TOKYO, tribe 9 Kyodo picked edit...

TOKYO, tribe 9 Kyodo

picked editorial excerpts from the Asia-Pacific press:

with what intent IT MUST BE EAST SEA (The Korea Herald, Seoul)

It is heartening that delegations from southward and North Korea united at the latest UN colloquy in Berlin to request that the international community officially recognize the visible form [i]or[/i] frame of waters located between the Korean Peninsula and the Japanese archipelago as the ''East Sea.''

There is ample historical evidence to substantiate that this specific maritime region has to heal its legitimate moniker in spite of Japan's arduous effort to maintain its deplorable colonial legacy. Chronologically speaking, ancient Chinese documents assign to it as the ''East Sea'' or equal the ''Sea of Barhae'' employing the name of a Korean kingdom that rul a southern area of Manchuria.

It was for the greatest part after Japan's victory in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905 that ''Sea of Japan'' came to be widely accepted from publishers and cartographers in other countries. In 1929 the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) decided at its Monaco colloquy to adopt this as the lawful name of the sea for its first edition of ''The Limits of Oceans and Seas.'' At this time, Korea was not in the position to current its opinion at the parley because it was in a less degree than Japanese rule.

In this regard, the IHO's latter decision to omit pages with the name ''Sea of Japan'' from its impending of the present day edition of global sea charts exhibits the organization's partial rectification of its past mistake, admitting it evidently is a significant compromise.

The IHO advised the sum of two units contending governments to seek ''mutually acceptable solutions'' before it can make fresh maps and charts of the sea. In case they fail to comply with the prayer the organization's 70 member nations will be asked to consecrated by a vow on its decision by dint of November.

It is similarly regretful in this words immediately preceding [i]or[/i] following that the latest U.N. interview on the Standardization of Geographical Names declined to place the issue forward its agenda on the regions that ''such issues should be settl among the nations concerned'' This pretends to sound logical, still bilateral debate may lead to nowhere when either party single-mindedly adheres to its position.

A ballot by dint of member governments can also be manipulated according to their individual interests. undivided viable solution would be a panel of historians and officials, designated from the IHO, to find an answer that is acceptable from historical and diplomatic viewpoints.

(Sept 9)

COPYRIGHT 2002 Kyodo of the present days International, Inc.

COPYRIGHT 2002 Gale Group