| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Smee
Joined: 24 Dec 2004
Location: Jeollanam-do
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:47 pm Post subject: New Dokdo disputes. |
 |
|
. . . didn't see this posted elsewhere . . .
Japan's Survey Boat Heads for Dokdo
Seoul to Adopt Hardline Stance on Japan
| Quote: |
A Japanese maritime survey boat left Tokyo for the South Korean exclusive economic zone (EEZ) near the Dokdo islets for ocean research last night, reports said.
President Roh Moo-hyun meanwhile indicated that South Korea would quit its ``silent diplomacy'' and adopt a more active approach to protect the Dokdo islets from Japan's repeated claims to them.
In a dinner meeting with leaders of the governing and opposition parties at Chong Wa Dae, Roh said the time had come for the nation to reconsider whether or not to keep its silent and cool-headed approach to the Dokdo issue.
``We have been coping with the matter in a calm manner so as not to be entangled in Tokyo's plot to make Dokdo a disputed area,'' he said. ``But Japan is now engaging in intentional and calculated provocation.''
Dokdo has been occupied and controlled by South Korea for a long time. But Japan has claimed its ownership, citing the history of its colonial rule of the pre-modern Korea between 1910 and 1945.
Tensions escalated again late last week when the Japanese authorities informed the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) of its plan to send a sea probe to the South Korean EEZ near Dokdo.
|
http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nation/200604/kt2006041816520411950.htm
More at The Marmot's Hole
| Quote: |
The Korean coast guard has responded by deploying 18 patrol vessels of 500 tons or more along the East Sea EEZ and around Dokdo. The flagship of this armada is the 5,000-ton Sambong-ho.
|
www.rjkoehler.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Smee
Joined: 24 Dec 2004
Location: Jeollanam-do
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Calls to Abandon Silent Treatment of Japan Grow Louder
| Quote: |
There is a growing feeling in government circles that Korea��s so-called ��silent�� diplomacy toward Japan has had its day after news that Tokyo is planning to send a research vessel into the country��s exclusive economic zone near Dokdo. They want an end to the consensus that the national interest is best served by ignoring Japan��s low-level provocations over the East Sea islets it covets.
Many government officials now say there can be no compromise when it comes to territorial issues. A meeting of ministers on Monday decided that if any incursion happens, Korea is within its rights to seize the vessel.
|
http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200604/200604170031.html
What Force Will Counter Japan's Designs on Dokdo?
| Quote: |
President Roh Moo-hyun, around this time last year, vowed to put an end to Japan��s hegemonic ambitions. Since then, the only measure the government has taken was to cancel all further bilateral summits. That Tokyo continues with its stealth campaign to take the islets suggests the absence of a summit is causing no great inconvenience or regret there.
The U.S. has usually offered opportunities to resolve such disputes behind the scenes whenever South Korea and Japan became mired in them. Not this time. Because the bilateral alliance between Korea and the U.S. is shaky, the cooperative framework among South Korea, the U.S. and Japan has collapsed. The public must wonder what action Seoul has in mind as Japan carries on its campaign to seize Dokdo.
|
http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200604/200604140032.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wrench
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 1:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Man Japan would wipe the floor with the Korean navy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 8:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, maybe turnabout is fair play: Korea's Army is almost certainly capable of, say, re-taking Tsushima.
The Tokdo thing is absurd. Japan's claim is based on an illegal and immoral seizure of Korea, which gives it the right to keep a small pile of rocks?
But let's not be so naive: Tokdo is a very rich fishery and has, so I am told, an abundant supply of natural resources in the sea floor. This is nothing more than Japan hoping to negotiate some partial ownership/access to these natural resources in a case where they know they have no legitimate claim.
I say Korea should seize their boats, ship their men back, and let them know their territorial waters will be defended with force from this point forward. Why? Because I'm a warmonger? No. Because Japan is playing stupid games, is morally, ethically and legally in the wrong and sometimes...
...meeting farce with force *is* the best, quickest and cheapest solution. It's essentially a bluff, but one you can't lose. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 10:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| they know they have no legitimate claim. |
If Korea is so adamant that its claim is legitimate, why are they so reluctant to take it to international arbitration? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jajdude
Joined: 18 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Good question.
Korea seems to perceive such things emotionally.
Man sets himself on fire. (That'll show 'em.)
Why has an international body not passed a ruling on who owns what?
Or what shall we name that piece of water, if not merely the Pacific Ocean?
Perhaps the world has bigger fish to fry? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 2:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
If Korea is so adamant that its claim is legitimate, why are they so reluctant to take it to international arbitration?
|
I agree. It seems the common sense thing to do.
However, I've seen a couple of references in the newspapers about this. To suggest that Korea take the case to the World Court (or whoever) is seen as a betrayal of Korea. At this point, Korea is not even open to the idea that ownership is under question. One article suggested the issue is a way of breaking the US alliance. The scenario went something like this: a) Japan makes a claim (like sending a ship); b) Korea objects; c) the US suggests arbitration; d) Korea declares arbitration is the same as supporting Japan; e) the alliance is declared broken. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When I go to a ga-shu-mi restaurant in Korea I always ask if the tuna came from Takeshima. They usually have a picture of said islands on the wall. Interesting.
