national

S Korea holds live-fire drill, ignoring Japan's protest

72 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2014 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

72 Comments
Login to comment

So, I thought North Korea was the crazy, unpredictable Korea? Also, I thought Japan was the expansionist, militarily minded Asian power?

In all seriousness, I don't see a reason to do this now. Instead of shelling Takeshima, Park should be having a summit with Japan and possibly solving some their issues.

I suppose talking is too much to ask of President Park, who would much prefer to send a military message to the country with one of the most sophisticated and powerful militaries in Asia.

8 ( +20 / -12 )

Come on let's please get over this. No Japan did not magically "discover" these islets and claim them terra nullis in 1909. Koreans have been staring at them from Ullungdo and fishing on them for thousands of years. Bigger fish to fry.

-10 ( +11 / -21 )

Given the position that Japan is in control of the other disputed islands with China and that helps support Japans claim. perhaps just give this one up.. I strongly feel Japan has much more to gain by working things out with Korea and providing some balance to China.

8 ( +12 / -4 )

This is a rather obvious attempt by South Korea to create an argument with Japan over Takeshima/Dokdo because North Korea and Japan have been talking closely, North Korea shares South Korea's view that the islands are Korean, and North Korea has been absolutely ruthless in their vitriol against South Korea. The South Korean military are conducting the exercise in a zone which did not need to cover the islands, it's almost as if they deliberately stretched the area so that it would become an issue.

7 ( +17 / -10 )

Clear provocation by Korean politicians, they always look the ways to provoce things , and making live practice so close , and in Japan terms, in Japan territorial waters, is clear provocation, another proof that Korea is constantly thinking how to provoke Japan . This act is same as slap in the face, and another proof how Koreans are dirty manipulators .

1 ( +15 / -14 )

Puk neefs a bit of national support, if Japan fails to react it would be of more use in not playing Puks game.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

the country with one of the most sophisticated and powerful militaries in Asia.

Good one. LOL

-9 ( +4 / -13 )

Stupid, provokative and unnecessary. Japan should show its displeasure by recalling its ambassador from Seoul and tripling the import duties on laver (seaweed) and kimchi.

-1 ( +9 / -10 )

Another example of South Korea playing by the PRC handbook of diplomatic relations. The new Jade Kingdom will be as happy to have them as a vassal as the old.

6 ( +13 / -7 )

country with one of the most sophisticated and powerful militaries in Asia

Are you serious? Maybe I misunderstand you, but are you really think that Japanese JSDF is powerful? South Korea has more vehicle and manpower(conscription). So South Korea has power to defense themself, also they have agreements with US, but South Korea doesn't have any agreement with Japan, Japan has no chance and no obligations to help South Korea in theoretical conflict. Politically there is no reason for South Korea keep good relationship with Japan, economically - maybe, but economic ties are not such thing that easy to cut off, so Japan will tolerate political provocations.

-8 ( +6 / -14 )

Wow, so South Korea is being the good little lap dog then. I knew Park wouldn't have the spine to stand up to China. Instead, she's siding with her expanionist and invasive neighbour and turning against the one country in the immediate vicinity that can actually stand up against China in a conflict. I'm not including Russia, cos they're doing their own thing in Europe at the moment. South Korea looks at the big red dog next to them, fails to spot the yellow belly, and immediately folds. Terrible poker players. They should be standing with Japan against China, but it seems that they want to be assimilated by the Chinese.

I also agree that this is probably linked to Japan's talks with North Korea as well. The timing is entirely suspect.. Chalk up another one in the fail column for South Korea. When will they learn?

South Korea has more vehicle and manpower(conscription)

Numbers count for nothing in a war if the opposition uses superior tactics. Besides, the JSDF is much more skilled and disciplined than Korea or China's forces. So yes, Japan does have one of the most sophistaced and powerful militaries in Asia.

5 ( +11 / -6 )

NZ2011 good point!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

We have been pressuring South Korea to work with Japan on security issues, we forced a meeting with Park an Abe, and they go ahead and do this, They could have conducted the same drills a stone's throw away so that there would be no issues. I seriously wonder whether our 28,000 troops in South Korea are actually safe being stationed in a country that openly acts on behalf of China's interests and against those of the United States. .

7 ( +13 / -6 )

Another example of South Korea playing by the PRC handbook of diplomatic relations. The new Jade Kingdom will be >as happy to have them as a vassal as the old.

That's ludicrous. South Korea have its own interests and independent foreign policies. To South Korea, Dokdo belongs to it. period. The reason South Korea is doing this naval exercise is because there are continuing voices from Japanese interest groups and governmental officials denying SK's sovereignty of Dokdo; which can be seen from the links below.

http://www.japantoday.com/category/politics/view/shimane-stages-annual-rally-over-disputed-islands-with-s-korea

http://www.japantoday.com/category/politics/view/s-korea-protests-japanese-opinion-poll-on-disputed-islands

http://www.japantoday.com/category/national/view/japan-revises-teaching-manuals-says-disputed-islands-its-territory

And this basic naval exercise simply show SK trying to reaffirm what they believes; that Dokdo is theirs. Trying to play the China-Fear card is just disingenuous and manipulative. What Japan need to understand, for the betterment of the relationship between them and SK, is that Dokdo will most likely stay under SK sovereignty as SK already controls it and with people stationing on the island.

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

Besides, the JSDF is much more skilled and disciplined than Korea or China's forces.

I guess you don't know anything about military training at all if you really think JDSF is better than ROKMC, especially in terms of both skill and discipline.

Anyways, what's wrong with hosting their own military exercise in their own territory? Didn't Japan conduct their own military exercise in Sengaku Islands as well? Look at this irony over here LMAO

1 ( +10 / -9 )

How many time do we have to talk about this??

