country is about to accept their ideas?(by including claims of Dokdo in text-books)
I guess you do acknowledge the fact that they are right-wings.
And yet you are accepting their ideas. So are you an ULTRA Right Wing?
Because the right-wings are the ones who are pushing the ideas to include Dokdo subject in the text-books.

"Here's the real question: Do you want people to know the truth? Or do you want people to hate Japan? Because judging from this and the vast majority of pro-Korean commentary, it looks overwhelmingly like the latter."

Yes I want people to know the truth. That includes Japanese kids who will be learning history. However, it seems like that will be highly unlikely. Most Japanese people I met really doesnt know about the Japanese envasion nor their war-crimes. I really hope they learn the truth.

I dont want people to hate Japan.

My statements are not gibberish. If you are a Japanese who have learned history in Japan, I doubt that you know the entire history or matter of fact the truth.
I am not trying to diss you but Japanese text-books are omitting many facts which would make Japan look bad.

 

[guy]

Ancient Korean Maps includes not only Ulleungdo and Usando, but also Dokdo.
Yea they might be drawn not exactly where it is but how accurate could they be thousand years ago?
Plus there are numerous facts out there you can just goolge it.(I dont even have to bother to write it in this post)

From my understanding, the name "Dokdo" only came into widespread use in the 19th century (evolving from Seokdo, Dolseom, Dokseom, etc). This is the argument used by linguists that claim the name Usando evolved into Dokdo. It would not make sense for an ancient Korean map to include both the old name Usando and the modern name Dokdo. If such maps exist they would be an errant few among the majority of maps that show only Ulleungdo and Usando, and using them as evidence would contradict the (stronger) argument of the etymology of the name Dokdo.

Regarding such maps, a major problem is falsification. One map which is referenced often among pro-Koreans is the 1530 map 八道総図, which shows Usando and Ulleungdo, with Usando to the west. However, in the Korean Dokdo Museum, a replica of the map was altered to depict Usando to the eastin order to corroborate the actual location of the disputed islets. A model with the same "simplification" was displayed but was later removed with the museum admitting their falsification.

This type of action is nothing short of distorting history, the same kind of "lies" that Korea accuses Japan of propogating. Though Japan is guilty of "willfully bending" the truth (particularly with the Yasukuni museum), Korea is far from innocent in this regard. This makes finding the actual truth very difficult, especially with finding "facts" through Google (I won't go into the problems of citation, academic credibility, "photoshopping", or even the overwhelming number of pro-Korean moderators on Wikipedia).

Unfortunately, damage is done in both countries as children are (obviously) brought to their respective museums to "learn one side of history". However, looking to higher education, many Japanese universities harbor numerous Japanese professors that support Korea's claim. On the other hand, from what has been reported, a number professors have been fired from Korean universities after revealing their pro-Japan stances, on the basis that their views could unbalance a sensitive issue (as if "balancing a sensitive issue" means "maintaining the popular majority") and might ruin the universities' repuations -- yes, being totalitarian is a really good reputation.

And plz dont think what I said is based on bias or emtions.
[...]
Whats wrong with the media portrayal? Let me tell you this. When my grandmother was in elementary school, the Japanese Pricipal always had his sword in school. Students were forced to use Japanese and if they even spoke a single Korean word they were punished. And you dare think Im hyping?

From your grandmother's personal experience, you would have us believe that everyone in Japan is a sword-carrying Japanese ultra-nationalist. Similarly, Korean media would have you believe that everything Japan does is a reflection of its militaristic character and an indication of an attack on Korean sovereignty. I do not excuse the unjust behavior of the particular Japanese principal, and I do not excuse the biased reporting of Korean media. Honestly, Japan learned its lesson and isn't about to declare war on Korea, and Korean media should not make such claims.

And far be it from me to consider your argument emotionally detached when your testimony is based on a personal relation. If you agree that not every Japanese person is like your grandmother's elementary school principal, why bring it up in the first place? I've already said that Japan's Prime Ministers' actions (regarding controversies like Yasukuni) should be revised -- and many Japanese feel so too -- but Korean media continues to give the impression that all Japanese are brainwashed.

Ah "Victim Mentality". Nice word. Yes true, Korea does have victim mentality against Japan. Should they not?

In America(USA), African-Americans were slaves for some part of its history. And they have been freed for more than 140 years now. And what do you think a black person would say if a white person claims him as his slave nowadays? Freed for more than 140 years and they still have "victim mentality".

