COVID-19 INFORMATION What you need to know about the coronavirus if you are living in Japan or planning a visit.
politics

4 Japanese lawmakers to be banned from visiting island near Dokdo

34 Comments

South Korea's Yonhap News Agency reported Thursday that the South Korean government will ban Japanese lawmakers planning to visit an island near the south's easternmost islets of Dokdo. Four lawmakers of Japan's opposition Liberal Democratic Party said last week they will visit Ulleung Island near Dokdo in early August.

The decision follows a warning from South Korean President Lee Myung-Bak on Wednesday that if the visit by Japanese lawmakers to the site near the islands, known as Takeshima in Japan, and which are claimed by both nations, went ahead, their safety could not be guaranteed.

© Japan Today

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

34 Comments
Login to comment

samurai spirit compromised(?) a wise decision by law abiding LDP members.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I'd love to see these pig-headed politicians go ahead with the visit and be greeted by a South Korean special forces team!

2 ( +3 / -1 )

When did S. Korea become a Totalitarian state limiting people's right ?

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

while the disputes over these islands might have started as grudges and historical possession. it is now just about one thing these days, carbon energy resources and fishing. what we are seeing with china, the koreas, japan, and taiwan disputing all these little deserted rocks in the middle of no where is the coming of world war three. the only way to solve these disputes and prevent war is for all the members of the San Fransisco treaty to come together and negotiate out final ownership. using third party verified historical claims.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

sunhawk

all the members of the San Fransisco treaty to come together

That is not going to solve it one bit considering that neither S.Korea or PRC attended the San Fransisco treaty and the Soviet Union now Russia did not sign.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Those japanese LDP politicians were following the path like those Kwantung army young officers to march in Manchuria 1931,defying the PM's will in Tokyo acting on their own. This is japanese politics traditions: Behaves like a maverick to embarass the Tokyo govt screwing them and troubling them! Seeking the oppuurtunity to topple the PM by arousing nationalisms!

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

"their safety could not be guaranteed. " I just cant believe it! the country is really a free nation?It's almost like gangster's threats. 

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

dokdo belongs to korea. full stop.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Why can`t people get along and share?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Well, S. Korea was a military dictatorship until 1993, so pretty recently. And the turmoil of political problems between Japan and S. Korea has always been big. But my South Korean friends also blame their own politicians for creating a lot of tension and the political environment is pretty bad. There is a growing group of S. Koreans who also think that the problems between North and south korea are worsened because of S. korean government rhetorics.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mamix: "I just cant believe it! the country is really a free nation?It's almost like gangster's threats."

And yet right here in Japan if you want to protest, let's say, a visit to Yasukuni and there are black trucks all around the J-cops will ask you not to go there because they, and they have literally said this, "cannot guarantee your safety". And that's domestic stuff!

This is Korean land, SK has a right to ban them. If they go despite the banning they have a right to arrest them.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

completely agree Smithinjapan. THese islands are administered by South Korea and the Japanese actions where purely provocative. Any country has the right to ban people that they think are going to cause trouble and as this is a sensitive issue the South Koreans took a careful approach by stopping any issues before they happened. Well done South Korea for sensible thinking.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

smithinjapan

If they go despite the banning they have a right to arrest them.

On what grounds might I ask? As for Yasukuni, no the police will not stop people and the occasional black vans although somewhat obnoxious can't park their vans there since it is a no parking zone. To tell you the truth I don't think you had ever visited the Shrine based on your remarks.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Why is JT calling the island Dokdo? Neutrality please.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

lalasalama

Why is JT calling the island Dokdo? Neutrality please.

Well the islands are administered by South Korea and thats what they call them so l guess thats their name. Therefore JT is calling them by there name. Whats wrong with that?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

SamuraiBlue: "On what grounds might I ask? As for Yasukuni, no the police will not stop people and the occasional black vans although somewhat obnoxious can't park their vans there since it is a no parking zone. To tell you the truth I don't think you had ever visited the Shrine based on your remarks."

Where did I ever say I've been to Yasukuni? there was an article about EXACTLY this only a couple of years back when protesters were warned (and I think even blocked) from going there and told it was for their own safety because a large number of Uyoko were there. If I find the link, I'll post it.

As for what right do they have? It's their sovereign land; only Japan disputes it. It's the same as when their boats get taken for fishing in Russia's zone.

lalasalama: "Why is JT calling the island Dokdo? Neutrality please."

