User talk:Yamasano chikuwa

SCAP
Power and right of SCAP +Potsdam Declaration　on July 26, 1945
 * (7) Until such a new order is established and until there is convincing proof that Japan's warmaking power is destroyed, points in Japanese territory to be designated by the Allies shall be occupied to secure the achievement of the basic objectives we are here setting forth.
 * (12) The occupying forces of the Allies shall be withdrawn from Japan as soon as these objectives have been accomplished and there has been established in accordance with the freely expressed will of the Japanese people a peacefully inclined and responsible government.

+Japanese Instrument of Surrender on September 2, 1945 http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Japanese_Instrument_of_Surrender We hereby undertake for the Emperor, the Japanese Government and their successors to carry out the provisions of the Potsdam Declaration in good faith, and to issue whatever orders and take whatever actions may be required by the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers or by any other designated representative of the Allied Powers for the purpose of giving effect to that Declaration. [...] The authority of the Emperor and the Japanese Government to rule the State shall be subject to the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, who will take such steps as he deems proper to effectuate these terms of surrender.

SCAPIN and related documents before peace treaty with Japan +SCAPIN677 on 29 January 1946 http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/SCAPIN677 1. The Imperial Japanese Government is directed to cease exercising, or attempting to exercise, governmental or administrative authority over any area outside of Japan, or over any government officials and employees or any other persons within such areas. 3. For the purpose of this directive, Japan is defined to include the four main islands of Japan (Hokkaido, Honshu, Kyushu and Shikoku) and the approximately 1,000 smaller adjacent islands, including the Tsushima Islands and the Ryukyu (Nansei) Islands north of 30° North Latitude (excluding Kuchinoshima Island); and excluding (a) Utsuryo (Ullung) Island, Liancourt Rocks (Take Island) and Quelpart (Saishu or Cheju) Island, (b) the Ryukyu (Nansei) Islands[…] 5. The definition of Japan contained in this directive shall also apply to all future directives, memoranda and orders from this Headquarters unless otherwise specified therein. 6. Nothing in this directive shall be construed as an indication of Allied policy relating to the ultimate determination of the minor islands referred to in Article 8 of the Potsdam Declaration.

行政の分離に関する第一回会談録（終戦第一部第一課） （昭和二十一年）二月十三日黄田連絡官GS「ロッヂ」大尉及び「プール」中尉と標記の件に関し第一回会談を行ひたり要旨左の如し 黄「本日は領土の歸屬問題乃至は本指令の妥当性等に付いては触れさることとし単に疑義に付質問を為さんか為参上せり」 米「本指令は単なる連合国側の行政的便宜より出てたるに過きす従来行はれ来りたることを本指令に依り確認せるものなり即ち其の他はSCAPの所管するところにあらす例えは大島はCINPACの所管. 鬱陵島は第二十四軍団の指揮下に在り従って本指令に依る日本の範囲の決定は何等領土問題とは関連を有せす之は他日講和会議にて決定さるへき問題なり」

SCAPIN1033 on 22 June 1946 http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/SCAPIN-1033?uselang=ja 1. The provisions of references (a) and (b), and paragraphs 1 and 3 of reference (c) in so far as they relate to authorization of Japanese fishing areas, are rescinded. 3. For the purpose of this directive, Japan is defined to include the four main islands of Japan (Hokkaido, Honshu, Kyushu and Shikoku) and the approximately 1,000 smaller adjacent islands, including the Tsushima Islands and the Ryukyu (Nansei) Islands north of 30°North Latitude (excluding Kuchinoshima Island), and excluding (a) Utsuryo (Ullung) Island, Liancourt Rocks (Take Island) and Quelpart (Saishu or Cheju Island), (b) the Ryukyu (Nansei) Islands[…] 5. The present authorization is not an expression of allied policy relative to ultimate determination of national jurisdiction, international boundaries or fishing rights in the area concerned or in any other area.

