Japan and South Korea clash over islets as old grievances resurface

Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s revival of Tokyo’s claim to islets whose symbolic weight far outweighs their size has rekindled an old dispute that may play well with nationalist supporters at home, but risks derailing hard-won diplomatic progress abroad. Seoul swiftly shot down Takaichi’s assertion last week that the rocky outcrops, known as Takeshima to Japan and Dokdo to South Korea, belong to Tokyo. “Dokdo is clearly our inherent territory,” the presidential office said in a statement on December 9, dismissing the Japanese leader’s remarks in the Diet that same day as unjustified and reiterating that “there is no territorial dispute”. It added that Seoul would “sternly and firmly respond” to any challenges to its sovereignty and insisted the islets were an integral part of Korean territory “historically, geographically and under international law”. The islets, also known internationally as the Liancourt Rocks, have long been a flashpoint in Japan-South Korea relations. Claimed by both nations but effectively controlled by South Korea since the early 1950s, the tiny outcrops sit roughly halfway between South Korea’s Ulleungdo and Japan’s Oki Islands and have come to symbolise unresolved grievances dating back to Japan’s 1910–45 colonial rule of the Korean peninsula. Seoul’s response marked President Lee Jae-myung’s firmest position yet on the issue since taking office in June, underlining how disputes over symbolism and sovereignty can quickly test the country’s ties. ‘A step backwards’ The timing of Takaichi’s comments – in response to a ruling Liberal Democratic Party lawmaker’s claim that the islets were being “illegally occupied” by South Korea – is “not ideal” for either side, according to Stephen Nagy, a professor of politics and international studies at the International Christian University in Tokyo. “In Japan’s case, bringing the dispute up as Beijing is engaged in a sweeping campaign of disinformation and economic coercion seems to be alienating a needed partner in resisting China’s aggressive tactics,” Nagy said, adding that Beijing was “likely celebrating” the squabble. Revisiting the dispute was not in South Korea’s interests either, he said, as it would only serve to undermine its trilateral ties with Japan and the United States, which are seen as central to balancing relations with China and deterring North Korea. Nagy described the episode as “a step backwards in the progress both states have made in their rapprochement”. He added that Washington under US President Donald Trump was unlikely to pressure the two allies “to step back and see the big picture”. Exploiting the rift Tensions between Tokyo and Beijing were already running high after Takaichi’s remarks last month about the possibility of Japan taking military action in defence of Taiwan – comments that drew swift condemnation from Beijing. Beijing views Taiwan as part of China and has not ruled out taking the self-ruled island by force. Most nations, including the US, do not recognise Taiwan as an independent state, but Washington is committed to helping it defend itself. China responded to the Japanese prime minister’s comments by reportedly reinstating its ban on Japanese seafood imports and issuing a travel warning, accusing Tokyo of reviving wartime militarism. Nagy said Beijing might now be tempted to “add fuel to the fire” by spreading disinformation aimed at driving a wedge between Japan and South Korea. “Beijing will do what it can to divide allies of the US,” he said, adding that President Lee was likely to “tilt back” towards engagement with Tokyo under the trilateral format with Washington. February flashpoint? According to Kim So-young, an assistant professor of international studies at the Nagoya University of Commerce and Business in Japan, Takaichi’s remarks were politically consistent with past Japanese rhetoric and unlikely to alter the status quo. She noted that the Japanese prime minister was responding to an LDP lawmaker from Shimane prefecture, under whose jurisdiction Tokyo claims the islets belong. “This makes it relatively easier for the Korean government to control escalation because it has been a long-standing issue,” Kim said. “Given Takaichi’s strongest political support is rooted in nationalists, it would have been difficult for her to respond otherwise.” Kim added that South Korea’s effective control over the islets since the early 1950s meant there was no need for Seoul “to respond proactively, or lash out as China did, because it has effective control over the territory”. Given Takaichi’s strongest political support is rooted in nationalists, it would have been difficult for her to respond otherwise Kim So-young, international studies professor President Lee, who has advocated pragmatic engagement with Japan, recently emphasised that the two nations “share the same front yard” and must overcome historical animosities to cooperate. His government has pledged to keep shuttle diplomacy on track and is reportedly pressing ahead with plans for a bilateral summit in Takaichi’s hometown of Nara early next year. But that pragmatism could soon be tested, according to Kim. On February 22, Shimane prefecture will again host “Takeshima Day”, a controversial commemoration marking Tokyo’s 1905 incorporation of the islets. All eyes will be on whether Takaichi sends a cabinet minister to the ceremony – a pledge she made during her leadership campaign – and how Seoul chooses to respond.

Japan and South Korea clash over islets as old grievances resurface

.css-1c6uqr6{color:inherit;font-weight:inherit;font-size:inherit;font-family:inherit;line-height:inherit;overflow-wrap:break-word;}Analysts warn the squabble is a ‘step backwards’ that offers Beijing a chance to drive a wedge between the two US allies

Analysts warn the squabble is a ‘step backwards’ that offers Beijing a chance to drive a wedge between the two US allies