Saturday, January 27, 2007

The origins of the Japanese

A very interesting article by Foreign dispatches about he Origins of the Japanese PeopleT

Abe, you miss the mark.

TOKYO (AFP) - Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has once again vowed to shake off the legacy of World War II defeat to create a "new national identity" as he is trying to revive sagging public support.Fri Jan 26,
.......
Huh? National identity? It is always changing. It is not politician's job to impose national identity on people.

"Haven't we ignored such values as self-reliance, public responsibility, morality and love of the country?

Huh? self-reliance is something an individual person learn through better experience. People will value public responsibility if politicians set an example. You
don't have to teach love of the country; I love my country though nobody taught me to love it.

Abe, just set up the solid base for our pension, first and foremost then you'll survive and we'll survive. That is your favorite co-prosperity policy, right?

Thursday, January 25, 2007

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Ozma suit will be available for you now.



After the NHK show, a lot of people asked the company for the party goods if OZMA Suit , which look like naked is available. The company decided to sell the suits that resembles the OZMA suit.



....................................................................................
1月24日9時56分配信 日刊スポーツ

 昨年大みそかのNHK紅白歌合戦で物議を醸したDJ OZMA(年齢非公表)の女性バックダンサーが着用したヌードスーツが、宴会芸グッズとして発売されることが23日、分かった。製造するのは都内のパーティーグッズメーカーのクリアストーンで、今年3月に宴会グッズを扱う大型店などで発売予定。同社は過去にマツケンサンバやレイザーラモンHGの衣装を模したコスチュームを販売した。年明けから「OZMAのバックダンサーの全裸に見える衣装はないのか?」の問い合わせが各地の販売店に殺到しているとの連絡を受け、急きょ全裸スーツを模したコスチュームの販売を決めた。

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Takeshima/dokdo 1883 document (j) illegal Japanese

Although the Korean government did not wish to allow the presence of Japanese on Ulleungdo (but they never checked out the island until 1882), the islanders seemed to have been getting along quite fine with each other, before 1882. The islanders and their leader seemed to not have considered the Japanese on the island as poachers.

There is a Japanese document titled “Report of a secretary of Ministry of Home Affairs Higaki Naoe who made an official trip to Ullung-do in Korea” which can be found at JACAR. Higaki had received orders from the Japanese government to go to Ulleungdo in 1883 and round up all Japanese on the island, in response to a complaint field by the Korean government that Japanese were conducting illegal lumbering on Ulleungdo. (A fact probably discovered by the 1882 inspection by Lee Gyun-yon.) It seems the men of both countries were getting along very well and wept when they were upon their parting like brothers or best friends. The Korean islanders (a little over 60 in all) seemed to have had been heavily dependent on the Japanese (who counted about 150) for their living. Thus they were horrified to hear that the Japanese were all leaving. Especially, they had just experienced a bad season and the horrible typhoon season had nearly cut off all travel between Ulleungdo and the Korean peninsula, the departing Japanese leave what food they have for the Koreans and the island leader also come to Higaki asking to loan him some food to prevent the remaining Koreans from starving to death, so Higakai gives them some rice from his private stock. A different document shows that Higaki was later compensated for the rice he gave the Koreans by the Japanese government, for the reason that the act could be considered the official duty of a Japanese policeman, since he wan in Ulleungdo under orders.

朝鮮国蔚陵島出張檜垣内務少書記官復命ノ件
Report of a secretary of Ministry of Home Affairs Higaki Naoe who made an official trip to Ullung-do in Korea
アジア歴史資料センター
Japan Center for Asian Historical Records
Reference code: A03023617600, Nov. 12, 1883
抑も朝鮮國人民ノ此島ニ在ル者嶋長ヲ併セ大凢六十余 其ノ状態ヲ察スルニ陰ニ御國人民ノ供給ヲ仰キ生計ヲ營ム者ニ似タリ 故ニ今回御國人民ノ帰國ヲ聴クヤ愁容表ニ溢レ哀情甚タ切ニ殆ド兄弟親友ニ別ルガ如ク 或ハ行李ヲ擔ヒ或ハ荷物ヲ負ヒテ海岸マテ送リ来レリ 御國人民モ亦タ別レヲ惜ミ且差向キ其ノ窮困ヲ憐察シ私ニ米若干包ヲ恵恤セシト云フ 其相親睦セル斯ノ如キヲ以テ島長ノ他ハ御國人民ノ伐木スルヲ以テ敢テ意ニ介セス 島長モ亦之ヲ盗伐視セスシテ其ノ既ニ伐木セシ木材ハ随意ニ本國ニ搭載シ帰ルヲ許可セリ(第一号参看) 以テ彼我ノ間ヲ推スルニ足レリ 将ニ蔚陵島ヲ発セントスルニ先タチ島長某其書記某ト共ニ本船ニ来リ請フテ曰ク朝鮮國人ノ島ニ在ル者ハ大凢六十名糧食絶ノ之命且夕ニ迫レリ 殊ニ時季風濤暴激ノ候ニ際しシ本國トノ航海ヲ為ス能ハス 願クハ米若干包ヲ恩貸セラレタシト因テ其事實ヲ推窮シ白米四斗二升俵廿五包ヲ恵恤ス(別紙第五号中丙号ニアリ)午後五時山三十分蔚陵島ヲ解纜シ同十五午後二時赤間関ニ着シ即時山口縣令ノ人民交附ノ義電信ヲ以テ照會ニ及ヒ搭載シ来リタル人民ハ上陸ヲ許サス two cents

Monday, January 15, 2007

Is Korea still a vassal state of China?

A traditional Chinese performing arts show scheduled for the National Theater of Korea in Seoul last weekend was abruptly canceled just a few days before opening. Organized by NTDTV, a broadcaster run by ethnic Chinese residents in the U.S., it was supposed to be a simple New Year’s gala celebration.

On its homepage, NTDTV said the National Theater unilaterally canceled the performance under pressure from the Chinese embassy in Korea. At first the theater claimed that China had simply informed them that NTDTV was an enemy organization and that they were lodging a strong protest with Korea’s Foreign Ministry. The theater blamed the Korean Culture Ministry for requesting the cancellation. But later the theater backtracked, saying it had received no such request from the Culture Ministry. It has since been revealed that NTDTV is on a Beijing blacklist for airing reports on China’s human rights abuses.
......
This isn't the first time that pressure from Beijing has had an impact in Korea. Last June, the Dalai Lama, the leader of Tibetan Buddhism, was invited here to attend a global religious leaders' conference and a summit of Nobel Laureates in the southwestern city of Gwangju. The Dalai Lama visited 13 different countries last year alone, traveling to Japan 13 times. But the Korean government rejected his visa application.

When Australia invited the Dalai Lama for a visit 1982, China threatened economic sanctions against that country. But Australia refused to give in -- and there is no evidence that China ever acted on those threats.

Any act of Chinese meddling in Korean internal affairs, such as telling us who can perform here or who should not be allowed, would not be possible if our government stood firmly by the principles of fair bilateral relations. The pride and joy of this administration is its stated independence from external influence. But why an independent government would volunteer to perform each and every one of China’s biddings is unfathomable. Jan.8,2007

How nice of Korea to follow Chinese warning!

NTD is scheduled to perform at Hyougo in March in Japan.


via 依存症の独り言

Sunday, January 14, 2007

The objective history received a great hit in China

"About 150 years ago, Japan, an island nation, found itself in a fateful crisis under the threat of Western colonialists. Japan turned this crisis into a historical opportunity to discard the old and regenerate itself and thereby built Asia's first modern nation."

Thus began the opening narration of a TV program broadcast last autumn by China Central Television, the country's leading network. It was the seventh installment of a documentary series entitled "Rise of the great powers" in modern times.

The objective viewpoint that set the series apart from traditional history programs shown on Chinese TV attracted much public attention.

The section on Japan, titled "100-Year Restoration," went to great lengths to explain the "Iwakura mission," a nearly two-year journey through the United States and Europe by Meiji Restoration statesman Iwakura Tomomi and the work of new nation building. After describing Japan's attempts to become an affluent military power through its invasion of Asian nations, the broadcast concentrated on Japan's postwar development. It showed how Japan, ruled by a Constitution that gives sovereignty to the people and renounces war, re-emerged as a major power by building on strengths developed since the Meiji Restoration of 1868.

The program may signal a newfound willingness by China to judge Japan as it really is. This was unimaginable just a few years ago when anti-Japanese demonstrations were raging in major cities across the nation.01/13/2007Asahi


This is a good news.
However another newspaper* has a different perspective. A journalist of Sankei asks why this program was such a bit hit.
Yes, it might be a manifestation of Chinese confidence in the recent success of Chinese development as a big nation.

But, it might also be a manifestation of a fret that she had no choice but to learn
from other countries to deal with serious social conflicts she is facing.

Or is it a manifestation of the will of expansionism China is advancing with military build-up and a disguised colonialism over Africa, leaning from the past colonialism?

I just can not simply pleased with this news, hearing Chinese say "The next conqueror is China"

Hmmm...what do you think?



...................................................................................
*



イデオロギー管理を強化し、共産党の一党独裁に役立つ歴史教育をずっと行ってきた中国で、なぜこんな番組が放送され、大ヒットしているのだろう。

 「歴史を鑑(かがみ)に」

 北京大学歴史学部の銭乗旦教授は上海紙・文匯報に寄せた論文でこんな風に背景を分析している。いわく、「大国崛起」が大反響を巻き起こしたのは、視聴者の歴史知識が欠乏していたためで、われわれの歴史教育の欠陥を反映している。中国人は歴史観念は非常に強いが、それは「天下観」であって「世界」に対する認識が備わっていなかった。中国が世界に向かうプロセスで、「歴史を鑑に」とするならば、自国の歴史ではなく、他国の歴史を鑑にすべきだ…。

 グローバル化する中国にとって世界史の正しい認識が必要、という考えは実は党中央でも芽生えている。2003年11月、党中央政治局で「15世紀以来の世界主要国発展史」をテーマとした集団学習会が開かれていた。そもそもこの番組は、この中央の動きをキャッチした敏腕プロデューサー任学安氏が、過去500年の大国の勃興史から、今まさに崛起の最中にある中国が教訓を得るべし、という狙いで制作したのだった。

 次の覇者は中国?

 今年1月、中国青年報の付属週刊紙氷点週刊が、中山大学の袁偉時教授の歴史教科書批判論文を掲載したため停刊処分になった事件を振り返れば、国内の歴史については依然、タブーが多い。が、世界貿易機関(WTO)加盟5年目を無事迎え、経済発展を持続、6カ国協議で各国から頼りにされ、アフリカや東南アジアの盟主としての地位を固めつつある中国は、大国としての自信を深めている。その自信が世界史を客観的に見ようとする余裕につながっているのかもしれない。あるいは、中国が直面する経済・社会矛盾の緩和のためには世界の大国の経験から智慧を吸収せねば、という焦りがあるのか。

 それとも過去の大国の植民地主義のやり方に学ぶのだと、自らが目下行っている軍事力強化やアフリカなどで行っているプチ植民地主義や経済侵略を肯定、拡大していく意志の表れなのか?

