There are some arguments between Korea and Japan surrounded Dokdo dominion. If you want to look more, please visit Northeast Asian History Foundation(www.historyfoundation.or.kr/), Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (www.mofat.go.kr), and Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan(www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/).
Refutation of Korea
In the drafting process of the Treaty of Peace with Japan, the United States rejected ROK’s request to include Dokdo, in the relevant articles of the Treaty, as one of the areas Japan would renounce, claiming that Dokdo was under the jurisdiction of Japan.
Initially, the United States recognized Dokdo as Korea’s territory, and the temporary change in the US position was only due to strategic lobbying by Japan.
Japan has failed to show logical consistency in its assertion that Dokdo, of which there is no provision in the San Francisco Peace Treaty, should be Japan’s territory, while at the same time refusing to accept the Kuril Islands (or “Four Northern Territories” as they are called by Japan) as Russian territory, although the islands are clearly acknowledged as such in the Treaty of Peace with Japan.
The General Headquarters of the Allied Powers, during its occupation of Japan, applied Directive SCAPIN-677 without issuing any other specific orders, and the Japanese government also acknowledged, after the ratification of the San Francisco Peace Treaty, that Dokdo was excluded from its jurisdiction,
In October 1951, the Japanese government submitted to the House of Representatives, the Map of Japanese Territory, drawn according to the San Francisco Peace Treaty. In this map, Dokdo lies outside the line marking the boundary of Japanese territory, showing that the island is not Japanese territory.
* Directive SCAPIN-677 provides that Dokdo, along with Ulleungdo, belongs to the area that is excluded from Japan’s governmental or administrative authority.
* SCAPIN-677: “3. For the purpose of this directive, Japan is defined to include the four main islands of Japan (Hokkaido, Honshu, Kyushu and Shikoku) and the approximately 1,000 smaller adjacent islands,…and excluding (a) Utsuryo(Ulleungdo) Island, Liancourt Rocks…”
The Allied Forces’ decision to exclude Dokdo from Japan’s territory between World War II and the conclusion of the San Francisco Peace Treaty was part of postwar measures to implement the results from the Cairo Declaration(1943) and the Potsdam Declaration(1945).
In conclusion, Dokdo was rightly included as an area Japan should relinquish because it was Korea’s territory, which Japan usurped through violence and greed during the Russo-Japanese War, which heralded the start of Japan’s full-scale land-grabbing war. After the war, Dokdo was separated from Japan, according to the Allied Power’s decision, to be under US military rule, until the island-along with numerous other islands, in accordance to a UN resolution-was handed over to the Government of Korea, which was established on August 15, 1948. The San Francisco Peace Treaty merely confirmed these facts.
The ROK is illegally occupying Dokdo, against which Japan has been consistently making strong protests.
Japan has never established its territorial sovereignty over Dokdo, in any period in history, and Japan’s claim on the Korean island is nothing but a unilateral, invalid, and illegal attempt to infringe upon Korea’s territorial sovereignty over Dokdo.
Japan made an attempt to establish territorial sovereignty over Dokdo via measures taken in 1905, but Korea had already established its territorial sovereignty over the island before that.
* There are a number of important historical documents in both Korea and Japan, which clearly state that Dokdo is Korea’s territory, including Sejong Silok Jiriji (“Geographical Appendix to the Veritable Records of King Sejong”:1454), Mangi Yoram(“The Book of Ten Thousand Techniques of Governance,”1808), the Korean Imperial Ordinance No.41(1900), a document by the Edo Shogunate prohibiting Japanese fishermen from the passage to Ulleungdo(1696), Chosenkoku Kosai-Shimatsu Naitansho(“Confidential Inquiry into the Particulars of Korea’s Relations with Japan”;1870) issued by the Meiji government, and the 1877 Dajokan Order.
Although Japan proposed to the ROK, to refer this dispute over Dokdo to the International Court of Justice, the ROK has rejected this proposal.
A remarkable self-contradiction exists in Japan’s position-while refusing to bring the issue of Diaoyutai/Senkaku Islands or the “Four Northern Territories” to the International Court of Justice, Japan asserts that the Dokdo issue should be solved through a decision from the Court.
Dokdo is an island of great historical meaning in that it is an area that Korea has finally restored from the aftermaths of Japanese imperialists’ harsh colonial rule, which devastated the Korean people and the land. It is an obvious fact that Dokdo is an integral part of the Korea’s territory, and Korea sees absolutely no reason as to why Korea should turn to a court. The only appropriate solution here is for Japan to relinquish its assertion, which is based on its dark colonial history that inflicted so much pain on its neighbors.