politics

Japan holds annual event to press claim to S Korea-held islets

34 Comments

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

© KYODO

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

34 Comments
Login to comment

The majority of the Japanese don’t care about the Liancourt Rocks. In South Korea, they’re a symbol of anti-Japan nationalism. Back when Trump talked to Kim Jong Un for the first time, South Korea cancelled its joint military drill with the U.S. along the border, yet it still did its regular drill on the rocks "in case of an invasion from Japan".

People all over the country cheered when some athlete swam all the way there. I even saw a video of some foreign exchange students being tricked into saying “Dokdo is Korean” in broken Korean.

7 ( +13 / -6 )

The majority of the Japanese don’t care about the Liancourt Rocks. But the government which is supposed to represent the will of the people does care so much that they go out of their way to have an annual event to claim it theirs. With the levels of stubborn attitudes both countries exhibit, I don't see this ever resolved without military conflict.

-7 ( +7 / -14 )

I have an idea. Instead of wasting billions of yen on campaigns and meetings, why not strike a deal with South Korea to share them?

-5 ( +6 / -11 )

why not strike a deal with South Korea to share them?

That won't work either. Japan's awful at negotiating this things.

Last time Russia and Japan were gonna go into negotiations for the Kuril islands, Japanese side cancelled all saying they will only go into meetings, only if Russia pre-agreed, before negotiations took any place, that they would return all four islands to Japan.

I think it would be worse between Korea and Japan, specially with all the anti-Japan sentiment and propaganda in Korea.

-3 ( +8 / -11 )

@lindsay. I agree. With the Fukushima radiation release, we won’t be able to consume fish from Hokkaido to Wakayama Pacific Ocean. As the article says, it is a very rich fishing ground. Sharing will help mend our hostilities.

-16 ( +1 / -17 )

"I have an idea. Instead of wasting billions of yen on campaigns and meetings, why not strike a deal with South Korea to share them?"

Excellent idea! But then xenophobic politicians won't have a loudspeaker to crow through.

-3 ( +8 / -11 )

"I have an idea. Instead of wasting billions of yen on campaigns and meetings, why not strike a deal with South Korea to share them?"

Excellent idea! But then xenophobic politicians won't have a loudspeaker to crow through.

Do you also mean Korean chauvinist politicians? They've continued to be super-obsessed with the tiny islets.

People all over the country cheered when some athlete swam all the way there. I even saw a video of some foreign exchange students being tricked into saying “Dokdo is Korean” in broken Korean.

It's well-known that right-wing Koreans take advantage of non-political sport and sociocultural events for its "Dokdo belongs to us" campaigns. They often intrude and appeal to social events hold by non-committal third party. Shameless and uncivil.... that's a general impression made by the third party. Thier attempt is futile even counter-productive.

6 ( +12 / -6 )

Dokdo are South Korean maintained, administered, and lived on. Japan has no claims, and while they can do this little thing every year and ask for a solution (while they claim they own other islands because they administer them), it does not need to go answered by SK since it is undisputedly theirs.

-2 ( +13 / -15 )

Annual……..if it’s been going on for over a decade with no progress, maybe that a sign. Enough. Get over it. Move on.

-7 ( +9 / -16 )

noriahojanen: "Do you also mean Korean chauvinist politicians? They've continued to be super-obsessed with the tiny islets."

You mean unlike the Japanese, which this article is about? haha.

Garthgoyle: "Last time Russia and Japan were gonna go into negotiations for the Kuril islands, Japanese side cancelled all saying they will only go into meetings, only if Russia pre-agreed, before negotiations took any place, that they would return all four islands to Japan."

Yup, and they had a chance at getting two back. And don't forget that lawmaker that joked that Japan could accept 3.5 of the islands back and leave the rest for Russia got canned... or near it... for saying so. Now with Kishida's big talk on sanctions, even though he of course doesn't have the stones to make it more than lip-service, Russia's got another excuse to start putting armed forces on those islands.

-8 ( +8 / -16 )

South Korea is very brave. Waiting until the worst moment in Japan's history, with shackles and restrictions and no navy to defend.... Thats when Brave S. Korea decided to make its move. When Japan lost ww2 and signed article 9, Brave S. Korea came in the early 1950s to show its strength, by stealing and illegally seizing Japanese territory and water when we could do nothing in return with USA watching every move we make.

