copenlu/druid huggingface dataset:
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of North Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2011-08-17): The rocky outcrop, known as Dokdo in South Korea and Takeshima in Japan, is considered by both countries part of their own respective territories, and the dispute over them has been an ongoing spoiler in bilateral relations. Last month, the Japanese government told its Foreign Ministry staff not to use Korean Airlines for a month, in response to the company’s decision to conduct the inaugural flight of its A380 passenger jet above the isles. [...] On the face of it, the two countries have every reason to overcome this seemingly petty territorial dispute and reach an agreement over resource sharing in their neighbouring waters. Given how much there is at stake in Northeast Asia – North Korea’s nuclear ambitions, rivalry between the United States and China, latent military hostilities across the Taiwan Strait – the two countries would do well to move past the Dokdo/Takeshima dispute and instead focus on the big picture of peace and stability in Northeast Asia. [...] It’s this historical memory that is responsible for Korea’s unwillingness to take this dispute to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). From the South Korean perspective, losing ‘Dokdo’ would be akin to the post-facto legitimization of Japanese colonial rule. On the one hand, Koreans think that as long as they have effective jurisdiction, there’s no point taking the risk that they may lose the islands. But more importantly, referral of the case to the ICJ appears to concede that Japanese claims to the islands are valid.
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of North Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2018-04-17): 1) These small islands have prompted geopolitical frictions. A memorable moment at the PyeongChang Winter Olympics came when North and South Korean athletes marched in together, waving the unified Korean flag. Japan quickly denounced the flag as unacceptable. The big fuss was over a tiny speck next to a blue unified Korean Peninsula — the flag design included the contested Dokdo/Takeshima islands, as shown here. [...] The Liancourt Rocks, known as Dokdo in Korean and Takeshima in Japanese, are a group of two small main islets and 35 smaller rocks, with a total surface area of 46.3 acres, located 135 miles from Korea and 131 miles from Japan. While South Korea controls the territory, its sovereignty is contested by Japan. Interestingly, the unified Korean map does not show an indisputably Korean island, Ulleung-do, bigger than Dokdo/Takeshima and closer to Korea. [...] And conflicts over small territories may help maintain a certain geopolitical order. The Diaoyu/Senkaku and the Dokdo/Takeshima disputes have deep historical roots that go back to the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty and the 1971 Okinawa Reversion Agreement.
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of North Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2021-03-18): The Asia-Pacific region is home to numerous island and maritime disputes but the Dokdo/Takeshima dispute is unique in that it involves two U.S. allies placing Washington in a uncomfortable position. U.S. policy has long been that it takes no position on sovereignty and will abide by any negotiated resolution of the dispute. Yet when tensions have flared between South Korea and Japan over the issue, there have often been calls for the United States to intervene and help solve the problem. However, any U.S. attempt to exert its leverage to reach a solution would be dangerous. Instead, Washington’s best course of action is to quietly remind both sides of their common economic and security interests while helping Seoul and Tokyo to manage the dispute in a careful and judicious manner.
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of North Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2021-07-01): Lying almost equidistant between the Korean Peninsula and Japan, the tiny islets called Dokdo in South Korea and Takeshima in Japan, are claimed by both countries and are a source of a dispute going back more than 300 years. Most recently, there was a public outcry in South Korea after the islands were marked on a map of Japan on the Tokyo Olympics website, with South Korea demanding an immediate correction and Japan refusing. To many outside Korea and Japan, these islets might seem inconsequential and hardly worth risking damage to the relations between two of the world’s most powerful economies. Yet the islets inspire fierce reactions on both sides and a solution to this long-running territorial dispute has been elusive. What is the history of this dispute? Which country has the more compelling historical claim? How do the islets figure in both Korean and Japanese politics, media and culture? Might the U.S. play a role in helping resolve this dispute between its two most important allies in East Asia? Can international law provide a framework for a resolution? The Center for Korean Legal Studies at Columbia Law School welcomes Paul Huth (University of Maryland), Sunwoong Kim (University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee), and Terence Roehrig (US Naval War College), editors of The Dokdo/Takeshima Dispute: South Korea, Japan and the Search for a Peaceful Solution for a discussion of these issues. They will be joined by contributors to the book including Yoshinori Kaseda, Hee Eun Lee, and Hyon Joo Yoo for a Q&A moderated by Center Director Jeong-Ho Roh.
