My Photo

Korean Radio/TV

Blogs about that part of Asia that isn't Korea

« LiNK coming to Sookmyung Women's University this Friday | Main | 'We herewith proclaim the independence of Korea and the liberty of the Korean people' »

Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Comments

pacifist

If you study how the SF peace treaty developed, you will notice that Takeshima/Dokdo was intentionally excluded form the list that Korea would get back from Japan. It remained in the Japanese territory.

To follow is the same posting I posted in the former chapter:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
As for the San Francisco Peace Treaty, it didn't include Takeshima/Dokdo in the list of Korean territory which was to be returned to Korea, it was intentionally delited from the list by USA.

It is apparent if you read the following data - written in chronological order.

1) 29th January 1946 - SCAPIN 677 (placed Takeshima/Dokdo outside Japan)

2) 22nd June 1946 - SCAPIN 1033 (blocked Japan from exploiting the adjacent ocean resources)

3) 16th September 1947 - SCAPIN 1778 (the islets for use by the Allied Powers as a bombing range for the Far East Air Force)

4) 19th September 1949 - SCAPIN 2046 (Abolished SCAPIN 1033)

5) 14th November 1949 - a telegram from William Sebald to W. Walton Butterworth:
“Article 6: Recommend reconsideration Liancourt rocks (Takeshima), Japan’s claim to these islands is old and valid. Security considerations might conceivably envisage weather and rader stations thereon”.

6) 19th November 1949 - a letter from Butterworth to the Secretary of the State:
“With regard to the dispositon of islands formerly posessed by Japan in the direction of Korea it is suggested that Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima) be specified in our proposed Article 3 as belonging to Japan. Japan’s claim to these islands is old and appears valid, and it is difficult to regard them as islands off the shore of Korea. Security considerations might render the provision of weather and radar station on these islands a matter of interest to the United States”.

7) 29th December 1949 - 6th amendment of the treaty draft:
“Article 3 1.The Territory of Japan shall comprise the four principal Japanese islands of Honshu, Kyushu, Shikoku and Hokkaido and all adjacent minor islands, including the islands of the Inland sea(seto Naikai); Tsushima,Takeshima (Liancourt Rocks), Oki retto, Sado, Okujiri, Rebun, Riishiri and all other islands in the Japan Sea (Nippon Kai) within a line connecting the farther shores of Tsushima, Takeshima and Rebun; the Goto archipelago, the Ryukyu Islands north of 29° N. Latitude, and all other islanls of the East China Sea east of longtude 127° east of Greenwich and north of 29°N. Latitude; the Izu Islands southward to end including Sofu Gan (lot’s Wife) and all other islands of the Philippine Sea nearer to the four principal islands than the islands named; and the Habomai group and Shikotan lying to the east and south of a line extending from a point in 43°35′ N.Lati- tude, 145°35′ E. logitude to a point in 44°N. latitude, 146°30′ E. longitude, and to the south of a line drawn due east on the parsllel in 44° N. Lati- tude. All of the islands identified above, with a three-mile belt of territorial waters, shall belong to Japan”.

8) July 1950 - Commentary on Draft Treaty of Peace with Japan:
(It also says that Takeshima belongs to Japan)

9) 19th July 1951 - Korea wanted amendment. Korean ambassador had a meeting with John Foster Dulles:
“Mr. Dulles then inquired as to the location of the two islands, Dokdo and Parangdo. Mr. han stated that these were two small islands lying in the Sea of Japan, he believed in the general vicinity of Ullungdo. Mr. Dulles asked whether these islands had been Korean before the Japanese annexation, to which the Ambassador replied in the affirmative. If that were the case, Mr Dulles saw no particular problem in including these islands in the pertinent part of the treaty which related to the renunciation of Japanese territorial claims to Korean territory”.(But after all, Korea's plea was rejected.)

10) the last draft of treaty:
“In the document footnote 2 above, Mr. Rusk continued : “As regards the island of Dokdo… this normally uninhibited 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”. (Korea had in the meantime withdrawn the claim to Parangdo.)

11) 8th September 1951 peace Conference - (treaty coming into effect on 28th April 1952)

12) 18th January 1952 - President Ree declared 海洋主権宣言, he made the Rhee Line which included Takeshima/Dokdo in Korean territory.
(Japan made an objection on 28th January 1952)

13) 1954 - “Report of Ambassador James A. Van Fleet”
“Unilateral proclamation of sovereignty over the seas (Syngman Rhee line) is illegal.
The United States had concluded Japanese sovereignty over the rocks.
The dispute over the rocks might properly be referred to the International Court of Justice”.

Addendum (Rusk's document; 10th August 1951)
Excerpt: "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."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rusk_documents

pacifist

The conclusion of the top comment is questionable:

He said, "The 1951 Treaty of San Francisco, which is the final word on the matter, neither excluded Dokdo from Japanese territory nor declared it to be Korean".

As I posted above, USA - the chief member of the allied nationas thought that Takeshima/Dokdo does NOT appear ever before to have been claimed by Korea. It explains why the name of Takeshima/Dokdo was not included in the list of islands that Japan should return to Korea. USA thought that it was Japan's territory and that Japan didn't need to give it to Korea.

So the exclusion of the name Takeshima/Dokdo in the SF treaty HAD a important meaning, that it belongs to Japan.

So Korea had to declare the Rhee Line to steal the island before the SF treaty would be put into effect. If he didn't do anything, it would be returned to Japan safely.


"The simple fact is that there is nothing in the World War Two or Occupation documents that definitively states that Dokdo is Korean territory".
- Yes, that's right. They didn't have any right to claim Takeshima/Dokdo.

The comments to this entry are closed.