From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
|
The factual accuracy of this
article is
disputed.
Please see the relevant discussion on the
talk page. (August 2008) |
| Disputed Islands |
Liancourt Rocks
Other names: Dokdo, Takeshima |

Location of the Liancourt Rocks in the Sea of
Japan (East Sea) between South Korea and Japan |
| Geography |
 |
| Location |
Sea of Japan (East Sea) |
| Coordinates |
37°14′30″N
131°52′0″E
/ 37.24167,
131.86667 |
| Total islands |
90 (37 permanent land) |
| Major islands |
East Islet, West Islet |
| Area |
0.18745 square kilometres (46.32 acres)
East Islet: 0.0733 square kilometres (18.1 acres)
West Islet: 0.08864 square kilometres (21.90
acres) |
| Highest point |
unnamed location on West Islet
169 metres (550 ft) |
| Administered by |
South
Korea |
| County |
Ulleung County |
| Claimed by |
Japan |
| Town |
Okinoshima |
South
Korea |
| County |
Ulleung County |
| Demographics |
| Population |
2 + 43 support personnel (in rotation) |
| Ethnic groups |
Korean |
The Liancourt Rocks are a group of small islets in the
Sea of Japan (also
called East Sea). Sovereignty over the islands is disputed
between
Japan
and
South Korea.[1]
South Korea has controlled them since July 1954.[2]
Its name derives from Le Liancourt, the name of the
French
whaling ship whose crew almost crashed on the rocks in 1849.[3]
The islets are also known as Dokdo (or Tokto)
(독도/獨島, literally "solitary island") in
Korean and as Takeshima
(竹島,
Takeshima?
, literally "bamboo island") in
Japanese.[4]
The Liancourt Rocks comprise of two main islets and 35
smaller rocks. Their total surface is 187,450 square metres (46
acres) and their highest elevation is 169 metres (554 ft).[5]
Two Korean citizens, an octopus fisherman and his wife, are the
only permanent residents of the islets. A small Korean police
detachment, administrative personnel and lighthouse staff are
rotated through non-permanent support positions on the islets.[6]
South Korea administers the islands as Dokdo-ri,[7]
Ulleung-eup,
Ulleung County,
North Gyeongsang Province. Japan classifies them as part of
Okinoshima,
Oki District,
Shimane Prefecture.
The islands lie in rich fishing grounds which could also
contain large gas deposits.[8]
Geography
A panorama image of the Liancourt Rocks.
The Liancourt Rocks are composed mainly of two islets, West
Islet (西島) and East Islet (東島), 150 metres apart.[5]
The West Islet is the larger of the two islets.
Altogether, there are about 90 islets and reefs,[9]
volcanic rocks formed in the
Cenozoic era.[10]
A total of 37 of these islets are recognized as permanent land.[9]
The total area of the islets is about 187,450 square metres
(46 acres), with their highest point at 169 metres on the West
Islet (554 ft).[5]
The West Islet is about 88,640 square metres in area (22 acres);
the East Islet is about 73,300 square metres (18 acres).[9]
The West Islet consists of a single peak and features many
caves along the coastline. The cliffs of the East Islet are
about 10 to 20 metres high. There are two large caves giving
access to the sea, as well as a crater.[10][11]
In 2006, a geologist reported that the islets formed 4.5
million years ago and are quickly eroding.[12]
Distance, elevation, and
visibility
Liancourt Rocks are located at about 131°52´ East longitude
and about 37°14´ North latitude.[9]
The West Islet is located at
37°14′31″N
131°51′55″E
/ 37.24194,
131.86528
(West Islet)
and the East Islet is located at
37°14′27″N
131°52′10″E
/ 37.24083,
131.86944
(East Islet).
Liancourt Rocks are 217 km (135 mi; 117 nm) from mainland
Korea and 250 km (150 mi; 135 nm) from Japan proper.[5]
Distance, elevations, and weather conditions all affect
visibility; a mathematical formula defines the numerical limits
of visibility.
-
- D = 2.09 x (sqrt H + sqrt h)
where D is visible distance (nm), H elevation of landscape
observed (m), and h elevation of observer's eyes (m).
[13]
[14]
The nearest Korean island,
Ulleung-do, is 87 km away (54 mi; 47 nm), from which
Liancourt Rocks are visible on a clear day in the absence of fog
in the vicinity of Liancourt Rocks.
[15]
[16] The nearest
Japanese island,
Oki Islands, is 157 km away (98 mi; 85 nm), from which
Liancourt Rocks are not visible on any day of the year
regardless of weather conditions.
[17]
[18]
[19]
Climate
Due to their location and extremely small size, the Liancourt
Rocks sometimes have harsh weather. At times, ships are unable
to dock because of strong northwestern winds in winter.[5][11]
Overall, the climate is warm and humid, and heavily influenced
by warm sea currents. Precipitation is high throughout the year
(annual average—1324 mm), with occasional snowfall.[11]
Fog is also a common sight. In the summer, southerly winds
dominate.[11]
The water around the islets is about 10 degrees Celsius in
spring, when the water is coolest. It warms to about 25 degrees
Celsius in August.[11]
Ecology
The islets are
volcanic rocks, with only a thin layer of soil and moss.[9]
About 80 species of plants, over 22 species of birds, and 37
species of insects have been recorded on the islets, in addition
to the local maritime life.[5]
Although the islets might appear rather small to support a
significant flow of fresh water, and existing spring water are
not fit for human consumption due to guano contamination,
several springs producing potable water have been located
recently.[citation
needed] In the early 1970s trees and some
types of flowers were planted.[5]
In historical times, however, there used to be indigenous trees
on Liancourt Rocks according to historical records, which
disappeared due to human harvesting.[citation
needed] Trees are required under
international law for the islets to be recognized as natural
islands rather than reefs.[6]
[11]
Demographics
There are two permanent Korean citizens, Kim Sung-do (김성도)
and Kim Shin-yeol (김신열), living on the islets. In addition to
these residents, there are 37
South Korean police officers (독도경비대/獨島警備隊) who take
residence on guard duty. There are also three
Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries personnel, and
three
lighthouse keepers living on the islets in rotation. In the
past, several fishermen also lived on the islets temporarily.[6]
For many years, civilian travel was subject to Korean government
approval because the island group is designated as a nature
reserve. Tourist boats carrying 1,597 visitors were allowed to
land in 2004. Since mid-March 2005, more tourists have been
allowed to land, up to 70 tourists are permitted at any one
time. Tour companies charge around 350,000
Korean won per person.[6]
International dispute
Currently, both South Korea,[20][21]
and Japan[22]
are claiming sovereignty over Liancourt Rocks. There are
conflicting interpretations about the state of sovereignty over
the islands in pre-modern times. Korean claims are partly based
on references to a Korean island called Usan-do (우산,
于山島/亐山島) in various historical records, geographies, maps, and
encyclopedia such as
Samguk Sagi,
Annals of Joseon Dynasty, Dongguk Yeoji Seungnam,
and Dongguk munhon bigo. According to the Korean view,
these refer to today's Liancourt Rocks, while the Japanese views
variously argue that they refer to either Juksoe (竹嶼; Korean
Jukdo
or Dae'soem), Kwanumdo (觀音島, 島項; Korean Seommok, G'aksae),
Ulleungdo, or a non-existent island.
[23]
1696 Murakami Document
Korean historical sources state that the administrator of
Tokugawa shogunate reaffirmed in January 1696 that Ulleungdo and
Dokdo belonged to Korea quoting
An Yong-bok's testimony.
[24]
[25]
[26]. The dispute
about the ownership of Ulleung-do between Chosun Korea and
Tokugawa Japan ignited when Korean fishermen clashed with
Japanese fishermen on Ulleungdo waters in 1692. The following
year, An Yong-Bok and Park Eo-dun, representing Korean fishing
communities, are variously said to have visited, drifted, or
even abducted by Japanese fishermen, arriving at Oki island in
1693. Taking this occasion, An discussed territorial title
matters with a Japanese governmental official, reminding him
that Ulleungdo and Jasando 子山島 (sic; a scribal corruption of
Usan-do 于山島/亐山島) are Korean territory. As a result, the bakufu
issued prohibitions banning Japanese fishermen from travelling
to Ulleng-do. This is called the 1st An Yong-bok incident.
An, on being released from a two-year exile on charges of
traveling to a foreign country without permission, made a second
trip to Japan together with a group of Koreans from Dongnae and
other maritime regions in 1696 with documents and a map to
reconfirm his initial claim during the first confrontation,
which had come under suspicion by the Korean government due to
the Tsushima clan's delaying Edo's orders to notify the Korean
government of Japan's prohibition to travel to Ulleungdo. Aware
of the severe punishement, which the Edo government would
certainy pass on the Tsushima lord, Tsushima expedited to the
Korean government Edo's decision to nullify "Permission to cross
to Takeshima (Ulleund-do)" which it had been witholding until
An's visit. Although Japan did not mention Matsushima (Liancourt
Rocks) on the prohibition papers, no Japanese could legitimately
travel to either Takeshima or Matsushima until the end of the
bakufu period.
[27] This document
from An's second trip[28]
relays An's words that Ulleungdo, geographically subordinate to
Gangwon province, was administered by Dongnae-bu. The document
records the distance between Takeshima (Ulleungdo) and
Matsushima (Liancourt Rocks) as 50 ri, and also states, in a
rough copy of An's map of Korea, that the two islands belonged
to Korea's Gangwon province. In the Annals of King Sukjong,
the official governmental chronicle, An is reported to have
stated that Jasan-do 子山島(sic) was what the Japanese called
Matsu-shima 松島 at that time.
[29]
1697 Korean court's decision to
disregard Tsushima's request of a formal letter for Edo
In Feb 1697, the Korean government reached a decision to
reject Tsushima clan's request to emend a previous letter that
mentioned Korea's Ulleungdo, and that An Yong-Bok's visit to
Japan to raise a legal case does not require a written response
from Korea since the Royal Court had no foreknowledge. These
facts were to be conveyed to the Tsushima envoy's house
informally: "An was an unenlightened subject who got thrown
about by a storm. If he executed something, it had not been
known by the Joseon Royal Court."[30]
[31]
In March, 1969, the Korean government made a formal
communication in writing that An was punished for submitting a
legal case against the governor of Hokishu to the Edo government
without authorisation from the Korean government."[32]
Although the Border Defense Command demanded capital
punishment, King Sukjong commuted An's sentence to exile in
positive consideration of his successful negotiations with the
Edo government that resulted in the "prohibition of all Japanese
travelling to Korea for fishing, harvesting, and lumbering for
eternity".
[33]
[34]
[35]
1785 Map of Three Adjoining
Countries
1785 map of three adjoining countries.
A Japanese scholar of practical science Hayashi Shihei
published 『Map of Three Adjoining Countries』(三國接壤地圖)in 1785,
which showed each country in distinct colors; Joseon (old name
of Korea) in yellow, Japan in green. In it, Uleungdo and a small
islet in the middle of the East Sea were not only colored in
yellow but marked, "As Korean territories (朝鮮ノ持ニ)".
1877 Daijō-kan order to exclude
Takeshima (Ulleungdo) and Another island from Japanese National
Land Registry
On March 20, 1877, the Japanese Supreme Council
Daijō-kan issued an order[36]
stating that
Ulleungdo (then called "Takeshima 竹島", now called Matsushima
松島 by Japan) and another island (外一島) are not under Japanese
rule
[37]
[38]. Korea claims
that "another island" (外一島) besides
Ulleungdo refers to Liancourt Rocks
[39]
[40]
[41] and considers
this order as an evidence that Liancourt Rocks was under the
control of Korea. The Japanese government has not made any
comment on this point whereas some Japanese consider that
"another island" (外一島) does not refer to Liancourt Rocks.[42]
[43]
1900 Korean Imperial Decree No. 41
separates Uldo Archipelago from Uljin County
In the year 1900, Korea issued Imperial Decree No. 41 of Oct
25, 1900, which included the following administrative actions.
-
- Ulleungdo, which had been subordinate to Uljin
Prefecture[44]
since the reign of King Sejong, shall be renamed Uldo
and elevated to county.
- Uldo County office shall rule over all of Uldo
proper and its dependencies including Jukdo and Seokdo.
The decree was published in Official Gazette No. 1716 (관보
제1716호) on Oct 27 and distributed to the international
community, including Imperial Japan, with representations in
Seoul.[45]
[46]
[47]
This decree states that Ulleungdo be renamed to Uldo (mod.
Ulleungdo), and that the county hall shall govern the whole
island of
Ulleungdo,
Jukdo,
and Sokdo.
