竹島問題の歴史

23.2.11

DPJ Lawmakers Attend 'Takeshima Day' Ceremonies

"The Mainichi Daily News" reports HERE that a record-high thirteen Japanese parlimentarians, including two lawmakers from the ruling Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ), attended Takeshima Day ceremonies on February 22, along with 500 other participants. This was the first time DPJ lawmakers have attended the Takeshima Day ceremonies.

In contrast, no major rallies were held by South Korean protestors near the ceremony site this year. In the past, Koreans had held rallies denouncing Japan's territorial claim to Takeshima, claiming, instead, that the islets belonged to Korea. Moveover, only about ten Korean civic group members even bothered to rally in front of the Japanese Embassy in Seoul this year. The Korean government did, however, issue its prefunctory statement denouncing Takeshima Day and insisting Takeshima belonged to Korea, where the islets are called Dokdo.

While political interest in the Takeshima dispute seems to be growing in Japan, interest in Korea seems to be dying, possibly because an overwhelming amount of historical evidence refuting Korean claims has been made public over the past few years. Afterall, it is hard to rally for a cause in which you no longer truly believe.

The Korean government seems to have given up trying to find evidence to support its historical claims to Takeshima and has decided, instead, to remain relatively quiet on the issue, probably hoping the world forgets about all the noisy claims Koreans made just a few years ago.

16 comments:

  1. The noisy claims will be done over again on the next month regarding the description of the new textbooks of Japanese junior high school which will say that Takeshima is a part of the territory of Japan.

    It may be the sign of their unrest which results from the fact that Korea has no historical and legal evidence for possessing Takeshima.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Korean must be feeling betrayed by DPJ, since DPJ seem to be more pro-Korean and keen of "historical" issue than LDP. Korean had tried to infiltrate DPJ lawmakers apparently.

    For example, Yuji Hosaka "explained" former PM Hatoyama why Dokdo is Korea's.

    http://nojeokhill.koreanconsulting.com/2010/04/my-associate-met-japanese-prime-minister-yukio-hatoyama-and-explained-to-him-why-dokdo-belongs-to-ko.html

    Or Korea's Northeast History Foundation had been lobbying DPJ for a long time.

    http://kr.news.yahoo.com/service/news/shellview.htm?articleid=2010122420131460835&linkid=4&newssetid=1352

    http://blogs.yahoo.co.jp/chaamiey/53075564.html (Japanese)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Why would a Japanese prime minister waste an hour and a half of his time listening to the Dokdo ramblings of a goofball like Yuji Hosaka?

    Could the Japanese prime minister really be that ignorant of the subject?

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. That's why he is called as "increasing loopy"

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/13/AR2010041304461.html

    and was chosen for the worst PM as ever.

    http://www.nikkansports.com/general/news/p-gn-tp0-20110217-738127.html

    Joking aside, it is said that his Korean secretary/adviser introduced Hosaka to Hatoyama, though Hatoyama told Hosaka that Takeshima is decided as Japanese territory by SF Peace treaty. They don't know anything about true history of Takeshima or even Korea/Japan relations. That's the reason they allow Korean agent take advantage and are so easily deceived by Korean. Many DPJ members are from Socialist Party (Social Democratic Party Japan) and its power base are Japanese Trade Union Confederation(連合), Japan Teacher's Union(日教組), All-Japan Prefectural and Municipal Workers Union(自治労) and Korean Residents Union in Japan(民団)(!?). Japanese communism and socialism activities have close connection with Korean nationalism and racialism historically. They are naturally pro-Korean. However, it is noted that Japan Communist Party was the only political party who insisted to send troops to Takeshima when Korea invaded Takeshima in 1954 and they still openly express Takeshima is a territory of Japan.

    I found Hosaka's article about their meeting written in English.

    http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2919243

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hatoyama was not the Prime Minister of Japan but General Secretary of DPJ when he met Hosaka in May 2006. However it makes little difference. The executive officer of Japan's political party does not have to hear the Hosaka's distorted opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  8. After millions and millions of donation made by Koreans, and which is still being donated from Korea to Japan, 'to help its people with sentiments in spite of all the angers and feelings within their soul' Japan's attitude towards whole Dokdo (or Takeshima if you ever wish to call it that way) seem so selfish, and at some point so childish. I thought there were commonalities between Koreans and Japanese when it came to respect and cultural behaviour. This is completely against such belief, isn't it? How can the whole country be so super-hypocritical?

    Japanese-colonial period is still recorded as one of the most cruel parts of Korean histories. They captured young women, tattooed their body so that they can't run away and get recognized even if they do and made them literally fuck 100 men a day. They were shot if they refused or were pregnant. They experimented on Koreans for new medical methods or whatsoever shit they came up with and killed them on spot because for them the Koreans were not human. Hardly anyone from the period is alive to prove such incidence. Even when they did, Japan, happily ignored it. Wow. Respect for such hostility and rudeness. While everyone is criticizing Nazism and their way of treating Jews, why can't anyone in the world realize the way the Japanese treated Koreans in the past, and in fact why does this bullying have to continue? When one matures and grows up I thought they would realize everything they have done wrong in the past and try to correct themselves. Haven't they realized enough? haven't they experimented and treated cruelly enough to its neighbor?

    The international laws had said the land belongs to South Korea and the Japanese not realizing what they are doing, being very shameless and also very embarrassing, are claiming the land to be theirs. Do they even have any concrete evidence behind such claim? I really do feel that Koreans are going to get so fed up of being generous towards such cold blooded, brain-less, shameless neighbors.

