Time to promote ’Sea of Korea’

By Park Si-soo

As tensions rise between Korea and Japan over the name of the body of water between the neighboring nations, a noted scholar has claimed it should be called the East Sea or Sea of Korea.

“Some say the name is just symbolic so it carries no negative impact on Korea’s ownership of the Dokdo islets. But it’s not, it’s significant,” said Kim Hak-joon, chairman of the Association for Preservation and Research of Dokdo and concurrently president of the Board of Directors of Dankook University.

“It will affect global awareness of Dokdo,” he said. Do you think people will believe that a disputed island in the Sea of Japan is Korean territory, he asked.

He said the name of the body should be dually branded as long as the dispute is pending. “That’s, I believe, an international practice on this matter,” he said.

He praised the foreign ministry’s idea of promoting the Sea of Korea, instead of the East Sea.

“Given that the East Sea sounds a bit confusing to countries, it’s a good idea to promote the Sea of Korea, which well describes the identity of the area,” he said.

The body of the water has been called the Sea of Japan for decades in the world’s most-cited guideline for maps, published by The International Hydrographic Organization (IHO).

Korea has worked for years to have it renamed the East Sea, Korea’s preferred term, or at least dually called the Sea of Japan or East Sea in the guideline.

Korea has claimed the name Sea of Japan was unfairly established during Japan’s colonial era. The latest version of the guideline was published in 1953. Back then, Seoul had no chance to address the matter due to its preoccupation with the 1950-53 Korean War.

Yet, the campaign seems to have become fruitless, observers say, as the United States openly expressed its support for the use of the Sea of Japan.

The U.S. State Department made it clear earlier this month that the standard name for the body of water is the Sea of Japan, citing the policy of the U.S. Board on Geographic Names.

In a sign of hope for Korea, however, some local news outlets recently reported the U.S. has asked the IHO to consider using the East Sea as an “alternate name” for the Sea of Japan in the appendix of its updated guideline, citing unidentified diplomatic sources.

The area’s appellation for an updated version of the guideline will be determined in the IHO’s general meeting in April next year through a vote by 80 IHO member states. Sensing urgency, the government and politicians have gone to great lengths to have the U.S. withdraw the decision.

Be cool on Dokdo issue

Whenever Japan has claimed Dokdo as its territory, Korea has reacted furiously in a very emotional way, rather than a rational one.

The government has instantly summoned the Japanese envoy here to protest. Hundreds of enraged people flocked to what used to be the peaceful and less-travelled front yard of the Japanese Embassy in central Seoul, chanting anti-Japanese slogans, tearing up Japanese national flags and setting fire to effigies of the Japanese politicians who raised the claim.

Some politicians stood at the forefront of such rallies, reading out a protest statement at the top of their voice before the crowd and calling for measures aimed at reinforcing Korea’s sovereignty over its easternmost islets.

In the eyes of Kim, such offensive protests by civilians are acceptable in view of the shared animosity against Japan among Korean citizens. Japan brutally occupied Korea from 1910 to 1945.

Even so, Kim said, it’s not wise behavior for politicians and public figures. He underlined the need to deal with the issue with great care, patience and a sophisticated long-term strategy.

“They should be cool when dealing with affairs on Dokdo,” said Kim, explaining he means they should remain calm, rational and careful. “It’s okay for citizens to vent their fury and stage strong protests against Japan since these are viewed as the materialization of patriotism. But politicians and public figures should react differently. They need to adopt ‘cool diplomacy.’”

He criticized some political heavyweights for calling on the government to dispatch a Marine unit to Dokdo and to take bold action in response to Japan’s fresh claim to the island this month.

Chairman Hong Joon-pyo of the ruling Grand National Party (GNP) suggested stationing a Marine unit to defend the islets on Aug. 14 amid escalating Seoul-Tokyo tensions due to the territorial dispute. Hong said now is the time for us to “go beyond the quiet and passive response and recognize the need for determination to protect Dokdo.” A small police detachment currently guards Dokdo.

Chairman Sohn Hak-kyu of the main opposition Democratic Party echoed the view, criticizing President Lee Myung-bak’s “quite diplomacy” over Dokdo.

“These remarks are not helpful at all in reinforcing our sovereignty, rather they might undermine it.” Kim said. “In peacetime, police are responsible for guarding territory. Stationing a military unit in an area in peacetime implies the area’s ownership is disputed.”

With the diplomatic spat over Dokdo now spanning five decades, Japan has repeatedly urged Korea to take the issue to the International Court of Justice, and Korea has declined to do so, arguing there is nothing to discuss.

History is on our side

Kim, who has researched Dokdo for decades and published books on the topic, said Tokyo’s territorial ambition of the Korean islets is totally groundless.

After World War II, Dokdo’s legal status was not explicitly stated in the San Francisco Peace Treaty between the U.S. and Japan in September 1951 and many historical records prove that Dokdo belongs to Korea, he said.

The treaty clearly stipulated Dokdo as Korean territory in its 1st to 5th draft. However, any mention of the islets was omitted in the final version due to a combination of factors including successful lobbying by Japan, and Korea’s lack of diplomatic clout as a young country about to attain independence.

“A growing number of Japanese scholars and experts admitted that Dokdo is Korean territory,” he said. “Even a renowned Japanese columnist suggested in his commentary the Japanese authorities give up its territorial ambition of Dokdo, which was a very auspicious sign.”

The writer, Wakaiya Yosibumi, ran a commentary on the mass-circulating Asahi Shimbun on March 27, 2005, calling on the Japanese government to drop its territorial ambition for Dokdo and seek peaceful means to share with Korea rich resources surrounding the islets.

Kim said the publication and global distribution of books which explain Korea’s justification of its control of Dokdo in five major international languages — English, French, Russian, Chinese and Spanish — will help bolster the country’s ownership of Dokdo and its international recognition.