US Ambassador and Japanese Diplomat Discuss Liancourt Rock Dispute in 2006

THE AMBASSADOR AND VFM YACHI DISCUSS LIANCOURT ROCK DISPUTE
2006 April 20

Classified By: Ambassador J. Thomas Schieffer. Reason: 1.4 (b)(d).

1. (S) At 11:00 a.m. on April 20, the Ambassador spoke with VFM Yachi, at Yachi’s request, regarding simmering tensions between Japan and the ROK over a planned Japanese maritime survey near the disputed Liancourt Rocks (reftel). He explained, briefly, that the ROK intended to propose to an international commission in June that features on the bottom of the sea in the disputed area be given Korean names. Japan wants to survey the area in order to make a counter-proposal at the meeting. Korea, Yachi stated, may use force to block the survey ship. Yachi further noted that he might travel to Seoul the following day, April 21, to try to resolve the matter peacefully.

2. (S) The Ambassador stated the United States understands that Japan is within its rights under international law. The Koreans are behaving irrationally, and the United States is concerned that they may do something crazy, causing a major problem. Everyone needs to back off, he stressed, to enable the matter to be resolved peacefully. We do not want our two allies shooting at each other, he asserted. The Ambassador advised that he might get in touch with FM Aso later in the day.

3. (C) Yachi thanked the Ambassador for his concern and said he would do his best. He requested that the Ambassador send an Embassy representative to the Foreign Ministry to hear Japan’s position on the issue. SCHIEFFER

Dokdo or Takeshima?
http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.jp/2014/03/2006-april-20-ambassador-and-vfm-yachi.html

Public Library of US Diplomacy ( wikileaks)
http://www.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/06TOKYO2154_a.html

***************************************

This is a secret document of the US government which was out of the closet by Wikileaks. The Us would have no intention of unveiling it.
Although It seems that any document or old maps reveal the Japanese legitimacy of the ownership of Takeshima (Dokdo), S.Korea claims its sovereignty over the islands fussily. Why? It is maybe because the issue is not about which side story is right in the context of historical facts. but just political one.
Recently, it just so happened that Russia took Crimea out of Ukraine by force. Pres. Obama and Western nations are huffing over Russia imposing sanctions against it. However Russia keeps on doing what it want to do, with composure. A decline in strength of the US leaves Russia, China and N-S. Korea to do whatever they like. The rest of the world should protect their own country from the outlaws all by themselves in the future.

Advertisements

Let’s Talk about the Truth of JP-SK Relations

This is an article from Sankei Shinbun, Japanese newspaper, on July 27, 2013. Professor James. E. Auer, the author of the article, showed surprise at S.Koreans completely ignorance on Japan and felt confused about their one-sided historical perceptions in another place. I think I want all S.Kreans to know about true histories between Japan and S.Korea.



Let’s talk about the truth of JP-SK relations

July 26 2013
James.E.Auer, a director of Center for U.S. Japan
Studies and Cooperation, Vanderbilt University


Last month, I visited to Seoul for three days at the invitation of a S.Korean senior politician who is a supporter of President Park Geun Hye. Unfortunately, most of S.Koreans whom I met there viewed Japan in a negative light.

<The comfort women were not exclusively the Korean women>

I asked the S.Koreans that I have met why they obviously changed their opinion about Japan-Korea disputes after the Japanese prime minister Keizo Obuchi and the President Kim Dae-jung (both at that time) issued a joint statement in 1998 saying that both nations agreed on settling the confrontation between the two and moving toward better relations.

Most S.koreans I met claimed that their stance have not changed since 1998. Instead, their current attitude of ant-Japanese are due to Japanese insensitivity toward bilateral history issues including Prime Ministers’ visits to Yasukuni Shrine or Japan’s claim to Takeshima (Dokdo).

I said them that none of the leader of Japan, S.Korea and the US would forgive the practices of prostitution conducted by Japan till 1945 in China

We have no hard numbers, but it might well be that the number of the Korean comfort women, who were sold by their poor peasant parents or applied for employment by other way, was more than that of the comfort women from Japan, China or other countries.