 このブームが、中国人民の対日感情の改善や民主主義への肯定につながるならすばらしい。が、この番組を見て「次の世界の覇者は中国だ」と悦にいる隣人の話を聞くと、なにか単純に喜んではいられない気がするのも、正直なところである。(福島香織)


12/24 /産経新聞

Thursday, January 11, 2007

1899 Daehanjiji (大韓地誌)

http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-daehanjiji.html
(Click on first map to enlarge.)

While I am at it, I might as well refute the contents of the above page, to give an example of shooting oneself in the foot.
Now this guy claims that the eastern limit given in the 1899 Daehanjiji (大韓地誌), E130º35’ cannot be taken at face value because it just copied the Japanese sources, mainly the 1894 Chosun Waterway (= Chosun Sea Lane; 朝鮮水路誌). Let’s be nice here and refrain from ridiculing the Great Korean government who simply allowed the editors to rip off Imperial Japanese sources without being critical or the contents or never thought to ask the Russian, U.S, English,or French legations for a second opinion. Now this guy claims that the Japanese book inherited their positional errors regarding the boundaries of Chosun from the English Navy’s “China Sea Directory,” and ignores completely how the Japanese government ordered the 1880 Amagi mission for the purpose of determining exactly which island (Takeshima/Matsushima) Ulleungdo was. The Japanese government knew exactly what it was claiming. In a 1878 document (Regarding Matsushima: 松島之議), it is made clear that Japan was aware that 3 islands were mapped in the Sea of Japan, and that the closest one, the Hornet Rocks which later came to be called the Liancourt Rocks was considered to be Japanese territory by western countries. Japan intentionally left out Liancourt Rocks from the limits of Chosun territory in the Chosun Waterway.

The New Dahanjiji in 1907 claims the eastern limits to be 130º56’ (page 3, or #14), still to the west of the Liancourt Rocks. But let’s forgive the Korean geographers for their errors. You see, the eastern limit in the Chosun Waterway was defined by the eastern limit of the northern continental territory, so they forgot to check the eastern limit of Ulleungdo, which should be Usan. So let us see what they have to say about Ulleungdo in the individual sections, shall we? Page 41 (image #42). Hmm, so the book says that Ulleungdo (鬱島) stretches from N130º35’-45’ and E37º31’-34’. I’ll be polite and just convert that into E130º35’-45’ and N37º31’-34’. You know, it’s typical to confuse east and north when writing coordinates. What I personally find interesting is the passage on the left of the blue line, “former Ulleungdo, lies 300 ris offshore Uljin, also know as Ulleung or Mulleung (古鬱稜島*蔚珍東三百餘里*在**一名羽陵**亦曰武陵)” since Korean historical records say that “Ulleungdo was called Usanguk during the Silla period and also known as Mulleung or Ulleung (新羅時、称于山国、一伝武陵、一伝羽陵 – Book of Goryeo, 1451) and the Annal of King Sejong says that two islands of Usan and Mulleung are not far away from each other (于山武陵二島在県正東海中 二島相去不遠). HOWEVER, that isn’t relevant to this site’s claim that Usan is Liancourt located 92 km away from Ulleungdo, is it? I mean, it CAN’T be the SAME USAN they’re talking about. At least, let us applaud the Koreans for finally getting the direction of the Usando to coincide with the Liancourt Rocks/former Matsushima, 2 whole centuries after Ahn proclaimed Matsushima to be Usan, and thus, Korean territory.

But sadly, someone had to make that critical error. The 1907 Elementary Daehanjiji (初等大韓地誌) blows it by saying in its Overview that the eastern limit is 130º58’ while stating that Ulleungdo (慶尚北道鬱島郡鬱稜島) is the eastern-most limit of Korea, thus, closing the path for using the excuse, “We were defining our limit by the northern territory and forgot about Ulleungdo.” Let us forgive them for forgetting to correct the coordinates in the Overview, since they are clearly for the northern territorial boundary. Instead, let us see if they have changed the limits of Ulleungdo, on page 24 (#28). N130º35’-45’ and E37º31’-34’…. I see they have not only failed to change the coordinates to include the Liancourt Rocks here, but not even bothered to correct their typos. Very sloppy work.

Then, finally, this guy tries to attribute the flaws in the coordinates to the fictitious Argonaut Island. Excuse-moi, but the Koreans were citing the 1894 Chosun Waterways by Japan, were they not? Then, they must have known that Argonaut didn’t exist. Please, can someone point out Argonaut for me on the maps drawn by the Koreans at the top and middle of the page? I must be blind not to see any island mapped to the west of E130º. What’s more, the coordinates of the Liancourt Rocks are explicitly given in the Chosun Waterways as N37º14’ and E131º55’. If the Koreans had believed the Liancourt Rocks which Japan now called Takeshima to be a part of the Ulleung county, they would have stretched the coordinates to that value, no? Why don’t I even see a stray island drawn to the southeast of Ulleungdo at some distance?two cent at occidentalism

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

A joke about race

When someone find that there is a fly on a soup, what will he do?
A German will have a soup, taking out the fly, with the thought that it is too hot, there is no sanitation problem.
A Chinese will have a soup without hesitation.
A Russian will have a soup without noticing because he would be drunken.
An American will call the manager and sue him.
A Japanese will call the waiter, after lookng around, confirming that his soup was the only one with a fly.
A Korean will burn the Japanese flag, saying that it is all Japan's fault.

Quite innocent but funny, I guess.
.....................................................................
via 依存症


早坂隆著『世界の日本人ジョーク集』(中公新書ラクレ)を読むと、日本人と韓国人が登場するジョーク(小話)がいくつかある。たとえばレストランで出てきたスープにハエが入っていたらどうなるか。

ドイツ人は「熱いスープだから殺菌されている」と冷静に考え、ハエを取り除いてスープを飲む。中国人はそのまま平気で飲む。ロシア人は酔っぱらっていて知らずに飲む。アメリカ人は支配人を呼んで裁判にする。日本人はあたりを見回し自分だけに入っているのを確認した後、そっとボーイを呼ぶ。韓国人は日本人のせいだといって日の丸を焼く…というのだ。

Tuesday, January 09, 2007

The insight on how to deal with Korea

I am deeply impressed by his insight.
Korean society as a whole uses nationalism to get what it wants - including when it comes to fulfilling agreements. This goes beyond the US-SK relationship. It used it against both Chile and China on trade major trade deals that have come up within the last 5 years. We should have taken special note of how China handled the Great Garlic War: when news leaked of the terms of the agreement SK tried to keep under wraps came out that specified a gradual reduction in tariffs on Chinese agro-fishery products, the Korean government did what it does with the US on trade and security issues —- caved into nationalist sentiment. It said the agreement was clearly flawed and detrimental to Korea’s interests and it would renegociate. The Korean press played up the nationalism too. Then China balled up its fist and wacked Korea upside the head by slapping huge tariffs on telecommunication and chemical industry products Korea was making a fortune on in China.

The Korean press and government got the message and reversed position on a dime — explaining to the Korean public that even if SK fulfilled its obligations in the deal, it would still be enjoying a massive profit in the bilateral trade, and the Korean people listened and the China bashing was kept to small groups.

The same kind of thing happens every time Korea’s nationalism increases on the US relationship front. When things get too out of control, and the US press starts writing about it and/or the US government begins making serious threats, the Korean media tells the masses to shut up, and they listen.usinkorea at lost nomad


—-Korean nationalism will seek to turn things into major issues and use the society’s expressed anger to get what it wants — even if what it wants is for Korea to fail to do agreements it has signed.

China has reacted to these things by slamming Korea upside the head by placing high tariffis and other economic sanctions or actions against Korean imports there. And Korean society has backed down quickly.

The pattern in anti-US activity has been for some time that — when Korea feels like venting spleen, they will build up any issue, large or trivial, and keep it going as long as it felt good to them.

Sometimes it just peters out on its own.

But other times, when they really get going, it will catch the attention of the American press and/or it will piss off someone high up in the US government.

Whatever the case, whenever Korean society fears that it might hurt Korean exports, hurt Korea’s image, or cause a shift in USFK’s committment to Korea…

….they put the brakes on anti-US activity fast.usinkore at marmot

Instant Noodle

I din't know there were some Koreans who claimed Koreans invented instant noodle.(The linked article is very interesting and humorous.) Not that I know who invented but that I wonder why they care so much about who invented what.
The idea of instant noodles can be traced back to the Chinese Qing Dynasty, when yimian noodles were deep-fried to allow them to be stored for long periods and then prepared quickly. Similarly, "Chicken Thread Noodles" (雞絲麵, deep-fried thin noodles served with boiling water and optionally an egg) were available in China and Taiwan since Qing Dynasty.

However, modern instant noodles were invented in Japan by Momofuku Ando, the founder of Nissin, one of the biggest manufacturers of instant noodles today. His noodles were boiled with flavouring, deep-fried with palm oil to remove moisture, and dried into a noodle cake. Other preservation methods have been tried, including preservation with salt and smoke, but Ando concluded that palm oil is the most efficient.wiki

Is VANK ready to attack this article?

Monday, January 08, 2007

How history is selected by Korean people

.....The panel reviewed the book, which tells the story of a Japanese family fleeing Korea at the end of World War II, after about a dozen parents complained that it was unfair in its portrayal of Koreans and too graphic for 11- and 12-year olds.

"If it was a perfect world, I would like to see us vote on it in January," said School Committee chairwoman Ellen Williamson . She said a vote was possible but she didn't know whether her fellow members felt they had enough information to vote.

Even if removed from the curriculum, the award-winning book, which has been taught in the district for 13 years, will remain in the school library.
.....
The "fictionalized autobiography" was written by Yoko Kawashima Watkins, whose family lived in Korea during the war while her father, a Japanese government official, worked in Manchuria.

After the war, Japanese citizens were forced out of Korea, which they had occupied for more than three decades. Many thousands of Koreans had been killed or wounded or drafted into forced labor during the occupation.

The story, told through the eyes of Watkins, who was 11 at the time, details her family's perilous journey. She, her sister, and her mother are hunted by Koreans because of her father's role in the government. In the book, the girl witnesses women being raped and sees people die. Returning to Japan, the mother dies, and the girl and her sister are left in desperate poverty.

The book is taught in middle schools across the state and country.

Watkins, who lives on Cape Cod, has visited several area schools to talk about the book.
.....
But Henry Jaung, father of a sixth-grader in the Dover-Sherborn schools, has argued that the book tells a one-sided story with no historical context.

He said it portrays Koreans as the villains without any reference to the wrongs committed against the Koreans by the Japanese occupiers. He also argued that the book's graphic content is inappropriate for such young children.