    For your information, read and find out why Dokdo belongs to Korea:
    http://www.stanford.edu/group/sjeaa/journal51/japan2.pdf

    AND
    DOKDO DEFINITELY BELONGS TO SOUTH KOREA AND ITS PEOPLE.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 日本人はお人よし過ぎた。盗まれたものを取り返すのは当然だ。教科書に明記するのはほんの入り口。日本の領有根拠を明記し、韓国の主張には何ら根拠のないことまでも記して、それらを常識として国民共通の認識とすべきだ。「わが国固有の領土にもかかわらず、韓国が不法占拠を続けている竹島(韓国名・独島)」(http://sankei.jp.msn.com/world/news/110330/kor11033008490001-n1.htm)と産経新聞は書いた。「韓国が実効支配する竹島」(http://www.47news.jp/CN/201103/CN2011032901000736.html)と共同通信は書いた。産経新聞の記述は国際法の正確な知識に基づいたもので適切な表現となっている。一方、共同通信の記述は何ら根拠のない韓国による占拠を法的根拠が存在するものであるかのように偽装するもので、報道の名に値しない。不法から法を生じさせる悪辣な行為の手助けをしていることに気づいていないようだ。

    ReplyDelete
  10. http://www.stanford.edu/group/sjeaa/journal51/japan2.pdf

    This is a poor propaganda paper.
    International law demands effective control with specific and directly evidences for the acquisition and keeping her territory. Korea didn’t have any evidence of effective control.
    A girl in a crowd, you should read judicial precedents, if you want to know the true international law.
    http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=2

    ReplyDelete
  11. True international law, PALMAS CASE
    http://untreaty.un.org/cod/riaa/cases/vol_II/829-871.pdf
    that the continuous and peaceful display of territorial sovereignty (peaceful in relation to other States) is as good as a title.
    [….]
    It cannot be sufficient to establish the title by which territorial sovereignty was validly acquired at a certain moment; it must also be shown that the territorial sovereignty has continued to exist and did exist at the moment which for the decision of the dispute must be considered as critical.
    [….]
    for the reason that Dutch possession of the island Palmas (or Miangas) is not proved Lo have existed at the critical date.

    True international law by ICJ, Pulau Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan CASE
    http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/102/7714.pdf, PP.64
    The Court moreover cannot disregard the fact that at the time when these activities were carried out, neither Indonesia nor its predecessor, the Netherlands, ever expressed its disagreement or protest.

    True international law by ICJ, Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh CASE
    http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/130/14492.pdf
    In the view of the Court, it was on 14 February 1980, the time of Singapore’s protest in response to Malaysia’s publication of the 1979 map, that the dispute as to sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh crystallized.


    fabricated international law by Sean Fern
    http://www.stanford.edu/group/sjeaa/journal51/japan2.pdf
    South Korea has an enormous advantage over Japan because it has de facto possession of the islands and has undertaken a variety of infrastructure projects and improvements. As the Palmas decision shows, international judicial bodies highlight establishing sovereignty through positive acts, especially when occupying a territory. Effective possession of the Liancourt Rocks generally entitles Korea to the claim.

    conclusion
    International demands the PEACEFUL effective control without protest by other country. Japan expresses her protest and Korea also rebuttals against Japan many times. Then Korean occupation is disvalue in the international law.

    ReplyDelete
  12. true international law by Clipperton
    France declared her dominium of the clipperton at the newspaper of Hawai in 1858.
    [After 40 years]
    Three Americans were mining guano of the clipperton island.
    Mexico hauled down a American flag on the island at 1898.

    fabricated international law by Sean Fern
    http://www.stanford.edu/group/sjeaa/journal51/japan2.pdf
    Japan may claim that formal protests such as hoisting the Japanese flag on the island and sending ships to the area are sufficient signs of sovereignty, but a judicial body might find otherwise. In the Clipperton case, Mexico tried to substantiate its claim by raising a Mexican flag on the island and by sending a warship to defend the island from takeover. Nonetheless, the court in the case found these acts insufficient to substantiate Mexico’s claim.

    conclusion
    The court assumed that France had acquired the island in the 1850's without Mexico’s protest. The dominium had already been established though Mexico would protest in 40 years. Japan protested immediately against the occupation of South Korea. Therefore, there is no time of PEACEFUL effective control for South Korea. I think Sean Fern doesn't have the concept at time or is misinterpreting time.

    ReplyDelete
  13. そういえば、韓国のファシスト、キムジャンフンが大変無知で恥知らずなことを発言していましたが、
    http://kamome.2ch.net/test/read.cgi/news4plus/1301112632/


    さんざん日本に支援してもらいながら、竹島侵略をやめない上に、反日を繰り返す韓国って、本当に恩知らずですね。
    http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/gaiko/oda/shiryo/jisseki/kuni/j_90sbefore/901-03.htm

    http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/gaiko/oda/shiryo/jisseki/kuni/j_99/g1-03.htm

    まあ、こういった悪質な侵略国家韓国に支援を続けてきたのが自民党ですから、日本人らしく、切腹していただきたいものです。

    ReplyDelete
  14. a girl in a crowd,

    I honestly thank all Korean who donated to the people of Tohoku. However, textbook procedure had already finished before you donate. Anyway, if you expected any return, that's not "donation" at all. Oh and I don't think there is anything common in both countries. We are not same country anymore and you guys need to free from Japan by now. We should establish healthy bilateral relationship.

    Anyway, whatever you believe, you need to show concrete historical evidence which support your claim. As far as I know, Takeshima Issue has nothing to do with Japanese Annexation because there is no single document which prove Korea had own the island before 1905.

    ReplyDelete
  15. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  16. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete