Teach the truth: Takeshima part of Japan

The Yomiuri Shimbun

It is the vital responsibility of the school education system to properly teach children about their country's territory and history.

An instruction manual for the education ministry's new curriculum guidelines for social studies at middle schools mentions for the first time that students should be taught that the disputed Takeshima group of islets, which South Korea calls Dokdo and claims as sovereign territory, is Japan's territory.

The Takeshima islets are an integral part of our nation's territory historically and according to international law. This is the position the Japanese government has steadfastly maintained.

The four Russian-held islands off eastern Hokkaido, known as the northern territories, have been described as part of Japan's territory not only in the Education, Science and Technology Ministry's curriculum guidelines and in its instruction manual, but also in all 14 textbooks on geography and civics used in middle schools. Four textbooks have already carried descriptions of the Takeshima islets. The ministry was too late in describing the Takeshima islets as part of Japan in the instruction manual.

After reports on Japan's plan to mention the Takeshima islets in the curriculum instruction manual, South Korean President Lee Myung Bak expressed concern, and the South Korean National Assembly adopted a resolution calling on the Japanese education ministry not to include mention of the Takeshima islets as an integral part of Japanese territory.

===

Diplomatic consideration

The instruction manual avoided a direct description of the Takeshima islets as "an integral part of our nation's territory."

The instruction manual calls for appropriately treating "the northern territories as part of our nation's territory," while it instructs teachers "to provide a deeper understanding of our nation's territory" by treating the Takeshima islets "in a manner comparable to that used in dealing with the northern territories." In doing so, the manual calls for teachers to refer to disagreement between Japan and South Korea over territorial claim to the Takeshima islets.

This shows a measure of a diplomatic consideration for South Korea. The South Korean government is strongly opposing Japan's move, as demonstrated by its plan to temporarily recall South Korean Ambassador to Japan Kwon Chul Hyun. We hope that Seoul responds to the matter calmly.

By the mid-17th century, or the early part of the Edo period (1603-1867), Japan had established its sovereignty over the Takeshima islets. In 1905, the islets were incorporated into the jurisdiction of Shimane Prefecture, with the move finalized at a Cabinet meeting.

===

Seized territory

The circumstances took an abrupt turn shortly before the San Francisco Peace Treaty, which stipulates the post-World War II territory of Japan, went into effect in 1952. Then South Korean President Syngman Rhee suddenly declared sovereignty over the waters around South Korea and drew a line in the Sea of Japan to claim the Takeshima islets as part of his nation's territory. Since then, South Korea has unlawfully occupied the islets.

South Korea is a neighboring country with which Japan has to closely cooperate in scrapping North Korea's nuclear weapons program and resolving the dispute over its abduction of Japanese.

However, what the Japanese should be taught in school--issues relating to their territory included--is a matter that can affect their sovereignty. Diplomatic consideration belongs in a different category from that covering an obligation to pass the history of a sovereign state and accurate facts about its territory onto upcoming generations.

Different from the curriculum guidelines, the instruction manual is not legally binding. But its significance is not negligible in that it will serve as a guideline for the editing of school textbooks by publishers and for classroom teaching.

Based on the spirit of the instruction manual, publishers have to commit themselves to provide easy-to-understand explanations in their textbooks while teachers must properly educate students.

Solving the territorial dispute over the Takeshima islets is a difficult task. For this reason, it is vital that the Japanese people correctly understand the issue and can state their case to the international community.

(From The Yomiuri Shimbun, July 15, 2008)
(Jul. 15, 2008)

Teach the truth: Takeshima part of Japan

The Yomiuri Shimbun

It is the vital responsibility of the school education system to properly teach children about their country's territory and history.

An instruction manual for the education ministry's new curriculum guidelines for social studies at middle schools mentions for the first time that students should be taught that the disputed Takeshima group of islets, which South Korea calls Dokdo and claims as sovereign territory, is Japan's territory.

The Takeshima islets are an integral part of our nation's territory historically and according to international law. This is the position the Japanese government has steadfastly maintained.

