|
Fact Sheet: Position of
Japan on Takeshima
Ministry
of Foreign Affairs of Japan
●
In light of the historical evidence and in
accordance with international law, Takeshima is an integral and inherent
part of Japanese territory. There is an ongoing dispute with the
Republic of Korea (ROK) over Takeshima, and in recent months President
Lee Myung-Bak visited Takeshima illegally. Japan seeks to resolve the
territorial dispute in a calm, fair and peaceful way, through the proper
framework of international law.
●
In accordance with the position stated
above, in order to settle the dispute in a calm, fair and peaceful way
based on international law, on August 21, Japan officially presented the
ROK with a diplomatic proposal to institute legal proceedings before the
International Court of Justice (ICJ) by a special agreement between the
two countries. Japan also proposed conciliation based on the Exchange
of Notes constituting an agreement between the two countries concerning
the settlement of disputes. However, on August 30, the Government of
the ROK replied by note verbale, stating that it did not accept the
proposal.
●
The ROK is an important member of the
international community and is supposed to support the ‘rule of law’
internationally through its activities in the United Nations and other
international organizations. Additionally the ROK has been positioning
itself under the catch phrase of “Global Korea.” As such, Japan expected
the ROK to accept this proposal and to fairly and unequivocally state
their assertions at the ICJ. The reply from the ROK, which did not
indicate a specific counter proposal to settle the Takeshima issue, is
therefore extremely disappointing.
●
The Government of Japan will continue to
take appropriate measures to settle the issue in accordance with
international law, and in a calm and peaceful way. These measures
include the submission of the dispute to the ICJ on its own.
●
Although the ROK is trying to associate the
Takeshima issue with the issue of understanding of history, it is not
appropriate to discuss the Takeshima issue in the context of
understanding of history. The Japanese Cabinet decision in 1905 to
incorporate Takeshima into Shimane Prefecture “reaffirmed” Japan’s claim
of sovereignty. During the early period of the Edo era, Takeshima was
used by merchants from Yonago who engaged in fishing and hunting under
license from the Shogunate. Thus, Japan had established sovereignty by
the mid 17th century at the latest. The fact that the ROK is
trying to discuss this issue in relation to the issue of understanding
of history indicates that the ROK does not have confidence in the
sovereignty over Takeshima.
●
Japan seeks a conclusive answer to the
problem of whether the ROK’s act of unilateral occupation is consistent
with international law and justice of the international community. The
Japanese government will continue to make the case to the ROK that
the best way to deal with this dispute is to refer the case to the ICJ
and to seek non-biased mediation from the international community.
●
In recent years, Japan has made efforts to
establish a forward-looking relationship with the ROK, on a variety of
levels. However, President Lee’s illegal visit to Takeshima on August 10
clearly marred our mutual ties. Japan hopes that the ROK will
sincerely act in the interest of mutual cooperation and good faith of
Japan.
[Historical Facts]
●
Multiple historical documents confirm that
Japan had established its sovereignty over Takeshima by the mid 17th
century at the latest. Furthermore, there is no counterevidence to
support the ROK’s claims that Korea had control over Takeshima prior to
Japan’s establishment of territorial sovereignty. For example, the ROK
claims that Usan Island which is described in historical Korean texts
(such as Sinjeung Dong Yeoji Seungnam - A Revised Edition of the
Augmented Survey of the Geography of Korea: 1531) is modern-day
Takeshima. However, in the maps of Sinjeung Dong Yeoji Seungnam -A
Revised Edition of the Augmented Survey of the Geography of Korea
(see ‘Attachment’), Usan Island is located west of Utsuryo
Island. In reality, Takeshima is located east of Utsuryo Island.
This clearly shows that Usan Island is not modern-day Takeshima.
●
In January 1905, the Japanese government
made a Cabinet decision to incorporate Takeshima into Shimane
Prefecture, reaffirming Japan’s claim of sovereignty over Takeshima.
Later, on the drafting of the San Francisco Peace Treaty, the ROK
submitted a request to the US to include Takeshima among the territories
Japan should renounce. The US declined this request, thereby
expressing its position that Takeshima is an integral territory of Japan.
The US position was further verified in 1952 by a bilateral agreement
under the Japan-US Security Treaty which designated Takeshima as a
bombing range for US Forces.
●
In light of the historical facts and based
upon international law, Takeshima is an integral and inherent part of
Japanese territory. However, in 1952, the ROK unilaterally proclaimed an
artificial boundary (the “Syngman Rhee Line”), and
declared “marine sovereignty” over the waters inside that line. This act
was in clear contravention of international law at that time
(Note). The line encompassed Takeshima inside, and the
ROK began illegally occupying Takeshima by force. During the 13
years period of the “Syngman Rhee Line,” which was formally abolished in
1965 with the Japan-ROK Fisheries Agreement, many Japanese fishing boats
were seized and many Japanese fishermen were detained, resulting in
heavy casualties.
(Note) The “Syngman Rhee Line” was drawn over the high
seas and the ROK declared that it would be a zone of control and
protection of national resources which would be placed under the
sovereignty of the ROK. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which
introduced the notion of the jurisdiction of a coastal nation over the
200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone, was adopted in 1982, and went
into effect in 1994.
●
Although Japan proposed to the ROK that the
issue concerning the sovereignty of Takeshima be referred to the ICJ in
1954, 1962 and 2012, the ROK rejected those proposals. On August 17,
2012, Japanese Prime Minister Noda sent a letter to President Lee
regarding the issue of Takeshima. However, the ROK side did not accept
the letter and returned it because it contained the word of “Takeshima.”
This should not have been done according to the diplomatic practice. It
would be customary to fairly and unequivocally state the assertions of
the ROK in the form of a reply, in response to any content that the ROK
does not accept in the letter. The fact that the ROK has repeatedly
refused to allow the case to be referred to the ICJ, as well as the fact
that the ROK returned the letter between the leaders of state, indicates
that the ROK does not have confidence in its claims of sovereignty
over Takeshima.
(For further details of Japan’s position on Takeshima,
please refer to the following web site:
http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/takeshima/ )
|
|