[48]
[49] Japan claims
that there is no evidence to identify the island "Sokdo" as
Liancourt Rocks,
[50]
[51] and that there
is no record that proves the effective occupation by Korea
before Japanese Cabinet decision of Jan 28, 1905. Korea claims
that the island "Sokdo" mentioned in this document is Liancourt
Rocks, and thus Liancourt Rocks was still officially part of
Korea as an ancient territory since 512. Korea presents evidence
that Koreans living on Ulleungdo referred to Liancourt Rocks as
Dokseom (or Dolseom; literally "rocky island") in speech and
Dokdo 獨島 in writing as a phonetic transcripton (音讀, umdok; 音読み
on-yomi), while the name "Seokdo" 石島 ("rocky island") in the
Ordinance was an instance of logographic translation (訓讀,
hundok; 訓読み kun-yomi).
[52]
[53]
[54]
Korea also claims Liancourt Rocks was effectively managed by
seasonal fishermen and divers in recent times
[55] as a result of
King Gojong's Ulleungdo Reclamation Program (鬱陵島開拓令) issued in
Dec 1881. A first-person account by one of the fisrt settlers
since the reclamation program has been presented as one evidence
to the fact of the claim.
[56] A South Korean
scholar claims to have uncovered evidence that Korean fishermen
effectively occupied engaged in "whaling" in Liancourt Rocks
waters in the 1880s and that sea lions were hunted and
sea-lion-derived products were exported to Japan in 1904 prior
to the Japanese Cabinet decision of 1905 to incorporate a
supposed terra nullius.
[57]
1904 Japan-Korea treaty
The
Japan-Korea Protocol of 1904 signed between Japan and Korea
on February 23, 1904 (Japanese 日韓議定書, Nikkan Giteisho; Korean
韓日議定書, 한일의정서, Han'il uijongso) stipulates in article 3 that
Japan shall guarantee the territorial integrity of Korea. It
further stipulates in article 4 that, in case the territorial
integrity of Korea is endangered by aggression of a third power,
Korea shall give full facilities to promote the action of Japan,
and that Japan may occupy, when the circumstances require, such
places as may be necessary for strategic reasons.
Article 4 of the treaty has been quoted as giving Japan full
authorisation in terms of international law in taking Liancourt
Rocks as a strategic surveillence point during the
Russo-Japanese War.[58]
[59]
[60] Article 3,
however, has been quoted as preventing Japan from appropriating
Liancourt Rocks post bellum, and hence ruling the 1905 Shimane
incorporation illegal after the end of the war.
[61]
[62] Although the
watch tower on Liancourt Rocks was demolished, suggesting the
necessity on strategic resaons had disappeared, the Japanese
Cabinet decision to incorporate Liancourt Rocks had not been
revoked in violation of the treaty. This suggests foreign
military threat from a third country in Article 4 was not the
primary ground of incorporating Liancourt Rocks,
[63] but its own
violence and greed that Japan is expected to disprove with prima
facie evidence in the manner of which the act of incorporation
was committed.
[64]
1905 Japanese Incorporation of
Liancourt Rocks
The imperial government of Japan incorporated Liancourt Rocks
as a result of a Cabinet decision in early 1905. Three motives
are commonly cited for it cause: civilian occupation of said
islets by a Japanese citizen from Oki, Nakai Yozaburo (中井養三郎;
1864-1934), practical necessities arising from the armed
conflict with Russia, and Japan's foreign policy regarding Korea
as its western frontier to fend off encroaching foreign powers.
The incorporation was conducted incognito to foreign nations
including Korea as the decision had never been announced by the
central government to the international community. The Korean
response to reports of the verbal notice by a local Japanese
official was one of shock and disbelief, and orders were issued
to investigate the truth of the report. While the result of the
investigation is obscured in silence, apparently lending
momentum to the Japanese claim, the Japanese Resident-General
residing in Seoul, in 1906, makes an inquiry into which islands
are administered by
Ulleungdo (sic.), in the older designation before the 1900
Korean Imperial Decree No 40, to which the Internal Ministry
relays facts consistent with the 1900 Imperial Decree No 41,
that Uldo County administers Uldo proper, Jukdo, and Seokdo.
1903-1904 Nakai's Fishing
Enterprise
On September 29, 1904, Nakai Yozaburo (中井養三郎; 1864-1934) of
Saigo, Shimane Prefecture, experimenting with sea lion hunting
business in the summers of 1903 and 1904, and wanting to protect
his investment, submitted a petition to incorporate Liancourt
Rocks and to issue exclusive license to hunt sea lions for ten
years. The petition was submitted to the
Home Ministry, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the
Ministry of Agriculture and Commerce. Nakai, initially believing
Liancourt Rocks to be Korean territory, had planned to ask for a
lease from the Korean government via the Ministry of Trade and
Commerce.[citation
needed] An officer of the Ministry of Home
Affairs considered it unwise to incorporate Liancourt Rocks
suspected to be Korean territory, but the Navy and the Foreign
Ministry advised incorporation would be profitable, and that
there would arise no diplomatic repercussions.
[65]
[66]
[67]
[68]
[69]
[70]
[71]
1905 Japanese Cabinet Decision on
Liancourt Rocks
Japanese government's official view has evolved since 1905.
On Jan 28, 1905, the Cabinet reached a decision to incorporate
Liancourt Rocks (明治三十八年一月二十八日閣議決定), on grounds that it had been
a
terra nullius under international law:
[72]
[73]
[74]
[75]
[76] "There is no
evidence to recognise that this uninhabited island was ever
occupied by a foreign country... As evidenced through relevant
records that a person by the name of Nakai Yozaburo (中井養三郞) has
relocated to said island in 1903 (Meiji 36) and practiced
fishing there since, we recognise the fact that occupation has
occurred in terms of international law."[77]
From 1947 to 1954, the Japanese government's claim shifted
from prior occupation of a terra nullius to effective
occupation by executing state intention to acquire
territory".
Not later than 1962, Japan again shifted its claim to
"[the 1905] reconfirmation of title to an inherent/ancient
territory", all based on Japan's changing interpretation of
the same Cabinet decision document, all the while carefully
avoiding its previous claim of incorporation on grounds of
prior occupation of a terra nullius.
[78]
Korea also claims that Japan's 1905 claim to
terra nullius conflicts with its previous recognition (i.e.,
the 1877 Daijō-kan order) of the islets as Korean territory.
[79]
[80]
[81]
1905 Shimane Notice 40
Japan claims to have enforced its Cabinet decision of Jan 28,
1905 to incorporate the "unclaimed" islands as part of
Shimane Prefecture (島根縣) in Shimane Prefectural Notice No.
40 of Feb 22, 1905 (島根縣告示第40號)
[82]
[83]
[84]. The decision
was reported in a newspaper,
San-in Shimbun, on Feb 24, 1905.[85]
[86]
[87]
[88]
Korea claims that the decision was not reported in a official
gazette. The decision was reported a one minor local newspaper
only. There is no evidence that decision reported in a
government gazette. Moreover, There is no evidence that decision
reported to a central government of Japan at one time, also the
decision was not noticed by central government. Japan was not
notice to neighbor country. Korea claims that it was a almost
impossible that tiny sized notice of local newspaper (3.4 cm[89][90])
recognized by foreign. Korea claims that the decision was a
nothing but a "document occupation", and its procedure was a
secret. Therefore, Korea claims that the decision was not fulfil
the necessary conditions of territory's incorporation by
international law.
[91]
[92] Korea also
claims that 'Shimane Notice 40' was not announced to public.
[93]
The incorporation came in the heat of the
Russo-Japanese War and before the
Eulsa Treaty of November 17, 1905, when Korea became Japan's
protectorate. A temporary watchtower was erected on the islands
for anti-Russian surveillance purposes, which was demolished
after Japan's victory in the war.
1906 Verbal Notification of
Incorporation and Korean Response
Japanese claims the incorporation was legitimate in that
Korea did not dispute the incorporation when the news was
published. Korea claims the incorporation was invalid in that
the Feb 24 San-in Shimbun report lacked official status as its
circulation was limited to the Shimane prefectural region. Korea
claims neither the decision of the Japanese Cabinet, the order
of Ministry of Home Affairs, nor the Shimane Notice had been
announced, until March 28, 1906, to the Korean government to
which many Japanese, including petitioner Nakai Yozaburo (中井養三郞)
and certain governmental officials believed the title of
Liancourt Rocks belonged.
On that date, a party of 44 officials from Shimane Prefecture
visited Ulleungdo. The Japanese officials, including Kanda
Yoshitaro, traveled to Ulleungdo by way of Dokdo, and informed
Sim Heung-taek, then Magistrate of Ulleungdo, that Dokdo had
been incorporated into Japan.
Stunned by this announcement, Sim sent word, the next day to
Yi Myeong-nae, then Governor of Gangwon Province. Yi, in turn,
recognizing the urgency and gravity of the matter, forwarded the
report to the State Council Minister of the Korean Empire.
State Council Minister Bak Je-sun, in Directive No. 3 issued
on May 20, 1906, stated, “It is totally groundless that Dokdo
has become Japanese territory,” and went on to order “an
investigation and report on the situation and on what the
Japanese have done.”[94]
The
Eulsa Treaty stripped Korea of all its diplomatic rights on
17 November 1905.[95][96]
Five years later, Korea was fully annexed by Japan.
1906 Communication between
Japanese Resident-General and the Korean Government
A curious inquiry and reply are exchanged between Japanese
and Korean officials, the result of which is reported in July 13
edition of Hwangseong Shinmun. In the letter, says the report,
the Japanese Resident-General asks which islands are
administered by Ulleung Is. The Korean Home Ministry simply
lists the same islands as in the 1900 Decree specifying Seokdo,
which Korea claims to be Liancourt Rocks. It also adds a
physical measurement of what is believed to be Ulleung Is.[97]
[98]
[99]
[100]
The Japanese inquiry is not current with the 1900 Korean
Decree in its inaccurate designation of place names and offices,
while the Korean reply remains silent on the rumour of
incorporation of Liancourt Rocks of which it had not been
officially notified. The details of the reasons for the
Resident-General's inquiry and the Korean government's judgement
regarding the inquiry are not known.
[101]
[102]
Prior to the Resident-General's inquiry and the Korean
government's response reported on July 13, daily newspapers
Hwangseong Shinmun (May 9, 1906) and Daehan Maeil Sinbo (May 1,
1906) had denied the rumoured Japanese local official's claim of
incorporating Liancourt Rocks. "their claim to Dokdo as
Japanese territory is totally groundless; the story is really
shocking."
[103] Although
Hwangseong Shinmun had clearly declared that rumours of the
Japanese incorporation of Liancourt Rocks were baseless two
months before the July communication[104],
and although the July communication reminded the
Resident-General,
Itou Hirobumi, of the 1900 Imperial Decree reaffirming
Korea's state authority over Liancourt Rocks, there is no
evidence that the then Resident-General or any other
representation of Imperial Japan raised a formal objection to
it.
In a memorial speech at the first anniversary of the 1919
March 1st Movement, Prime Minister
Yi Dongnyeong accused Japanese government's illegal
incorporation of Liancourt Rocks of 1905.
[105]
Post World War II era
The recent dispute stems largely from conflicting
interpretations of whether Japan's renunciation of sovereignty
over its
occupied territories after
World War II was supposed to cover the Liancourt Rocks as
well.
Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers
Instruction #677 of January 29, 1946, listed the Liancourt
Rocks, along with many other islands, as part of those
territories over which Japanese administration was to be
suspended.[106]
In the
first to
fifth drafts of the
Treaty of San Francisco between Japan and the Allied powers,
Liancourt Rocks was described as part of Korea.
The
sixth and
seventh drafts, made on Dec 29, 1949, and Aug 7, 1950,
respectively, ruled that Liancourt Rocks belonged to Japan.
The U.K. draft and the attached map[107]
reflecting the view of Commonwealth nations[108]
submitted April 7, 1951, excluded Liancourt Rocks from Japanese
territorial definition and placed Liancourt Rocks within Korean
territory:
- "Japanese sovereignty shall continue over all the
islands and adjacent islets and rocks lying within an area
bounded by a line ... bearing north-easterly between ... the
islands of Oki-Retto to the south-east and Take Shima to the
north-west".
Finally, the U.K. agreed to the US style of the treaty
excluding the islands of Quelpart, Port Hamilton and Dagelet
from Japan.
[109]
The final version left the territorial title of Liancourt
Rocks undefined between Japan and signatory states.
- Article 1
- (b) The Allied Powers recognize the full
sovereignty of the Japanese people over Japan and its
territorial waters.
