Rebuttal to Japan’s Arguments
1. [Japan’s argument: The name "Sea of Japan" is the only internationally established name for the sea area between the Korean Peninsula and the Japanese Archipelago.]
(ROK’s response) "East Sea" is a firmly established name in both the domestic and international arena. The name "East Sea" has been used for more than 2,000 years and to the 75 million people living on the Korean Peninsula the sea area is known by no other name than "East Sea." The name "East Sea" is also widely used in world maps and media reports. The world’s prominent atlases, papers and books such as National Geographic, Rand McNally, The Economist and The Times use both names for the sea area.
2. [Japan’s argument: the ROK held no objections to the name “Sea of Japan”
until the Sixth United Nations Conference on the Standardization of Geographical Names (UNCSGN) in 1992.]
(ROK’s response) The Republic of Korea has been raising the issue of naming the sea area in question for decades. For example, during the process of negotiations on the Fisheries Agreement between the Republic of Korea and Japan in 1965, the two parties, unable to reach agreement, decided to use their respective names to refer to the sea area between the two countries. Korea has never accepted the name "Japan Sea" at any time in history.1
3. [Japan’s argument: the UNCSGN Resolution III/20 and IHO Technical Resolution A.4.2.6. are not relevant to the issue of naming the sea area in question because “East Sea” is not a geographical feature under the sovereignty of any country.]
1 Japan claims that the Republic of Korea accepted the name “Sea of Japan” on the 1966 International Convention on Load Lines by joining the Convention in 1969. However, the Convention deals with the limits to which ships may be loaded without affecting maritime safety, not the naming of sea areas. The ROK’s accession to the Convention does not represent its acceptance of the sole use of “Sea of Japan”. Japan also claims that the ROK used the name
“Sea of Japan” in its hydrographic chart in 1993. However, the Korean Government used dual names “East Sea” and “Sea of Japan” in the nautical chart to give necessary information to ships sailing through the sea area. The concurrent use of the name in the nautical chart does not mean that the ROK officially recognized the name “Sea of Japan”.
(ROK’s response) The sea area between the Korean Peninsula and the Japanese Archipelago fits the geographical features as described in UNCSGN Resolution III/20 and IHO Technical Resolution A.4.2.6. The sea area in question is not the high seas as Japan claims but falls under the definition of a "semi-enclosed sea" as set out in Article 122 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), in that,
- Firstly, it is a sea "surrounded by two or more States": the sea area lies between the Republic of Korea, the DPRK, Japan and extends north towards Russia.
- Secondly, it is a sea "connected to another sea or the ocean by a narrow outlet”: the sea area is connected to the Sea of Okhotsk in the North by the Tatar Strait, and connected to the East China Sea in the South by the Korea Strait.
- Lastly, it is a sea "consisting entirely or primarily of the territorial seas and exclusive economic zones of two or more coastal States": the sea area consists entirely of the territorial seas and EEZ claimed by all coastal states.
"A bay, strait, channel or archipelago" as stipulated in the IHO TR A.4.2.6 are referred to simply as examples of a given geographical feature. They do not set any limits for application of the Resolution.
4. [Japan’s argument: The United Nations and the governments of major nations such as the United States recognize Sea of Japan as the official name.]
(ROK’s response) The UN Secretariat uses the name "Sea of Japan" based on its own practice of adopting the most widely used name to describe a disputed geographical feature until a solution can be negotiated.
Nevertheless, this is only the practice of the Secretariat for its administrative and bureaucratic convenience, and not a collective decision by the UN Member States. Thus, the argument that the name "Japan Sea"has been authorized by the UN is not true. The UN Secretariat has also clarified that its practice should not be interpreted as advocating or endorsing any one party’s position, and can in no way be invoked by any party in support of its own arguments on the issue. (Refer to the attached letter of the UN Secretariat)
5. [Japan’s argument: The use of the name “East Sea” together with “Sea of Japan” will hamper navigational safety.]
(ROK’s response) The number of ships navigating the sea area between the Korean Peninsula and the Japanese Archipelago annually reaches around 400,000. Many of them identify the sea area as "East Sea." It is important to provide sailors with full and accurate information for navigational safety. In this regard, the concurrent use of "East Sea" and "Sea of Japan" serves the purpose much better than the single use of "Sea of Japan."
6. [Japan’s argument: The naming issue cannot and should not be handled bilaterally.]
(ROK’s response) The naming issue cannot be separated from the history, culture and identity of a nation. Therefore, when it comes to a name for any geographical feature, the views of countries directly concerned should be fully respected. In this regard, consultations among the littoral states are the best way to address the issue. This is also reflected in both the IHO Technical Resolution A4.2. and UNCSGN Resolution III/20. The resolutions are recommending an endeavor on the part of the countries directly concerned to reach an agreement on a common name. /End/
