Newsletter

In Japan, Dokdo is called Takeshima. In the old days, Japan called Dokdo Matsushima and Ulleungdo Takeshima. However, in 1905, Dokdo was forced to be incorporated into Shimane Prefecture, abandoning its existing name and beginning to call it Takeshima. It was because Japanese people in the middle of the 17th century had fishery in the sea near Ulleungdo. Why did Japan abandon the name that it had maintained for more than 200 years and call Dokdo Takeshima? I will not be the only one who is curious about this.

Textbook authorization to promote anti-Korean

On March 24 this year, the Japanese government announced the results of authorization of middle school textbooks. All 17 social studies textbooks that passed this authorization describe Japan's Claim to Dokdo. It is that Dokdo is Japan's own territory, or that Korea illegally occupies Dokdo. This is similar in number to textbooks that passed authorization five years ago, but it contains more distorted contents of Dokdo. This is because Jiyusha textbooks published by a right-wing group called "People Who Create New History Textbooks" were rejected this time, and Shimizu publishing house did not apply for authorization.

Peace Line vs. Lee Seung-man Line

In particular, the declaration of 'Peace Line' in Korea in 1952 led to the capture of Japanese ships, the detention of sailors, and the occurrence of casualties. Japan has published a story that could encourage the youth to have an anti-Korean atmosphere. First, South Korea set up Peace Line(Japan is called Lee Seung-man Line) in violation of international law, and seized Japanese fishing boats and detained crew members. Second, Korea has been illegally occupying Dokdo since 1954 by allowing Dokdo Security Police to reside. Third, Japan is trying to file a complaint with the International Court of Justice to resolve the issue peacefully, but Korea is refusing it.

Some textbooks on civics are distorting the relevant contents to emphasize Korea's illegal occupation of Dokdo. It explains events that have nothing to do with Dokdo, such as the capture of Japanese fishing boats, the detention of sailors, and the death of Japanese people due to the shooting of the Korean army, in a very stimulating way using photographs and maps. But the Japanese fishing boat was captured and the crew was detained because they broke into the jurisdiction of the country. This contradicts the claim that Japan should include Dokdo as Japanese territory in order to protect the fishery resources and the living ground of its own fishermen. It is true that Japanese fishing boats invaded the Korean Coastal Sea Area, and the captured area was also the southern or western sea of ​​Korea far from Dokdo.

Dokdo is located at 37 degrees north latitude, but the fishing area of ​​the Japanese fishing boat is concentrated at 33 to 35 degrees north latitude. Therefore, Japan's claim that Dokdo is a living ground for Japanese fishermen is a lack of awareness of Dokdo. Also, as the Japanese government acknowledged, Dokdo is included in Korea's administrative authority after the war, and it is the area where we exercise the Territorial Sovereignty. Nevertheless, most textbooks have only specific grounds for Japan's Claim to Dokdo in the position of the Japanese government.

An area where a Japanese fishing boat was captured, and a crew was detained

153 Japanese fishing boats seized in South Korea by invading the peace line
- Source: The Asahi Journal (December. 1959)

Textbook Description of Japan

So who is leading the distortion of the description of Dokdo in Japanese textbooks? We need to note that these things have been made up of active intervention and initiative by the Japanese government. In Japan, when a publisher produces a textbook, it conducts an authorization to judge acceptance or failure in the Ministry of Education. In addition, the government presents the teaching tips and commentary methods that are the standards of textbook writing in advance, and sets the direction and contents of writing. Therefore, the government authorizes textbooks written according to the government's guidelines, so the government's policy is inevitable when writing textbooks. Textbooks that are not written according to the government policy are difficult to pass the test, and the publishers are bankrupt because they are not sold and used. So the textbooks that passed the authorization represent the Japanese government's position in dealing with the Dokdo issue, which is a pending issue between Korea and Japan.

Sophism of Japan's Claim to Dokdo

What is the basis of Japan's description that Dokdo is Japan's inherent territory and that Korea is illegally occupying? In short, this is an obsession with Dokdo. Japan wanted to describe Dokdo as a Japanese territory in a middle school textbook published in 2005, but it faced a difficulty of lack of grounds. So the idea they came up with was to describe Dokdo in 'Guidebook of the Course of Study' and to provide the basis of ‘Dokdo is Japan's own territory’ to the textbook writer.

However, the Japanese government was able to force writers to write textbooks according to the guidelines they created, but there was a limit to describing Dokdo as Japanese territory based on this. So they tried to make a justification for the writers themselves to describe the Dokdo is Japan's own territory. At the time, the Minister of Foreign Affairs Nobutaka Machimura responded in parliament:

“…I do not deny that the Guidebook of the Course of Study should include descriptions of Takeshima. However, if all of the related cases are included in Guidebook, there is a possibility that the amount will become vast. So I think that the issue of sovereignty of the state, such as territorial issues, was written in the Guidebook to be clearly described in the textbook. In the future, how and specifically the writer accepts the content will be the key.”

However, this still has a limit to provide the basis of 'the Dokdo is Japan's own story' to textbook writers. Masami Jeniah, Deputy Secretary of the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, mentioned the inclusion of Dokdo in the Guidebook of the Course of Study for Middle School, which was revised in July 2008, as "the Japanese government wrote a pamphlet about Takeshima in 2005". However, the pamphlet was criticized by Japanese Dokdo experts as a forced analogy. Nevertheless, the reason why Japan is obsessed with Dokdo is not the legacy of forgetting about imperialism.