Other parents and students have come out in support of the book, praising it as a much-loved educational experience and a book that illustrates the evils of war in genera.....By Lisa Kocian, Globe Staff | December 31, 2006/Boston com

via 世の中をなま暖かく見守るブログ

And how it should be taught.

Zonath from United States
Posted January 9, 2007 at 3:44 am | Permalink


I think some of you are pretty hard on the Koreans…..for example. Just out of curiousity. What would/could have France done if Russia, England and America had all signed treaties or consented to Nazi Germany’s invasion of France?


France probably couldn’t have done a whole lot, given that the interventions on their behalf basically saved French independence. So where are we going with this one? France, unlike Korea at the time, actually acted to protect itself and ensure that, when Germany invaded, other countries would come to its aid. Korea didn’t act until it was much too late. So really, what’s the difference here? Maybe, by fostering the kinds of international relationships that could protect it, France ensured that its occupation was a short one. And maybe, by closing its doors to the outside world for an extended period of time, Korea weakened itself so greatly (both in its international relations and its technological prowess) that it basically ensured that its own occupation would be much longer than otherwise.

Of course, I point all this out (I’m hard on Korea) not so much for the general pleasure of attempting to crush long-held and mistaken beliefs of persecution and victimhood that the South Korean school system seems to enjoy fostering, but because those beliefs threaten to make much the same thing happen again. Korea’s famous isolationism has long been its single greatest weakness, and continues to be such. Let me just point out my own hypothetical… If tomorrow, China invaded North Korea, what would be the eventual result? Sure, there would be protests and such, and the US and SK would probably move their armies closer to the DMZ in order to make sure that the Chinese army stopped there… There would be the inevitable threats of punitive sanctions against China… But who would actually lift a finger to help North Korea? What country would feel obligated to North Korea in such a way that they would go to war with China in order to ensure that North Korea stayed an actual country rather than a province of China? My guess is that, when the dust settled, and all the sabres stopped rattling, China would have a shiny (or dusty) new province, and the rest of the world would be well pleased about it. A few of them might even secretly agree with China beforehand not to intervene if such a move be made. Would this mean that they’d be selling North Korea down the river? (Of course, this assumes that a Chinese invasion led to a quick collapse of the KJI regime rather than a regional nuclear conflict…)

And so where is South Korea in all this? It’s continuing to press down its own road of isolation by trying to play the ‘balancer’ role in the region. It’s alienating its neighbors by insisting on pressing issues that would probably be better ignored. It’s stupidly isolating its agricultural markets rather than modernizing them. And all this while teaching its students that the Japanese occupation was anyone’s fault but Korea’s, rather than realizing that there’s an important lesson to be learned in history, not just justifications for their own impressively stupid and wrong-headed nationalism.

Takeshima/Dokdo effective conrol during Edo period

As far as I know, the Oya and Murakawa families considered Ulleungdo to be uninhabited land discovered accidentally by one of their men. Chosun at the time had been following an empty island policy to supress Korean pirates posing as Japanese (仮倭) and deprive them of their bases. The two families and the shogunate were unaware of this, and so you could say they took effective control of the empty Ulleungdo. They had been going about their business for 80 years since the Korean officials never even bothered to patrol the island. When Ahn, learning from Koreans who had gone to Ulleungdo the year before and hearing of their success, goes to Ulleungdo. (He claimed that he was acting under official orders to fish on Ulleungdo in his statement in Japan, but later in Chosum claimed that he had been shipwrecked and arrived at Ulleungo accidentally to downplay his offense.) The Murakawa’s upon arriving at Ulleungdo find signs of activity on the island and discover that their boats and gears had been used without their consent by the “tresspassing Koreans.” The Murakawas take Ahn and several others back to Japan as evidence to the shogunate that there are tresspassers on Takeshima (Ulleungdo). At first, Chosun was willing to cede Ulleungdo. But while Japan was pondering over the wordings of the treaty, the opposing faction takes control of things in Korea, and ultimately in 1698, Japan agrees to keep the island off-limits, like Korea. Since both Japan and Chosun were not willing to go to war over Ulleungdo, it seems no treaties were traded to explicitly state which country the island belonged to. (I think, like most Japanese, that Japan basically forfeited its claim on Ulleungdo at this point.)

In 1836, the Shogunate executes a fisehrman, Aizuya Yauemon, for “going to Takeshima while claiming to have gone to Matsushima.” This indicent is proof that the Shoguante did not consider Matsushima to be included in the off-limits agreement with Chosun or even considered it foreign territory, unlike Takeshima (Ulleungdo).two cents at marmot


As for present-day Takeshima, even after Japan accepted the Korean claim to Ulleungdo and ceased to go there, the fishermen still went to Takeshima for the abalone and seagrass, and eventually sea lions. Proof that they went to Takeshima (Matsushima) is that the Japanese maps of Takeshima (Matsushima) keeps becoming more accurate through the ages, unlike maps in Korea which one has a difficult time being convinced that it even represents Dokto.two cent at marmot

Takeshima/Dokdo Ahn Yong-bon

As for Ahn Yong-bon, his statement is so full of untruths it’s laughable. He broke the Korean law forbidding its people to go over to Ulleungdo, and he was trying to lie his way out of being executed. He claimed to have met lords of Tottori and Tsushima, and even claimed that the latter begged him not to tell the shogunate about having ceded Usan, since the shogunate would punish him by ordering the death of his son as punishment. Both lords were in Edo (Tokyo) at the time and could not possibly have met Ahn. Furthermore, the son of the Tsushima lord had passed away the year before, and so the lord would not beg Ahn to save his son’s life.two cents at marmot


Ahn smuggles himself to Japan the second time to get Japan to cede what he believs to be Usan (Matsushima) to Chosun. However, Japan kick the troublemaker back to Korea, and he is promptly arrested in Korea. Then, he tries to talk himself out of the mess, and makes up the story that he got the Japanese to give up Usan/Matsushima. However, from the records in Japan and in Korea, it is clear that Ahn had no idea of what Matsushima was like, since he claimed that the island was far larger than Ulleungdo and lay between Ulleungdo and Tottori (which, if he had not lied about seeing it during his passage to Japan, must have been the Oki islands). However, Ahn’s lies stuck in Korea, and since then, Korean records claim that Usan is Matsushima (present Takeshima). But curiously, no Koreans came to Matsushima to enforce their claim.Two cents at marmot


Then, in the late 17th century, Ahn Yong-bok appears and claims that Usan is the island the Japanese call Matsushima, although it is clear from records that he considered Matsushima to be located northeast of Ullengdo and also much larger than Ulleungdo. Thus, it could not possibly have been Matsushima (present Takeshima) he was talking about, but this man was desperately trying to save himself after having broken the Korean law twice, so he tells the Chosun government that he had persuaded the Tsushima lord to cede Matsushima/Usan. The Tsushima lord did not meet him on his second (illegal) trip to Japan since he was away in Edo (Tokyo), and it is very clear that Ahn was lying - though I can’t blame him; going overseas was a crime punishable by death in Chosun.) Although Ahn is punished for his crime (banished to a remote inland area), the Koreans start to pick up his claim that Usan is Matsushima, without clearly understanding where or what Matsushima is. If they had, the maps after the 18th century would have shown two small rocks located en route to the Japanese archipelago and further away from Ullengdo. This is further complicated by the fact that Ulleungdo also had an smaller island named Songdo (松島), according to the conversation between King Gojong and Lee Gyu-won on April 7, 1882.two cents at occidentalism


Here is the excerpt from the Annals of King Sukjong, February 23, 1694.

自禮曹覆書曰: “弊邦禁束漁氓, 使不得出於外洋, 雖弊境之鬱陵島, 亦以遼遠之故, 不許任意往來, 況其外乎?

예조(禮曹)에서 회답하는 서신에 이르기를, “폐방(弊邦)에서 어민을 금지 단속하여 외양(外洋)에 나가지 못하도록 했으니 비록 우리 나라의 울릉도일지라도 또한 아득히 멀리 있는 이유로 마음대로 왕래하지 못하게 했는데, 하물며 그 밖의 섬이겠습니까?”

The letter from the (Korean) Ministry of Rites, Protocol, Culture and Education said, “We prohibit our fisherman from going far out into the open sea. We even restrict their freely going to our island of Ulleungdo because it is so far away, so why would we allow them to go to an island beyond (Ulleungdo)?”


That passage shows quite clearly that Chosun Korea considered Ulleungdo to be its eastern-most boundary.Gerry at occidentalism

Before Ahn Yong-Bok (1692)
In the 17th century (while Chosun enforced “empty island” policy), Ulleungdo was thought to be Japanese territory for at least 80 years from the early 17th century until the dispute began.
In 1692, Japanese fishermen found Korean fishermen gathering seaweed (Wakame) and abalones in Ulleungdo, which was, by the way, an illegal thing for Koreans because of the “empty island” policy. (See the details below)

On March 26th 1692, when the fishermen from the Murakawas reached Igashima (伊賀島; Jukdo in Korea)and saw Ulleungdo, they noticed that something was wrong. Many abalones were dried under the sun. There was somebody gathering abalones and fishing. Next day (27th) they went to Ulleungdo and saw two strange ships. One ship with about 30 people went by Murakawa’s ship. There were two foreigners on a boat offshore, so Murakawas called them and asked them, “Where did you come from?”. One of the fishermen said that they came from “Kawatenkawagu” of Chosun. One of Murakawas said to them, “This island belongs to Japan” and told them not to come here again. The Korean explained, “We didn’t have intention to gather abalones here from the beginning, we used to go to a different northern island every three years by order of our king but we met a storm this year and we drifted ashore”.
When Murakawas reached Ulleungdo, they discovered that their fishing gears and eight fishing boats were gone. Asked about this, the Koreans disclosed that their people used them without notice. The fishermen from the Murakawas took home some abalones on a skewer, a sedge hat and a net ball as evidences of violation of territory and reported it to the local government. The local government thought that it was a grave thing and brought this report to the Shogunate. The Shogunate decided not to make it a political issue as they took an optimistic view and thought the Koreans would leave the island after they mended their ships.

This episode may show that in those days Ulleungdo (Takeshima) was believed to be Japanese territory, even Korean fishermen thought so.Pacifist at occidentalism

Takeshima/Dokdo red stamp ship/朱印船

In comment #406, you say that the Japanese fishermen to Ulleungdo were given “voyages passage given to those travelling to foreign countries.” They were given both exclusive rights to fish in Ulleungdo and also written passports (往来手形 ourai-tegata)The latter was required by all travelling Japanese. The Tokugawa shogunate kept a strict watch over the comings and goings of people within Japan. That was their method for maintaining peace in Japan.two cent at marmot


As for the”red stamp” on the permits, that just represents that the orders/permission/grants/etc. came from the Shogun. Permits issued by the local lords have black stamps. While it is true that only the shogunate can issue travel permits to foreign countries for red-stamp ships (朱印船), all such ships had to set sail from Nagasaki, since it was the only port open to foreign countries. However, ships to Chosun were exempt from this law since the Tsushima han had historically dominated commerce with Chosun and required only the black stamp of the Tsushima lord, and all commerce with Chosun was carried on through Tsushima. The fact that the Murakami and Oya families did not have to set sail from Nagasaki or Tsushima indicates that fishing on Ulleungdo was not considered to be activities involving foreign countries, but rather that they were activities on “the red stamped land (朱印地),” which requires a red-stamp permission from the Shogun for access.two cents at marmot

Sunday, January 07, 2007

KT picked up Gerry's issue.

