1955 - “Introduction to Dokdo Issue (獨島問題概論)” - ROK Government Blotted out Rusk Note to hide the truth from its own Diplomats.

In 1955, ROK Minisitry of Foreign Affairs published the book titled “Introduction to Dokdo Issue (独島問題概論)”. The purpose of this book is, according to the preface written by KIm Dong-Jo(金東祚), a Minister of Foreign Affairs of ROK, to help Korean diplomats’ at overseas agencies of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs aquire better understandings on Dokdo Issue. However, the “American Embassy’s Note Verbale No.187” which dates on 4th Dec. 1952 attached in the 6th of “ANNEX” section of the book had crucial flaw for better understanding of the Issue.

“Introduction to Dokdo Issue (獨島問題概論)”(1955)

ANNEX 6

No. 187

The Embassy of the United States of America presents its compliments to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and has the honor to refer to the latter’s note of November 10,1952 stating that a single engine airplane described as being under the Command of the United States Forces in the Far East dropped bombs on Dokto Island on September 15, 1952. The embassy is advised that the limited amount of information provided in the Ministry’s note as well as the very long time which has elapsed since the incident is said to have taken place make it virtually impossible for the United Nations Command to determine the facts in the case. Preparations have, however, been expedited to dispense with the use of Dokto island as a bombing range, etc.

American Embassy,

Pusan, December 4, 1952

Note that it ends with “etc”. If you see other documents in the Annex, they add “etc” for the section they omitted mainly because it has not direct relationship with the Issue of Dokdo/Takeshima. However, As was shown in the previous post, original American official Note No.187 dated on 4th Dec. 1952 had contained the part of notification of Rusk Note following the bombing matter and it clearly denied ROK claim on Dokdo and warned her that U.S. considered Takeshima/Dokdo is Japanese territory. ROK government apparently blotted out to conceal the fact that their claim on Dokdo had been already rejected by U.S. , leaving the islets to Japan, from its own diplomats. Check the original document below.

“American Embassy’s Note Verbale No.187” dates on 4th Dec. 1952.

No. 187

The Embassy of the United States of America presents its compliments to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and has the honor to refer to the latter’s note of November 10,1952 stating that a single engine airplane described as being under the Command of the United States Forces in the Far East dropped bombs on Dokto Island on September 15, 1952. The embassy is advised that the limited amount of information provided in the Ministry’s note as well as the very long time which has elapsed since the incident is said to have taken place make it virtually impossible for the United Nations Command to determine the facts in the case. Preparations have, however, been expedited to dispense with the use of Dokto island as a bombing range.

The Embassy has taken note of the statement contained in the Ministry's Note that "Dokdo Island(Liancourt Rocks)...is a part of the territory of the Republic of Korea". The United States Government's understanding of the territorial status of this islands was stated in Assistant Secretary of State Dean Rusk's note to the Korean Ambassador in Washington dated August 10, 1951.

American Embassy,

Pusan, December 4, 1952

As has told in the previous post, ROK government used the fact that U.S.’s suspension of the bombing on Liancourt Rocks after Korean fishermen/women were almost killed on 15th September, 1952. The document was thus included in the book for the purpose to reinforce their logic. However, Takeshima was finally decided to be released from bombing range by the U.S. & Japan Joint Committee on 19 Mar., 1953, not Korea-U.S. Committee, because of the petition by Shimane Prefecture.

Although Rusk Note went to public on April 1978, even today, Korean government keeps telling lies, such as Usando is Dokdo’s old name, to its own people and never stops illegal occupation on Japanese islets. The only way for innocent Korean people to escape from deception by its own government is to see the first-hand historical documents and old maps which are available on this blog.

The original idea of this “discovery” was brought by yabutarou and the photocopies of the book was provided by matsu. It was discussed on this blog on January 2010.