However, it was not a plan to recruit comfort women only from Korea. There seems little doubt that Japan sincerely feels a sense of remorse for the true suffering which this project inflicted on comfort women of all the nationalities during the war.

In those days, prostitution was legal in Japan. The US troops also received sexual services from Japan during the occupation. I don’t mean to suggest that these facts prove what happened was right, but I mean that they show how different values at that time were from the ones of today.

With regard to Japanese government officials’ visit to Yasukuni Shrine, I said them the Japanese leaders have not visited Yasukuni Shrine in order to either honoring some class-A war criminals listed there or praising Japan’s own behavior of apologies toward other countries. More importantly, it seems to be a big contradictions that such a country like China that hates criticism against its own internal affairs from abroad blames Japan for its politicians’ visits to the shrine which is dedicated to the Japanese soldiers who served and died for their country.

130183

 
<Yasukuni is no different than Arlington>

Now the US president and leaders of other countries include Japan and S.K. visit the Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia, US, even though there are many tombs of Johnny Rebs who fought for the South that supported slavery. Today most of advanced countries don’t accept slavery, but there is no one who claim to remove the tombs of Johnny Rebs from the National Cemetery because they believed in slavery.

After much talk with the S.Koreans I found that the most difficult problem was concerned with “Takeshima” I said that Japan didn’t seem change its views of the problem due to legal bases favorable to Japan. Meanwhile, I asked, though Japan never be likely to send SDF troops to drive away the S.Korean soldiers from Takeshima now, why they don’t stop worrying about the issue. The only answer that I heard from them was because the SKoreans thought the Japanese govt should agree the opinion that Takeshima belongs to S.Korea absolutely.

There was only one group that didn’t complain about Japan. They were in the base of S.Korean navy. I saw “Cheonan(天安)” which was the S.Korean corvette (a patrol combatant craft) torpedoed by N.Korea before. The officers never talk about politics, instead, talk of the need to collaborate with the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force and the United States Navy to counter vicious and unpredictable behaviors by N.Korea realistically.

<Contribution of JP-Sino War and JP-Russo war to Korea>

What can we do to change S.Korea’s attitude towards Japan for the better? One of my students who has lived in Seoul since his/her birth and worked there for more than 20 years since graduated from Vanderbilt University, said that he/she thought Japan would have to keep taking a patient stance until the Koreans overcome thier inferiority complex. I’m sorry to say that it seems to be right to the point. However I would expect President Park to be able to work out a deal with Prime Minister Abe.

Although the Japanese would never mention this, I believe it deserves consideration for the Koreans that there was a common reason for Japan to win the two wars against China in 1895 and Russia in 1905. Japan wasn’t against Korea at that time, but it was afraid that Korea come to be controlled either by China or Russia.

If China won JP-Sino War, Korea might have become a colony of China, also if Russia defeated Japan, Korea must have been Russian’s. After all Japan’s victories of the two wars leaded Korea to the position of a democracy based on the market economy like today.
(sorry if misinstlation)


http://sankei.jp.msn.com/world/news/130726/kor13072603210001-n1.htm

“When will US & JP’s financing help for China be over?”

470325

Developed countries have not extended economic assistance to China in order to help the country become a military superpower and invade its neighbors.
Watching how China interacts with its neighboring countries these days, we find that the territorial dispute with Japan has nothing to do with historical issues between Japan and China.

“When will US & JP’s financing help for China be over?”

The US media had argued that it was no longer viable in today’s situation, where China has achieved rapid economic growth, for Japan and the US to continue to provide financial help to China every year.

Foreign Policy, an American magazine specializing in foreign affairs, published the article on 12th July, saying that Japanese and Americans are raising serious questions about their continued financing of China, while the country is not only the greatest competitor for Japan and the US geopolitically, it also overtook Japan in economy size as the world’s second-largest economy in 2010.