- Article 2
- (a) Japan recognizing the independence of Korea,
renounces all right, title and claim to Korea, including
the islands of Quelpart, Port Hamilton and Dagelet.
Korea claims that its territorial title to Liancourt Rocks
was returned to Korea with the surrender of Japan which was
enforced by Suprme Commander for Allied Powers' prohibitions
suspending Japanese access to within 12 miles (19 km) from said
island
[110] which needs to
be explicitly revoked in order to effect a change
[111]. Such a change
modifying the status of Liancourt Rocks has never occurred
before "SCAP transferred its jurisdiction... to the
United States Army Military Government in Korea on January
29, 1946." The U.S. Military Government in Korea, in turn,
reverted all jurisdiction over Liancourt Rocks to the
Government of South Korea when it launched on August 15,
1948.[112]
South Korea's President Rhee Syngman's announcement of the Peace
Line enforced Korea's territorial title to Liancourt Rocks.
US's recognation about this format of treaty was Japan
recovered full sovereignty under article1 except islands which
was excluded from Japan by name.
[113]
Early Japanese efforts to claim
Liancourt Rocks and Ulleung Island
Both countries submitted petitions and documents to pursuade
the Allied Powers to rule Liancourt Rocks in their favour. The
Japanese government's Foreign Office submitted a series of
documents, issued from November 1946 to June 1947, entitled
Minor Islands Adjacent to Japan Proper; Parts I-IV, of which
Part IV, Minor Islands in the Pacific, Minor Islands in the
Sea of Japan described Utsuryo-shima (Ulleungdo) and
Take-shima (Dokdo, Liancourt Rocks) as Japanese territory.
[114]
[115]
[116]
[117]
[118] This document
largely based on material prepared by Kawakami Kenzo 川上健三, the
then treaties expert for the Japanese Foreign Office, argued for
the Japanese title to Dagelet Is and Liancourt Rocks in the
following words
[119]:
-
- Chapter II. Minor Island in the Japan Sea
[120]
-
-
- "Liancourt Rocks and Dagelet Is lie off the
Tsushima Strait [are] some 50 miles (80 km)
apart."
- "The existence of these islands was known to
Japan in early times."
- The Japanese names for these two islands
were reversed due to the cartographic error of a
German Dutch physician
Philipp Franz von Siebold.
[121]
- I. Liancourt Rocks (Take-shima)
-
-
- Liancourt Rocks are 86 miles (138 km)
from Oki Islands of Shimane Prefecture.
-
- "[T]he Japanese knew the existence of
the Liancourt Rocks from the ancient times."
- "The earliest documentary evidence is
Inshu Shicho Goki" of 1667.
- "While there is a Korean name for
Dagelet, none exists for the Liancourt
Rocks."
- "They are not shown in the maps made in
Korea."
-
- "It is presumed no one has ever settled
on the islets."
- "In 1904, the inhabitants of Oki islands
began to hunt sea-lions on these islets."
- "[E]ach summer, the islanders, using
Dagelet as their base, went regularly to the
Rocks and built sheds as temporary quarters
for the season."
- II. Dagelet Island (Matsu-shima, Utsuryo or
Ul-lung Island)
-
-
- "Dagelet Island is equidistant from the
port of Fushan (Busan) and the port of Sakai
of Tottori Prefecture of Japan."
- "The flora of this island... is
recognized to have many common features with
Japan Proper."
- "The cultivation in Japan of the
Take-shima lily (lilium hansonii), an
indemic plant of the island, is mentioned in
a book published in 1710, a fact which
points to an early intercourse between the
island and Japan."
-
- In Japanese documents... reference was
made as early as 1004 to Uruma Island, an
old Japanese equivalent for Ul-lung Island."
- "The Korean Government from 1400 and
onward adhered for a long time to a policy
of keeping it uninhabited...the island was
thus virtually abandoned by the Korean
Government."
Many of these claims, regardless of their historical verity,
and without critical historical review
[122], were
emphasised by
William J. Sebald, the then political advisor for SCAP in
Tokyo, which eventually had a strong formative influence on the
position maintained by the Diplomatic Section of SCAP and the US
State Department regarding the territorial aspect of the Peace
Treaty.
[123]
[124]
Educated neither as an historian nor a geographer, Kawakami
Kenzō (川上健三,
Kawakami Kenzō?)
went on to build on this early investigation supporting the
Japanese claim in a work called An Historical and
Geographical Study of Takeshima
(竹島の歴史地理学的研究,
Takeshima no Rekishi
Chirigakuteki Kenkyū?)[125]
for the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs published in 1966,
in which he added such claims as:
-
- Koreans on Ulleungdo could not see Dokdo, due to the
heavy forestation on Ulleungdo
- Koreans were not aware of the Liancourt Rocks before
the 20th century, as seen in the lack of documents
pertaining to the Liancourt Rocks
- Koreans did not have adequate naval navigation to
reach Dok-do/Takeshima
While such adherents as Shimojo Masao, Tanaka Kunitaka, and
Gerry Bevers have presented arguements essentially building on
Kawakami's old claims, many of the claims, old and new, have
been disproved as spurious by both Korean and Japanese scholars.
-
- Visibility of Liancourt Rocks from Ulleungdo is
attested in history
[126]
[127]
[128]
[129], in
theory
[130]
[131] and
from observation
[132].
- Koreans already possessed the skills to reach
Ulleung-do from mainland Korea since not later than the
6th century.
[133]
- Koreans transmitted advanced
shipbuilding/navigational technology to the Japanese
from early historical times.
[134]
[135]
[136]
Early Korean efforts to claim
Liancourt Rocks as an Appendage/Dependency to Ulleung Island
A corresponding Korean effort came from a private
organisation self-styled "Patriotic Old Men's Association" led
by a former military leader of the Korean Government in Exile,
Cho Sung Hwan, on August 5, 1948, ten days before the
inauguration of the South Korean government.[137]
[138]
[139]
They petitioned for the sovereignty of Docksum (Liancourt
Rocks), Ullung Do,
Tsushima and
Parang islands
[140]
[141] The
Headquarters of the Patriotic Men's Association made the
following statements to back up Korea's claim to sovereignty
over Ulleung Is and Liancourt Rocks:
-
- Request for Arrangement of Lands between Korea and
Japan
- I. Returning ... the island "Docksum."
-
- "'Ulneungdo' and its attached ... belong... to
Korea historically."
- "Japan planned to profit by fishing and
foresting under the evacuation policy."
- "Resolute negotiation... Japan acknowledged
their fault and made a word to prohibit to fish
there in 1693."
- "Since 1881, Japan began to reinvade... Under
the negotiations in Tokyo... by plenipotentiary Suh
Sang Woo and ... advisior G. von Mollendorf, Japan
surrendered to Korea."
- Japan, never dismiss[ing] the fishing profit
around Ulneungdo, ... planned to occupy a corner of
it... and became to find out a small island called
'Docksum'... near the Ulneungdo, where whales
gathered."
- "In 1904, Japanese fishere of Tottoriken named
Nakai Yosaburo made a cruel programm to seize the
Docksum and was practised to submit petitions or
requets to the hydrographic department of Navy,
Dep't of Home Affairs, Dep't of Foreign Affairs and
Dep't of Agriculture and Commerce... to register the
island into Japanese territory."
- "The so-called Takeshima is the very 'Dockusum
(sic) in Korean name."
- "This is namely Liancourt Rocks on the
world's chart."
- "This name "Liancourt-Rocks" was established due
to the name of the French whaler which found... the
island. Thereafeter, by the Russian warship
'Paleada' ion 1854, and by the English warship
"Hornet" in 1855, the said island was re0found and
the ship's name was given to it."
- "But it was never suspected that these variously
named island was the very island "Ulneungdo."
- "It is ... said that a Japanese district office
carried out such a plan imposing upon the world."
- "Such an island occupied illegally by Japan
should be returned to Korea."
The document's clear identification of Liancourt Rocks with
the Korean "Docksum" in the vernacular language is not noted by
William Sebald, whose office relayed a facsimile copy to the US
State Department. The document is unique in its logical
treatment of Liancourt Rocks as an appendage/dependency
[142] to Ulleung Is
as can be seen in the statement: "these variously named island
was the very island 'Ulneungdo'" although some scholars believe
the prerequisite to
unity theory needs a qualification before it can be applied
to the case of Liancourt Rocks.[143]
First US bombing incident over
Liancourt Rocks
The US designated Liancourt Rocks as a bombing range(SCAPIN
#1778), and notified Japanese government on September 16,
1947. On June 8, 1948, twenty-nine US B-29 bombers from Kadena,
Okinawa, flew over Liancourt Rocks in a bombing excercise
dropping seventy-six bombs causing civilian casualties.
[144] The South
Korean government announced 16 civilians were killed by the US
military drill, higher estimates run up to twenty times that
figure, i.e. 320.
[145]
One researcher estimates damages somewhere between 30 and 80
fishing boats and civilian deaths between 30 and 100.
[146]
[147]
Classified US communication to
Korean Government
On Aug 10, 1951, a secret correspondence currently known as
Rusk documents was sent to South Korea communicating the
then U.S. position on issues of territorial sovereignty in the
Peace Treaty explaining why the US believed Liancourt Rocks were
Japanese territory: "[T]his 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.
The island does not appear ever before to have been claimed by
Korea."
Korea announces state intention to
resume administration
On January 18, 1952, South Korea, a non-signatory state to
the San Francisco Peace Treaty, announced the
Presidential Declaration of Sovereignty over Adjacent Seas
(Peace Line, Rhee Line) including Liancourt Rocks within Korean
territory along the expiring MacArthur Line (SCAPIN#1033; June
22, 1946 - April 1952) before the Peace Treaty came into force
on April 28.
On July 18, 1952, South Korea issued a presidential order to
seize all illegal foreign vessels engaging in fishing in breach
of the Peace Line.
Japanese MOFA acknowledges
intention behind bombing range designation
On May 23, 1952, in a Foreign Affairs committee meeting held
in the House of Representatives, Ishihara, Vice-minister of
Foreigner Affairs acknowledged MOFA's intention regarding the
designation of Liancourt Rocks as bombing range for Occupation
Forces in response to a question raised by Yamamoto, a Diet
member from the Shimane constituency: "[To] help Japan get
confirmation of its territorial sovereignty over the island."
[148]
Second US bombing incident over
Liancourt Rocks raises doubts
On September 15, 1952, a South Korean scientific expedition
aboard Chinnam-ho and a fishing crew of 23 aboard Kwangyong-ho
were attacked on Liancourt Rocks waters by a mono-propellered
aircraft bearing the US insignia that disappeared in the
direction of Japan after dropping four bombs. The South Korean
Navy had initially submitted an itinerary to the United Nations
Naval Commander in Busan (CTG 95.7) on Sept 7 of the expedition
to visit Ulleungdo Island and Liancourt Rocks 14th and 15th of
September. Granted approval to travel to said areas by CTG 95.7,
the expedition departed Busan on Sept 12 unaware of the United
States-Japan Joint Committee's bombing plan over Liancourt Rocks
for Sept 15.[149]
In response to the bombing incident, the US Embassy to Japan
in Tokyo transmitted a message including the following on
October 3, 1952, to the US State Department, "The history of
these rocks has been reviewed more than once by the Department,
and does not need extensive recounting here. The rocks, which
are fertile seal breeding grounds, were at one time part of the
Kingdom of Korea. They were, of course, annexed together with
the remaining territory of Korea when Japan extended its Empire
over the former Korean State... There exists a fair chance
that... American bombs may cause loss of life... which will
bring the Korean efforts to recapture these islands into more
prominent play, and may involve the United States unhappily in
the implications of that effort."
[150]
US State Department answered to US Embassy Korea and Tokyo on
Nov 14, 1952,"It appears that the Department has taken
the position that these rocks belong to Japan and has so
informed the Korean Ambassador in Washington.[...]it did not
appear that they had ever before been claimed by Korea. As a
result Article 2(a) of the Treaty of Peace with Japan makes no
mention of the Liancourt Rocks."
Finally, US government kept the understanding of
Rusk notes, and
US Embassy Korea sent a diplomatic document to Korea government
on Dec 4, 1952, "The Embassy has taken note of the
statement contained in the Ministry's Note that'Dokdo Island
(Liancourt Rocks) .....is a part of the territory of the
Republic of Korea.'The United States Government's understanding
of the territorial status of this island was stated in
assistant Secretary dated August 10,1951." .
US downplays its support for
Japan's sovereignty over Liancourt Rocks, declines to interfere
in the dispute
On Dec 9, 1953, the US Secretary of State John Foster Dulles
cabled the American Embassy in Tokyo, "US view re Takeshima
is simply that of one of many signatories to the treaty. The
U.S. is not obligated to 'protect Japan' from Korean
"pretensions" to Dokdo, and that such an idea cannot...be
considered as a legitimate claim for US action under the
U.S.-Japan security treaty.""