See also other articles at the bottom for the freedom of speech in Korea

Here is a rough translation of Korea Times.

韓国の大学で英語の教師をしている米人が、日本と係争問題がある日本名竹島、韓国名独島に関する自分の見解のために再雇用を拒否されたと、コリアタイムとのインタービューで主張している。
「先月末に自分の独島の見解のせいで雇用はできないと通告されました。」と51才になるGerry Beaver氏と語る。彼はGachon医、科学大学で6年間努めてきた。今回のことがあるまでは一年おきに何の問題もなく更新されきたのである。

学部長から送られた12月23日付けのEメールにはこうある。
「今朝、学長らが会合を開き貴方の契約問題について討議しました。その結果更新はしないという結論がでました。独島問題が多いに関係するということに殆ど疑いはないと私は考えています。本件を伝えなくてはならないのは心が痛みます。」

8月なかばから、彼は独島問題について彼は連載をしていた、そのなかで自分の見解を表明していた。その一つは、[嘘、、ごまかし、と独島ビデオ」というものである。それは豪人によるブログwww.occidentalism.orgで閲覧することができる。
そのなかの一つにはこんな記事がある。

米人の法律家が主張する1900年の大韓帝国による公告も含めて1905年までに独島を言及した文書地図は存在しない、だから、ビデオで独島と云っていれば、それは嘘だとわかる。

彼は自身でも韓国語ノートというブログをもっており、そのなかで韓国の歴史などを論じている。

11月初旬に大学は新しく英語教師の応募を始めることを公知した。2年生大学から4年生大学に移行するため英語教師の増員が必要だったのだ。

その結果、彼は応募することになった。

学部長は彼がいい教師なので採用は形式的なものにすぎず、心配する必要はない、と学部長には云われていたとGerry氏は述べている。

応募の公知の直後、11月中旬に彼は学長に呼ばれた。雇用のことだと考えたがそうではなかった。学校のモットーが人間性、奉仕、愛国心であるのにあんな教師を雇うのは不適切だ、とインターネットで彼の論述をみた人たちから苦情があったということであった。
学長との会合では、学長に、「インターネットで独島問題について書くのはやめなさい」と云われた、「学長は私がすきな歴史の本をくれました、そして、独島問題についてはもう書かない」と伝えました。

11月下旬に再雇用面接があり、その一月後再雇用しないとの通告を受けたのだ。
不採用の理由を聞きに選好委員会の執行委員の一人の事務所を尋ね、訴訟を念頭に、そこでの会話を録音した。
 教師としては問題はないが、独島問題があまりに大きすぎて、雇うわけにはいかないし、他の委員もそれに賛同した、との録音がある。

「独島問題に韓国人が敏感になっているのはわかるが、議論もできなほど過敏な問題になってしまったのか?大学のモットーは人間性、奉仕、愛国心だが、違った意見を持つ人を罰したり、言論の自由を検閲することが愛国心なのですか?」

選考委員の一人であるChoi Mi-ri独島問題が不採用の理由ではないときっぱりと断言した。
Gerryさんはいい人ですが、このポストに応募したひとが沢山いて、その人たちも優れた人なのです。大学が拡張される機会に変化も必要かと判断しました。

Gerry氏にテープ録音された執行委員はコメントをするのを拒絶している。

Beaver氏にとって独島問題を含めて歴史を勉強したりデベートするのは趣味なのである。

「2年程前、韓国で反日気分が絶頂だったころ、韓国の教授Kim Byung-ryul氏が書いた、日本側の独島の説明をした本を読みました。韓国側とは違う説明でそれ以来、独自に研究して、みなと自由に討議できるかと思って、インターネットに掲載しました。私は人生の半分を韓国で過ごしてきています。私は韓国文化や言葉、人々が大好きです。独島に関して違う意見をもつだけで、私を反韓と言う人も多くいますが、そう呼ばれる筋合いはないと思っています。」

11月には学長に独島に関してはもう書かないといったものの、再雇用されないと決まったいまはそうする必要もないと考え、この問題に関する論述を再開している。

Beaver氏は1977年米国海軍の一員としてはじめて来韓した。
その後米国にもどり、ハワイ大学で韓国語と韓国文学で学位を取得している。
それ以後人生の大半を韓国ですごし、共同事業、アジア航空や様々な大学で仕事をしてきている。、



By Park Chung-a
Staff Reporter


Gerry Bevers

An American English instructor at a Korean university claimed he was not rehired because of his views on Dokdo, the disputed islets between Korea and Japan, which Tokyo calls Takeshima, in an interview with the Korea Times last week.

``I was informed late last month that my university would not be rehiring me as an English instructor due to my views on Dokdo,’’ said 51-year-old Gerry Bevers. Bevers has been working as an English instructor at Gachon University of Medicine and Science for the past six years. His one-year contract was renewed every year _ until this year.

The e-mail he received from the department head informing him of the decision was sent to him on Dec. 23.

It read: `` This morning, at a meeting attended by the president and the deans of the school, your contract problem was discussed, and it was decided that your contract would not be renewed. I think there is little doubt that the school made this decision because of the Dokdo problem. It also hurts me to have to relay this news.’’

Since mid-August of last year, Bevers has been writing a series of articles on Dokdo. In them, he expresses his view on the islets based on his own research. They are titled ``Lies, Half-truths and Dokdo Video’’ and are available at www.occidentalism.org, a blog run by an Australian.

One of his articles posted on the Web site reads: ``There are no Korean maps or documents before 1905 that refers to any island in the Sea of Japan as `Dokdo,’ including the 1900 Korean Imperial Proclamation mentioned by the American law professor. Therefore, every time the video claims that a Korean map or document says `Dokdo,’ you will know that it is a lie.’’

Bevers also runs his own blog, titled ``Korean Language Notes,’’ on which he also posts his views on Korean history.

In early November, the university announced an open recruitment system for new English instructors. The university needed to hire more teachers when it transformed into four-year university from a two-year college last year.

As a result, Bevers had to reapply for the position.

The dean of planning had told him that since he was a good teacher, he should not worry about the recruitment process, and the interview for getting rehired was just a formality, according to Bevers.

Not long after the announcement, he was called to the president’s office in mid-November. He thought the meeting was about his job, but it wasn’t. The president said that someone who saw Bevers’ writings on the Internet complained to the president, saying that it’s improper to hire such teacher in a school whose motto is ``Humanity, Service and Patriotism.’’

``The president told me that I should stop writing about Dokdo on the Internet,’’ Bevers said about his meeting with the university president. ``He gave me a history book that I appreciated. I told him that I wouldn’t write any more.’’

Bevers had an interview with the rehiring committee at the end of November.

About a month later, he was informed that he would not be rehired.

To find out the reason for the school’s decision, he went to the office of one of the administrators from the school from the rehiring committee. Bevers secretly recorded a conversation with the administrator, because he thought he might have to sue the school.

In the recording, the administrator said that although he had no problem with his teaching skills, the school’s dean of planning had said that the ``Dokdo problem is too great’’ to rehire him and other members from the committee agreed.

``I realized that Dokdo is a sensitive issue in Korea, but has it become so sensitive that people cannot even freely discuss it?’’ he said. ``The motto of my university is `Humanity, Service and Patriotism.’ But is it patriotic for a university to censure free speech or punish people who have a different opinion?’’

Choi Mi-ri, the dean of planning of the university, flatly denied Bevers’ claim, saying that his view on Dokdo was not the reason the school refused to rehire him.

``Although we like Gerry very much, there were so many other good teachers who applied for the position. We made a decision based on objective evaluation on his teaching skills. As our school expanded, we thought it was time for a change,’’ Choi said.

The administrator from the school, who was recorded by Bevers, refused to comment.

Bevers said that it is his hobby to study and debate on Korean history, including Dokdo issue.

``About two years ago, when anti-Japanese sentiment was at its peak in Korean society, I happened to come across the book by Korean Professor Kim Byung-ryul, which was about the Japanese side of the story on Dokdo. It was different from the Korean side. Since then, I started to research on my own to learn more about the issue and posted my thoughts on Internet hoping I could discuss it openly with people,’’ he said. `` I have lived almost half of my life in Korea. I love the culture. I love the language. I love the people. Just because I disagree on Dokdo, I don’t think that makes me an anti-Korean, which a lot of people assume.’’

Bevers said that although he told the president of the school that he would not write about Dokdo anymore on the Internet in November’s meeting, as he was not rehired, he doesn’t feel the need to abide by what he said and hence restarted to write on the issue a few days ago.

Bevers first came to Korea in 1977, when he was in the U.S navy.

He then went back to the United States and earned a degree in Korean language and literature from the University of Hawaii.

He has spent most of his life in Korea since then, working at joint-venture companies, Asiana Airlines and several universities.


Korea times
via occidentalism

related articles

S. KOREA TO BLOCK PRO-JAPANESE WEB SITES AMID DOKDO DISPUTE.


SEOUL, March 17 Asia Pulse - South Korea's Internet content regulator said Thursday it is requiring Daum Communications Corp. (KOSDAQ:035720) to shut down five pro-Japanese Web sites following Japan's fresh claim to the South Korean islets of Dokdo.

"Those sites have a possibility of harming youngsters' physical and mental health by distorting historical facts and undermining international friendship," the Information Communication Ethics Committee, affiliated with the Ministry of Information and Communication, said in a statement.

Following the committee's decision, Daum, one of the nation's most-visited Internet portals, said it blocked access to the five Web sites.

If no appeal is made within 15 days from the site owners, the sites will be automatically closed, Daum said.

Anti-Japanese sentiment escalated in South Korea Wednesday after Japan's Shimane Prefecture Assembly passed a motion making Feb. 22 "Takeshima Day," to assert Tokyo's claim on the South Korean islets. Dokdo is known as Takeshima in Japan.

Dokdo, halfway between South Korean and Japan, has been held by Seoul since the Korean Peninsula was liberated from Japanese colonial rule in 1945. However, Japan has periodically attempted to claim sovereignty over the islets.

The pro-Japanese sites were administrated by South Koreans on record, but the location of their residences isn't available, Daum said.

One of the sites, which has a banner that reads "Dokdo is Japanese territory," in Korean, has about 4,500 registered subscribers, Daum said.

