1822 - Jido - Gwandongdo (地圖 - 關東圖)

The following map was made in 1822 and is from an atlas entitled Jido (地圖). It is stored in National Library of Korea. The Gwandongdo (關東圖) map shows Usando (于山島) just off the northeast shore of Ulleungdo. Usando was the old name for Ulleungdo's neighboring island of Jukdo (竹島), which is just two kilometers off the northern half of Ulleungdo's east shore.


1965 - June 22 - Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea

On June 22, 1965, Japan and South Korea mutually signed the basic Treaty to restore the diplomatic relations. South Korea, claiming as the only existing government on whole Joseon peninsula including North Korea, agreed to demand no compensations, either at the government or individual level, after receiving $800 million in grants and soft loans from Japan as compensation for its 1910–45 Japanese rule in the treaty. Most importantly, the treaty says "Recalling the relevant provisions of the Treaty of Peace with Japan signed at the city of San Francisco on September 8, 1951" in the preface. In other words, Korean government has obligation to follow the San Francisco Treaty, in which Allied Powers clearly concluded that Takeshima/Dokdo/Liancourt Rocks was excluded the sovereignty which Japan should renounce, even though Korean were declined to join the SF treaty because they were not the "Allies".

Japan and the Republic of Korea,

Considering the historical background of relationship between their
peoples and their mutual desire for good neighborliness and for the
normalization of their relations on the basis of the principle of
mutual respect for sovereignty;

Recognizing the importance of their close cooperation in conformity
with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations to the
promotion of their mutual welfare and common interests and to the
maintenance of international peace and security; and

Recalling the relevant provisions of the Treaty of Peace with Japan
signed at the city of San Francisco on September 8, 1951 and the
Resolution 195 (III) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on
December 12, 1948;

Have resolved to conclude the present Treaty on Basic Relations and have accordingly appointed as their Plenipotentiaries,

In the first to fifth drafts of the Treaty of San Francisco between Japan and the Allied powers, Liancourt Rocks were described as part of Korea. However, the sixth draft, which was made on Dec 29, 1949, ruled that Liancourt Rocks belong to Japan. The final version did not mention Liancourt Rocks. In Aug 10, 1951, a notification currently known as Rusk documents was sent to South Korea as a final U.S. Government reply on the issue of sovereignty between South Korea and Japan, and it states that Liancourt Rocks are territory of Japan. In November 1952, Confidential Security Information of USA claimed that "It appears that the Department has taken the position that these rocks belong to Japan and has so informed the Korean Ambassador in Washington.". In 1954, "The Report of Van Fleet mission to the Far East" reported that "[...]the United States concluded that they remained under Japanese sovereignty and the Island was not included among the Islands that Japan released from its ownership under the Peace Treaty.[...] There is no single doubt that American and Allied Powers concluded that Takeshima is Japanese territory.

Treaty of Peace with Japan
(Signed at San Francisco, 8 September 1951)

Article 2
(a) Japan recognizing the independence of Korea, renounces all right, title and claim to Korea, including the islands of Quelpart, Port Hamilton and Dagelet.

History of San Francisco Peace Treaty

1946 - SCAPIN 677 - #1

1946 - SCAPIN 1033 - #2

1947 - SCAPIN 1778 - #3

1949 - Willam J. Sebald's telegram - #4

1949 - A letter from W. Walton Butterworth - #5

1949 - December 29th; 6th Amendment of the Treaty Draft - #6

1950 - July - Commentary on Draft Treaty by the Department of State - #6-b

1950 - August - U.S. Draft of the Peace Treaty - #6-c

1950 - October 26th - USA Answers to Questions Submitted by the Australian Government - #7

1951 - April - May: Joint UK and USA Draft - extra(1)

1951 - June 1 - New Zealand's view - extra(2)

1951 - July 9th - Coversation of Yu Chan Yang with John F. Dulles - #8

1951 - July 19th - The 2nd Conversation between Yu Chan Yang and John F. Dulles - #9

1951 - August - Another letter from You Chan Yang - #10

1951 - August 3rd - Memorandum - #11(On re-ceiving Boggs's memo. I asked the Korean desk to find out whether anyone in the Korean Embassy officer had told him they believed Dokdo was near Ullengdo, or Takeshima Rock, and suspected that Parangdo was too.)

1951 - August - Rusk's Letter - #12

1951 - September 9th - San Francisco Peace Treaty - #13

Korea's Illegal Land Grab from Japan

1952- January: Syngman Rhee Line

After the Installation of Syngman Rhee Line - American documents

1952 - November - Confidential Security Information of USA - #1 ("It appears that the Department has taken the position that these rocks belong to Japan and has so informed the Korean Ambassador in Washington." )

1952 - December - Confidential Security Information of USA - #2( "I much appreciate your letter of November 14 in regard to the status of the Dokdo Island (Liancourt Rocks). The information you gave us had never been previously available to the Embassy. We had never heard of Deen Rusk’s letter to the Korean Ambassador in which the Department took a definite stand on this question.")