Koreans dont want to share by the way! I see some comments with good intentions but S. Korea doesnt have good intentions when it comes to Japan! !

Islands, water, agreements signed, apologies given= South Korea hates Japan ever more! Richer they become, the more we apologies and give in, the worse relations will be, either in the short term or the long term, South Korea only understands Strength! Only respects Strength! They feed on weakness.... Especially coming from Japan. Favor type of ice cream for S. Korean government.

2 ( +13 / -11 )

The islands are Koreans,so to all the Japanese apologists and right wingers I suggest to take a deep breath,swallow your Samurai pride and live with it.

Keep living in the pass won’t make a better future.

-1 ( +10 / -11 )

Fisher folk of both countries visited the islands for centuries, but until 1905 all indications were that the islands were a part of SK (reems of evidence)

Japan annexed them in 1905 as a part of it's strategic response to the ongoing hostilities of Russo-Japan war.

They were annexed in Jan 1905 and the Portsmouth treaty ending the war was signed in Sept 1905.

Pretty convenient timing.

Also Japan stated that they were terra nullus before a Japanese fisherman set up camp there in 1904 - again convenient timing - meaning that they were now a part of Japan.

And when SK "regained" the islands we have to remember a full scale war was in progress. Chinese/NK forces had taken Seoul. USA 100% did not want to relinquish it's de facto hold via Japan on the islands in case of things going bad in the war.

So the US fueled the idea that Takeshima/Dodko belonged to Japan. They actually initially supported the return to SK after WW2, but the "menace" of communist China was not fully appreciated then. Only when Mao's power was evident did they do a U-turn.

And the bottom line is as others noted - they are now exclusively possessed, occupied and maintained by SK.

Rightfully or Wrongfully there's no escaping this fact and the islands will remain as SK territory for a long time to come.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

@Lindsay

why not strike a deal with South Korea to share them?

Koreans are not interested in sharing their territory with Japan.

@Garthgolye

Japan's awful at negotiating this things.

The Liancourt Rocks are non-negotiable; its status can only be changed through war.

-17 ( +3 / -20 )

Just for all those who took my previous post seriously. It was a rhetorical question.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The Takeshima Islands have historically, legally belong to Yamato people illegally occupied by South Korea.

They will return to their true owner soon.

1 ( +9 / -8 )

Sounds like a really fun event. Who provided the entertainment ? Did they serve cheese and pineapple on cocktail sticks ? Did children go home exhausted but with memories that will last a lifetime ?

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

I say let them have their fun. What was that saying about possession and 9/10th?

-11 ( +2 / -13 )

Japan doesn't want the islands, they just don't want to lose it.

-11 ( +2 / -13 )

browny1Today  11:32 am JST

Fisher folk of both countries visited the islands for centuries, but until 1905 all indications were that the islands were a part of SK (reems of evidence)

Utter rubbish. All indications were that the islands were a part of Japan. Joseon Dynasty did not even have a clear idea about the islands. And today's SKoreans are just struggling for making up stories with such old maps which don't even say left or right , not to mention the location of the islands. BS

and May I remind you? You forgot SK did not exist in 1905.

Japan annexed them in 1905 as a part of it's strategic response to the ongoing hostilities of Russo-Japan war.

They were annexed in Jan 1905 and the Portsmouth treaty ending the war was signed in Sept 1905.

Pretty convenient timing.

Also Japan stated that they were terra nullus before a Japanese fisherman set up camp there in 1904 - again convenient timing - meaning that they were now a part of Japan.

What about timing? What's wrong with Japan having followed int'l convention. Do you even know when Japan was forced to open it's gate by Western Powers? If you want to challenge *terra nullus logic, think twice and flip the world map all over by returning the lands to their 1st people. ***And you know that.

And when SK "regained" the islands we have to remember a full scale war was in progress. Chinese/NK forces had taken Seoul. USA 100% did not want to relinquish it's de facto hold via Japan on the islands in case of things going bad in the war.

So the US fueled the idea that Takeshima/Dodko belonged to Japan. They actually initially supported the return to SK after WW2, but the "menace" of communist China was not fully appreciated then. Only when Mao's power was evident did they do a U-turn.