(Yonhap) 17-03 1248


link

Professor under fire for praise of Japan




March 07, 2005 ㅡ A magazine article by a retired professor who wrote in praise of Japan's colonial rule in Korea has ignited a firestorm in academic circles and among the public, leading last night to the professor's resignation from Korea University.
In a contribution to Seiron, a monthly publication put out by the Sankei Shimnun newspaper, Hahn Sung-joe, a professor emeritus at Korea University, argued Japan's occupation of Korea from 1910 to 1945 should be regarded as a godsend.
"The fortunate part about the occupation of Korea is that it was Japan that had colonized the peninsula," Mr. Hahn wrote. "It was rather a blessing for Korea."
In the article and afterwards in an interview with Korean media, Mr. Hahn said that the early 1900s were a period of fierce competition among regional powers in Asia.
"At the time, if Japan had not occupied Korea, Russia would have done so," the prominent 75-year-old politics professor said. "If it were Russia, the Korean Peninsula would have been communized. Korean people would have been dispersed under Stalin's policies. Therefore, I think Japan's colonial rule rather reinforced Koreans' awareness and nationalism."
Mr. Hahn said Korean nationalism had risen during the colonial rule, and it was Japanese scholars and their Korean disciples who had built the foundation of Korean studies.
He urged Koreans to stop making compensation claims for Japan's use of Korean women as sex slaves during World War II. He said the episode was only temporary and an exceptional case that had done no great damage.
Following the publication of the article, originally written in Korean and then translated and printed in Japanese, fierce attacks erupted in Korea against the professor. Civic groups, even conservative organizations, said Mr. Hahn's views were inappropriate.
"A Korean academic has provided opportunities to Japan's ultra right-wing politicians to continue their thoughtless claims," said Kang Ju-hye, secretary-general of the Korean Council for the Women Drafted for Military Sexual Slavery by Japan.
The Free Citizens Alliance of Korea, a league of the nation's 43 conservative civic groups, held a press conference yesterday to denounce Mr. Hahn's position.
Mr. Hahn was the co-chairman of the group but resigned from the post becuase of the uproar. He also stepped down from the his univesity post.joong Ang daily


Trial by new media


South Korea's OhmyNews website has helped to elect a president and to sack Fred Varcoe, the veteran sports editor of the Japan Times, writes Jonathan Watts

Friday January 24, 2003
Guardian Unlimited

The creative power of South Korea's new media may have won victory for the incoming president, Roh Moo-hyun, but their destructive power has also ruined the career of at least one journalist.

Last May, Fred Varcoe, veteran sports editor of the Japan Times, was in full swing preparing for the World Cup finals when he was suddenly given an ultimatum: "Either resign or you're fired."

It was an abrupt end to his 15-year employment with the daily paper at what should have been the highpoint of his career. Fred was well known among British sports journalists and foreign correspondents (me included) as the most prolific writer on Japanese football in the English language.

His personal and irreverent style probably had as many critics as fans, but that was his well-established trademark. He also got some important scoops. The Fifa president, Sepp Blatter, once blamed him for the headaches of co-hosting the World Cup, a suggestion that Fred claims he was the first to make.
But on the eve of the tournament, he was given his marching orders as a result of a report that appeared in another country, another language and another medium.

Fred had probably never heard of OhmyNews until the influential South Korean online news site brought about his downfall with a withering criticism of one of the World Cup preview stories that he had written for the Japan Times. That story - an introduction to Seoul - began with Fred reminiscing about being propositioned by a prostitute during his first visit to the South Korean capital.

It was exactly the kind of old-fashioned, run-down, sleazy image that the host nation - which has never been more self-confident or assertive - did not want to present to the world. The URL of the offending article was sent anonymously to Bae Eul-sun of OhmyNews, who criticised the contents and the writer online in her own trademark aggressive style.

Although Ms Bae had not called for Fred to lose his job, her article spawned a furious online campaign for his dismissal. Fred's Korean wife received email death threats and the South Korean embassy in Tokyo twice visited the Japan Times to demand action.

Although the paper had been running similar stories by Fred for years and no one inside the paper had complained at any time when the offending article was submitted, edited or published, the Japan Times - whose publisher, Toshiaki Ogasawara, has business interests in Korea - decided its sports editor must go. Days before the opening game, the paper withdrew his tournament accreditation. He refused to resign and was fired on July 4 for, among other reasons, "insulting the honour of Korean women".

It appears to be a salutary tale of the risks of online journalism, which is still at an embryonic stage even in South Korea - the world's most advanced internet nation. Although the new media have played a mostly positive role in democratising South Korea in ways that other countries have not yet experienced, its ambitions are in danger of running too far ahead of its resources and the establishment of safety checks.

OhmyNews is just three years old, but with 3 million readers it has become as influential as any newspaper - helping to propel Roh Moo-hyon into the presidency and starting anti-American campaigns that drew in tens of thousands of people. But its young, idealistic staff admit they are too rushed off their feet to check the comments posted by readers.

"I feel guilty," said Bae Eul-sun. "It was not my intention to get Fred sacked. That was a proposal by one of the readers. Even though his article was insulting, I don't think it is democratic to fire journalists just because you don't like what they say."

The South Korean embassy also claims the consequences were unintended. "We passed on the feeling of anger expressed on OhmyNews about Mr Varcoe's yellow journalism, but we did not specifically ask for him to be fired," said a diplomat.

Nobody at the Japan Times was available for comment. According to Fred, his old employers share the biggest burden of blame for failing to stick by a story that they had published.

"This would never have started without OhmyNews, which is able to fire off insults unchecked, but the biggest culprit is the Japan Times, which would not fight my corner or give me the opportunity to defend myself," he said.

Fred will file a legal case against the paper for unfair dismissal next week. If he wins, his former employers may end up wishing they had followed the old-media journalistic principle of sticking by a story rather than caving in to pressure from the South Korean government and accusations by a sometimes wild new media.Friday January 24, 2003
Guardian Unlimited

Saturday, January 06, 2007

Takeshima/Dokdo 東国地興勝覧



When Ahn's incident took place, Korea claimed that Ulleungdo was Korean territory because it could be seen from the land, the peninsula.

opp

Takeshima/dokdo Notification---Is it necessary?

oppe


先生は、1905年の日本の竹島編入を通知義務を果たしてないので無効とされました。そして、その論証として「通知義務」を支持している国際法学者を紹介して下さいました。大変頼もしい限りです。先生は、「M.F. Lindley viewed it proper to regard notification and effective occupation as the necessary conditions for occupation, before and after the signing of the 1885 Berlin Act」とおっしゃいました。先生を信頼してないわけではないのですが、念のため原文を確認してみました。
Dear professor , you said Japanese inclusion was invalid because Japan did not notify. And you show some international lawyers who support the obligation of notification as a presupposition for the acquisition of the territory. That sounds great. You showed us M.F. Lindley. Well I checked the original text.






CHAPTER: EFFECTIVE OCCUPATION←実効的先占の章
p143
Article 34 will be dealt with in the Chapter on 'Notification.' Article 35 calls for several observations.←わざわざ通知義務は違う章とことわっている。
(中略)
p157
According to views adopted by Britain, Germany, France and the United States, at the time of before and after the Berlin conference, there were no colonial states which took exception to the application of new rule of occupation, and it seems to be justified to say that all recent acquisition of territory obeys to this rule irrespective of whether it is the African coast or not ←このあたりの「実効的先占」に関する記述に「通知義務」を脳内挿入したものと思われる。

CHAPTER: NOTIFICATION←通知義務の章
p295
These isolated special agreements, when taken into conjunction with the fact that, apart from the region dealt with in Article 34, notifications have been the exception rather than the rule, seve to emphasize the point that such notifications were not required by general law.←明確に慣習法ではないと記述。(it deny that notification is a customary law!)



先生!! 引用するところが間違ってます。しかし、通知義務を主張している学者は他にも沢山いるので安心です。(Professor! you misquoted!!, but you said there are other professor who support the obligation of notification. you said, 先生は、「William E. Hall also argues that the Act of Berlin is not only valid for the contracting parties but should be considered as having a general binding power under international law .He says ...an agreement, made between all the states which are likely to endeavour to occupy territory, and covering much the largest spaces of coast, which, at the date of the declaration, remained unoccupied in the world, cannot but have great influence upon the development of a generally binding rule」とおっしゃいました。HALLがそのように言ってくれているのは嬉しいです。失礼かと思いましたが、これも念のため調べてみました。(Well I am glad Hall said that, I checked it too)


The declaration it, it is true, affects only the coasts of the Continent of Africa; and the representatives of France and Russia were careful to make formal reservations directing attention to this fact; the former, especially, placing it on record that island of Madagascal was excluded.
Nevertheless an agreement, made between all these states which are likely to endeavour to occupy territory, and covering much the largest spaces of coast which, at the date of declaration, remained unoccupied in the world, cannot but have great influence upon the development of generally binding rule.*

*France, on taking possession of Comino Islands, and England with regard to Bechuana Land, have already made notification which were not obligatory under the Berlin Declaration. These notifications were, however, evidently made form motives of convenience and not with a view of establishing a principle; France having placed upon record the reservations mentioned above, and England not having notified, at a later date, her assumption of a protectorate over the Island of Socotra.


先生!!これは何かの勘違いですよね。しかし、まだ他にも学者はいます。(I must be mistaken. You said, 先生は、「John B. Moore also advocates the obligation of notification by citing Hall' s above-mentioned argument」とおっしゃいました。モアーの本を読みました。HALLをそのまま引用してました・・・・・・。
I checked Moore's book. He just quoted Hall. You must have been too tired aren't you?


oppe

Korea rejected self-restraint for the violation of the agreement about fishery

Japan requested Korea to restrain the operation of fishing snow crab in the provisional area as the compensation for the violating the agreement that both countries use the area by turns, Korea rejected, saying it is hard to accept, and expressed her intention to deal with this issue at the meeting in autumn. Japan has not convinced and requested Korea to respond at the meeting from 9th.