THERE IS NO ANCIENT EXISTING KOREAN MAP SHOWING WHERE DOKDO IS LAND IS WHILE JAPANESE MAPS SHOW.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H91QN6ho8jU

JAPAN IS HAPPY TO TAKE THIS ISSUE TO INTERNATIONAL COURT WHILE KOREA REFUSES TO DO SO. BUT YET NEVER STOPS CLAIMING IT BELONGS TO KOREA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3_H5YFm5lU

later this video was reported as "inappropriate" and shut down because many crazy Koreans reported to youtube.

I SINCERLY HOPE WORLD COMES TO REALIZE THIS KOREAN'S CULTIC STALKING CRAZY NATURE.

Just like there is no single evidence that Japanese ex-official military forced women for sex in organized manner where there are evidences that comfort women were prostetutes like photo of job-advertisement or receipt.

Japanere rising sun flag is offensive, toxicating French cartoon festiveal with politics of Confort women issue, buidling statue of comfortwomen right in front of Japanese embasssy ensuring every single J people has to see,.. trying to chang name of Japan sea on the map by lobying US politicians,....

They are CRAZY!

1 ( +8 / -7 )

SK nationalists at it again.

And then they have the audacity to accuse Japanese of being war mongering hate mongers.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

What is wrong with S Korea. It's becoming more and more like arrogant Commie China !!!!! S Korea you can't beat Japan.

9 ( +13 / -4 )

@Kungaa Mergen

Politically there is no reason for South Korea keep good relationship with Japan, economically - maybe, but economic ties are not such thing that easy to cut off, so Japan will tolerate political provocations.

Oh, really? According to the other news article, there is a huge gap between two nations in terms of degree of dependence on foreign trade. In the year 2013, Japan gained $25.3billion surplus which is only 0.35% of the total balance. On the other hand, ROK economy (based on GDP) is heavily depending on the foreigne trade, 46% for exporting (13.4% toward Japan) and 46% for importing (14.9% from Japan). Honestly, ROK does only harm and no benefit for Japan. If anyone disagrees, please enlighten me.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Shame on you South Korea — and I would be equally (or even more) unhappy if Japan had pulled a similar stunt.

I think it is time the U.S. rethink its commitment to protecting South Korea, and be less willing to put lives of members of U.S. armed forces on the line for a nation that seems to be working against peace in the region.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

Anyways, what's wrong with hosting their own military exercise in their own territory? Didn't Japan conduct their own military exercise in Sengaku Islands as well? Look at this irony over here LMAO

In fact Japan hasn't conducted exercises on the Senkaku islands. That's the difference between Japan and Korea, although Japan views the Senkaku islands as its territory it still respects China's claim despite the behaviour of the CCP. That's why nobody is allowed to visit the islands. Korea however doesn't know how civilised nations should act.

12 ( +13 / -1 )

Sorry, one correction.

46% for exporting (13.4% toward Japan) and 46% for importing (14.9% from Japan).

It was 48.5% for exporting.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I strongly feel Japan has much more to gain by working things out with Korea and providing some balance to China.

It seems like South Korea followed the footsteps of their North 'brethren' and turned pro-Chinese. US should realise it as well.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

hachikouJun. 20, 2014 - 02:27PM JST

THERE IS NO ANCIENT EXISTING KOREAN MAP SHOWING WHERE DOKDO IS LAND IS WHILE JAPANESE MAPS SHOW.

You are wrong. Korea has maps showing where Dokdo(Usando) is. https://docs.google.com/document/d/17aYqXZcMrtYn1Lue1vUjBN3DPNoP303V0TOpAqmbEnU/edit

Yes, Japan has old maps depicting Dokdo because of Japanese trespassing to Korean islands for illegal fishing, however it doesn’t mean Japan was exercising sovereignty over Dokdo. Japan has no maps showing only Dokdo belonged to Japan. Instead, Japan has official documents excluding Dokdo from Japan. How many Japanese know about those documents?

Tottori Han replied Dokdo doesn’t belong to any province of Japan in 1696. http://whathappenedtodokdo.blogspot.kr/2012/12/matsushimapresent-takeshima-doesnt.html

Meiji Government ordered to investigate how Dokdo became Korean territoryin 1870. http://whathappenedtodokdo.blogspot.kr/2012/04/hos-takeshimaulleongdo-and.html

Meiji Government ordered to remember Japan had nothing to do with Dokdo(Takeshima) in 1877. http://whathappenedtodokdo.blogspot.kr/2013/01/japan-has-nothing-to-do-with-ulleongdo.html

In spite of those historical evidence, Japan says Takeshima is an inherent part of territory of Japan. This is really crazy.

-9 ( +3 / -12 )

I seriously wonder whether our 28,000 troops in South Korea are actually safe being stationed in a country that openly acts on behalf of China's interests and against those of the United States.

While I think the government is willing to follow the PRC too closely, economically dependent as it is, it is still very much pro-American.

Friends in the military who have been deployed to South Korea have been amazed at the affection shown to them.

That said, should the DPRK collapse tomorrow, South Korea will have to accommodate the PRC to annex it, and I'm sure that ejecting the US forces will be a condition. After that, they will become even more dependent and eventually a de facto if not de jure vassal.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I guess you don't know anything about military training at all if you really think JDSF is better than ROKMC, especially in terms of both skill and discipline.

Well, Japan doesn't have Marines so I don't know what you're comparing? I bet you don't have any knowledge about both Korean army and JSDF let alone your countrie's armed forces.

Didn't Japan conduct their own military exercise in Sengaku Islands as well? Look at this irony over here LMAO

Japan don't conduct their military exercies over 'Sengaku' (lol) Islands. US did bomb them though when they were part of territories occupied (Nansei Shoto etc) after WWII. Look how scarce your base and informations are LMAO.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

So, South Korea is ignoring Japan's protests over this live-fire drill? Then when Japan blocks South Korean ships from transiting through Japanese waters to fish off the disputed Kuril Islands, Jalan should ignore Seoul's protests

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Kungaa Mergen

So South Korea has power to defense themself, also they have agreements with US, but South Korea doesn't have any agreement with Japan, Japan has no chance and no obligations to help South Korea in theoretical conflict. Politically there is no reason for South Korea keep good relationship with Japan...

