Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I think his point was more of, what Europe has become. Not what it has done, and hopes Asia can eventually change for the good too.
I'm sorry, but I fail to see any proof that 'Takeshima' belongs to Japan yet. All you seem to be doing is complaining about Koreans =/
I'm sorry, but I fail to see any proof that 'Takeshima' belongs to Japan yet. All you seem to be doing is complaining about Koreans =/
What is the purpose of this thread? To discuss the matter of 'Takeshima' or to childishly insult Koreans?
If I remember correctly, didn't the incorporation of the island into Japan lead to the full-scale process of annexation to Japan? If that is true, there is no mystery about their overreaction. Korea is still haunted by horrifying memories inflected by Japan. What is more, the success of virtually any kind is measured against the Japanese equivalent.
Until the country moves out of the current state of insecurity, the attitude of the Korean people will probably not drastically change.
I am not an expert on history so I cannot say for sure which country holds the proper right to the island. And, probably the case made by the Korean side lacks enough evidence.
But, it is certain that Koreans are reacting more to the symbolic meaning of the action that Japanese are engaging in. To their eyes, the Japanese claim appears similar to what Japan did during the pre-annexation period.
Whether the link between these two events is substantiated or not, it is obvious that Koreans are not in the mood to settle down and calmly discuss the issue. I don't think provocation is a reasonable way to solve a problem when the opponent ostensibly displays illogical and emotional responses.
In the current state of affairs, Japan's move is nothing but a provocation, since the country lacks resources to bring back the island under their sovereignty. The Self-defense forces cannot attack the island. It can only defend.
As long as the government provides financial support to those fishermen who lost their place to do their business, Japan would gain more by not provoking the neighbor. It can be likened to living in an apartment. The residents need to find a way to get along. Otherwise the situation can escalate. One difference, though, is that there is no police to intermediate between the two parties when it comes to international relations.
I think J-givernment has continued to tell South Korea "Let's go to International Court" for the past 50 years.
Or you want Japan to keep quiet only ?
It would be great if Japan could bring Korea to the court. But, my understanding of the way in which most of the territorial disputes have been resolved is that the disputing two parties find middle ground between themselves, rarely relying on an international institution. Probably this is because there is no enforcement of submission to the ruling of the court. If the parties cannot reach a compromise or unwilling to go to court, then the two sides might engage in war, as seen in the conflict between Russia and Georgia. The latter scenario does not apply since the Japanese self-defense forces cannot invade.
With the island successfully occupied and controlled by the Koreans, there is no incentive for them to contest in the court. Also, among the current 15 judge positions is a Japanese judge but no member from Korea.
Even if Japan manages to bring Korea to the court, the prospect of smooth enforcement of the court's decision seems dim. The enforcing authority of its decision is the UN, viewed by many as a defunct institution. Also, the current secretary of the UN is Korean.
Given the low probability of successfully regaining the sovereignty of the island, it seems, unfortunately, wise and beneficial to the relationship of the two countries if Japan behaves more yielding. We all know that Japanese people are good at it.