The following news article comes from today's Yomiuri Online. I learned of the news from Naver's "Enjoy Korea" Web site, which is a Korean site. The news has not been reported on Japanese TV. I do not understand why most Japanese media ignore this kind of news, but it seems the Koreans never fail to report it for the Japanese.
The Education, Science and Technology Ministry will incorporate a description
of the Takeshima islets in the Sea of Japan, over which Japan and South Korea
claim sovereignty, as "Japanese territory" in its handbook on the revised
curriculum guideline for social studies classes at middle schools, The Yomiuri
Shimbun learned Saturday. (May. 18, 2008 The Yomiuri Shimbun)
I am glad to hear that our government has finally started doing its job.
The government is doing it's job Kaneganese? Is their job to continually sabotage good relations between Japan's neighbouring countries?
ReplyDeleteWhat I see is a major rift between 2 political groups in the Japanese government. One group is trying to move beyond this dispute and the other wants to remain mired in the past. The Japanese right wingers are continually souring relations between Korea and Japan on a couple of rocks they have no chance of ever owning again.
When the Korean media gets a hold of this their going to have a field day. The Koreans will get pissed off, and tours to Dokdo Island will double. Whenever tension is increases on the Dokdo issue it really spurs the Koreans to fight even harder.
Steve,
ReplyDeleteThe only and righteous way for the good relationship of the two countries is Korea's appology for grabbing the island unlawfully and to return it to Japan.
Only Korean people were made to believe Rhee Syngmann's lie but the world knows that it was unlawful deed. (Of coure, Steve, you are not included in the "world" here. You are included in Korean people because you are woking hard for the Korean government.)
So I still have a hope that the new president will change the Rhee Syngmann's policy. It will be the best way for both Korea and for Japan.
Kaneganese,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the posting.
As I read the article in Japanese, I noticed that the English version lacks in the expression concerning the reason why Japan hadn't mentioned the islets in textbooks.
The original text is as follows: "竹島の記述は日韓関係への配慮などで見送られてきた" (The description of Takeshima had been postponed because of concern about the relationship of Japan and Korea).
Japan had refrained from saying it loudly for the good relationship between Korea and Japan, it was consideration for Korea. But Korea had not understood the situation.
So it's an adequate time to say it loudly.
I work for the Korean government??!!
ReplyDeleteThat's pretty funny Pacifist!! While it's no big secret I back Korea's claim to Dokdo, I don't "work for" the Korean government.
A few months ago, the North Gyeongsan Provincial Government requested they link to my website. I was flattered and naturally I allowed them to me.
DokdoSite
So the Koreans and I are not part of the "world" eh Pacifist? Your attitude pretty much symbolizes the lunatic fringe of Japanese right wing politics.
Syngman Rhee's "Peace Line" was not some draconian boundary dreamed up by a greedy dictator Pacifist. The Rhee line is almost identical to the Japan Korea boundary drawn by SCAP, the UK, and New Zealand. The Japanese trespassed on this territory and naturally the Koreans responded in a manner any country would if they thought their territorial limits were being violated. The bottom line is Japan had disrespected Korea's territorial limits for 500 years and Korea was fed up.
Please read the truth about the Rhee Line on my latest page. Put all of the "Rusk Papers" and other exchanges into proper context and don't be mislead by Japan's MOFA's rubbish 2 paragraph summary of seven years of Allied deliberations regarding post WWII Japan's territorial limits
SanfranTruth
"Pacifist" what an ironic name for a Japanese Takeshima lobbyist who insists we draw Korea's territorial limits back to Japan's expansionist colonial era!!
Pretty funny.....
Thank you, pacifist
ReplyDeleteI've just came back from local library to check the article. It was on the front page plus on 4th page for brief explanation. I'll add more to describe whole situation and brief history of this handbook issue so that brainless radical Korean nationalists and anti-Japanese racists won't jump to the conclusion that this is "right wingers" ' activity.
Steve,
ReplyDeleteWhy your website doesn't feature the important record that Korean ambassador negotiated with USA?
Why do you forget Korea (Rhee Syngmann) wanted Liancourt rocks, Tsushima and even an imaginary island?
This fact illustrates how Rhee was eager to grab Japanese lands. But you intentionally omit this important thing.
Pacifist, I didn't include every document from all of the negotiations. There are many more I'd like to include but I just didn't want it to be more than about three or four pages long. It is true that Rhee wanted Tsushima, it is also true that the Japanese wanted Ulleungdo, so what?
ReplyDeleteJapan's foreign ministry and the posters here are trying to tell us the Japan Korea Peace Treaty was.
A. Binding on Korea.
B. A researched study on historical ownership of the islands.
C. A declaration that Liancourt Rocks was Japanese territory.
I'm very proud that my page exposes the lies of Japan's MOFA and we can see that all of their claims I've listed above are false.
R.I.P Japan's false claims of the Japan Peace Treaty. Another Japanese Takeshima lobbying effort bites the dust.
Concerning the news Japan had decided to clearly write that Takeshima is Japan's territory" in the guidance book for junior high schools （学習指導要領）, Yomiuri's online news today reported that according to Yonhap news Korean authority told "if it was confirmed as a fact, we would take an appropriate measure" ....
ReplyDeleteIt is quite natural to say both of the countries insist that the disputed land is theirs. Actually, Japan didn't blame Korea because they write "Dokdo is Korean land" in their textbooks. If Korea blame Japan, it would be quite silly.