竹島問題の歴史

3.9.08

"Korea Times" Distorting Facts

In a September 2 article entitled "Fukuda's Exit Complicates Korea-Japan Ties," the Korea Times wrote the following:

On Monday, Tokyo also revealed its defense white paper for this year in which Dokdo is described as its territory. It is the fourth time in a row that Japan's annual defense white paper has referred to Dokdo as its own....

The islets were annexed by Japan along with the Korean Peninsula in 1910, but Tokyo claims its territorial rights to the islets were declared five years before the start of Japanese colonial rule between 1910 and 1945.

Japan incorporated Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo) in 1905, and Japanese officials informed a Korean official on Ulleungdo about it in 1906. The Korean official then informed his superiors about it. All of this is recorded in official Korean documents, so I cannot understand why the Korea Times continues to claim that Liancourt Rocks was annexed by Japan in 1910?

The Korea Times regularly uses the above paragraph to describe "Dokdo," so I can only assume that the newspaper does it intentionally to distort the facts.

The Japanese incorporation of Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo) had nothing to do with the annexation of Korea.

7 comments:

  1. Gerry, what the Korea Times means is that Liancourt Rocks were annexed along with the whole Korean Peninsula back in 1910. The annexation colonization of Korea was not an overnight process Gerry, Korea was stripped of her sovereignty over the span of many years. This process started with the February 1904 Japan-Korea Protocol. By August of the same year Korean foreign affairs department was being dismantled.

    Korea-Political

    Japanese Takeshima lobbyists insist their annexation of Liancourt Rocks was not related however, we know Japan's annexation of Liancourt Rocks was an inseprarable part of Japan's bid to colonize Korea. This of course happened during the Russo-Japanese War.

    Japanese-Navy-Dokdo

    Japan notified Korea about their annexation of Liancourt Rocks almost 2 years after Japan stripped away Korea's right to independently conduct state to state affairs. So we will never really know if Korea did object to Japan's annexation.

    It's kinda funny how the Japanese use the characters 石島 in their description of Liancourt Rocks in their "announcement"...... Sounds familiar.

    Takeshima-Ad

    ReplyDelete
  2. Steve Barber,

    No, the "Korea Times" was not talking about a process. The newspaper intentionally ignored the fact that Japan incorporated Liancourt Rocks five years before the annexation of Korea.

    In July 1906, Japan gave Korea a chance to protest Japan's incorporation of Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo), but Korea did not protest it or include "Dokdo" as one of Ulleungdo's neighboring islands. See "July 1906, Korea Omits Dokdo from Uldo County."

    Also, your link to the 1905 announcement of Japan's incorporation of Liancourt Rocks uses "rock islets" (石島嶼) as a description of Liancourt Rocks, not as the name of the rocks.

    And, yes, it does sound familiar because Korea also used "rock islets" (石島 - 석도) as a descriptive phrase in 1900 to describe "Jukdo" (竹島) and the "rock islets" (石島) around Ulleungdo as being part of Uldo County (鬱島郡 - 울도군). Korea's 1900 edict was not referring to Liancourt Rocks.

    The Japanese announcement you linked to is more evidence that the "Seokdo" (石島 - 석도) in the 1900 Korean edict was used as a descriptive, catchall term to refer to include the remaining rock islets around Ulleungdo, not as the name of any specific island.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This maybe a proof of their distorted history and distorted education. If this kind of articles were repeatedly published, naive Korean people may believe the fictitious story that Japan really annexed Liancourt Rocks along with Korea in 1910. Actually, some pro-Korean handsome guy with a beard is already propagating the story to make naive people deceived.

    But truth is that Japan incorporated Liancourt Rocks in 1905 after no other countries' traces were confirmed and the incorporation was approved by the international society.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Gerry, Seokdo is the name of one island, not islets. There is not one iota of information to verify your theory about 石島 being "all surrounding rocks" That's just your guess, and a pretty bad one at that. Korea won't be losing sovereignty over Dokdo over your unsubstantiated theories Gerry.

    Yes, Japan officially annexed Korea in 1910, but anyone who has studied even rudimentary Korean history knows the Japanese had stripped Korea's sovereignty long before 1910 Gerry. Seriously who do you think you guys think you are fooling here?

    Gerry and Pacifist, the best I can do is give you the historical facts. If you want to deny it, that's your prerogative I guess. Ignorance is bliss for you I guess. But don't expect others to support Japan's case for Takeshima when they know the truth.

    Korea did not omit Dokdo from their definition of Dokdo in 1906. They clearly stated Seokdo was part of Uldo County and they gave the dimensions of Ulleungdo. That's all Gerry.

    Here is the true face of Japanese diplomacy regarding the Dokdo Takeshima issue. They put on a calm face, then they craftily create and distribute false maps.

    Japan's-Slippery-Gov't

    Japan's government feigns rational diplomacy while they whitewash history and deceive their own public. Give me a finger-chopping, bee-wearing, pheasant eating Korean anytime. At least I don't have to worry about getting a knife in my back.

    Never trust Japan's MOFA, ever!!

    ReplyDelete
  5. A pro-Korean guy with a beard is saying "they whitewash history and deceive their own public" - yes, it's true if it means Korean government.

    They started distributing this kind of false information since Rhee Syngman robbed the island. But even if they could deceive the people in Korea, they can't decieve the world.

    It is obvious for the people of the world that they have no historical grounds and the way they robbed the island was against the international law.

    ReplyDelete
  6. pacifist,

    Rigardless of Korea Times’ article, these days Koreans accurately know Dokdo was annexed in 1905 and whole Korea was annexed by Imperial Japan in 1910. They also know Japanese had stripped Korea's sovereignty before 1910 and Japan's annexation of Dokdo was an inseparable part of Imperial Japan's annexing the whole Korea as dokdo-takeshima.com said. They also know that’s the historical fact, not propaganda as pacifist insists. Korea Times’ article doesn’t make Korean people deceived.


    It’s Japanese government that whitewashes history and deceives their own public. Japanese government falsely claims Takeshima(Dokdo) is inerent part of Japan in spite of its official records (Onshu Shicho Goki(1667), Tottori Han’s Reply(1696), Meiji Government’s Instruction(1870), Dajokna Order(1877)) and the oldest map of Japan (改正日本輿地路程全図) that excluded Takeshima as part of Japan.

    Japanese government falsely claims Japan incorporated Takeshima(Dokdo) because it was ownerless which is apparently contradictory to its claim that Takeshima(Dokdo) is inherent part of Japan.

    Japanese government’s Takeshima logic is self-contradictory and the Japanese think Takeshima is Japan’s land based on such a self-contradictory theory.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Correction:

    Rigradless --> Regardless

    The links above are not working properly. URLs of each link are:

    Onshu Shicho Goki(1667)
    http://whathappenedtodokdo.blogspot.kr/#!/2013/01/onshu-shicho-goki-earliest-japanese_12.html

    Tottori Han’s Reply(1696)
    http://whathappenedtodokdo.blogspot.kr/#!/2013/06/japanese-governments-1696-ordinance.html

    Meiji Government’s Instruction(1870)
    http://whathappenedtodokdo.blogspot.kr/#!/2012/04/hos-takeshimaulleongdo-and.html

    Dajokna Order(1877)
    http://whathappenedtodokdo.blogspot.kr/#!/2013/01/japan-has-nothing-to-do-with-ulleongdo.html

    改正日本輿地路程全図
    http://whathappenedtodokdo.blogspot.kr/#!/2012/12/the-famous-japanese-ancient-map-shows.html

    ReplyDelete