Toshiyuki, C., & Park, J. (2012). Why Japan and South Korea Are Feuding Over a Cluster of Rocks, n.pag. Newsweek. Retrieved from http://mag.newsweek.com/2012/09/02/why-japan-and-south-korea-are-feuding-over-a-cluster-of-rocks.html
The main point of this article is to explain why Japan and South Korea are fighting over Dokdo/Takeshima. The authors list multiple reasons why the two countries are in conflict over the islets, and seem to place the blame more so on South Korea than Japan. The authors then provide a reason the U.S. should be worried about the the situation: they are a major trading partner with both Japan and South Korea. The authors conclude their argument by remarking on how strongly South Koreans feel about the islets while in Japan, it is a low-priority issue.
I chose this article because the authors provide many actions South Korea has taken to show Japan and the world that Dokdo/Takeshima belongs to them. The article itself does not provide a broad history of the islets, but events that took place because of the dispute over the islets. Finding articles that show what each country is doing to show their national support for the islets is difficult and this article proved to be helpful for my research.
Kim, Y. (2005). What Is the Controversy Over Dokdo All About?. Koreana, 19(3), 14-19.
This magazine article explains the controversy over the Dokdo/Takeshima islets by providing historical references given by both South Korea and Japan. The article concludes by saying that Japan does not have the rights to the islets and lists treaties that agree with the author’s stance. This article is very biased in favor of South Korea.
I chose this article because of the bias the author has toward the Dokdo/Takeshima situation. The author, a South Korean, provides many great historical reasons for why the islets belong to South Korea. If these historical reasons prove to be true, they will be very useful to use as an argument in my final paper. I wish the author talked more about why Japan decided to recognize the islets as their own in the early 1900s.
Van Dyke, J. M. (2006). Reconciliation between Korea and Japan. Chinese Journal Of International Law, 5(1), 215-239. doi:10.1093/chinesejil/jml005
The author of this article first explains the situation of the disputed islets and says that the conflict occurred because of the annexation of Korea by Japan. The author then provides examples of annexations in history, such as the United State’s annexation of Hawaii. He states the the islets dispute can be solved similarly to the United State’s annexation of Hawaii and if Japan apologizes for their previous actions. In a small section of the article, the author states his reasons for why he believes South Korea owns the islets.
I chose this article because it provides a new perspective to the Dokdo/Takeshima conflict. The author’s proposed solution to the islets situation draws upon past occurrences of other countries. This article relates the islets conflict to the world rather than just between South Korea and Japan. This piece is unlike any other research I have found, and I believe it will be an invaluable source in my final paper.
Sung-jae, C. (2005). The Politics of the Dokdo Issue. Journal Of East Asian Studies, 5(3), 465-494.
This article explains how the issue of the Dokdo/Takeshima islets has only further deteriorated relations between South Korea and Japan. The article provides a long summary of the conflict and reasons why the islets are symbolic to Koreans and Japanese. The main evidence used to support the author’s stance on this issue are of civil cases and other actions taken by Koreans to upset the Japanese and vice versa. He concludes by stating that all of the negative actions surrounding the Dokdo/Takeshima conflict have hurt the Korea-Japanese relationship.
This article, as well as the Newsweek article, provide me with actions Koreans and Japanese have taken to prove that Dokdo/Takeshima belongs to their respective country. I agree with the author’s viewpoint that these actions are only hindering the efforts to develop a positive relationship between South Korea and Japan. The extensive summary of the history of the islets will be helpful in my paper when I explain the background of Dokdo/Takeshima.
Seokwoo, L. (2011). Dokdo: The San Francisco Peace Treaty, International Law on Territorial Disputes, and Historical Criticism. Asian Perspective, 35(3), 361-380.
This scholarly article explains how the San Francisco Peace Treaty may favor South Korea in the Dokdo/Takeshima conflict. The article states that Japan signed the San Francisco Peace Treaty, which states in one article of the treaty that they must renounce all of their claim to Korea and its islands, except for Dokdo/Takeshima. Japan argues that because the treaty they signed does not include Dokdo/Takeshima, they still have rights over the islets. The author then draws upon previous court cases involving contested territories and compares them to the islets conflict. He concludes his argument by stating that the San Francisco Peace Treaty should be closely examined in order to determine who is the rightful owner of the islets.
This article provides a legal view to the situation of Dokdo/Takeshima. I did not know about the San Francisco Peace Treaty prior to reading this article and believe it is worth mentioning in my argument in my paper. I wish the author would provide his opinion in a section in the article instead of leaving the relevancy of the San Francisco Peace Treaty up to one’s decision.
Kat Platt
Information Literacy: Conflicts 