Registered user login:

Whose islands are they?

Barak Kushner

Published 21 July 2008

If a politician yells in the middle of the ocean, does anyone hear? Barak Kushner on how a Japanese educational directive about its territory has reopened old wounds

According to Japanese news reports over the last week Minister of Education Tokai Kisaburô and several other high-ranking officials decided that the Japanese government needed to reject South Korea’s claims over Takeshima (Tokdo in Korean) - a set of small islands in the Sea of Japan.

This “educational directive” would instruct students that the sovereignty of Takeshima was not an issue and that it remained an inviolable part of Japan. In response, Seoul recalled its ambassador to Japan and recent commentary suggests he may not return. What is Japan doing by suddenly probing this geographical wound and why is this such a controversy?

Despite the inclination to cite a famous East Asian proverb concerning the need to work toward consensus, this latest scuffle seems to mirror a line from Woody Allen: “No man is an island, and yet some are peninsulas.” It’s as if the land were somehow connected over the sea to encompass the island as a peninsula.

The problem is that while Korean and Japan may wish to live in political and historical isolation the tiny islands in between are wedded to a long and fractured history that feeds feuds about ownership.

And there is more to this than a simple standoff about algae covered real estate. Islands in the middle of the sea are actually tricky legal issues. According to various interpretations of the UN Law Of The Sea, islands and atolls can sometimes significantly expand national claims to seabed minerals or mining rights or mark out more clearly defined limits of national territory near international waters.

Moreover, such outcrops stand as lone fishing stations in the seas of East Asia that have been running dry thanks to overfishing. Consequently, islands are both symbols and a physical manifestation of the State and have serious military, economic, and social implications.

And yet as important as these issues are neither South Korea or Japan (nor Russia for that matter as Japan’s new educational directive includes the the Kuril Islands) currently employ such arguments.

Instead, we are delivered a complex orchestration of appeals to gut emotional nationalism. “We need this land … because it’s ours,” they declare. Both Japan and Korea will unroll ancient maps, trot out anecdotes, and seek questionable scholarly testimony to encourage public opinion that these isolated dots in the sea were always part of their nations.

The entire history of Japanese colonialism and unilateral declaration of ownership of Korean lands, prior to 1945, along with imperial Japan’s early 20th century land grabbing phase that occupied several Russian islands, complicates the situation even further.

Any Japanese claim to land often meets with a Korean, Chinese, or Russian backlash stemming from the lingering distaste of what many experienced through past Japanese aggression.

The political and social pressure that drives these actions can be described in three simple words - weak country mentality. All three countries of Korea, Japan and Russia are struggling with their international positions.

Domestic appeals to naked nationalism hold strong latent appeal. These actions are mere proxies for real political debates about substantive issues and yet all sides appear incapable of probative internal or foreign dialogue, resulting in childish sophistry. However, the potential for the situation to suddenly escalate to something more volatile, remains a feared possibility.

The irony of the situation is that these government directives are aimed at students who rarely read the textbooks anyway. Textbooks are a step toward passing the test for advancement but the real focus of most educational progress in Japanese and Korean society is cram schools. Since cram schools are not official they don’t use authorized textbooks. The move is a hollow example of a shrill political gamble to rally national pride in a time when many more significant issues fail to receive proper attention.

Barak Kushner is lecturer in Japanese history at the University of Cambridge, and the author of works on Japanese propaganda and nationalism in East Asia. Currently he is in China as an Abe Fellow conducting research concerning how the Chinese government adjudicated Japanese war crimes

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

8 comments from readers

ampontan
21 July 2008 at 13:55

Mr. Kushner gets quite a lot wrong here.

"The problem is that while Korean and Japan may wish to live in political and historical isolation..."

He is obviously unaware of the efforts on both sides of the Korean Strait to create a super-regional economic zone. President Lee said that such a zone already exists de facto.

He fails to mention that the Japanese directive also mentions the Korean claims on the islets.

"However, the potential for the situation to suddenly escalate to something more volatile, remains a feared possibility."

Not from the Japanese side it doesn't, and never has. They are ready to go to the International Court of Justice. The Koreans refuse.

"The irony of the situation is that these government directives are aimed at students who rarely read the textbooks anyway."

Of course they do, and that doesn't take into account classroom lectures. Perhaps the professor is judging by the number of people who read his textbooks?

For more detail, try this:

http://ampontan.wordpress.com/2008/07/21/seouls-choice-busan...

gnuneo
23 July 2008 at 18:59

the most interesting element this mentions is the lack of "substantive" discussion in the Public arena about these claims. The fact the the various Govts will only use emotive language and not the language of reason is indicative of a number of policies and issues - the most obvious is that these nations are therefore clearly ruled to a large extent by technocrats, who do not believe either they can convince the Public of their arguments, and/or that they do not believe the Public are 'developed' enough to handle such debate - nor do the Rulers wish them to be!

there is also the long-term element that emotive nationalistic language in children's textbooks is usually a precursor to future militarism, such behaviourist style BS has been used for that reason throughout the entire 20th century, and it seems further into the 21st.

how will this develop? Unfortunately, the history of Mankind is replete with such examples, and even more unfortunately, history tells us how they generally end. Or more accurately, never end, no matter what level of bloodshed is caused by later, unscrupulous Leadership.