Related posts and links;
1946 - Jan 29 - SCAPIN 677
1946 - Feb 13 - "Conference with GHQ/SCAP concerning separation of the administration"
1946 - Jun 22 - SCAPIN 1033
1947 - Sep 16 -SCAPIN 1778
1949 - Nov 14 - Willam J. Sebald's telegram
1949 - U.S. Maps DOES NOT Confirm Korean Sovereignty Over Dokdo
1949 - Nov 14 - A letter from W. Walton Butterworth
1949 - Dec 29 - U.S. Draft made on December 29, 1949
1950 - July - Commentary on Draft Treaty by the Department of State
1950 - Aug 7 - U.S. Draft made on August 7, 1950
1950 - Oct 26 - USA Answers to Questions Submitted by the Australian Government
1951 - Apr - May: Joint UK and USA Draft - extra(1)
1951 - Jun 1 - New Zealand's view - extra(2)
1951 - Jul 6 - SCAPIN 2160 (cache)
1951 - Jul 9 - Coversation of Yu Chan Yang with John F. Dulles
1951 - Jul 19 - The 2nd Conversation between Yu Chan Yang and John F. Dulles
1951 - Jul 26 - the Japan-U.S. Joint Committee designated Takeshima as a bombing range for the U.S. Forces stationed in Japan. (official gazette of Japan)
1951 - Aug 2 - Another letter from You Chan Yang
1951 - Aug 3 - Bogg’s Memorandum (On re-ceiving Boggs's memo. I asked the Korean desk to find out whether anyone in the Korean Embassy officer had told him they believed Dokdo was near Ullengdo, or Takeshima Rock, and suspected that Parangdo was too.)
1951 - Aug 9 - Rusk's Letter 　( As regards the island of Dokdo, otherwise known as Takeshima or Liancourt Rocks, this normally uninhabited rock formation was according to our information never treated as part of Korea and, since about 1905, has been under the jurisdiction of the Oki Islands Branch Office of Shimane Prefecture of Japan. The island does not appear ever before to have been claimed by Korea. )
1951 - Sep 9 - San Francisco Peace Treaty
1951 - Sep 21 - Korean Government comprehended Takeshima/Dokdo was affirmed as a Japanese Territory in Peace Treaty
1952- Jan 18 - Syngman Rhee Line
1950's - Japan & Korea Argue Their Claims in 1950s Letters
1952 - Jul 26 - The Japan-U.S. Joint Committee designated Takeshima as a bombing range for the U.S. Forces (The Ministry of Foreign Affairs published this fact in the official gazette.)
1952 - Nov 5 - Confidential Security Information of USA ("It appears that the Department has taken the position that these rocks belong to Japan and has so informed the Korean Ambassador in Washington." )
1952 - Dec 4 - Confidential Security Information of USA ( "I much appreciate your letter of November 14 in regard to the status of the Dokdo Island (Liancourt Rocks). The information you gave us had never been previously available to the Embassy. We had never heard of Deen Rusk’s letter to the Korean Ambassador in which the Department took a definite stand on this question.")
1952 - Dec 4 - “American Embassy’s Note Verbale No.187” - U.S. iterates Rusk Note to ROK.
(American Embassy in Busan gave South Korean Government an official notification that Takeshima is not Korean territory by reminding Dean Rusk’s Note on 9th August, 1951, which rejected Korea’s demand for Takeshima/Dokdo. )
1953 - Mar 19 - Japan U.S. Joint Committee decided to release Takeshima from the designation of a bombing range for the U.S. Forcese
1953 Jul 22 - Confidential Security Information of USA “Possible Methods of Resolving Liancourt Rocks Dispute between Japan and ROK”( The United States Government's understanding of the territorial status of this island was stated in assistant Secretary dated August 10,1951.")
1953 - Nov 30 - Secret Security Information of USA ("The Liancourt Rocks case appears to have aspects in common with that of Shikotan Island" "Remind the ROK of our previous statement of view (the Rusk letter)")
1953 - Dec 9 - SECRET SECURITY INFORMATION by Dulles
1953 - Jul 22 - US Doc. Reconfirms Dean Rusk Letter (Letter from Office of Northeast Asian Affairs To E. Allan Lightner American Embassy, Pusan Korea by L. Burmaster Office of U.S. Northeast Asian Affair )
1953 - Oct 13 - Daiichi-Daihou Maru Incident - the dispute over the Rhee Syngman Line
1954 - Aug - Report of Van Fleet mission to the Far East, 26 April - 7 August , 1954
2008 - Jul 30 - Press Briefing by Senior Director for Asian Affairs at the National Security Council, Dennis Wilder, on President's Trip to Asia (cache)

1952 - Dec. 4 - “American Embassy’s Note Verbale No.187” - U.S. iterates Rusk Note to ROK.

