Comments

Posts

Takeshima Day 2009

Yesterday was Takeshima Day in Shimane Prefecture, so TBS news went to Seoul and reported on a new “Dokdo Experience” exhibit in Seoul that is aimed at kindergartners:

It is already common for South Korean elementary schools to teach children that the Liancourt Rocks are undeniably Korean territory. The children shown in the video are mere kindergartners, but they already know the “Dokdo is our land” song and they believe that Dokdo is wonderful. The man in charge of the exhibit believes it is important to teach youngsters about the “value and history” of the islets.

So much for the hope that future generations of South Koreans might be able to treat the territorial dispute as an unimportant issue…

[via Dokdo or Takeshima blog]

—

Akihabara News – Gadgetry from Japan (Subscribe)
dannychoo.com – Your portal to Japan (Subscribe)
Kirainet.com – A geek in Japan (Subscribe)

162 comments - What do you think? Posted by James - February 23, 2009 at 7:44 am

Categories: Anti-Japan Tags:

Matt

2 worthless barren rocks sticking out of the ocean. How freaking hard is it to
A: just let a country have them.
B: just have each country take 1.

Nothing good is going to come out of them anyways. Sometimes I think there is fighting just for the sake of fighting. This is one of those cases.
http://www.chirimotsumoreba.net Jordan

It’s sad to see South Korea becoming more and more like their North Korean brothers every year.
Rocky

Actually those “rocks” are extremely valuable. The two rocks makes a difference of sea territory.

Imo it makes Korea look bad here, but to the Koreans it justified.
Say someone in Europe suddenly takes claim of California. Koreans have been occupying it after WWII (And before Japan took over Korea), and at some point Japan has been claiming it is in fact their territory because they never technically “gave it back” to Korea in what ever treaty i don’t know about the specifics.

Koreans are bitter about the Japanese Occupation — mind you it wasn’t a pretty one, a lot involving killing the country’s spirit (e.g burning the country’s symbolic flower into pieces, forcing the Koreans to change their name into Japanese Style, using the women of Korea as prostitutes) — and with that viewpoint of believing Japanese Occupation was “wrong” –> therefore the territory that Japan occupied and took away must be rightfully a part of Korea,

Korea’s claim on Dokdo/Takeshima is not anti-Japan/like North Korea, but a rightful claim on their territory. Also, Japan actually did not return a bunch of islands they took over the occupation, so to the Koreans this island is the last remaining pride they have.

To the Japanese, they have to claim this island is theirs, because if they easily give it back to Korea, they are in a way admitting all the islands they DO OCCUPY, yet formally have not given, are not actually a part of their land.

ponta

Imo it makes Korea look bad here, but to the Koreans it justified.
Say someone in Europe suddenly takes claim of California.

The comparison is unjustified.The fact is that　

Korea has no old maps of Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo), and the only two references to the rocks in Korean history, before Japan incorporated them in 1905, suggest that they were part of Japanese territory.
http://www.japanprobe.com/?p=8955

In other words, Korea stole the territory after the liberation from Japan when Japan could do nothing about it and has been occupying it illegally.

But sadly Korea makes Dokdo the emotional issues and and the symbol of their ultra-nationalism.

It is best to settle the matter at ICJ.
That’s what Japan has been insisting on.
LOD

Are you saying there are some Korean islands which Japan still occupy now? Could you kindly tell us their names?
stereo

I am tired of this argument, but someone has to tell anyway.

On February 22, 1905, Japan declared Takeshima its territory, and that is why people in Shimane commemorate this day. Before 1905, there is no fact or evidence that Korea took effective control over Takeshima. Therefore, Japan’s title is pretty much established by the declaration.

Now, Koreans claim such absurd things like,
Seokdo is actually Dokdo.
Jusando is actually Dokdo.
Usando is actually Dokdo.
and so on. They are not.

After WW2, Japan did agree to return what it had taken from Korea during annexation period that started from 1910. But because Japan never took Takeshima from Korea, in other words, Takeshima belonged to Japan from the beginning, Japan has no obligation to return Takeshima to Korea. Korea’s occupation of Takeshima is in violation of international treaties.

Koreans, if you think your claim over the rocks is well justified, why do not you bring the case to International Court of Justice, to end the bitter relationship with your neighbor?

Mister M

THAT IS TRUE
The Overthinker

Gerry Bevers does the most thorough research on this. Look up his stuff. He started off assuming the Korean side was true, but found it rather dubious. There is a great deal of effort done by people who have no hope of changing the status quo on determining just what cryptic markings on a map mean.
Whats wrong?

Incorrect. Japans 1905 theft of Dokdo was just that- theft. According to international law, territory cannot be annexed for military purposes or without the consent of neighbors. Japan knowingly broke both laws. Japan took Dokdo in 1905 in order to establish a military outpost, territorial expansion and for a staging ground to swallow Korea and fend off the Russians. Japanese warships did several military surveys prior to 1905 and documents further provide evidence of Japans militaristic intentions over Dokdo. Plans for a tiny military installation were already being drawn up before 1905. Japan did not tell Chosun of its seizure of Dokdo until 1906 or 1907(when Chosun was pretty much powerless). When the Japanese government did finally tell the Korean government of their theft of Dokdo. The Korean government immediately protested stating that “Dokdo was Korean territory”. If the Chosun government did not consider Dokdo to be sovereign territory, then they wouldnt have protested nor would Japan actually have had to write up a law to annex Dokdo in 1905.

In conclusion, Japans 1905 claim to Dokdo was illegal. Due to its illegality, it is not a valid claim nor would it work in court. I cannot stress this enough. JAPANS 1905 THEFT OF DOKDO BROKE INTERNATIONAL LAW AND THUS IS ILLEGAL AND INVALID. Anyone who believes Dokdo is rightfully Japanese because of the 1905 claim needs a proper history lesson.

Whats wrong?

There are also plenty of maps prior to 1905 that validate Koreas claims to the islands. Japanese historians retort this obvious fact by “claiming” that all Korean maps prior to 1905 were naming different islands. This childish act shows desperation on the Japanese side. There are litterally hundreds of tiny islands scattered all around Korea, Japan and in between. Some smaller then a car. Its rather convenient for the feeble evidenced Takeshima supporters to claim that all maps supporting Korea were naming every single island out there excluding Dokdo. Even though Dokdo easily stands out due to its size and obvious shape.

How very convenient of them.

The ICJ excuse doesnt work either. Why? Because Korea already controls the islands and 99% of world maps already lists Korea as having soverignty over the islands. Why does Korea have to go to court over an island they already control? If Japan decided to claim Hawaii belonged to them. Would America go to court with Japan or simply ignore them since Japanese claims are nothing more then empty words?

Another fact Takeshima supports do not recognize is that in order for Korea to go to the ICJ, it would have to drop its soverignty over Dokdo. The Korean government would basically have to give up the island and make it neutral territory. In doing so, the waters around Dokdo would also become neutral. Why the hell would they do that? More importantly, if it did become neutral territory. Japanese ships could freely land and fish the waters of Dokdo without getting blown to bits by the Korean navy. Thats the difference. Korea controls the islands, Japan doesnt even own a drop of water around the islands. If Dokdo truly did not belong to either countries(as Japan claims), then the Japanese government would have been able to go to court by itself decades ago and resolve the issue. Instead Japan has to constantly beg Korea to go to court with them, knowing full well the Korea will say no. Japan either doesnt go to court at all or it goes to court with Koreas permission. Japan cannot go to court by themselves because Korea controls the islands. If Korea refuses to grant them permission then tough luck. Japan has no power in this issue.

P.S. The Japanese government knows full well that if they did go to court, they would lose miserably against Koreas mountain of evidence. But thats not what the Japanese government is aiming for. They dont actually care about the ICJ. The Japanese government only wants the Korean government to drop its sovereignty and turn the islands into neutral territory. Once this is done, the Japanese government can refuse to ever go to court. Thus turning Dokdo in a perpetually neutral territory. Very disgusting and evil I might say.
helical

@Whats wrong?

You were making some rational sense (though peppered with loaded words) based on your premises — if the question of whether your premises are grounded in facts were put aside for a moment.

But you must have smoked a big one midways through.

Japan has been repeatedly asking Korea to go to ICJ to settle this matter, every single year, and every year, Korea has been the one to refuse this.
IF Korea has to admit that the Liancourt Rocks are neutral territory first before it can take the case to the ICJ as you say, is there any reason the situation’s any different for Japan?
Then you say that Japan will then not go to the ICJ and keep it perpetually neutral … except in the same breath you then say Japan could have taken the case to the ICJ and settled it by herself if it was truly neutral.

Good job, you’ve contradicted yourself.
Try again.
stereo

Whats wrong?
“According to international law, territory cannot be annexed for military purposes or without the consent of neighbors.”

Show me that “international law”. Actually, there is no such international law. I will tell you in advance that notice is different from consent.

This is a classical case that Korean argument is filled with untruth.
ponta

Incorrect. Japans 1905 theft of Dokdo was just that- theft.

Incorrect.
You can’t steal something I don’t have from me.
Korea had no knowledge about Dokdo at the time.
Korea had no effective control over Dokdo at the time.
Stereo

Since I cannot read Korean, I cannot tell for sure, but it seems this Korean government document tells Koreans knew Japan’s incorporation of Takeshima on Feb.22 1905, the same day when Japan so declared.

http://db.history.go.kr/url.jsp?ID=NIKH.DB-gj_006_1905_02_22_0040
Whats wrong?

helical, maybe you should learn to read. I did not come remotely close to contradicting myself. Korea doesnt need to go to the ICJ. It already controls the danm islands. The purpose of the ICJ is to designate territory neither side controls to the victor. The fact is, Korea already controls the islands, making the ICJ invalid in this instance.

Japan doesnt even give a crap about the ICJ. In fact, it knows full well that it would lose to Korea in the ICJ. But thats not what theyre aiming for. Most international courts side with the current occupier excluding territory won via “aggressive full out war”. In order for the Korean government to go to court with Japan, it would first need to acknowledge that Dokdo is a disputed territory. In order for a territory to become legally and offically disputed, it must become NEUTRAL territory rather than soverign territory(as Dokdo is right now). You cannot go to court over a disputed territory when one country already controls the territory and holds completely soverignty over it. Then it no longer becomes a disputed territory. It becomes soverign territory.

If Dokdo truly was a disputed territory, then Japan could have gone to the ICJ by itself 60 years ago and ended this petty dispute. Instead the only thing the Japanese government can do is whine incessently about going to the ICJ. Which Korea is in no way obliged or legally binded to do so. Too bad for Japan.

Japan doesnt really want to challenge Korea in the ICJ. It only wants the Korean government to turn the island into a neutral territory(drop its sovereignty). Korea cannot go to court unless it drops Dokdo. If the Korean government dropped Dokdo, then Japan could freely use Dokdo due to its neutral status. Once this happens, the Japanese government could freely refuse to ever go to court. As there is no law forcing the two countries from having to go to court.

