— Overview
This account sets political conflict and cultural exchange beside each other in Korea–Japan relations. Dokdo, the East and West islets southeast of Ulleungdo, is treated as Korea’s territory under effective control, with the coast guard resident there. Japan’s claim, the account says, cites a 1905 notice by Shimane prefecture; the position of the Republic of Korea is that, by history, geography, and international law, the islets are inherent Korean territory.
School textbooks are followed through the 1982 screening controversy, in which “invasion” was written as “advance,” and through a 2001 textbook criticized for glorifying aggressive war that passed screening and drew a strong reaction in Korea and China; scholars and civic groups later tried to write a joint history textbook. On comfort women, Kim Hak-sun gave public testimony in 1991, the Kono Statement in 1993 recognized military involvement, and UN human-rights bodies called the matter a grave rights violation and recommended fact-finding and responsible measures. After the 1998 joint declaration, Japanese popular culture was opened and people-to-people exchange grew; in the 2000s, Hallyu in Japan, through drama and music, continued alongside the political conflict. Later agreements are not added here.
— Contents and key concepts
Effective control, and a 1905 notice
Dokdo, in this account, is Korea’s territory. The East and West islets lie southeast of Ulleungdo. The coast guard is resident there, and control is effective. Japan’s claim, the account says, cites a 1905 notice by Shimane prefecture. The position of the Republic of Korea is stated in three frames at once: history, geography, and international law, and in all three the islets are inherent Korean territory. Those positions are left as the account states them.
School history is followed as a second front. In 1982, a screening controversy arose when “invasion” was written as “advance.” In 2001, a textbook criticized for glorifying aggressive war passed screening, and the reaction in Korea and in China was strong. Later, scholars and civic groups of Korea, China, and Japan tried to write a joint history textbook. The account stops at those attempts; later official textbook decisions are not added here.
Testimony in 1991, and Hallyu beside the conflict
On comfort women, the account begins with Kim Hak-sun’s public testimony in 1991. The Kono Statement in 1993 recognized military involvement. UN human-rights bodies called the matter a grave violation of rights, and recommended fact-finding and responsible measures. Those dated statements are left as they stand. Later agreements are not invented here.
Exchange is set beside the conflict, not in place of it. After the 1998 Korea–Japan joint declaration, Japanese popular culture was opened, and people-to-people exchange grew. In the 2000s, Hallyu reached Japan through drama and music, and that cultural exchange continued even while political conflict did not go away. Local exchange, the account says, shrank as sentiment over Dokdo worsened. The picture that remains is of two tracks running at once: a political dispute that the account dates through 1905, 1982, 1991, 1993, and 2001, and a popular exchange that widened after 1998 and through the 2000s — without turning either track into a later official settlement that is not in the account.
Sources
- an account of Korea–Japan relations that treats Dokdo as Korean territory under effective control against a Japanese claim citing a 1905 Shimane notice, follows the 1982 and 2001 textbook controversies, records Kim Hak-sun’s 1991 testimony and the 1993 Kono Statement, and sets 2000s Hallyu in Japan beside the political conflict after the 1998 joint declaration.
Last updated: 14 November 2026
Refund policy
- Change of mind / refund requested after partial use / more than 7 days after purchase
◆ Exceptions
- File errors / cannot download or open the file
◆ How to request a refund: send a 1:1 inquiry via Customer Service at the top