Revisionist country South Korea held Propaganda conference about Sea of Japan.

This is the article on Hangyole newspaper
http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/437972.html
-----quote-----
Parallel labeling for East Sea discussed
A participant reported a positive response, although the U.S. and some European experts do not support parallel labeling

? 2005 Yearbook, published by the prominent German publishing company Fischer, labelled the sea that iles between the Korean Peninsula and the Japanese archipelago as ‘Ostmeer’, East Sea, and labelled parallely ‘Hapanisches Meer’, Sea of Japan, in the parenthesis on page 262 introducing Korea. (Yonhap News Agency) 　

By Oh Tai-kyu, Senior Staff writer

What is the correct name of the sea that lies between the Korean peninsula and the Japanese archipelago? From Aug. 22 to 23, the 16th International Seminar on the Naming of Seas hosted by The Society for East Sea Research and the Northeast Asian History Foundation was held at The Hague, Netherlands, the center of international law. The seminar, where the issue of naming “Donghae,” East Sea, was discussed, was attended by more than 30 experts from 12 countries including the United States, the United Kingdom, Austria, China and Japan.

This seminar was highly significant in that the issue of naming the East Sea was lively discussed within the general framework of toponymy, free from the narrow perspective being viewed against the special historical background that lies between Korea and Japan. In attendance were many influential experts in this field, including Ferjan Omeling, vice chairman of the United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names (UNGEGN), Paul Woodman, former Secretary of the United Kingdom Permanent Committee on Geographical Names, Peter Jordan, co-convenor of UNGEGN’s Working Group on Exonyms and an expert on Austrian place names and Milan Adamic of Slovenia.

Their attempts to link current issues in the field of toponymy, such as naming cultural heritage sites, the status of endonyms and exonyms, and the difference of place names within maritime boundaries between national and international waters, to the issue of naming of Donghae drew interest. Specific examples of two countries each using their own name for one area that involves them both, which can be consulted in future discussions of the naming of Donghae, were also reported. These included the English Channel (UK)/La Manche (France) and the Gulf of Piran (Slovenia)/Gulf of Savudrija (Croatia).


South Korea, which seeks parallel labeling of the sea in question as “East Sea”/“Sea of Japan,” appears to have gained new theoretical and practical weapons at the conference in addition to its logic predicated on the historical background of the name change from the East Sea to the Sea of Japan under the influence of Japanese colonial domination. Lee Ki-suk, emeritus professor at Seoul National University who has participated in these seminars from the beginning, said, “A lively discussion took place over the theoretical and practical examples, going beyond the central historical background.” Lee also said, “The biggest result of the seminar was the overall formation of a positive mood with regard to parallel labeling as the East Sea and the Sea of Japan.”

However, simply employing parallel labeling alone will not solve all the issues. The proportion of maps using parallel labeling has increased from 2.8 percent in 2000 to 10.5 percent in 2005, 23.8 percent in 2007 and 28.1 percent in 2009, thanks to concentrated efforts on the part of the government, academia and others. However, the United States, which wields the most powerful influence when it comes to global location names, has yet to employ the parallel label practice.

Also significant is the fact that a few European experts at the seminar suggested strongly that linking single labeling to colonialism was unreasonable.

Choo Sung-jae, vice chairman of the Society for East Sea Research and a professor of Kyung Hee University, said, “Singularly using the label “Sea of Japan” acknowledges a number of realities, and efforts to objectively provide logic to reverse this reality, rather than emotion, are important.”

Please direct questions or comments to [englishhani@hani.co.kr]
-----quote end-----

"The Society for East Sea Research and the Northeast Asian History Foundation was held at The Hague, Netherlands, the center of international law."

East Sea Research and the Northeast Asian History Foundation
both of them are ethno-centristic revisionist history propaganda organization for anti-Japanese propaganda agent under the Korean govemental support, it is not "scholor" group, and use black propaganda against naughty children and their student with wrong explanation about Japan's Takeshima(Liancourt Rocks which South Korea invaded fron 1950's) and Sea of Japan is colonial name.

South Korea refuse to dispute the territorial disputed island of Liancourt Rocks on Hague International court of Justice, although they claim the name of Sea of Japan at Hague? Why they dont dispute the Takeshima (Liancourt Rocks)issue?


"historical background of the name change from the East Sea to the Sea of Japan under the influence of Japanese colonial domination"

"Also significant is the fact that a few European experts at the seminar suggested strongly that linking single labeling to colonialism was unreasonable."

It is already confirmed variety of inspection by Japanese goverment, and my blog that the name of Sea of Japan is nothing to do with colonialism.
I believe that European Experts of hydrographics they does knows Korean abusive distorture story about Sea of Japan which name from colonial ages???

Yea, reader of this blog already understanad that the name of Sea of Japan become common around 1780-1820's in Europre, and around 1860-70 in Japan.
Korean did use "Sea of Japan" before annexation on their textbooks.
I guess those ”experts will understand "Mer de Coree or East Corean Sea become today's Tongjoseonman,Brouhghton bay. So korea just claim to change the name of Tongjoseoman to "East Sea". No need to change S-23 definiation of Sea of Japan.

It is strange that Korean text saids as follows
또한, 이번 회의에서 유럽의 몇몇 전문가가 일본해 단독 표기를 식민주의와 연결하는 것은 무리라는 주장을 강하게 제기한 것도 유의할 대목이다.

Some experts claims that it is difficult to link the name of Sea of Japan with the colonialism.


Korean repeats 1000 times same black propagandad . The number of Korean lier is 671 times than in Japan. Who trust Korean claims?

We need to start the claims to those "experts" who believes korean fake propaganda.