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of North Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2018-02-06): The territorial dispute over Takeshima began in 1952, when South Korean President Syngman Rhee asserted sovereignty over a sea area including the islands. Takeshima is Japanese territory historically and legally, and Japan has urged Korea to agree to International Court of Justice proceedings to resolve the issue, to no avail. Legal specialist Miyoshi Masahiro explores the case, defining 1952 as the "critical date" after which acts should not be taken into consideration in determining the legal status of Takeshima. South Korea must promptly recognize the need for a law-based resolution. [...] In January 1905, the Japanese cabinet decided to incorporate Takeshima into its territory, referring to the "title by occupation." Effective control of an island is a key to occupation. In this paper, legal specialist Tsukamoto Takashi shows various examples of effective control, conducted peacefully and continuously by Japan, and examines Korea’s claims to the island (Korean name Dokdo) based on historical records up to around the turn of the twentieth century. [...] The territorial dispute between Japan and South Korea over Takeshima is complex, involving numerous issues that have unfolded over hundreds of years. Japanese and Korean fishermen clashed in the late seventeenth century over abalone fishing grounds around Ulleungdo. Korea points to the shogunal order banning Japanese fishers from this island—then called Takeshima in Japan—as evidence that Japan negated her claim to today’s Takeshima (Dokdo). This study, by legal specialist Tsukamoto Takashi, examines documentation of the incident to ascertain whether this is the case.
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of North Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2019-12-23): Though the claims of both sides go back several hundred years, the core of the dispute began in 1905. Japan maintains it had re-established sovereignty over the islets in February 1905 prior to the establishment of its protectorate over Korea in November 1905. South Korea disagrees, arguing that their sovereignty had long been established over Dokdo/Takeshima. Thus, Japan’s annexation was illegal and did not establish sovereignty, requiring Tokyo to return the islets after World War II. Early versions of the Treaty of San Francisco (1951) that formally ended the war included mention that Dokdo/Takeshima be returned to Korea, but the final version omitted a specific listing of Dokdo creating confusion and uncertainty over their status. Nonetheless, in 1952, President Syngman Rhee announced a "peace line" that drew a maritime boundary that in many places far exceeded the accepted limits of territorial waters and included Dokdo/Takeshima. In 1954, South Korea occupied Dokdo/Takeshima and built a lighthouse, a dock, and barracks for 50 personnel.
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of North Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2022-01-01): Between Dokdo and Takeshima Lie the Liancourt Rocks: Explaining the U.S. Relationship to the South Korea-Japan Territorial Dispute The dispute over the Liancourt Rocks, referred to as Dokdo in Korean and Takeshima in Japanese, remains a festering wound in the bilateral South Korea-Japan relationship. The United States, a steadfast treaty ally of both nations, stands to benefit massively from leveraging its influence between them to improve this state of affairs. Yet, instead of playing a leading public role in finding a solution to the conflict, the U.S. strictly avows and frequently reiterates that it takes no position on the sovereignty of the Liancourt Rocks. At first glance, this stance seems unintuitive given that the U.S. has sided with Japan in its disputes over the Northern Territories with Russia and the Senkaku Islands with China in addition to having articulated a position on other South Korea-Japan "history issues" like the Comfort Women controversy.