Private fisherman groups agreed in 2001 that in order to protect natural resource, Korea operate from November to December, and Japan operate from January to March, and
updated the agreement in Autumn. However, because Korean fishermen left the implement, Japanese fishermen could not operate at the area.日本海新聞jan 6th


....................................................................................
韓国、操業自粛を拒否 ズワイガニ漁民間合意違反

 日韓暫定水域のズワイガニ漁場を交代利用する両国の民間漁業者団体間の合意を韓国側が守らなかった代償措置として、日本側が申し入れていた今月からの操業自粛要請に対し、韓国側は五日までに「受け入れ難い」と回答。違反があった場合の措置については来漁期前の今年秋に検討したい意向を示した。日本側は納得せず、九日から再協議に応じるよう求めた。

 両国の民間漁業者団体は二〇〇一年、ズワイガニ漁場の資源を保護するため、韓国側は十一、十二月の二カ月間、日本側は一月から三月二十日まで操業しないことを申し合わせ、毎秋の取り決めで合意内容を更新。しかし、日本側の利用期には韓国側の漁具が設置されたままになっており、日本側が操業できない状態が続いていた。

 これを受け、大日本水産会など日本側団体は先月二十九日、韓国釜山市で行われた韓国水産会などとの当事者間協議の席上、日本側が操業できなかった期間のペナルティーとして今月一日から二月十九日まで操業しないよう韓国側に求めていた。

 問題を先送りした韓国側に対し、日本側は「到底納得できない」として、九日から十二日まで東京での再協議に応じるよう五日付の文書で通知した。
via アジアの真実

Roh called African-American "nigger"껌디/검둥이를

UPDATE
myCoree Said:

January 8, 2007 at 2:21 am

surabaya johnny
Matt

You have wrong information. I heard his address.
He didn’t say this.

“미국 껌디 껌디 뒤에 매달려서 형님 형님 …”

He said :

미국 엉뎅이 뒤에 숨어가지고 형님 백만 믿겠다?
Should we only believe Big Brother Uncle Tom’s power hiding behind his ass?

There are many anti-Roh parties in Korea. You got some twisted information from them.mycoree at occidentalism


노통 껌디 발언 황당

글쓴이 : 미친다 (2006-12-22 17:37:33 ) 읽음 : 1274, 추천 : 17


껌디라는 말은 흑인을 비하하는 검둥이를 가리키는 경상도 사투리이다.

노무현씨가 평통 자문회의 공개석상에서 제 흥에 겨워 마구 뱉어 낸 말 중에 한 대목이 바로 이 껌둥이 발언이다.



"미국 껌디 껌디 뒤에 매달려서 형님 형님..." 어쩌고 저쩌고 한 것이다.



처음 그 동영상 연설장면을 보았을 때 필자는 필자의 귀를 의심했다.

내가 잘못들은 것인가 싶어 몇 번이나 다시 그 대목을 찾아 여러번 반복해서 듣고 또 들었다.

그런데, 틀림없이 껌디 껌디라고 하는 것이 아닌가!



필자는 한 동안 충격에 빠져 아무 생각도 나질 않았다.



도대체 저 작자가 정말 대통령이 맞나?INTERNET 독립신문
*
President Roh made the remark "nigger, nigger" at the ceremony.



In 1986 then Japanese Prime Minister Nakasone said that African Americans and Mexican Americans made the intellectual level of the United States lower than than Japan’sAsian week


Nakasone appologized to American people*, maybe Roh should do that?
Anyway,
President, or Prime minister, just study the world.
..............................................................................
ノ−トングコムデ−発言荒唐

著者 : 及ぶ (2006-12-22 17:37:33 ) 読み : 1274,推薦 : 17


コムデ−という言葉は黒人を卑下じるゴムドングイを示す慶尚道なまりだ.

ノ・ムヒョンさんが平和統一自問回の公開石像で自分の興じてでたらめに吐き出した言葉の中に一書き入れ時がまさにこのコムドングが発言だ.



"アメリカコムデ−コムデ−後にぶら下げられて御兄さん御兄さん..." なんだかんだしたのだ.



初めてその動画演説場面を見た時筆者は筆者の耳を疑った.

私が聞き誤ったことそうで何番(回)もまたそのところを捜して何回繰り返して聞いてまたかかった.

ところが,まさしくコムデ−コムデ−と言うのではないか!



筆者は一間衝撃に抜けてどんな考えも出なかった.



一体あの作者が本当に大統領が当たるか?

*
1986年
 9月20日、韓国を訪問した中曽根首相は、全斗煥大統領に陳謝しました。
 9月22日、中曽根首相は、自民党研修会で、「黒人などのいるアメリカは知識水準が低い」と発言し、米国内で激しい批判を浴びました。
 9月27日、中曽根首相は、「黒人などのいるアメリカは知識水準が低い」発言で、米国民に陳謝しました。国内問題

1882 K inspecter document (and 1784 survey)

Frogmouth wrote:

Ulleungdo was surveyed in 1794 before the Ulleungdo maps you posted were drawn. In the report only three islands were reported Jukdo, Bangpaedo and Ongdo.
Here is the report.

http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/1794-Ulleungdo-Report1.jpg

Usando was not reported as a neighbour island by Leekyuwon either.

Usando was another name for Ulleundo’s neighboring island of “Jukdo.” Not only is it located in approximately the same location as modern-day Jukdo on old Korean maps, but King Kojong also suggested that Usando was another name of Jukdo. Here is King Kojong’s conversation with Inspector Lee Gyu-won in 1882:

The king said, “Have the inspector come forward,” and Lee Gyu-won came forward.

The king said, “These days there is the evil practice of foreigners regularly coming and going to Ulleungdo and occupying convenient places. Also, Songjukdo (松竹島 – 송죽도) and Usando (于山島 – 우산도) are next to Ulleungdo, but there are still no details on the distance between them and what products they have. You were chosen especially for this trip, so pay particular attention to your inspection. We also have plans to establish a settlement there, so be sure to prepare a thorough map and report.”

Lee Gyu-won replied, “I will carry out the mission to the best of my abilities. Usando is just Ulleungdo. Usan was the name of the ancient country’s capital. Songjukdo is a small island about thirty ri offshore (相距爲三數十里). The products there are rosewood trees and pipestem bamboo.”

The king said, “It is called either Usando or Songjukdo (敎曰 或稱芋山島 或稱松竹島) all of which is written in the Yeojiseungram (輿地勝覽 – 여지승람). It is also called Songdo (松島 – 송도) and Jukdo (竹島 – 죽도), and together with Usando, three islands combine to make up what is called Ulleungdo. Inspect the situation on all of them. Originally, the Samcheok commander (三陟營將 – 삼척 영장) and the Wolsong commander (越松萬戶 – 월송 만호) took turns searching Ulleungdo, but they were all careless, inspecting only the exterior of the island. This has led to these evil practices.

Lee Gyu-won said, “I will go deep inside and conduct my inspection. It is occasionally called Songdo and Jukdo because it is to the east of Ulleungdo, but there is only Songjukdo, no separate Songdo and Jukdo.”

The king asked, “Did you possibly hear that from previous inspectors?”

Lee Gyu-won said, “I have not yet talked with previous inspectors, but that is the summary of what I have heard.” Link

Notice that King Kojong said that another name for Songjukdo was “Usando.” Songjukdo was present-day Jukdo. The reason that Lee Gyu-won could not find Usando when he surveyed Ulleungdo in 1882 was that the people living on Ulleungdo at the time were referring to the island as Jukdo rather than Usando. At other times in history, Usando was probably the preferred name. The island residents said they had heard of Usando, but did not know where it was. I think the reason they did not know its location is that it was just another name for Jukdo.gerry at marmot



Below is the 1882 conversation between King Kojong and Lee Gyu-won in the original Chinese,a Korean translation, and my English translation:

召見檢察使李奎遠 辭陛也 敎曰 鬱陵島近有他國人物之無常往來 任自占便之弊云矣 且松竹島芋山島 在於鬱陵島之傍而其相距遠近何如亦有何物與否 未能詳知 今番爾行 特爲擇差者 各別檢察 且將設邑爲計 必以圖形與別單 詳紀錄達也 奎遠曰 芋山島卽鬱陵島而芋山 古之國都名也 松竹島卽一小島而與鬱陵島 相距爲三數十里 其所産 卽檀香與簡竹云矣 敎曰 或稱芋山島 或稱松竹島 皆輿地勝覽所載也而又稱松島竹島與芋山島爲三島統稱鬱陵島矣 其形便一體檢察鬱陵島本以三陟營將越松萬戶 輪回搜檢者 而擧皆未免疎忽 只以外面探來 故致有此弊爾則必詳細察得也 奎遠曰 謹當深入檢察矣 或稱松島竹島 在於鬱陵島之東而此非松竹島以外 別有松島竹島也 敎曰 或有所得聞於曾往搜檢人之說耶奎遠曰 曾往搜檢之人 未得逢著 而轉聞其梗개矣.

——

召見檢察使李奎遠 辭陛也

檢察使 李奎遠을 소견하였다. 하직인사를 하였기 때문이다.

The King called forward Inspector Lee Gyu-won so that he could give his farewell greeting.

—-

敎曰 鬱陵島近有他國人物之無常往來 任自占便之弊云矣 且松竹島芋山島 在於鬱陵島之傍 而其相距遠近何如亦有何物與否 未能詳知 今番爾行 特爲擇差者 各別檢察 且將設邑爲計 必以圖形與別單 詳紀錄達也

하교하기를, “울릉도에는 근래에 와서 다른 나라 사람들이 무상으로 왕래하면서 제멋대로 편리를 도모하는 폐단이 있다고 한다. 그리고 松竹島와 芋山島는 울릉도의 곁에 있는데 서로 떨어져 있는 거리가 얼마나 되는지 또 무슨 물건이 나는지 자세히 알 수 없다. 이번에 네가 가게 된 것은 특별히골라서 임명한 것이니 각별히 검찰할 것이다. 그리고 앞으로 고을(邑)을 세울 생각이니 반드시 지도와 함께 별지에다가 자세히 적어 보고할 것이다” 하니,

The king said, “These days there is the evil practice of foreigners freely coming and going to Ulleungdo and doing as they please. Also, Songjukdo (松竹島 – 송죽도) and Usando (于山島 – 우산도) are next to Ulleungdo, but there are still no details on the distance between them and what products they have. You were chosen especially for this trip, so pay particular attention to your inspection. We also have plans to establish a settlement there, so be sure to prepare a thorough map and report.”

—-

奎遠曰 芋山島卽鬱陵島 而芋山 古之國都名也 松竹島卽一小島而與鬱陵島 相距爲三數十里 其所産 卽檀香與簡竹云矣

이규원이 아뢰기를, “芋山島는 바로 鬱陵島이며 芋山이란 바로 옛날의 나라 수도[國都]의 이름입니다. 松竹島는 하나의 작은 섬인데 울릉도와 떨어진 거리는 20∼30리쯤 됩니다. 여기서 나는 물건은 檀香과 담뱃설대라고 합니다”라고 하였다.

Lee Gyu-won replied, “I will carry out the mission to the best of my abilities. Usando is just Ulleungdo. Usan was the name of the ancient country’s capital. Songjukdo is a small island twenty to thirty ri offshore (相距爲三數十里). The products there are rosewood trees and pipestem bamboo.”

