Journalism 101
It must be tough for English-language newspapers in Japan to recruit competent journalists. That’s the only reason I can think of for the Japan Times to print columns such as this one by Philip Brasor. If Brasor were a blogger, he’d be folding up his website inside of a month.
His column is called Media Mix, for reasons that I’ve never understood. The media is not really Brasor’s subject matter, but then his subject matter is not really well defined. It’s apparently whatever floats through Brasor’s head when he sits down to write, but that changes from week to week, and sometimes sentence to sentence.
This week Brasor turned his attention to what he considers Japanese political apathy, which he unconvincingly uses as a springboard to talk about Japanese foreign policy in general and South Korean- and Sino-Japanese relations in particular. How bad can a bad column get? Take a look:
…in 1905…the Meiji government unilaterally incorporated Takeshima into Shimane Prefecture and later that year revoked Korea’s diplomatic rights. Five years later it annexed the Korean Peninsula, so Koreans view the 1905 declaration as the first step toward colonization.
Phil, Koreans tend to have a Korea-centric view of the galaxy, and it’s not necessary for you to share it. Instead, pick up a history book—any one will do—and find out what else happened in 1905. Don’t be surprised if you stumble across a reference to the Russo-Japanese War. That war had significant naval battles—the Japanese decimated the Russian fleet in the Strait of Tsushima—and the first step the Japanese took was to secure its position in the Sea of Japan. One part of this strategy was occupying Takeshima/Dokto.
Claiming a connection doesn’t mean it actually exists. Some Koreans think that Shimane Prefecture’s declaration of a Takeshima Day is the first step in the Japanese effort to recolonize South Korea. A few years ago, some people in a group called Heaven’s Gate thought if they castrated themselves, the spaceship hiding in the tail of the Hale-Bopp Comet would take them to paradise. Take my word for it, Phil, you don’t have to believe any of them.
After the war, Japan avoided discussing the fate of Tok-do, and Korea took advantage of this reticence by occupying it. But no formal negotiations have ever been carried out.
Stick with us here. It’s not every columnist who can spin a military occupation and subsequent refusal to negotiate into a legitimate territorial claim, but Phil tries to pull it off.
There is no real advantage to Japan in its claim, except maybe some fish.
We don’t know how many fish Phil thinks is “some”, but unlike Phil, we do know the value of Takeshima/Dokto for the maritime industry. The annual crab catch alone is estimated at 765 million yen (more than US$ 7.1 million), and that’s not counting the finfish.
It’s easy enough for a guy sitting on his putz in front of a PC in Tokyo to dismiss the advantage of a territorial claim as “maybe some fish”. It’s not so easy for the fishermen of Shimane Prefecture, who have to go out on the boats every day to make a living. Has Phil found out yet that the uproar in Shimane started because the Japanese believe the Koreans are violating a fishing agreement by overfishing the area and preventing Japanese fishermen from using it? I would say it’s unlikely.
It would be in Japan’s interest if, as a gesture, it gave up all claims to the island. In turn, the South Koreans might support them on territorial disputes with China and Russia that are more vital to Japan’s interests, as well help them with the North Korean abduction issue.
Now that the laughter has died down, let’s take a closer look at the problems this gesture would create. The first problem with this gesture is the idea that ceding Takeshima/Dokto to the Koreans would win the Japanese good will. About the only thing it would win the Japanese is louder and more belligerent claims from the Koreans, as anyone who has observed Korean-Japanese relations over the years would realize.
The second problem is the idea that South Koreans might then support Japan in its territorial disputes with China and Russia. Phil, most politicians in South Korea would rather neuter themselves with an old shovel than support Japan in a territorial dispute. Finally, has Brasor stopped to think how Messrs. Hu and Putin would react if South Korea chimed in on Japan’s behalf? Stifling a yawn would be my guess.
And Phil doesn’t bother to tell us why the four small islands to the north of Hokkaido would be more vital to Japanese interests than Takeshima/Dokto.
Koreans obviously feel an attachment to Tok-do that very few Japanese feel toward Takeshima.
That’s true, Phil, and the attachment stems from the Korean belief that they’re sticking it to the Japanese by holding on to the islands. Just because people feel an attachment does not justify their behavior. An American university professor suggested to the South Koreans that they take their Takeshima/Dokto claim to the World Court, telling them he thought they probably would win.
The Koreans rejected the idea out of hand because there was a chance, no matter how slim, that they might lose the case. That would force them to bear the unbearable. The whole point for them is to get the better of the Japanese in any situation in any way they can.
Brasor’s thinking is yet another example of the influence of the Politics of Emotion on political discourse. South Korea feels very strongly about it, and more strongly than Japan does, so that must mean they’re right. Using Phil’s logic, we could argue that the Dear Leader, Shogun-sama Kim Jong-il himself, is actually one cool dude with those shades instead of a sybaritic butcher running one of the most repressive regimes on earth. We only have to remember how unglued the North Korean cheerleaders became when they saw a banner welcoming the North Korean team to South Korea for the Universiade games two years ago. Now that’s attachment.
