Newsletter

In this age of global village, various historical issues and conflicts in Northeast Asia reported to North America, Europe and other major regions of the world tend to develop into an interesting subject for the global community. Published in October 2011, 《European Perception of Dokdo》 is the fruit of a research analysis of how much, how and from what perspectives major European media have reported on Dokdo for the last 15 years.

European perception of Dokdo based on media reports

Dokdo is a land of Korea that has long been effectively controlled by the country in its history. However, Japan has unreasonably claimed its territorial right on the island since a long time ago. In response to Japan, Korean government has acted calmly in order not to be driven into a situation created by Japan which tries to make Dokdo 'a conflict area'. However, since Japan announced its inclusion of Dokdo in its exclusive economic zone in 1996, Korea has been active in responding to Japan in our efforts to defend our territorial sovereign right.

Europe's major media have also reported on Dokdo a lot since the mid 1990s. Therefore, the co-authors examined Europe's perception of Dokdo on the basis of Dokdo-related reports in the media of traditional European powers including Britain, France, Germany and Russia from 1995 till 2010. Particularly, the analysis was focused on whether European media view the Dokdo problem as a 'territorial conflict', i.e. a diplomatic issue of the present, as claimed by Japan or they do understand the problem as a matter of history that originated from the Japanese imperialist colonization history in the past. It has analyzed which side between Korea and Japan has been judged as more right by the media.

In the four chapters dealing with France, Britain, Germany and Russia's perceptions of Dokdo , the authors examined first, for a quantitative analysis, the frames of media reports including the frequency of report on Dokdo in the particular country, report size, report time and context, the reporter and information source and naming of Dokdo and the East Sea, etc. Then, a qualitative analysis was carried out to analyze main arguments in the contents of the reports. Here the analysis was to find out how much they understood the root and essence of the Dokdo problem and what were the primary factors that sparked the tension between Korea and Japan. Finally, there was an attempt to explain the implications of Dokdo reports in the European media. Each chapter contains about 10 reports on Dokdo in the original form and the Korean translations for them to increase the reader's understanding.

In France, which exerts a strong diplomatic influence on other countries in the international arena, there were 24 reports on Dokdo through 5 daily newspapers and 3 weekly magazines. Central and important arguments in these reports were criticizing Japan by relating the Dokdo problem to Japan's history distortion. Most of these arguments appear in media taking a progressive stance. In 2006, a French television station broadcast a documentary on Dokdo, Yasukuni Shrine, textbook distortion, etc. criticizing Japan's swing to the right. Japanese government called for cancellation of the program immediately, but the request was rejected according to a report.

(Picture 1)
British Daily Newspaper
《The Guardian》.
Report on Dokdo on
February 21, 1996.

Britain showed great interest in the Dokdo problem as the country had experienced a war against Argentina in 1982 due to a conflict over Falkland Island. There were 54 reports in 7 daily newspapers for 15 years. British newspapers introduced grounds of the ownership claims on Dokdo in similar proportions between Korea and Japan, taking a neutral stance. However, the general tone of the press is that Japan causes conflicts and tensions between the two countries. British press view that the nationalistic sentiments accumulated from the Japanese colonial rule become an important factor for the two countries' conflict over Dokdo.

There were 99 reports on Dokdo for 15 years in Germany's daily newspapers and weekly magazines where the past history can still cause a discord with neighboring nations. The German press in the mid 1990s tended to report fragmentary news, but have gradually progressed to analyze the situation, explain the historical origin and provide interpretations and judgments. Many of the German reports explain the Dokdo issue in the frame of colonial rule or within the context of overcoming the past. German reports often tend to deal with North Korea issues simultaneously.

Russian media reported on Dokdo more often than those in other European countries. It is because Japan's incorporation of Dokdo during the Russo-Japanese War was one of the factors that contributed to the conflict between Korea and Japan over Dokdo and also the conflict between Russia and Japan over the Kuril Islands is similar to that over Dokdo. There were 104 reports on Dokdo for 15 years. There were not many reports until mid 2000's, but the number has increased a lot since then. Russian press understands that Dokdo is not only the most important symbol of the conflict between Korea and Japan but also an important factor contributing to the instability of Northeast Asia. Russian press also view that Dokdo is a matter on which both South and North Korea stand together against Japan and also it is one of the various history issues in Northeast Asia on which Russia, China, North Korea and South Korea are united against Japan.

Providing broader angles and perspectives for history education

With regard to Dokdo's naming in the European press in general, 'Dokdo' and 'Takeshima' were used together in many cases. However, even if the two names are put together side by side, 'Takeshima' tended to be written first in the 1990s while 'Dokdo' tends to be written first since the beginning of the 2000s.

(Picture 2)
Dokdo in a documentary Japan : the
shadow of its past on France5.
August 18, 2006.

In descriptions of Dokdo's location, 'Sea of Japan' was exclusively used in the past while there has been a tendency recently that 'East Sea' and 'Sea of Japan' are used together. Dokdo reports in the European press appeared most often when there were conflicts between Korea and Japan. With regard to the report content, most prevalent was a view that Japan did not want to clear its militarism and colonial rule of the past in a proper way but was rather trying to praise them. The second most prevalent view was related to the issues of the economy and the regional security in Northeast Asia.

All the major European countries are critical of the imperialism and colonial rule of the past. So it happens that a lot of press reports relating to Dokdo are relatively more favorable to Korea. In order to spread this view more widely across the world, we will have to let widely understood that the Dokdo issue originated from Japan's non-repentance over its imperialistic colonial rule.

Dokdo is not a matter relating to us alone. It is a matter of clearing the negative legacy left by the imperialistic invasion and colonial rule of the past, which still becomes an obstacle to the peaceful coexistence and community development in Northeast Asia and the broader global village. I hope that 《European Perception of Dokdo》 will make a little contribution to formulating our information strategy to spread our right claims in the international arena, and it will also be used widely for history education critical of the colonial rule which was against the universal direction of human development.