I see that you have very little understanding of the strategic position that South Korea is in. The ROK does have an efficient system of conscription and are indeed a capable force militarily. However, although their military is technologically far more advanced than the DPRK, they are woefully outnumbered. With Seoul situated a mere stone's throw from what will be the initial front line in the event of an invasion from the North, ROK forces will be inevitably overrun initially if/when the DPRK mount a full invasion and ROK forces and government will be continually forced to retreat south. The ROK military is not capable of pushing back such an invasion and the US forces in Korea are not capable of doing this either as they are designed to merely assist the ROK military in slowing down and possibly stalling the southward advance of the DRPK invasion forces until US contingency plans for a conflict on the Korean Peninsula can be activated and executed and reinforcements can arrive from the US and Japan. Yes, Japan. Most of the US bases in Japan are dual-missioned United Nations bases, and if a war is to be fought again on the Korean Peninsula, ALL of the reinforcing forces, i.e. personnel, ships, vehicles, equipment, supplies (fuel, ammo, etc.), basically everything that UN forces (primarily US of course) will need to fight and push the DPRK forces back up to the DMZ will arrive in and be staged at US bases in Japan and on Okinawa first before being shipped or flown across to Korea. In an all out war like this, it is expected that the DPRK will use special operation forces (SOF), both inserted and pre-staged in Japan) to attack US and JSDF bases and damage/destroy/mine critical infrastructure like ports, bridges, tunnels, railways, etc. in order to disrupt the rear-area logistic support that's critical for UN forces to operate forward in Korea. When this happens, it will be the mission and responsibility of the Japanese (JSDF, JCG, police, etc.) to protect UN forces supporting the Korean campaign from Japan, keep sea and air lanes between Japan and Korea open and available to the invasion force, provide ballistic missile defense, and aid in the evacuation of the tens of thousands of Korean non-combatants/civilians who will be evacuated from the war zone. Have you ever given any thought to where these evacuees would go? Along with the defense of Japan, the support of a war on the Korean Peninsula is one of the primary missions of the US Forces permanently deployed to Japan, and Japan understands this and supports this mission as a member of the UN, a key American ally, and a strategically vital nation in the Northeast Asian theater, and effectively pays for a good chunk of it through its "Omoiyari Yosan/Sympathy Budget" for the USFJ presence. So it is absolutely ignorant and ungrateful of you to say that the Republic of Korea has no political reasons to keep favorable relations with Japan. If the fires of the Korean War are ever rekindled and the ROK again find themselves fighting the DPRK in all out war, they will (again) be dependent on and indebted to Japan in more ways than you can imagine. It's not an exaggeration to say that, without Japan's cooperation and support via the UN/US, the probability of the ROK surviving Korean War Part II is ZERO. I'd say that's reason enough for you to reconsider your prejudices.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

I see that you have very little understanding of the strategic position that South Korea is in. The ROK does have an efficient system of conscription and are indeed a capable force militarily. However, although their military is technologically far more advanced than the DPRK, they are woefully outnumbered. With Seoul situated a mere stone's throw from what will be the initial front line in the event of an invasion from the North, ROK forces will be inevitably overrun initially if/when the DPRK mount a full invasion and ROK forces and government will be continually forced to retreat south. The ROK military is not capable of pushing back such an invasion and the US forces in Korea are not capable of doing this either as they are designed to merely assist the ROK military in slowing down and possibly stalling the southward advance of the DRPK invasion forces until US contingency plans for a conflict on the Korean Peninsula can be activated and executed and reinforcements can arrive from the US and Japan. Yes, Japan. Most of the US bases in Japan are dual-missioned United Nations bases, and if a war is to be fought again on the Korean Peninsula, ALL of the reinforcing forces, i.e. personnel, ships, vehicles, equipment, supplies (fuel, ammo, etc.), basically everything that UN forces (primarily US of course) will need to fight and push the DPRK forces back up to the DMZ will arrive in and be staged at US bases in Japan and on Okinawa first before being shipped or flown across to Korea. In an all out war like this, it is expected that the DPRK will use special operation forces (SOF), both inserted and pre-staged in Japan) to attack US and JSDF bases and damage/destroy/mine critical infrastructure like ports, bridges, tunnels, railways, etc. in order to disrupt the rear-area logistic support that's critical for UN forces to operate forward in Korea. When this happens, it will be the mission and responsibility of the Japanese (JSDF, JCG, police, etc.) to protect UN forces supporting the Korean campaign from Japan, keep sea and air lanes between Japan and Korea open and available to the invasion force, provide ballistic missile defense, and aid in the evacuation of the tens of thousands of Korean non-combatants/civilians who will be evacuated from the war zone. Have you ever given any thought to where these evacuees would go? Along with the defense of Japan, the support of a war on the Korean Peninsula is one of the primary missions of the US Forces permanently deployed to Japan, and Japan understands this and supports this mission as a member of the UN, a key American ally, and a strategically vital nation in the Northeast Asian theater, and effectively pays for a good chunk of it through its "Omoiyari Yosan/Sympathy Budget" for the USFJ presence. So it is absolutely ignorant and ungrateful of you to say that the Republic of Korea has no political reasons to keep favorable relations with Japan. If the fires of the Korean War are ever rekindled and the ROK again find themselves fighting the DPRK in all out war, they will (again) be dependent on and indebted to Japan in more ways than you can imagine. It's not an exaggeration to say that, without Japan's cooperation and support via the UN/US, the probability of the ROK surviving Korean War Part II is ZERO. I'd say that's reason enough for you to reconsider your prejudices.