Hey, maybe we could apply this philosophy to the Six-Party talks! No need for all the endless wrangling and posturing. They could just rent a gym, hold a pep rally, and the country whose team yelled the loudest and with the most spirit would win. Just like in high school.
Speaking of high school, that’s where I’d expect to see such poorly considered ideas so poorly presented—the high school newspaper. Even if an English-language newspaper in Japan is an afterthought, you’d think they could do better than this.
Poor Mari….she’s my favorite. If I ever become a j-pop singer and part of the...
Shes definitely at the top of my hot list.
perfeckt 10:10
Do you hate Korean people or is it my imagination?
April 21st, 2005 at 5:43 amSorry if that came out wrong. It was meant as a joke, but it’s not that funny now that I think about it. Please delete it.
April 21st, 2005 at 5:54 amThanks.
“Do you hate Korean people or is it my imagination?”
It’s your imagination. You can find Koreans saying the same things about themselves, and besides, I’m talking about only one segment of society. Check back with Killing the Buzz for what I see as the good aspects of J-K relations.
For the record: I’ve been studying the Korean language for several years, and enjoy it. I have been to South Korea twice, and loved it. If I could find a way to go there regularly and get paid for it, I’d do it. (It’s real close to Kyushu.) All the Korean folks I’ve met have been a lot of fun and easy to get along with (including the college guy who told me that he detested Americans and wanted to teach all Japanese to detest Americans too.
I’ve long thought that the Japanese and the Koreans are like two sides of the same coin, and that’s why I remain interested in the country, the people, and the language.
The behavior of some people in the country is pretty straightforward, however, and I’m not making any of it up. It’s all out there in the open. Some of it is also excellent subject matter, and there you have it.
April 21st, 2005 at 9:45 amI was just kidding anyway, but it came out a lot differently then I intended.
April 22nd, 2005 at 2:53 amBut come on, you just want to learn Korean to meet girls. Be honest.
I have to agree with you guys here at japundit. For the most part the korean side of the aruguement is full of shit.
amen
April 22nd, 2005 at 3:01 pmOne more thing. it looks like Koizume appologized. THe koreans are all screaming that the appology was not sincere and was not “real” and is invalid becasue some small time nationalist said that Takeshima is Japanese. How pathetic of the Koreans.
April 22nd, 2005 at 3:07 pmCareful, PH, that’s not how I would characterize our position.
April 22nd, 2005 at 3:54 pmA journalist is supposed to be fair; next time try representing both sides of an argument.:roll:
April 22nd, 2005 at 6:34 pmJapanese troops were (“legally”) patrolling the streets of Seoul in January 1904. Japan claimed Dokdo/Takeshima in February 1904.
(Prior to that (1894) it suppressed Korea’s “Tonghak rebellion.” And the list goes on…..)
BTW, in 1908 Japan claimed the non-existing, imaginary island of 中の鳥島. The mood in Japan was just expantionalist to the core. It didn’t claim imaginary islands to fight the Russians (like that would make it legal) or for that matter anyone else. See some of these: http://tinyurl.com/dxtyl
I’m guessing that is one of the parts people think look hateful. I don’t see the difference between your overreaction to Korean overreactions and Korean overreactions. So what if Koreans get “too” excited about certain issues? You say it doesn’t make them right, but you fail to explain how it makes them wrong.
April 22nd, 2005 at 10:07 pm“Japanese troops were (”legally”) patrolling the streets of Seoul in January 1904. Japan claimed Dokdo/Takeshima in February 1904. ”
I of course mean 1905 for both.
April 22nd, 2005 at 10:12 pmAndrew, in my somewhat extensive experience I can say that while Koreans on the whole are probably more beautiful, the advantage to dating them ends there — at least when compared with Japanese women
April 22nd, 2005 at 10:19 pmBut that was an awesome post, Japundit. Thx.
[...] 7;s position. On a similar yet unrelated note, Ampontan at Japundit has a wicked post on bad journalism in Japan (of which there is plenty in the domestic English language press) [...]
April 22nd, 2005 at 11:52 pmCurzon,
April 23rd, 2005 at 1:58 amYeah I don’t know much about Korean women as a whole, since I have only dated one, albeit for 5 years.
I live in Korea, I teach American history and I’ve always been baffled by the legality of one country claiming a chunk of land. dokdo/takeshima needs a JSA like the one on the 38th parallel. no casting your fishing nets on my side! seriously, the US should use the rocks for bombing practice again (check the wikipedia links on liancourt rocks), and this time, they should make sure they blow the f*ers out of the water. or lets just give all the fishermen switchblades and let them play ‘king of the rock’ with the score of ‘west side story’ playing in the background…
April 23rd, 2005 at 2:01 pm“Japanese troops were (”legally”) patrolling the streets of Seoul in January (1905).”
