Yuh Pok-keun, director for the Territory and Oceans Division at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, reconfirmed the government’s position on Dokdo during an interview with NewsWorld. Yuh said, “Dokdo is not a matter of dispute since Korea’s easternmost island in the East Sea is an integral part of Korean territory historically, geographically, and under international law.”

The Japanese are shifting toward a nationalism tinted with a military inclination as their politicians take the initiative in an apparent attempt to take advantage of territorial disputes in the East Sea, including its alleged territorial claims over the islets of Dokdo, many observers in Korea and abroad agree. Japan has glossed over its past atrocities, denying that Korean comfort women were imperial Japan’s forced sex slaves, and even some Japanese conservatives and politicians have paid homage to the Yasukuni shrine of former World War II war criminals and proposed a revision of the pacifist Japanese constitution, rekindling the specter of resurgence of Japanese militarism.    

In particular, the Japanese government has intensified an offensive over its territorial claims since early August when President Lee Myung-bak became the first Korean incumbent Chief Executive to tour the islets. The following are excerpts of an interview with Dir. Yuh in which he had spoke of Korea’s rebuttal of Japan’s territorial claims over Dokdo and its proposal of taking the Dokdo issue to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

Answer: Dokdo is not a matter of dispute since Korea’s easternmost island in the East Sea is an integral part of Korean territory historically, geographically, and under international law.

The Japanese government has intensified its offensive over its alleged territorial claims over the island since this past August when President Lee made his historic visit.

After the Korean government returned Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda’s protest letter, the Japanese government responded by proposing to take the sovereignty issue to the ICJ. Prime Minister Noda, who once called President Lee’s trip to Dokdo illegal, is putting on hold a plan to submit the issue to the ICJ until the upcoming general election is over.  

Japan has ratcheted up its provocations following President Lee’s visit. The Japanese augmented its budget for publicizing its stand by 84 billion won, and it is seeking to install a separate government body in charge of Dokdo, or what the Japanese call “Takeshima.” The House of Councilors has adopted a resolution calling for a return to Japan’s effective control over the islet.

Flatly denying Japan’s proposal of taking the issue to the ICJ, the Korean government has stressed through Korea’s overseas missions that the Dokdo issue has a historical aspect in which it is derived from the Imperial Japanese invasion of Korea, so it takes on a significance as a symbol of Korea’s sovereignty and independence. 

Japan tried to incorporate Dokdo into its own territory in 1905 through Shimane Prefecture Public Notice No. 40. At the time, Japan was at war with Russia over its interests in Manchuria and the Korean Peninsula. Japan had forced the Empire of Korea to sign the Korea-Japan Protocol in 1904 to secure unlimited access to Korean territory in the execution of the Russo-Japanese War. Japan’s attempt at turning Dokdo into Japanese territory was also aimed at meeting its military needs in the face of possible maritime clashes with Russia. 

Japan had also coerced the Korean government to appoint Japanese and other non-Korean nationals as advisors through the First Korea-Japan Agreement in August 1904. In effect, Japan had been systematically implementing its plan to take over Korea even before the forced annexation in 1910. Dokdo was the first Korean territory to fall victim to the Japanese aggression against Korea. Japan’s attempt at incorporating Dokdo in 1905 through Shimane Prefecture Public No. 40 was not only an illegal act that infringed upon Korea’s ancient and undeniable sovereignty over the island, but also null and void under international law. 

On a clear day, Dokdo is visible to the naked eye from Korea’s Ulleungdo (Ulleung Island), the island which lies in the closest proximity (87.4 km) to Dokdo. Given its geographical location, Dokdo has historically been considered to be a part of Ulleungdo. Dokdo is 157.5 km away from Japan’s Oki Islands. This is well evidenced in early Korean documents. For instance, the Joseon (Korean) government publication Sejong Silrok Jiriji (Geography Section of the Annals of King Sejong’s Reign), 1454, which provides a geographical record of Korean territory, states, “Usan (Dokdo), Mureung (Ulleungdo)  “The two islands are not far apart from each other and thus visible on a clear day.” While there are numerous adjacent islands around Ulleungdo, Dokdo is the only one visible to the naked eye from Ulleungdo on a clear day.