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of North Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2022-12-09): The territorial dispute over Dokdo/Takeshima (or Liancourt Rocks) has frequently strained South Korean-Japanese relations in the post World War II era. Japan claims that it acquired Dokdo/Takeshima as a terra nullius in 1905, whereas Korea rejects Japan's claim on the ground that Dokdo was a Korean island, not a terra nullius, which Japan usurped llegally in 1905.The dispute was exacerbated further due to the inconsistent U.S. policy in the disposition of the disputed island during the Allied occupation of Japan (1945-1952). Initially, the U.S. decided to return Dokdo/Takeshima to Korea in accordance with the Cairo Declaration (1943) and the Potsdam Declaration (1945). Furthermore, all of the U.S. drafts of the peace treaty with Japan from 1947 to November 1949 explicitly stipulated the return of Dokdo/Takeshima to Korea. (The rest omitted)
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of North Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2015-07-08): Furthermore, even in the Korean media there are such statements as given in the article headlined "Argument That 'Dokdo [Takeshima] Is Korean Territory on Old Maps' Ineffective in International Adjudication" in the August 17, 2012, edition of the Hankyoreh newspaper, shortly after President Lee Myung-bak's visit to Takeshima. Based on precedents from International Court of Justice rulings in disputes between Thailand and Cambodia and between Malaysia and Indonesia, the article states: [...] - 2012. "Argument That 'Dokdo [Takeshima] Is Korean Territory on Old Maps' Ineffective in International Adjudication: Historical Entitlement May Not Be Considered Important . . . Despite 50 Years Effective Korean Control . . . Japan Has Raised Steady Objections," Hankyoreh, August 17. http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/politics/diplomacy/547540.html (Korean only; accessed on February 27, 2015). [↩]
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of North Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2012-08-20): Of these various disputes, the Korea-Japan battle over Dokdo/Takeshima seems the best candidate for resolution by international arbitration. Japan, in fact, has formally asked Korea to submit the dispute to the ICJ for binding arbitration and has even threatened some mild economic penalties if the Koreans don’t agree. And Korea has flatly turned down Japan, which is somewhat surprising given that Korea is one of the most enthusiastic supporters of international organizations and international dispute resolution in general. The President of the ICC is a Korean national, and Korea has a judge sitting on the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. (Oh yeah, that UN Secretary General is from Korea too!). According to news reports, Korean diplomats have said that the ICJ is inappropriate because the Dokdo/Takeshima islands plainly belong to Korea under international law. "Dokdo is clearly part of Korean territory historically, geographically and under international law, and no territorial dispute exists," said Cho Tai-young, spokesman at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. "The Japanese government’s proposal to take the Dokdo issue before the ICJ is not worth attention."
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of North Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2021-01-16): Japan, however, continues to maintain its claim and protests South Korea’s occupation of Takeshima as illegal.[16] In 2005, in response to South Korea issuing Dokdo stamps the previous year, Shimane Prefecture—the local government in Japan that would have jurisdiction over Takeshima—designated February 22 as "Takeshima day." Both countries include assertions of their sovereignty over the islands in middle and high school curriculum, along with defense documents that proclaim the islands as an integral part of their territory. On several occasions, Japan has indicated that it would take the matter to the International Court of Justice for adjudication. However, this is a moot point because both sides must agree to have the court consider the case, which South Korea would never do. Its position is that there is no dispute to settle—Dokdo is Korean. Moreover, the current circumstances of the islands are in South Korea’s favor, and thus it has little to gain by agreeing to adjudication.
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of South Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2012-08-10): South Korea calls it Dokdo, which means solitary islands. Japan calls it Takeshima, which means bamboo islands. And it has also been known as the Liancourt Rocks, named by French whalers after their ship in 1849. [...] South Korea says Dokdo was recognised by Japan as Korean territory in 1696, after a run-in between Korean and Japanese fishermen. [...] Dokdo was rightly restored to Korea after World War II, it says. "Dokdo is an integral part of Korean territory historically, geographically and under international law," it says on a government website dedicated to the issue, external.
