The Korea Times has posted an August 7 article entitled, "Korea Needs to Do Much More to Defend Dokdo," in which Korean Dokdo researcher Lee Sang-tae makes a load of ridiculous claims about the islets (Liancourt Rocks). I already knew that Professor Lee could make ridiculous claims since I have his book, "Historical Evidence of Korean Sovereignty Over Dokdo," but I did not know he could be as ridiculous as he is in this Korea Times article. For example, look at the map that was posted with the article:
The map shows two islands off the east coast of Korea labeled as "Ulleungdo" (鬱陵島) and "Muleungdo" (武陵島). Also, next to Muleungdo is written "also called Usan" (一 云 于山). The caption for the map reads, "A map dating back to Korea's Joseon Dynasty (1392-1910) shows Ulleungdo Island and the Dokdo islets."
In Korea, if a map shows two islands in the Sea of Japan, Koreans seem to automatically claim that one of them is Dokdo, no matter where the island is located, what shape it is, or what name it is labeled. That is evidence of very good brainwashing. In the case of the above map, the article claims that Muleungdo was Dokdo, even though it is shown as only "one" island, not two, and is located to the southwest of Ulleungdo, rather than to the southeast. Dokdo, is essentially two small rock islets ninety-two kilometers to the southeast of Ulleungdo.
Actually, the above map is interesting because it shows two things: name confusion and a transition from the name "Muleungdo" back to "Ulleungdo." As I talked about in my post "Why did old Korean maps show Ulleungdo as two islands?," during the reign of King Sejong, Muleungdo (武陵島 - 무릉도) was the name used to refer to Ulleungdo's neighboring island of Jukdo (竹島 - 죽도), which is about 2.2 kilometers off the east coast of Ulleungdo, while the name "Usando" (于山島 - 우산도) was used to refer to the main island of Ulleungdo. Of course, Muleungdo was just another spelling for Ulleungdo, but during the time of King Sejong, Muleungdo was generally confused with Usando. That is why old maps showed Usando to the west of Ulleungdo, even though there is no island to the west of Ulleungdo. See Korea's 1530 "Paldo Chongdo" (八道總島) map
Since the above map said that "Usan" was another name for Muleungdo, that means the map was still showing Usando to the west of Ulleungdo. Soon after this map the name Muleungdo probably disappeared from Korea's maps, leaving "Usando" to the west of "Ulleungdo." Actually, this might be the only map I know of that showed the name Muleungdo, and I know it is the only one that showed Ulleungdo and Muleungdo together. Anyway, it requires more explanation, but I do not have the time to do it right now. I just want to stress that the island was not Dokdo.
Notice in the article that Professor Lee repeated Korea's bogus claim that the 1145 "Samguk Sagi" is "historical evidence that Dokdo was indeed recognized as part of Korea even during Korea's Three Kingdoms period in the 4th century." In fact, he seems to have decided to make it the 4th century instead of the 6th century. I talked about this bogus claim in my post entitled, "Has Dokdo been a part of Korean territory since the sixth century?," so I will not talk about it again here.
He also claims that Korea was not informed about the incorporation of "Dokdo," even though there is written evidence that Korea was informed, yet did not protest the incorporation. See my posts "1906 Apr 1 - Japanese Tell Koreans of Takeshima Incorporation" and "July 1906, Korea Omits Dokdo from Uldo County."
In the article, Professor Lee also gives the same lame excuse that other Koreans have given for Korea's refusing to take the issue to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which is that the court would be biased against Korea, even though Professor Lee claims Korea has "an abundance of historical data and supporting materials that would overwhelm whatever Japan shows as its historical materials." And since Japan has one justice on the court, I have read that Korea would be allowed a temporary judge, as well, to help ensure impartiality. That would mean that there is really no excuse for not going to the ICJ expect that Korea knows she does not have the evidence to support her claim.
The real reason Korea does not want to take the dispute to the ICJ is that Korea has no old maps showing Dokdo, by any name, and no solid documentary evidence to back up her claim to the islets. In fact, there is no evidence that Koreans ever traveled to Liancourt Rocks before the Japanese started taking Korean fishermen there on Japanese fishing boats in the early 1900s.
Professor Lee's claims are so shameless that they make me want to just shove the history down his throat.