Dear Hiroo Aoyama,

I hope this message finds you well. My name is Yuri Hwang, and I am a college student actively engaged in advocating for the recognition of "Dokdo" and the "East Sea" in Korea.

I recently read your article, "The History of the Name of the Sea of Japan," published on the SPF website. I appreciate your detailed examination of the historical context surrounding the naming of the body of water in question. However, I have some concerns and would like to offer a different perspective regarding the use of the term "Sea of Japan."

Your article concludes by stating that the term "Sea of Japan" was adopted by the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) in 1929 and that Japan's imperialism is not directly related to the establishment and popularization of this term. While it is true that the term was internationally recognized during a period when Korea was under Japanese colonial rule, this context cannot be dismissed when discussing the validity and fairness of geographical nomenclature.

It is essential to acknowledge that the naming of geographical features is inherently political and can reflect power dynamics and historical contexts. The widespread adoption of the term "Sea of Japan" during a time of Japanese imperial expansion is, therefore, not free from the influence of Japan's colonial policies. Ignoring this context undermines the historical experiences and cultural significance that the term "East Sea" holds for Koreans.

The Korean Government has been raising this issue since the Sixth UNCSGN in 1992, advocating for either the exclusive use of "East Sea" or the joint use of both "East Sea" and "Sea of Japan." This stance is rooted in a desire to correct historical injustices and promote a more balanced and inclusive approach to geographical naming.

Your article states that "The Japanese Government should patiently explain the historical facts about the term 'Sea of Japan' while giving due consideration to the circumstances of the time when the international agreement was concluded." I respectfully suggest that a more comprehensive approach would involve acknowledging the historical and political context of the colonial period and the legitimate concerns of the Korean people.

To move towards a resolution that fosters mutual understanding and respect, it would be beneficial for discussions to consider the historical perspectives of all involved parties. Recognizing the term "East Sea" alongside "Sea of Japan" would be a step towards addressing these historical grievances and promoting a more inclusive and accurate representation.

Thank you for considering my perspective on this matter. I hope that future discussions and publications will reflect a more balanced view that acknowledges the complexities of history and the importance of geographical nomenclature to cultural identity.

Sincerely,

Yuri Hwang