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of South Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2017-07-23): Dokdo-Takeshima Islands: South Korea And Japan’s Intractable Maritime Dispute – Analysis [...] Yet another long-standing maritime dispute in the region has continued to exist under-the-radar, and remains unresolved after more than six decades. The dispute concerns a collection of small islands located in the Sea of Japan – or the East Sea as it is known on the Korean peninsula. The contested islands are called the Dokdo Islands by South Korea, yet are known as the Takeshima Islands by the Japanese, and the Liancourt Rocks by many in the West. [...] Today, the Dokdo-Takeshima islands remain administered by South Korea and the dispute has rumbled on at a relatively low level, albeit damaging bilateral relations between the two countries. South Korea has constructed a coast guard station on one of the two main islands, whilst on the other resides a Korean fisherman and his family – the territory’s only permanent residents.
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of South Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-07-30): Dokdo (also known internationally as the Liancourt Rocks and in Japan as Takeshima) is an island located in the East Sea of Korea. South Korea asserts its territorial sovereignty over Dokdo through historical, legal and administrative evidence, arguing that the island has been an integral part of Korean territory for centuries, deeply rooted in historical records and continuous administrative management. [...] Over the centuries, Korea has claimed to have managed Dokdo administratively. Numerous royal decrees and maps from Joseon, such as the "Paldochongdo" (1530), include Dokdo as part of Korean territory. Korean fishermen and residents of Ulleung Island have historically used Dokdo as a base for fishing, demonstrating a continuous Korean presence and utilization of the island. [...] As discussed above, from the Korean perspective, the historical, legal and administrative evidence strongly supports Dokdo as an inherent part of Korean territory. The consistent documentation of Dokdo in historical records, uninterrupted administrative control, acknowledgment from Japan within a historical context and actions taken after World War II collectively reinforce Korea’s position.
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of South Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2013-08-06): For decades, two small, rocky islets have been a source of political and social tension between two of the most powerful Asian nations. The islets are but a tiny, insignificant dot on a map; however, they mean much more to the people of Japan and South Korea. The Japanese call the islets Takeshima and have claimed their official ownership since 1905, during the Russo-Japanese War. Koreans call the land Dokdo and claim it has historically been Korean territory and was wrongfully taken during the Japanese occupation of Korea. This essay will outline ten historically accurate facts, unknown in Japan, surrounding the Dokdo dispute. [...] During this period, three more factscan be found in Japanese historical records. A Japanese survey conducted by Ihohara Fumiichi in the 20th century clearly registered Dokdo as Korean territory. Japanese scholar Hibata Sekko categorized Dokdo as part of Korea's Gangwon Province in 1930. In 1923, the Japanese Navy published "Korean Coastal Straits," citing Dokdo as part of Ulleungdo, a nearby Korean island.
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of South Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2013-01-01): A Chronological Table of Historical Events that Prove Dokdo is Korean Territory
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of South Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2014-05-13): So, why not bring the case jointly to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to finally put the issue of sovereignty to rest? In fact, this has been a previous approach by Tokyo, which has asked Seoul three times to agree to a joint submission to the ICJ. South Korea has refused each time, as it believes there is no dispute over the sovereignty of the islets. During Tokyo’s last approach in 2012, the South Korean Foreign Ministry responded, "Dokdo is clearly part of Korean territory historically, geographically and under international law, and no territorial dispute exists. The Japanese government’s proposal to take the Dokdo issue before the ICJ is not worth attention." Ironically, this is similar to Tokyo’s approach with China over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea.
