In the Treaty of Peacn with Japan, there are the
Liancourt Rock is not listed up on the treaty
which
Because Rusk
Documents, result of the process that United Nation refuse Korean claim
that Liancourt rocks and
Tsushima island separate from
The process to San Fransisco Treary
1.
Korean
request that Liancourt Rocks be Territory of Korea. July 19, 1951
1.My Government requests that the word “renounces” in Paragraph
a, Article Number 2, should be replaced by “confirms that it renounced on
August 9,1945, all right, title and claim to
2.
Dean
Rusk documents refuses Korean request that
Liancourt Rocks and Tushima is
With respect to request of the Korean Government
that Article 2(a) of the draft be revised to provide that Japan "confirms
that it renounced on August 9, 1945, all right, title and claim to Korea and
the islands which were part of Korea prior to its annexation by Japan,
including the islands Quelpart, Port Hamilton, Dagelet, Dokdo and Parangdo," the United States
Government regrets that it is unable to concur in this proposed amendment. The
3.
Treary of Peace
with Japan in San Francisco.(Liancourt Rocks is not
included that
Article 2
(a) Japan recognizing the
independence of Korea, renounces all right, title and claim to
Korea, including the islands of Quelpart, Port Hamilton and Dagelet
Those document below reconfirms Peace treaty with Japan and Dean
Rusk Doccuments.
ⅰ)1952.11.05.Confidential Security Information about
Liancourt Rocks
Letter
from Office of Northeast Asian Affairs To E. Allan
Lightner American Embassy, Pusan Korea
by Kenneth T. Young, Jr. Director Office of Northeast Asian
Affairs
It
appears that the Department has taken the position that
these rocks belong to
The
action of the United States-Japan Joint Committee in designating these rocks as a
facility the Japanese Government is therefore justified.
The Korean claim, based on SCAPIN677, which suspended Japanese administration of various island
areas, include Takeshima (Liancourt Rocks), did not preclude
ⅱ)1952.12.04CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION
Letter
from E. Allan Lightner American Embassy, Pusan Korea To Office of Northeast
Asian Affairs, the Department of the State
(1pages)
by E. Allan Lightner, Jr. American Embassy, Pusan Korea
We had never heard of Dean Rusk's
letter to the Korean Ambassador in which the Department took definite stand on
this question…..
but had no thinking that that decision constituted a rejection of the Korean claim. Well, now we know and we are very
glad to have the information as we have been operating on the basis of a wrong assumption
for along time
I am sending with a transmitting
dispatch, a copy of the note that we have just sent to the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs.......which refers to Dean Rusk’s note to Ambassador Yang of August 10, 1951
ⅲ)1953.07.22 COMFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION
Letter
from Office of Northeast Asian Affairs To E. Allan Lightner American Embassy,
Pusan Korea (3pages)
by L. Burmaster Office of U.S. Northeast Asian Affair
Since
sending the August 10,1951 note to the ROK Government,
the United States Government has sent only one additional communication on the
subject this was done in response to the ROK protest of the a??leged bombing of
" The Embassy has taken note of the statement contained in the
Ministry’s Note that ‘
ⅳ)1953.11.30 Secret security Information.
Memorandum
in regard to the Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima Island) controversy
by William T. Turner
ⅴ)1954.04.26-08.07. Report of Van Fleet mission to the Far East
1954
United States Military Assistance Program Far East "Van Fleet
Mission" 26 April - 7 August 1954
by Ambassador James A.
Van Fleet
The Island of Dokto (otherwise
called Liancourt and Take Shima) is in the Sea of Japan approximately
midway between
Those document clearly denies Korean insist on Liancourt rocks,
their ground of SCAPIN 677
and SCAPIN1033.
Orcourse, the map below, is just G.HQ’s administlative area,
but
it is not Final decision of
Final decision concludes in Treaty of Peace with