On 4th December 1952, American Embassy in Busan gave South Korean Government an official notification that Takeshima is not Korean territory by reminding Dean Rusk’s Note on 9th August, 1951, which rejected Korea’s demand for Takeshima/Dokdo.

No.187

The Embassy of the United States of America presents its compliments to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and has the honor to refer to the latter's note of November 10, 1952 stating that a single engined airplane described as being under the command of the United States in the Far East dropped bombs on Dokdo Island on September 15, 1952. The Embassy is advised that the limited amount of information provided in the Ministry's note as well as the very long time which has elapsed since the incident is said to have taken place make it virtually impossible for the United Nations Command to determine the facts in the case. Preparations have, however, been expedited to dispense with the use of Dokdo Island as a bombing range.

The Embassy has taken note of the statement contained in the Ministry's Note that "Dokdo Island(Liancourt Rocks)...is a part of the territory of the Republic of Korea". The United States Government's understanding of the territorial status of this islands was stated in Assistant Secretary of State Dean Rusk's note to the Korean Ambassador in Washington dated August 10, 1951.

American Embassy,

Pusan, December 4, 1952

On 9th July 1951, Korean Government was formally declined it's greedy demands for Tsushima by Ambassador Dulles. Instead, she suddenly asked for Dokdo/Takeshima and even non-existent Parang-do on 19th, 1951. However, the 3rd August’s note inside American Governmen reveals that Mr. Boggs, long-time Geographer to the Department of State, couldn’t identify the location of Dokdo and Parang-do despite trying all resources in Washington, and neither did Korean Embassy. As a consequence, Assistant Secretary of State Dean Rusk officially denied Korea’s inordinate demand for Takeshima/Dokd on 9th 1951.

As regards the island of Dokdo, otherwise known as Takeshima or Liancourt Rocks, this normally uninhabited rock formation was according to our information never treated as part of Korea and, since about 1905, has been under the jurisdiction of the Oki Islands Branch Office of Shimane Prefecture of Japan. The island does not appear ever before to have been claimed by Korea. It is understood that the Korean Government's request that "Parangdo" be included among the islands named in the treaty as having been renounced by Japan has been withdrawn.

Korean Government didn’t offer a counterargument concerning the sovereignty of the islands before the Peace Treaty was signed on September 8, 1951. However, On Sep. 21st, 1951, ROK again claimed Dokdo/Takeshima based on SCAPIN-677 MacArthur line and U.S.’s apology to Korea for the victims of 1948 bombing incident. But American Embassy in Pusan laughed off ROK’s empty comment, “we have substantial documented evidence to prove that the isle has been in the Korean possession for many hundred years”, which they couldn’t present any. The series of denial by America cornered ROK and she weiled the big stick after she finally realized that Takeshima/Dokdo has formally left to Japan by San Francisco Peace Treaty. ROK suddenly set Rhee Line in open waters, enclosing Dokdo/Takeshima inside Korean side.

As was stated in the note, it was issued in the response to the ROK’s protest against the bombing incident happened on 15th Sep. Some 23 Korean fishermen and women divers fishing on Takeshima/Dokdo narrowly escaped from bombs dropped by the airplane which returned to the direction of Japan afterwards. Consequently, a “scholarly exploration” party by Korean government couldn’t reach to Takeshima. It is no wonder since SCAP and U.S. government considered Takeshima was Japanese territory and U.S. and Japan joint committee designated Takeshima as bombing range for U.S.Forces.

