독도 (Dokdo/獨島): [I have no sarcastic subtitle for this]
Background: Japan's been claiming Dokdo since the ROK's founding, and lately it decided to take a different approach. The issue was basically unknown in Japan, and they recently implemented a plan to include in public school curricula that Dokdo is Japanese. Coincidentally, it was around this time that the US Library of Congress considered changing its registry from Dokdo as Korean land, to the Liancourt Rocks as disputed territory. This was delayed by a Korean-Canadian librarian. Also, it was discovered that the US Board of Geographical Names had changed its entry from Dokdo as Korean land, to the Liancourt Rocks as disputed territory. In addition, in its list of other names, it places Takeshima (Japan's name for the island) before Dokdo. Need I say that this doesn't make alphabetical sense? President Bush, on learning of it from the Korean Embassy, worked with Secretary Rice to change the entry.
This issue has been going on for years. There are many old maps, both Korean & Japanese, that recognize what is supposedly the island under many different names; furthermore, they place it in different locations around 울릉도 (Ulleungdo), the larger island west of Dokdo. These inaccuracies can easily be explained when one accounts for dynastic changes, local vs. official nomenclature, and the limited cartographical knowledge available at the time. Japan's proposed numerous times to take the matter before international court, but Korea's refused.
Conclusion: Let's put it like this. Korea claims that Dokdo, under the name of Usando, was first mentioned in The History of the Three Kingdoms during the Shilla Dynasty. As time progressed, different names have been given to the island, as it was uninhabited: Sambongdo (삼봉도, or 3-peak island), Seokdo (독섬 - Deoksam, or rocky island, is translated into into Hanja as both Dokdo and Seokdo), and Gajido (seal island). While old maps place Dokdo in the wrong spots, the fact remains that, despite cartographical errors, the islands under their various names were recognized by the Korean government as Korean territory. That's the Korean side. Yet in my limited research, nothing in Korean records indicates that Dokdo is officially Korean territory, much as I'd like to believe it. The fact that I know neither Japanese nor Chinese only stresses my inability to properly research available documents.
March 1936 Japanese Army General Staff office mapThis marks the island as Korean
Japan also claims historical title to Dokdo; if that was the case, why do old, official Japanese maps recognize it as Korean territory? Furthermore, why did Japan annex it in 1905, if it has been Japanese territory for centuries, as some claim? Yet the fact that Japan recognized the land as Korean does not mean that Korea had ever claimed the land for itself. Some radicals claim that Koreans didn't know of the island's existence, but this is ridiculous; one can easily see the island from Ulleungdo on a clear day. Korea's knowledge of this island does not mean that it had formally claimed it as Korean land; however, this could possibly have been offset by Korea considering it de facto Korean territory.
My perspective is that neither side has made a foolproof argument that would stand up in court. I type this with regret because in my heart I believe that it is Korean land, but my head tells me that it's still debatable.
From a pro-Korean perspective, Korea should start thinking internationally; refusing to go before international court makes the world think it hasn't a case. Of course, it makes sense that the ROK wouldn't want to appear before international court. First of all, previous International Court of Justice decisions have favoured action over historical legitimacy. If the ICJ goes with this precedent, Korea may 'lose' (these decisions are non-binding) possession of the island. Hopefully (here's where this becomes very biased), though, the ICJ would take into account the fact that Korea, basically governed by Japan when Japan annexed the island, and didn't really have any say in the matter. In fact, when local Korean officials learned that Japan had annexed the island, they sent in protests to the central government. Why would they do that unless they understood it to be Korean land?
Furthermore, despite Korea's miraculous economic development, most people would favour Japan just because they are more familiar with its culture. The world is full of Japanophiles, just because of sushi, Honda and that ridiculous Pokemon or whatever anime is popular right now (not downing sushi or Honda, definitely downing Pokemon). Korea is still in many ways the hermit kingdom. 한류, or the 'Korean wave,' hasn't spread far outside of Asia. Korea needs to realize that the majority of developed nations (and much international power, rightly or wrongly) lie within Western civilization. Because Japan has spread its culture, and because Japan appears more westernized, western countries feel closer to Japan; people feel more comfortable with that which they recognize. Korea has already spread its companies into western nations; now it needs to spread its culture. (Hint, Korea: appearing like a developing nation on international television by rioting and assaulting police officers doesn't help your case.)
This matter needs to be resolved somehow, whether by sharing the island, or by throwing additional effort into researching the matter to conclusively decide the debate. I know this is obvious, but recent peninsular developments only increase the need for the ROK and Japan to work together closely. Kim Jong-Il's deteriorating condition, which the DPRK continues to deny, could lead to his death or incapability to govern the land. (I use the term 'govern' very loosely; I consider neither throwing people into gulags -- or worse -- for the smallest offenses nor obsessing about nuclear weaponry, expensive cognac and toys while one's population starves effective governing. But that's another matter, as well as a really long sentence. Apologies.)
If and when Kim Kong-Ill loses control of the DPRK, most likely the country will either be thrown into chaos, or the military will adopt a hard-line stance to solidify its power. Already the DPRK diplomatic pendulum is swinging back towards neuroticism. Each scenario poses a threat for both the ROK and Japan. The DPRK displays deep-seated resentment against both nations, and has threatened both nations on multiple occasions, through the use of military threats, or the kidnapping of nationals. A treaty with China promising mutual military aid raises the stakes. The ROK and Japan must resolve their differences and work together to protect themselves. Strange bedfellows, perhaps, but, in my opinion, necessary.