Speculation much? I don't blame US for how it had finally decided on this particular islands. Koreans LOUDLY appealed and Japan was ENEMY. Yes Japan lost the war and was not an independent sovereign nation for a while. If your logic prevails, just simply say US should decide it even now.

And the bottom line is as others noted - they are now exclusively possessed, occupied and maintained by SK.

Rightfully or Wrongfully there's no escaping this fact and the islands will remain as SK territory for a long time to come.

SK detained more than 4000 fishers and gunned down 8~10 people since a Korean nobody who had been hiding himself in the US unilaterally drew the national sea border when JAPAN HAD NO SAY. NICE TIMING isn't it?

I have an idea , Many of their kids must still be alive, they should sue South the greatest Korea for the inhumane atrocities 、seize and sell off SK assets in Japan. More than anything, revoke all those stupid SPR status entitled to Koreans in Japan and kick them all out of this country.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

kennyg - thanks for your thoughtful response.

A few comments.

Your "utter rubbish" statement can be easily challenged whether you want to accept it or not. Reems are available. That's not an opinion. Look.

And of course SK didn't exist - that's funny - we all know that - it's just a convenient way of naming a zone!!!

And your logic re terra nullus, the Black Ships, flipping the world et al - well that had me scratching. Could you please hone in on the point you're trying to make.

And other points about my logic and USA should decide. Well that's got Eh??? written all over it.

I have no sides in this issue. I have read quite widely documents and discussions from both sides over the past few decades.

What I pointed out in my 1st post was simply stating situations that occurred. Funny that you thought I was being a naughty boy stirring up trouble.

Some facts are simply that - facts - and opinions cannot rewrite them.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

LindsayToday  07:52 am JST

I have an idea. Instead of wasting billions of yen on campaigns and meetings, why not strike a deal with South Korea to share them?

Since Syngman Rhee unlilaterally claimed the Liancourt Rocks as South Korean territory in 1952, Japan has requested South Korea settle the dispute peacefully in accordance with International Law before the ICJ (International Court of Justice). South Korea has refused three times.

You seriously think they'd consider "sharing"? LOL

6 ( +9 / -3 )

browny1Today  11:32 am JST

Fisher folk of both countries visited the islands for centuries, but until 1905 all indications were that the islands were a part of SK (reems of evidence)

That really is a pile of rubbish. The proof is that if that were true, South Korea would accept Japan's request to settle at the ICJ and it would be a slam dunk. Yet, Soith Korea has refused to go before the ICJ three times. Not the kind of behavior one would expect from anyone who has "reems of evidemce".

7 ( +10 / -3 )

Osssan - thanks.

A pile of rubbish???

I can only offer the same advice as earlier given - please research and you will find plenty of documentation supporting SKs claim. Also there exists documentation supporting Japan's claims, but you won't find me calling it a "pile of rubbish".

And why SK won't go to International arbitration - well I assume they believe that as they are in possession - rightfully or wrongfully - they don't see the necessity.

For them the issue is "not in dispute". The same as the Senkakus are "not in dispute" re China's claim.

In fact there are 100s of in dispute claims around the world re borders, territories, islands, economic zones etc. In many of the cases all sides probably have some level of legitimate claim, but sides in control hold fast.

Witness Ukraine now. Ukraine has held fast but the bigger brute Russia may well decide.

Not many things are as they seem and the Dokdo/Takeshima saga is surely one of them.

Nothing like a pile of rubbish.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

I have no sides in this issue. I have read quite widely documents and discussions from both sides over the past few decades.

As if you have more Reems than most aggressive Korean claimants. Sorry then, I have read quite widely documents and discussions from both sides since I was an elementary school kid . Almost every reems have been already presented. Do you agree or not.? THERE's NONE, absolutely no map which captured the islands as precisely as the ones prepared by Japanese in Edo era. Funny Moon got excited looking at the map at their national library in Spain, which was as equally screwed up as Koreans.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

kennyg - thank you.

"..Supporting South Korea's claims are ancient descriptions of the islands being part of the Silla Dynasty in 512 AD as well as maps and documents - Korean, Japanese and those made by Western explorers - amassed by the Seoul-based Northeast Asian History Foundation.

Arguably the most persuasive piece of evidence is a map produced as late as 1877 by Japan's Department of the Interior and which is held at the National Archives in Tokyo. The document shows that in a reply to a letter from the department to Japan's Great Council of State in March of that year, the council made it clear that Japan had no relationship with Dokdo.