1953 July: Confidential Security Information of USA - #3( The United States Government's understanding of the territorial status of this island was stated in assistant Secretary dated August 10,1951.")

1953 - November - Secret Security Information of USA - #4 ("The Liancourt Rocks case appears to have aspects in common with that of Shikotan Island" "Remind the ROK of our previous statement of view (the Rusk letter)")

1953 - December - SECRET SECURITY INFORMATION by Dulles - #5

1954 - Report of Van Fleet mission to the Far East





  • 秋月望「日韓領土問題再考」竹島独島『明治学院論叢』国際岳研究 16号 1997.3月東壽太郎「国際紛争と地図一」 神奈川法学 第一巻第二号 昭和40年
  • 東壽太郎「国際紛争と地図二」 神奈川法学 第二巻第一号 昭和41年
  • 植田捷雄「竹島の帰属をめぐる日韓紛争」『一橋論叢』54巻1(1965.7)pp19-34
  • 芹田健太郎「竹島問題」『島の領有と経済水域の境界確定』有信堂 1989 pp.225-239
  • 芹田健太郎「日本領土の変遷」日本の国際法事例研究(3)『領土』(1999)所収
  • 芹田健太郎『日本の領土』中公叢書 2002
  • 芹田健太郎「竹島を消すことが唯一の解決策だ」 中央公論2006年11月号
  • 太寿堂鼎「竹島紛争」『国際法外交雑誌』第六四巻四・五合併号、1966、105-136
  • 太寿堂鼎「領土問題 北方領土・竹島・尖閣諸島の帰属」『ジュリスト』647、1977.9.1
  • 高野雄一『日本の領土』(1962年、東京大学出版会)69頁,p.266
  • 塚本孝「日本の領域確定における近代国際法の適用事例 - 先占法理と竹島の領土編入を中心に」『東アジア近代史』3号(2000.3)pp.84-92
  • 塚本孝「サンフランシスコ条約と竹島」『レファレンス』389(1983.6)pp.51-63
  • 塚本孝「平和条約と竹島(再論)」『レファレンス』518(1994.3)pp.31-56
  • 塚本孝「竹島領有権をめぐる日韓両国政府の見解」『レファレンス』617(2002.6)pp.49-70
  • 朴培根「日本による島嶼先占の諸先例 - 竹島/独島に対する領域権原を中心として」『国際法外交雑誌』105巻2号(2006.8) pp.32-47
  • 濱田太郎「竹島(独島)紛争の再検討 一」 法学研究論集 明治大学大学院法学研究科 6号 1997.2月
  • 濱田太郎「竹島(独島)紛争の再検討 二」 法学研究論集 明治大学大学院法学研究科 7号 1997.9月
  • 濱田太郎「竹島(独島)紛争の再検討 三」 法学研究論集 明治大学大学院法学研究科 8号 1998.2月
  • 広瀬善男「国際法からみた日韓併合と竹島の領有権」『明治学院大学法学研究』81号 2007年1月皆川洸「竹島紛争と国際判例」(『国際法学の諸問題 - 前原光男教授還暦記念』1963、慶応通信所収)
  • 皆川洸「竹島紛争とその解決手続」『法律時報』1965年9月号
  • 横川新「竹島」日本の国際法事例研究(3)『領土』(1999)所収
  • 「『竹島』と国際裁判例の動向」 鬼頭誠 / 「インタビュー 小田滋前国際司法裁判所判事に『竹島』問題を聞く」  『読売クオータリー』2008 秋号 通巻第7号 読売新聞東京本社調査研究部 (島根県サイトにあり)


What happened to our "hit counter"?

On both my Blogger sites, Korean Language Notes and here, the "hit counters" have suddenly started over at somewhere around 12,000 hits. It happened a couple of days ago on my Korean Language Notes site, so I assume it happened at around the same time on this site. Before the change, my Korean Language Notes site had close to 50,000 hits, and this site had more than 1.1 million.


Is the Dokdo-Takeshima debate still alive in Japan?

I heard my name mentioned in the video below and am curious to know the background and what is being said. Could someone please give me a brief summary? It may be an old video, but I just found it mentioned in a September 2, 2009 post on Occidentalism.

I apologize for not participating in the debate much this year. I have tried to stay away from the Dokdo-Takeshima dispute mainly because of job-related concerns, but also because I have been busy with other things. Another reason is that I had lost a lot of motivation because Korea has been relatively quiet on "Dokdo" lately, which I think is a good thing. It seems like Japan and Korea have been trying to improve relations, so it did not seem like the right atmosphere to talk about the Dokdo-Takeshima dispute.

Anyway, my school has recently told me they will not be renewing my contract next year, so I feel more comfortable about getting back into the debate. However, I wonder if anyone is still interested? It seems like the debate has died down in both Korea and Japan, for whatever reason. Are Japanese still interested in the debate?