In July 1951, while Japan was still under Allied occupation, the Supreme Command for Allied Powers designated Takeshima as a bombing range for U.S. Forces by SCAPIN No. 2160. In July 1952, right after the San Francisco Peace Treaty came into effect, in response to the desire of the U.S. Forces to continue to use Takeshima as a training area, the Japan-U.S. Joint Committee established as the consultative body for the implementation of the Japan-U.S. Administrative Agreement (an agreement based on the former Japan-U.S. Security Treaty, which was succeeded by the current Japan-U.S. Status of Forces Agreement) designated Takeshima as a bombing range for the U.S. Forces stationed in Japan. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs published this fact in the official gazette. ( “Takeshima as a Bombing Range for U.S. Forces” by Japanese MOFA)

Despite the fact that the islands are within the danger zone, the government of ROK not only didn’t take necessary steps to protect its own people dissuading fishermen/women from collecting shells on the islands but also even sent government lead “scientific expedition” whose “intent has obviously been to establish claim to Korean sovereignty over the rocks”. The similar incident had once happened in the June 8 of 1948. About 20 Korean were killed by the American bombing. In other words, ROK government took precedence its territorial ambitions over the life of its own people.

Next year, U.S. government ceased bombing because of the “crude implementation of Government control in Korea” and the U.S. and Japan “Joint Committee decided to release Takeshima from the designation of a bombing range for the U.S. Forces in March 1953”. Although the decision was made not only because of the incident, but because of petition by local people from Shimane on 20th May, 1952., Korean government soon started to take advantages of this cession as one of the proof U.S. ‘s recognition Korea’s sovereignty on the rocks.

This note is very important since Mr. Dennis Wilder, a Senior Director for Asian Affairs at the National Security Council, officially told that U.S. policy on this territorial dispute has been firm and consistent since 1952 during the press briefing on President's trip to Asia on July 30, 2008. “Our position since 1952” apparently means the U.S. position described in this official Note to ROK.

This note No. 187 had been referred many times in other U.S. documents such as “Letter from E. Allan Lightner American Embassy, Pusan Korea To Office of Northeast Asian Affairs, the Department of the State by E. Allan Lightner, December 4, 1952” or “Possible Methods of Resolving Liancourt Rocks Dispute between Japan and ROK, July 22, 1953.” Thus we did know that U.S. conveyed ROK their position (Takeshima/Liancourt Rocks are Japanese territory) second time. However, this is the first time we had an chance to see the document itself, since Korean government had not those unfavourable documents made open to the public.

The original of the document is from NARA, Box "322 Liancourt Rocks, 1952-54", Korea, Seoul Embassy, Classified General Records, 1952-63, RG 84 Records of the Foreign Service Posts of the Department of State,1788-1964.