[151]
[152]
In 1954, James Van Fleet, a US special mission ambassador,
submitted a secret report after a round of visits to South
Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines, to the U.S. President
Dwight Eisenhower. The
The Report of Van Fleet mission to the Far East summarised:
"[T]he United States concluded that they remained under
Japanese sovereignty and the Island was not included among the
Islands that Japan released from its ownership under the Peace
Treaty ... Though the United States considers that the islands
are Japanese territory, we have declined to interfere in the
dispute.""
Proposal to settle before ICJ
rejected
In September 1954 and March 1962, Japan proposed to South
Korea that the dispute be referred to the
International Court of Justice. South Korea has rejected the
proposal.
Sebald predicts negative outcome
in Japan's bid for UNSC action, but advises legal counsel
On November 17, 1954, Japanese Embassy Minister Shigenobu
Shima asked William Sebald, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Far Eastern Affairs, and Mr. R. B. Finn, Officer in Charge of
Japanese Affairs at the State Department, Washington D.C.,
whether the U.S. would support Japan in the Security Council if
it submited the dispute with the ROK over Liancourt Rocks.
William Sebald responded, "I have personally followed this
controversy over a long period of time... although Japan is free
to do as it thought best in presenting its case, the Security
Council would probably want to see that all bilateral efforts
have been exhausted before hearing the case." He added, "It
seems that the ROK will not submit to ICJ arbitration regardless
of Security Council action." Sebald added, "It is important for
Japan to keep its claim alive and not to permit its rights to be
prejudiced by default... A note to the ROK or other periodic
formal statements would serve this purpose."
[153]
When Embassy Minister Shigenobu Shima asked whether this
constituted US recognition of the validity of Japan´s claim,
Sebald responded, "US relations with the ROK had recently
improved," noting, "The US-ROK Mututal Defense Treaty is being
brought into force on November 17...The general understanding
had been agreed to in Seoul."[154]
The current U.S. government stands on a neutral position on
this issue.
Recent conflict
A banner outside a Seoul government building
demanding that Japan apologize
On July 14, 2008, South Korea temporarily recalled its
ambassador to Japan,[155]
after Japanese government decided to mention the dispute over
the islands in the "Commentary to the
Curriculum Guideline" (学習指導要領解説,
Gakushu sido yōryō kaisetsu?)
for
social study classes in
junior high school.[156]
The
Korean Coast Guard strengthened its early warning system as
a preventative measure against any possible attempt by
Japanese right-wing groups to land on the islets.[157]
On July 18th, there was a protest in front of the Japanese
embassy in Seoul.[158][158][159]
The
Korean government is considering sending
marines to replace a
police contingent on Dokdo to thwart Japan's territorial
claim to the islets.[160]
Prime Minister
Han Seung-soo expressed strong dissatisfaction for
Japan's Education Ministry[161]
The Korean government is also considering building
infrastructure to provide
tap water, establishing an oceanic scientific base,
dispatching public officials to the area, allowing freer public
access to the islets, and turning Dokdo into a
resort area with hotels.[161]
Korea rejected a Japanese offer for a bilateral meeting on the
sidelines of the annual
ASEAN regional security summit in Singapore.[162]
Japan's
Chief Cabinet Secretary expressed concern that military
tensions would escalate.[162]
In July 2008, the
U.S. Board on Geographic Names (BGN) changed the name of the
country that Liancourt Rocks belong to from South Korea to
Undesignated Sovereignty. Responding to this change, Gonzalo R.
Gallegos, Acting Deputy Spokesman of the U.S. State Department,
said on July 28, 2008 that the United States has long maintained
a policy stance of neutrality on the islets, and that the latest
change does not represent any policy change within the U.S.
government.[163]
The same change that classified Liancourts Rocks as
Undesignated Sovereignty in the BGN database was reversed on
July 30th under the order of U.S. President
George W. Bush, once again marking the status of Liancourts
Rocks under South Korean control.[164][165][166][167][168]
Appearance in Chinese records
In 1488,
Dong Yue, a Chinese fonctionnaire and diplomat, wrote a
memoir of his Korean journey in a fu epic called A Fu on
Korea,
Chao Xian Fu,(Chinese
朝鲜赋).
A 1717 Japanese facsimile manuscript recently rediscovered
includes a map of Korea, Joson paldo chongdo, which shows
the islands of Ulleung (Dagelet Is.) and Usan (Liancourt Rocks)
as Korean territory.
[169]
See also
External links
References
- ^
Charles Scanlon
"South Koreans vent fury at Japan"
BBC Online, 18 March 2005
-
^
"Liancourt Rocks / Takeshima / Dokdo / Tokto",
Globalsecurity
-
^
Kirk, Donald (2008-07-26).
"Seoul
has desert island dreams", Asia Times Online.
- ^
Staff
Seoul and Tokyo hold island talks BBC, 20 April 2006
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Korea.net (1999–2006).
Dokdo: A Profile. Retrieved 9 January 2006.
- ^
a
b
c
d
Korea.net (1999–2006).
Dokdo: Inhabitants and Visitors. Retrieved 9 January
2006.
- ^
"Act
1395 amending Chapter 14-2, Ri-Administration under
Ulleung County, Local Autonomy Law, Ulleung County
(울릉군리의명칭과구역에관한조례 [개정 2000. 4. 7 조례 제1395호)]".
"Pursuant to Act 1395 amending Chapter 14-2,
Ri-Administration under Ulleung County, Local Autonomy
Law, Ulleung County, passed March 20, 2000, enacted
April 7, 2000, the administrative designation of Dokdo
addresses as 42 to 76, Dodong-ri, Ulleung-eup, Ulleung
County, North Gyungsang Province, is changed to address
1 to 37, Dokdo-ri, Ulleung-eup, Ulleung County, North
Gyungsang Province." "2000년 4월 7일 울릉군조례 제1395호로 독도리가
신설됨에 따라 독도의 행정구역이 종전의 경상북도 울릉군 울릉읍 도동리 산42~76번지에서 경상북도
울릉군 울릉읍 독도리 산1~37번지로 변경 됨."[1]
- ^
Island row hits Japanese condoms
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
Gyongsangbuk-do (2001).
Cyber Dokdo. Retrieved 9 January 2006.
- ^
a
b
Geography of Dokdo truthofdokdo.or.kr, retrieved
2007-08-21, 'Dokdo is composed of alkaline effusive
rocks which erupted during the Cenozoic Era. Dokdo began
to form about 4.6 million years ago'
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
f
Truth of Dokdo.
Story of Dokdo. Retrieved 9 January 2006.
-
^
"독도, 일본보다 빠른 속도로 침몰하고 있다",
The Korea Times, 2006/12/01.
손영관교수 `독도ㆍ울릉도 `침몰하고 있다``,
JoongAng Ilbo, 2006/12/01.
-
^ Kawakami
Kenzo, An Historical and Geographical Study of
Takeshima, 1966, pp. 205-208
-
^ If the unit of
elevation is by the foot, the coefficient of 2.09 for
the metric becomes 1.17 by a simple conversion of units;
or as explained in the foot note to [s:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lighthouse#Design|lighthouse
design], [s:http://www.boatsafe.com/kids/distance.htm|How
Far is the Horizon?].
-
^ BAEK In-ki,
SHIM Mun-bo, Korea Maritime Institute. "A
study of Distance between Ulleungdo and Dokdo and Ocean
Currents (울릉도와 독도의 거리와 해류에 관한 연구) Dec 2006 (pdf)".
pp. 20-22: "Kawakami Kenzo presented a mathematical
formula for calculating visible distance... with
the highest elevation of Dokdo at 157 metres above sea
level... supposing point of view at 4 metres above sea
level (deck height on an common vessel being 2.5 metres
and height of observer's eyes at 1.5 metres giving 4.0
meteres), he obtained a visible distance of 30.305
nautical miles (56.124 km). Lee Han-key (1969), taking a
more recent measurement of elevation of Dokdo ... at 174
metres above sea level, and elevation of Ulleung Is' Mt
Seong'in at 985 metres above sea level, obtained a
visible distance of 93.17 nautical miles (172.55 km)...
demonstrated that any observer, facing Dokdo from
Ulleung Is at an elevation greater than 120 metres, can
sight Dokdo." (가와카미 겐조(川上健三; 1966)는 시달거리(視達距離,
visible distance) 공식을 제시하고... 독도... 157m로 보고 眼高를 4m(높이
2.5m의 갑판 상에서 1.5m의 사람이 선 경우)로 가정하여, 독도를 볼 수 있는 범위를 약
30.305해리 (56.124km)로 계산하였다. 이에 따라 가와카미는 울릉도와 독도는 50해리
떨어져 있으므로 울릉도에서는 독도를 볼 수 없다고 주장하였다. 이에 대해 이한기(1969)는
서도... 174m로 하고, 울릉도... 985m를 적용하여 93.17해리라는 시달거리를
계산하였다... 울릉도에서 120 m 만 올라가면 독도를 볼 수 있다는 것을 보였다.)
-
^ ibid.
pp. 43-44: "It is not any clear day that Dokdo is
visible from Ulleung Is; local weather around the Dokdo
area must not be foggy... The minor islets in the
immediate neighborhood of Ulleung proper are visible on
any day of the year provided the fog is not overly dense
to be impenetrable. Dokdo, in contrast, is just so far
that it is only visible on 'a clear day, and when any
fog is absent near Dokdo." (오늘날 울릉도에서 독도를 볼 수 있는 날은 그냥
맑은 날이 아니라 '독도 부근에 해무가 없는 맑은 날'이다... 울릉도 주위의 섬들은 해무가 아주
짙게 낀 날을 제외하고 일년 중 대부분 볼 수 있다. 그러나 독도는 '독도 주변에 해무가 없는 맑은
날'에만 보일 만큼 떨어져 있다.)
-
^ National
Geographic Atlas of the World, 7th edition. pp. 103-104.
This map of Japan and Korea shows the highest point of
all islands of the Oki Archipelago on Dogo (島後) Island
with peak at 608 metres above sea level.
-
^ At 377 meters
lower than Ulleung Is' highest peak, the visible
distance from the highest peak of Oki's Dogo Island
towards an island of height 174 meteres (Lee Han-key's
figure for the West Islet of Liancourt Rocks) is
considerably less than 93.17 nautical miles (172.55 km).
The actual distance from Oki Iss to Liancourt Rocks is
85 nautical miles (157 km). Kawakami's visible distance
formula requires minimum elevation of observer on top of
Dogo Is at 755 metres; observer must be standing at 147
metres above the higest Dogo peak to make a sighting of
Liancourt Rocks.
-
^ Joong'ang
Daily. "A
1454 Dokdo Description Confirmed (옛 문헌에 나온 독도기록은 사실이었다)".
"Japanese [historical] records .... are devoid of any
instance of sighting Dokdo (Liancourt Rocks) with the
eye [from a Japanese territory]." (일본 측 문헌에는 ... 독도를 눈으로
확인했다는 기록조차 없다.)
-
^
The History of Dokdo (pdf)(English) (Japanese) North
Asian History Foundation; direct link to texts provided
separately as finding it is problematic although the
following government page refers to the NAHF home page.
-
^
Dokdo Issues The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and
Trade of Korea; mostly visuals and multimedia with
scanty text information if any
-
^
The Issue of Takeshima The Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Japan
-
^ "10
Issues of Takeshima, MOFA, Feb 2008". p. 4; Article
2, para. 2: "Such description... rather reminds us of
Utsuryo Island." para. 3: "A study... criticizes... that
Usan Island and Utsuryo Island are two names for one
island." para. 4: "that island does not exist at all in
reality."
-
^ Shin, Yong-Ha,
in "Disputes
over Ullungdo and Tokdo at the End of the 17th Century".,
says, "An Yong-bok's activity proved highly successful,
because the lord of Tsushima sent Judge Tairano
Naritsune to Korea in January 1697 to notify the Korean
government of the Kanpaku's decision. By 1699 the
diplomatic notes had been exchanged and all the
formalities had been cleard to recognize Korea's title
to Ullungdo and Dokdo. After the An Yong-bok incident
and the Kanpaku's reconfirmation of Korea's title to
Ullungdo and Tokdo around the end of the 17th century,
no documentary records of the period showed Japan's
claim to these two islands."
