작성일 : 21-06-25 02:34
|
글쓴이 :
영파여고박지우
 조회 : 583
|
|
https://ishingen.wordpress.com/2007/03/03/desired-ground-part-two/#comments
|
 |
|
| 서한 |
시정서한 |
|
| 매체 |
웹사이트
|
|
| 이슈 |
|
|
| 언어 |
영어
|
|
| 서한보내는곳 |
https://ishingen.wordpress.com/contact.info |
|
| 오류내용 |
1905년 포츠머스조약전 식민지화단계에서 일본이 합법적으로 독도를 취득했다고 강변하고, 사용지도에서도 독도를 Takeshima로 표기 |
|
| E-mail / Contact |
/ishingen/contact |
|
서론 |
Dear Shingen, I am Jiwoo Park, a Korean highschool student. I happened to visit your blog and see your postings, especially the one, titled as “Desired Ground-Part Two” while I searched for articles on Dok-do. I assume you are a Japanese, so to some extent, I understand your position on Dok-do. Besides, I believe everybody has a right to free speech. This reply does not mean I deny such freedom. However, I was surprised to see that your reasons for justifying Dok-do in the sovereignty of Japan are basically grounded on colonialists’ rationale for their annexation, even though Japan surrendered in 1945. I’d like to make a couple of comments on this reasoning based on the following reasons.
|
|
| 본론 |
You pick the year of 1905 as critical time that decide the sovereignty of the island. As quoted, “Japan had annexed the rocks in January 1905, eight months prior to the signing of the Treaty of Portsmouth. It had done so under the presumption of terra nullius, or ’empty land’. A month later, on February 22nd, it was incorporated into Shimane Prefecture. It was only after the signing of the Treaty of Portsmouth, over a year after the annexation of the Liancourt Rocks, that Japan informed Korea, who by that time were already controlled by Japan. The Treaty of Portsmouth (1905) gave control of Korea to Japan. Article 2 of the treaty reads” Historically, Japan began to approach into Korean territory since 1870s with bare intent to have control over Korea. Since then, Japan forced Korean government to consent unilateral treaties that meet only Japanese interests in politics, diplomacy and economy. In 1905, Japan threatened Korean government to sign a treaty taking away Korean diplomatic power by force. Annexation of Dok-do and incorporation of the island into Japanese sovereignty occurred during this kind of colonialization. In 1910, Japan finally succeeded in annexation of Korean peninsular. So, your basis for justifying Dok-do under Japanese sovereignty is no more than justifying illegal colonialization. It was a stolen property on the part of Korea. After Japanese surrender in 1945, it is so much legitimate and reasonable to get it back to Korea. It is no different to say that a robber still claims the stolen property belongs to his ownership.
|
|
| 결론 |
I hope Japan would throw away the still-colonialist’s reasoning on Dok-do as soon as possible. I strongly believe that judging the matter of sovereignty should be based on historical data to find out how the territory was historically treated between neighboring countries. Please research historical data prior to 1905. Lastly, you only mark the island by naming “Takeshima” in the map and comments, but I believe it is quite fair to mark the island as Dok-do as well, just as you say you try to be neutral on this issue. Thank you for your reading my comment. I wish you best luck. |
|
