The Korea TImes has another two articles out about the Dokdo issue. It appears that the Korea Times can’t get enough of the Dokdo dispute. The first article gives advice on how to deal with the publicity campaign coming from Japan. I found this line in the article interesting though:
According to the center, what the Japanese government clearly wants is to drag this debate over to the international community and to the International Court of Justice.
“But Dokdo has clearly been part of Korea. No country would consider taking such a clear-cut issue to an international court. Japan wants to take the debate to the international court but we see it as Japan’s publicity ploy, to give an impression in the world community that this is a genuine territorial dispute,” according to the center. [Korea Times]
Heck if Dokdo is so clearly part of Korea then why not take it to the international court right now and end all of this nonsense? Could it be because it is not so clear cut as the writer claims?
The second article in the Korea Times by someone named Norman Cherkis I thought was actually pretty good though I disagree with his main theme that the Dokdo dispute is driven by Japan wanting to claim natural gas reserves:
Neither Korea nor Japan has major hydrocarbon energy resources. Below the East Sea area of the Pacific Ocean and indeed, most of seas in the world, however, there exists, in various locations and quantities “gas hydrates,” or methane gas frozen with water, on top of and beneath the sea floor.
The existence of “frozen gas” on the seafloor has come to light over the past 35 years. When collected from the sea methane gas that has frozen around a crystal of water, will burn when touched by a flame, momentarily creating “frozen fire.”
But it also evaporates into the atmosphere as soon as it reaches the melting point, leaving only a drop of fresh water in its place. It is formed by complex chemical processes, but once deposited on or in the sea floor, it could hold a partial solution to a nation’s energy dependence.
The problem, however, is that it is not yet technologically possible to extract methane hydrates in commercial quantities from the sea floor and use it as fuel. [Korea Times]
This theory however doesn’t explain why the Shimane Prefecture is the one that has been driving the Dokdo/Takeshima issue in Japan. The Shimane Prefecture is driving the issue because of fishing rights:
A century ago, Shimane Prefecture claimed Takeshima island as part of its territory. The remote island is located in the Sea of Japan. On Thursday, a Shimane prefectural assembly committee approved a bill to designate Feb. 22 as “Takeshima Day.”
It aims to formally establish territoriality over the island, which is under de facto South Korean rule. The Shimane assembly’s plenary session is expected to adopt the bill next week.
It is not hard to see why Shimane wants this bill passed. An agreement between Japan and South Korea recognizes a wide area of the Sea of Japan as “provisional waters” under joint administration, where fishermen of both countries are allowed to operate unencumbered by the dispute over sovereignty. This area does not include the 12- nautical-mile zone around the island, which South Korea claims as part of its territorial waters.
Fishing communities in Shimane and other prefectures along the Sea of Japan coastline have been worried for some time that they are not getting a fair deal. They say South Korean ships are overfishing in the area.
It was these anxieties that fueled Shimane’s move to declare Takeshima Day on the centennial of its land-grab. In short, the bill reflects the concerns of local communities.
South Korean fishermen have been poaching in Japanese waters for years and have gotten away with it to the extent that they even kidnapped two South Korean coastguard personnel that tried to apprehend them. That is why the government of Shimane Prefecture which is very dependent on its fishing industry have been driving the Dokdo issue in order to get it greater visibility within Japan. The South Korean overreactions have played right into the hands of the Shimane Prefecture folks because now the Dokdo issue has gotten greater awareness within the Japanese public and become a national issue that now national politicians are beginning to advance.
The whole issue of natural gas is something I have seen played out more in the Korean media in order to create an excuse other then the fishing issue of why Japan is advancing the Dokdo dispute. This whole stupid issue started over fish and has now turned into a nationalistic cause by politicians looking for political advantage that will make any negotiations to solve the original fishing problem next to impossible.
AS HIGH TECH CLIMBS SO...
1:04 am on August 20th, 2008 1
What surprises me more than his gas argument is that Norman Cherkis voices this unqualified argument: “Nonetheless the continuous occupation of Dokdo firmly establishes Korea as the rightful owner of the islets.”
Korea loves this argument, however the argument ‘possession is nine tenths of the law’ has no place in geopolitics. With this argument we can say Korea was never occupied by Japan, rather Korea was a part of Japan as it was fully possessed by Japan and thus apologies and compensation from Japan are moot.
Dokdo is one of many non-violent border disputes around the globe which can only be solved diplomatically among disputing parties. Squatting will not solve the issue. Until Korea decides to pursue a more logical route to resolution, Dokdo will remain in dispute. If Korea wishes to validate its borders it needs to with substantive diplomacy.
Of course a never ending dispute has its advantages. It is an easy source of nationalistic euphoria, and has become endeared by the Pols who need this issue to distract for the rampant corruption and mismanagement in government.