Thus issuing a perpetual territorial dispute and making Japan a moral hypocrite.
helical

It’s really too bad that some people or countries still seem to interpret attempts by others to settle disputes between them verbally or diplomatically in a civilized fashion without violence or threats thereof as tacit approval of their legitimacy or “sovereignty”.
Dr.Yu

There is no dispute. It is Korean. Can’t you see the Korean flag in Dokdo? It´s time for japan accept it and show some respect to international law.
Dr.Yu

Helical,
Tell me, what is the chance a country would give part of its territory to another country in a “diplomatically and in a civilized fashion” just because this country demands so?
If Korea claims that Tokio is Korean land would Japan settle this “dispute” “diplomatically and in a civilized fashion” in ICJ? I’m sure Japan would simply ignore such nonsense.
Now, we don’t brainwash our children to hate the japanese, but we do teach them korean history and sadly for you, Korean history is full of japanese invasion of korean peninsula, and children learn that from ancient times Japan inflicted suffering and sorrow to korean people because they came to korea to steal and kidnap people and they also killed many Koreans when attempted to conquer korean peninsula for their expansionism ambition. Do you remember Ear grave in Japan (mimizuka)? Have you hear about reaping what you sow?
I think somebody needs to teach the Japanese that murdering and slaughtering people is wrong and by doing so one assumes the risk of being hated.
Again, don’t blame the Koreans, but assume your fault (or simply stay quiet and don’t bother anymore).
ponta

If Korea claims that Tokio is Korean land would Japan settle this “dispute” “diplomatically and in a civilized fashion” in ICJ?

Sure, why not？

but we do teach them Korean history

Teaching history of Japanese invasion into Korea is good, but teach them also how Korea emulated comfort women system from Japan after Japan lost the war and Korea sacrificed Korean women as comfort women and still hasn’t apologized and compensated while Japan offered apology and compensation for cofmort women. For that matter, tell them Japan apologized to Korea several times and compensated.

Tell them also that Korean had no map nor documents about Dokdo at the time and yet demanded the U.S. to ask Japan to return Tsuhima,which no one doubted as Japanese territory, Prangdo, which was imaginary land, and Dokdo because it wanted to expand the territory in the postwar mess.
Korea is still looking for the old map of Dokdo!!

Tell them also that Korean took over Dokdo at the time by brutal force, leaving Japanese fishermen injured and dead.

If Korea did that, I think Japan would be willing to drop the case and make Dokdo a neutral nature preserve administered by both Korea and Japan.
Dr.Yu

Sure. Come to Korea to discuss the matter. I will schedule a meeting for you with the korean congress and President Lee. You will be awarded the Nobel price.
Ponta, thanks for showing how irrational and emotional a japanese debater is.
How old are you Ponta? I haven’t heard such a cutting riposte since I was about ten.
Ponta, the problem with your logic is that despite of the fact that your country committed all possible and imaginable crimes against humanity during your history, you simply choose to ignore this “detail” to point the finger to “evil” korea. Wake up man. Nobody believes your lies except you.
Korea will never claim Tokio as korean land because it is not true, and Japan will never accept to go to ICJ because Japan has better things to do, and Korea will never turn Dokdo into a neutral land because we are the owners. It was always korean land, and that’s the reason why Japan formally declared that Dokdo is Korean land many times in history.
stereo

Dr.Yu: “what is the chance a country would give part of its territory to another country in a “diplomatically and in a civilized fashion” just because this country demands so?”

There are a lot of cases in which territorial disputes are settled in a diplomatic and civilized fashion.

US and the Netherlands settled territorial dispute over Palmas Island through ICJ.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_of_Palmas_Case

Denmark, Norway and other nations settled territorial dispute over Greenland through Permanent Court of Arbitration.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland#Sovereignty

Norway, UK and the Netherlands settled territorial dispute over Svalbard through diplomatic negotiation and established Spitsbergen Treaty.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Svalbard#Spitsbergen_Treaty

And most importantly, in the 18th century, Korea and Japan settled territorial dispute over Ulleungdo through diplomatic negotiation. Koreans knew Ulleungdo since ancient time, but since the island was “too remote to control” the King employed so-called “empty island policy”, by which no Koreans were allowed to go or live in the island. In other words, it was out of their sphere of control and they abandoned it.

In the 17th century, Japanese started to settle in Ulleungdo, where no Koreans lived. (At this point, Japan possessed the island.) In the 18th century, Korean King started their territorial claim against Japan. After much negotiation, Japan conceded Ulleugndo “for the friendship of two nations”. There is an unpleasant epilogue to this case. Koreans could not understand what “concession” is, and thought the concession is evidence of fault on Japanese side. So they started demanding apology in addition to concession. The lesson is “Don’t concede anything to Koreans.”
ponta

Korea will never claim Tokio as korean land because it is not true, and Japan will never accept to go to ICJ because Japan has better things to do,

Japan will accept going to ICJ because Japan will lose nothing.
Korea will never claim Tokyo as Korean land because it will be another laughing stock and embarrassing just as when it claimed Tsushima and Prangdo as Korean land.

Korea will never turn Dokdo into a neutral land because we are the owners.

If Korean ownership of Dokdo is as obvious as Japan’s ownership of Tokyo, people wonder why Korea shouldn’t send it to ICJ and let it declare that Japan was wrong, Japan sucks.
People who has studied the history of the islands know why Korea shouldn’t.

Korea is an illegal owner.

Tell Korean people the true history of the islands, you might gain the co-ownership and friendship with Japan despite the fact that Korea has no valid historical and legal ground on Dokdo/Takeshima now.
Or let’s go to ICJ and let Korean people know the truth hard way, though it means Korea will lose Dokdo entirely.
These are very simple and civilized ways to settle the issue.
Don’t fuel ultra-nationalism by Dokdo.

that’s the reason why Japan formally declared that Dokdo is Korean land many times in history.

Documents please.

you simply choose to ignore this “detail” to point the finger to “evil” korea.

I can give you the details but it is simply off the topic.
You picked up Hideyoshi’s invasion into Korea from 1592 to 1598, which has nothing to do with the topic. People might wonder why you mentioned it.

And don’t get me wrong. I said it was good to teach the history of Japanese invasion into Korea.
I just wanted to point out many Korean people were not told the whole story.

The rest of your comment is what you were told by me and other posters. You are just repeating them out of context.
stereo

Dr Yu: “It(Dokdo) was always korean land, and that’s the reason why Japan formally declared that Dokdo is Korean land many times in history.”

Just amazing. Dokdo had never been Korean land before 1950′s. Seokdo, Usando, Jasando and so on are not proved to be Dokdo. Japan has never formally or informally declared Dokdo Koeran land. If you insist otherwise, just show me one of such declarations.
The Overthinker

“How old are you Ponta? I haven’t heard such a cutting riposte since I was about ten.”

Are you seriously trying to consider ponta’s response at the same level as your eaarlier “If you like Gerry so much, why not marry him?” line?

Here’s a problem: “Korean history is full of japanese invasion of korean peninsula, and children learn that from ancient times Japan inflicted suffering and sorrow to korean people”

Full of? I count precisely two, which were really just the same one in two stages, at the end of the 16th century. Unless you count the Treaty of Kangwha by gunboat diplomacy. The occupation in the 20th century was not an invasion of course. But more than that is the emotionalism of the teaching, if your account is accurate. It’s like the UK still being angry at France for the Hundred Years War or something. They’re not even mad at the Germans any more. Are Korean children being taught to be victims rather than learning history? Is the Mound of Ears really used as an example of Japanese cruelty even today? And why is that so much worse than the standard bringing back of severed heads?
Dr.Yu

My japanese friends,
I won´t give you history lessons here. Dokdo is Korean. Respect international law.
This discussion is getting irrational and emotional. Ok, let´s go to ICJ, make the appointment. I’ll see you guys there tomorrow. Don’t be late.
Dr.Yu

Stereo,
Nations can chose the way they will settle their disputes, some by force, some by submitting the dispute to the court. Some chose the arbitration as you pointed out, but some prefer another way like Israel and Palestine, Pakistan and India, USA and Cuba, Equador and Colombia, China and Taiwan, Chile and Peru, Japan and China, Japan and Russia and so on. That depends on each nation and they will decide the way best suit their particular need.
The “dispute” between Korea and Japan won´t be decided in the court because Korean stance is that there is no dispute, so no arbitration is needed. Japan does the same with China with the Diaoyu island´s case, Japan will never take the case to ICJ because as Ponta said, there is no dispute according to Japan government stance.
You keep arguing that that´s the civilized and diplomatic way to solve disputes, but it is also civilized and diplomatic manner respecting the sovereignty of other countries and respecting their will as well.
I repeat it again: it is irrational for Korea to go to ICJ, because Korea already has the island and don´t need to gamble the island just because Japan is wining.
Don´t waste your time with Korea, file a suit against Russia at ICJ for the Kurilas Island (although I think it belongs to Russia now).
oillusion

Dr.Yu…you really need to step back and see who’s irrational and emotional because from where I stand it is you.

You assume whoever disagrees with you is Japanese… and you write a lot but I have yet to see any proof from you for your stance on the issue. Show us your source for your conclusions please.

I’m not saying your wrong or right how can I? You haven’t proved anything…so prove it by showing us your source material and not just saying I’m right and your wrong.(that is childish)
Dr.Yu

My friend Ponta,
Except by Dokdo and some historical issues Japan and Korea are already friendly nations. Korea and Japan trade goods, people of both countries are interested in each other´s culture, they cooperate in several fields like finance, science, culture even in the military field, and I have excellent Japanese friends. My best Japanese friend´s name is Masami Sonoda, and he helped me a lot when I graduated from my college.
Look, I don´t want to keep this futile discussion and we both made clear our stance in this matter, so let´s finish this discussion now. Only the future will tell what will happen to the Dokdo issue, but clearly it won´t be decided by us, ok?
Dr.Yu

Illusion,
I wont give you proofs because you can find thousands of proofs in the internet. There are lots of sites showing the stance of both countries so good luck. I won´t waste my time repeating them.
stereo

It is pathetic that someone would join a debate with no intention at all to prove his point. I hope this is limited to this particular Korean.
ponta

My friend Ponta,
Except by Dokdo and some historical issues Japan and Korea are already friendly nations. Korea and Japan trade goods, people of both countries are interested in each other´s culture, they cooperate in several fields like finance, science, culture even in the military field,

I basically agree.

Only the future will tell what will happen to the Dokdo issue, but clearly it won´t be decided by us, ok?

Basically I agree.
That is basically what Japanese side is saying.
Don’t use this issue to fuel Korean ultra-nationalism.
The way kindergarten kids on the video, for the matter, Korean kids in general, are educated are just the way that makes Dokdo the symbol of Korean nationalism rather than symbol of friendships.

