Dokdo, which is currently Korean territory, is facing threats from Japan.
Dokdo (獨島) is a beautiful island that belongs to Korea, situated in the East Sea in Korea. Dokdo has unique geographical features and is characterized by the following:
- Geographical Location: Dokdo is a small island located in the East Sea, east of the Korean Peninsula. It is situated between the Korean Peninsula and Japan, near the boundary between Korea and Japan. Territorial disputes persist, but Dokdo is clearly Korean territory.
- Natural Environment: Dokdo boasts a beautiful natural environment, including rugged coastlines, underwater rock formations, coastal underwater caves, and diverse marine ecosystems. These islands have been designated as natural conservation areas, with a strong focus on environmental protection.
- Historical Significance: Dokdo has played a historically significant role and has been considered Korean territory since the Goryeo and Joseon dynasties. Even today, Koreans reside on the island, and it is guarded by the South Korean Dokdo Coast Guard. It remains Korean territory.
- Fishing Activities: The waters surrounding Dokdo are an area where fishermen engage in fishing activities. Fishermen primarily catch fish, sea urchins, and abalone, among other marine products, to make a living.
- Administration and Claims: Currently, Dokdo is administered by South Korea and claimed as Korean territory. However, Japan also asserts territorial claims over Dokdo. Due to Japan’s claims, it remains a subject of dispute between the two countries.
Dokdo is a geographically unique and historically significant island, continually garnering attention due to disputes between the two countries. This island is well-known for the territorial dispute between Korea and Japan.
Dokdo is historically Korean territory.
However, Japan claims it as its territory, leading to ongoing disputes. Each country asserts its sovereignty over Dokdo, and this dispute has persisted for a long time, with international controversy regarding the island’s affiliation. South Korea calls it “Dokdo,” and the South Korean government claims it as Korean territory, managing and defending it through its police force and navy. Japan refers to the island as “Takeshima” and asserts it as Japanese territory. The Dokdo dispute continues to be a contentious issue between the two countries for various reasons, including geographical, historical, and international legal factors, contributing to tensions in their relationship.
However, Dokdo is unquestionably Korean territory for the following reasons.
- Historical Basis: Korea claims that Dokdo is its historically long-standing territory. From the Goryeo Dynasty to the Joseon Dynasty, Korea utilized and managed the islands in the East Sea, including Dokdo. Records and geographical information about this region exist from the Joseon Dynasty and even during the Japanese colonial period.
- Geographical Basis: Dokdo is located to the east of the Korean Peninsula, in close proximity to it. This geographical location is a significant basis for Korea’s territorial claim.
- Korean Administration: Currently, the Korean government recognizes Dokdo as Korean territory and manages it. Korea invests in the administration and security of Dokdo, with Korean police and navy regularly dispatched to maintain security and safety on the island.
- International Legal Basis: Korea asserts, in accordance with international law, that Dokdo is its territory. Under international law, a nation’s sovereignty is recognized based on historical, geographical, and substantial control and claims. Korea maintains substantial control over Dokdo and cites this as its international legal basis for the claim.
However, the issues surrounding this island continue to persist.
First, with the reduction in government budgets, this year’s October 25th (Dokdo Day) has become a somber ‘Dokdo Day.’
While Japan has designated ‘Takeshima Day’ to commemorate and has increased budgets for its territorial claims over Dokdo, the reality is that the South Korean government seems to be turning away from it.
In September, the Japanese Yomiuri Shimbun reported that the Japanese government had allocated approximately 300 million yen (around 2.7 billion won) for expenses related to territorial disputes, including Dokdo, with other countries. The fact that they allocated a budget for a place that is not Japanese territory demonstrates a lack of reflection on their past actions.
In international law, claiming sovereignty and jurisdiction over an island that has long been uninhabited often hinges on the relationship with neighboring larger islands.
The historical significance of figures like “Ahn Yong-bok,” who repelled Japanese intruders on Dokdo, and the establishment of Dokdo-related facilities like the Dokdo Museum on Ulleungdo are important reasons for promoting Dokdo.
Please remember the additional fact below.
On Ulleung Island, there is the Memorial Hall of the Volunteer Defense Corps. This space commemorates the Dokdo Volunteer Defense Corps, consisting of 33 young individuals who gathered and defended Dokdo against Japan’s attempted invasion for 3 years and 8 months. However, despite the affection and efforts of the people, there are still many areas in which the government should provide support.
On the eastern coast of Ulleung Island, there is an underwater cable that can only be found by cutting through thick vegetation. It connects from Matsue in Japan through Dokdo and Ulleungdo, all the way to Wonsan in Gangwon Province. It serves as a symbol of Japan’s heinous actions attempting to invade our territory, Dokdo.
Great article! I appreciate the clear and insightful perspective you’ve shared. It’s fascinating to see how this topic is developing. For those interested in diving deeper, I found an excellent resource that expands on these ideas: check it out here. Looking forward to hearing others’ thoughts and continuing the discussion!
I’ll check it out if I have time. thank you
This article provided a lot of valuable information. The author’s perspective was both refreshing and enlightening. It would be interesting to hear how others feel about these points. Any thoughts?
This piece provided some great insights. The author’s approach was both clear and engaging. I’m curious to see how others feel about these ideas. Any additional thoughts?
This article had me laughing and learning! For those interested, check out: DISCOVER HERE. What’s your take?