U.S. Army Military Government - South Korea: Interim Government Activities, No.1, August 1947 Representatives of the Fisheries Bureau and Korea History and Geography Association left for Ullung-do and Tok-to on August. The latter, two small islands about 40 miles southwest of Ullung-do, is an excellent base for extended fishing operations. Formerly belonging to Japan, a recent occupation directive which drew an arbitrary line demarcating Japanese and Korean fishing waters placed Tok-to within the Korean zone. Final disposition of the islands' jurisdiction awaits the peace treaty.

SCAPIN1778 16 September 1947 http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/SCAPIN1778 1. The islands of Liancourt Rocks (or Takes Shima), located 37° 15’ north, 131° 50’ east, are designated as a bombing range. 2. The inhabitants of Oki-Retto (Oki-Gunto) and the inhabitants of all the ports on the west coast of Honshu north to the 38th parallel, north latitude will be notified prior to each actual use of this range. This information will be disseminated through Military Government units to local Japanese civil authorities.

SCAPIN2160 6 July 1951 http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/SCAPIN2160 2. The islands of Liancourt Rocks (Take-Shima) located 37°15’ North, 131°52’ East are designated as a bombing range. 4. The inhabitants of Oki-Retto (Oki-Gunto) and the inhabitants of all the ports on the west coast of the island of Honshu north to the 40th parallel, north latitude, will be notified fifteen days prior to use of this Range. When the Range is used for periods in excess of fifteen days, warning reminders will be disseminated to the inhabitants indicated above every fifteen days. This information will quarters, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers to the Japanese Government for dissemination to the local civil authorities in the areas concerned.

1951 - Sep. 21 - Korean Government comprehended Takeshima/Dokdo was affirmed as a Japanese Territory in Peace Treaty http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.jp/search?updated-max=2011-06-02T11:49:00%2B09:00&max-results=50&start=79&by-date=false

Republic of Korea

Ministry of Foreign Affairs SEOUL September 21, 1951

Dear Ambassador Muccio,

This note is to seek to draw your attention to the enclosed exerpt of Memorandum of SCAPIN-677, 29 January 1946, which should be regarded as a conslusive factor in deciding, in Korean favor, the controversy over the ownership of Dokdo, known as "Liancourt Rocks" and also as "Takeshima" in Japanese. The fact that the disputed isle has been put on the Korean side of the MacArthur Line is another manifestation of the SCAP memorandum under notice.

In 1948, if I do not remember wrongly, when air bombing practice caused casualities among the Korean fishermen in boats nestling near the isle SCAP apologized to this Goverment for the incident. Had SCAP regarded the isle as Japanese territory, the presence of the Koreans there would have been illegal and no apologies necessary. As evidenced by the Memorandum in question, SCAP has, at no time, doubted that the isle belongs or ought to belong, to Korea.

We have substantial documented evidence to prove that the isle has been in the Korean possession for many hundred years. The fact that Japan incorporated the isle into one of its nearby prefectures in 1905 (a deal sneaked on a prefectural level, not on a Governmental level, for the obvious convenience to back down more easily in case of a possible international trouble) cannot repudiate our rightful claims to the isle, supported not merely by Korean documents but by Japanese ones also.

Sincerely yours,

Yung Tai PYUN Minister of Foreign Affairs

Enclosure: Memorandum of SCAPIN-677, 29 January 1946

His Excellency

TRANSMITTAL OF LETTER FROM MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS ON KOREAN CLAIM TO DOKDO ISLAND (Oct. 3, 1951) (Records of the U.S Department of State relating to the Internal Affairs of Korea, 1950-54 Department of State Decimal File 795)

・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・ With regard to the " substantial documented evidence" referred to in the last paragraph of the letter, an officer of the Embassy was orally informed by the Minister of Foreign Affairs that such evidence appears throughout Korean and Japanese archives. The implication was that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not possess a compilation of such "evidence" at this time. Although it was pointed out to the Minister that the Embassy would welcome the submission of such "evidence" for transmittal to the Department, it appears doubutful that such information will be forthcoming.