-
^ "1696
Ahn Yong-bok's second visit to Japan: Part I". Naito
Seichu 內藤正中 raises doubts as to the accuracy of An's
testimony regarding the kanpaku document. He denies the
existence of the kanpaku document claimed by An. 'When
An Yong-bok was transferred to Tottori, the feudal lord
could not have met An because he had gone to Edo. There
was initially no such document as given An, stating
Ulleungdo and Liancourt Rocks are Korean terrotiry. To
the contrary, An Yong-bok and Park Eo-Dun were
forcefully taken because they had trespassed Takeshima
considered Japanese territory. It is impossible that the
Tottori hanshu could have issued papers stating
territorial title to Koreans who had been arrested.'
(Dokdo and Takeshima, pp. 101, 147)
-
^ "안용복이
돗토리번에서 받은 '울릉도는 일본령이 아니다'라는 서계의 존재여부 (Whether the
so-called kanpaku document An received in Tottori
existed)". "안용복이
일본에서 받았다는 서계의 존재 (The existence of the so-called kanpaku
document An received in Tottori)". On his first trip
to Japan in 1693, An Yong-Bok stayed in Tottori from
June 1 to June 7; he met with four officers of the
Tottori feudal government. On his second trip to Japan
in 1696, An again stayed in Tottori from June 21 to some
time before August 6; the Tottori hanshu was away from
Tottori to Edo from June 23 to July 19.' Contacts
between Tottori officers and An clearly existed, and the
Tottori feudal lord was not away for the whole preiod of
An's stay in Tottori.
-
^ Shin, Yong-Ha.
"Disputes
over Ullungdo and Tokdo at the End of the 17th Century".
-
^ "1696년,
安龍福의 제2차 渡日 공술자료 -『元祿九丙子年朝鮮舟着岸一卷之覺書』에 대하여 (The second
public statement of An Yong Bok's migration to Japan in
1696)".
-
^ "[숙종실록
비변사에서 안용복 등을 추문하다]". The primary source of the An
Yong-bok statement is The Annals of King Sukjong, 22nd
reign year (1696), 9th moon, 25th. "以鬱陵子山等島 定以朝鮮地界
至有關白書契"
-
^ "竹島領有紛争の焦点
国際法の見地から(Focus of Takeshima dispute from the viewpoint
of International Law) p.5".
-
^ ":::::조선왕조실록의
홈페이지에 오신 것을 환영합니다.:::::" (in Korean). Retrieved on
2008-09-06.
-
^ "竹嶋紀事五巻(Record
of Takeshima VOL5) p.201".若其呈書誠有妄作之罪故已施幽極之典
-
^ Kim Hak-Jun
김학준. "Dokdo'nun
u'ri'd'ang 독도는 우리땅 (서울, 한중가, 1996)".
-
^ Shin, Yong-Ha.
"Disputes
over Ullungdo and Tokdo at the End of the 17th Century".
-
^ 竹島紀事5巻:
"永不許入往漁採"
-
^ "Daijō-kan
shirei 太政官指令". Japanese Wikipedia article on 太政官指令
of Mar 20, 1877
-
^ "Meiji
Government's Reconfirmation of Korea's Title to Tokdo".
Shin, Yong Ha, describes the nature of the 1877 Supreme
Council (Daijō-kan) Directive
-
^ "image
of Daijō-kan Directive of Mar 20, 1877 明治十年三月二十日 太政官指令文".
image is a faithful reproduction by author himself,
Shin, Yong Ha; "A Study of Korea's Territorial Rights to
Tokdo (Liancourt Rocks) and the Japanese Invasion",
Journal of Korean Independence Movement Studies, Vol. 3,
Nov 1989. (http://i815.or.kr/media_data/thesis/1989/198902.html)
-
^ "image
of document appended to Daijō-kan Directive of Mar 20,
1877 明治十年三月二十日 太政官指令文 附屬文書". Shin, Yong Ha, op. cit.
"磯竹島一ニ竹島ト稱ス. 隱岐國ノ乾位一百二拾里許ニ在ス. 周回凡九(sic.)十里許山峻嶮ニシテ平地少シ.
川三條アリ. 又瀑布アリ. 然レトモ深谷幽邃樹竹稠密其源ヲ知ル能ハス...動物ニハ 海鹿
...就中海鹿鮑ヲ物産ノ最トス. ...又海鹿一頭能ク數斗ノ油ヲ得ヘシ. 次ニ一島アリ松島ト呼フ.
周回三十町許竹島ト同一線路ニ在リ. 隱岐ヲ距ル八拾里許 樹竹稀ナリ. 亦魚獸ヲ産ス."
"Isotakeshima is also called 'Takeshima' (modern
Matsushima, Ulleung Island). It is located 120 ri (里
here is kairi 浬/海里 or nautical mile of 1.852km; 120 x
1.852km = 222.24 km) to the north of Okikuni. Its
circumference is around 10 ri (里 here is unit of
distance 3.927km; 10 x 3.927 = 39.27 km); its slopes are
steep, and flatlands few. There are three streams and
even a waterfall. The bamboos and trees are dense in the
deep ravines, and where they begin is
unknowable...(Among the catch,) the most abundant are
sea lions and abalones... Furthermore, several tomasu (斗
is measure word of volume roughly equiv. to 5 gallons)
of oil is to be got from one head of sea lion. Next is
an island called 'Matsushima 松島' (modern Takeshima,
Dokdo or Liancourt Rocks). Its circumference is roughly
30 chou (町 109 m; 30 chou is ca 3.27 km), which is on
the same sea route as 'Takeshima 竹島' (modern Matsushima
or Ulleung Island). It is roughly 80 ri (80 x 1.852km =
148.16 km) from Oki. Trees and bamboos are rare, but it
also produces fish and (other) sea animals." p. 167,
Tokto ui minjok yongtosa yongu, Chisik Sanopsa; 1st
edition (1996) ISBN-10: 8942310362; passage a faithful
translation from Shin Yong Ha's transliteration (except
for 凡九十里 which is corrected to 凡十里 after collation with
two images reproduced by Shin) and translation from
Japanese original text to Korean, retranslated to
English; in notes not part of original text or Shin's
but provided by contributor for readers' convenience
-
^ "'Takeshima'
and Another Island in Japan's Daijō-kan Directive 일본 태정관
지령문의 죽도외 1도". Transcribes and translates two letters
exchanged between Shimane Prefecture and the Internal
Ministry in 1876 that lead to the 1877 decision in the
Daijō-kan Directive; In summary, it says, "In the year
1876 when Japan was conducting a nationwide land
registry and mapping project, the Internal Ministry
requested Shimane Prefecture of information regarding
Ulleung-do (then 'Takeshima 竹島') on Oct 5 (明治九年十月五日). On
Oct 16, same year (明治九年十月十六日), Shimane Prefecture
submitted relevant documents including a map inquring
after guidelines on dealing with two islands instead
(竹島外一島). The map called A Rough Map of Isotakeshima
磯竹島略圖 (http://hanmaum.web-bi.net/dokdo/DocuPic/T22.jpg),
which came from the Otani (大谷) clan of Shimane, shows
Isotakeshima (磯竹島; today's Ulleung Island) and
Matsushima (松島; today's Dokdo or Liancourt Rocks)
exclusively in addition to the northern tip of Okishima.
This map shared by Shimane Prefecture, the Internal
Ministry, and the Supreme Council (Daijō-kan) can mean
only that they were in an unambiguous agreement on which
island they meant by 'another island 外一島': 'Matsushima
松島', which has since been renamed Takeshima 竹島 also
known as Liancourt Rocks and Dokdo."
-
^ "Myung
Chul Hyun, Korean Observer, Spring Edition 1998.".
Translation of the annexed text: "Isonotakeshima
(Ulleungdo) is also called Takeshima. It is 120 ri
(222km) northwest of Oki. The island is about 10 ri
(40km) around....Next there is another island which is
called Matsushima (Dokdo). The area of this island is
approximately 30 chongbo (73 acres) and is on the same
straight latitude as Ulleungdo. It is 80 ri (148km) from
Oki. Trees and bamboo are scarce, sea lions live there."
The distance given here is in ri (里) There were two
forms of ri used at this time in Japan. One was a
standard ri of 4km (Used for land measurements). It was
used in the circumference of Ulleungdo in this document
(10 里 = 40km). The other was a nautical ri or nautical
mile which equaled 1.852 meters. Nautical 里 or miles
are/were used in international law and treaties
especially regarding the limit of territorial waters.
There can be no doubt given the location, name, and
description the island referred to in this document was
today´s Dokdo. The ratio of the real distances in
kilometers and the distances in 里 on the 1877 document
are about the same. 120里:80里 (distance on 1877 document
ratio=.66) 240km:157km (actual distance ratio in km
=.65)
-
^ "Prof.
Shimojo Masao:The 8th column “Seeking Truth Based Solely
on Facts”".Japanese(http://www.pref.shimane.lg.jp/soumu/web-takeshima/takeshima04/takeshima04-2/takeshima04-o.html)
-
^ >"Shimane
Prefecture document sent to the Meiji governemnt
regarding "Takeshima and another island."". Prof.
Shimojo Masao's reference to the 1881 survey is out of
context as the designation of the two islands are quite
different: "As a matter of fact, Matsushima as 'another
island' in Dajoukan order turned out to be today's
Ulleundo three years later (1880), and 'Takeshima' in
the order was identified as today's Jukdo which locates
2km east of Ulleundo until 1881." The 1876-1877
documents of Dajoukan and the Ministry of Home Affairs
clearly demonstrate that, at the time of the
investigation of the islands based on historical
documents, "Takeshima" refers to modern Ulleung-do and
"Matsushima", modern Liancourt Rocks.
-
^ Uljin County
Hall. "History
of Uljin County 울진군(蔚珍郡) 연혁".Uljin Prefecture was
elevated to Uljin County in May, 1895, as part of the
Gabo Reform, and was subordinated to Gang'neung
Bu-county.
-
^ "Chosun
Dynasty's Re-development of Ullungdo and Tokdo and
Imperial Ordinance No.41". Shin, Yong Ha, describes
the circumstances that culminated in the 1900 Imperial
Decree No. 41. Also makes a brief reference to a 1904
account of Liancourt Rocks by Japanese warship Niitakago
crew during the Russo-Japanese War.
-
^ "image
of Imperial Decree No. 41 of Oct 25, 1900, as published
in Official Gazette No. 1716 (관보 제1716호) on Oct 27".
-
^ Shin Yong-Ha.
"1900년
대한제국칙령41호 독도영유권 국제적 재선언". "대한제국이 1900년 칙령 제41호로
독도(石島, 獨島)의 울도군수 행정관리를 통한 영유를 중앙정부의 관보에 게재한 것은 ‘국제적 고시’의
성격을 갖는다. 왜냐하면 중앙정부 관보는 의무적으로 대한제국의 체약국 공사관에 발송되고, 각국
공사관도 이 중앙정부의 관보를 반드시 보기 때문이다. 따라서 대한제국의 1900년 칙령 제41호의
관보 고시는 대한제국이 울릉도와 독도의 영유를 재선언한 것이었다. ‘재선언’이라고 한 것은 이미
15세기에 ‘동국여지승람’에서 우산도(독도)의 조선 영유가 당시 조선의 교역국가에 선언됐기
때문이다."
-
^ These islands
are being transfered from
Uljin County to Uldo County (mod.
Ulleung County). According to Geographical Treatise,
Annals of King Sejong, Gangwon Province, Uljin
Prefecture, two islands of Usan and Mulung are in the
Eastern Sea; they are close enough to be visible from
each other on a clear day. During the Shilla period,
they were called Usan'gug or Ulleungdo.
-
^ "Facts
on Arrangement of Uldo County". Jul 13, 1906,
edition of the daily, Hwang Seong Shinmun, reported:
"The [Japanese] Resident-General sent an official letter
to the [Korean] Ministry of the Interior asking for a
clarification as to which islands belonged to Ulleung
(sic.) Island, which was (sic.) under the administration
of Samcheok County (sic) in Gangwon Province, and which
year and month the County Office was established. The
response was that the post of Ulleungdo Directorate was
established on May 20, 1898, and that the County
Magistrate was stationed on October 25, 1900, as a
result of the government's decision. The County seat is
at Taehadong (台霞洞), with islands of Jukdo (竹島) and Sokdo
(石島). [The Island of Uldo] measures sixty ri from east
to west and forty ri from north to south with a
circumference of 200 ri in total."
-
^ "MOFA:
Incorporation of Takeshima into Shimane Prefecture".See
2. Background (5) and (6). Note the misrepresentation of
Sokdo (石島 석도) as "Ishi-jima"; as a credible governmental
document offered to English speakers, the island should
have been referred to as "Seokdo" in the current
standard of romanisation of a Korean place name. This
error, however, is corrected, on page 9 in the Feb 2008
MOFA document, "10 Issues of Takeshima". ([2])
-
^ "Prof.