Nakagawa
24 July 2008 at 15:45

Why Japan's 1905 incorporate is "illegal"?

1. Japan did not obeyed international rule,

When Japan incorporate this islands, They hide this fact. even official gazette of shimane 1905 was a "for reading of circulation members only"

after 1906, they announced this in minor local newspaper in shimane.

However, since 1905, 'diplomatic rights' of Korea deprived by Japan.(in 1910, Japan forced annexed korea) in 1906, all diplomatic agents in korea were Japanese.

Why Japan's 1905 incorporate is "illegal"?

2. Japan's claim "terra nullius" was originally false. so, '1905 declare' is originally invalid. (it as Korean territory from records that date back to the sixth century during the Unified Silla period and on the 1900 Korean Empire ordinance officially incorporating three islands into modern Ulleung County. also Japan official goverment documents proved that it is a territory of Korea) Japan's claim "terra nullius" is a originally false claim.

Wow..it's really shocking and scary to find Japanese they are doing nothing wrong. Japanese custom to think that "We do not go to ICJ with China and Russia. (Whole Kuril islands, Diaoyutai Islands) we Japanese refused to go to ICJ. because we anyhow wanted island must belong to japan! However, when we Japanese put pressure go to ICJ with korea(we Japan nothing to loose!), that is perfectly normal and OK." Typical Japan double standard..cowardly and sickening.

Nakagawa
24 July 2008 at 15:53

http://www.korea.net/News/Issues/issueDetailView.asp?board_n...

According to Korea.net,

"Reference to the International Court of Justice

ㅇ The incorporation of Dokdo in 1905, as was shown above, was a clear act of imperialist invasion, and all of the Japanese claims are the result of distortion and cover-up of history. Far from showing any remorse over its history of invasion and colonialism, Japan has instead insisted that Korea take the issue of sovereignty of Dokdo before the International Court of Justice.

ㅇ However, there is no reason whatsoever for Korea to bring the issue to the International Court of Justice when Dokdo so clearly belongs to Korea from the perspective of history, geography, and even international law.

ㅇ The reason why Japan wants the issue taken to the International Court of Justice is simple: Japan would gain an enormous political advantage by standing at the Court on equal footing with Korea. Since Japan has neither sovereignty nor control over the island, it has nothing to lose even if it goes to Court. It is interesting to note, however, that China has recently intensified its claims to the Senkaku Islands/Diaoyutai currently under the effective control of Japan, but Japan has not demanded that the issue be brought to the International Court of Justice. "

Nakagawa
24 July 2008 at 17:41

but fact is........

before 1953, Japan goverment did not recognized that Dokdo belong to Japan.

even Korea-Japan annexation period(1910~1945), Dokdo was classified as a part of Gangwondo, Korea.

After 1945, Korea liberation from Japan, Korea shortly govered by USFK and WW2 allied force. even that period, Dokdo was classified as a Korean territory.

"historically, Takeshima belong to Japan!" in fact, This claim is later maded claim since 1953.

See this 1951 Japan map(drawed by Japanese goverment 衆議院)

-Dokdo was Officialy exclude in Territory of Japan.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/28788327@N05/2690838397/

Nakagawa
24 July 2008 at 17:46

Here is the very good source from japanese scholar.

This docuement tell a everything.

Japanese scholar Kazuo Hori's 1997 Article.(please read this)

http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/kazuo-hori-doc.pdf

BJP
30 July 2008 at 18:19

Does any one believe that there won't be any military conflict when two nations teach their children that the same island is theirs. Dokdo do may have been disputed in the past irrespective of the merits. Teaching that the island is Japan's in Japanese textbook only means a military conflict. Since someone above is suggesting reading someone else's research, I will say read my research report where all arguments are considered.

http://knol.google.com/k/byeongju-park/dokdo/2zvfgrgyend5c/2

Any merit in Japanese claims?? Are we kidding? This island has been under Korean occupation since A.D. 512 for goodness' sake. This is no Terra Nullius. Japanese occupation between 1905 and 1945 with the rest of Korea does not make this island Japan's.

In the end, it seems like the Japanese politicians are using this to rally their right wing agenda.

nawawimohamad
31 July 2008 at 10:34

The Japanese and Russian can continue squabbling over the islands and even start the WWIII. These are just puny thoughts of the human minds which is more childish then small children.

My suggestion is to bomb the islands to oblivion so that nobody can claim them.

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

Read More

Vote!

Is capitalism finished?