Related Posts;
1946 - Jan. 29 - SCAPIN 677
1946 - Feb. 13 - "Conference with GHQ/SCAP concerning separation of the administration"
1946 - Jun. 22 - SCAPIN 1033
1947 - Sep. 16 -SCAPIN 1778
1949 - Nov. 14 - Willam J. Sebald's telegram
1949 - U.S. Maps DOES NOT Confirm Korean Sovereignty Over Dokdo
1949 - Nov. 14 - A letter from W. Walton Butterworth
1949 - Dec. 29 - U.S. Draft made on December 29, 1949
1950 - July - Commentary on Draft Treaty by the Department of State
1950 - Aug. 7 - U.S. Draft made on August 7, 1950
1950 - Oct. 26 - USA Answers to Questions Submitted by the Australian Government
1951 - Apr. - May: Joint UK and USA Draft - extra(1)
1951 - Jun. 1 - New Zealand's view - extra(2)
1951 - Jul. 6 - SCAPIN 2160 (cache)
1951 - Jul. 9 - Coversation of Yu Chan Yang with John F. Dulles
1951 - Jul. 19 - The 2nd Conversation between Yu Chan Yang and John F. Dulles
1951 - Jul. 26 - the Japan-U.S. Joint Committee designated Takeshima as a bombing range for the U.S. Forces stationed in Japan. (official gazette of Japan)
1951 - Aug. 2 - Another letter from You Chan Yang
1951 - Aug.3 - Bogg’s Memorandum (On re-ceiving Boggs's memo. I asked the Korean desk to find out whether anyone in the Korean Embassy officer had told him they believed Dokdo was near Ullengdo, or Takeshima Rock, and suspected that Parangdo was too.)
1951 - Aug. 9 - Rusk's Letter 　( As regards the island of Dokdo, otherwise known as Takeshima or Liancourt Rocks, this normally uninhabited rock formation was according to our information never treated as part of Korea and, since about 1905, has been under the jurisdiction of the Oki Islands Branch Office of Shimane Prefecture of Japan. The island does not appear ever before to have been claimed by Korea. )
1951 - Sep. 9 - San Francisco Peace Treaty
1951 - Sep. 21 - Korean Government comprehended Takeshima/Dokdo was affirmed as a Japanese Territory in Peace Treaty
1952- Jan. 18 - Syngman Rhee Line
1950's - Japan & Korea Argue Their Claims in 1950s Letters
1952 - Nov. 5 - Confidential Security Information of USA ("It appears that the Department has taken the position that these rocks belong to Japan and has so informed the Korean Ambassador in Washington." )
1952 - Dec. 4 - Confidential Security Information of USA ( "I much appreciate your letter of November 14 in regard to the status of the Dokdo Island (Liancourt Rocks). The information you gave us had never been previously available to the Embassy. We had never heard of Deen Rusk’s letter to the Korean Ambassador in which the Department took a definite stand on this question.")
1953 Jul. 22 - Confidential Security Information of USA “Possible Methods of Resolving Liancourt Rocks Dispute between Japan and ROK”( The United States Government's understanding of the territorial status of this island was stated in assistant Secretary dated August 10,1951.")
1953 - Nov. 30 - Secret Security Information of USA ("The Liancourt Rocks case appears to have aspects in common with that of Shikotan Island" "Remind the ROK of our previous statement of view (the Rusk letter)")
1953 - Dec. 9 - SECRET SECURITY INFORMATION by Dulles
1953 - Jul 22 - US Doc. Reconfirms Dean Rusk Letter (Letter from Office of Northeast Asian Affairs To E. Allan Lightner American Embassy, Pusan Korea by L. Burmaster Office of U.S. Northeast Asian Affair )
1953 - Oct 13 - Daiichi-Daihou Maru Incident - the dispute over the Rhee Syngman Line
1954 - Aug. - Report of Van Fleet mission to the Far East, 26 April - 7 August , 1954
2008 - Jul. 30 - Press Briefing by Senior Director for Asian Affairs at the National Security Council, Dennis Wilder, on President's Trip to Asia (cache)

Should Japanese Boycott Ulleungdo?

I have put up a new survey on the right-hand side of the blog that asks the following question:

Should Japanese boycott travel to the Korean island of Ulleungdo to protest South Korea's barring of Japanese lawmakers to the island?

( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) I don't know.blockquote>

Yonhap --"Dokdo ferry operator imposes ban on Japanese passengers"

According to an Aug. 3 Yonhap News article HERE, a South Korean operator of a regular ferry service to Ulleungdo and Dokdo has said that "all Japanese citizens" are indefinitely barred from taking its ferries from South Korean east coast city of Gangneung to Ulleungdo and Dokdo. The article says he is barring Japanese "in protest against Tokyo's latest territorical claims."

Excerpt

"Our decision is to protest against the Japanese lawmakers' attempt to visit Ulleung Island earlier this week," said an official of Seaspovill Co., referring to the East Sea island located some 90 kilometers west of Dokdo. "It is in line with the government's will to sternly respond to the Japanese (government's) renewed assertion."
...

"Any Japanese passengers will not be allowed to board our ferries starting today," according to the official. "We will not scrap the decision until Japan stops making its absurd claims."

This may just be a marketing ploy to get more Korean customers since there are other ferries serving the same route.

Japanese Politicians Stopped from Leaving Korean Airport

Three Japanese lawmakers arrived in Seoul, South Korea on the morning of August 1, but were denied entry into the country at Seoul's Gimpo International Airport because the Korean government claimed it could not guarantee their safety.

The three lawmakers wanted to visit the Dokdo Museum on Ulleungdo, which showcases maps and documents that supposedly support Korea's claim to Takeshima (Dokdo), a small group of rocky islets that is claimed by both Japan and Korea. The Korean president, himself, ordered that the Japanese lawmakers be denied entry to Korea ("Lee Wants Japanese Lawmakers Barred from Dokdo Mission").