Let the experts deal with it so ordinary people from both countries can enjoy friendships.
And the best way to do that, as Gerry Beaver suggests, is either
1)let the International Court of Justice settle it.
2)make it a neutral nature preserve administered by both Korea and Japan by telling the people whole truth.
Dr.Yu

Ponta, thanks for you answer.
Korean kids don’t get ultra-nationalist education, that´s why korean young people are not ultra-nationalist. You don’t see korean kindergarten kids chopping their fingers and worshiping war criminals.
There are ultra-nationalist in Korea (just like in Japan and everywhere), but there are minority and their influence over korean government is not as strong as in Japan.
The video shown by the japaneses TV shows nothing but the ordinary, and the kids are taught about the Dokdo issue because it is part of Korean history. I’m sure japanese kids are also taught about japanese history and the “Takeshima” issue under Japanese perspective.
Korean stance is clear and the more Japan keeps rising controversy and lies, the more Korea will answer to this provocation.
Finally, you are getting repetitive, so the answers will be repetitive as well.
ponta

There are ultra-nationalist in Korea (just like in Japan and everywhere), but there are minority

That is what I heard.
Nevertheless,　the Dokdo rider and other crazy Korean guys and posters on the media and on the Internet ranting about Dokdo in crazy ways in Korea and outside Korea make people think that there must be ultra-nationalistic education must be going on in Korea and among some kyopos.

People won’t see this education on the video as “ordinary” —that’s why Japanese TV picked it up —but are inclined to see it and , for instance, your groundless allegation about Japanese education and politics as an result of such Korean nationalistic education in Korea and among some Kyopos.

As you said,

Nations can chose the way they will settle their disputes、

But insinuating the war is a barbaric way to settle the issue.
Modern world has found the way to settle the issue in an civilized way.
Let the experts handle it and go to ICJ or negotiate diplomatically by telling its people the whole truth rather than making Dokdo the symbol of Korean ultra-nationalism. I hope Korea will take this route so that ordinary Japanese and Koreans can make friends with each other more comfortably.
Dr.Yu

“But insinuating the war is a barbaric way to settle the issue.
Modern world has found the way to settle the issue in an civilized way.”
So sad Japan didn´t chose this way before WWII …. if I remember well japan ultra-nationalism lead Japan to be part of the “axis” with Germany and Italy, right?
Now you seem to be frightened by the korean ultra-nationalist kids, but don’t worry because they don’t bite nor eat people alive.
I repeat it again: it is irrational for Korea to go to ICJ, because Korea already has the island and don´t need to gamble the island just because Japan is wining.
Don´t waste your time with Korea, file a suit against Russia and China at ICJ for the Kurilas and Diaoyu islands (although I think Kurilas belongs to Russia now)
The Overthinker

“You don’t see korean kindergarten kids chopping their fingers and worshiping war criminals.”

I don’t see too many Japanese kindergarten kids being taught to sing songs about Takeshima either. It is tantamount to child abuse to indoctrinate them in this way. Tell that that Dokdo is Korean land, if you like, in the context of a geography lesson, assuming kindergarten kids in Korea are actually given geography lessons. When they get a bit older, they can be taught it was an island taken over by Japan and then reclaimed by Korea (I am not saying that is exactly what happened or not), just sticking to the (Korean version of the) facts. Fine and dandy – it’s acceptable to toe the line on official views of your country’s lands, especially as to contradict them is often even more problematic at this stage. But to use it as a naked way to instill nationalism into those who are too young to know the deeper meaning and context is just wrong. It is like a religion (something also inculcated into the young): it promotes nothing but fanaticism and single-mindedness, leaving out any room for subtlety and context. It is brainwashing, and brainwashing of the people least able to recognise it for what it is.

Incidentally I just looked through my copy of Kuwashii Shakai, a social studies textbook for the 6th grade of primary education, to see what Japanese shougakusei (not kindergardeners though) are taught about Takeshima. Not a damn thing. It’s not even mentioned. it does say, however, that “In 1937 the Japanese army killed many Chinese indiscriminately in the Nanjing Incident, which was denounced by the world.” It also says the Army blew up the South Manchurian Railroad and blamed the Chinese to start a war.
The Overthinker

“So sad Japan didn’t chose [sic] this way before WWII ….”

That is an impressive comment. So basically your view is that Japan can never claim a wish to settle anything in a peaceful or civilized manner because they invaded East Asia last century?
Dr.Yu

I’m just stating the obvious, when its is conveninet Japan uses the force, when it is not, they use “diplomacy”.
ponta

I repeat it again: it is irrational for Korea to go to ICJ, because Korea already has the island and don´t need to gamble the island just because Japan is wining.

Yes Japan is winning on the argument:plenty of evidences clearly suggest that historically and legally Takeshima is Japanese territory and Korea stole it in the postwar mess.
As you admit, that is why Korea does not want to send it ICJ.

Now, people can’t help wondering if Korea considers it rational to possess the territory illegally by brutal force and keep deceiving its people to pump up nationalism rather than settling the dispute in a civilized way.

when its is convenient Japan uses the force, when it is not, they use “diplomacy”.

It is not convenient for Japan that Korea occupies the territory illegally but it is Japan who propose to settle the issue diplomatically and/or at ICJ.
It is some of Korean people who insinuate the war because Dokdo makes them face up to the inconvenient truth.
The Overthinker

When it is convenient, America uses blacks as slaves, when it is not, they elect them “president.”
Dr.Yu

Guys,
History proved that the only ultra-nationalist here were the japanese that committed war crimes during the WWII and today worship this criminals as patriots and heroes.
Now, korean children not only learn songs about Dokdo, but they also learn to make drawings about Dokdo and make poems about the island, yet they don´t commit war crimes or worship criminals as heroes.
You guys are desperate and now are appealing to nonsense to bring down Korea to the same moral level that Japan is after the war crimes, but it won’t happen because your arguments are based on lies.
Leave the kids alone, they don’t profess the Dokdo cult as you suggesting, nor they sacrifice Japanese kids in Dokdo island to honor the island. There is no such nonsense.
I thought it was Koreans role to play the irrational and emotional ones here, but you guys are outperforming koreans in this field.
The Overthinker

Again, everything in your rambling boils down to your insistence that Japan has lost any right to morality after WW2. And your insistence that you are the calm and logical one here is quite an astounding bit of chutzpah. In fact it is a classic case of this issue:

“The report urges Seoul and Washington to keep publicizing the importance of their bilateral relations at home. Historical issues are dogging Korean-Japanese relationship, it notes, and urges Japan to stop provoking Korea but adding that Korea’s excessive response allows the issues to remain burning. It warns that Seoul’s noisy protests over the Dokdo islets, an area it already controls, could mar its international credibility.”
(http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200902/200902260001.html)
Dr.Yu

The report is clear: Japan must stop provoking Korea because it already posses the island.
The Overthinker

No, the report says that korean over-reaction is making the country look foolish. See these three words: “Korea’s excessive response”. And the nature of Japanese provocation is usually something like a publisher putting out a textbook which says “Takeshima is Japanese.”
ponta

History proved that the only ultra-nationalist here were the japanese that committed war crimes during the WWII and today worship this criminals as patriots and heroes.

And　don’t forget Korean ultra-nationalists equivalents.
If you want me to cite, I’ll cite.

Now, korean children not only learn songs about Dokdo, but they also learn to make drawings about Dokdo and make poems about the island

Just like North Korean kids are worshiping Kim Jong il?

yet they don´t commit war crimes or worship criminals as heroes

Japanese kids neither learn takeshima song nor make drawing about takeshima nor make poems about the island, And they don’t commit war crimes or worship criminals as heroes.

I thought it was Koreans role to play the irrational and emotional ones here

Did　you think that way? Hmmm. Is that because you often see Koreans do that?

but you guys are outperforming koreans in this field.

An example of irrational and emotional accusation?
Dr.Yu

Hey guys, look at the image below:

http://img261.imageshack.us/my.php?image=busdokdo.jpg
Dr.Yu

Korean historical evidence of Dokdo possession. have fun.

http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/
ponta

The image suggests that it is is posted on the bus because many people think–mistakenly or not— Korean kids are ultra-nationalists. So it is not just Japanese but also English speaking people who suppose—mistakenly or not—Korean kids are educated to be ultra-nationalistic. And there must be reason why they think so.

And you can find the link to dokdo-takashima com on Gerry’s site. (Steve Barber’s Site —I guess he is on this thread under another handle.)
Dokdo-takeshima com does not have comment sections to protect it from someone revealing the inconvenient truth.
On the other hand, Gerry’s site has comment sections to search for the truth through dialogues. Steve often leaves a comment and ・・・you’ll read it yourself.
Unfortunately, as you expected above, you’ll also see some Koreans who is playing irrational and emotional role.
But in any case, enjoy reading discussions on “Dokdo-or-Takeshima? ” too.

http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/
Dr.Yu

Take it to ICJ. Act in a civilized manner. Let the experts decide. Use the diplomacy. Stop being ultra-nationalist. Don’t be emotional or irrational. Turn the Diaoyu island into a neutral island to be administrated by both countries thus assuring eternal friendship between China and Japan (and of course share the EEZ around the island with China). Don`t use Diaoyu island as a symbol of japanese ultra-nationalism. Stop lying to japanese people about the Diaoyu island and teach them that Japan got it illegaly.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D96J86780&show_article=1
The Overthinker

I think that bus sign is another of the “add your phrase here!” fun things you can do on the net – like with graves or church signs.
ponta

Dr.Yu
As for senkaku island, I told you to ask China to send it to ICJ.
China is the one who think there is a dispute.

And Japan is not acting as Korea is acting toward Dokdo.

So your analogy fails. Sorry.
http://aki-akiaki.blogspot.com Aki

Here is another bus sign for Dr. Yu.
http://partypooperwontdie.blogspot.com/2009/02/dokdo-update.html
Dr.Yu

Here is another photo for you too. Have fun

http://img365.imageshack.us/img365/3186/dokdoakisan.jpg

Mister M

NO WAY FOR PEACE AND RESTAURATION OF GOOD RELATIONS WITH KOREA.THAT IS REGRETABLE, TWO GREAT COUNTRIES WITH A WONDERFUL CULTURAL VALUES, AND FIGHTING WITH EACH OTHER. SAD, BUT VERY SAD.

The Overthinker

Is your Caps Lock key stuck?
helical

yES i THINK SO TOO.

helical

Of course, if the Liancourt Rocks didn’t exist, this whole ridiculousness would still be taking place, except it would be Korea trying to grab Tsushima, which is bigger, closer to home, and inhabited.
Actually they probably are already, sort of, by buying up Tsushima real estate through Korean-owned businesses, but that’s rather hard to prove as having some organized motivation, and doesn’t escape the realm of “strongly suggestive” of their true motives.
Roger

Time is on Korea’s side. The longer they hold onto the island the more Korean it will get. Once Korea agrees to take the case to an international court they know they will lose so Korea’s strategy is not to take this to court and keep holding to the islands long enough until people accept it as Korean. Call Korea dirty or whatever but their plan is working and there is nothing Japan can do about it.

