Basic Position of the Republic of Korea on the ‘East Sea’ naming issue
1. The sea area between the Korean Peninsula and the Japanese Archipelago has been called the “East Sea” for more than 2,000 years as evidenced in numerous historical documents. The book, “Samguk Sagi(History of the Three Kingdoms)”, which was written by a government official and prominent historian Kim Busik in 1145, shows that the name “East Sea”
was used from around 50 B.C in the ancient kingdoms of Korea.
Numerous literary and geographic works also show that the name “East Sea” has been closely connected to the daily lives of Korean people for more than 2,000 years. As the naming issue cannot be separated from history, culture and identity of a nation, when it comes to a name for any geographical feature, the views of countries directly concerned should be fully respected.
2. The name "East Sea" is gaining wide acceptance at the international level.
An increasing number of atlases, books, and papers refer to the sea area in question as "East Sea", alone or together with "Sea of Japan." For instance, the world’s prominent cartographers, publishers, and medias, such as National Geographic, The Times Books, Le Grand Atlas, Le Figaro, The Economist, and CNN, use the dual name of “East Sea” and
“Sea of Japan” in their publications and articles. Most recently, the Austrian Board on Geographical Names (AKO) recommended the concurrent use of “Ostmeer (East Sea)” and “Japanisches Meer (Sea of Japan) in “Recommendations for the rendering of geographical names in Austrian educational media.” A recent survey by the Korean Government demonstrates that the proportion of usage of the name “East Sea” in commercial maps worldwide has increased tenfold in 2009, representing a sharp increase compared to that in 2000. These statistics are a strong indication of the international trend towards recognizing the name “East Sea” contrary to Japan’s claims that the name “Sea of Japan” is the one and only internationally established name for the sea area concerned. The international community should recognize this undeniable reality and give the name “East Sea” the right place in international geographical nomenclature.
3. It is a general rule of international cartography that when there is no agreement on a common name among the countries concerned sharing a given geographical feature, the name used by each of the countries concerned will be accepted. This general rule of international cartography
is enshrined in the UNCSGN Resolution III/20 and IHO Technical Resolution A.4.2.6.1 The UNCSGN Resolution also states that a policy of accepting only one or some of such names while excluding the rest would be inconsistent in principle as well as inexpedient in practice. Thus, the concurrent use of the name “East Sea” and “Sea of Japan” is the most reasonable solution in accordance with international norms.
4. The use of the name “East Sea” enhances navigational safety. Given that the number of ships navigating the sea area between the Korean Peninsula and the Japanese Archipelago annually reaches around 400,000, it is important to provide sailors with full and accurate information not to make any confusion on the names of oceans.
5. The concurrent use of “East Sea” and “Sea of Japan” is the most reasonable solution in the absence of agreement on a single name. It does not exclude one name at the expense of the other. /End/
1 UNCSGN Resolution III/20
The Conference,
Considering the need for international standardization of names of geographical features that are under the sovereignty of more than one country or are divided among two or more countries,
1. Recommends that countries sharing a given geographical feature under different names should endeavor, as far as possible, to reach agreement on fixing a single name for the feature concerned;
2. Further recommends that when countries sharing a given geographical feature do not succeed in agreeing on a common name, it should be a general rule of international cartography that the name used by each of the countries concerned will be accepted. A policy of accepting only one or some of such names while excluding the rest would be inconsistent in principle as well as inexpedient in practice. Only technical reasons may sometimes make it necessary, especially in the case of small-scale maps, to dispense with the use of certain names belonging to one language or another.
IHO Technical Resolution A.4.2.6
It is recommended that when two or more countries share a given geographical feature (such as, for example, a bay, strait, channel or archipelago) under a different name form, they should endeavor to reach agreement on fixing a single name for the feature concerned. If they have different official languages and cannot agree on a common name form, it is recommended that the name forms of each of the languages in question should be accepted for charts and publications unless technical reasons prevent this practice on small scale charts. e.g. English Channel/La Manche.