[Reply]
4:14 am on August 20th, 2008 2
GIKOREA, Why do you call the Liancourt rocks/Takeshima the Korean name of dukdo? I guess according to (some people) America should called MEGOOK too? This is your blog but I feel shame when Americans (MEGOOK to Americans without shame) should be called America, and according to the same naming convention Takeshima/ Liancourt rocks should be called Liancourt rocks/Takeshima.
[Reply]
1:26 pm on August 20th, 2008 3
I know why the Korea Times can’t get enough of Dokdo. The question expats should ask themselves is, why can’t we?
[Reply]
2:25 pm on August 20th, 2008 4
GI Korea… right on the money…
“if Dokdo is so clearly part of Korea then why not take it to the international court right now and end all of this nonsense? Could it be because it is not so clear cut as the writer (or Korea) claims?
If Korea is SO SURE of its claim… go to the ICJ!
Japan has offered the independant arbitration, and is therefore WILLING TO RISK IT ALL…
Go for it Korea… try the test!
If your history is real, YOU WIN.
If not… well then, bad luck. Oh yeah,. and END OF THE ARGUMENT.
[Reply]
7:18 pm on August 20th, 2008 5
First article by reporter Michael Ha is “ho-hum” a rehash of everything said before. Nothing new. In fact, I’d quibble with him about when the Japanese central government took a stand on Dokdo on their official website. I was living in Kunsan when they did and that was years ago.
However, the second article is atleast NOT a by a “hobbyist,” but the a qualified “expert” whose views I appreciate hearing from. His area of expertise is in the maritime affairs area according to a Google search of his articles and involvement.
As to taking this to the ICJ, it won’t happen as long as the ROK “effectively controls” — meaning it occupies the islet. However, about a month ago, the ROK slyly decided to stop using “effective control” in its statements and documents — instead using the terminology of “territorial defense”. So in essence, though the ROK does maintain effective control, it is not using that terminology any longer to prevent the Japanese from making such claims against them. Aren’t diplomatic word games wonderful?
This Dokdo affair will drag on for years to come.
Also I would quibble that Lee was the first to use Dokdo to turn the attention away from his domestic problems. Instead, it was the progressives who brought this issue up first intending to use it as a rallying point issue as the anti-US beef was dying, but LMB made the best of the situation foisted upon him and turned it to his advantage. Yes, he played the nationalist card, but look at how he’s doing it. VERRRY different from the Roh Moo-hyun hystrionics. Atleast he’s trying to keep it in the diplomatic courts — instead of making it personal like supporting the pheasant bashers and flag burners. It seems to be working as the people see that he is doing SOMETHING and atleast has a long-range plan — not like Roh.
[Reply]
3:49 am on August 21st, 2008 6
#4, of course Japan wants to go to the ICJ. Otherwise they can’t ever get Dokdo, so they have nothing to lose. Korea would stand to gain nothing but lose territory by taking that option.
The best thing would be for the saber-rattling conservatives in Japan to knock it off. They exploit the issue as surely, albeit more savvily, as Koreans do.
[Reply]
5:40 am on August 21st, 2008 7
Flat Knacker,
I think Japan should give the example: They should take the Diaoyu Island dispute with China to the ICJ.
Good luck Japan.
[Reply]
5:54 am on August 21st, 2008 8
What an irony.
If Japan takes the Diaoyu Island dispute with China to the ICJ and wins the dispute, that could legitimate the Korean claim on Dokdo, since the most effective argument they have to win the case would be the actual possession of the island, unless they have strong historical arguments to back their claim.
The Japanese ICJ argument is just rhetoric. They know it will never happen, but if they really insist about it, they should show the example first. It’s that simple.
[Reply]
11:37 am on August 21st, 2008 9
“most effective argument they have to win the case would be the actual possession of the island”
Korean logic
If possession=legal owner, then why do Koreans whine about Japans “illegial” occupation of Korea. Japan possessed her, so it was legal. 
Silly Korean logic.
[Reply]
1:00 pm on August 21st, 2008 10
“Dr. Yu”.
Thanks for your insight.Please note the blog post was relating to Korea, Japan, and Dokdo/Takeshima.
There is no relevance to your assertions about Diaoyu Island/Senkaku Islands or China.
This is off-topic.
I am also with “Shattered” on this… if ‘actual possession of the island’ (or any other land) is the rule by which the world was governed, then there would be many wars.
No… this is not an acceptable position.
Only arbitration (by an independant body) based on fact, historical record, and science can resolve this. Emotion is not any of the above.
[Reply]
2:34 pm on August 21st, 2008 11
I vote for Kim Jong-il droppin’ a couple of Taep’odong-2’s on them bad boys.
[Reply]
10:58 pm on August 21st, 2008 12
“Only arbitration (by an independant body) based on fact, historical record, and science can resolve this. Emotion is not any of the above.”