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of South Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2021-04-12): In The Dokdo/Takeshima Dispute, Paul Huth, Sunwoong Kim, and Terence Roehrig have assembled some of the top scholars from Japan, South Korea, and the United States to provide a fresh and comprehensive look at one of the most long-running island disputes in East Asia. The book examines the dispute from multiple perspectives with chapters that provide a detailed and balanced assessment addressing issues in international law, history, foreign policy, domestic politics, the media, education, and the impact on relations with the United States. The book also provides analyses of why this dispute has persisted for decades and explores possible solutions that are relevant for other maritime disputes in the Asia-Pacific. [...] Introduction: The Dokdo/Takeshima Dispute: South Korea, Japan, and the Search for a Peaceful Solution Paul K. Huth, Sunwoong Kim and Terence Roehrig 1 Why Is a Pathway to Peaceful Resolution of the Dokdo/Takeshima Dispute So Elusive? Paul Huth and Sunwoong Kim 2 International Law and Maritime Disputes J. Ashley Roach 3 Japan’s Claim to Takeshima Eiichi Usuki 4 South Korea’s Claim to Dokdo Hee Eun Lee 5 Takeshima in Japanese Politics and Foreign Policy Yoshinori Kaseda 6 Dokdo in the South Korean Politics Hyon Joo Yoo 7 Takeshima in Japanese Education, Media and Culture Yuji Fukuhara and Takeshi Sato 8 Dokdo in South Korean Education, Media, and Culture Ji-Young Lee and Jaehyun Lee 9 U.S. Policy and the Dokdo/Takeshima Dispute Terence Roehrig [...] Scholars studying Japan and South Korea politics and foreign relations, international law, maritime and territorial disputes, and conflict resolution. Also for classroom use in upper division and graduate courses.
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of South Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2021-02-22): The uninhabited islet rich in fishing grounds off the northwestern coast of Shimane is called Takeshima in Japan and Dokdo in South Korea. It has been effectively controlled by South Korea since the 1950s. [...] In a statement, it demanded that the event be abolished and said it is clear that the island is South Korean territory because of "history, geography and international law". [...] "Takeshima is clearly Japanese territory under international law and in light of historical facts," he said. "In order to solve the Takeshima problem, it is important to obtain the international community's correct understanding."
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of South Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-10-01): The Liancourt Rocks,[2] also known by their Korean name of Dokdo (Korean: 독도)[a] or their Japanese name of Takeshima,[b] are a group of islets in the Sea of Japan between the Korean peninsula and the Japanese archipelago administered by South Korea. The Liancourt Rocks comprise two main islets and 35 smaller rocks; the total surface area of the islets is 0.187554 square kilometres (46.346 acres) and the highest elevation of 168.5 metres (553 ft) is on the West Islet.[4][dead link] The Liancourt Rocks lie in rich fishing grounds that may contain large deposits of natural gas.[5] The English name Liancourt Rocks is derived from Le Liancourt,[c] the name of a French whaling ship that came close to being wrecked on the rocks in 1849.[6] [...] References - BAEK In-ki; SHIM Mun-bo; Korea Maritime Institute (December 2006), A study of Distance between Ulleungdo and Dokdo and Ocean Currents (울릉도와 독도의 거리와 해류에 관한 연구), pp. 20–22, ISBN 978-89-7998-340-1, archived from the original on 12 January 2013 - BBC staff (20 April 2006), Seoul and Tokyo hold island talks, BBC - BBC staff (27 July 2008), "Island row hits Japanese condoms", BBC News - Fern, Sean (Winter 2005), "Tokdo or Takeshima? The International Law of Territorial Acquisition in the Japan-Korea Island Dispute", Stanford Journal of East Asian Affairs, 5 (1)
Claim: Dokdo/Takeshima is a territory of South Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2013-01-01): It is recorded in the Geography Section of the Annals of King Sejong’s Reign, one of Joseon’s early government compilations, that both Ulleungdo and Dokdo belong to the Uljin county of Gangwon Province. It specifically notes that "The two islands of Usan [Dokdo] and Mureung [Ulleungdo] are not located far apart from each other so Dokdo is visible from Ulleungdo on a clear day." Dokdo is the only island that is visible from Ulleungdo without visual aid. [...] This is a report submitted to the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs by an inspection team including Hakubo Sada. This report, entitled "A Confidential Inquiry into the Particulars of Korea’s Foreign Relations" records of "How Takeshima [Ulleungdo] and Matsushima [Dokdo] came to belong to Joseon [Korea]" which reveals that the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs clearly recognized Dokdo as Korean territory. [...] > Korea's Position on Dokdo > Why Dokdo is Korean Territory ※ The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Korea holds all rights to this image and prohibits any reproduction or duplication without permission.