The four Russian-held islands off eastern Hokkaido, known as the northern territories, have been described as part of Japan's territory not only in the Education, Science and Technology Ministry's curriculum guidelines and in its instruction manual, but also in all 14 textbooks on geography and civics used in middle schools. Four textbooks have already carried descriptions of the Takeshima islets. The ministry was too late in describing the Takeshima islets as part of Japan in the instruction manual.

After reports on Japan's plan to mention the Takeshima islets in the curriculum instruction manual, South Korean President Lee Myung Bak expressed concern, and the South Korean National Assembly adopted a resolution calling on the Japanese education ministry not to include mention of the Takeshima islets as an integral part of Japanese territory.

Diplomatic consideration

The instruction manual avoided a direct description of the Takeshima islets as "an integral part of our nation's territory."

The instruction manual calls for appropriately treating "the northern territories as part of our nation's territory," while it instructs teachers "to provide a deeper understanding of our nation's territory" by treating the Takeshima islets "in a manner comparable to that used in dealing with the northern territories." In doing so, the manual calls for teachers to refer to disagreement between Japan and South Korea over territorial claim to the Takeshima islets.

This shows a measure of a diplomatic consideration for South Korea. The South Korean government is strongly opposing Japan's move, as demonstrated by its plan to temporarily recall South Korean Ambassador to Japan Kwon Chul Hyun. We hope that Seoul responds to the matter calmly.

By the mid-17th century, or the early part of the Edo period (1603-1867), Japan had established its sovereignty over the Takeshima islets. In 1905, the islets were incorporated into the jurisdiction of Shimane Prefecture, with the move finalized at a Cabinet meeting.

Seized territory

The circumstances took an abrupt turn shortly before the San Francisco Peace Treaty, which stipulates the post-World War II territory of Japan, went into effect in 1952. Then South Korean President Syngman Rhee suddenly declared sovereignty over the waters around South Korea and drew a line in the Sea of Japan to claim the Takeshima islets as part of his nation's territory. Since then, South Korea has unlawfully occupied the islets.

South Korea is a neighboring country with which Japan has to closely cooperate in scrapping North Korea's nuclear weapons program and resolving the dispute over its abduction of Japanese.

However, what the Japanese should be taught in school--issues relating to their territory included--is a matter that can affect their sovereignty. Diplomatic consideration belongs in a different category from that covering an obligation to pass the history of a sovereign state and accurate facts about its territory onto upcoming generations.

Different from the curriculum guidelines, the instruction manual is not legally binding. But its significance is not negligible in that it will serve as a guideline for the editing of school textbooks by publishers and for classroom teaching.

Based on the spirit of the instruction manual, publishers have to commit themselves to provide easy-to-understand explanations in their textbooks while teachers must properly educate students.

Solving the territorial dispute over the Takeshima islets is a difficult task. For this reason, it is vital that the Japanese people correctly understand the issue and can state their case to the international community.

(From The Yomiuri Shimbun, July 15, 2008)
(Jul. 15, 2008)

Yomiuri Shimbun is known to be Anti-Korean, and all of their articles don't carry much values other than showing up ultra-right wing opinions.

Bringing San Francisco Peace Treaty is nothing do with Korea, since Korea wasn't even invited, any treaties dating back 1905/1910 and SF peace treaty doesn't concern Korea.

If Japan wants Dokdo, first they have win the war with Korea and I don't see this coming now.

I've already request Mods to ban this Chinilpa considering this lone some have been posting nothing but inciting hatreds towards to Korea and useless arguments only to bring more his dirt to this forum.

Haven't you seen your other post have been deleted from this chat?

Why would some lone Hawaiian guy like you cares about Japan and Korea?

Its not Takeshima. Its Dokdo. Takeshima = bamboo island. There is no bamboo on Dokdo.



Wheres the bamboo? I dont see any bamboo on the islands. And dont you just love the beautiful scenery and Korean jet fighters flying over Dokdo?
And yet Japan cannot provide any evidence to its claims.
Translation: Japan has territorial disputes with all of their neighbors including their ally- Taiwan. Even the Taiwanese are sick and tired of Japanese lies.
Japan never claimed Dokdo or owned Dokdo by the 17th century. On the contrary they executed Japanese fishermen who landed on Dokdo. Implying that it was Korean. What 17th century document are they referring to? Japanese delusions at its finest. They need to quit eating Mercury laden fish. It causes brain damage.

