Sea of Japan naming dispute

Between Japan, North Korea and South Korea, there is an ongoing dispute since 1992 the name of the Japan Sea, which lies between the three countries.

South Korea insists on renaming of the Sea of ​​Japan to the East Sea. Even the name Korean sea is brought into play by South Korea. Other name suggestions South Korea are the sea of peace, friendship and the sea the sea of reconciliation " '. North Korea would like to see the ocean in Korean East Sea renamed but otherwise also supports the proposal of South Korea renamed the " East Sea ". Japan is so far all change requests dismissive of. Russia as another Riparian Party to this sea behaves cautious in this dispute.

So far, the demand North and South Korea by the United Nations Conference on Standardization of Geographical Names ( UNCSGN ) has been neither accepted nor rejected. Until a decision is still the name " Sea of ​​Japan " for international use is recommended. In Japan, the Republic of China, Russia and the People 's Republic of China, the name " Sea of ​​Japan " is still used. In South Korea, the name " East Sea " is by the local government and the South Korean media consistently used, while in North Korea through the name " East Sea of Korea ".

Arguments

Both sides have a number of arguments invoked to support their demands for maintaining or name change. Many of the arguments were put forward not by governments but by nationalist organizations.

Geographical reasons

Japanese groups argue that the North and South Korea forced name " East Sea " is geographically ambiguous. It can, in contrast to the existing name, for example, relate to the East China Sea or confused with translations from local names of other seas, such as the South China Sea, in which the Vietnamese local name Bien dong literally means " East Sea " means. Comparable to the situation with the Baltic Sea, Baltic Sea whose name is used only regionally limited.

North and South Korean groups argue that the sea is located in the eastern part of the Asian continent. The situation is comparable with the North Sea, which derives its name from the northern location in Europe.

Historical reasons

Designation of the sea in historical maps

Both sides put selected examples of historical maps to support their claim. Japan argues with historical maps, which bear the name " Sea of ​​Japan ", but not from its colonial period. South Korea argues with historical maps that do not contain the name " Sea of ​​Japan ". However, the old maps are often ambiguous and some show neither Japan nor Korea.

A part of the name dispute is reduced to the question of when the name " Sea of ​​Japan " the de facto standard was:

Japanese groups argue that the name " Sea of ​​Japan " was originally coined by Europeans and brought by them to the de - facto standard. Reference is made to the early 19th century after the evaluation of maps, a time before Japan economic and political influence gained in the region, including with respect to the naming of the sea.

South Korean groups when available, to the early 20th century, when Korea was annexed to the Japanese Empire. Therefore, North and South Korea see the current dominance of the name " Sea of ​​Japan " as a reflection of Japan's imperial past.

Studies of historical maps

In July 2001, South Korea issued a report about cards from Europe. The cards came mostly from the 19th century and have been restored in the British Library. From 377 cards, which also show that sea, it shall designate 72 as the " Sea of Korea " and / or " East Sea " and 10 boards using the name " Sea of ​​Japan ".

In 2002, the University of Southern California ( USC) published on the internet its digital archive of topic-specific cards - 172 cards from the 17th and 19th centuries. Name for this sea emerge until the 18th century. " Sea of Korea " or " East Sea " is 95 - times used as a name, while the name " Sea of ​​Japan " appears only once. On the maps of the 19th century, nine times " Sea of ​​Japan " and 30 times " Korean Sea" is used. From a total of 165 maps of the collection use 135 the term " Sea of Korea " or " East Sea " and only ten " Sea of ​​Japan ".

In December 2002, South Korea issued a report on the names to 228 cards that were issued before 1800 and owned by the U.S. Library of Congress. According to this report bear two-thirds of the cards the name " East Sea ", " Sea of Korea " or similar variants.

The South Korean " Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries " notes that in its analysis of 763 historical maps in various government authorities and university libraries around the world, 440 times the name " Sea of Korea ", " East Sea " or a variant emerges.

The answer lay in September 2003 Japan a report on the designation on European maps, which were published 1801-1861, and have been evaluated by the British Library and the University of Cambridge. Of the 37 cards of the British Library, representing the area around the sea, use 32 the name " Sea of ​​Japan " and 5 the name " Sea of Korea ". In the University of Cambridge 21 cards were found, 18 of them the name " Sea of ​​Japan " and 3 the name " Sea of Korea " used.

In March 2004, the Japanese Foreign Ministry released a report with a list of maps of the French National Library. Of the 1495 examined Cards ( published between the 16th and 19th century) use 407 a name for the sea, 249 times " Sea of ​​Japan " and 60 times " Korean Sea". Unable to find any map that used the name " East Sea ". Furthermore cards from the first half of the 19th century were examined. Of these, 90 % used (99 cards) the name " Sea of ​​Japan ". Cards that were printed in the second half of the 19th century, used to 100 % (105 cards) the name " Sea of ​​Japan ".

Another report of the Japanese Foreign Ministry on the name dispute deals with maps in the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. Of the 1435 cards representing the disputed sea, 1110 using the name " Sea of ​​Japan ".

On 18 February 2010 put the " Korea Maritime Institute " a study, according to the studied of about 20,000 historical maps that come from one of the largest private collections (David Rumsey Collection Web site), only 6% of the name " East Sea " wear. 55 % of the cards were labeled " Sea of ​​Japan" and in another 35 % the sea area had no name.

