|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Real Reality
Joined: 10 Jan 2003 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2004 3:11 pm Post subject: Korean domination; "Stamps Sold Out"; Unbiased? |
|
|
All 1,874,000 stamps were sold within three hours.
http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200401/200401160025.html
Fever of Dok-do Love, Stamps Sold Out
With the absurd assertions from Japan which urges their right of control of Dok-do, on January 16, the commemorative stamps (four types, 22.4 million pieces) which incorporate the beauty of nature in Dok-do, have been issued at last. At Gwanghwamun post office in Seoul, a long queue was formed in the early hours of morning. As people came rushing in to purchase the stamps, the stamp sale was limited to 16 pieces per one person.
http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?biid=2004011737198
"absurd assertions from Japan" (How dare the Japanese make such an assertion?)
"beauty of nature in Dok-do" (See Below)
"issued at last" (How long have you been waiting?)
"a long queue was formed in the early hours of morning" (It reminds me of the enthusiasm of waiting for the third installment of Lord of the Rings.)
"people came rushing in" (People rushing? Do people rush in Korea?)
Korean Government's Position on Dokdo
Dokdo is apparently part of Korea's territory from standpoints of history and international law. Korea's dominium over Dokdo is firmed by "effective domination", one of core elements to establish territorial sovereignty in the international arena, and historical facts. The basic standpoint of the Korean government is that Dokdo is part of effectively occupied territory by Korea and cannot be the subject of diplomatic negotiation. The best way to consolidate dominium over Dokdo is continue to calmly and effectively dominate Dokdo.
The Korean government carries out such policies and conveys our strong position over Dokdo's dominium to Japan whenever the Japanese government raises question on that matter.
Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (MOMAF)
http://www.momaf.go.kr/eng/policy/dokdo/b_dokdo_policy01.asp
Japanese Government's Position on Takeshima
Based on historical evidence and international law, it is apparent that Takeshima is an integral part of Japan's sovereign territory. For example, a documented record in 1650s indicates that Takeshima, then known as "Matsushima" , was granted to the Ohyas and Murakawas of Houki-Han (today's Tottori Prefecture) from the Tokugawa Shogunate and came under administration of these families.
In July 1954, ROK unlawfully occupied Takeshima, stationing a dozen or so security guards. In September 1954, Japan proposed that the dispute be settled at the International Court of Justice. ROK rejected the proposal. The Government of Japan will continue its efforts to settle the dispute with ROK peacefully.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/takeshima/position.html
Where is Dokdo (Takeshima)?

Last edited by Real Reality on Sat Jan 17, 2004 5:54 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Joseph Fitzgerald

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2004 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dok-Do, or however you spell it, is just 2 big rocks in the water. Koreans make such a big deal out of nothing. I am not sure which the rocks are closer too, Korea or Japan. Are the Japanese making a big issue out of it or not? I have been back in the states for the last 2 months, soo I really don't pay close attention to this? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Gord

Joined: 25 Feb 2003
|
Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2004 4:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joseph Fitzgerald wrote: |
Dok-Do, or however you spell it, is just 2 big rocks in the water. Koreans make such a big deal out of nothing. I am not sure which the rocks are closer too, Korea or Japan. Are the Japanese making a big issue out of it or not? I have been back in the states for the last 2 months, soo I really don't pay close attention to this? |
It's less that it's two rocks and more that it pushes out the borders, thereby increasing potentional wealth due to natural resources, revenue from shipping routes, and prohibition of ships from coming closer to the Korean mainland should they be from undesirable countries. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Real Reality
Joined: 10 Jan 2003 Location: Seoul
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
hellofaniceguy

Joined: 10 Jan 2003 Location: On your computer screen!
|
Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2004 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Heck, koreans don't buy that many stamps usually! It's all about protest. "We want the Japanese to look bad." But koreans sure want the Japanese to spend the Yen in korea! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Real Reality
Joined: 10 Jan 2003 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2004 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Old French Map Found that Labels Dokdo as Korean
A French map made in 1894 marking Dokdo Island as Korean territory has been found. This map clearly indicates the border between Korea and Japan on the East Sea, and Dokdo, along with Ulleong Island, is inscribed as "Usando (I.Quen-San)."
http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200401/200401150014.html
I guess the map clearly indicates the border between Korea and Japan.
Do you see what I see? What is the name of the body of water between Korea and Japan?
Is that Sea of Japan (Mer du Japon)?
A big map
http://www.joy.hi-ho.ne.jp/nippon/french2.jpg
COR�E DU SUD
La R�publique de Cor�e (Cor�e du Sud) a une fronti�re commune au Nord avec la zone d�militaris�e (la s�parant de la R�publique populaire d�mocratique de Cor�e), est bord�e � l'Est par la Mer du Japon (Mer de l'Est).
http://www.guidemondialdevoyage.com/data/kor/kor.asp
How about both East Sea and Sea of Japan?
"MER DE L'EST" OU "MER DU JAPON" : UNE D�NOMINATION CONTROVERSEE
 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
tsgarp

