Abstract
This paper explores new patterns, from the perspective of colonial history and international politics, which might have been overlooked in previous studies of Dokdo, a Korean Island, particularly those conducted by foreign scholars. This study emphasizes that Japan’s history of aggression is the origin of the Dokdo issue, and Japan’s move to incorporate Dokdo in 1905 was actually in the line of Japan’s imperialistic aggression. This study found a few interesting patterns which may be observed from events related to Dokdo that arose during the transfer of presidential power in the United States. These findings highlight the need to pay particular attention to the first year, the so-called honeymoon period and the last year, the so-called lame duck period of American administrations, particularly the Democratic Party, with regard to changes in the American position on or policy towards Dokdo. This study suggests that it will be necessary to conduct an analysis of the probability that the government of a country, that is, Japan, for example, when faced with a drop in public approval or domestic unease, might attempt to provoke another country. This paper also introduces the empirical report that measured twenty-two factors in a total of forty-two territorial dispute cases worldwide containing the context of history (for example, “historic animosity”) as well as the context of international politics (for example, “US interest”), showing that most of the cases in Northeast Asia are measured as having a “very high” level of ‘historic animosity’ and ‘US interest.’ It is strongly recommended that the aggressors or colonizers in history should recognize the original territorial sovereignty of de-colonized or despoiled nations, and return the invaded territories.
LINK