Even Japanese Professor Shimojo Masao, who studies the history of the disputed islets, was denied entry to Korea on Sunday (July 31) even though he was not on the list of those banned from entry. According to this article, "Right-wing Japanese prof. heading to Ulleung Island denied entry to S. Korea", he was denied entry "due to the local Justice Ministry's disapproval of his visit."

I have read that Professor Shimojo has a Korean wife and property in South Korea. Is anyone who disagrees with Korea's historical claim to Takeshima a "right-winger" and banned from Korea?

It is very possible that the Japanese lawmakers would have been attacked by ultra-nationalist Koreans, but the Korean government and some of her politicians helped to incite the fanatics with hysterical rhetoric that claimed the Japanese were coming to Korea to "deny Korea's constitutional order" and "to pounce on Korean territory."

The policy committee chairman of Korea's leading Grand National Party called the Japanese "assassins without swords," and Korea's Special Affairs Minister called them "descendants of war criminals." See LINK.

The photo to the left shows Korean protesters throwing salt and red pepper powder up into the air near the arrival gate inside the Korean airport while airport security stand by and watch.

Why would Koreans not want Japanese lawmakers visiting the Dokdo Museum on Ulleungdo since it supposedly has evidence to prove Korea's claim to Takeshima (Dokdo)?

The answer is that the museum does not have evidence to prove Korea's claims. It is essentially a propaganda facility designed to brainwash Korean school children and ignorant Korean tourists. The Korean government most probably did not want Japanese lawmakers seeing the distorted history and exhibits in the museum, fearing that they would return to Japan and expose the distortions and fabrications.

HERE is just one example of how the museum uses distorted models to try to support its false historical claim to Takeshima (Dokdo).

The Japanese lawmakers were denied entry to Korea because it was feared they would expose the lies of the Dokdo Museum.

Japan Probe has a great article on the story HERE.

The following is a Japanese language report of statements made by the Japanese lawmakers at the airport:

"Korea bans entry of Japanese reps on Ulleung foray"

Korea's Joongang Daily is reporting HERE that Seoul has informed Tokyo that it would ban from entering Korea four Japanese lawmakers planning to visit the Korean island of Ulleungdo and the Dokdo Museum there.

The Korean government said that it was banning the lawmakers because it would be "difficult to guarantee their safety and out of consideration of the influence on bilateral relations." However, I think the real reason for banning the Japanese is that the Korean government knows that the Dokdo Museum is a sham promoting distorted history to which the Korean government does not want the Japanese drawing international attention.

Should Japanese Lawmakers Be Barred from Visiting Dokdo Museum?

I have put up a new survey on the right side of the blog that asks the following question:

Should Japanese lawmakers be barred from visiting Dokdo Museum?

( )Yes
( ) No
( ) I don't know.

 Please let me know how you feel.

Korean President Bars Japanese Lawmakers from Korea

South Korean President Lee Myung-bak has instructed his government to bar a group of Japanese lawmakers from entering Korea because they wish to visit the Korean island of Ulleungdo and the Dokdo Museum, which is a museum on the island that showcases maps and documents that Koreans say support their claim to Liancourt Rocks, which are called "Dokdo" in Korea and "Takeshima" in Japan. Both Korea and Japan claim sovereignty over the Rocks.

According to a July 27, 2011 article in Korea's Chosun Ilbo entitled "Lee Wants Japanese Lawmakers Barred from Dokdo Mission," the official reason for barring the Japanese is that "Seoul cannot guarantee their safety"; however, the chairman of Korea's Grand National Party (GNP) says they should be banned "because they're coming to deny Korea's constitutional order," whatever that means.

Why would it be dangerous for Japanese lawmakers to visit a Korean museum, and how does it "deny Korea's constitutional order"? Why would Korean authorities not want Japanese lawmakers to visit a museum that purportedly showcases evidence that supports Korea's historical claim to Liancourt Rocks?