To be fair, JT does usually follow it up with ('known as Takeshima in Japan'), and they do sometimes print vice-versa, calling it Takeshima ('known as Dokdo in SK'), it just depends on whether the island is focused on the SK or Japan side. Regardless, if one is to be considered correct and not the other it would be Dokdo, as SK lives on and administers the island.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Readers, the story does say that the island is known as Takeshima in Japan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smithinjapan; As for what right do they have? It's their sovereign land; only Japan disputes it. It's the same as when their boats get taken for fishing in Russia's zone.

They are not going fishing, they are only going to visit. Even though most locals does not like it, they cannot stop foreigners from coming to Taji to protest. Really you should get a smell of reality on how justice works.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

SamuraiBlue: "They are not going fishing, they are only going to visit. Even though most locals does not like it, they cannot stop foreigners from coming to Taji to protest."

Who needs the dose of reality? No, they're not going fishing, they're going to a place they've been banned. If I'm banned from entering a nation, or even a bar for that matter (as another example), what do you think is going to happen when I try to enter? As to the Taiji allusion, are the protesters allowed to enter the actually building in which they do the culling? No, they're not. We heard NOTHING but cries of how bad the movie is because the video footage was 'obtained illegally' (trespassing), but by your logic it should not have been illegal. Regardless, what makes the analogy even sillier is you equating it to a nation that the people have already legally entered (ie. Japan), so no, they cannot stop protesters from going to Taiji because they're already legally in Japan. But what would happen to SS Paul Watson if he tried to enter Japan, from which he's been barred?

Again, a silly analogy. SKorea administers these islands, and if they have banned these lawmakers from entering and they enter anyway... well, like I said earlier. In fact, these lawmakers going over to the islands plays right into SK hands -- if it became a larger (international) issue then there would be more pressure to solve it, and right now only one side sees a dispute. If the UN or some body had the power to see the 'dispute' end tomorrow, in all likelihood the islands would be full-out recognized as belonging to the country that resides on and administers them.

These lawmakers, for a variety of reasons, would be wise to stay away.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

smithinjapan; No, they're not going fishing, they're going to a place they've been banned.

It seems you do not have any clear distinction between public and private. Inside of a building would be private property therefore you would need permission for the proper authority. On the other hand, the island is public area there are approx. 10,000 inhabitants living there with a port. Unless S.Korea is a totalitarian state that prohibits free access to foreigners then there should be no basis for them to be banned, but since you have no concept of justice I guess you do not understand what I am talking about.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

SamuraiBlue,

On the other hand, the island is public area there are approx. 10,000 inhabitants living there with a port. Unless S.Korea is a totalitarian state that prohibits free access to foreigners then there should be no basis for them to be banned, but since you have no concept of justice I guess you do not understand what I am talking about.

Given that the land belongs to South Korea they have the right to stop anyone they like from entering especially if the people are going there with the express purpose of creating a situation and causing trouble. Which these Japanese were doing. If l turned up at a Japanese airport and presented to immigration officials in Sea Shepard gear and said l was here to go to the dolphin slaughter and cause trouble would l be allowed in? Nope. It the same thing, these politicians where going to South Korean land for a political stunt and SK has refused them entry, good on SK

0 ( +2 / -2 )

might as well have a news conference, point to an image of the island, and pound the chest. Ridiculous

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Oh good grief, when are these kids going to stop arguing about these rocks?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

If l turned up at a Japanese airport and presented to immigration officials in Sea Shepard gear and said l was here to go to the dolphin slaughter and cause trouble would l be allowed in? Nope.

If you're dumb enough to state to the immigration officials that you are going to Taiji to cause trouble, then yeah. But if you're wearing a Sea Shepard gear and stated that you're going to Taiji, then no. Many SS members have successfully came to Japan without any problems and they will continue to do so.

Let's be clear. These lawmakers are going to Ulleungdo and not Takeshima. Ullengdo is recognized by Japan as Korean territory.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Japan has suggested submitting the issue of territorial rights of TAKESIMA(Liancourt Rocks) to the International Court of Law, but Korea has refused.

It’s all.

Which country believes their own JUSTICE? Which country knows their own INJUSTICE?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What's to stop the LDP from sending its real protestors?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

He meant: Your granddaddys caused havoc for 50 years and we carbon copied your economy so you if come and get hurt or killed its not our fault. PS, send back our K-pop bands.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

time to send the ROK ambassador home, perhaps even more for restricting lawful Japanese from visiting South Korea in violation of so many treaties. Time to let them face the North alone as well, if they can not face a underpopulated bankrupt north alone, they deserve to be invaded.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

YuriOtani

time to send the ROK ambassador home, perhaps even more for restricting lawful Japanese from visiting South Korea in violation of so many treaties.