Possession claims

North Korea and South Korean groups argue that the name " Sea of ​​Japan " claim to ownership of an international waters represented as the Japanese proposal to the International Hydrographic Organization ( IHO ) for this name and the subsequent official naming took place at a time in Korea a Japanese colony. In this regard, the current name is not perceived as neutral.

From the Japanese side from is emphasized, however, that it represents any proprietary interest in this sea and it is merely a name.

Further arguments for maintaining the current name

Precedent

Furthermore, it is also led by the Japanese side from that the renaming would be a disruptive end precedent. The order or double designation would be contrary to the spirit of the geographical standardization. Since the name " Sea of ​​Japan " is introduced internationally, a renaming would be a preventable complication.

Further arguments for the amendment of the current name

Country names independence

As the sea can theoretically be separated by the exclusive economic zones of the individual countries, it is South Korea "inappropriate" and not justifiable to perform a uniform naming without the consent of all the sea surrounding countries.

Age of names

From the Korean side, it is argued that the name " East Sea " is significantly older than the name " Sea of ​​Japan ". The first evidence of the use of this term comes from the Gwanggaeto Stele (414 AD). Another use of the term in the Samguk Sagi (written in 1145 ) and the book on the history of the Three Kingdoms Chinese author Luo Guanzhong († 1400 ). In Japan, however, there was at that time the term " Sea of ​​Japan " is not, there was at this time that part of the Pacific Ocean nameless. For the first time documented this term is on the cards and in the reports of the Jesuit Matteo Ricci by the year 1600.

Reactions of the media and publishing

Most publishers in the world continue to use only the name " Sea of ​​Japan ". This case is applied, for example, for German school atlases. Few publishers and editors have been received on the name dispute, in that they received both names in their cards. So there are in Germany so far only one publisher who can print this way. Of the larger publishers, these are globally the U.S. publisher Rand McNally and the Encyclopedia Britannica. In a few cases, the area was left without a name. Some publishers have adopted the name " East Sea " without further additives. How Google Earth displays this name as a sole name near the coast of South Korea on, but in all other areas the name " Sea of ​​Japan ".

1999 recognized the National Geographic Society that South Korea has the right to the name " Sea of ​​Japan " to challenge. Since then called the National Geographical Society, the waters in the form of " Sea of ​​Japan ( East Sea ) ." It is their general policy officially add controversial names in parentheses.

By 2002, a voluntary, South Korean cyber organization had begun with an aggressive e -mail campaign to Webmaster, with the primary aim to replace the name " Sea of ​​Japan " by the North and South Korea favored the name " East Sea ". This group has experienced both successes and setbacks caused by the backlash from supporters of the current marine name.

Historical development of the name dispute

1919 held a conference on the designation of water bodies with internationally accepted name of the IHO. At the time, only the name " Sea of ​​Japan " for use at international cards. The Japanese delegation therefore submitted as an official name of proposing the name " Sea of ​​Japan ". Since Korea was incorporated since 1910 as a Japanese colony in the Japanese Empire, and thus at the time of the IHO Conference has long ceased to exist, there was therefore no possibility of attendance for this now former country. The first gazetteer of the IHO Limits of Oceans and Seas (1928 ) thus contained the name " Sea of ​​Japan ".

1974 published independently of this dispute the technical resolution A.4.2.6 the IHO. Although in this resolution only general guidelines are included, is often referred to. The resolution describes that in cases of disputed geographical names, both names must be used simultaneously. This should especially apply when the same geographical unit extends over both countries.

1977, the Council adopted Resolution names of geographic units outside of a single sovereign state ( III/20 ) the third UN Conference on the standardization of geographical names ( UNSCGN ). This resolution recommends:

" When States share a geographical unit and can not agree on a common name, it should be a general rule in cartography to accept both names. Just to take a name and exclude the other would unkonsequent and impractical in practice. "

1992 South Korea sought to bring the issue on the agenda of the 6th UNCSGN conference. Through an appeal of Japan's application was rejected.

1995 put South Korea, contrary to the resolutions listed above, the name " Sea of ​​Japan " from its official nautical charts. Until then, both designation were according to the international convention on the South Korean charts printed - " Sea of ​​Japan " and " East Sea ".

1997 South Korea said the issue again at the 7th Conference on UNCSGN. Further discussion was rejected by the opposition in Japan. Both countries were again pointed and asked to come to an agreement on the above-mentioned resolution III/20. To date, however, neither country is willing to sacrifice his position a compromise.

2002 failed the request of South Korea to bring the issue on the agenda of the 8th conference on UNSCGN Japanese opposition.

In 2002, the IHO issued a circular in which they call for a vote on unresolved questions - called - among other things for the name " Sea of ​​Japan ". Specifically, it was open sides of the fourth edition of Limits of Ocean and Sea. After an appeal of Japan, the letter was withdrawn.

2004 confirmed on 23 April in a letter to the Japanese government that in official documents, also the name " Sea of ​​Japan " is used the UN. However, the issue is kept open for further discussion. In a letter to South Korea stressed the same institution, that it would not rule on the validity of the two names, but am going to use the currently most widely used name for so long, until the two sides have settled their differences.

2006, during the APEC in November, were made by the South Korean government several other proposals for renaming of the Sea ( " Sea of Peace", "Sea of ​​Friendship " and " Sea of Reconciliation" ). In early 2007, this proposal was rejected by the Japanese side. This was justified by the lack of need for a name change.