Furthermore, according to the article, the US govt gave China 28.3 million dollars in economic aid in 2012 to spend on an environmental program, the development of rules of law and the battle against AIDS in China. Even though Japan and China have been in a touch-and-go situation with a great deal of complexity, Japan provided China with 8 hundred million dollars in 2011 due to Japan’s feeling guilty about the historical issues between the two countries. And now peoples of Japan and the US have come to express their opinion that their govts should stop giving aid to China because it already has the ability to solve its social problems on its own.

In addition, the media reports that the peoples of supporting countries to China including Japan and the US feel the aid unreasonable, and wonder how much longer they will have to aid China’s development before they can stop giving aid to such a country as China that is beginning to finance Asian-African developing countries aggressively. http://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20130716-00000041-scn-cn

A cable says Takeshima(Dokdo) is Japan’s

A telling evidence for Japanese claim to Takeshima(Dokdo)

This is a cable from Douglas McARTHUR Ⅱ, once the U.S. ambassador to Japan and the General Douglas McARTHUR’s nephew, to the U.S. State Department in 1960. The cable said that the U.S. authority had a hard time with the Yi Syngman regime which draw a national bordered, so-called Rhee Line, on the sea between Japan and Korea in defiance of international laws, and seizing many Japanese fishermen who was fishing around the Rhee Line, using them as political hostage. Besides, it said clearly “Takeshima Island has always been considered as Japanese territory.” This meens it was a simple recognition that Tkeshima(Dokdo) belonged to Japan in that time. So the Japan’s claim to Takeshima has nothing to do with either the WW2 or the Japanese annexation of Korea.
Some Koreans claim that Japan should give up the islands because it lost the war, but this is also their own peculiar logic. Japan did not fight a war against Korea, but rather fought together in WW2. Korea was not a victor country of the war, it was the U.S. that Japan defeated with. That country was saying the islands was Japanese territory. Where on earth is the problem on it?

This official letter has made public due to being declassified lately.
It has been authenticated by National Archives.
for details, refer to the site “Texas Daddy Japan Secretariat”http://texas-daddy.com

the full text

SECSTATE 3470 PRIORITY

Rptd info: Amembassy SEOUL 351

For Assistant Secretary Parsons from MacArthur.

Seoul for Ambassador McConaughy.

Now that we have prospect of new and democratic regime in Korea I strongly recommend that as soon as possible we seize opportunity to try to bring about durable solution to Korea – Japan dispute. As long as Rhee held power there seemed little chance of any solution but now we have entirely new situation which could lead to liquidation of Korea – Japan controversy. Implications of Korea-Japan are not just bilateral between government of Japan and Korea but deeply and directly involve US and our inescapable responsibilities in Northeast Asia. As practical matter if reasonable solution is to be found it will be produced only by our good offices and working closely with both Korea and Government of Japan. It is of utmost importance that we identify and be prepared to move swiftly for solution those specific Korea-government of Japan problems which prevent progress toward basic settlement this festering dispute. We do not know what response Communists may make to new Korea regime and it is vital we try to put Korea-Government of Japan house in order as soon as possible.

While Rhee regime violated most basic tenets of democracy in authoritarian police rule imposed on Korean people, it has also in past done violence to most fundamental principles of international conduct and morality by committing acts of piracy on high seas around Rhee Line and then imprisoning and holding as political hostage Japanese fishermen and by seizing and holding non-Korean territory by force. The uncivilized practice of hostage diplomacy is one of our serious charge against Communist China and if continued by Korea it will be a great liability to a new democratic Korea regime

I therefore recommend strongly that as soon as new regime is in control in Korea (whether or not it be of interim character) we use all our influence to persuade it (1) to release and return to Japan all repeat all Japanese fishermen hostage (including those who have not completed their sentences) who have suffered so cruelly from Rhee’s uncivilized and oppressive acts and (2) to cease practice of seizing Japanese fishing vessels on high seas. This would not only rid new Korea regime of liability of practicing hostage diplomacy but also more than anything else would lay foundation in Japan for really fruitful negotiations. At same time I would be prepared to press Kishi and government of Japan most strongly that in return for repatriation of all fishermen, Japanese would exercise self-restraint in their fishing operations in Korean Straits until reasonable opportunity had been given for negotiation of mutually agreed Korea – Japan fishing conservation agreement.

In addition to seizing Japanese boats in high seas and practicing hostage diplomacy, Rhee regime also seized by force and is holding illegally Takeshima Island which has always been considered as Japanese territory. This is very serious and permanent irritant in Japan-Korea relations and there can be no over-all Korea-Japan settlement until this island is returned to Japan. Therefore we should also press new Korea regime to return Takeshima to Japan. If it is unwilling to do so pending satisfactory conclusion of over-call Korea-Japan negotiations, new regime should at least signify a willingness to withdraw from as part of mutually satisfactory settlement of other outstanding issues between two countries. While we should press strongly for return of Takeshima to Japan, if by any chance new regime were unwilling to do so we should, as very minimum, insist that they agree to submit matter to International Court of Justice for arbitration.

Finally, we should inform new regime very clearly that it must be prepared to adjust its relations with Japan on terms of reciprocity, in such matters as diplomatic missions, visits by businessmen
and journalists, commercial trade. Japanese have suffered Rhee’s occupation-minded approach for eight years and will be unwilling to accept such indefensible treatment from his successor. In its own interests, new regime should start with conformity with normal International standards of conduct, and could most usefully begin (in terms of Japanese and other free world opinion) by permitting Japanese diplomatic mission to enter and function in Korea on same terms Korea Embassy operates here.

If we now move swiftly with new Korea regime which should generally be receptive to our views because of our helpfulness, we may have initial opportunity, which may never reoccur, to influence its position on Japan-Korea problem. Japanese would certainly welcome warmly and reciprocate fully, measures indicating new Korea regime willing take “new look” at Japan.

D MacAuthur:mek POL:WHGleysteem DCMWmLeonhart

Reproduction from this copy is prohibited unless “UNCLASSIFIED”

Confidential

classification Official file copy

Japanese_Name_Change_Bulletin_of_Taikyu_Court_1img007-600x8472img009-600x847 4img008-600x847 3

Texas Daddy Japan Secretariat
http://texas-daddy.com

the full text in Korean

국무상 3470 우선문서

서울 대사관 직원 351

퍼선스 차관포에게 맥아더로부터

매카나기 서울대사

우리에게는 한국에 새로운 민주주의체제 전망이 있는 지금에 되도록 빨리 우리가 한국과 일본 분쟁에 항구적 해결을 가져오려고 하는 기회를 잡을 수 있도록 나는 강하게 진언한다.

이승만이 권력 자리에 앉아 있는 한 해결의 실마리가 거의 없는 것 같이 보였지만 현재 우리에게는 한국과 일본의 논쟁 정산으로 이어지는 완전히 새로운 상황이 있다.

한국과 일본의 관계는 단순히 일본과 한국과 정부라는 측면뿐만 아니라 미국과 우리의 북동아시아에 있는 책임에 깊이 직접적으로 관계되고 있다.

실제 문제로서 합리적인 해결책을 찾아낼 수 있다면 한국, 일본정부와 우리가 긴밀하게 협조하는 것이 반드시 필요하다.

최대한 중요한 일이 한국정부가 명확하게 일본문제를 빨리 해결하기 위한 기본적인 화해 진전을 방해하고 고민시키고 있는 울적한 문제를 특정시키고 재빨리 일이 진행될 수 있도록 준비하는 것이다.

우리는 공산주의자가 새로운 한국 체제에게 어떤 반응을 나타낼지 모르지만 우리가 되도록 빨리 한국과 일본정부를 적절한 상태로 조정하려고 하는 것이 반드시 필요하다.

이승만 정권이 한국인에 대해서 권위주의적인 경찰지배에 있어서 민주주의 기본심정을 모독하고 국제적인 품행이나 도덕 등 기본원리를 범하고 이승만 라인 주변의 한국영역 외 공해상에서도 실력행사로 해적행위를 하고 일본인 어민들을 정치적인 인질로서 투옥시켜서 한국영역 외 영역을 강제로 잡고 있었다.