Big D

Just my opinion and I don’t know how the politics of it work…

but even with Korea holding the islands for don’t know how long, as long as every year Japan reaffirm it claims on Takeshima/Dokdo Islands and make it known to the world, it will continue to be a disputed territories between Korea and Japan.
If Japan explain this and it’s history, and the fact that Korea illegally took control of the dispute islands, maybe the international committee won’t truly recognize the islands as Korean territory even as time pass since it did unlawfully took it by force. The other nations may take sympathize with Japan and condemn Korea’s actions and would not acknowledge Korea’s claim.

Maybe this is Japan’s plan to counteract Korea’s control of Takeshima/Dokdo Islands over time…

but I don’t know, is there a law/policy about how long a piece of territory could be disputed and who could legally take it?
LOD

I agree. And that’s why Koreans shouldn’t worry in the first place.
It’s this simple: They already have it, and Japanese is unlikely to take it back.

Japanese don’t talk much about Senkaku, because they already have it. Russians don’t talk much about Iturup, because they already have it. But in the case of Dokdo, Koreans do talk much though they already have it, and that’s how the issue gets bigger and bigger. They are nothing but backfiring on themselves.

Dr.Yu

I wonder what credibility has a country that denies the truth and spreads lies around the world about their war crimes.
The japanese conservatives believe that the Dokdo issue is the last attempt they have to rescue at least the minimum of their “samurai pride” they lost when the USA drop the nukes on Nagasaki and Hiroshima and lost the war, in that sense it is an emotional issue for them as well.
If they really want to solve this problem in a civilized way why they just don’t give the example and submit the Diaoyu island dispute with China to the ICJ first? and that would be funny because if Japan wins the Diaoyu case in ICJ that would be the legitimation of Korean possession of Dokdo, and they don’t want it.
As some pointed out most japanese people don’t even know about dokdo and they just don’t care about it, than why the conservative government of Japan is risking to go to war with Korea for something their population is against? Even if it is for economic reason japanese people don`t want the war, because they are happy with their economic prosperity now. Simply the island is not worthy the risk of a war.
Korea is Japan`s main source of profit and they still want to enagage in war because of “two small rocks in the middle of nowhere”, is this rational? Tell me that this is not emotional.
Korea and Japan need to settle their historical problem and work together for the sake of both countries.

ponta

If they really want to solve this problem in a civilized way why they just don’t give the example and submit the Diaoyu island dispute with China to the ICJ first?

Japan’s stance is that there is no dispute. Ask China to send the dispute to ICJ. Japan will take it.
Japan has asked to send the dispute about takeshiama to ICJ. Korea is afraid to agree to send it because there is no historical fact that Korea had effective control over takeshima/Dokdo.

Korea and Japan need to settle their historical problem and work together for the sake of both countries.

I　agree.

The rest of your comment just does not make sense: it is just your facy talk.

Dr.Yu

Ponta,
Korea stance is that there is no dispute on Dokdo, It is Korean, we posses it now. Got it?
Finally you understand why Korea will never go to ICJ.

LOD

Yes, that’s Korean stance. But they should understand they won’t have much credibility on their claims, unless they do go to ICJ.
ponta

It is Korean, we posses it now. Got it?

Korea　posses it illegally. Got it?
And Koera has been refusing to settle the matter at ICJ

The Overthinker

“I wonder what credibility has a country that denies the truth and spreads lies around the world about their war crimes.”

Every time you make blanket statements like this on a website frequented by people who know a lot about the country you refer to you make yourself look unnecessarily bigoted. Do not confuse the right-wing nuts who get all the press with the rest of the people.
LOD

I wonder what credibility has a country that denies the truth and spreads lies around the world about their war crimes.

Which country do you mean? China, North Korea, South Korea, or Japan? Maybe all of them?

that would be funny because if Japan wins the Diaoyu case in ICJ that would be the legitimation of Korean possession of Dokdo, and they don’t want it.

Sorry, but you don’t sound terribly logical here. These two are the different cases.

If Japan wins on the Senkaku/Diaoyu at ICJ, then it would mean Japan had more legitimacies, and it has absolutely nothing to do with Dokdo/Takeshima.

As for the other parts of your post such as “samurai pride” and Hiroshima/Nagasaki, I’ll just say I’m amused by your imagination.

Dr.Yu

What are you afraid of Overthinker? That people will know the korean side of the history? Let them judge by themselves what side they will believe.

weirdo

Isn’t the Korean side of the history plastered on random billboards in Texas?
The Overthinker

Your reasoning completely escapes me. I just said that Japan does NOT hide its war crimes.

Dr.Yu

Only in your dreams.

The Overthinker

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. Ever read 江口圭一 on WW2, for example? To what extent are you familiar with the literature on Japanese war crimes in WW2 written in Japanese and by Japanese? Even more right wing ones like 秦郁彦 don’t deny things like Nanjing, for example.
Dr.Yu

Man, this is an other issue, but i know that some japanese individuals acknowledge the crimes, but not the government.
I know that there are people in Japan that want their government to acknowledge it formally and apologize for the crimes, but they are minority in the political sphere, so it will never happen.
Honesty, I dont need the japanese government`s apology to move forward and forget about it, but I would like them stop provoking korea by spreading lies about the crimes or blaming the koreans for their “fate” or justifying the crimes with the same hypocrite answer “we did for the sake of korean people”. Just say it happened and it will never happen again or just say nothing about it. That’s it.
The Overthinker

“i know that some japanese individuals acknowledge the crimes, but not the government.”

How do you know this? Have you ever looked at the list of Japanese government apologies? Which precise war crimes do you think the government has refused to acknowledge? Or do you consider that because, for example, the government says that comfort women were arranged by private enterprise and local groups rather than being personally carried out by the government is a denial that comfort women ever existed? When did the Japanese government declare that the occupation of Korea was for the sake of the Korean people?
Dr.Yu

It is getting long. As I said if Japan don’t want to addmit it, than say nothing at all instead of lying. I think the only emmotional and irrational here are the japanese.

Dr.Yu

I think no more discussion is needed. Dokdo is Korean. Its under Korean possession and that’s it.

The Overthinker

So from 1910 to 1945, Korea was Japanese then, and that’s that. Why did the Koreans protest then?
ponta

I think no more discussion is needed.

No more fake Korean education is needed. Don’t use Dokdo to fuel Korean ultra–nationalism.
Let the young Korean people face up to the history. Korea possess Dokdo illegally. Korea had no historical record about Dokdo but she stole it from Japan by brutal force.
stereo

Dr.Yu, what you are talking about is a bloody way to solve, or not solve, conflicts. Such an idea belongs to the 19th century.

If possession is everything, what happens? Suppose Japan occupies Beijing or Seoul tomorrow. You say it belongs to Japan with no need for discussion, right? What next. You call for war instead of discussion. While your country is fighting against Japan, another neighboring country of yours may start aggression against your country. A very bloody idea isn’t it.

This kind of things happened all the time in the past, and most people learned from that experience. Let’s solve dispute through discussion and treaty. If a country breaks treaty and starts aggression, rest of the world shall unite and punish the aggressor. This is the framework of the world since the end of ww2.

I hope you would learn also.

Dr.Yu

Why? it is Korean. Do you see the japanese flag in Dokdo? I`m tired of this japanese nonsense.Take the Diaoyu island dispute with China to ICJ and good luck.

stereo

Thank you for showing no respect to international laws. Go back to the place where you belong, and never come here again, for you will see serious consequence if you keep defying international laws.
Dr.Yu

That hurts man.

putang

sad story.
this attitude is obviously backfiring on korean.
it looks like that they are intent to implant hate in the children’s mind. children would not understand the issue and just felt ” japan is the evil”. gorily future.
http://www.victorymanual.com Alex

The blanket statements about Japan are just as ludicrous as the blanket statements about Korea in this thread.
north

Koreans have always struck me as a bit fanatical, and this video helped explained why. I guess the brainwashing starts from childhood.

Before I was transferred to Japan, one of my engineering profs was aghast. He was a Korean who had apparently done a year of post-graduate research in Japan and was “determined” to set me straight on a number of issues. For example (and I am NOT making this shit up):

1. Sushi was invented by Koreans, not Japanese. The most DESIRABLE type of sushi being kimchi sushi. (Again, I am not making this up!)

2. The historically correct pronounciation of “Toyota” and “Tokyo” are “Doyoda” and “Dokyo”.

3. Koreans have invented virtually everything “good about Japan” and the Japanese are notorious intellectual thieves. What is more, the French come to Seoul and copy the latest fashions and claim them as their own. Scandalous! Seoul is the most cosmopolitan city in the world.

I suspected that even he knew what he was saying was complete bullshit and wondered why he would even bother trying to convince me with these ludicrous arguments when he knew I’d be coming over here anyways…
Roger

I think both countries will have a hard time proving that the islands belonged to them a few hundred years ago. The idea of clearly defined borders is a new mind set that did not take hold before imperialism. Much of Asia, Africa etc only had loose borders. It was not before the European imperialists came and colonised various parts of the world that they started to draw up borders as we have come to know today. Though both Japan and Korea have these islands drawn in ancient maps, since no one lived there I doubt any of the countries claimed the islands.

ponta

Though both Japan and Korea have these islands drawn in ancient maps,

Wrong. Korea　has no historical map of the islands, Japan has many.

Roger

This I have a hard time believing. But still, just because someone draws something does not mean that it is theirs. People drew maps of what not in ancient times too. It was more common throughout Asia to draw loose borders according to the people living there who were loyal to the various authorities. For instance. Thailand had no borders up until the Europeans came. Therefore with no borders they defined someone who paid tribute to the Siam Monarchy as a Thai. It was more who respected who than geographic boundaries. This thinking came from China. China having enormous influence over both Japan and Korea, I doubt the mind set was all that different in both Japan/Korea too. Since no one lived in Takeshima there were no people there who could pay tax or pay tribute to the various authorities in Edo or Kyoto therefore the leaders in Edo, Kyoto did not look at Takeshima as theirs.

The idea of drawing borders like we know today is only 200 years old.

ponta

It is true that the concept of terrritoy was different.
That is one reason why Japan confirmed the islands as Japanese territory in 1905 when Japan was embracing the western notion.
It is also true that Japanese had detailed maps and documents of takeshima in Edo period:they used to hunt sea lions while

Korea has no old maps of Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo), and the only two references to the rocks in Korean history, before Japan incorporated them in 1905, suggest that they were part of Japanese territory.
http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2009/02/korean-translation-of-jang-han-sangs.html
Roger

Thanks for the nice link to the interesting blog. Will have to do more reaseacrh on this matter.

leitmotiv

I find it utterly hilarious that there are apparently western gaijin who, for some unfathomable reason, actually have a strong opinion on this non-matter of a rock’s ownership. For what its worth, I also understand that there is a corresponding collection of western foreigners in Korea who take the equal-but-opposite hardline korean view on this.

