뉴스레터

The Japanese government reopened the National Museum of Territory and Sovereignty (NMTS) in downtown Tokyo on January 20 this year. Since establishing the planning and coordination office for territory and sovereignty measures (hereafter territory and sovereignty office) in the Cabinet Secretariat in 2013, the Japanese government has been pushing aggressively for territory-related policies. Particularly in 2017 and 2018, Japan created a framework for coercing education regarding Dokdo by revising legally binding government guidelines for teaching at elementary, middle, and high schools, and opened the NMTS in January of 2018. Two years later, it expanded by seven times and relocated before reopening in a location where audiences can find it more easily. The Japanese government has since reinforced its support for multifaceted education and publicity regarding territory as well as research and surveys.

Regarding this, the Dokdo Research Institute of our Foundation held a seminar on Dokdo policies under the theme of "Japan's National Museum of Territory and Sovereignty and Our Tasks" on February 4 at the Foundation's conference room.

First, researcher Kim Gwan-won made a presentation with the theme of "Analysis of the directional nature of Japanese government's policies on territory and sovereignty". In April 2013, the Japanese government established the "gathering of experts on issues related to territory and sovereignty" (hereafter gathering of experts) comprised of experts in the fields of international relations, international law, and history under the minister of state for territorial affairs. The gathering of experts dealt with Japan's claims and international perceptions over Dokdo, the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyutai), and the South Kuril Islands and how to effectively expand public opinion at home and abroad.

During the gathering of experts, detailed measures to that effect—collection of data and development of teaching aids, reinforcement of domestic opinion and school education, development of researchers and research support, and publicity for international students via internet and English—were suggested three times (July 2013, June 2015, and July 2019). At the request of the gathering of experts, the Japanese government has been implementing these measures aggressively across the board by changing its education system according to a long-term plan and securing venues for publicity like the NMTS.

Researcher Kim Young-soo, the second speaker, spoke about the "Status and contents of Dokdo data in the Japanese Cabinet Secretariat's ‘Jukdo (Japanese name for Dokdo)' portals".

The territory and sovereignty office has disclosed investigation reports every year after the first report came out in 2015 by entrusting and enforcing the survey of data related to Dokdo in 2014. So far, the territory and sovereignty office has gathered 1,990 materials, 233 of which have been open to the public through portals related to Dokdo. That is, Japan has disclosed about 11.7% of the collected materials. Most of them are data related to Japan's incorporation of Dokdo into Shimane Prefecture in 1905 and the Treaty of San Francisco in 1952.

This selective disclosure of data seems to be in accordance with the standard of "whether data would be advantageous to Japan's claims". Namely, it is likely that Japan believed that disclosing data mainly after the Shimane Prefecture incorporation in 1905 would help highlight Japan's administrative jurisdiction over Dokdo. However, data after 1905 reveals Japan's behaviors—more clearly—to disguise the history of pillage and illegality regarding the Korean Peninsula after the Russo-Japanese War as being of peace and legality. This also shows that Japan is intentionally trying to avoid the history that it has continuously acknowledged: the historical fact before 1905, namely the Japanese government's contention after its ban on crossing the sea in the late 17th century that "Ulleungdo and Dokdo have nothing to do with Japan."

Researcher Hong Seong-keun, the third presenter, spoke on the "Dokdo-related exhibition contents of Japan's National Museum of Territory and Sovereignty and their problems."

The NMTS, which reopened in January, set up its exhibition rooms with contents regarding three islands over which Japan makes territorial claims (South Kuril Islands, Dokdo, and Senkaku Islands). The Dokdo exhibition corner emphasizes that Korea's occupation of Dokdo is illegal by posting the phrase "Korea continues to occupy by force since 1953" at the entrance. Japan is also glossing over the essence of problems by comparing Korea's illegality and Japan's legality, mentioning Korea's declaration of the Peace Line in 1952 and rejection of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) lawsuits three times through exhibition contents.

A look at the data on exhibit shows that Japan appears to have made much of international legal aspects rather than historical perceptions, but Japan excluded even state-compiled data unsuitable for its position from exhibition contents after weighing the advantages and disadvantages. That is, Japan did not even mention such data as the 1877 Dajoukan Order, Japan's documents that excluded Dokdo from Japan's territory, the investigative report on details of Joseon's friendship in 1870, and the complete maps of Japan in the late 19th century.

Inside 'the Japanese Territory and Sovereignty Exhibition Hall' which reopened on January 20, 2020

Following the topic presentation, professor emeritus Kim Byung-Ryll (Korea National Defense University), researcher Lee Myong-chan (Northeast Asian History Foundation), and Professor Han Cheol-ho (Dongkuk University) took part as designated discussants. They put forward several suggestions, stating, "The fact that data before 1905 excluded from the data that Japan disclosed is relatively smaller is tantamount to admitting itself that the basis of "the proprietary territorial theory" is poor".

First, we need to actively push for Dokdo trips by overseas figures, officials sent to diplomatic missions abroad, and reporters, capitalizing on the fact that we are in control of Dokdo. Second, given that details related to Dokdo have relations with the issues of the South Kuril Islands and Senkaku Islands (Diaoyutai in Chinese) from the perspective of international relations and policies, it is necessary to conduct comparative research into their similarities and differences. Third, an integrated website should be established to comprehensively manage data proving that Dokdo is definitely our land, and the Dokdo Research Institute of the Northeast Asian History Foundation needs to be at the center of it.

The latest Dokdo seminar delved into the latest trends related to Japan's territorial policies. The salient point is that since establishing the territory and sovereignty office in the Cabinet Secretariat, the Japanese government has put its intent on the front burner and dealt with territory-related issues offensively. This is demonstrated well through the English name of the territory and sovereignty exhibition center, the National Museum. It is surprising and sad indeed that Japan, which created the history of pillage and illegality in the past, has not reflected on its past and has let its government stand in the vanguard of glorifying it. Now is the time to look at our situation more calmly and do our part wisely.