Joined: 01 Dec 2003
|
Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2004 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's just two big rocks. Please, anyone incapable of understanding simple matters of international politics refrain from comment.
Gord, you are absolutely right. The fishing waters around Dokdo are rich in squid and other commercially important species, they also support some of the finest scuba diving waters in the area and could lead to a very lucrative tourism business someday. Shipping lanes, airspace, potential natural resources (most likely would be gas), etc... These small islands represent a lot more than national pride. They represent sovreignty and no country will give up even the meanest little piece of crap land if it can help it. Look at the current dispute between Vietnam, China, and the Phillipines over those little rocks that barely stick out of the water (I forget what they're called). |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Sooke

Joined: 12 Jan 2004 Location: korea
|
Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2004 8:52 pm Post subject: timing is key |
|
|
I have discussed this issue with my university free talkers. While all agree that it is Korean territory, which it most likely is (going back to 512 C.E.), one of my students brought up an interesting point.
This current round of the "Dok-do" controversy was kind of started on the Korean end, by the Government releasing stamps with Dokdo on them. Inevitebly, the Japanese responded to the bait, and so on. Anyway, my student pointed out that it was interesting that these stamps were released at the exact same time that President Roh is due to appear in court over corruption charges. This student, although a Roh supporter, suggests that the Korean government is using this current flap to take media attention off of Roh. People in Korea will definately take an interest on a "Korean vs. Japanese" issue, and more people would be inclined to follow this story. A convenient smokescreen. He also said the government routinely provokes these kind of issues when they are under scrutiny from the media.
Most of the class disagreed with him but I thought he had a good point. He was not denying the islands are Korean, but he thinks the government uses these issues when it is politically convenient for them to do so.
Geez, I can imagine any other countries in the world that do this.  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Dan

Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Sunny Glendale, CA
|
Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2004 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As I understand, Dok do is currently Korean land.
So, why talk about it? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
wylde

Joined: 14 Apr 2003
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
matko

Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: in a world of hurt!
|
Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2004 10:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sooke,
I think you're right. I haven't heard a word about it here in Japan. I don't watch the Japanese news much, but I do read the paper and haven't seen anything. Maybe I'm just not looking hard enough.  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
tsgarp

Joined: 01 Dec 2003
|
Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2004 10:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Actually, stamps have been released twice before. On one occassion thde Japanese sent a letter of protest and on the other they remained silent. This time they also sent a letter of protest. Can't really imagine why they would run hot and cold but they do. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
The Lemon

Joined: 11 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2004 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CNN offers this, from a South Korean official:
Quote: |
"From Japan's perspective, they are judging Tokto Island as a disputed territory, but from our perspective and from the foreign ministry's view, we clearly claim that it is not disputed land," said South Korean Director General of Posts Jay Q. Park. |
It seems Mr. Park needs to look up "disputed" in the dictionary. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Gord

Joined: 25 Feb 2003
|
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2004 12:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dan wrote: |
As I understand, Dok do is currently Korean land.
So, why talk about it? |
From what I've read up on it as of late, if it were taken to a simple vote by outside parties, Japan would be granted ownership of the islands as they have a far greater claim to the islands. Ranging from Korea claiming they didn't own the islands nor knowing of the islands in the nineteenth century when asked about them (in part to remove the Korean government from having to further spread part of it's navy to partol for piracy in the region), to surrendering all claim to the islands at the turn of the twentieth century in the off chance that Korea did at one time have a claim to the islands.
Which, ironically, is why the Korean government has historically refused to bring the issue to arbitration while welcoming such actions when a stronger case is had. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003 Location: England
|
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2004 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Lemon wrote: |
CNN offers this, from a South Korean official:
Quote: |
"From Japan's perspective, they are judging Tokto Island as a disputed territory, but from our perspective and from the foreign ministry's view, we clearly claim that it is not disputed land," said South Korean Director General of Posts Jay Q. Park. |
It seems Mr. Park needs to look up "disputed" in the dictionary. |
He is using the word in a legal sense. For an action under international law the territory must be "disputed." Thus, it is quite possible to claim it is not "disputed" land in a legal context. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|