JSDF will defend it's country only and won't repeat the history ,any one who is playing provocative to drive japan into going to war is delusional

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Truly unbeleiveable of the right wing Japanese government!! The Doko island is clearly belongs to Korea. Korea can do whatever it wants near or on the island. Wake up Japan. This is not 1930s and 1940s. By the way, Japan lost the war thus forfeiting any lands its claimed during the war.

-9 ( +3 / -12 )

AsianhometownJun. 20, 2014 - 08:59PM JST Truly unbeleiveable of the right wing Japanese government!! The Doko island is clearly belongs to Korea.

Nonsense. If that were true South Korea would have settled this issue at the ICJ and put it to rest for good. Instead Japan has asked 3 times and all 3 times South Korea has refused. Lack of certainty and confidence in being able to obtain a favorable ruling is the only reason South Korea would continue to refuse.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

“Japan can never accept the drill given its position on Takeshima, and so we strongly demanded that the South Korean government stop its plans,”

But, Japan can hold a drill that practiced taking the islands by force. Double standards much?

Asianhometown - You really should read some history before making such outlandish claims. Japan kept control of those islands after the war as part of the US treaty, which Korea agreed to at the time. It's only now, some 70 years later, they have realised there 'may' be natural gas in the waters surrounding them and they want them back.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

DisillusionedJun. 20, 2014 - 09:19PM JST “Japan can never accept the drill given its position on Takeshima, and so we strongly demanded that the South Korean government stop its plans,” But, Japan can hold a drill that practiced taking the islands by force. Double standards much?

How is that a double standard? Japan has never conducted drills on any territory or island that is a subject of dispute with any other country Unlike what South Korea is now doing..

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Suin Kim

I am happy at least there is someone who can claim things with reference in constructive way. Sadly I was not able to reach your link of Korean map supposedly showing Dokdo island , because they require google login. Why don't you post some place else so that everybody can see it.

The rest of your claim about te fact Japan having waived the right of governing Dokto island in past is something that Japanese already know. We are not stupid. But then in 1905, Japan,Shimane prefecture acquired Dokto island again. You think Japan having stopped governing island at some period of time makes automatically this island belongs to Korean territory, that is soo wrong, unless you have evidence that Koreans at that time recognized the Dokdo island correctly and posessed, which they doesn't have. And that is the problem for Koreans.

Korean claims In 17 centuriy, a korean civilian,安龍福, already recognized Dokto island. But even he had pointed out island correctly, he is just a civiian individual not representing Korean goverment at that time nor any official document asa proof of its territory. In late 18 century, Korean official document shows 松島 is 干山, and they belongs to Korea. But they are NOT dokto island,nor able to show the proof that either of island is same as Dokto island. In 1900 Korean gverment ordered to govern Ishijima,石島, but again that is not Dokto island.

After all, Koreans didn't have enough evidence to convince the world Dokto island indeed belonged to Korea, and San fransisco treaty, it was recognized as Japanese territory. Quote below

As regards the island of Dokdo, otherwise known as Takeshima or Liancourt Rocks, this normally uninhabited rock formation was according to our information never treated as part of Korea and, since about 1905, has been under the jurisdiction of the Oki Islands Branch Office of Shimane Prefecture of Japan

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Rusk_note_of_1951

I think Korea needs to show following, if they want to claim Dokto island -> Historical evidence, official document in past which shows Dokto island "accuratly" and proof of governing. -> International basis, treaty or acknowledgemet by world Korea did govern Dokto island.

I think most of the things you want to show me are something already discussed in Japanese website among Japanese people, unless you found new document in your secret closet or something.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

DJJapan453

JSDF will defend it's country only and won't repeat the history ,any one who is playing provocative to drive japan into going to war is delusional

I'm not sure if you posted this in disagreement with what I posted in addressing Kungaa Mergen, but it IS a fact that Japan is very much a willing and critical part of the UN and the US' contingency plans for an invasion of the ROK by the DPRK. The US and Japan also exercise and train annually to the scenario I described above. Japan's involvement will be constitutional in such a scenario because all of their operations will be within Japanese sovereign territory in support of allied forces operating here and against DPRK forces conducting hostile operations here. This is very much a part of the GOJ and the JSDF's plans/missions right now and is not dependent on a future amendment of the constitution legalizing collective defense.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

“Japan can never accept the drill given its position on Takeshima, and so we strongly demanded that the South Korean government stop its plans,”

Who cares what you demanded? It's South Korean administered land, recognized world-wide save for in Japan, who also does drills to 'recapture islands' or plans to put weapons on islands on or nearest those in dispute, while also getting ready to renounce their pacifist constitution. South Korea can do what it wants in and around that area, and Japan can shake its fists and continue denying massacres and atrocities; it doesn't matter, and will accomplish nothing. What is Japan going to do? Better yet, what CAN they do? NOTHING.

-8 ( +4 / -12 )

For those people who are not aware: S.K has notified the US about its live-fire drill around the disputed island before the exercise took place. So folks, please take it easy.

Nowadays, Japan’s angry demands wrapped around with strong wordings such as ‘withdraw’, ‘stop’, ‘rescind’, ‘remove’ … etc. seemingly have little meaningful effects on the actually results.

Maybe, Abe’s admin should think about why Japan is increasingly become less relevant in the world even Abe himself visited 30 plus countries already yet japan's foreign policy so far has yielded few real fruits. Is there anything to do with all of Japan's immediate neighbors attitudes or Japan might bear some burden of proofs as well for its own questionable practices.