Excelent argument. Japan now has the right argument to win the Diaoyu Island dispute in the ICJ. Good luck.
[Reply]
7:08 pm on August 22nd, 2008 13
#6…
“of course Japan wants to go to the ICJ. Otherwise they can’t ever get Dokdo, so they have nothing to lose. Korea would stand to gain nothing but lose territory by taking that option.”
Well noted… Japan prefers to go to the ICJ, rather than have a military showdown, which is against their constitution. Send troops to the rocks (as Koreas did in the ’50s) is ‘gun-boat diplomacy’, and not in the interests of peace in the region.
Of course you missed the point of my comment and the posting.
If Kores has its facts correct, its history documented and accurate, then there is no chance for them to lose.
BUT to not go to the ICJ cast doubts over Korea’s case.
If Korea fears losing in arbitration, then they must be worried about the validity of thier case.
Let it stand the test of independant scrutiny.
Or are you worried of a repeat of other fakery…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hwang_Woo-Suk
[Reply]
7:11 pm on August 22nd, 2008 14
Dr Yu.
As before…
The blog post was relating to Korea, Japan, and Dokdo/Takeshima, and there is no relevance to Diaoyu/Senkaku or China.
This is off-topic.
Do I need to do this again?
[Reply]
10:46 pm on August 22nd, 2008 15
Flat Knacker
As before…
The blog post was relating to Korea, Japan, and Dokdo/Takeshima, and there is no relevance to Hwang Woo Suk.
This is off-topic.
Do I need to do this again?
[Reply]
12:47 am on August 23rd, 2008 16
I know this is off topic, but it gives an idea of why Koreans get emotional on any Japanese provocation.
Nose Grave, Offspring of Ferocity and Brutality of Japanese.
In Kyoto, the old capital of Japan, there is a large domed grave called “Mimizuka” (ear grave).
It is a historical evidence of the past crimes of Japanese invaders whose ferocity and brutality were their physical quality.
In June 1597 during the Imjin Patriotic War (1592-1598), with the war protracted and the Japanese invaders stranded in the southern area of Kyongsang Province, in face of the stubborn resistance of the Korean people, Hideyoshi Toyotomi, the ringleader of Japan, issued the following order:
Cut the noses of Koreans instead of their heads as a man has two ears and one nose. A soldier is allowed to capture Koreans after collecting one sho of noses.
On this order, a naval unit of Japan slaughtered tens of thousands of Koreans in 10-odd days, while the boss of the unit, Wakizaga, killed more than 2,000 people single-handed and cut their noses, boasting his “excellent performance.”
Privates also killed Koreans right and left, irrespective of sex, to render “military services”. They murdered even babies and cut off their noses.
Toyotomi nominated seven nose-collecting officers and dispatched them to Korea. They issued a note of confirmation. To cite one example: “3,487 noses in total taken over.”
After the noses were salted and packed in big wooden barrels, pots and straw bags by 1,000-3,800, they were carried to Nagoya by sea and then to Osaka. They were reloaded to horse or ox carts and carried to Kyoto through a highway.
Toyotomi gave instructions to drag out villagers and make them welcome the carts along the road, lauding the “military achievements,” and bury the noses in the “nose grave” after checking and confirming them. In this way 185,738 noses of Koreans were buried in the grave.
In the later period, the Japanese rulers renamed the “nose grave” “ear grave”, trying to throw the ferocity and brutality of the Japanese into oblivion.
However, the “nose grave”, without a parallel in the history of aggression, tells that the Japanese invaders were the most brutal man-slaughters.
[Reply]
10:39 pm on August 23rd, 2008 17
G.I. Korea.
The Japanese have nothing to blubber about. Listening to Shimane cry the blues about not having enough ocean to fish makes me wanna hurl.
Japan is the 2nd richest nation in the world. Japan has the 5th largest EEZ in the world that totals 4,500,000 square kilometers and yet they are trying to nickel and dime their way westward to Ulleungdo Island, indisputably Korean land since the 6th Century, and Dokdo’s most proximal land. Korea’s EEZ amounts to a mere 300,000 square kms even much less than Japan claims around tiny Marcus Island.
The most surprising thing to me is that none of the Koreans have ever pointed out to Japan that the current boundary enforced by the ROK is quite fair when we look at the distance from nearest Korean and Japanese adjacent islands and landfalls.
Check this map.
http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/12-mile-limit.gif
And then see this page.
http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-not-japanese-1.html
ICJ ? No way. No leader in their right mind would allow any foreign organization step in and define her territorial limits. Korea’s been down that road twice, never again.
[Reply]
2:19 pm on September 18th, 2008 18
[...] It seems like the Korea Times just loves having foreigners right in about Dokdo. [...]