Last time l looked South Korea was a nation on its own not part of the glorious Japanese empire you realise that ended in the 40's right. As such the South Koreans have the right to stop the entry into their country of whoever they like. Especially when they have announced that they are coming to a sensitive area that will cause tension.

The funny thing about your comment is though that its not just the South Koreans, the Japanese government has also critisised the stunt and asked them to not go. So maybe you should restrain some of that anti South Korea nationalist sentiment you have there.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Spidapig24, The South Koreans look for any excuse to bash Japan. Their civil war with the north is still in progress. I am in favor of having nothing to do with either of them. For your information am not Japanese but from Okinawa. It would of shown "tolerance" for the South Koreans to have let them visit Japan. Now the government of Japan has been put on the spot. Members of their government wanted to visit their "ally" and we deported at the airport. The government needs to do something in return for this insult. As I said helping the south in their civil war against the north is putting Japan in harms way. Japan needs to be strictly NEUTRAL in the ongoing civil war in Korea.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

oops visit South Korea

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nice way for the government to distract the Japanese Public from the real problem: public health and radioactive foods

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@YuriOtani I think perhaps you are not too familiar with the reason why this is a sensitive issue for both countries. You may think SKs look for any excure to bash Japan, but you must also see that many Japanese purposefully choose to 'ignore' or 'look down' on Korea and Koreans. This is obvious from the treatment of Zainichi Koreans in Japan I believe, that there is an obvious discrimination. But aside from that, the point is that Korea was colonised by Japan for several decades, where the Koreans were forbidden to 'be Korean'. Koreans were forbidden to eat Korean food and speak their own language and were forced to wave the Japanese flag. And when I mean forced, they basically killed anyone who didn't listen to them and many did. Then the war ended and Korea had their independence again but Japan hardly apologized for their atrocities to the countries they invaded, including the Philippines and China (mainly Manchuria) which is why many Chinese in that area have the same reaction against the Japanese as the Koreans. As you can see it is not an easy relationship to just say "oh okay let's just be friends again". Dokdo is currently administered by SK because the country administered it before the country was colonised by the Japanese. The SKs show 'proof' by documentation as well as landmarks on the island, dating before Japanese invasion. I do not doubt that the Japanese too visited the island before the war, but as far as administration I believe the SKs have more so-called 'proof' to back their stance. I am guessing that the Japanese need to investigate the island to prove otherwise but that's just my personal estimation. Anyway - the island was so-called Japanese territory during the colonisation, but after the war, SK resumed administration to this day, yet the Japanese claim that the island is in fact, Takeshima and part of Japanese territory - you can imagine what the SK reaction was to that.

I just want to say, consider what visas are and what they are for. There are many people who will visit the US and stay until they become illegal immigrants. If they are found out, they are kicked out of the country. It is law, although these people normally have their reasons for staying, in the end no matter what their excuse is (i.e. I have to feed my children) they are kicked out of the country because it is the country's law. Not all countries allow all other international visitors direct entry into other countries. Some countries are stricter about who enters and who cannot. That is why people have to apply for visas for certain countries to get access. If you are denied the visa for whatever reason (visa rejection is common for Asians who wish to visit the US, it's bizarre if you hear the reasons why but anyway not the point here) you are denied access into the country. It is their country's law and even if you don't agree with it, you stick with it. You push yourself then you can get arrested. The country doesn't have to be totalitarian to be able to do that.

The Japanese lawmakers were given a warning in advance. They purposefully ignored the warning and went ahead with it anyway knowing they would get rejected. They know the Koreans are more sensitive about the issue than most of the general Japanese are. It stems from the history. The point was they wanted to make a show and they pretty much succeeded. The thing is, there isn't much they can really do by visiting yet they did it out of pure provocation. They went to SK and said "Dokdo is Takeshima and is Japanese land" on public TV in the Korean airport. Dokdo and Takeshima is not the only example of territorial dispute, there are other landmarks, areas, mountains that have countries fighting over for the land but Dokdo and Takeshima have always been the heat of the media. I personally think that SK should've kept it quiet and it's turned out to be a much bigger deal than it really is but I guess it is impossible with international TV and the internet making news.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The RoK government should cut ties between their military department with the Japanese SDF and that will really sending a good message to let Mr Kan knows how serious this matter is!

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