Wow….Just, wow.

I fully support and admire those that move to Japan and/or Korea and really like their adopted country and want to blend in etc, but from whence comes motivation to pick up (and help promote) corresponding nationalistic viewpoints? By definition an expat/gaijin/foreigner is at least somewhat worldly – so the parochial and backwards motivations that fuel each side of this non-issue should be blindingly obvious.

Maybe the ICJ can look at this matter, as suggested above, but I would imagine that they have some genocides and various war crimes to clear from their docket before hand (i.e., important issues).

The Overthinker

Well, look at it this way – how many Westerners have actually gone as far as chopping their fingers off in protest? Most seem to restrict themselves to arguments on the web rather than picketing embassies.

leitmotiv

Yes, self mutilation has happened amongst some of the more unhinged protestors – amusing of course, but its not the bar for me. Just having a voiciferous opinion about a clearly nationalistic matter and stating it in blogs is enough to set off my WTF meter (for expats etc). I would think they would take a more sophisticated view of “it honestly doesnt friggin matter one iota one way or the other” – as do large fractions of the (more sophisticated) populations of their adopted countries.

The Overthinker

Well, it also depends on how much of an “ex” the “ex-pat” is. I agree that for someone over in Japan on a two year JET holiday, it would be silly. But what about someone who has lived here half their life, has married into the country, has a family here and everything? “Japan” (or “Korea”) is not merely a fun little place to poke around in for a bit before returning to the “real” world, but their life and their home.

I also think that a lot of it, especially among those that don’t have such deep connections, is like sports fans. You pick your team and you root for it.
leitmotiv

Well, it also depends on how much of an “ex” the “ex-pat” is.

Kinda splitting hairs, arent you? There are plenty of ethnic Korean and Japanese nationals who dont care about this issue and see it for what it is – nothing important. An expat of 2-years or 20-years should automatically have at least the sophistication to take the same view – and not buy into base nationalistic talking points concocted for various domestic political agendas of their adopted country.

Its not really at all like typical brain-dead rooting for a sports team – which at least has entertainment & time wasting utility. This is several orders of magnitude dumber.
The Overthinker

Hardly splitting hairs, and your dismissal of the issue as “unimportant” is merely your own opinion – there is a huge EEZ riding on this, after all. EEZs are valuable. And more useful than Arsenal or Real Madrid, probably. You can support the view of your adopted country without devolving into foaming-at-the-mouth fanaticism, but to tell someone they can’t share the concerns of their adopted country unless everyone in the country shares them is rather presumptuous. Essentially, when you live in a country, then that country’s domestic agenda affects you. Why not have an opinion about it? And as I said before, the expats, while they enjoy arguing in harmless venues like the net, don’t tend to actually get fanatical enough about it to do anything seriously stupid.

I also think you are expecting too much from an ex-pat merely by virtue of them being an ex-pat. It would be nice if they were more worldly and sophisticated than an Appalachian redneck, but this is not necessarily the case.
leitmotiv

Hmmm….”huge EEZ riding on this” – interesting that its brought up now, subordinate even to analogies with sports fanaticism. And virtually nowhere else – at least on this thread. Just shrill historical antagonisms and navel-gazing arguments about whose ancient maritime maps were more accurate. But perhaps you are right. The difference in EEZ on either side of this issue could – in therory – have SOME effect on foreigners living in Japan/Korea, so I exclude from my presumptuous comments those expats working directly within in the fishing industries and underwater mineral exploration on the liancourt-adjacent coastlines of Japan/Korea. btw – is there any working estimation, at least from Japan side, how much value is at stake in contested EEZ? As percentage of GDP, for example? Or as fraction of existing EEZ?

It would be nice if [expats in Japan] were more worldly and sophisticated than an Appalachian redneck, but this is not necessarily the case.

And I’m dismissive?? Oy veh!
The Overthinker

The EEZ is brought up elsewhere on this thread, and your comment about fishing and mineral is just being silly. I assume that you would expect no less of migrants to your country – why should they care about national issues that don’t directly and immediately affect them? For that matter, why should anyone?

It would be interesting to determine exactly how much is at stake. A fair amount, since the area is not small. What, by the way, is your cut-off point for allowing expats to give a shit?

And I said “not necessarily” – as I’m sure anyone who has met any would agree.
leitmotiv

why should they care about national issues that don’t directly and immediately affect them?

What, by the way, is your cut-off point for allowing expats to give a shit?

national issues = OK

nationalistic issues = not OK

Vague rationalizations about actual value at stake being “A fair amount, since the area, is not small” is not enough to lift this issue above mere nationalistic bickering. If there were something of significant value besides nationalistic pride and historical irrational antagonisms at stake, it would have been settled by some means long ago. Liancourts only value is cheap political currency for low-grade domestic politicians in JPN/KR (and their corresponding nationalist fan clubs….most being natives while a few, entertainingly, being non-natives).
The Overthinker

You seem to be using entirely your own determination of what is and what is not significant. And considering that there are a number of territorial claims going on that are not settled, some much greater than Takeshima, the idea that this is not important otherwise it would be settled does not seem to mean much.

I do agree that the bickering is fun to watch though – that is why I am here.
leitmotiv

You seem to be using entirely your own determination of what is and what is not significant.

What else can be really trusted if not one’s “own determination”? Isn’t that all that any of us really has?

[/pseudo-philosophizing]

ponta

Gerry Beaver, who is the owner of “Dokdo or Takeshima” site, really likes his adopted country, Korea and want to blend in it. He has studied the documents and reached the conclusion that Korean stance is wrong.
One of his strongest motivation is perhaps to know the truth despite the propaganda spreading in Korea.
Nationalism has little to do with his attitude.

Developed countries have many territorial issues.
Sending the territorial issue to ICJ is the smart and civilized way to settle the matter, it is a way of overcoming imperialism.
Japan has been proposing it.

To regard sending it to ICJ as having the backward motivation is backward.

leitmotiv

Interesting. When does he get out of prison?

Just kidding – will have a look. Not to get to the bottom of who’s claim is right (because it’s a rock and it doesnt matter) – just because he sounds interesting.
leitmotiv

I hope you dont think I said ICJ approach is backward. I merely mean that if, for example, the docket for ICJ has (1) liancourt rock issue and (2) issuance of arrest warrants for donald rumsfeld and dick cheney (hey I can dream…), I would hope they would take the latter case first.
ponta

There are territorial disputes all over the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_territorial_disputes
You can’t say someone has the nationalistic and backward motive just because she proposes to send the issue to ICJ.
But brainwashing kids and making them sing dokdo song at the public institution surely sounds nationalistic.

Dr.Yu

You love Gerry. Marry him.
ponta

Thanks for showing how irrational and emotional a Korean debater is.
The Overthinker

How old are you, “Dr” Yu? I haven’t heard such a cutting riposte since I was about ten.
Dr.Yu

Sorry, the only irrational and emotional debater here is you ponta. Your arguments are lies and shows how desperate you are. Dokdo belongs to Korean sovereignty. Stop rising lies about it.
The only reason why you keep mentioning the ICJ is because out of ICJ Japan has no chance at all to steal Dokdo from Korea as it did before. It is a good bet for Japan because Japan has nothing to lose, but Korea would risk losing the island for nothing (and the island was always korean possession). That would be something irrational for Korea. You see, you are the only irrational here.
Also, Japan will never submit the Diaoyu island dispute with China to ICJ, because like korean case with Dokdo, Japan already has the possession of Diaoyu island, so it would never risk to lose the island to China in the court. Japan wants Korea to bet the island in the court, but it doesn´t want to do the same. Why? Don’t you need credibility before the international community? Oh … Japanese are smart, but not the koreans right? You are so smart.
I think you should take your blind hatred toward Korea to ICJ. Good luck.
ponta

I don’t hate Korea. I am just sometimes at a loss how to respond to some of immature Korean debaters.

Japan’s claim is the strongest, having first been formally made in 1895. The United States took control of the islands after World War II, and used some of them for bombing practice. Japan continued to claim ownership when, in the 1970s, the possibility of oil deposits in the area caused China and Taiwan to make claims as well.
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairfo/articles/20061103.aspx

The United States returned them to Japan in 1972
And note also

NAHA, Okinawa Pref. (Kyodo) Former Taiwan President Lee Teng-hui has said the Senkaku Islands, which are Japanese-controlled but claimed by Taiwan and China, actually belong to Japan

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20020925a9.html

Ask China to send the issue to ICJ. Japan will take it.
Japan asked Korea to send it to ICJ. Korea refused it.
The Overthinker

“Japan has no chance at all to steal Dokdo from Korea as it did before. It is a good bet for Japan because Japan has nothing to lose, but Korea would risk losing the island for nothing.”

So Japan has no chance at all…but Korea risks losing? Which is it?
Dr.Yu

“So Japan has no chance at all” Unless they take Dokdo by force, and that would triger a war between both countries.

“but Korea risks losing” Japan is the major donator for ICJ, so they could “seduce” the judges. I know that there is a small chance for this to happen, but again, why should we risk the island? it was always Korean, only the conservatives in Japan don´t want to admit it.

Roger

These islands play a vital role due to fishing zones. It means they can go fishing in their own territorial water. But yes, there is lots of nationalism coming from both ends. The J-media is social engineering how we should think about the issue by coming with a critical look on how they do it in Korea.
Rocky

Whats so wrong about nationalistic.

The whole reason you learn history is because to give you a sense of nationalism.
Any country, America, parts of Europe, loses its color with nationalism.
I don’t see how Japan is any less nationalistic than Korea — I don’t think any other country changed their history and hid their war crimes more than Japan. Not that I hate the Japanese, clearly I’m visiting this site and I have an interest and liking from them.

But I find it disturbing to find people, who don’t half know about Koreans and Japanese, or their deep history, arguing how “overly-nationalistic” Korea is.

The Overthinker

“The whole reason you learn history is because to give you a sense of nationalism.”

Woah that is so wrong. It’s like saying you learn astronomy to be able to give star sign readings.
http://www.victorymanual.com Alex

The reason we study history is to determine how it is exactly that the state of the modern world came to exist, learn from the mistakes of our ancestors, and mimick their successes. Ideally, history should be taught as events with sequential impact that have shaped our world. Erroneously, most history teachers make their students simply memorize dates.

Nationalism uses history as a pillar of support, not the other way around. Nationalism is also based on ideology – So all of that stuff you hear about “free-market capitalist society” or “a socialist society by the people for the people”, all of it is used to prop up a nationalistic view of your country.

The Dokdo/Takeshima issue exists because of history, and is shaping future conditions, so you can’t just blow it off as “some nationalistic bickering over a couple of rocks.” As has been already mentioned, besides the status it represents, it carries with it a wealth in EEZ boundaries.

>>>> “But I find it disturbing to find people, who don’t half know about Koreans and Japanese, or their deep history, arguing how “overly-nationalistic” Korea is.”

How do you know what it is exactly they know or don’t know? You know? Are you just assuming people don’t have a clue, or do you have all of our resumes on your desk for review?

jc

What South Koreans are saying and doing about Dokdo/Takeshima is tantamount to Americans invading and occupying Iraq. How annoying is it to yell at the Japanese and plead them to apologize for war crimes committed during World War II every time one of their dignitaries visit their country… only to turn around and say “Takeshima is our territory and we do not negotiate with [Japanese] terrorists.”?

Wanna argue again?
leitmotiv

What South Koreans are saying and doing about Dokdo/Takeshima is tantamount to Americans invading and occupying Iraq.

*eyeroll*
Dr.Yu

This conversation is getting irrational and emotional. We should stop here.

The Overthinker

Only one side is getting that way, and it isn’t the side you think it is.
weirdo

Dr. Yu, from reading your comments you seem to be basically saying “Dokdo is Korea’s, shut up about it. No, I’m right you’re wrong”, while the other posters are mostly saying “Evidence seems to be in favor of Japan, ergo, Korea is not willing to take it to the ICJ”. For this reason I think that it is you being more irrational and emotional, however, feel free to point out how I am wrong and you are correct if I am, with specific examples.

Dr.Yu

Weirdo,
There is a reason why I avoided playng the “my evidence is bigger that your evidence” game here.
People like Ponta are not prepared to deal this matter in a honest and frank manner because it has become a emotional issue for them.
Besides they already know all evidences Korea has and will bring all possible and imaginable nonsense to deny the truth. I know it, they have been doing it in other sites on dokdo for years. They don`t want to find the truth, they just want to play the victims and preach to the world how koreans are evil.
If you want to know the korean side of this issue please go to http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com

helical

So you didn’t present us with any definitive answers to back up your (wild) claims because it would hurt our feelings?
I’m so touched … I don’t know what to say!

On an unrelated note, I can’t help but recall an urban legend or a type of film storytelling device.
helical

That first link didn’t come out quite right.
So I’lltry again.

Mods:
It really is unrelated for the most part, so please delete this and the above comment if you think I’m straying too far.

rw

one thing that surprises me about this debate is people saying that it’s just rocks and rocks don’t matter.

why shouldn’t rocks be important?
if people hold something to be important,
it get’s important, simply because it incorporates meaning for them.

there are/ have been lots of places in international relations that seem to matter just because there is some meaning attached to them, rather than a direct economical or territorial value.

ausschwitz, dayton, jerusalem, ground zero, versaille, hiroshima, falkland islands…

who are you to tell people that something doesn’t matter?
steve barber

Ponta all of those who are involved in the Dokdo issue know Gerry Bevers has zero credibility. His translations have been proven wrong. I think he changed his translation of the Ulleungdo Sajeok about four times in 2 days. Finally he went with the one on my website and put his bizarre spin on it.

The Ulleungdo Sajeok shows us.
1. The Koreans knew of Dokdo hundreds of years before Japan annexed the islets.
2. The Koreans considered the islets outside of Japanese territory (as did the Japanese)

In short, don’t trust Gerry Bevers’ translations.

If Koreans were to assert Japan’s only claim to Takeshima was a wartime colonial annexation without evidence, we could say they are being irrational.

However, Japan’s own records show their annexation of Dokdo Takeshima was an inseparable part of the colonization process over Korea.

http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-x-files2.html

Dr.Yu

Ponta, answear please …

Ikunochan

It’s quite possible that Ponta may have a job, and responsibilities that take precedence over arguing with you on the internet, Dr. Yu. I realize that this battle has been raging for days, but allow the man a life once in awhile, won’t you?

I’m sorry to butt in here – I have been reading all of the comments because I’m interested in the subject (and frankly, amused by your antics) – but for someone who seemed previously to be so anxious to stop talking about it, you sure are determined to keep jumping in. It seems you’ll only really be happy to end the discussion once Ponta, Overthinker and everyone else with an opinion you don’t agree with suddenly “see the light” and admit that you’re right. I just don’t think that’ll happen, though.

Given that, it wouldn’t bother me at all to see everyone move on, past this round. Another opportunity to have at it is sure to come.
ponta

Ponta, answear please …

With pleasure.

Ponta all of those who are involved in the Dokdo issue know Gerry Bevers has zero credibility.

This is very poor argument, the sort of argument that steve uses often.

This assertion is as bad as “all of those who are involved in the Dokdo issue know Steve Barber has zero credibility.

Steve, this is g good opportunity. Just show the readers here the old Korean map of Dokdo. That way you can prove Gerry’s assertion is wrong once and for all.

stereo

Most of your points are irrelevant. All Koreans have to prove is, according to the international laws, that they “effectively controlled” Dokdo as of 1905. But you cannot prove it, can you.

There is a big difference between “knowing” and “effectively controlling”. Koreans may have known the moon long long ago, but that does not make moon their territory. The same can be said about Dokdo. Just knowing of Dokdo is not enough to establish territorial claim. And do not tell me Seokdo, Usando, Jasando and so on are Dokdo. They are least likely to be Dokdo.

Whether Koreans thought Dokdo is outside of Japan is also irrelevant. They may think whatever, but that does not make any piece of land into their territory. They have to prove “effective control” of the land.

Even if your allegation that Japan’s incorporation of Dokdo is “an inseparable part of the colonization process over Korea” were true, that point is irrelevant. It is true that Cairo Declaration says “Japan will also be expelled from all other territories which she has taken by violence and greed.” but since Dokdo was terra nullius as of 1905, it was not “taken” and Japan need not lose its title.

So, everything boils down to the point “whether Korea had effective control over Dokdo as of 1905.” If you can prove that point, I am happy to support Korean claim.

Dr.Yu

Stereo,
Your point is irrelevant since Japan acknowledged Dokdo as korean territory. Japanese maps show that.
Japan knew Dokdo was part of korean sovereignty but took it violating our sovereignty.

stereo

You are talking about maps issued by private entities. Such maps may not necessarily reflect the acknowledgement of the government.

And then again, color on the map does not give Korea any territory if it does not “effectively control” the land. Just prove effective control as of 1905.

LB

“Koreans may have known the moon long long ago, but that does not make moon their territory.”
It doesn’t?

The other point here is that while Japan may (may) have declared Takeshima as “Korean territory”, that is irrelevant if Korea did not consider it Korean territory. Korean records stating the island is “outside of Japan” do not in and of themselves mean “part of Korea”. China is also “outside of Japan”, but it is not and was not part of Korea (nutcase Korean history books to the contrary…).
http://image.ohmynews.com/down/images/1/yamanin_342952_1%5B578986%5D.jpg

http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o60/mdavid35/map_of_korea_in_history_textbook.jpg

What if Edo-period Japan mistakenly thought that Taiwan was “Korean Territory”, and declared it such? Would Korea today be insisting that Taiwan was Korean territory just because Japan said so?

OK, so they probably would…

The Overthinker

Wow, that first image is impressive.
It does make me wonder about Korean cartographic abilities….

http://aki-akiaki.blogspot.com Aki

Arguments in http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com by Steve Barber are based on mistranslation and misinterpretation of old documents and maps. They have been thoroughly discussed in a series of posts by Gerry Bevers and in its comment section.

Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video, Part 1

The post above was the first one in the series concerning the lies and half-truths of the Korean argument. At the end of the post, those of you who are interested in the issue can find links to other posts in the series. Steve Barber also participated in the discussion in the series using his alternative name, toadface.

The reason dokdo-takeshima.com does not supply comment sections is that Steve Barber does not like truth to be exposed.
steve barber

Aki, I don’t have a comments section because I simply don’t have time to respond to the dozens of Japanese right wing radicals who troll the internet and dump propaganda. I do visit websites and debate with others interested but there’s no way I could carry on a discussion on a continual basis with people. If I don’t respond, it may give other readers I have no response or I agree. So I’m selective where and when I debate.

Ponta, Gerry Bevers has shown he quickly jumps to conclusions before he posts. This is because Mr Bevers craves the attention I guess. But when we step back and analyse his articles we can often see how he slants his translations and omits very critical data.

For example. Here is the map on Gerry’s website related to Hachiemon’s Trespassing incident on Korea’s Ulleungdo.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LdEVcyLsLFA/RnpTGMlMHAI/AAAAAAAAAA0/psG_nDzpnTQ/s1600-h/Yaemon_map_2.jpg

The Hachiemon Incident is a very important record. It was about the territorial limits of Korea and Japan. The related documents and maps show BOTH Ulleungdo (竹島) and Dokdo (松島) as Chosun territory.

Please read;
http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-takeshima-incident.html

Japanese records either excluded Dokdo or declared the islets as Korean. No mistake L.B. just a conclusion based on hundreds of maps and documents Korean and Japanese.

ponta

I don’t have a comments section because I simply don’t have time to respond to the dozens of Japanese right wing radicals who troll the internet and dump propaganda.

You’ve never had a comment section.　How do you know J right wing radical troll?
And you know K radicals have trolled on Gerry’s blog.

Ponta, Gerry Bevers has shown he quickly jumps to conclusions before he posts. This is because Mr Bevers craves the attention I guess.

I am sick and tired of hearing you speaking ill of Gerry.
Just show the readers Korean old map of Dokdo so that you may refute Gerry’s thesis.
The Overthinker

In relation to earlier remarks about foreigners caring about J-K issues, why do you care so much, steve barber? Is it pure academic interest? If so, have you had any articles on the subject published in academic journals, or presented at conferences? These might be more fruitful arenas for debate than internet blogs full of people shouting past each other.
LB

“Japanese records either excluded Dokdo or declared the islets as Korean. No mistake L.B.”

Yes I know, Toadface, We’ve had this discussion before. Like I said before (which you still can’t seem to grasp): just because I say the empty lot next door belongs to Steve Barber, doesn’t make it so. If you tried to claim that lot based on the fact that I mistakenly thought it was yours, you’d be laughed out of town.

http://deleted steve barber

Ponta, I have never spoken ill of Mr Bevers as a person. On the other hand, he has hurled obscenities at me personally and cursed at others who refute his biased views. My problem with Gerry, is only through his incorrect interpretation of historical maps, and misleading translations of old records. Because of his views, outside of his blog, Mr Bevers has become a running joke of sorts.

If you will recall Ponta, we discussed Gerry’s incorrect interpretation of ancient Chosun maps on another thread. But, you decided to bail. I believe differently than Mr Bevers of course and I’ve shown quite clearly, Gerry jumped to some serious conclusions on Chosun maps and it should be pointed out.
http://www.occidentalism.org/?p=978#comments

Ponta your idea of “debating” the Dokdo Takeshima is to impose your level of proof on others as if you are charged with the credentials to set the bar. True academics must pool all of the documents Japanese and Korean. Then, put them on the table and use them to arrive at a clear picture of both Japan and Korea’s territorial perceptions. From here we know Dokdo is Korean.

Above I posted a very powerful pieces of historical evidence that proves Japan banned passage to both Ulleungdo and Dokdo in the year 1837. On top of that, the colour-coded maps that accompanied the trial of Aizuya Hachiemon of Hamada clearly show Japan designated the islands as Korean.
http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-takeshima-incident.html

Overthinker, you think too much. I don’t take sides on all J-K matters. Unlike Ponta and his ilk who lobby for Japan on all controversial J-K issues, my interest doesn’t extend beyond the Dokdo problem.

My motives? First, I find it fascinating. Second I love the Ulleungdo~Dokdo area. I have been there many times. Knowing the true situation of the region (geographic, political economic) it’s clear Dokdo must remain part of Korea. These reasons transcend the historical debate. On a personal level, I have friends on Ulleungdo whose very lives depend on Ulleungdo’s adjacent waters (including Dokdo) for their livelihoods.

L.B. Japan didn’t mistakenly make Dokdo as Korean. Her leaders issued a formal decree that clearly outlined their policy on Dokdo Takeshima. That being, the islands belonged to Chosun. This totally contradicts Japan’s basis for incorporating the islets (terra nullius) in 1905 that Dokdo was ownerless. As I’ve shown, Japan had already “ceded” Dokdo Island much earlier.

Knowing the above, there is no reason to entertain Japan’s wrongful claim to Dokdo.

ponta

Ponta your idea of “debating” the Dokdo Takeshima is to impose your level of proof on others

So　do you agree that there is no old Korean map of Dokdo, right?
http://aki-akiaki.blogspot.com Aki

This document in your page clearly shows that the reason the Shogunate punished Hachiemon was that he visited Ulleungdo, not that he visited the Liancourt Rocks. Hachiemon’s personal view that you called “a very powerful pieces of historical evidence” has nothing to do with the Shogunate’s view.

The fact that you called it “a very powerful pieces of historical evidence” just shows that you have nothing that supports your claim.
The Overthinker

“These reasons transcend the historical debate.”

Does this mean that even if the historical evidence proved it was Japanese you would still argue it should be Korean?

http://deleted steve barber

Aki, the Shogunate issued a travel ban on foreign lands because of Hachiemon’s travels. One of those foreign lands banned was Dokdo. The maps in question were not only Hachiemons personal view they were copied and they showed Dokdo as Korean. Case closed.

Overthinker, no.

Ponta, go fish.

If this thread represents the best Japan has to offer in support of her claim to Dokdo, you might as well give the Koreans Tsushima too.

The Overthinker

“If this thread represents the best Japan has to offer in support of her claim to Dokdo…”

I would hope you would not assume a random internet thread written by amateurs is the best Japan has to offer. That would be in professional academic studies on the subject. What on earth would ever make you think that this thread represented the distilled wisdom of this issue? Or was it just a chance to get in a sarcastic dig?
ponta

Gerry claims there is no old Korean map of Dokdo.
Ponta asked to Steve if there is any.
Steve answers

Ponta, go fish.

It tells everything.
http://aki-akiaki.blogspot.com Aki

the Shogunate issued a travel ban on foreign lands because of Hachiemon’s travels.

As clearly stated in the Japanese document in your page, the Shogunate issued a travel ban on Ulleungdo because of Hachiemon’s travels.

“One of those foreign lands banned was Dokdo.”

But you have not presented anything that supports your claim.

BTW, I have a suggestion for you concerning the translation of the Japanese document in your page. In the translation of the document describing the travel ban on Ulleungdo, you translated “右 (right)” in the Japanese document as either “on the right” or “to the right”. They should, however, be translated as “above” in English. Those 右s in the Japanese document mean “above” in English. Since Japanese documents were written from right to left in vertical lines, “former lines” were situated to the right of a “present line”.

“you might as well give the Koreans Tsushima too.”

That makes sense. Quite a lot of Koreans claim that Tsushima is Korean land when the island has been Japanese territory from the mythical period. Perhaps Koreans might as well take Tsushima by force as they took the Liancourt Rocks by force in the 1950s.

http://deleted steve barber

Overthinker…amateurs? Speak for yourself and Ponta.

These are what Japan’s government has to offer.

http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-shimane-case.html

http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-mofa-2008.html

Ponta, quit harping on maps. Korea’s Ulleungdo Sajeok records Chosun knew of Liancourt Rocks over 200 years before Japan annexed the rocks. It also shows Chosun didn’t consider the islets Japanese.

http://www.japanprobe.com James

Overthinker…amateurs? Speak for yourself and Ponta.

You’re a professional historian, Steve? If so, why aren’t you publishing your findings in scholarly journals instead of wasting time arguing on the internet?

The Overthinker

Exactly the question I asked, and had ignored.

Oh, and steve, I haven’t been arguing with you for the GOJ position, you might note. However my credentials as a historian are more than adequate.

ponta

Gerry claims that there is no old Korean map of dokdo.
Ponta asks Steve to show us a Korean map if there is any.
Steve’s response is

Ponta, go fish.

Ponta,　quit harping on maps.

I think the answer is obvious.

Japan has detailed old maps of Dokdo.
Korea has none.

To legally own the land you need effective control over the territory over which no other country had the effective control before.

Japan has record of effective control over Dokdo
Korea has none.
So, it has never belonged to Korea and it legally belongs to Japan.

Korea wanted to expand the territory in the postwar mess.
Korea demanded the US to give Tsushima, Japanese territory, Prangdo which Korean couldn’t even locate, and Dokdo to Korea, saying they were Korean territory.
The US rejected the demand because there is no historical record to back up Korean claim.

So Korea took over Dokdo illegally by brutal force after the liberation when Japan could do nothing about it.

That explains why Korea does not want to send the issue to ICJ.

Thanks Steve, you’ve been helpful as always albeit in indirect ways.
ponta

Steve, can I ask you?
Why had Korea been banning the travel to Ulleungdo? Is it because Korea considered it as Japanese territory?

http://deleted steve barber

Ponta, Korea doesn’t need maps to show title over Dokdo. Japanese records do the trick just fine. At some point Ponta you should start asking yourself, “Why do Japan records support Korean historical title to Dokdo?” The answer is clear, because Japan knew the rocks were appended to Chosun’s Ulleungdo.

Maps are one piece of the puzzle in determining true historical ownership of Dokdo. Korean maps are very difficult to interpret. We’ve noticed recently Gerry Bevers’ and the Japanese interpretation is flawed. Chosun maps can also be interpreted to show Dokdo as appended to Ulleungdo, I explained that to you on this thread.

http://www.occidentalism.org/?p=978#comments

On the above thread, Ponta you inisisted the Japanese landing port on Ulleungdo was near Jukdo Islet. However we know the Japanese moored at Hamada which is today’s Dodong Harbour. Please check this map. Hamada (濱田浦-Dodong) is a far south of Jukdo. The Japanes boathouse on Bak Seok Chang’s original map was at Dodong.
http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/1877-docmap-2.jpg

Chosun’s Ulleungdo maps show this “Jukdo” next to Dodong, this is wrong and we know why. They were drawn on heresay from other records such as the Ulleungdo Sajeok. In other words, Usando or not, Chosun maps of Ulleungdo could be said to show Liancourt Rocks on the Southeast shore of Ulleungdo.

Ponta, Chosun placed a vacant island policy on Ulleungdo for a few reasons. First, Koreans who were living there we being robbed and attacked by Japanese pirates. Second, Chosun could not ensure the safety of these people during the violent storms from the sea. Finally the Chosun government wanted to maintain the rare resources of Ulleungdo such as ginsaeng and medinical plants. However, reading the historical records related to Ulleungdo many Koreans still stayed on Ulleungdo and Chosun didn’t strictly enforce the vacant island policy.

Ponta, post WWII Allied negotiations made no final decision on the disposition of Dokdo. What they did agree to were the terms of the Potsdam Declaration and this document separated Dokdo from Japan. As John Foster Dulles made clear, this was the only legal document along with the Japan Peace Treaty that had legal effect on Japan.

L.B. my opinions have enough credibility to counter any garbage Japan’s MOFA or Shimane Prefecture can toss at us. Certainly I have done enough research to refute anything from Ponta or Mr Bevers.

http://aki-akiaki.blogspot.com Aki

The Japanes boathouse on Bak Seok Chang’s original map was at Dodong.
http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/1877-docmap-2.jpg

Chosun’s Ulleungdo maps show this “Jukdo” next to Dodong, this is wrong and we know why. They were drawn on heresay from other records such as the Ulleungdo Sajeok. In other words, Usando or not, Chosun maps of Ulleungdo could be said to show Liancourt Rocks on the Southeast shore of Ulleungdo.

As you know, the map you linked is a Japanese map showing Ulleungdo and the Liancourt Rocks. This is the Bak Seok Chang’s map that you mentioned. You really can find the Liancourt Rocks anywhere you want.

Which ones are the Liancourt Rocks in the following Korea’s map?
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2183/1849347021_8005669785_o.jpg
LB

Now, why are you still dragging me into this, Toadface? I have been ignoring you for the past couple of days because, quite simply, there is no point to arguing with you. Or to put it another way, your village called and they want their idiot back.

But before I go, one more time:
“Korea doesn’t need maps to show title over Dokdo. Japanese records do the trick just fine.”

I’m going to type slowly now, so hopefully you can keep up. Japanese records prove nothing except what Japan thought. They do not prove the islands were actually Korean. What you are arguing is exactly the same as saying that because the Bush administration said there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq in 2003, that therefore there were, regardless of the fact that the evidence later showed there were not.

Or to put your ~~argument~~ one-man comedy show another way: “Everything Japan says about Takeshima is wrong. Except for when they said the rocks belongs to Korea, that is!”

I think Vanna White is holding a vowel for you…

http://deleted steve barber

Aki the Ulleungdo Sa-jeok states:

東望海中有一島杳在辰方而其大未滿蔚島三分之一不過三百餘里
Toward the East, in the middle of the ocean, an island was vaguely visible to the east-southeast (辰方). It is not quite one third the size of Ulleungdo and only 300 ri away.

Looking directly next to “長” (South-Southeast) on Bak’s map you can see the vague form of an island drawn in the same direction as mentioned in the Ulleungdo Sa-Jeok.
http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/Ulleungdo16.jpg

Looking at the other prominent rock features on Ulleungdo, it’s clear Bak’s map is not drawn to size and scale. Knowing Bak’s map drew heavily from the Ulleungdo Sa-jeok it’s not unreasonable to claim this island could be Dokdo. Some Korea’s don’t like this thought because it damages the Usando equals Dokdo theory but I think it makes far more sense.

We also know Bak copied the island to the East side (Jukdo?) from the Ulleungdo Sa-jeok because it has the same “海長竹” quote written on it.

In the Ulleungdo Sa-jeok it states:
東方五里通許有一小島不甚高大海長竹
About 5 ri to the East was an island that was not too big with Haejang Bamboo on one side.

This island was wrongly drawn directly East of Ulleungdo instead of far northeast where it should be. Bak drew directional markers all over this map so why did he make such a huge error? Because some features of Bak’s map were drawn according to the 1694 Ulleungdo Sa-Jeok.

Notice how the island Japanese say is Jukdo is drawn South of 所謂佇田洞 which is today’s Naesujeon Beach near Jeodong. The location of this Jukdo on Bak’s map is about 4kms too far South and on the wrong side of the area Bak’s drew as Naesujeon on Ulleungdo. Also notice how Bak’s map has ghost islands located on the South shore of Ulleungdo.

As I’ve tried to explain to Ponta, Bak labelled where he placed his stone marker drawn as “刻石立標” Bak’s marker was found during construction on Dodong Harbour. In addition the Japanese boathouse marked as “倭船倉可居” confirms this spot as Japan’s so-called 濱田浦 or what we now know as Dodong Harbour. However, Jukdo Island isn’t even visible from Dodong Harbour because of the large point of land to the North.

Look at this map of Ulleungdo and imagine Jukdo Island as in front of Dodong Harbour because that is where ancient Korean maps of Ulleungdo actually show this “Usando (Jukdo?)” to be.
http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/ulleungdo-yahoo-map-1711.jpg

Bak drew some features on his Ulleungdo map from heresay and previous surveys.

Every Chosun map showing these ghost rocks was based on Bak Seok Chang’s 1711 map. This chart was copied for at least 200 years afterward. That being the case, these maps show the Southeastern island off of Ulleungdo and thus can be said to show Dokdo Island.

http://aki-akiaki.blogspot.com Aki

Your theory does not hold good because pairs of the islands to the south (南,午) and to the south-southwest (未) of Ulleungdo which were drawn on the Bak’s map do not exist in reality.

Your comment showed that Koreans never visited the Liancourt Rocks. They didn’t even know that it is consist of two major islets. You can’t say “all your islands are belong to us,” when only several people had seen something from 90km-distance in several handred years of time period.

ponta

Gerry claims that there is no Korean old map of Dokdo
That is his main thesis.
Ponta asks Steve if there is any.
Steve’s responses are

Ponta, go fish.

Ponta,　quit harping on maps.

Ponta, Korea doesn’t need maps to show title over Dokdo.

The answer is obvious but it is taboo in Korea.

“University English teacher fired because he questioned South Korean claims to disputed territory on the internet…”
http://www.japanprobe.com/?p=855

Korean maps are very difficult to interpret.

It IS difficult to interpret when you try to (mis)interpret the dot on the map that is different from Dokdo as Dokdo.
But it is quite easy to interpret for anyone with no bias;There is no Dokdo on Korean maps.
Let the readers decide.
http://takeshima.cafe.coocan.jp/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/kr_1834_map.gif

At some point Ponta you should start asking yourself, “Why do Japan records support Korean historical title to Dokdo?”

Well, sorry, there is no Japanese records that support historical title to dokdo.But there are plenty of records that support Japan’s title to takeshima/dokdo.

Ponta, Chosun placed a vacant island policy on Ulleungdo for a few reasons.

Good. So it is not because Korea considered it as Japanese territory.
Likewise it is obvious that it is not because Japan considered Dokdo/takeshima as Korean territory that Japan banned the visit to it.

However you twist Japanese records, Korea needs Korean documents and maps that support Korean’s claim. But as you admit that Korea has no Korean old map of Dokdo. and as Gerry says

the only two references to the rocks in Korean history, before Japan incorporated them in 1905, suggest that they were part of Japanese territory.

Just admit the truth and start telling Korean people the truth and start negotiating with Japan to make it a neutral nature preserve administered by both Korea and Japan as Gerry suggests. He loves Korea and that’s why he proposes it, despite the fact that he knows that Korea has no title to dokdo in the hope that it’ll make Korean tie with Japan stronger and friendlier.
Or let Korean people face the truth hard way by sending it to ICJ.
If Korea keeps fueling nationalism by deceiving Korean people, there will be Korean people who start claiming that if there is enough evidences, let Japan shows she is wrong and be embarrassed at ICJ, though it will be Korea that will be embarrassed.
http://deleted steve barber

Ponta, thanks for pointing out Gerry’s “thesis”…lol

Gerry, is not interested in the true historical ownership of Dokdo. He is a lobbyist and a pro-Japanese advocate who only attacks the Korean side of the story. Look on Gerry’s website and you’ll see reams of data. However, none of his information bolsters Japan’s historical title at all. In fact Gerry has basically declared all Japanese records as off the table.

Gerry, was not fired because of his views on Dokdo. That is lame. Gerry’s contract was up for renewal and he was not resigned. The English program at the school said they were overhauling the whole program.

Ponta, Japan’s travel ban differed from Korea’s. Japan’s travel ban on Ulleungdo was because the land was foreign. In 1837, the Japanese government declared the status of Dokdo to the same as Ulleungdo that being, the island was appended as part of Ulleungdo. Unfortunately for you and your right-wing Takeshima lobbyists, the maps that accompanied this travel ban confirm Japan “ceded” Dokdo to Chosun.

Korea doesn’t need Korean documents Judge Ponta. Korea currently owns and administers over Dokdo. The clear records, we have at hand prove the island is in the rightful owner and if Japan wants her day in court it is she who must present a case worth going to ICJ. However, we can see this is false.

Let’s look at Gerry Bevers’ other B.S. statement you pulled out of your hat Ponta.

“The only two references to the rocks in Korean history, before Japan incorporated them in 1905, suggest that they were part of Japanese territory…’

Gerry misinterprets both the 1714 record and the Ulleungdo Sa-jeok to fit his own agenda.

The 1714 record states “To the East of Ulleungdo there is an island that is adjacent to the border of Japan..”

Gerry says this means “To the East of Ulleungdo there is an island which is connected to the border of Japan…”

鬱陵之東島嶼相望接于倭境

First, in territorial applications the Korean term “接” means “adjacent to” or “bordering on”. Indeed how can an island be connected to a border. Also, this record was quoted by Korean coastal residents who didn’t even know how far away Japan was. Furthermore the idea of a linear marine boundary in the East Sea in 1711 is a pretty ridiculous notion.
http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-1714-report.html

These Korean residents saw an island East of Ulleungdo and they knew (somewhere) beyond it, was Japan. Nowhere does this record suggest Koreans thought Dokdo was Japanese.

The other record is the Ulleungdo Sa-jeok in this document Jang Han Sang stated he saw Dokdo 300ri away from Ulleungdo. In his summary at the end of his report, Jang reported he did not see Japan and thus he had no idea how far away Japan was. Putting these to pieces of information together, it’s clear Jang did not consider Dokdo part of Japan but rather within the realm of Korea. Gerry Bevers gave about four different translations for this record none of them even remotely could be understood to be proof of Japanese ownership of Dokdo.

Gerry, loves Korea? What a laugh riot Ponta. I’ve been listening to Gerry Bevers bash all things Korean on every forum from the Korea Times to the Marmots Hole for at least a decade now.

Ponta, if anyone should be embarrassed it is Japan’s MOFA and people like you who purvey the Japanese myths about Dokdo. The truth is Japan has no historical title to Dokdo, they declared the island Korean many times. Japan’s only “claim” was an inseparable part of the colonization of Korea. It’s such a shame right wing radicals like you want to re-colonize Asia.

L.B. if you’ve got some historical data to toss into the fray please do. Your cheesy one-liners don’t cut it boy.

Aki, the Ulleungdo Sa-jeok also mentions rocks on Ulleungdo’s South shore.
Dr.Yu

We have been discussing about the island so for long but nothing has changed so far. Dokdo is still Korean, and I’m sure this conversation will last longer because our japanese friends are emotional and irrational as always, and refuse to see the truth.
I have seen Ponta and friends arguing about Dokdo in other sites and its always the same move: refuse korean arguments and try to discredit koreans accusing them as irrational, emotionals, ultra-nationalist, and so on …. only he “forgets” that history proves that japanese were irrational and so on.
This dispute is an isolated move from minority ultra-right conservatives in Japan despised by Japan government as seen in next links:

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20080528a2.html
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D96GJNS01&show_article=1&catnum=10

Japanse accuse koreans of being emotional about dokdo. Look at the picture of shimane activist on Dokdo:

http://japanfocus.org/products/details/1685

Probably they they got some sake before entering the room, and what about the nonsense about the coral reef okinotorishima, a proof of japanese desperation to increase its limits by any means:

http://www.japanfocus.org/products/details/2541

I think Japan should take the Diaoyu island and the coral reef case to ICJ, first declaring them neutral territory and than submitting the case to the court. Yes, after all they are disputed island:

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/journaleditorialreport/042205/photoessay1.html

http://www.javno.com/en-world/japan-protest-to-china-on-ships-near-disputed-isle_212231

http://chinadigitaltimes.net/tag/cnooc/

With this two islands Japan has the chance to show to Korea how island disputes can be resolved in a civilized and diplomatic way.

ponta

Dr you.
Let the readers read the whole comments on this thread again and they’ll judge themselves.

Steve,
Gerry’s argument is convincing that’s why you use ad hominem attack against him because there is no other argument for Korean ownership of Dokdo.

f anyone should be embarrassed it is Japan’s MOFA and people like you who purvey the Japanese myths about Dokdo.

It that is the case, one cannot help wondering why Korea does not send it to ICJ to embarrass Japan and people like us. It is well known that many Korean people love seeing Japan embarrassed.

Dr.Yu

Sure Ponta.
They will make their own judgement.

Dr.Yu

I thought it was the korean’s role to play the irrational and emotional here.
Easy man.

Takeshima Day 2009

Recent Comments

Further Reading

South Korean Government Demands That International Hydrographic Organization Use “East Sea”

Japanese Documentary About Sea Shepherd’s Protest Activities in Taiji (English Subtitles)

Babies Born on March 11th Receive Special Present

Washington Times Freelancer Slams Former Employer, Fails to Ethically Disclose Relationship?

Christopher Johnson Attempts to Silence Criticism of His “Gaijin Gulag” Article (Legal Threats!!!)

Tabloid Reports About Yu Darvish’s Love Life: Kirara Asuka & Miho Koga?

Does K-Pop Group KARA Have Ties to North Korea?

Tokyo Gate Bridge

Sara Errani Admits She Avoided Tennis Tournament in Tokyo: Feared Radiation

Chinese Workers Who Survived March 11th Tsunami Return to Tohoku

Categories

Archives

Subscribe

Japan Blogs

Korea Blogs

Linkroll

Other Asia Blogs