13 September 2002 23:57
A sea by any other name
Shakespeare once addressed the unimportance of the names of things in his famous line "a rose by any other name
would still smell as sweet." Sadly, once again the international community is wasting time on the disputed name of
the Sea of Japan. It is hard to imagine the wasted time, energy and money that Korea has put into this fruitless
exercise. The proposed re-naming of the Sea of Japan begs several questions. The first such question is: Why bother? An
internationally accepted name is adopted for convenience of correspondence and to aid in geographical, historical,
diplomatic and scientific discussions. A name in no way implies ownership of the waterway. The Korean desire to adopt
the name "East Sea" coming from the Korean word "Tong-Hae" is both absurd and preposterous in the
modern global age in which we live. Naming the body of water that lies east of the Korean Peninsula, south of the Far
East of Russia and west of the Japanese archipelago the "East Sea" would lead to great confusion and be
farcical in the extreme. The "East Sea" is not east of anything, except Korea. If the Japanese archipelago did
not exist there would be no need for a name at all for this body of water, for it would be the beginning of the Pacific
Ocean. Suggestions that the sea lies east of Asia are absurd, unless one considers Japan not to be a part of Asia. Also,
either the Sea of Okhotsk (north of Japan and east of Russia) or the Bering Sea lay to the east of Asia, depending on
one's perspective. Though, apparently, Korea would like the rest of the world to adopt the peninsula as the center
of the universe, it just simply is not the case. If one examines any atlas, one can find many examples of bodies of
water named for a single nation or province that in no way indicate ownership of the water: The Indian Ocean, the
Mozambique Channel, the Tasman Sea, the Gulf of Mexico, the Norwegian Sea, the English Channel, the Irish Sea, the Gulf
of Gascongne, the Korea Straight, the East China Sea, the South China Sea, the Timor Sea, the Florida Straight, Lake
Ontario and others all share boundaries with more than one nation and no one seems to object. The Sea of Japan has
boundaries on four nations (three if one considers the Koreas together) yet only the Koreans complain. It is curious to
note that Russia seems particularly unconcerned even though they have a far larger coastline bordering the Sea of Japan
than the Koreas can claim. That the Korean government must spend time and money in attempts at a name change is almost
laughable if there was not a more serious question of the garbage and pollution that is dumped into this sea on a daily
basis. The industrial cities of Ulsan and Pohang as well as the port city of Busan would be South Korea's main
offenders in this ecological crime. Certainly Vladivostok and the industrial cities of Japan would also share blame for
the pollution, depleted fish stocks and general poor health of this body of water. Korea should assert such
international pressure on bettering the ecology of the water rather than on unimportant nomenclature so that the people
from all four nations would benefit in longer lives, better heath and a more vibrant marine industry. Todd Vercoe Inje
University
[AIW [Asia Africa Intelligence Wire]] |
RUSSIA IN FACTS