Shimojo Masao:The 10th column “Seeking Truth Based
Solely on Facts”".Japanese(http://www.pref.shimane.lg.jp/soumu/web-takeshima/takeshima04/takeshima04-2/takeshima04_q.html)
Shimojo Masao claims it is impossible for "Seokdo" 石島 to
be Liancourt Rocks because the figures given for Uldo
Island in the 1906 Hwangseong Shinmun report is only 200
ri in circumference, which can not cover the distance to
"Sokdo", 87 to 92 km away from Uldo Island depending on
tide levels.
-
^
The truth of Dokdo: Comments by the Northeast Asian
History Foundation
-
^ Shin Yong-Ha.
"1900년
대한제국칙령41호 독도영유권 국제적 재선언". "대한제국 정부는 칙령 제41호에서 울릉도
주민들의 호칭인 ‘독섬’을 의역하여 ‘石島’라 한 것이다. ‘독섬’을 뜻을 취해 한자 표기하면
‘石島’가 되고, 발음을 취해 한자 표기하면 ‘獨島’가 되는 것이다." "대한제국 정부가 칙령
제41조를 발표할 때 각 섬의 명칭을 약간씩 수정했는데, 울릉도를 울도라 개칭하고, 죽서도를 죽도라고
했으며, 우산도에 대한 어민들의 명칭인 '독섬' '독도'를 의역해 한자로 ‘石島’로 번역 표기했다."
-
^ Song Byung-ki.
"Korean
Title to Dokdo as Evidenced in Korean Sources (국내
자료(資料)를 통해 본 한국(韓國)의 독도영유권獨島領有權)". "" (석도(石島)는 어느 섬을
가리키는 것일까. 우선 울릉전도(鬱陵全島), 즉 울릉본도(鬱陵本島)와 이에 부속된 작은 섬·바위들과
죽도를 제외하고 나면, 울릉도 주변에 잇는 도서로서는 오직 오늘의 독도(獨島)가 남을 뿐이다. 또
석도를 훈독(訓讀)하면 '독섬' 혹은 '돌섬'이 되는데, 지금도 울릉도 주민들은 독도를 '독섬' 혹은
'돌섬'이라 부르고 있다. 이렇게 볼 때 이 제2조 후단의 석도는 바로 독도를 가리키는 것이다.
1906년 (광무 10)에 울도군수(鬱島郡守) 심흥택(沈興澤)이 강원도관찰사 서리 이명래(李明來)에게
보낸 보고서에서 '독도운운(獨島云云)'한 독도16) 는 이 석도, 즉 '독섬'에서 차음(借音)한
것이라 하겠다.)
-
^ 국민일보 (Gookmin
Daily). "독도‘실효적
지배’새 근거 (New Evidence of effective control), 1890년 이전부터
독도서 강치잡이 (Sea lion hunting before 1890) [2006-07-26]".
retrieved Aug 31, 2008
-
^ Kazuo Hori,
"Japan's Incorporation of Takeshima into Its Territory
in 1905", Korea Observer Vol XXVII, No 3, Autumn 1997,
p. 509, quotes Hong Chae-hyon (홍재현; born 1862) who moved
to this island in 1883, who recalled [in 1947], "at the
time of the development [in the 1880's], the people on
Ulleungdo discovered Tokdo immediately, and went to
Tokdo many times to harvest kelp (konbu) and abalone and
to catch sea lions. I myself went there several doezens
of times." Taehan Gongnonsa (Korean Public Information
Service), ed., Tokdo (Seoul: 1965), p. 30
-
^ Gookmin Daily,
op. cit.
-
^ Kazuo Hori,
"Japan's Incorporation of Takeshima into Its Territory
in 1905", Korea Observer Vol XXVII, No 3, Autumn 1997,
p. 511: "The Japanese government ... made the Korean
government ackowledge in the Korea-Japan protocol that
Japan would temporarily expropriate the places needed
for military purposes."
-
^ Tanaka
Kunitaka
竹島の島根県編入 in 1905,
"確かに竹島の編入は日韓議定書からの連続した侵略過程とも採らえることが出来る。"
-
^ Lee Han-Key. "Korea's
Territorial Rights to Tokdo in History and International
Law". p. 19, "Korea was forced to sign a treaty of
protocol which provided, among other things: "Japan
shall temporarily expropriate places considered
necessary for military purposes." After all, this clause
applied to the lease of fishing grounds to Nakai, a
fisherman from Shimane prefecture. Tokdo, thus leased,
was finally incorporated into Okinoshima in Shimane
prefec ture on February 22, 1905, when Japan's victory
became decisive after the sea battle of Port Arthur on
February 8."
-
^ Asia Today,
Aug 13, 2008. "“한일의정서에
대한제국 영토 보증”". "한일의정서는 대한제국의 독립을 박탈하려는 데는 이르지 못했다.
실제로 한일의정서 제 3조에도 “대일본제국정부는 대한제국의 독립과 영토보전을 확실히 보증할 것”이라고
명확히 명기했다. 하지만 일본은 다음해인 1905년 2월 22일 독도를 일본령으로 편입 결정하는
조치를 단행함으로써 스스로 명기한 대한제국의 영토보전 약속을 어겼다. 대다수 전문가들은 여기에 일본의
독도 영유권 주장의 가장 큰 허점이 있다고 주장한다. 고려대 한국사학과 정태헌 교수는 “독립국
대한제국 영토를 일본이 자국령으로 편입시켰다면 이는 독립국의 영토를 조약도 없이 강제로 약탈한 것으로
당연히 국제법 위반”이라고 지적했다."
-
^ Article 4 of
the Japan-Korea Protocol was to continue in force even
after the signining of the
Eulsa Treaty of Nov 17, 1905, which states in
Article 4: "The stipulations of all treaties existing
between Japan and Korea not inconsistent with the
provisions of this Agreement shall continue in force."
The text of the Eulsa Treaty can be found below in
full."The
1905 Agreement (Korean-Japanese Agreement, Nov 17, 1905)".
-
^ Lee Han-Key. "Korea's
Territorial Rights to Tokdo in History and International
Law". p. 27, "[Japan's] Foreign Ministry states: "
Article 4 of the Korean-Japanese Protocol originally
provided for temporary expropriation of places
strategically deemed necessary for the preservation of
Korea's territorial integrity during the Russo-Japanese
War and had nothing to do with the incorporation of
Tokdo." end note 95: Japan Foreign Ministry, Kaigai
chosa geppo (Overseas Research Monthly), Nov. 1954.
-
^ Lee Han-Key. "Korea's
Territorial Rights to Tokdo in History and International
Law". p. 37, "So far as the "incorporation" or
"prior occupation" of Tokdo by Japan is presumed to have
been an act of seizure or aggression against Korea's
title, Japan should prove this prima facie evidence that
the act was not committed by "violence and greed."
Unless this burden of proof is removed, Japan should
find itself bound by the "restrictive character" under
international agreements (Cairo Declatation-Postam
Declaration-Surrender instruments) as shown in the
Frontier case. Here, the relative strength of evidence,
seen in the Minquiers and Ecrehos case, to
contradistinguish evidence does not apply."
-
^ "Sanin
Chuo
Shimpo,(発信竹島~真の日韓親善に向けて~:第2部「勅令VS閣議決定」-明治時代-(6)無主先占),
Aug 28, 2005". Aug 28, 2005 article from interview
with Shimojo Masao.
-
^ "Sankei
Shimbun, "Beyond the crest of waves: Takeshima Report
Part 1 (1) The Challege of a Fishery Investor"
(【波頭を越えて 竹島リポート 第1部】(1)水産家の挑戦)". Mar 7, 2007
article.
-
^ "Okuhara
Hekiun, Takeshima Executive Nakai Yosaburo's
Biography, 1906.
manuscript『竹島経営者中井養三郎氏立志伝』明治39(1906)年(奥原碧雲)(pdf)".
Codified from manuscript by Takeshima Institute of
Shimane Prefecture.
-
^ "Shimane-ken
Education Board, "Chapter 4. Shimane Prefecture's
Takeshima" in A Treatise on Shimane Prefecture,
1923; 島根県誌 in 1923".Photographic reproduction of the
1923 publication.
-
^ "Petition
to Incorporate Liancourt Rocks (リャンコ島領土編入並二貸下願 )".A
draft translation.
-
^ "Who
was Nakai Yozaburo?". Compiled by Mark Lovmo; see
bibliography for sources.
-
^ "Nakai
Yozaburo and The Shimane Prefecture Inclusion". The
text has been identified as that of Kazuo Hori's from
"Japan's Incorporation of Takeshima into Its Territory
in 1905", Korea Observer Vol XXVII, No 3, Autumn 1997,
conveyed by Steve Barber.
-
^ "Japan's
Annexation of Tokdo".Shin, Yong Ha, describes the
circumstances of the 1905 Cabinet Decision
-
^ "Image
of Japan's Cabinet decision of Jan 28, 1905
明治三十八年一月二十八日閣議決定".
-
^ "Aug
28, 2005, Sanin Chuo article 發信竹島-眞の日韓親善に向けて 第2部
勅令VS閣議決定 - 明治時代 - (6) 無主先占".
下條正男・拓殖大教授「ポイントは二つある。まず、竹島を他国が占領したと認められる形跡がないことを確認した。さらに、中井の漁業会社が小屋を構えていることを、国際法上の占領の事実とした。これらのことから、竹島を『無主先占』の地であると判断した」
Prof. Shimojo Masao of Takushoku Universuty said, "There
are only two points. First, it has been confirmed there
is no evidence to recognise the occupation of Takeshima
by any other country. Second, Nakai's fishing company
has constructed a shed there; this is a fact of
occupation under international law . From these facts,
[the Japanese government] determined Takeshima is to
have been subject to prior occupation of a terra
nullius (無主先占)."
-
^ "Sean
Fern, Tokdo or Takeshima? The International Law of
Territorial Acquisition in the Japan-Korea Island
Dispute" in Stanford Journal of East Asian Affairs, Vol.
5, No. 1, Winter 2005, p. 84". "The Japanese claim
to have incorporated Liancourt - land they considered to
be terra nullius - into Shimane Prefecture on February
22, 1905."
-
^ "search
key Kim, Myung-Ki, A Study of Legal Aspects of Japan's
Claim to Tokdo, Korea Observer, Autumn 1997, pp. 365-366".
Professor Kim Myung-Ki summarises: "The Japanese
government stated on Feb 10, 1954, that Japan['s]
announcing [of] prior occupation of territory ... has
satisfied the requisite conditions under international
law," MOFA of Korea, Tokdo kwan'gye charyojip
(Collection of Data on Tokdo) (I) Wangbok oegyio munso
(Diplomatic Correspondence Exchanged); Chipmu charyo
(Reference Material for Staff), (Seoul: MFA, 1997), p.
55
-
^ "search
key 隠岐島ヲ距ル西北八十五哩ニ在ル無人島ヲ竹島ト名ヶ島根県所属隠岐島司ノ所管ト為ス pp. 1-3 (on
images 1 and 2) in '公文類聚' Vol. 29, 1905(明治三十八年) book 1".
"明治三十八年一月二十八日閣議決定 ... 無人島ハ他國ニ於テ之ヲ占領シタリト認ムヘキ形迹ナク、...
依テ審査スルニ明治三十六年以來中井養三郞ナル者該島ニ移住シ漁業ニ從事セルコトハ關係書類ニ依リ明ナル所ナルハ國際法上占領ノ事實アルモノト認メ."
-
^ MFA, op. cit.,
pp. 234, 236, 250 via Kim, Myung-Ki, A Study of Legal
Aspects of Japan's Claim to Tokdo, Korea Observer,
Autumn 1997, p. 361, MOFA of Japan stated in a
memoramdum of Jul 3, 1962, "The Japanese government
has made clear the postition of its claim that Takeshima
is Japan's inherent territory from olden times and is
now reconfirming repeatedly that position."
-
^ "image
of Map appended to a 1696 manuscript 元祿九丙子年朝鮮舟着岸一卷之覺書".
-
^ "元祿九丙子年朝鮮舟着岸一卷之覺書
transcribed by 半月城通信 (in Japanese; pdf)".
-
^ "元祿九丙子年朝鮮舟着岸一卷之覺書
transcribed by Takeshima Institute (竹島硏究會) (in Japanese;
pdf)".
-
^ "Japan's
Annexation of Tokdo".
-
^ "Image
of Shimane Prefectural Notice No. 40 of Feb 22, 1905
島根縣告示第40號".
