A little biased, but writing this helped me summarize this land dispute. During the research for this short writing, I was glad that many scholars found Dokdo as being part of the Korean territory.
The South Korean men’s soccer team won Bronze medal at the 2012 London Olympics but one player was not seen at the medal ceremony. He was banned by the IOC from participating the event and his medal was withheld by the committee. The reason being that he ran over the field waving a banner which said ‘Dokdo is our land’.
South Korea and Japan have long been disputing over this chain of small islands, Dokdo, located in the East Sea. This dispute is also one of the reasons to why there is intense anti-Japanese sentiment in Korea. The football player's action proves how much of a big deal this dispute is in the country. There are countless songs, paintings and poems that try to support Korea's authority over Dokdo and many celebrities have also risked their fame in Japan by holding events to claim that Dokdo belongs to Korea.
Japan's biggest claim to the islands is based on agreements with the Korean government during its colonisation of the Korean peninsula. In September 1905, Japan, after attaining its victory in the Russo-Japanese war, wanted to strengthen its empire's influence and power by occupying a weak country in Northeastern Asia, Korea. Through the Taft-Katsura Agreement, Japan expressed reasons for the occupation of Korea to the United States, who agreed not to interfere. In November, Ito Hirobumi, the prime minister of Japan, arrived at the Korean imperial palace with the Japan-Korea Protectorate Treaty in his hand and threatened the Korean emperor to sign the treaty. Japanese troops were also ordered to march around the palace in order to strengthen this threat. The Korean emperor, Gojong and the Korean officials had no choice but to sign the treaty which made Korea a protectorate of Japan. The treaty also made it easy for Japan to seize all Korean territories. After just four months, Japan announced its incorporation of Dokdo which they referred to as Takeshima.
Japan believes that the treaty was a peaceful negotiation between the two countries and that this is the reason why Japan is the rightful owner of Dokdo. However, as stated earlier, Korean officials were under a huge threat during the time of the signing of the treaty. This shows that they were not intending to give up their authority and pass the ownership to the Japanese, making Japan's occupation of Korea completely illegal. In addition to this, when the Korean Minister of Home Affairs heard about the incorporation of the islands, he responded by saying, "It is totally groundless for the Japanese to lay claim to Dokdo and I am shocked at the report". This statement also supports the idea that Korea's giving up of the title to Dokdo was forced by Japan. Moreover, Japan's claim to the sovereignty over the islands based on such incorporation agreements in fact makes the country admit that Korea was the first rightful owner of Dokdo. Therefore, this only weakens Japan's other arguments of it being the initial owner of the islands.
Even if the treaties that were signed during the annexation of Korea officially made Dokdo a part of Japanese territory, Korea gained independence from Japan in August 15, 1945. Thus, Korea has the right to regain all its territories that were taken by Japan during the colonial rule including Dokdo. As mentioned earlier, because Japan has almost admitted that the initial owner of Dokdo was Korea through its treaties and incorporation agreements, Korea can voice their desire to have Dokdo returned strongly.
Fortunately for Korea, the international community also believed that all Korean territories that were occupied illegally by Japan were to be returned. There are numerous international declarations and treaties which support that Japan was to lose its ownership of Dokdo. One of them is the Cairo declaration. When the victors of the World War II met at Cairo in November 1943, they not only decided to liberate Korea and make it an independent nation but also made talks about other territories invaded by Japan. After long talks, the Cairo declaration finally stated that "Japan will be expelled from all territories which she has taken by violence and greed". Dokdo perfectly fits as one of the "territories" mentioned in this statement because of the way Japan occupied the islands in 1906. Many historical documents also proved that Korean officials were strongly refusing against this occupation at the time. After the official victory of the Allies in 1945, the Potsdam declaration was issued. One of the terms was for Japan to accept the discussions made at the Cairo declaration and because the Japanese emperor did accept both his surrender and the Potsdam declaration, Dokdo was to return to Korea. In the following year, the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers (SCAP) issued SCAPIN no. 677 which stated that "Japan is defined to include the four main islands of Japan (Hokkaido, Honshu, Kyushu and Shikoku) and the approximately 1,000 smaller adjacent islands, including the Tsushima Islands…and excluding Utsuryo (Ullung) Island, Liancourt Rocks [Dokdo] (Take Island) and Quelpart (Saishu or Cheju) Island…". This article actually names the islands that Japan should lose ownership of. It clearly excludes Dokdo from being a part of Japan's territory.
On 24th of August 2012, Yoshihiko Noda, a former Japanese Prime minister, used the San Francisco treaty as one of the reasons to why Japan holds the ownership of Dokdo. He claimed, “The US Department of State turned down Korea’s request to include Dokdo within the Treaty articles relating to Korea’s territorial sovereignty when the San Francisco Peace Treaty was being drafted in July 19, 1951. Korea nevertheless declared the Seungman Rhee Line (Peace line) and has been illegally occupying Dokdo to this day”. This statement is true but it was Japan’s lobbying tactics that led to a change in U.S stance. Japan proposed to the United States through William J. Sebald, a pro-Japanese political advisor of General McArthur, to let U.S install weather and radar bases on Dokdo if it recognised the land as a Japanese territory. Therefore, decisions made by the U.S was based on military reasons rather than true evidence supporting Japan’s claim. Moreover, other Allied nations objected to this and viewed Dokdo as part of Korean territories. The U.S failed to convince these states which left the final draft of the treaty mark Dokdo neither as being part of Japanese territory nor as a Korean territory.
One of the possible solutions that have come up during the dispute was taking the case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Japan has actually proposed to do this several times but the offers were rejected by the South Korean government expressing that Dokdo is not a disputed land because it rightfully belongs to South Korea. The islets are currently administered by South Korea and 2,051 people have Dokdo as their permanent addresses. Taking the case to the ICJ would be admitting the territorial dispute of Dokdo when it has been governed by the South Korean government for years. Moreover, the nature of the ruling is disadvantageous to South Korea. The Minquiers and the Ecrehos case between Britain and France was dealt unfairly by the Court which supported the imperialist power, Britain, because of the reason that there was lack of protest from the French when the incorporation agreement was made (ICJ). The ICJ chose to ignore the historical evidences that supported the French and relied on the treaties, ruling in favour of the British. Thus, the South Korean government has a chance of losing the case to Japan because the ICJ clearly does not understand the concept of imperialism. Also, the ICJ is often criticised because of its lack of binding force. It is possible for the Security council to always veto the enforcement through resolutions and countries can simply ignore the decisions made by the ICJ. Therefore, even if the Court sees Dokdo as a South Korean territory, Japan can still deny this and there is still a chance of the dispute being continued.
Another solution that came up among the South Korean community was to increase the military forces in Dokdo. This will show South Korea’s strong will to protect the islets from being ‘taken away’ but this is a very sensitive case to both countries and increasing armed forces may result in a serious conflict between the countries. Japan has previously responded to the Korean Airlines’ decision to fly its A380 jet above the islets by forbidding all its foreign ministry staff members from using the airlines for a whole month. Thus, it is predictable that Japan will strongly respond to an increase in the armed forces of the South Korean military and this will further problematize the dispute.
The dispute is extremely difficult to solve and for Japan to stop its arguments based on distorted evidence South Korea needs to co-operate with other countries, especially Russia and China who are having similar territorial disputes with Japan. South Korea needs to increase its influence in the international community and through co-operating with other nations, it needs to fix the history that Japan has distorted. Only then, they will be able to successfully condemn the Japanese to drop their claim.
0 comments:
Post a Comment