Funny thing is even the Japanese government does not recognize any Japanese claim predating 1905. LOL what a $hitty newspaper. Cant even get its facts right or is aware of their own position.

Last but not least Japans 1905 claim is invalid. It broke the law and cannot be used in court as evidence. By international law, territory must not be annexed for military purposes. Japanese naval records, documents and surveys clearly indicate the Dokdo was annexed for military purposes. A military light house was even built on the island and Russian documents also indicates its military purposes. Another poignant fact is that the Japanese government did not publically announce the annexation of Dokdo or tell the Korean government until 1 year later. This further invalidates Japanese claims to the island. The 1905 claim to Dokdo is illegal, immoral and invalidate. The Japanese without their precious 1905 claim no longer has any claims to the island. Zip, zero, nadda. Their entire argument falls into the sea.

Conclusion: Japan never claimed Dokdo. They have yet to make a legal claim to Dokdo. japans oldest claim to Dokdo occurred AFTER 1945 when Korea was already in possession. Koreas claims on the island are centuries old.
Japanese claims and support evidence is weak. Korea already controls the islands and there is nothing the Japanese can do about it. Cry all you want, Koreans will simply laugh at you kids and fly our jet planes over the islands just to send a message.

Its not Takeshima. Its Dokdo. Takeshima = bamboo island. There is no bamboo on Dokdo.



Wheres the bamboo? I dont see any bamboo on the islands. And dont you just love the beautiful scenery and Korean jet fighters flying over Dokdo?
And yet Japan cannot provide any evidence to its claims.

Yomiuri is the largest newspaper in Japan (and the world too) and is generally known to be centrist in terms of its editorial stance. Its hardly a "right-wing" paper.

If the San Francisco Peace Treaty has nothing to do with Korea, then there would not be a country by the name of "Daehanming@@k" on the southern half of the Korean peninsula, nor would there be a DPRK on the north.
I know, Korea's legal claims over Takeshima is so strong that they refuse to go to the ICJ to settle it.

I know, Korea's legal claims over Takeshima is so strong that they refuse to go to the ICJ to settle it.

hey darkhamster

....
If Japan wants Dokdo, first they have win the war with Korea and I don't see this coming now.
....

Not necessarily. The Japanese may have to wait until there is a change in the correlation of economic, political and military forces in the region as there was in 1910 and 1945.

Well, take it from me...someone who actually has taught in the Korean school system and has seen the garbage that they try to pass off as "history" including such outrageous claims of the Korean War as as:

- The US and Russia decided to start the Korean War because they could not let the ammunition leftover from WWII to go to waste.

- Korea singlehandedly defeated both Japan and N.Korea to win the Korean War...

- Kim Jong Il and Kim Il Sung are the most generous and kindest leaders in the world who only want peace and would never dream of harming others. They live humbly just like all of the common citizens in N. Korea.
- N. Korea is a utopian state where everyone is happy since there is no foreign influence at all. An ideal state is a purely Korean state.

I know, Korea's legal claims over Takeshima is so strong that they refuse to go to the ICJ to settle it.

I know, Korea's legal claims over Takeshima is so strong that they refuse to go to the ICJ to settle it.

Koreans don't want to take the Dokdo/Takeshima issue to the ICJ in The Hague because Korean culture and society does not recognize the court system of justice and law. Koreans have no concept of "laws" and "rules". In Korea, whoever screams the loudest or waves the largest amount of money in his hand is the person who rules over others. Such a lawless and corrupt society in which there is no concept or respect for ethical principles would be a joke if it tried to actually adopt a civilized legal system such as those employed by first world countries. Koreans also are incapable of understanding the concept of having to provide evidence to prove an argument. In Korea, whoever screams the loudest is the one who wins an argument, not the person who provides the best evidence.