Textbook trouble

The disputed island has a very unique "split" feature in its shape. So it is easy to show graphically if it is drawn in ancient maps.

THERE IS NO KOREAN ANCIENT MAP THAT DRAWS THE DISPUTED ISLAND. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZrmdWHUvdI

Korean goverment refuses to go to International Court to settle this problem when Japan goverment is happy to.

I'm certainly not qualified or informed enough on this to say whose islands these belong to, but instead of all of these demonstrations and hate speeches, isn't there a way to amicably work out ownership?

I know each leader can't be seen as weak or the one who has given up, but isn't there some merit in being the bigger person in making a deal? You get the islands, we get X or Y, something, some kind of deal that can end this bickering.

I've read through the evidence on this a few years ago. Both Korea and Japan have websites dedidicate to it. There isn't really a smoking gun piece of evidence. I think the post war peace treaties would carry more weight at the ICJ than old maps.

One piece of evidence that did really stick with me is that Dokdo/Takeshima can actually be seen from the Korean island of Ulleung-do (what Japan used to call Takeshima) on a clear day. It's hard to believe that Korean fisherman didn't sail to the island just to have a look around. Both Japan and Korea agree that Ulleung-do would have been inhabited for centuries before Japan lays any claim to Dokdo/Takeshima.

Also, Korea has two Dokdo mascots.... Japan doesn't even have one!

Cute dog pictures, today's weather, the latest celebrity gossip, angry Korean protestors....

The staples of the news these days.

harvey pekarApr. 07, 2015 - 08:33AM JST

isn't there a way to amicably work out ownership?

When Korea Japan Basic Treaty was concluded in 1965, both governments exchanged a secret memorandum that sovereignty issue of Takeshima should be postponed forever, and that the sea area around the island is to be designated as "Joint Fishing Area." http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%97%A5%E9%9F%93%E6%BC%81%E6%A5%AD%E5%8D%94%E5%AE%9A You can see the "Joint Fishing Area" around Takeshima in the link. The Fishing Agreement was concluded in 1965 and renewed in 1999.

Japan kept low key reflecting the 1965 agreement. Korea ignored the agreement. That is how we have got this complication today.

Japan kept low key reflecting the 1965 agreement. Korea ignored the agreement.

Except any agreement that agrees not to agree forever is not worth the paper its written on. I wouldn't make too much of it... the ICJ would probabaly say it simply has no weight.

I think historically Japan shot itself in the foot when it banned its citizens form travelling to Takeshima (just like all foreign lands). It continues to do the same thing today in the Northern Territories by discouraging Japanese citizens from traveling there as well.

Japan conducted a war of aggression in Asia. One which many of its people have little or no knowledge of (Or show little repentance for) Moreover Korea was colonised for 35 years. In that light, Japan is hardly in a moral position to still be making territorial claims

M3M3M3Apr. 07, 2015 - 11:24AM JST

Except any agreement that agrees not to agree forever is not worth the paper its written on. I wouldn't make too much of it

Territorial disputes on small islands between mature nations are usually postponed forever.

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