-
^ "Image
of Shimane Prefectural Notice No. 40 of Feb 22, 1905
島根縣告示第40號(PDF)".
Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs. a cleaned-up
text lacking the various seals and handwritten figures
-
^ "Minuscule
Image of Feb 24, 1905, Sanin Shimbun report on Shimane
Notice".
Shimane Prefecture.
-
^ "Full-page
image of Feb 24, 1905, Sanin Shimbun report on Shimane
Notice".
-
^ "Cropped-up
Image of Feb 24, 1905, Sanin Shimbun report on Shimane
Notice".
-
^ "Korean
and Japanese POV's regarding the Sea surrounding Dokdo
Is. 독도를 둘러싼 바다에 대한 韓日간의 시각 (in Korean only; HWP viewer
required)". In Chapter 2, Lee, Jong Hak discusses
the historical verity of the 1905 Shiname Noitce No. 40
in detail
-
^
This San-in Shimbun newspaper notice size is a
almost 3.4cm(1단크기)
-
^
신용하/ 日 독도 침탈 기도 사죄해야, Prof. Shin,
Dong-a Ilbo(Korean)
시마네 현이 ‘산음(山陰) 신문’이라는 지방지에 눈에 잘 띄지도 않는 1단 크기(3.4 cm)로
‘관내 고시’한 날이 바로 100년 전의 오늘이다.
-
^ "The
Shimane Notice that Never Was 시마네현 고시는 존재하지 않았다".
Part 2 summarises Lee, Jong Hak's study of the
historicity of the Shimane Notice
-
^
독도연구보전協 학술토론회, 2008.05.29(Korean)
“일본의 독도영유권 주장은 1905년 2월 22일 시마네 현 고지 제40호에 근거하고 있다”며
“그러나 국제고시가 아닌 은밀한 ‘지방고시’에 의한 독도 편입은 서류점령에 불과하지 형식이나
절차면에서 국제법적 영토 취득의 요건에 맞지 않는다”(It was not reported by
public Gazette. it was a ""document occupation"
secretly. This secret "document occupation" was not a
fulfil the necessary conditions by international law.
-
^
Dokdomuseum(Korean)일본
시마네현 측에 확인한 결과, 1905년 2월 22일 '시마네현고시 40호'는 내부 회람용이란 도장이
찍혀 있고 관보 게시 사실이 없는 것으로 밝혀졌다.(According to Shimane
Prefecture, 'Shimane Notice 40' was not announced
outside. it imprinted a stamp of 'circulation for inner
memebers', it was not a announced to public)
-
^ "Japan’s
Meiji Government affirmed that Dokdo was Korean
territory. Cyber Dokdo History Hall".
-
^
Emperor Gojong's letter to German Kaiser discovered
-
^
Painful, significant landmark, Joongangdaily, June 23,
2008
-
^ The
interpretation of this report has ignited some
controversy, the published articles of the participants
of which are listed in the following, arranged in
chronological order."Feb
2, 2008, 杉野洋明(Sugino Youmei)'s interpretation of
Hwangsoeng Shinmun article of Jul 13, 1906".
-
^ "Feb
22, Sanin chuou shimpo, local newspaper article
reporting on Mr Sugino's claim".
-
^ "Apr
3, 2008, Yoo, Mirim, Korea Maritime Institute, "Analysis
of Hwangsoeng Shinmun article of Jul 13, 1906"".
-
^ "Jun
30, 2008, Yoo, Mirim, Korea Maritime Institute,
"Critical Review of Japanese Seokdo Denial" (pdf)".
-
^ Yoo, Mirim,
op. cit. Apr 3, 2008.
-
^ Yoo, Mirim,
op. cit. Jun 30, 2008.
-
^
Japan's Incorporation of Takeshima into Its Territory in
1905, by Kazuo Hori "It is certain that many
Korean people learned through this newspaper coverage of
the Japanese move to incorporate Takeshima/Tokdo into
its territory and must have read it as an aggression
into Korean territory. For example, Hwang Hyon who lived
in Kurye, Chollado, at that time writes in a note that
"the Japanese are making a false statement that Tokdo
belongs to Japan while it is our own territory."
-
^
Dokdo: Korean Territory Since the Sixth Century,
koreaembassy.org
-
^ "Dokdo
yoksa munhwa hwangyong archive 독도 역사문화환경 아카이브".
-
^ "Letter
from Office of Northeast Asian Affairs To E. Allan
Lightner American Embassy, Pusan Korea".
-
^ "The
Territory under Japanese Sovereignty as Defined in Art.
1 of the Peace Treaty" (JPG) (in Korean). Retrieved
on
2008-09-06.
-
^ Hara Kimie. "New
Light on the Russo-Japanese Territorial Dispute".,
p. 9: "The Canberra Conference was held among the
Commonwealth countries in August 1947 to discuss a peace
treaty with Japan. Before signing a peace treaty which
would determine the final position of territories as a
result of the war, Japan had to appeal to the nations
concerned." UK National Archives Memorandum. "Canberra
Conference, 1947". "At the suggestion of the United
Kingdom and Australian Governments, a meeting of British
Commonwealth countries was held at Canberra at the end
of August 1947 in order to exchange views as a
preliminary to an international conference about the
peace settlement with Japan. The meeting was attended by
delegations from Australia, the UK, Canada, New Zealand,
South Africa, India, Pakistan and Burma."
-
^ ""Commentary
on Draft Treaty by the Department of State on June 1,
1951"". In the discussions at Washington the British
agreed to drop this proposal when the U.S. pointed to
the psychological disadvantages of seeming to fence
Japan in by a continuous line around Japan. The Japanese
had objected to the British proposal when it was
discussed with them in Tokyo. U.S. willingness to
specify in the treaty that Korean territory included
Quelpart, Port Hamilton and Dagelet also helped to
persuade the British.
-
^ Shin Yong-Ha.
"SCAPIN
NO.677 and Reversion of Tokdo"."On June 22, 1946
SCAPIN No. 1033 was issued in which Clause 5 set up the
fishing and whaling areas permitted for Japanese
fishermen and prohibited Japanese ships and crews from
entering the 12-nautical-mile (22 km) seas off the
Liancourt Rocks at 37°15" N. latitude and 131°53"E.
longitude and approaching the island."
-
^ ibid.
"Clause 5 of the instruction provides that 'the
definition of the Japan contained in the directive shall
also apply to all future directives, memoranda and
orders from the Headquarters unless otherwise specified
therein.' Therefore, without another specific
instruction by SCAP this definition could not be changed
and would continue to be binding."
-
^ ibid.
"In accordance with this instruction, SCAP transferred
the jurisdiction over Tokdo to the U.S. Army Military
Government in Korea on January 29, 1946. When the
Republic of Korea was proclaimed on August 15, 1948, all
the territories of Korea, including Tokdo, automatically
reverted to the Korean government."
-
^ ""U.S.
– U.K. Meeting"".The Americans would prefer a
wording which emphasized the full sovereignty of Japan
such territory as we should leave her and, exclude by
name from her sovereignty and only such territory and
islands as might be necessary to avoid confusion.
-
^ 1947/6
[USNARA/894.014/9-2347]
-
^ "Japanese
government lobbies for Ulleung Is. as well as Liancourt
Rocks (日정부, 울릉도도 일본땅 로비)". Yonhap News, Feb 8, 2005
-
^ ""A
news of Dokdo (Tokdo)"". Korea Times, Feb 27, 2005
-
^ ""William
J Sebald and the Dokdo Territorial Dispute (html)"".
Jung Byung-Joon, Korea Focus, 13:4 July-August 2005, pp
55-81, gives a detailed account of the comprehensive
efforts of the Japanese Foreign Office Treaty Department
and the Executive Committee for Research on the Peace
Treaty and William Sebald's role in the exchange of
national needs of Japan and the US in the negotiating
process. Originally published in Yukbi, Critical Review
of History, Vol 71, Summer 2005. (Minor textual
corruption exists; see the pdf version below for
accurate text.)
-
^ ""William
J Sebald and the Dokdo Territorial Dispute (pdf)"".
pdf version of above essay by Jung Byung-Joon
-
^ Jung
Byung-Joon, op. cit. p. 68
-
^ Lee Seok-Woo,
The San Francisco Peace Treaty, North-east Asian
History Foundation, Seoul 2006,
ISBN 89-91448-68-2-93910. pp.56-60
-
^ long passage
of three paragraphs summarised from Lee, Seok-Woo,
op. cit. p. 58
-
^ Lee Seok-Woo,
in "The Resolution of the Dispute over the Liancourt
Rocks", p. 12, quotes an excerpt from a USNARA document
wihtout a classification number, USDOS 1954b,
"Conflicting Korean-Japanese Claims to Dokdo Island
(Otherwised Known as Takeshima or Liancourt Rocks)",
1954/8/26, "[I]f one were to assess the merits of these
claims, without reference to the peace treaty, a more
thorough study, with the guidance of experts in Oriental
history, would have to be made."
-
^ Jung
Byubg-Joon, op. cit. p. 73
-
^ In contrast,
the corresponding Korean claims made in Aug 5, 1948, had
a relatively low impact, according to which, many of the
Japanese claims are proven selective, manipulative or
inaccurate.
-
^
竹島の歴史地理学的研究, 川上 健三,
ISBN 4772218564, May 1966, 古今書院; 復刻新装版版
-
^ "Historical
Perception of Dokdo 1 (우리 역사속의 독도 인식 1)". "1451년(문종
원년)에 편찬된 『고려사지리지』에는 “울릉도가 (울진)현 정동쪽 바다 가운데에 있다. 신라 때에는
우산국이라 칭했고, 무릉, 우릉이라고도 한다. ... 일설에는 우산 무릉은 원래 두개의 섬으로 거리가
서로 멀지 않아 날씨가 맑으면 바라보는 것이 가능하다.(有鬱陵島 在縣正東海中 新羅時稱于山國 一云武陵
一云羽陵 ... 一云于山武陵本二島 相距不遠 風日淸明 則可望見(「高麗史」 권58 地理3, 東界
蔚珍縣條)"
-
^ "Annals
of King Sejong, Geographical Treatise, Gangwon Circuit,
Samchok Protectorate, Uljin Prefecture". "우산(于山)과
무릉(武陵) 2 섬이 현의 정동(正東) 해중(海中)에 있다. 2 섬이 서로 거리가 멀지 아니하여,
날씨가 맑으면 가히 바라볼 수 있다."
-
^ BAEK In-ki,
SHIM Mun-bo, Korea Maritime Institute. "A
study of Distance between Ulleungdo and Dokdo and Ocean
Currents (울릉도와 독도의 거리와 해류에 관한 연구) Dec 2006". pp.
101-102 "Jang, Han-Sang wrote that both an island
(Dokdo) and Daegwan Pass (on mainland) are visible from
Mt Seong'in, to the southeast at 300 ri and to the west
respectively...Facts and Evidence of Ulleungdo by
Jang, Han-Sang, records a visual description of
Liancourt Rocks from Seong'in Mt.: 'To the southeast of
Ulleungdo at a distance of some 300 ri lies an island
not quite one third the dimensions of Ulleungdo.' The
distance he gives overestimates the actual distance by
about 28 km. (장한상은 울릉도 성인봉에서 동남쪽 300여리에 섬(독도)이 보이고 서쪽에
대관령이 보인다 하였다...장한상張漢相의『울릉도사적蔚陵島事蹟』에는 울릉도 성인봉에서 독도를 묘사한
기록이 담겨있다. 울릉도의 진방(辰方, 동남방) 300여리에 울릉도 1/3이 안되는 섬이 있다고
기록하였는데, 이 거리는 실제거리인 약 92km 보다 28km 정도 더 멀게 표현하였다."
-
^ "Usando
Turns Out to be Liancourt Rocks ('우산도'는 역시 독도였다)".
"한국해양수산개발원 독도연구센터 책임연구원인 유미림(柳美林) 박사는 최근 이 개발원이 발간하는
‘해양수산동향’ 1250호에서 “조선 후기 박세당(朴世堂·1629~1703)이 쓴 ‘울릉도’를 분석한
결과, 우산도는 울릉도가 아닌 독도를 지칭하는 것으로 밝혀졌다”고 말했다... 조선 후기 주요 학자
중의 한 사람인 서계(西溪) 박세당의 기록 ‘울릉도’를 분석한 결과는 달랐다. 이 글은 박세당의
11대 후손이 2001년 한국학중앙연구원에 기탁한 ‘서계 종택 고문서’ 중 ‘서계잡록’에 실려 있는
필사본으로, 지금까지 사료의 존재가 일반에게 알려지지 않았었다. 박세당은 이 글에서 배를 타고
울릉도에 갔다가 돌아온 승려로부터 전해들은 얘기를 기록하면서 이렇게 언급했다.“대개 두 섬(울릉도와
우산도)이 그다지 멀지 않아 한번 큰 바람이 불면 닿을 수 있는 정도다. 우산도는 지세가 낮아,
날씨가 매우 맑지 않거나 최고 정상에 오르지 않으면 (울릉도에서) 보이지 않는다(不因海氣極淸朗,
不登最高頂, 則不可見."
