일본의 동아시아 영토인식에 대한 비판적 고찰

A Critical Study on the Japanese Understanding of the Territories in East Asia

Since 1999, when Korea and Japan concluded fisheries agreement, establishing new fisheries order in Northeast Asia around Korean peninsular based on Exclusive Economic Zone regime, disputes regarding the territoriality over Dok-do has become more intense between the two countries. According to the agreement, two intermediate zones/provisional measures zones were established in the overlapping zones in the seas of Northeast Asia. It was because the two coastal States agreed to shelve delicate issues such as maritime boundary delimitation and treatment of Dok-do during transitional period. Therefore, in negotiation about boundary delimitation on the East Sea between the two States, the most difficult issue to be agreed on would be the dispute over the ownership of Dok-do. By the way, studies on Dok-do in Korea have had a tendency to overemphasize the validity of Korean position, naturally failing to provide persuasive or well-balanced solutions. Under these circumstances, this essay intends to examine other territory-related issues of Japan in East Asia, that is, disputes over the northern territories and Senkaku islands, from critical point of view, but not to reiterate denunciations on Japanese position. Also the functional aspects of International Court of Justice as a procedure regarding peaceful settlement of disputes and Japanese position toward judicial settlement were examined. As a conclusion, Japanese contradictory position on their territorial issues was explained and possible countermeasures of Korea regarding those issues were suggested.