And no discount.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gypsyfish
Joined: 17 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Instead of trying to summarize why Korea is loath to go to court(and probably doing a poor job of it), I'll just post this link. It makes sense to me.
http://www.geocities.com/mlovmo/page10.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That pretty much sums it up. But, seriously, did any of you actually need to read that first to understand the situation?
1. Dokdo has been Korean since the time of Shilla, when it was conquered by Shilla.
2. Japan's claim is based solely on events associated with its annexation of Korea.
3. No-brainer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bigverne wrote: |
| Quote: |
| they know they have no legitimate claim. |
If Korea is so adamant that its claim is legitimate, why are they so reluctant to take it to international arbitration? |
Because they shouldnt have to. Would the US agree to go to arbitration if Russia suddenly wanted Alaska back? No bloody way in hell. They would do the exact same thing: defend Alaska with force if needed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gypsyfish
Joined: 17 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
That pretty much sums it up. But, seriously, did any of you actually need to read that first to understand the situation?
1. Dokdo has been Korean since the time of Shilla, when it was conquered by Shilla.
2. Japan's claim is based solely on events associated with its annexation of Korea.
3. No-brainer. |
And Korea has people on the island. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
itaewonguy
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 12:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
That pretty much sums it up. But, seriously, did any of you actually need to read that first to understand the situation?
1. Dokdo has been Korean since the time of Shilla, when it was conquered by Shilla.
2. Japan's claim is based solely on events associated with its annexation of Korea.
3. No-brainer. |
tell that to tibet, Isreal, USA, NEW ZEALAND, AUSTRALIA, ZIMBABWAE, BLAR BLAR BLAR BLAR...
JAPAN owned it. and during the past 100 years where land ownership pretty much got settled and what you now have you owned! KOREA LOST IT!
its japans! doesnt matter if Korea owned it pre colonization!
Japan kept it once they left and its only been the last 10 years korea decided it wants it back!
TIBET!! thats a story!! not a pile of rocks in the ocean!
they can just split the rocks.. you take the left side and we take the right
china gonna give tibet back?
china gonna give manchuria back!?
what about the russians with their land ownership over ummm forget the name ukraine? or something..
this is a joke!!!
DOKDO belongs to JAPAN now!!
until another war breaks land remains with who had it last |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 1:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| itaewonguy wrote: |
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
That pretty much sums it up. But, seriously, did any of you actually need to read that first to understand the situation?
1. Dokdo has been Korean since the time of Shilla, when it was conquered by Shilla.
2. Japan's claim is based solely on events associated with its annexation of Korea.
3. No-brainer. |
tell that to tibet, Isreal, USA, NEW ZEALAND, AUSTRALIA, ZIMBABWAE, BLAR BLAR BLAR BLAR...
JAPAN owned it. and during the past 100 years where land ownership pretty much got settled and what you now have you owned! KOREA LOST IT!
its japans! doesnt matter if Korea owned it pre colonization!
Japan kept it once they left and its only been the last 10 years korea decided it wants it back!
TIBET!! thats a story!! not a pile of rocks in the ocean!
they can just split the rocks.. you take the left side and we take the right
china gonna give tibet back?
china gonna give manchuria back!?
what about the russians with their land ownership over ummm forget the name ukraine? or something..
this is a joke!!!
DOKDO belongs to JAPAN now!!
until another war breaks land remains with who had it last |
Well Japan may have owned it but Korea owns it now. Japan can try to take it back if they want war. Are you not up on who actually has physical posession (as in people and soldiers) of the place? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gypsyfish
Joined: 17 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 2:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| itaewonguy wrote: |
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
That pretty much sums it up. But, seriously, did any of you actually need to read that first to understand the situation?
1. Dokdo has been Korean since the time of Shilla, when it was conquered by Shilla.
2. Japan's claim is based solely on events associated with its annexation of Korea.
3. No-brainer. |
tell that to tibet, Isreal, USA, NEW ZEALAND, AUSTRALIA, ZIMBABWAE, BLAR BLAR BLAR BLAR...
JAPAN owned it. and during the past 100 years where land ownership pretty much got settled and what you now have you owned! KOREA LOST IT!
its japans! doesnt matter if Korea owned it pre colonization!
Japan kept it once they left and its only been the last 10 years korea decided it wants it back!
TIBET!! thats a story!! not a pile of rocks in the ocean!
they can just split the rocks.. you take the left side and we take the right
china gonna give tibet back?
china gonna give manchuria back!?
what about the russians with their land ownership over ummm forget the name ukraine? or something..
this is a joke!!!
DOKDO belongs to JAPAN now!!
until another war breaks land remains with who had it last |
So you're ranting that Tibet should belong to China?
The 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty with Japan doesn't specifically mention the disposition of Dokdo or Liancourt Rocks, as it was also known, just as it didn't mention other Korean islands that are not disputed today. After the treaty was signed, though, the US Air Force requested permission from Korea when they needed to land there.
It still sounds like Korea's right this time. And, since they are physically occupying the island, (possession being nine tenths of the law) it only reinforces their claim.
I'm not an apologist. I think the whole East Sea thing is silly. Ditto the Korea/Corea thing. But I'm not so blinded by hate that I can't see who is right here.
(And I don't really think that you believe that China should occupy TIBET.) (Ooooh, I like capital letters, too.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