The answer to all the above questions is that the Dokdo Museum is not an ordinary museum. It is an propaganda facility constructed to promulgate Korea's fabricated historical claims to Liancourt Rocks. Several of the exhibits there are distorted, childish models designed to brainwash school children and ignorant tourists, not Japanese lawmakers who are familiar with the history. It is pretty obvious that the real reason the Seoul government does not want the Japanese lawmakers visiting the Dokdo museum is that it fears the lawmakers will return to Japan afterwards and expose the blatant historical distortions being promulgated there.
Headlines should read as follows:

"Japanese Lawmakers Denied Entry to Korea for Wanting to Visit Korean Museum"

Why are Koreans afraid of Japanese lawmakers visiting Ulleungdo?

Japanese lawmakers plan to visit the Korean island of Ulleungdo, where they also plan to visit the Dokdo Museum, a museum dedicated to spreading Korea's false territorial claims to the Japanese islets of Takeshima, which Koreans call Dokdo. Koreans have illegally occupied Takeshima since the 1950s, beginning soon after the 1951 Peace Treaty recognized the islets as Japanese territory.

In the photo to the left, Korean protestors rip up a portraint of one of the Japanese lawmakers planning to visit the museum during a rally near the Japanese Embassy in Seoul. LINK

I think the reason Koreans are opposed to Japanese lawmakers visiting the museum is that they fear the lawmakers will expose some of the distortions and outrageous claims made at the museum, which is more of a propaganda facility than a real museum. The Korean government seems to be embarrassed by the museum. If Seoul were proud of the museum, then wouldn't the Korean government be encouraging the Japanese to visit the museum rather than discouraging them?

Probably one of the more infamous examples of the distortions at the Dokdo museum is an altered model of a 1530 Korean map. In the original map, an island labeled Usando (于山島 - 우산도) appears off the west coast of Ulleungdo (鬱陵島 - 울릉도), but in the model at the museum, Usando appears off the east coast of Ulleungdo. Koreans claim that Usando was the old name for "Dokdo," but Dokdo is off the east coast of Ulleungdo, so the museum staff apparently switched the location of the island on the model to better support their claim.

A copy of the original map and the altered model at the museum appear below:

"Seoul in Quanary Over Japanese Lawmakers" Planned Visit to Dokdo Museum

In a 19 July 2011 online article entitled "Seoul in Quandary Over Japanese Lawmakers' Dokdo Mission," the Chosun Ilbo reports that "Korean lawmakers were up in arms" on hearing that lawmakers from Japan's Liberal Democratic Party plan to visit Ulleungdo and the "Dokdo Museum" during their visit to Korea next month. The following is an excerpt from the article:

Japanese media reported Friday that the LDP lawmakers plan to visit Korea on Aug. 1-4. They want to meet Korean lawmakers on Aug. 1 and board a ferry to Ulleung the next day, where they plan to spend the night and visit the Dokdo Museum.

Korean lawmakers were up in arms. Special Affairs Minister Lee Jae-oh tweeted, "If their visit aims at supporting their country's groundless territorial claim on Dokdo, it's tantamount to encroachment of Korea's sovereignty. I will use all means to stop them landing on the island."

Doesn't the Dokdo Museum supposedly have evidence that supports Korea's territorial claim over Dokdo? Is seems Korean lawmakers would want Japanese lawmakers to visit the place.

1906 - July 13 - "Daehan Maeil Shinbo" reports on Japanese Resident General Ikeda's Request for Information on Uldo County

On July 13, 1906, the Korean newspaper, Daehan Maeil Sinbo (大韓毎日申報:The Korea Daily News), reported that that the Japanese Resident-General asked the Korean Ministry of Interior to clarify the names of towns and titles of villages and the year/month of establishment of “Uldo County” (鬱島郡面名洞号).

池田公函　

統監府通信管理局長池田十三郎氏가江原道三陟郡으로부터分設한鬱島郡面名洞号와設置何年月을昭詳録交하라고内部에公函하얏다더라

----------------------------------------

Ikeda’s Official Letter

Mr. Ikeda Juzaburo(池田十三郎), chief of the Administrative Bureau of Communications of the Japanese Resident-General, sent Korean Ministry of Interior an official letter of inquiry, asking for the clarification of the names of towns and titles of villages and the year/month of establishment of Uldo County, which was branched out of Samcheok County, Gangwon-do.