야만적인 인질 외교의 실행이 공산주의 지나에 대한 우리의 심각한 비난의 하나이고 그리고 한국에 의해 계속된다면 그것이 새로운 민주주의체제의 큰 책임이 될 수 있다.

한국에서 새로운 체제가 정비되자 마자 우리의 영향력을 구사시켜서 이런 것들을 설득하는 것을 진언한다. (그것이 잠정적인 성격이겠지만) (1)이승만의 잔인하고 야만적인 탄압행위를 당하고 괴로워한 모든 일본인 인질을 해방하고 (아직 형벌이 확정되지 않은 인질도 포함) (2)일본 어선을 공해상에서 나포하는 습관을 중지시키는 것.

이것은 한국의 새로운 체제에서 인질외교를 그만두게 할 뿐만 아니라 진정한 성과가 있는 일본과의 외교관계 기반을 만드는 것이 무엇보다도 중요하다.

동시에 나는 모든 어민의 본국 송환과 맞바꾸어 키시총리와 일본정부에 대해 한국과 일본 사이에서 기회를 얻어서 타당한 교섭이 행해져서 서로 합의를 해서 어업협정이 맺어질 때까지 한국 해협에서 하는 어업을 자숙할 수 있도록 강하게 요청할 준비가 있다.

공해상에서 일본 어선을 나포하고 인질외교를 하는데 이승만체제하에서는 평소에 일본 영토로 되어 있는 타케시마를 강제로 점거하고 있다.

이것이 일한관계의 상당히 중요하고 영원한 고민이고 이 섬이 일본에 변환될 때까지 일한 전체 화평이 결착할 일이 없다.

그렇기 때문에 우리는 새로운 한국 정권에게 타케시마를 일본에 변환하도록 압력을 주지 않으면 안 된다.

일한 포괄교섭의 만족스러운 종결을 할 마음이 없으면 새로운 체제는 적어도 미해결인 다른 문제를 양쪽이 만족스러운 형태로 해결할 의욕을 표명하지 않으면 안 된다.

우리가 타케시마를 일본에 변환하도록 강한 압력을 주고 있는 동안 만일 새로운 체제가 그렇게 할 마음이 없으면 최저한 우리는 이 건을 국제사법재판소에게 부탁하고 중재를 구하는 것과 합의하도록 주장해야 된다.

마지막으로 우리는 새로운 체제에 대해 외교사절단, 비즈니스맨과 저널리스트의 방문, 상업적인 거래 등에 있어서 상호주의 조건에 관해서 일본과의 관계를 조절할 준비를 하지 않으면 안 되는 것을 특히 명확하게 알려주지 않으면 안 된다.

일본인이 8년 동안 이승만 점령주의 수법으로 고통을 당하고 그의 후계자에서 그런 옹호할 수 없는 취급을 받을 생각이 없다

일본인이 8년 동안 이승만 점령주의 수법으로 고통을 당하고 그의 후계자에서 그런 옹호할 수 없는 취급을 받을 생각이 없다

그 자신의 이익에 있어서 새로운 체제는 보통 국제행위규법에 준거한 행동부터 시작하지 않으면 안 되고 가장 유효한 시동이 (일본이나 다른 자유주의 세계세론에 비춰서) 한국대사관이 여기(일본)에서 운영하는 것과 같은 조건으로 일본 외교사절단을 받아들여 한국에서 기능하는 것을 승낙시킬 것부터 시작하는 것이다.

일한 포괄교섭의 만족스러운 종결을 할 마음이 없으면 새로운 체제는 적어도 미해결인 다른 문제를 양쪽이 만족스러운 형태로 해결할 의욕을 표명하지 않으면 안 된다.

일본이 틀림없이 새로운 한국 체제가 일본에 대한 새로운 견해를 따뜻하게 받아들여서 그것에 보답할 것이다.

기밀 취급이 해제될 때까지 복제를 금지한다.

친전

기밀종별 공식문서