-
^ Lee Han-Key.
"Korea's
Territorial Rights to Tokdo in History and International
Law". pp, 3-4
-
^ Wada Haruki
和田春樹. "鬱陵島(ウルルン島-ウルルンド)から竹島(独島-トクド)はどのように見えるか計算で推定(シミュレーション)".
-
^ Gyungbuk
Daily (경북일보). "Dokdo
Visible to the Unaided Eye (경북도 파견 김철환씨 사진 공개 울릉도서 독도 모습
뚜렷이 보여)". "울릉군청에 근무하다가 현재 경상북도 환경해양산림국에 파견근무중인
김철환(43)씨... 는 지난 2004년과 2007년에 울릉도에서 촬영된 독도사진 2 점과 지난
2006년 독도에서 촬영한 울릉도 사진을 공개했다... 김 씨는 1968년 일본의 국토지리원이
"울릉도에서 독도는 보이지않는다"는 주장을 반박하기 위해 지난1999년에도 수개월간의 시도 끝에 북면
천부리 석포마을(해발360m)에서 사진촬영에 성공, 일본국토지리원의 허구성을 알렸다. 김씨는 맑은
날이면 울릉도에서 87.4km 떨어진 독도를 육안으로 볼 수 있는 날은 1년 중 30~40 일
정도이며 해발 100 m 이상 동쪽고지에서 어디서나 육안 조망이 가능하다고 설명했다."
-
^
Usan-guk was annexed in 512 CE.
-
^ "MBC
Pohang 29th anniversary special documentary Usan-guk
"우산국 보기" (movie file)". "Petroglyphs depicting
whaling expeditions discovered in Uljin, South Gyungsang
Province, Korea, attest to the antiquity of Korean
navigation skills in the Sea of Japan not later than
early bronze age Korea. Lee, Won-Sik, Director of Ennin
Ancient Naval Technology Research Institute (원인고대선박연구소),
says, 'Prehistoric Koreans built ships strong enough to
withstand whaling expeditions and long-range
navigation... Due to the diffusion of naval technology,
ships in east coast Shilla and west coast Japan shared
an essentially identical design.'"
Bangudae Petroglyphs: "Other depictions of whales
show it carrying calves... This type of stone-working
technique suggests that the engravings were made towards
the end of the Neolithic or the start of the
Bronze Age."
-
^ "What
Whale species are represented in Ban'gudae Petroglyphs?
(반구대 바위그림에는 어떤 고래가 있을까?)". "A variety of petroglyphs
depicting cetaean species occur in Ban'gudae;
distinguishing features of the Korean
Gray Whale (Eschrichtius robustus), the
Humpback Whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), the
Killer Whale (Orcinus orca), and the
Fin Whale (Balaenoptera physalus) are depicted with
vivid realism. Furthermore, scences of whale hunting
using harpoons and throw nets reveal the details of a
typical hunting expedition; anatomical cross sections of
whale game is also noteworthy. (반구대에는 고래와 관련된 다양한 바위그림이
등장한다. 귀신고래, 혹등고래, 범고래, 긴 수염고래 등 종류별 고래의 특징이 사실적으로 새겨져
있다. 뿐만 아니라 투창이나 투망을 이용해 고래를 잡았던 당시의 생활상이 확인되고 고래의 해체
단면도까지 확인된다.)"
-
^ "Korean
naval techonology in the Three Kingdoms Period (한국 배의
역사: 삼국시대)". A summary description of photos:
archeological evidence unearthed in Japan shows
haniwa clay models of vessels in
Gaya fshion. History records the Baekje Ajikki's
transmission of Bakje shipbuilding to Japan, while
Shilla technicians were invited to Japan to assist in
advanced ship building. Korean naval superiority before
Japanese modernization was proven during the
Seven-Year War.
-
^ The absence
of the identification as the
Korean Government in Exile or the
Interim Korean Government is due to that the United
States Army Military Government in Korea had decalred
itself the only legitimate government on the Korean
peninsula, rendering illegal any other existing
government claiming soverignty over Korea.
-
^ HAM Sok Hon[3][4].
"1.3.
A Corrupt Christian Regime and Inefficient Government".
"In south Korea numerous political parties sprang up. As
early as August 16, 1945, some Koreans formed a
Committee for the Preparation of Korean Independence,
and [s:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuh_Woon-Hyung|Yo
Unhyong] (Lyuh Woonhyung: 1885-1947) organised the
left-wing Korean People's Republic (KPR). But on
entering south Korea, the American commander [s:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_R._Hodge|Lt.
Gen. Hodge] declined to acknowledge any sort of
political organisation, stressing that
USAMGIK was the 'only' government. USAMGIK
suppressed any kind of political movement from above,
disbanded the People's Committees, ordered the KPR
dissolved, and annulled the [s:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_Government_of_the_Republic_of_Korea|Provisional
Government], headed by the nationalist leader Kim Ku."
-
^ Bryan Robert
Gibby,. "Fighting
in a Korean War: The American Advisory Missions from
1946-1953". pp. 23-24: "To be fair to the Americans,
Hodge's task to maintain order was vague: 'suppress
activities of individuals and organizations which may be
inimical to the operations of the occupation force.'
Hodge also had the military task to receive the
surrender of Japanese forces, disarm them, and
repatriate them as soon as possible. Beyond that, his
mandate for political, social, or economic
reconstruction was ambiguous.17 As a result,
circumstances forced Hodge to play for time, which had
nearly catastrophic results. Immediately upon Japan's
capitulation, fearful colonial officials in Korea had
attempted strike a deal with prominent Koreans. They
convinced a moderate Korean,
Yo Un-hyong, to accept responsibility for
maintaining order while awaiting the tardy Americans. Yo
agreed, but only under conditions that would exclude any
Japanese or pro-Japanese Korean from exercising
influence or power.18 From Liberation Day (15 August) to
8 September, Yo and his left-leaning organization, the
Committee for the Preparation of Korean Independence,
effectively governed Korea and managed to control
violence while planting the seeds of national feeling.
On 6 September, Yo's partisans even declared the birth
of the Korean People’s Republic.19 This act unsettled
Hodge's sense of good order, particularly as military,
quasi-military, youth group organizations that answered
to no central authority proliferated. In any event, the
United States Army Forces in Korea (USAFIK), which
included both the XXIV Corps and the military
government, was supposed to be the central authority,
and Hodge wanted to make sure there was little doubt of
that. To erase any doubts, Hodge unceremoniously dumped
Yo, explaining 'There is only one government in South
Korea – the
United States Army Military Government.'20"
-
^ 1948/9
[USNARA/894.014/9-1648]
-
^ ""Request
for Arrangement of Lands Between Korea and Japan," by
the Patriotic Old Men's Association, Seoul, Korea,
August 5, 1948". A reproduction of a verbatim copy
made by the Office of POLAD (Political Advisor of
Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers). The title page
properly identifies the nature of the document as
formally unofficial yet reflecting the dominant Korean
view.
-
^ cf.
Minquiers and Ecrehos Case: "[T]he occupation of the
principal islands of an archipelago must also be deemed
to include the occupation of islets and rocks in the
same archipelago, which have not been actually occupied
by another State."
-
^ Lee Seok-Woo,
op. cit. p. 13, quotes the Eritrea-Yemen
Arbitration: "[T]he unity theory might find a modest and
suitable place, for the Mohabbakahs have always been
considered as one group, sharing the same legal
destiny."
-
^ ""The
June 8, 1948 Bombing of Dokdo Island"". also
published in Transactions of the Royal Asiatic Society -
Korea Branch, Vol. 78 (2003), pp. 21-33. International
Journal of Korean History, Vol. 4, (August 2003), pp.
261-278.
-
^ "독도
폭격 사건: 공두업옹의 증언 (현 83세)". "옹의 증언에 의하면 서도 쪽에서 조업을 하던
배들은 모조리 가라앉았으며 어부들은 태극기를 흔들고 폭격을 중지시키려 하며, 도주를 시도했으나
역부족이었다. 생존한 배는 강원도 소속의 배 1척과 공옹의 배였으며 그나마 폭파된 파편과 충격으로
인해 성치 못한 상태였다 한다.지금까지 희생자의 수는 30여명으로 알려졌으나 증언자의 말에 따르면
당시 서도 부근에서 격침된 배에 승선한 인원들은 1척당 5-8명이어야만 조업이 가능한 배들이었기에
최소한 150 ~320명 정도의 인원이 이때 희생된 것으로 파악된다."
-
^ ""1948년
6월 독도폭격사건" (The Bombing Incident of June, 1948)". Ju
Ganghyeon, Director of Korea Ocean Research and
Development Institute and visiting scholar with Jeju
University, quotes a survey conducted by international
jurist Hong, Sung-geun.
-
^ Hong
Sung-Geun 홍성근. "진상규명과
주요쟁점_홍성근.hwp&sFname=독도폭격사건의 진상규명과 주요쟁점_홍성근.hwp 독도폭격사건의
진상규명과 주요쟁점 (hwp reader required)". 2001 study
reported before the National Assembly, Republic of Korea
-
^ "8.
Concerning the designation of Dokdo as a bombing range
for the US Forces in Japan". When Yamamoto asked,
"As for the designation of the military practice area
for the Occupation Forces, I think that if the vicinity
of Takeshima is designated as a practice area, it would
help Japan get confirmation of its territorial
sovereignty over the island. Please tell me if that is
what the Ministry of Foreign Affairs intends," Ishihara
replied, "It seems that things are sought after in
various ways, largely from such an idea."
-
^ "John
M. Steeves, Despatch No. 659, "Koreans on Liancourt
Rocks"". Historical context, summary, and source
documents offered by Mark Lovmo. See the declassified
despatch in para. 1952; 10/3/52.
-
^ ibid.
-
^ Mark Lovmo. "The
United States' Involvement with Dokdo Island (Liancourt
Rocks):".
-
^ "The
Historical Facts of the Dokdo Takeshima Island Dispute:".
-
^ Mark Lovmo. "The
United States' Involvement with Dokdo Island (Liancourt
Rocks):".
-
^ Mark Lovmo
op. cit.
-
^ "South
Korea to recall Japan envoy".
BBC (2008-07-14).
Retrieved on
2008-07-14.
-
^
日韩国内问题引爆岛屿纷争 (in Chinese) Phoenix TV Hong Kong
2008年07月16日
-
^
"South
Korea Beefs Up Patrols Near Disputed Isles",
REUTERS (2008-07-15).
- ^
a
b "Japan-S
Korea island row escalates",
Al Jazeera (2008-07-18).
-
^
또 쇠파이프… 물대포… 폭력시위 재연 (in Korean) 18 July 2008
-
^
Jung, Sung-ki (2008-07-20).
"Seoul
May Take Hardline Steps on East Sea Islets",
The Korea Times.
- ^
a
b
Jung, Sung-ki (2008-07-20).
"Dokdo
to Become Inhabited Islets",
The Korea Times.
- ^
a
b "S
Korea rejects talks over islands",
Al Jazeera (2008-07-23).
-
^ "Daily
Press Briefing, Gonzalo R. Gallegos, Acting Deputy
Spokesman, Washington, DC, July 28, 2008". Bureau of
Public Affairs, U.S. State Department. Retrieved on
2008-07-29.
-
^ "US
restores Korean status of islets at center of
Japan-SKorea row", AFP (2008-07-30).
-
^ Klug, Foster
(2008-07-30).
"US
backtracks on name of disputed Asian islands",
Associated Press.
-
^ "Japan
tries to confirm Bush's Dokdo orders", KBS (2008-07-31).
-
^ Pelofsky,
Jeremy (2008-07-30).
"U.S.
backs away from S.Korea-Japan island dispute",
Reuters.
-
^ Hans, Holly,
Nichols, Rosenkrantz (2008-07-30).
"Bush
orders reversal of map change after South Korean protest",
Bloomberg.com.
-
^ "Uri
d'ang Dokdo, Daemado nun Joson d'ang Jung(guk) 15 segi
jido balgyon".
Dong'A Daily (2005-03-16).
Retrieved on
2008-08-06.
Coordinates:
37°14′30″N
131°52′00″E
/ 37.24167,
131.866667