I think you misunderstand my use of the term: Yes Korea was a victim of imperial Japan, but by clinging on to that idea of victimization, it creates a society that continually places blame on others for all of its misfortunes. More specifically, in the long run it prevents the society from accepting responsibility for its current situation and incapacitates it from moving forward. Signs of this in Korea are the slumping economy and shaky confidence in the government. I do not expect Koreans to overcome this "overnight", but progress has to start from somewhere, and inspiring anti-Japanese feelings (over a pair of rocks that will neither fix the economy nor solidify the government) isn't going to help.

The comparison to African Americans is yet another superlative. True, there are blacks that still hold onto their anti-white prejudices, but there are countless examples of black individuals that have overcome adversity against all odds and have become influential figures -- individuals who did not spend their lives blaming caucasians in order to receive land or money in reparation.

China is currently overcoming its victim mentality (following the humiliation from the West which took away its grandeur as "The Middle Kingdom"). By hosting a successful Olympics next month, China will indicate that it is capable of making positive contributions to the world, which will help build self-confidence and develop reconciliation with its past -- and this does not center around being anti-West.

You said "when in reality the ultra-right wing makes up a very small percentage of modern Japanese demographics". Dont you think your statement is contradicting to your ideas? Based on those few ultra-right wings the whole country is about to accept their ideas?(by including claims of Dokdo in text-books)
I guess you do acknowledge the fact that they are right-wings.
And yet you are accepting their ideas. So are you an ULTRA Right Wing?
Because the right-wings are the ones who are pushing the ideas to include Dokdo subject in the text-books.

I am not accepting their ideas through "indoctrination". Within the scope of Korea-Japan relations, I see little reason why Japan should bother claiming the rocks. But outside that, and concerning the precedence it would set regarding disputed islands with China and Russia, I can sense the ulterior motive (again, which I have suggested earlier).

More to the point and focusing on Korea-Japan relations, my sympathies lay with Japan if only for the reason that Korea's claim to the islets does not result in popular anti-Korean sentiments among Japanese in the way that Japan's claim results in anti-Japanese sentiments among Koreans. If Korea lost the islets there would undeniably be a massive outcry, but if Korea won the islets there's no guarantee that the anti-Japanese sentiments would stop. On the other hand, whether Japan won or lost the islets, the issue would probably become just a footnote in the minds of most Japanese, and very few Japanese would develop anti-Korean feelings, if anything at all.

Moreover, Japanese universities remain an open forum for the dispute as demonstrated by the aforementioned professors: under Japanese education, there's a fair chance that an individual can disagree with the textbooks and support Korea's claim (again, many professors do just that); however under Korean education, there's almost no chance (maybe even life threatening) for an individual to support Japan's claim. Maybe you're suggesting that there's no need for debate in Korea because it teaches "the correct and indesputable history in which anything pro-Korea is right and anything anti-Korea is wrong; the only thing Japan ever did was attack us; and anyone who disagrees is a liar and anti-Korean racist" (?). Forgive me if you are dumbfounded that I can be critical of Japan's war crimes and yet at the same time be dubious at best about a pair of rocks.

Yes I want people to know the truth. That includes Japanese kids who will be learning history. However, it seems like that will be highly unlikely. Most Japanese people I met really doesnt know about the Japanese envasion nor their war-crimes. I really hope they learn the truth.

I dont want people to hate Japan.

If you are a Japanese who have learned history in Japan, I doubt that you know the entire history or matter of fact the truth. ... Japanese text-books are omitting many facts which would make Japan look bad.

Many Koreans don't want people to know about the truth, they want them to know about their truth, and in particular only the truth about Japan's imperialist past and warcrimes. If you are Korean, I doubt you know anything besides the Korean perspective of its history [an ignorant comment, but so is the one about what Japanese people know]. So I fail to see how the education from either country constitutes "the entire history".

Again as I've said here and earlier, this is willful distortion of unverifiable facts, only this time through conflation of issues: specifically, saying Japan's claim of Liancourt Rocks is yet another war crime. I agree more needs to be done to address Japan's education regarding its history. However I am unconvinced about bringing the same level of contention to this textbook/academic dispute (which is not an act of war) over the islets. I fail to see what good is done if Korea continues to judge everything Japan does based on a single period of its history.

The way I see it, Korea is willfully using Japan's war crimes as an excuse to rally popular nationalist support over a pair of rocks that, in the long run, probably have relatively little value (economically or diplomatically) beyond symbolic meaning. Normally I have no problem with nationalist sentiment (every country has it), but Korea is allowing it to spiral out of control into outright anti-Japanese racism (check YouTube comments, Facebook groups, or just take a look at what VANK is up to) -- and that is more destructive to Korea-Japan relations than sovereignty over the rocks or passages in textbooks that can always be revised.