—-

敎曰 或稱芋山島 或稱松竹島 皆輿地勝覽所載也 而又稱松島竹島與芋山島爲三島統稱鬱陵島矣 其形便一體檢察鬱陵島本以三陟營將越松萬戶 輪回搜檢者 而擧皆未免疎忽 只以外面探來 故致有此弊 爾則必詳細察得也

하교하기를, “芋山島라고도 하고 松竹島라고도 하는데 다 輿地勝覽 에 실려 있다. 그리고 또 혹은 松島․
竹島라고도 하는데 芋山島와 함께 이 세 섬을 통칭 鬱陵島라고 하였다.그 형세에 대하여 함께 알아볼 것이다. 울릉도는 본래 三陟營將과 越松萬戶가 돌려가면서 수색․검열하던 곳인데 거의 다 소홀히 대함을 면하지못하였다. 그저 외부만 살펴보고 돌아왔기 때문에 이런 폐단을 가져왔다.너는 더 구체적으로 살펴볼 것이다.”

The king said, “It is called either Usando or Songjukdo (敎曰 或稱芋山島或稱松竹島) all of which is written in the “Yeojiseungram” (輿地勝覽 – 여지승람). It is also called Songdo (松島 – 송도) and Jukdo (竹島 – 죽도), and together with Usando, three islands combine to make up what is called Ulleungdo. Inspect the situation on all of them. Originally, the Samcheok commander (三陟營將 – 삼척 영장) and the Wolsong commander (越松萬戶 – 월송 만호) took turns searching Ulleungdo, but they were all careless, inspecting only the exterior of the island. This has led to these evil practices.

—-

奎遠曰 謹當深入檢察矣 或稱松島竹島 在於鬱陵島之東而此非松竹島以外 別有松島竹島也

이규원이 아뢰기를, “삼가 깊이 들어가서 살펴보겠습니다. 어떤 사람들은 松島와 竹島는 울릉도의 동쪽에있다고 하지만 이것은 송죽도 밖에 따로 송도와 죽도가 있는 것은 아닙니다”라고 하였다.

Lee Gyu-won said, “I will go deep inside and conduct my inspection. It is occasionally called Songdo and Jukdo because it is to the east of Ulleungdo, but there is only Songjukdo, no separate Songdo and Jukdo.”

—-

敎曰 或有所得聞於曾往搜檢人之說耶

하교하기를, “혹시 그전에 가서 수색조사한 사람의 말을 들은 것이 있는가.”라고 하니

The king asked, “Did you possibly hear that from previous inspectors?”

—-

奎遠曰 曾往搜檢之人 未得逢著 而轉聞其梗개矣.

奎遠이 아뢰기를, “그전에 가서 수색조사한 사람은 만나지 못하였습니다. 대체적인 내용을 얻어 들었습니다”라고 하였다.

Lee Gyu-won said, “I have not yet talked with previous inspectors, but that is the summary of what I have heard.”

Here is your analysis of the conversation, Frogmouth:

The above conversation gives us some understanding as to the confusion Chosun was dealing with regarding Ulleungdo’s surrounding islands. It’s clear the king and Leekyuwon were sourcing their information differently while the king referred to historical documents Leekyuwon was using heresay through the “grapevine” as it were.

The information is a mosaic of facts but a few things can be ascertained. One of the islands was Jukdo Island about 2.2kms from the shore of Ulleungdo and the other was most likely Dokdo. The island of Songjukdo was most likely Dokdo Island. As mentioned above Leekyuwon’s second-hand information was that the distance to Songjukdo was 30 ri. In Chosun measurements 30 ri is about 12kms of which there are no islands even near. However in Japanese measurements about 30 ri is close to the distance to Dokdo.

The Japanese name for Dokdo was of course Songdo (松島) which is similar to Songjukdo. At this time about 30 percent of those living on Ulleungdo were (illegal) Japanese. The Japanese distance of 30 ri to Dokdo was also quoted in this document in 1903. Leekyuwon’s information may have been a combination of Japanese and Korean facts.

Despite the long distance between these islands the Koreans of the day still regarded both Usando and Songjukdo as part of Chosun from ancient times and as islands appended to Ulleungdo.

Here is my summary the conversation:

King Kojong believed there were two islands next to Ulleungdo names Songjukdo and Usando, but Lee Gyu-won told the king that Usando was just the name of the old country’s capital and that there was only one island next to Ulleungdo named “Songjukdo.” Lee said Songjukdo was 20 to 30 ri offshore and had rosewood trees and pipestem bamboo.

The king answered, “[It] is called Usando and Songjukdo, both of which are written in the YeojiSeung. [It] is also called Jukdo and Songdo, and together with Usando, three islands combine to make up what is called Ulleungdo.”

Lee continued to disagree with the king and said that Songjukdo was sometimes called “Songdo” and sometimes called “Jukdo,” but that there was only one neighboring island.

Here is my analysis of the conversation:

It apprears the Yeojiseungnam had mentioned both “Usando” and “Songjukdo,” which King Kojeong believed to be two separate islands rather than two names for one island. Lee Kyu-won believed there to be only one neighboring island named Songjukdo, which was sometimes also called “Songdo” and “Jukdo.” King Kojong seemed to agree that Songdo and Jukdo were other names for Songjukdo, but he seemed to continue to believe there was another island named Usando.

There are many problems with your analysis, Frogmouth. First, we do not know where Lee Gyu-won got his information, but he said that there were rosewood trees and pipestem bamboo on Songjukdo, which is something King Kojong did not appear to know. If there were rosewood trees and pipesteam bamboo on Songjukdo, then than would eliminate the possibility that Songjukdo could have been “Dokdo,” since “Dokdo” was just two barren rocks.

Second, both King Kojong and Lee Gyu-won said that other names for Songjukdo were “Songdo” and “Jukdo.” When Lee inspected the island, he learned that local residents there were using the name “Jukdo” to refer to present-day Jukdo, which is 2.2 kilometers off Ulleungdo’s east shore. Lee even drew a map that leaves little doubt that it was present-day Jukdo. Therefore, since both King Kojong and Lee Gyu-won said that Jukdo was another name for Songjukdo, your theory that Songjukdo was “Dokdo” lacks the support of the king of Korea and one of his top officials.

Third, Lee said that Songjukdo was 20 to 30 ri (相距爲三數十里) from Ulleungdo. I am not sure how to translate the Chinese, but if the Korean translation is correct, then 20 to 30 ri is 8 to 12 kilometers. The Korean measure of ri is 0.4 kilometers, and it is quite silly to suggest that Korean officials used the Japanese measure of a 4-kilometer ri, especially given the fact that both King Kojong and Lee Gyu-won said that Songjukdo and Jukdo were the same island. The document you referenced in your “analysis” was a Japanese document, not a Korean.gbevers from Korea (South)
Posted January 7, 2007 at 1:50 pm/Marmot

1835 Japanese map


Your 1835 Japanese map is interesting because it shows Matsuhima (松島 - Songdo) to the northeast of Ulleungdo (竹島 - Takeshima), which is approximately where present-day Jukdo is. In my quote above, both King Kojong and Lee Gyu-won said that “Jukdo” was also called “Songdo.”

If present-day Jukdo was also called Songdo, then it would explain why An Yong-bok got so angry at the Japanese when they said they lived on “Songdo” (Matsushima), which he believed to be Usando (Jukdo).

Koreans believe that when An Yong-bok said that “Songdo” was the the Korean island of Usando, he was saying that “Usando was Dokdo.” However, since Korean documents and maps show that Usando was almost certainly Ulleungdo’s neighboring island of Jukdo, what An Yong-bok seems to have actually been saying is that Usando (Jukdo) was also called “Songdo.”gerry at marmot

Friday, January 05, 2007

Samurai and Saurabi

bishamon Said:

December 18, 2005 at 2:26 pm

“Samurang” is a word created in the 80’s by the creator of Haedong Kumdo. He claims he learned and mastered the ancient skill from the mountain wizard. No such word is ever recorded throughout the Korean history, and the Haedong Kumdo is just the imitation of Iai-do. They wield Japanese Katana and wear hakama, the Japanese style slacks.

It’s interesting that most of these Korean nonsense had started in the late 70’s to 80’s. I think the then-military regime was trying to recupture the sense of the cultural unity and identity that once they had under the Japanese occupation. How ironic but Japan is always and forever in the minds of modern Koreans…

HangPC2 Said:

January 4, 2007 at 7:41 pm

Samurai

The Word samurai comes form the old japanese word ‘’ saburau ‘’ meaning ‘’ attendant ‘’ . Samurai are usualy the guardians of castles serving a feudal lord, and in the form Asuka to Edo period a great many of them import and adopted a Confucian , Saurabi (Baekje @ Paekche Warrior) code know as ‘’ Bushido ‘’ and copy guerrilla tactics of the Emishi (Japanese babarian)


Two Cents Said:

January 5, 2007 at 4:56 am

bishamon,
Isn’t it pathetic how some Koreans can believe a strange and unsupported theory put forth by some common author? I believe it was 金容雲 who first claimed in his book “Koreans and the Japanese” that “fighting man (ssaul-abi)” in Paekche was the origin of the word samurai. He apparently overlooked that fact that samurai was a word established in the 16th century, while Paekche was a country destroyed in the 7th century, or the fact that the modern Korean term “ssaul” was “saho-da” in middle-age Chosun language. Quite frankly, I think there is no way to determine what the Paekche people called the warriror in their dialect, since there are almost no written records that survive from the era. His theory was totally ignored since it was baseless, but was revived by a Korean movie in 2002. But then, the laughably nationalistic lot of the Koreans (I am sure not all, but there are plenty of them on the net) will believe that anything good about Japan that has been recognized by the west must have roots in their land, even when all they have to support their claim is a movie. In the past, Koreans used to claim that samurais were the symbol of the militaristic and aggressive Japanese, never understanding that samurais in the Edo period was simly bureaucrats, who were expected to pursue both the ways of the sword and the pen, and lead very Spartanian lives unlike the merchant class. Now, that they are aware that Bushido is regarded with respect in the west, they claim it’s rooted in their culture. Hmm. Does that mean the aggressive behavior of the Japanese also came from them? It should if you follow their logic.two cents at occidentalism

Thursday, January 04, 2007

The General Association of Korean Residents in Japan now

The followings are the stroy about The General Association of Korean Residents in Japan/Chongryon by Asahi.

Kim Chin Yong was once a wealthy businessman with a chain of yakitori restaurants in Kawasaki. These days, however, he barely gets by on 120,000 yen he receives each month from the government in public livelihood assistance. For decades, Kim gave generously to the pro-Pyongyang General Association of Korean Residents in Japan (Chongryon), which serves as North Korea's de facto embassy in Japan and acts as a catalyst in funneling funds to prop up the tottering regime across the Sea of Japan.

The 82-year-old routinely handed over tens of millions of yen each year. Eventually, he lost everything to the cause.
.....
"I wanted to do my bit to help North Korea develop a diplomatic relationship with Japan on an equal footing," he says. "I felt that if we could achieve that, it would strengthen the position of Korean residents in Japanese society.