Respects needs to be earned, not those toothless threats or demands per se.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Japan can never accept the drill given its position on Takeshima, and so we strongly demanded that the South Korean government stop its plans,”

Who cares what you demanded? It's South Korean administered land, recognized world-wide save for in Japan, who also does drills to 'recapture islands' or plans to put weapons on islands on or nearest those in dispute, while also getting ready to renounce their pacifist constitution. South Korea can do what it wants in and around that area, and Japan can shake its fists and continue denying massacres and atrocities; it doesn't matter, and will accomplish nothing. What is Japan going to do? Better yet, what CAN they do? NOTHING.

Good that you said that , Actually I am with you except that when DPRK takes over ROK , japan will just have to shut the borders and watch video games

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

It's South Korean administered land, recognized world-wide save for in Japan

Nope, that's not true. Name those countries who don't talk about those islands as 'disputed'.

who also does drills to 'recapture islands'

So what's wrong with training for a 'recapture an island' scenario? South Korea does lots of landing operations trainings so that means they're going to capture Honshu?

plans to put weapons on islands on or nearest those in dispute

You mean Senkaku Shoto? What's wrong with putting weapons for defence of those islands against foreign invasion?

What is Japan going to do? Better yet, what CAN they do? NOTHING.

So you would like to see Japanese taking over the islands by force? They could that but they wanted to resolve the dispute in court - South Korean side knowing their claims are baseless withdrew the Japanese propositions to do so a fair number of times. So who's bad?

5 ( +7 / -2 )

I can see why Japan wants this to be an issue but I can't see how this really an issue. The Island has been developed on with regular tours happening weekly. This is similar to the Islands found above Hokkaido, they have been developed and are in use.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

No, SK's claim is not recognized by most nations since it goes against the San Francisco treaty in which 49 nations are signatory of.

If anybody claim otherwise please show proof.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

This is a rather obvious attempt by South Korea to create an argument with Japan over Takeshima/Dokdo because North Korea and Japan have been talking closely, North Korea shares South Korea's view that the islands are Korean, and North Korea has been absolutely ruthless in their vitriol against South Korea. The South Korean military are conducting the exercise in a zone which did not need to cover the islands, it's almost as if they deliberately stretched the area so that it would become an issue.

Ossan -- LOL. Now you can read the minds of the SK government? And you are saying they did this because Japan recently held talks with NK over abductees. Please, do you really believe that? And, also, by the way, I thought you were stating just the other day that "all the Asian countries that Japan occupied during the war" were supporting Japan's re-militarization. Guess that theory just went up in smoke.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Now you can read the minds of the SK government? And you are saying they did this because Japan recently held talks with NK over abductees

It's beacause president's Park supporting polls hit the lowest levels recently... It's only made to distract the public opinion from internal problems.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

jerseyboyJun. 20, 2014 - 10:47PM JST Ossan -- LOL. Now you can read the minds of the SK government? And you are saying they did this because Japan >recently held talks with NK over abductees. Please, do you really believe that?

Do you ever read the news? South Korea has already complained about Japan and North Korea's talks. Even JT had an article on it.

And, also, by the way, I thought you were stating just the other day that "all the Asian countries that Japan occupied >during the war" were supporting Japan's re-militarization. Guess that theory just went up in smoke.

All Asian countries excluding China and South Korea. That's hardfly a "theory" it's a fact. he two countries that make anti-Japan sentiment an official political and diplomatic tool. We expect this from China. But how does South Korea pretend to be a US Ally on one hand while supporting China's position?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Funny things is they conducted the same tests last year and Japan did not complain. It looks like somebody is playing games, eh?

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Sir_EdgarJun. 20, 2014 - 11:16PM JST Funny things is they conducted the same tests last year and Japan did not complain. It looks like somebody is playing >games, eh?

They are live fire drills as in exercises, not tests. And if South Korea last year has done a live fire drill in an area which INCLUDED the disputed islands, please provide a link.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

You should read the "Rusk documents”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rusk_documents

Claim Korean government has dismissed all.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

hachikouJun. 20, 2014 - 09:47PM JST

Why don't you post some place else so that everybody can see it. Now, you can see it without log-in.

The rest of your claim about te fact Japan having waived the right of governing Dokto island in past is something that Japanese already know. We are not stupid. Waive? How could Japan waive the right of governing Dokdo which had never been governed by Japan? Please show any evidence Japan governed Dokdo before illegal incorporation of 1905? Please don’t bring Japanese fishermen’s trips to Dokdo on the way to Ulleongdo. As Tottori Han replied Dokdo didn’t belong to any province of Japan, Japanese fishermen went to Dokdo which was the foreign land. I doubt Japanese are not stupid. If they know the existence of such official documents, they should be ashamed of their government’s claim Takeshima was an inherent part of territory of Japan.

But then in 1905, Japan,Shimane prefecture acquired Dokto island again.

Have you ever read Japanese Cabinet Decision to incorporate Dokdo? Is there any mention Japan acquired Dokdo again? Do you know the full process how Japan decide to incorporate Dokdo into Japanese land? If you have full knowledge on those, you can’t say Japan acquired Dokdo again.

You think Japan having stopped governing island at some period of time makes automatically this island belongs to Korean territory From when did Japan govern Dokdo? Is the Japanese fishermen’s stopover in Dokdo during 17C in your mind? Then forget about it. As Tottori Han said Dokdo was not Japanese land at that time. If Japan governed Dokdo, why did Japanese exclude Dokdo in the maps of Japan? Why did the first Japanese record on Dokdo "Onshu Shicho Goki” exclude Dokdo from Japan in 1667?

http://whathappenedtodokdo.blogspot.kr/2014/06/a-recently-found-japanese-map-of-1802.html

Korean claims In 17 centuriy, a korean civilian,安龍福, already recognized Dokto island. But even he had pointed out island correctly, he is just a civiian individual not representing Korean goverment at that time nor any official document asa proof of its territory.

