Below is a translation of The 13th column “Seeking Truth Based Solely on Facts(実事求是)” by Prof. Shimojo Masao
"Sins of Asahi Shimbun and Mr. Wakamiya Yoshibumi(若宮啓文)”
Asahi Shimbun (evening newspaper) had serialized articles titled "Newspaper and war" until recently, and reported their own responsibility for the war on reflection, which back them they swallowed the announcement of the government on trust during the war without criticism and did the war cooperation on their own. However, even today, Asahi Shimbun is repeating the same error again. In the column dated July 20, Mr. Wakamiya, a former Managing Editor (who once wrote that he dreamed to transfer Takeshima to South Korea on 27th March, 2005) blindly followed the Korea's historical claim that the Japan's incorporation of Takeshima has something to do with Japanese Invasion. Moreover, he is making the point of the issue obscure based on the claim by Professor emeritus Naito Seichu of Shimane University, which had been already refuted as false. In the end, Asahi Shimbun is repeating the same error, which they made more than 60 years ago, by infringing the public right of access to true information again. When it comes to Takeshima Issue, which is a territorial issue, historical facts are very important naturally, and the media report should also tell the truth.
Japan officially incorporated Takeshima into Shimane Prefecture in 1905, since "there were no traces of occupation by any other countries ("他国ニ於イテ之ヲ占領シタリト認ムベキ形跡" 無し)". If Korean wants to claim it as an "Invasion", like they are doing now, they owe the responsibility to prove the fact Takeshima had been South Korean territory before 1905, naturally. Because of this, Korean side have been claiming that Takeshima/Dokdo is a neighbouring island of Ulleungdo and have been the Korean territory since 512 based on the notation(分註) of "Dongguk Munheon Bigo Yojigo(東国文献備考・與地考)"(1770). However, this notation was altered after ages as I pointed out repeatedly, and there were no historical grounds of Korean claim that Usando in the 15th century, such as "Sejong's 1454 geography text （「世宗実録地理志」）" nor "東国輿地勝覧" (reference : 1530 Sinjeung Dongguk Yeoji Seungram（「新增東國輿地勝覽」) is today's Takeshima, as well.
Then, what about the "Imperial Ordinance no.41" in 1900, which Korean side use as a base for the theory of "Invasion" by Japan? Koean side claims that the Seokdo(石島) of the two islands (竹島 and 石島) in the ordinance must be Dokdo(独島) because the pronounciation of "Seokdo" has something in common with "Dokdo". However, the name of "Dokdo" started to be used around 1903 and it was called as "Yanko" island before. In other words, their theory "Sokdo(石島) = Dokdo(独島)" cannot be true in consequence. Moreover, the promotion of Ulleungdo to Uldo County in October 1900 was proceeded based on the report of Ulleungdo by the inspector 禹用鼎 in June 1900. According to his report, 禹用鼎 recognized Ulleungdo as the circumference of 140-150 ris(56-60 km) and he didn't even go to Takeshima/Dokdo since his sphere of inspecion was limited to Ulleungdo. Uh's recognition of Ulleungdo followed the footstep of the inspecion by Lee Gyu-won(李奎遠) in 1882. In his map "an outside map (view) of Ulleungdo(鬱陵島外圖)" , Jukdo(竹嶼, Korean name 竹島) and Dohan(島項) are depicted as two neighbouring islands of Ulleungdo. The image of "Ulleungdo with two neighbouring islands" had been already formed by "欝陵島図形"(1699 c.a.).
Furthermore, "Choson Seaway(朝鮮水路誌)" by Japanese Navy in 1894, which was written based on British seaway journal, defines the Eastern limit of Choson as 130º 35' E.longitude and it clearly exclude Takeshima/Dokdo, which locates at 131º 52'E longitude, from the territory of Choson. This historical and documented facts prove that Takeshima was owner less island and Japanese naming the island as Takeshima and incorporation it into Japanese territory in 1900 was not "Invasion" at all. Hence, Mr. Wakamiya's interpretation that it was "Invasion" has no basis to support. This illogical and baseless interpretation is the results that Mr. Wakamiya blindlessly believed the misinterpretation of Dajoukan Order(太政官指令) in 1877, "Takeshima and another island has nothing to do with Japan.（「竹島外一島之儀、本邦関係之なし」）". Mr. Naito distorted "another island" as today's Takeshima and falsely reported that it is not the inherent part of the territory of Japan.
In fact, "the another island" in this order was confirmed not to be today's Takeshima/Dokdo by the survey of Warship Amagi in 1880. In this survey, Matsushima was found to be Ulleungdo and Takeshima to be Jukdo, which is also written clearly as Jukdo = 竹島 in the map "an outside map (view) of Ulleungdo(鬱陵島外圖)" by Lee Gyu-won(李奎遠) in 1882.
As we have seen above, there is no historical title for Korea to claim the sovereignty over Takeshima/Dokdo at all. Let alone there is no right for Korean to criticize Japanese incorporation of Takeshima, which had nothing to do with Korean territory, as "Invasion". Therefore, Mr. Wakamiya's strange logic which dare to tie the Invasion or Colonization by Japan with lawful incorporation of Takeshima without any concrete evidence is nothing but the same attitude of Asahi Shimbun who never stopped biased media reports in prewar.
Courtesy of Web Takeshima Research Center.
Other Column of the Series:
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4
The 21st column " Refutation against "Analysis of Shimojo Masao's Editorials" by Mr. Park Byeong-seop(朴炳渉)”
The 8th column “The Historical Facts" The 6th column “Onshu-shicho-goki (隠州視聴合記)" and the "Nihon Yochi Totei Zenzu (日本輿地路程全図)" by Nagakubo Sekisui(長久保赤水)"
The 5th column “South Korea’s erroneous interpretation of the document 'Takeshima and Another Island are Unrelated to Japan"
The 4th column “Errors in Educational Video Produced by the Northeast Asian History Foundation (東北アジア歴史財団)."