Wednesday, January 28, 2004
MORE ON THE BATTLE FOR HEARTS, MINDS, AND USELESS HUNKS OF ROCK IN THE EAST SEA/SEA OF JAPAN. I noted the ever-simmering conflict over Tokdo here. Now the Marmot points to an interesting form of early-childhood education/indoctrination on the issue. Given the infinite number of possible topics for pottery painting, the selection of "Tokdo is our land" probably doesn't bode all that well for future Korea-Japan relations.
An not entirely unrelated aside: there has been much controversy over the proper name of the body of water in which Tokdo can be found. "Sea of Japan" was often the default name for most English-language maps in the 20th century, a nod to Japan's prominent position in the world at that time. However, the ROK has mounted a full-court press to have the sea renamed the "East Sea." See here for an example (note: VANK is involved). See here for one of the formal attempts to change opinions on this subject. Snippet:
I have long suggested that only an entirely neutral but appropriate name will solve the problem. My suggestion: the "Green Sea" (ûÇØôìú). There is absolutely no historical precedent for this particular name. However, there is a nice symmetry with the Yellow Sea that lies between China and Korea on the other side of the peninsula. And the color "green" (ch'ong in Korean) really refers to a blue-green that nicely captures some of the different hues of sea water. And finally, and obviously, it does not favor one side or the other. If you like the idea, pass it on.
An not entirely unrelated aside: there has been much controversy over the proper name of the body of water in which Tokdo can be found. "Sea of Japan" was often the default name for most English-language maps in the 20th century, a nod to Japan's prominent position in the world at that time. However, the ROK has mounted a full-court press to have the sea renamed the "East Sea." See here for an example (note: VANK is involved). See here for one of the formal attempts to change opinions on this subject. Snippet:
Every geographical name on earth has a unique identity that reflects the history and culture of the area. International norms and practices require that geographical names conform with the usage of the residents of the area. First and foremost, we believe that to adopt an internationally acceptable name for the sea between Korea and Japan is necessary from the standpoint of removing one of the vestiges of Japanese colonialism. We do not believe that the international community should condone the use of a name that was decided upon unreasonably and without the consent of a party directly involved.That is all well and good, but how does "East Sea" really resolve the dilemma? The sea certainly isn't east of Japan (nor of Russia for that matter). Does changing the frame of reference from former colonizer to former colonial victim really make things better?
I have long suggested that only an entirely neutral but appropriate name will solve the problem. My suggestion: the "Green Sea" (ûÇØôìú). There is absolutely no historical precedent for this particular name. However, there is a nice symmetry with the Yellow Sea that lies between China and Korea on the other side of the peninsula. And the color "green" (ch'ong in Korean) really refers to a blue-green that nicely captures some of the different hues of sea water. And finally, and obviously, it does not favor one side or the other. If you like the idea, pass it on.