If Dokdo was not Korean land, how could a Korean recognize Dokdo belonged to Korea? If your assertion that Japan was governing Dokdo at that time is right, why didn’t the Japanese say “No, it’s Japanese land.” when Ahn declared Dokdo was Korean land? As Tottori Han said Dokdo didn’t belong to any province of Korea, no Japanese considered Dokdo belonged to Korea then. The official document proving Dokdo was Korean land is “Annals of King Sejong” of 1454. If you want to argue about it, I’m ready for it.

In late 18 century, Korean official document shows 松島 is 干山, and they belongs to Korea. But they are NOT dokto island,nor able to show the proof that either of island is same as Dokto island. Can you explain in detail which document you are talking about?

In 1900 Korean gverment ordered to govern Ishijima,石島, but again that is not Dokto island.

If Seokdo is not Dokdo, then what is it? Uldo Governor Shim reported to the Korean central government that Dokdo belonging to his county became Japanese land in 1906. Definitely, Korea was governing Dokdo.

San fransisco treaty, it was recognized as Japanese territory. Quote below

Rusk Note has nothing to do with the final decision of SF Treaty. It was nothing but a American private support for Japanese claim which was not delivered to the other signatories of SF Treaty. John F. Dulles said “US view re Takeshima simply that of one of many signatories to treaty.” and Van Fleet said “The Republic of Korea has been confidentially informed of the United States position regarding the islands but our position has not been made public.”

I think Korea needs to show following, if they want to claim Dokto island

You can find the answers here : http://whathappenedtodokdo.blogspot.kr/. How about Japan? Japan has historical evidence saying Dokdo belonged to Korea , SCAPIN 677 defined Japan to exclude Dokdo during the negotiation of Sf Treaty and SF Treaty concluded with Article 19 stating "Japan recognizes the validity of all acts and omissions done during the period of occupation under or in consequence of directives of the occupation authorities." Is it right for Japan to claim Dokdo?

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Suin Kim, you obviously believe that South Korea's position is correct and that it can be substantiated through various pieces of evidence. Why then has South Korea refused 3 times to settle this issue at the ICJ as Japan has suggested, and make them shut up for good?

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Do you ever read the news? South Korea has already complained about Japan and North Korea's talks.

Ossan -- huh? you are adding two plus two and coming up with five. First off, I do read the news -- in print and on the Internet (nice try). Second, the fact that SK complained about Japan talking to NK has NOTHING to do with this live-fire drill. What possible link would there be? The SK complains all the time about Yasakuni, but don't shoot off rockets.

And, as usual, you can't reply specifically to a question/comment, and instead just try semantics:

All Asian countries excluding China and South Korea. That's hardfly a "theory" it's a fact. he two countries that make anti-Japan sentiment an official political and diplomatic tool. We expect this from China. But how does South Korea pretend to be a US Ally on one hand while supporting China's position?

Suddenly it is "all Asian countries excluding China and South Korea -- the two that just happen to have the biggest issues with Japan -- and you can't reference a single country other than Australia that has stated support for Japan re-militarization. But you keep stating it anyway. You need to stop letting blind hatred for SK and China keep you from truly grasping Japan's plight.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

South Korea should decide if they want to ally themselves to China or continue to enjoy the benefits of U.S protection and Japanese support. They overestimate their own importance and military abilities and is the weakest link in the Western camp.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Japan is now working to abolish the Constitution that will allow them to freely engage in war to resolve disputes is calling Korea deplorable for having an exercise to defend their territory??? Mr ABE and his admin is becoming a laughing stock of the World.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

As long as it happened in international waters (aka at least 12 nm from the islands), South Korea can do what they want. Yes, live-fire drills are rare because the cost of the weapons launched prevents such drills from happening on a regular basis, but they DO happen occasionally. In my six years in the U.S. Navy I was aboard for only one live-fire SM-1 missile shoot and two dummy warhead ASROC missile shoots. You can train up to actually performing the launch only so many times before you need the crew to go through the WHOLE procedure or people forget what they need to do after the launch has happened.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Yes, Korean government back then didn't respond effectively, but this doesn't make Dokdo/Takeshima as Japan's land. The information Dean Rusk had was based on Japanese side. The problem here is the information Japan gave wasn't based on the true historical fact. That's what U.S. Department of State suspected. This document reminded the fact Japan established a protectorate over Korea in 1904, and annexed Korea in 1910. Japan deprived diplomatic right of Korea in 1904, deprived Dokdo in 1905 and deprived whole Korea in 1910. Most people except the pro-Japanese people can easily figure out Dokdo/Takeshima was the victim of Imperial Japan's expansionism and colonialism.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I don't trust a word from South Korea. South Korea and Japan will not need to talk.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I don`t know why the U.S. looked the other way and allowed S.K. to build those facilies on the island. On the one hand the U.S. says they recognize Dokdo/Takeshima is dispuited territory and does not take a side but by allowing S.K. to do what they did IMO shows that the U.S. takes the S.K. side in the dispute. Knowing that the U.S. is on their side is why S.K. is doing these things.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yesterday they conducted inexcusable military exercise in those island , If they took it , Abe administration should never breach the japanese borders and let the NK overrun ROK military

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Fadamor, yes, that is correct in theory, but the one fact that this article does not mention is that the top right hand corner of S Korea's designated sea rectangle sat across the line and into the disputed area. SK could have adjusted the box so this did not happen, but they chose not to. It's like stepping on someone's little toe in a crowded station and not apologizing. You know what you did, and the person whose toe was stepped on knows what you did. This kind of thing does not make for good neighbors.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

jerseyboyJun. 21, 2014 - 02:07AM JST Do you ever read the news? South Korea has already complained about Japan and North Korea's talks. Ossan -- huh? you are adding two plus two and coming up with five. First off, I do read the news -- in print and on the >Internet (nice try). Second, the fact that SK complained about Japan talking to NK has NOTHING to do with this >live->fire drill. What possible link would there be? The SK complains all the time about Yasakuni, but don't shoot off >rockets. And, as usual, you can't reply specifically to a question/comment, and instead just try semantics:

Post when you actually have something to say please.