Indeed, the Japanese had military control of the Korean Peninsula before the annexation of T/D, which is why I don’t understand the logic of claiming that the annexation was the first step toward colonization. Even if you make the assumption that the annexation was related (which is not a given), it would seem that steps one through about 50 had already been taken.
“BTW, in 1908 Japan claimed the non-existing, imaginary island of 中の鳥島.”
There’s a lot of this weirdness to go around on both sides. I’m sure you’re aware of the importance of the word “visible” regarding T/D. The Koreans have made two completely different claims about which land this refers to, on different occasions, when it suited their interests.
I hope to have a post on this sometime this week.
April 23rd, 2005 at 3:48 pm“the Japanese had military control of the Korean Peninsula before the annexation of T/D, which is why I don’t understand the logic of claiming that the annexation was the first step toward colonization.”
No one ever said annexation was the first step towards colonization, at least no in Korea, where annexation is usually seen at the final step in colonization.
“There’s a lot of this weirdness to go around on both sides.”
??
I’d be very, very surprised to find anything Korea (at anywhere close to the same time period) that even comes close to claiming islands that don’t exist.
BTW, since you mention the Russo-japanese war… you do remember what they were fighting over, right?
Saying the Japanese only took Dokdo as part of the Russo-Japanese war (and that seems to have been what you said) is problematic because the war was in part a fight for control of Korea. So it’s like saying “Japan only took control of the islets in a war that was about taking control of the whole peninsula.”
Whatever final conclusions one makes about who owns the islands, Koreans have plenty of basis (in historical context) to assume Japan’s 1905 action on D/T to have been part of the agression against it. I might add that IMHO even if Japan _does_ have a claim to them I would think a country that keeps saying it keeps apologizing would at the very least be a little more sensitive about it. If Koizumi really does profoundly “regret” the past agression, you would think he wouldn’t talk about D/T as if is just any other bilateral issue, even if he actually does believe D/T is Japan’s.
April 24th, 2005 at 10:30 amThe comments regarding my Media Mix column of Apr. 17 in the Japan Times were all very interesting though most of the overheated comments in “Journalism 101″ seem beside the point with regards to the purpose of the column. I was discussing an article in the Asahi Shimbun written by Yoshinobu Wakamiya that was derided by the Japanese media because he suggested in very guarded language that maybe it wasn’t such a bad idea to let Korea have Tok-do/Takeshima for diplomatic reasons alone. Wakamiya’s version of history may seem selective to the person who wrote “Journalism 101,” but the purpose was to show how Japan’s claims on the islands are related to its pre-war expansionist policies only.
Wakamiya doesn’t claim that because Koreans have a greater emotional stake in Tok-do than Japanese have in Takeshima it makes the Koreans “right.” The point he was trying to make is that, diplomatically speaking, Japan can use the issue as leverage. Since the war, the Japanese government avoids anything that will remind them of their colonization of Korea, so the assertion that Takeshima is Japanese is merely reflexive, a response to Shimane prefecture’s declaration of Takeshima Day, which was obviously made to provoke Tokyo not Seoul (since Shimane wants those fish). Wakamiya says that Tokyo has little to lose by giving up its claim to the islands and a lot to gain, and I think he has a point. However, the media won’t discuss such a possibility since its smacks of appeasement.
I won’t argue with the “Journalism 101″ author’s view that “Koreans have a Korea-centric view of the galaxy” or that “most politicians in South Korea would rather neuter themselves with an old shovel than support Japan in a territorial dispute.” Wakamiya, who was educated in Korea and has written extensively about the country, obviously feels South Koreans aren’t quite so close-minded. But someone has to budge and when they do the other side will have to acknowledge it.
April 24th, 2005 at 11:30 am“No one ever said annexation was the first step towards colonization, at least no in Korea, where annexation is usually seen at the final step in colonization.”
Take a look again at the column we’re talking about; Brasor says it was about the views of a man educated in Korea. The phrase “first step” appears there.
It also appears in this column, written by a man who studied in Korea 23 years ago and then conducted a recent dialog with a Korean journalist for the Asahi newspaper.
http://www.asahi.com/english/column/TKY200504020132.html
Presumably these folks are coming up with this idea by talking to Koreans. Then again, maybe I shouldn’t take journalists so seriously.
April 24th, 2005 at 3:40 pmAbout Japan Times.
I think many people still remember the Fred Varcoe incident.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,881746,00.html
So Japan Times got a penalty from Korean government.
Now what they have to do is hiring the foreign journalist who speak for Korean interest.
Do you guys notice that Ueto Aya praise Korea frequently when she appears on TV.
May 2nd, 2005 at 9:18 pmLast year, she was accused of being ignorant about Korea. (She thought Korea was not a foreign country!)
Yes, she got a penalty too.
[...] ne too complimentary about articles written in The Japan Times by Roger Pulvers, here, and Phillip Brasor, here. But to give credit where credit is due, both make good points in to [...]
May 9th, 2005 at 12:48 pm