Since it's clear that emotional detachment is impossible, I'll put it this way: If Japan recognized Korea's sovereignty over the islets and corrected its textbooks accordingly, would it help you or your grandmother forgive Japan for its past war crimes? Probably not, and I wouldn't blame either of you. But having those strong emotional scars does not justify risking more bloodshed in the future by creating anti-Japanese sentiment (however popular it may be), and the Korean government, media, and education is largely responsible for allowing it to get out of control.

 

[shindb81]

Very logical piece of writing, guy.
Yes, emotional detachment is impossible for most people...although it could only be human nature.
I think I'll stop here with the islands discussion. I realized that I'd been believing what I have heard from just one side. But today, with some research, I found that as you said, it's much too difficult to determine the truth. I don't think I want to jump in for more chaos.

 

[Panic_Crow]

look at the facts not the conflicts. stop making mountains out of mole hills

 

[d2p4show]

You keep saying im Emotional but im speaking of the facts.
My grandmothers story, is YET ANOTHER FACT.(you just dont get it do you?)
Its everyone's grandmothers story.
And how is that a medial portrayal or emotional attachments?
HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY KEEP CALLING THESE FACTS EMOTIONAL AND BLAME KOREA FOR VICTIM MENTALITY?

Thats truely A fact which JAPANESE TEXT_BOOK doesnot INCLUDE.

So there is a big difference. The whole understanding of a one story is so different.

Japanese should not attempt to crawl out of their island to the mainlands.

As being a Great Economical Power in the Eastern Asia, Japan should've act as a leader to other countries in order to receive respect. However, they are very little minded and keep holding on to their imperialism thinking. That is why they get no respect from any neighboring countries.

These mentality and attitudes would be really helpfull when Japan will be disputing with China and Russia for other disputed territories.

anyways, It really doesnt matter what you argue.

Dokdo was, is, and will be a Korean Territory as long as there is Korea.

Dont try to make excuses or trying to bring some weird facts.

Japan will be never respected by other countries unless they fix their acts. Dont blame other people, think why Japan is getting disrespected in the international society.


Im done.


ps. could Japan stop the whaling? Dont they just get it? Everyones calling them stupid and they JUST DONT GET IT. And asking why no one respect Japan?

 

[kim0702a]

Someday in our future... Dokdo.. meaning the ISLAND OF PEACE...

 

[guy]

Well here you go:

The [dispute over the islets] has affected 104 exchange programs between Japan and South Korea, including the cancellation of 63 ... Most of the cancellations, postponements, suspensions and scalings down of such events ... were decided on at the request of South Korea.

So much for teaching Japanese kids the right history.

 

[iamnowonline]

what all of you guys are missing is the fact that japan decided to invade korea because they were supported by what is now termed "zionists."
http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/5168

How does this relate to the news? The island will go to whoever the zionists will think is going to be their asset or front. The so-called emotional scuffle from mainstream media is always purposely incited by the zionists (who owns most of the world's media outlets) so that idiots will not see past the facade of so called "historical documents."

The fact that the island belongs to korea is irrelevant, since superficial documents will surface to support whoever is going to be the zionists puppet nation. If it's japan, then it'll end up as japanese territory with so-called supporting documents. If it's korea, then it'll end up as korean territory with so-called supporting documents.

Again, I point out that most of the world's major media outlets belong to the zionists, which is unreliable as a source of relatively unbiased information.

 

[guy]

How is this helpful?

I don't disagree that a significant amount of the world's media outlets are under Jewish control, but I fail to see how supplanting a bilateral power struggle (Korea/Japan) with a hidden conspirator (Zionist) clarifies the ordeal. What difference does it make whether historical documents are forged by Koreans, Japanese, or Zionists?

The assertion that "the fact of the islands belonging to Korea is irrelevant" illustrates the problem. Where is this so-called "fact that the islets belong to Korea", and if Zionism is indeed at play, isn't that "fact" suspect to the same falsification?

I don't deny that there might be some greater power at play in this debacle (is it Zionism? maybe a co-conspiracy among East Asian nations? or just an elaborate cover for an under-the-table deal between Korea and Japan?), but when you try to expose a macro conspiracy by throwing out the micro details, you make it harder to discover the objective truth.

Is your argument that exposing a connection between Japan and Zionism proves Korea's claim over the islets? But you admit that Zionists could simply be manipulating the truth to Korea's favor (again, distorting the truth). Or is your contention that, if Zionism were exposed and somehow overthrown, Korea and Japan would suddenly become friends?

More often than not, macro-conspiracies are a convenient way for people to ignore data (saying that "everything is a lie"), and that in itself is in many ways a distortion of truth.