Suddenly it is "all Asian countries excluding China and South Korea -- the two that just happen to have the biggest >issues with Japan -- and you can't reference a single country other than Australia that has stated support for Japan re->militarization. But you keep stating it anyway. You need to stop letting blind hatred for SK and China keep you from truly >grasping Japan's plight.

No my first statement was "nearly all countries:" which you re-wrote to "all countries"., Try the Philippines. Now please go bother someone else.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

OssanAmericaJun. 21, 2014 - 02:05AM JST

Settle what? Korea has no dispute related to Dokdo to settle in ICJ. Korea is completely and effectively controlling Dokdo and the cause of the conflict is Japanese provocation based on the false claim. Korea has no legal and moral obligation to say “Yes” to Japan’s asking to go to ICJ, thus there’s nothing wrong with Korean decision not to say “Yes” to Japan’s proposal. If Japan believes ICJ is the rational thing to settle the territorial dispute, why doesn’t Japan try to settle Kuril islands and Senkaku issues in ICJ first?

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

you want to know in what they are exploiting japanese military to go defend and then later blame

http://www.gasengi.com/main/board.php?bo_table=member_translation&wr_id=244430

ROK military can go defend himself , of course UN military with the US will finish the job as usual

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Suin Kim

Like I said, what you said is already discussed in Japan. I respond to one of things you said because there are so many things involved.

What you pointed out is so called, 竹島外一島 issue known in Japan. http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%AB%B9%E5%B3%B6%E5%A4%96%E4%B8%80%E5%B3%B6

竹島外一島 is confusing word,but direct translation is "Takesima island and other single island"

In 1877, official Japanese goverment document says it abandoned "Takeshima with other one island". I completly agree on statement above.

But question is... WHICH ISLAND DID JAPAN MEAN IN DOCUMENT ? BECAUSE NAMES WERE DIFFERENT FROM NOW. IN 1877, JAPAN USED TO CALL 鬱陵島 AS 竹島(takeshima) 鬱陵島. is a big island in west from "dokto/takeshima" island,not takeshima/dokto we are talking about.

So I agree that Japan abandoned the territory of 鬱陵島, which Japanese used to call, 'Takeshima', which is not dokto/takeshima ... agree??

Next important question is what is 外一島, other one signle island? Because document says Japan also abandoned "外一島(other single island)" as well. 外=other 一島=single island

Question is.. WHICH ISLAND DID JAPANESE MEAN BY 外一島??

Korean claims It has to be,,, dokto/takeshime we are talking about.

Japanese claims No, it is the "tiny island" now called, 竹嶼, on right next to 鬱陵島.

Photo of 鬱陵島 with a tiny island. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/Ulleung_island_from_above.jpg Korean map below, it says 于山 which is a tiny island http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/DaedongyeojidoUlleungdo.png

Which claims is the right one??

To me, it is reasonable to see 鬱陵島 with this tiny island 竹嶼 are the islands Japan abandoned and noting to do with Dokto/Takeshima we are talking about, which is far far east from 鬱陵島 , and island shape is more like two rocks split. But I think the japanese map you showed me 磯竹島略図, which is precise, tells us answer.

THERE IS NO NAME ON TINY ISLAND ON RIGHT ABOVE ON MAP!!!!!!

NO NAME? WHY? isn't that why japanese document says "外一島",called "other single island" or, nameless island Don't you think if Korean claims is right and "外一島" is indeed dokto/takeshima island, don't you think Japanese document wouldn't call it "OTHER SINLE ISLAND" but would says "松島(matushima)" on map, that is what Japanese used to call doktota/takeshima. Don't you thnk if Korean claim is right it would be "竹島外松島"(takeshima and Matushima) not "竹島外一島"??

After all, this document is meannigless, or inconclusive, since we have no way of knowing which islands they are talking about. so this document won't do anything to support Koreans claim.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Suin Kim

The sticking issue of Takeshima is that control was taken unilaterally through force.

No nation is going to accept SK's claim knowing this fact.

It really doesn't matter how much time lapse since that fact is recorded and cannot be changed.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

hachikouJun. 21, 2014 - 05:06PM JST

Is that what you learned from the discussion on Dajokan Order in Japan ? It’s deplorable some Japanese are still believe such a lame logic. Unfortunately, you learned how to distort Dajokan Order, not the truth. In other words, Japanese are desperate to deny Dajokan Order which said Japan had nothing to do with Ulloengdo and Dokdo . I understand Dajokan Order is critically inconvenient for Japan’s claim on Dokdo. Let me tell you the truth.

You deny another island is Dokdo and instead try to make another island Jukdo which is 2.2 km off Ulleongo, which is nonsense. The reasons your claim is wrong is as follows:

Read carefully the inquiry of Ministry of Home Affairs of Japan to Dajokan. It’s said “Regarding the islands in question, they are known to have nothing to do with our country as per documents prepared in the first month of the 9th year of the Genruko (1696) after the entry of the Koreans into the island. ” In other words, Ministry of Home Affairs concluded Japan had nothing to do with Ulleongdo and another island based on the document of 1696. What happened in 1696? Edo government prohibited the Japanese to go to Ulleongdo and Dokdo after Tottori Han answered those two islands didn’t belong to Japan in 1696. Thus, Takeshima and another island are definitely Ulleongdo and Dokdo. Dajokan just confirmed what Ministry of Home Affairs said that Japan had nothing to do with Ulleongdo and Dokdo.

Have you seen the map attached to Dajokan Order? There are two islands named 竹島 and 松島 are depiced in the map. As you said, 竹島 is Ulleongdo and 松島 is Dokdo. Thus, you should admit to claim another island is Jukdo, not Dokdo is very foolish. The map proves anothe island in question is 松島(=Dokdo). There's no Jukdo in the map.