But in Tokyo, the government now brushes aside Seoul's claims and insists that the islands are an inherent part of Japanese territory, based entirely on historical facts and international law...."

Simply - stuff exists to support both claims.

I can see both sides. Some people can only see what they want to see.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

browny1Today  07:45 pm JST

Osssan - thanks.

A pile of rubbish???

I can only offer the same advice as earlier given - please research and you will find plenty of documentation supporting SKs claim.

browny

Yes rubbish. When someone has "reems of evidence" they willingly go to court to for an easy win. They don't refuse to go to court and allow a dispute to keeop going. This is universal common sense.

Unless you can explain South Korea's refusal in a sound and reasonable way, yes I'm afraid such claims will remain rubbish.

7 ( +10 / -3 )

Ossan - thankyou.

Firstly I don't have to explain anything because you think I've got some explaining to do.

Again I am not privy to the concerns of SKs decision as to why or why not. Why would I be?

I merely put forward a probability that SK doesn't see fit to go to court as it has said nothing is "in dispute".

That's their reasoning. That's a fact. The reasoning that is.

I have said I don't support the issue one way or another.

What's so difficult for you to comprehend re that???

And I reiterate - please read up if you want, on the evidence of both sides. Then make an appraisal based on all of that. Calling 1 sides a pile of rubbish is not going to go far in a court of law.

Then you can fulfil your desire to be right.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

"..Supporting South Korea's claims are ancient descriptions of the islands being part of the Silla Dynasty in 512 AD as well as maps and documents - Korean, Japanese and those made by Western explorers - amassed by the Seoul-based Northeast Asian History Foundation.

Hope you knew what islands this ancient description of Silla Dynasty is referring to in the History of the Three Kingdoms. It is not Takesima/Dokdo It was about Usanguk=Usando

Simply - stuff exists to support both claims.

I can see both sides. Some people can only see what they want to see.

No you can't see both sides. As SK arguments are mostly based on primary source they dug up from Japan, in Japan. How Japan had treated the islands and what not. Why? Because they have NONE in their hands, their own source to claim the islands had been inherent to their historical dynasty AT ALL.

6 ( +10 / -4 )

There's Ullungdo island, to the north-east, there're small islands called Chukudo and Kwannundo, very close to Ullungdo.

Simply put, Korean reems of evidence (Korean documentations and Korean maps) , after all, were all about these three islands stretched out to make up stories to disguise such small islands to be meant the islands in question, Takeshima.

And you do not need a few decades to realize it

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Arguably the most persuasive piece of evidence is a map produced as late as 1877 by Japan's Department of the Interior and which is held at the National Archives in Tokyo. The document shows that in a reply to a letter from the department to Japan's Great Council of State in March of that year, the council made it clear that Japan had no relationship with Dokdo.

Of course, they were discussing on and the council instructed about not Dokdo but Ullungdo and other small islands as above in this case.

Even with 100 steps back supposing it was about Takeshima, the instruction does not say it was Koreans,

back to terra nullus*

6 ( +9 / -3 )

browny1 Feb. 23  09:55 pm JST

Ossan - thankyou.

Firstly I don't have to explain anything because you think I've got some explaining to do.

Again I am not privy to the concerns of SKs decision as to why or why not. Why would I be?

I merely put forward a probability that SK doesn't see fit to go to court as it has said nothing is "in dispute".

You are "not privy" to SK's decisions regarding the Liancort Rocks but you are somehow privy to their posession of "reems of evidence"?? LOL! When a person makes a statement and refuses to substantiate it in any way, we call that rubbish.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

kenny - thank you.

Well you've got your mind made up. Good for you.

Personally, I'd never be so sure that I know exactly what ancient/old documentation specifically refers to.

Especially not being an archaeologist/anthropologist/historian.

But good luck with your research on the island of bamboo.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

There is little historical or legal doubt that Takeshima islands are 100% Japanese territory.

South Korea should agree to take this territorial dispute to the ICJ - IF they are so sure they are Korean territory. Which they arent. Sadly, SK has militarized the islands, trashing the environment. Japan - should they be given rightful ownership - could turn then into eco-reserves/resorts.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

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