"But in its desperation, the Pyongyang regime now seems to believe that its only diplomatic option is to pose as a military threat to the rest of the world. Contrary to all my expectations, Pyongyang is making things much more difficult for Koreans living in Japan."
,,,,,,,
most Korean residents here are skeptical of the group's motives. As such, they regard Chongryon as little more than a money collecting machine that exploited a yearning among older Koreans for more contact with their isolated homeland, now generally regarded as an international pariah and rogue state.
Another Korean, 71-year-old Tokyo resident Shim Gwang Seop, recalled that when his grandmother, So Kum An, died in 1977 at the age of 82, hundreds of Korean residents in Japan mourned her passing

......
Shim, her grandson, was working for Chongryon's Chamber of Commerce Federation at the time.

He became so disgusted at Chongryon's avarice that he decided to quit. The last straw, he said, was when Chongryon tried to solicit donations at his grandmother's funeral.

For Shim, 1972 marked a turning point in Chongryon's activities in Japan. North Korea was celebrating the 60th birthday of the Great Leader, Kim Il Sung.

He said Chongryon's affiliate organizations went on a donation spree, confiscating even cars and other assets from Koreans who were unable to pay.

"The birthday project was such a success that Pyongyang began to make demands for more monetary gifts by using one auspicious occasion after the other.

"In the end, the reputation of individual Chongryon officials came to be judged by the amount of the money they collected," Shim said. "In that way, Chongryon gradually became the instrument in Japan for Pyongyang to get its hands on hard foreign currency."

Kim Chan Jung, a former reporter with a magazine published by Chongryon, estimates that Chongryon collected more than 5 billion yen from Korean residents in Japan for Kim Il Sung's 60th birthday bash. He said gifts ranged from industrial machines and construction vehicles to computers and bundles of cash.

By the early 1970s, Chongryon effectively was Pyongyang's puppet, Kim said. This was accomplished through intra-organization manipulation by a pro-Pyongyang faction within Chongryon. Pyongyang created what is known as the ideological study group shortly after Chongryon's founding in 1955.

As testimony to this, Kim said senior Chongryon officials were left in no doubt that they had to toe the line when they were forced to educate their children in North Korea under a repatriation program set up in 1959.

In effect, the children were hostages, he said.

Against this backdrop, Pyongyang's demands for even more cash reached a new level in the mid-1980s, when it ordered Chongryon to set up businesses so profits could be remitted to Pyongyang, according to former Chongryon officials.

Pyongyang also tapped the operators of Korean businesses in Japan to invest in joint ventures in North Korea.

Chongryon, ever-eager to meet the requests of its master in Pyongyang, seized on Japan's asset-inflated bubble economy in the late 1980s to set up pachinko parlors and real-estate businesses, journalist Kim said.

Chongryon's affiliated credit unions eventually suffered huge losses when the economic bubble burst in 1991 and they went belly up in quick succession.

As for the joint ventures in North Korea, they usually failed miserably, according to a former official of a Chongryon-related trading company.

"Pyongyang basically sucked Chongryon dry, to the point it now finds it difficult to even pay salaries to its officials and for teachers at related ethnic schools," said another former Chongryon official in his 30s.

"Pyongyang's acknowledgment that it abducted Japanese nationals gravely damaged Chongryon's credibility in Japan," he said. "A more fundamental problem is that it has lost the trust of the Korean community here."

Public security authorities estimate that the number of Chongryon supporters and their family members now totals no more than 90,000, a far cry from around 250,000 in the early 1990s.

Furthermore, public security sources say that 28 parcels of land owned by about 70 Korean-run schools around Japan had been put up as collateral to obtain loans by the end of 2004. This generated funds in excess of 63 billion yen that went to Chongryon-related companies or individuals, he said.

A substantial portion of the money was swallowed up to support Chongryon's business activities here or was sent to North Korea as donations.

Several schools have closed since then, he added.

The land formerly occupied by Choson Sinbo, Chongryon's official newspaper, in Tokyo's Shinjuku Ward is now a construction site. Work has been under way since 2005 to put up a multistory apartment building there.

The 1,192-square-meter land area was put up as collateral for a 4.4-billion-yen loan. A large portion of that amount was spent on Chongryon-related pachinko businesses, public security sources said.

Unable to repay the loan, the newspaper sold the land for 1.7 billion yen to a real-estate developer in August 2005, ending nearly a half-century of printing and publishing on the site.

....Asahi: January 4,2007BY HIROSHI MATSUBARA

Wednesday, January 03, 2007

Foreign labor in Japan

UPDATE
Debito has added Asia Pacific University to his blacklist of Japanese Universities that foreigners would probably not want to work for. Debito
Isshyokikaku used to accuse Japanese university of Academic incest:Japanese university tend to employ only its pupil as a professor. I deeply agree. Japanese
university should be more open to variety of talented people from Japan, from abroad.
And the law applied to them should be the same one.
.................................................................................

Japan's population started declining in 2005, but in contrast, registered foreigners soared to a record high 2.01 million, a leap from 1.36 million a decade ago and accounting for 1.57 percent of the nation's total population.Japan times

It is inevitable that more and more foreigners are coming to work in Japan; Japan needs them. If so she needs to prepare it.
"Japanese were very closed to foreigners, especially Asians," Ma said, recalling how difficult it was to land a part-time job just because she was not Japanese
.....
"I came to realize that even if you are a foreigner and a woman, Japanese will accept you if you continue to make efforts to meet your target." She also feels that being a foreigner helped because she was unshackled by old business traditions.


On the other hand,
Foreign trainees facing chronic abuses
Firms refuse to stop exploiting interns as cheap labor, leading many to quit

Foreign trainees facing chronic abuses
Firms refuse to stop exploiting interns as cheap labor, leading many to quitJapan times/Wednesday, Jan. 3, 2007


Cheaper labour force is okay. But let's be fair.
Taking advantage of Japanese work-ethics, Japanese companies often use Japanese employee for free. But that does not work for people from abroad. Just set up the strict law that is beneficial for both Japanese and foreigners and make sure it is in fact working.
Probably there will be a lot of conflicts Japanese companies have never experienced, but that is the challenge the aging society like Japan has to face. The problem might differ from case to case, and we need to look into details in each case, but let's not get trapped in nationalism and let's be fair. It is a fair society that will survive and will be stable after all.

Tuesday, January 02, 2007

Lankov on Korean society

I once complained of Lankov's writing style and the choice of the topic. Not that what he wrote is inaccurate, but he chooses the topic and the writing style in such a way that his writing fits with Korean nationalism. Yes, he sometimes critizes Korean society, but it is obvious he takes care not to offend it by not focusing a good benificialside Korea received
during the colonial period.
Now I understand the reason why.


53 Lankov from Korea (South)
Posted January 1, 2007 at 1:50 pm | Permalink

Frankly, I am not surprised. I am surprised that somebody is surprised, since most people here have spent in Korea a number of years, often speak Korean, married to a Korean and sometimes are Koreans themselves. Frankly, when I read about Gerry Bevers being merely called to his university president a couple of months ago (?), I was surprised how liberal and free-minded the school is and how much things have changes over the last decade. Ten years ago a mere discovery of such activity would lead to an immediate dismiss of the wrongdoer.

Korea is a seriously nationalist country. It might be unpleasant and annoying, but this is a part of package. In every country, US/Australia/Russia/India/Singapore there are features one likes and features one does not. We make decision about whether we like place or not, based on balance, not on complete absence of things we do not like. Nobody is perfect. Will any of us go to a seriously fundamentalist Muslim country and then spend some efforts proving that certain chapters of the Holy Koran are, well, not perfect, and would not stand a serious scrutiny? And if such a person is fired from a teaching job and perhaps kicked out of the country, should anybody be surprised? This is not “democratic”, of course, but now, in 2007, democracy is not a universally accepted value, whichever people in the White House want to believe.

Frankly, and not as an offence to the overwhelmingly American crowd here: it sometimes strange to see that you people behave as if American or Western values apply everywhere and are accepted everywhere. They are not! If you go to Saudi Arabia, you do not wear mini-skirts and preach Bible in public (do it in your home)! If you come to Korea, you do not attack the sacral cows, and the Dokdo issue is one of the most sacral cows now. Dokdo was the worst possible choice, I can think of only few issues where an expression of doubt by a foreigner would produce similar outbursts.

In Korea you do not criticize nationalist assumptions, at least, you do not do it too actively. This is not the States where academic writing about slaughter of the Amerindians or the US military interventions/aggressions in Latin America is not merely safe but will improve your career opportunity in academia. Again: in Saudi Arabia you do not criticize Koran, in Korea you do not question the nationalist superiority complex, in the States you do not cast doubts at women’s perfect equality and do not make whichever would pass for a “racist statement”. At least, you do not do it in public, and if you do, you know that retribution might be swift. Do you remember what happenned to Professor Lawrence Summers? And he was not a hakwon teacher…


54 Lankov from Korea (South)
Posted January 1, 2007 at 1:56 pm | Permalink

THE SECOND PART, so to say. About the situation. Well, advices to use the legal channels might sound good, and I wish Bredon Carr and his colleagues all the best. However from my own experience I am very skeptical about outcome. Even if a case is won, there will be too many ways to make life miserable, and these ways will be used, be sure. Serious people in Korea seldom solve their issues at the court, and people here know how to get around a court decision they do not like. Again, there might be righteous outrage about it, but this is how things are done here. Period. And you/we are here. Period.

Gerry Bevers’s situation is made worse by two things. First, foreigners are expandable. Even if they happen to have special skills (not a common situation), foreigners are not protected by the networks of chi-yol, hak-yol, hyol-yol. Second, the major task of a Korean university administrator is to avoid scandals and embarrassment. Everything should move smoothly Once again, I am not judgmental, I have worked in Russia and in English-speaking West long enough to make equally unfavorable comments about situation there! People in the university might be even sort of sympathetic, but since there is a great potential for a scandal now, and since Gerry is a foreigner without a clan and an alumni association sanding behind his back, the solution is obvious.

As a matter of fact, three years ago a reputable university suddenly broke a contract with me. Yes, they signed a contract, I paid a lot of money to prepare for my move to Korea, but in the last moment when I had tickets, paid for storage etc. they notified that they could not accept me, citing an invention they wrongly believed I could not check. It took me few phone calls to learn that they were lying, and more time to learn that the real reason was an act of one very nasty and influential person who happens to dislike me (mutually, I am proud to say). So, what did I do? Did I sue them for breaking the signed contract? No. Did I try to revenge? No. I sighed, said a few Russian obscenities, wrote off some five thousand dollars spent on the preparations, and began to look for other opportunities. Last year I went to the said university for a presentation and had a nice dinner with some of those people and even their president (well, the guy who was most actively involved with the intrigue, did not come). Why? Because a legal case, even if it is won, is not something which helps your reputation here. Well, to the Westerners it might sound unfair? To me, too. But, first, it works (see South Korean GNP), second, it is how things are being done here. Like it or not.

Of course, Gerry might try. This was just my humble opinion.
Lankov at Marmot