In the Sejong Silrok Jiriji, it is recorded that Ullengdo (Mureung) and Dokdo (Usan) are two islands that are part of Joseon’s Uljin-hyon (Uljin prefecture). It is also recorded that the two islands had been territories of Usan-guk (Usan State), which was conquered by Silla (former kingdom of Korea) in the early 6th century (AD 512), indicating that Korea’s effective control over Dokdo extends back to the Silla period. 

Consistent records pertaining to Dokdo are also found in other government publications, including Sinjeung Dongguk Yeoji Seungnam (Revised and Augmented Survey of the Geography of Korea), 1531; Dongguk Munheon Biggo (Reference Compilation of Documents of Korea), 1770; Man-gi Yoram (Manual of State Affairs for the Monarch), 1808; and Jeungbo Munheon Biggo (Revised and Enlarged Edition of the Reference Compilation of Documents on Korea), 1808.

Particularly noteworthy is the record in the volume “Yeojigo” in Dongguk Munheon Biggo, which states, “Ulleung and Usan (Dokdo) are both territories of Usan-guk, and Usan is what Japan refers to as Matsushima (the old Japanese name for Dokdo). This passage makes it evident that Usan is present-day Dokdo and that it is Korean territory.

Up until the Meiji period (1868-1912), the Japanese government had consistently acknowledged that Dokdo was non-Japanese territory ever since the Ulleungdo Dispute, through which it was confirmed that Dokdo was Korean territory. This is corroborated by the absence of Japanese government documents citing Dokdo as being Japanese territory prior to Japan’s attempt to incorporate Dokdo in 1905 through Shimane Prefecture Public Notice No. 40. 

In fact, there are even official Japanese government publications that plainly state that Dokdo is not Japanese territory. The Ulleungdo Dispute is referred to as an incident in which while illegally fishing in Ulleungdo, the Ohya and Murakawa families of Totori-han (feudal clan of Tottori) of Japan had a run-in with Korean fishermen, including An Yong-bok, in 1693. The two Japanese families proposed to the Japanese government (Edo shogunate) to prohibit Koreans’ passage to Ulleungdo. The Edo shogunate sent an inquiry to Tottori-han on Dec. 25, 1695. Upon receiving Tottori-han’s response that neither Ullengdo (known then in Japan as Takeshima) nor Dokdo (known then in Japan as Matsushima) belonged to Tottori-han, the Edo shogunate issued a directive on Jan. 28, 1696, prohibiting all Japanese from making passage toward Ullengdo. The dispute between Korea and Japan thus came to a close, confirming Ulleungdo and Dokdo as being Korean territory.  

The Japanese side has spread ill-natured propaganda that Japan wants a peaceful solution by taking the issue to the ICJ, but Korea opposes. 

In this regard, we make it clear that any country should not make unjust allegations by distorting historical facts and abusing international law.

It is a self-contradiction and a double standard that Japan would not take its territorial disputes over the Senkaku Islands and Kuril Islands to the ICJ, but only the Dokdo issue.

Recognizing Korea’s position that the Dokdo issue is not just a matter of properties and territory, but a historical question stemming from imperial Japan’s invasion of Korea, many news organizations across the globe have made headlines.

Japanese Nobel laureate Kenzaburo Oe and other prominent figures issued the Citizens’ Appeal on Sept. 28, 2012, calling for Japan’s repenting of the past history, saying that Japan’s annexation of Dokdo was part of the colonization of the Korean Peninsula. 

Ex-Korean prime minister Han Seung-soo contributed an article, titled “Heeding History in East Asia” to Project Syndicate, in which the Dajokan, Japan’s highest decision-making body in 1868-1885, denied any claims over Dokdo through its Order of 1877. Yet, it said, in 1905, Japan took measures to incorporate Dokdo in order to use it as a strategic military site for its war with Russia.

It said the final text of the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty, which ended World War II in the Pacific, makes no mention of Dokdo. But earlier versions identified the island as Korean territory. The reference in the final version, drafted by the United States, was removed in light of U.S. interests in building strategic partnerships with both South Korea and Japan.