----------------------------------------

池田公文書簡

統監府通信管理局長池田十三郎氏が江原道三陟郡から分設した鬱島郡の面の名や洞・号と設置の年月を回答せよと内務部に公文を送ったとのこと。

Note that article says Mr. Ikeda asked about the towns and villages of “Uldo County”, not “Ulleung Island”. As we have already found, the article in the Korean newspaper, Hwangseong Shinmun (皇城新聞) on a same day reported that the Korean ministry replied that the county was established on October 25, 1900, and that the neighboring islands were Jukdo (竹島) and Seokdo (石島), or rocky island Jukdo (竹島石島). The Korean ministry also gave the dimensions of Ulleungdo as sixty ri from east to west and forty ri from north to south for a total of 200 ri. This left “Dokdo” outside of the County, meaning Korean government set Takeshima/Dokdo outside of their territory.

Pro-Korean claim that this dimension is for the solo island of Ulleungdo, not Uldo County, however, it is extremely unnatural to answer the area/dimension of sole island when you are asked about the Uldo County. Moreover, it almost coincides with the areas given by Lee Geon-ha(李乾夏), a Minister of Internal Affairs of Korea, who submitted the petition for the ordinance in the Imperial Edict which made Ulleungdo a County of Gangwon Province (大韓勅令第41号) in 1900. It is apparent that Korean government at the time didn’t even hint that they considered Seokdo(石島) in this Edict was today’s Dokdo(独島) as they suddenly started to claim around 1969.

When Korean central government finally received the report from Gangwon Province governor and Chunchon county magistrate Lee Myung-rae (江原道觀察署理・春川郡守 李明來), who originally received the report about "Dokdo", which locates 40km in the open sea(外洋百余里) away from Ulleungdo, becoming Japanese territory from the county magistrate Shim Heung-taek(沈興沢), Minister of Interior Lee Jee-yong（内部大臣 李址鎔) and Prime Minister Bak Che-soon (議政府参政大臣・朴齋純） ordered governor Lee to investigate the "circumamstances of the island in concern and the activity of Japanese on the island" by the "Directive no. III (指令第三号)" on 20th May.

If Korean government found out that Shim’s “Dokdo” was appended island of Ulleungdo and “Seokdo” in Ordinance 41 in 1900 was another name of the island, they must have answered “竹島独島(JukdoDokdo)”, instead of “竹島石島(JukdoSeokdo)”, in the reply letter to the Resident-General, who asked about the towns and villages of “Uldo County”, not “Ulleung Island”.

From those articles, it is apparent that Korean government then didn’t consider Dokdo/Takeshima as their territory, and technically, that means they officially acquiesced the Japan's sovereignty over Takeshima/Dokdo by not interpolating "Dokdo" in the answer to claim the sovereignty.

chaamiey helped me for translating the article and corrected my mistakes. Two hanguls which are not used today were replaced by 한 and 하 by his advice. Thak you, chaamiey.

Related posts;
1899 - Sep 23 - "Hwangseong Sinmun" (皇城新聞) 1899 Sep 23: Ulleungdo Situation
1900 - "Uldo-gi" (鬱島記), by U Yong-jeong (禹用鼎)
1900 - Oct. 22 - A petition by 李乾夏 "鬱陵島를鬱島로改稱하고島監을郡守로改正에關한請議書", which excluded Dokdo from Uldo County.
1900 - Imperial Edict Makes Ulleungdo a County of Gangwon Province (大韓勅令第41号)
1906 - Feb 20 & April 17 - "Official Documents of the Ministry of Internal Affairs Vol.1" - Korean government protested about land transaction in 竹邊浦
1906 - July - Korea Omits Dokdo from Uldo County (皇城新聞 「鬱島郡의 配置顛末」)
1906 - Apr 1 - Japanese Tell Koreans of Takeshima Incorporation (山陰新報 "竹島土産")
1906 - Apr 8 - "Diary of My Trip to Takeshima" # 3 (山陰新報 "竹嶋渡海日記")
1906 - Sep 26 - Boundary Survey of Uldo County Conducted (皇城新聞 "鬱島戸口")
1913 - June 22- Location of Usando Unknown in Early 1900s (毎日申報 "無人島探検中止")