<http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-rORNE7Ei9ZE/UPcyDmnO_UI/AAAAAAAADgE/o_FHktpVLAM/s1600/%25EA%25B8%25B0%25EC%25A3%25BD%25EB%258F%2584%25EC%2595%25BD%25EB%258F%25841.jpg >

There’s no any reason Japan’s Shimane Prefecture asked Ministry of Home Affairs whether to include Jukdo, not Dokdo in their jurisdition. And there's no any reason Ministry of Home Affairs of Japan to ask Dajokan to conclude about Jukdo. Historically, Japanese had never paid attention to Jukdo. Claiming Ministry of Home Affairs of Japan and Meiji Government’s highest authority Dajokan said Japan has nothing to do with Jukdo is the most ridiculous thing in Japanese Takeshima logic. The following link is how Jukdo looks like and how close it is to Ulleongdo. . http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-eCjuordJ9_4/U57kcXwwq4I/AAAAAAAAE98/8oIe7rZl3NA/s1600/2.jpg

It’s just a foolish attempt to make another island which has nothing to do with Japan in Meiji Government’s Dajokan Order Jukdo. Japanese should wake up.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Korea has no legal and moral obligation to say “Yes” to Japan’s asking to go to ICJ

In 1952 or 53? when Japan had no force to defend, Korea established a boundary on the sea of japan by force, violating international law, and killed many japanese fishermen and arrested thousands of japanese people. and they required the release of Korean criminals who were imprisoned in Japan in exchange for japanese hostage. Since then, korea has been illegally occupaying takeshima. Japan can't use armed force to take it back due to japanese constitution.

Do you think korea doesn't have to accept the offer from japan to settle the dispute "peacefully" over the ilands korea took by killing japanese people?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

At the end of the day Koreans are all sticking their fingers in their ears and singing Lalalala I can't hear you creating pathetic excuses believing the problem is going to go away if they just ignore it.

Can you really call this a modern and responsible nation ?

I don't think so.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

No my first statement was "nearly all countries:" which you re-wrote to "all countries"., Try the Philippines. Now please go bother someone else.

Ossan -- weak. Your statement was what it was -- "all countries". And "try the Philippines" is just another dodge. Point to a specific statement by The Philippines welcoming Japan's re-militarization. You can't, because you know it does not exist. Except maybe in the same place where it was concluded that this action on SK's part was a result of Japan talking to NK about abductees.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

People here suggest that if SK wants to ally with the US and Japan,, then she should not do anything to annoy Japan even if SK is just exercising her rights. All talk is about containing China. Then in the same breath, they say they do not want to contain China. Then Japan tries to stir Vietnam and Philippines. Then they criticise China. What double standards!

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

bamboo pinkJun. 21, 2014 - 10:12PM JST

when Japan had no force to defend

Defend Dokdo? You misunderstood. At that time, SCAPIN677 separated Japan from Dokdo and SCAPIN1033 prohibited the Japanese nationals to enter the 12-nautical mile seas off Dokdo and approaching Dokdo. However, Koreans were enjoying the sovereignty over Dokdo. Dokdo was not the island Japan had to defend with the use of force.

Korea established a boundary on the sea of japan by force

Are you talking about President’s Ryee’s Line known also as Peace Line? Korea didn’t use the force to establish the Peace Line. What Korea did was an announcement of "Declaration of Sovereignty Over Neighboring Seas". Japanese fishermen‘s violation of SCAPIN 1033 partly led to he President Rhee’s declaration of Korean sovereignty over the waters around the Korean peninsula. Peace Line is almost identical to MacArthur Line of SCAPIN 1033. Dokdo was Korean land which Japan had to renounce after the surrender of WW2. SF Treaty deciding the territory of Japan started with the recognition that Dokdo was Korean land. It was Japan’s aggressive lobbying and U.S. strategic interests that messed up this initial recognition, however President Ryee did the right thing to keep Korean Dokdo from Japan by establishing Peace Line. As to the use of force after the establishment of Peace Line, it was a reasonable self defence against Japanese vessels violating Peace Line.

violating international law

Which international law are you talking about? Was there international law saying a nation’s declaring the sovereignty over its surrounding seas illegal at that time? Please show me if there was. American position on Peace Line which extremely sided with Japan was not an international law. President Ryees declaration had international precedents.

Since then, korea has been illegally occupaying takeshima.

President’ Ryee’s Peace Line was legitimate then and it was abolished in 1965 by an agreement between Korea and Japan. The reason Korea is occupying Dokdo is that Dokdo inherently belonged to Korea.

Japan can't use armed force to take it back due to japanese constitution.

Do you think the use of force is the way Japan can take Dokdo away from Korea? It’s not surprising many people think Japan should keep peace constitution.

Do you think korea doesn't have to accept the offer from japan to settle the dispute "peacefully" over the ilands korea took by killing japanese people?

There’s no dispute related to Dokdo with Japan to settle in ICJ. The peaceful solution to solve the conflict is Japanese sincere reflection that Imperial Japan illegally took Korean Dokdo by greed during the course of colonizing Korea.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

@Suin Kim

Today Takeshima, tomorrow Tsushima. The next week you might as claim Shin-Okubo in Shinjuku for your own.

The problem with Korea is its deep-seated inferiority complex and its self-entitled delusions. Go on, go claim Manchuria as part of Goguryeo. China will not be as beneficent.

In the mean time, Japan should cease all financial support and investment in an unsupportive country.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Takeshima - Seeking a Solution based on Law and Dialogue http://youtu.be/DYRHZX3m-bg

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Masaki Miyamoto: Takeshima - Seeking a Solution based on Law and Dialogue http://youtu.be/DYRHZX3m-bg

South Korea won't talk to Japan about the islands so 'Dialouge' with Japan about them is pointless

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites