Sea of Japan naming dispute

There is a dispute over using the name "Sea of Japan" to refer to the sea bordered by Russia, Japan, North Korea, and South Korea. Although Sea of Japan, or equivalent translations, are commonly used in international productions, North and South Korea are proposing different names.

North Korea proposes the "East Sea of Korea"¹ and South Korea proposes the "East Sea",² or the "Sea of Korea/Korean Sea" ³ instead of, or as a name concurrent with, "Sea of Japan".

Arguments

South Korean groups argue that "East Sea" should be implemented as a historically and geographically appropriate name, claiming that the sea was known as "Sea of Korea/Corea/Joseon" or "East/Oriental Sea" until Japan's militant expansionism. ⁴ They insist the title "Sea of Japan" was unfairly standardized during Japanese rule of Korea, and thus remains a symbol of Japan's imperialistic past. Korea argues that during the critical period for asserting the name East Sea in the international arena, Korea was militarily occupied by Japan and Koreas sovereignty was less influential and therefore had no diplomatic representation on the global stage.³ Koreans were forced to surrender the use of their native language under the Japanese rule (1938~), and adopted Japanese names (1940~), while Korean geographical names including the East Sea (Donghae - 동해/東海) were dropped in favour of Japanese ones.³ Korea's position is that while "Sea of Korea" is actually the more common historical European name, "East Sea," without reference to a specific country, is more neutral.⁵

Since the 1990s, South Korea has been making efforts to change the official international name referring to the sea. The North Korean government supports South Korea's position,⁶ but uses "East Sea of Korea" in its English publications instead."¹⁷

Japan protests that the name "Sea of Japan" had internationally established itself as a single name by the early 19th century during a period in which Japan was under the isolation policy (Sakoku).⁸⁹ Accordingly, they state, Japan could at that time have had no influence on the international community in regards to the naming of the sea.¹⁰

Both sides in the dispute have put forward a number of arguments to support their claim. Some of these arguments are not supported by the respective governments, but rather by nationalist organizations^{citation needed}. Around 2002, the volunteer Korean online organization VANK began an aggressive e-mail campaign (like a cyber spam attack) aimed at webmasters, with some success, but also backlash from supporters of Japan's position.¹¹

Geographical reasons

Japan argues that because the marginal sea is separated by the Japanese Archipelago from the Pacific Ocean, the sea was named Sea of Japan.¹² Of the nine other marginal seas, two are named for the marginal feature (see Marginal sea). Korea argues ¹³ that the adjective “East” describes its geographical position east of the Asian continent, although it is west of Japan and south of Russia; this is analogous to the North Sea, which lies north of the European continent, but west of Scandinavian countries and east of Great Britain.

Historical reasons

South Korea and Japan use selective samples of old European maps to support their respective claims. South Korea points to maps that show "Sea of Korea" or "East Sea", whereas Japan points to maps that show "Sea of Japan" to argue that the name was in use before the rise of Japanese imperialism. Many old maps are ambiguous and some do not even include Korea or Japan.⁸⁹

Part of the dispute boils down to the disagreement over when "Sea of Japan" became the de facto standard. Japan claims that the term "Sea of Japan" was originally used by Westerners and became the de facto standard before Japan gained commercial and political influence over other nations.¹² Japan's claims date to the early 19th century,⁸⁹ whereas Korea claims Japan promoted the "Sea of Japan" name in the early 20th century when Korea was colonized by Japan.³

Korea's argument for "East Sea" stems from their claim that the term was used in European maps before the 20th century¹⁴. Japan counters by saying "there was no map that used only the name 'East Sea' by itself.¹⁵"

South Korea pointed out that a few 19th-century Japanese maps even referred to the sea as the "Sea of Joseon (Korea)",¹⁶ including the 1855 Matsuda Ryokuzan's (松田緑山) Chikyubankoku zenzu (地球万國全図), and the 1870 Meiji kaitei bankoku yochibunzu (明治改訂万國輿地分図). ¹⁷ Additionally, in several Japanese maps, the Pacific Ocean was called Dainihon kai "大日本海" (the Great Sea of Japan), and the Korean Peninsula side of the Sea of Japan was called Chōsen-kai "朝鮮海" (Sea of Korea).¹⁸

Ambiguity

Japanese groups claim¹⁹ that the name "East Sea" is not suitable as an international geographic name, because it could refer to various places including the neighbouring East China Sea,²⁰ and used as compound words such as the East Sea Fleet and the East Sea Bridge. Much of this argument is based on translations of local names into English. Potential confusions are the Chinese local name for the East China Sea, Dōng Hǎi (东海), which can be translated as "East Sea", the Vietnamese local language name for the South China Sea, "Bien Dong", which can be translated as "East Sea",²¹ or the Baltic Sea which in many European languages is called the equivalent of "East Sea".²²²³ Additionally, the Timor Sea is called Laut Timor in Indonesian, basically meaning the East Sea, as Timor is a variation on the word for East, Timur.

Historical developments of the dispute

In 1928, Limits of Oceans and Seas, the first edition of the guideline by the IHB, adopted the "Japan Sea", among many other geographical names. At the time, Korea could not participate because it was under Japanese occupation. Therefore, South Korea insists that the "Sea of Japan" has been used almost exclusively on international maps, although the parties disagree on when and which name was previously prevalent.

Since the early 1970s, South Koreans have argued against the "Sea of Japan" name.²⁴

In 1974, IHO released technical resolution A.4.2.6 independently of this dispute. This resolution is frequently referred to, although it only gives general guidance. It endorses the principle that when the sharing countries of a geographical feature do not agree on a common name, the different names should be recognized simultaneously.

In 1977, the third UN Conference on the Standardization of Geographical Names (UNCSGN) adopted resolution III/20 entitled "Names of Features beyond a Single Sovereignty". The resolution recommended:

In 1986, Draft for the fourth edition of the guideline of IHO, Limits of Oceans and Seas (S-23), was completed and the "Sea of Japan" appeared as a sole appellation. South Korea did not raise an objection against the name "Sea of Japan."

In 1992, South Korea raised the issue at the sixth UNCSGN. Japan objected and the issue was not addressed.

In 1995, South Korea deleted "Japan Sea" from its official nautical charts. Before then, South Korea's nautical charts showed both "Japan Sea" and "Tong Hae" (the then used romanization of "Donghae"), out of respect for international conventions.

In 1997, South Korea raised the issue again at the seventh UNCSGN and Japan opposed. The issue was not addressed but the resolution III/20 was recollected, which urges Japan and South Korea to reach a consensus. To date, however, neither country is willing to compromise their position, although Korea suggests that both names be used until the dispute is resolved.

In 2002, South Korea raised the issue again at the eighth UNCSGN. Japan objected again and the issue was not addressed.

In 2002, the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) distributed a circular letter asking for a vote for omitting pages containing the Sea of Japan from the fourth edition of Limits of Oceans and Seas. After Japan's objection, the IHO withdrew the letter.

On April 23, 2004, the United Nations affirmed in a written document to the Japanese government that it will continue using the name "Sea of Japan" in its official documents. However, it has agreed to leave the topic open for further discussion. In a letter to South Korea, it was explained that the UN was not determining the validity of either name, but using the currently most widely used term until the parties resolved the disagreement.

In 2006, some members of the National Assembly of South Korea formed a private organization to promote "Sea of Korea" as the international name.²⁵²⁶²⁷

In November 2006, during an APEC summit, South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun made a casual suggestion to Prime Minister of Japan Shinzo Abe the possibility of a "name such as 'Sea of Peace'". The prime minister called off the issue for a later time. ²⁸²⁹³⁰

Current stance of the international organizations

The United Nations Conference on the Standardization of Geographical Names (UNCSGN) and the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) have so far neither accepted nor denied South Korea's claims, but left the issue open to discussion while continuing to use "Sea of Japan". The United Nations confirmed its adoption of "Sea of Japan" in its official documents in March 2004, ³¹, but also stated that "the practice of the UN Secretariat is to use, in the absence of an internationally agreed standard, the most widespread and generally recognized denomination. This practice is without any prejudice to the position of any Member State of the United Nations on a particular appellation and does not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations. The use of an appellation by the Secretariat based on the practice is without prejudice to any negotiations or agreements between the interested parties and should not be interpreted as advocating or endorsing any party’s position, and can in no way be invoked by any party in support of a particular position in the matter." ³²

IHO and UNSCGN resolutions endorse the principle of the simultaneous use of different names when countries sharing a geographical feature do not agree on a common name. ³³

On August 27, 2007, the Ninth Conference on the Standardization of Geographical Names elected to retain the title of the body of water as "Sea of Japan". F. J. Ormeling, chair of the session, stated, "I encourage the three countries concerned to find a solution acceptable to all of them, taking into account any relevant solutions, or else to agree to differ and to report the outcome of these discussions to the next conference."³⁴

Response of media and publishers

Some publishers and media outlets have responded to the dispute by either adopting both names on maps, or—in very rare cases—leaving the area blank, until a consensus can be reached between Japan and Korea.

Historical maps and studies

Contents