Dokdo Essay

The rules were that it had to be about 800 words and address the theme: "The meaning of Dokdo for Koreans." First place prize was 1.5 million KRW, so it was definitely worth a shot. I haven't heard back, so I assume I wasn't even selected for the top 12 (they did up to 6th place, and 6 honorable mentions). Slightly disappointed, but it was nonetheless a good exercise and reminded me that I still enjoy writing. For what it's worth, I don't really have a side in this debate. Most Koreans that I've talked to answer "KOREA!" because, well, they're Korean. If I had to choose, I suppose I would choose Korea. The evidence seems legitimate enough and Japan did trample on them for 35 years. So here it is in all its Korean pandering glory!

Dokdo: The Soul of Korean Sovereignty

To this day, Korea remains divisive over certain issues from its past with Japan. Chief among these issues is the rule over Dokdo Island. Indeed, this dispute has been on-going for well over a century – since the Japan-Korea Treaty of 1905 – when Japan attempted to recognize the island as its own territory. This exposition will highlight historical evidence and provide a clear view of what sovereignty over the island truly means to the Korean people as a whole.

Dokdo, also known as Takeshima to Japan and Liancourt Rocks in the West

Japan incorporated Dokdo as a part of the country around the end of the Russo-Japanese war in 1905. They claim there was reasonable doubt whether Korea had completely retained its sovereignty of the island. Years later after World War II, the 1952 San Francisco Peace Treaty purposefully left out the sovereignty of Dokdo due to its contentiousness. A bombing incident in September of 1952 started a series of scuffles between Japan and South Korea until the Basic Relations Treaty was signed in 1965 between to the two nations. Since then, both countries have repeatedly declared the island, creating a stalemate with no end in sight. The method of how a power claims sovereignty over another entity is an age-old problem not unique to Dokdo. Many countries fight over similar situations. The problem is that hundreds of years ago, when much of the Earth was still being discovered, there wasn’t an international consensus on how to claim sovereignty over an uninhabited body of land or water. Naturally, it was a practice of who was there first.

Korea first claimed Dokdo Island, according to Korean historical records, back in 512 A.D. Governor Kim Isabu (Taejong) set out during his seventh year as governor and subjugated Usanguk, which is both Ulleungdo and Usando (i.e., Dokdo), as part of the Korean Silla Kingdom. Immediately following was the publication of the event in the government records Samguk Sagi (512). There were subsequent government records that mentioned Korea’s sovereignty over the island, namely Sejong Sillok Jiriji (1454) and Sinjeung Dongguk Yeoji Seungnam (1531). Unsurprisingly, Japan refuses to accept these records as proof of sovereignty. Japanese proponents claim that Korean historical records are not verifiable.

But even if Korean history is disregarded for the sake of argument, far greater points of uncertainty and contradiction appear when looked through the lens of the Japanese.  The “Records on Observation in Oki Province” from the 17^th century state that the Oki Islands mark Japan’s northwestern border, and Dokdo has never been within that border on any map (even from the Japanese). This is perhaps Japan’s earliest concession, albeit indirect, to the ownership of Dokdo. In “The Revised Complete Map of Japanese Lands and Roads” of 1848, both Ulleungdo and Dokdo are outside the respected territorial (maritime) boundaries. There’s several other maps from the Japanese Edo and Meji era that continue to confirm Korean ownership of Dokdo. “The Great Map of Japan” published by Mori Kenseki in 1877 shows Dokdo and Ulleungdo colored the same as Gangwan Province and contains appended maps which precisely label each of Japan’s minor islands along its perimeter – Dokdo was not one of them. Ironically and perhaps the biggest blow to Japan's claim of ownership is their own contradictory statement given by the State Council (Dajokan) in which they openly deny Dokdo (and Ulleungdo) as Japanese territory altogether.

Indeed, even from the vantage point of Japan’s own historical records, it appears they have little grounds for claiming Dokdo. A closer reexamination of their intentions for claiming Dokdo appear to stem back to the conclusion of the Russo-Japanese War in 1905. Japan was not only invading and attempting to annex Korea in the early 20^th century, but Manchuria, and later mainland China as well. It seems clear that Japan was heavily driven by an imperialist greed for land and power. The fact that they’ve since apologized for their actions in the early half of the 20^th century yet remain adamant on disputing Dokdo is boggling.

            Korea lost over a generation of its history and people due to Japan’s unwarranted occupation of the country from 1910 to 1945. Korean suffering was myriad from Japanese rule: over half of all arable land was stolen and taxed exorbitantly; palaces, relics, and artifacts were seized or destroyed; families were separated, names changed; Korean women were forced into prostitution; 670,000 Koreans were deported and forced into labor in Japan; and ultimately Korea was divided into North and South after World War II. It is Japan, and Japan alone, who is wholly responsibility for these hardships. Thus, it seems logical from an intermediary perspective to be charitable to Korea. Dokdo is not merely an island, but a symbol of Korea’s liberation from Japan; it serves as a sign of condolence and respect to the plight their ancestors endured.

            For South Koreans today, concession of Dokdo would be a preposterous idea – and understandably so. There is too much to lose from a Korean standpoint. When looking carefully at historical evidence from both sides, it seems the scales indubitably tip in Korea’s favor. In the words of Thomas Hobbes, “the Sovereignty is an Artificial Soul, as giving life and motion to the whole body” (1651). The piece of sovereignty, that is Dokdo, is analogous to the soul that gives Korea’s body its life and motion. Japan has stripped Korea of its body and soul once, but they will not let it happen again. The debate of Dokdo needs to be put to rest on the correct side of history. Not just for Korea’s past, but for moving forward with its relationship with Japan into a brighter future.