|
|
Japan’s Arguments
|
Korea’s Arguments
|
|
Evidences From Ancient Times
|
The Japanese already recognized existence of Dokdo
in ancient times and in the 17th century,
they already established ownership of Dokdo through
using it as an anchorage harbor and fisheries.
|
In 512 A.D., the Silla
Kingdom conquered Usanguk (Usan
State), of which the
main part was Ulleungdo. Since then, the Korean
people have considered Dokdo to be a part of
Ulleungdo.
The subsequent Korean states, namely the
Goryeo Dynasty (918~1392), the Joseon Dynasty
(1392~1897), the Daehan (or Korean) Empire
(1897~1910) and the Republic of
Korea
(since 1948), exercised sovereignty over Dokdo.
The ancient documents the Japanese provide
as evidences are rather indicating Dokdo was
excluded from the Japanese territory.
|
|
Evidences From Ancient Times
|
In the 17th century,
Japan
prohibited sailing to Ulleungdo but, not to Dokdo.
The Japanese Foreign Ministry points to
historical documents dating to 1618, which purport
to provide evidence of Japanese fishermen’s use of
Dokdo.
Further, Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs
points to a 1779 map by Sekisui Nagakubo, which
represents the location of Takeshima (Dokdo) as part
of
Japan.
|
Sejong Sillok Jiriji,
this book describes Dokdo and Ulleungdo as part of
the Korean territory in the
East Sea, and states: "The two islands are
located in the middle of the sea, due east."
According
to Sukjong Sillok (1674-1720), Ahn Yong-bok
rebuked some Japanese fishermen for staying at
Ulleungdo and Dokdo and warned them against
returning to these islands in the future.
Jeongjo Sillok
(1776-1800), reports that, following Ahn Yong-bok's
actions, inspectors were dispatched every three
years by the Government to Ulleungdo and Gajido (Dokdo).
|
|
Evidences From Modern Ages
|
|
Imperial Decree No. 41
was issued in 1900 by Emperor Gojong (1864-1907) of
the Daehan Empire as a measure to reform the
traditional administrative system. This Decree
placed Dokdo under the jurisdiction of the Ulleungdo County
office.
|
|
1905 Incorporation
|
1905 incorporation of Dokdo into the
Shimane
Prefecture was intention
of the Japanese government to claim territorial
rights over the islets.
This notice
of incorporation amounts to occupation of terra
nullis, re-declaration of its sovereignty over the
islets, or cession from Korean government because it
did not protest the incorporation (intentional
relinquishment of title).
|
1905 incorporation was not peaceful but forceful,
thus invalid.
Further, the notice of annexation of Dokdo
into the
Shimane
Prefecture was not open,
nor public.
|
|
After the Liberation
|
The status of the islets was not addressed in
Article 2(a) of the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty,
which forced Japan
to recognize
Korea’s
independence.
This means that international community
recognized
Japan’s
territorial rights over Dokdo.
|
Following the liberation of Korea, all Korean territories were returned to
Korea
including Dokdo.
Even if the Treaty did not mention Dokdo,
this does not necessarily mean Dokdo is Japanese
territory.
|
|
After the Liberation
|
The Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP)
issued SCAPIN 677, which outlined Japanese territory
and specifically instructed that the disputed islets
were to be excluded from Japanese administrative
authority. The directive included a caveat, however,
stating that the
document would not represent a final decision
regarding the attribution of Japanese sovereign
territory.
|
In 1946 SCAP issued Directives No. 677 and No. 1033,
in which Japan is defined as including the four main
islands and approximately a thousand smaller
adjacent
islands. The directive, however, specifically
excluded Ullungdo, Chejudo and Dokdo.
Given that the directive was made without the
participation of Korean diplomats, Dokdo was clearly
recognized as Korean territory by the international
community.
|
|
After the Liberation
|
1952, the US Air Force based in
Japan
used Dokdo for bombing training.
|
The Korean government protested the bombing and
the
United States
officially apologized and stopped the bombing training
following the protest.
Further, in 1952, President Seungman Lee declared
the Peace Line which includes Dokdo inside the Line.
.
|
|
Effective Occupation Since the 20th
Century
|
Japan
has been making formal protests such as hoisting the
Japanese flag on the islets and sending ships to the
area to protest against Korean illegal occupation
over it.
|
First, Japan has never established its
ownership over Dokdo, which means its protest
against Korean occupation has no valid grounds.
In
Clipperton case, the court held that just
raising a Mexican flag on the island and sending a
warship to defend the island from takeover is not
sufficient manifestation of its sovereignty.
Second, Korea’s
manifestations of sovereignty, including permanent
Korean inhabitants and the construction of
infrastructure since its liberation from Japan should
prove sufficient to demonstrate effective
occupation.
Japan’s
occupation, by contrast, was not continual and
only occurred during times of unrest.
According to international law, effective
occupation grants sovereignty over some disputed
area.
|
