Singer Kim Jang-hun puts East Sea, Dokdo back in US papers.

Singer Kim Jang-hun (김장훈) took out ads in the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal on the 6th, telling readers about Dokdo and that the Sea of Japan ought to be called the East Sea.


From here.

I can't find the full-text of the ad, though in this picture you'll see that it reposts a story that appeared in the WSJ in July about North Korea firing missiles. The ad crosses out "Sea of Japan" from the article and replaces it with a large "East Sea." You'll notice the map does not label the "Yellow Sea" the "West Sea." This article shows that the ads slated for the Washington Post and New York Times feature similiar corrections alterations.

The Korea Times has the story:

Singer Kim Jang-hun, who privately funded the public awareness campaign ad on The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post on Aug. 6, will run the same ad on The New York Times next week as well, determined to "go all the way with the Dokdo issue," Chosun Ilbo reported Saturday.

"This is not a showbiz stunt to boost my popularity. Actually I am risking my entire professional career because I believe this is something I am compelled to do," he said.

Kim has been at the forefront of international campaign to raise awareness on Dokdo, a set of disputed islets in the East Sea.

Kim has so far funded hundreds of millions of won for the cause.

Kim said his passion for Dokdo came from the fact that "Korea is a country that has been invaded by foreign forces as many as 936 times, but each time it rose again. It also rose from the rags of the Korean War a few decades ago to become the world's 13th largest economy.

"This country is resilient. It has something. It's cool. I am proud of it. I cannot let go of it," he said.

Some worry that such an open and public campaign for Dokdo, like that of Kim, is exactly what Japan wants as Japan can use it as "evidence" that Dokdo is a "disputed" territory and bring the matter to the international court for a new settlement on the islets.

Dokdo is currently under the de facto control of Korea.

"I am aware of it," Kim said. "But then, the 'quiet diplomacy' approach has it limitations when Japan is mounting a very aggressive international lobbying on the matter. You cannot just sit back and watch."

And from the Chosun Ilbo:

Korean pop singer Kim Jang-hoon, who has been actively promoting international awareness of Korea's sovereignty over the Dokdo islets, is now on a mission to inform the world about the name of the sea that separates Korea and Japan.

According to public relations expert Seo Kyoung-duk, he and Kim plan to run a full-page advertisement in the New York Times, Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal showing why the sea should be labeled as the East Sea rather than the Sea of Japan.

On the "Sea of Japan" issue, because it's just much easier to quote myself from earlier posts, I'll quote myself from an earlier post.

I do, though, object to naming the Sea of Japan the "East Sea." The name is 동해, or East Sea, in Korean and that's perfectly acceptable. Nobody is suggesting it be called 일본해. However, the accepted English name is Sea of Japan, and it's arrogant and inappropriate to dictate the rules of another language. Moreover, and what realy induces eye rolls and forehead slaps is that people are advocating replacing the Sea of Japan because it supposedly reflects Japanese imperialism and is a product of, so they say, aggressive lobbying by Japanese politicians. The alternate name suggested, though, is even more disgustingly ethnocentric and nationalistic because the sea is, after all, to the immediate east of Korea. Here I would write "just call it the East Asian Sea and let's move on," but you see how I view Korea's whining in isolation, and am no longer willing to see the merits of any of its historical claims.

I'll quote a little more from that post, because it touches on what Kim talked about in the Times article.

And it's not simply "whining," not just the words of a humble people looking to redeem themselves a half century after a 35-year occupation, the noble protests of a smaller country trying to stand up for itself between two larger Asian powers. What is clear to people who look at what Korea has to say on these issues is that Korea is being the aggressor by constantly going after foreign languages and foreign communities. Nobody likes being told to rethink their language, certainly not by a foreign country who looks more like a radical fringe group when you look at the sum of its wacky protest culture.

Kim and his friend have taken out ads like this before (1, 2, 3) and also made a Dokdo documentary last December.

"As a singer, my ultimate dream is to hold a big festival at Dokdo. It will be a natural way to remind the place to even foreigners. Where is the festival being held? At Dokdo. Where is that? In the East Sea? And where is that? In Korea," he added.

For the sake of completeness, here's a quotation from a New York Times ad he took out last year, a line repeated in last week's advertisement:

"For the last 2,000 years, the body of water between Korean and Japan has been called the `East Sea.'"

Been called "East Sea"? I'm surprised to learn that Koreans and Japanese have been using English for 2,000 years.

In April I invited readers to argue why the "East Sea" is a viable name, and to be fair I'll share what Gomushin Girl wrote:

While I'm loathe to jump in here, you DID ask for legitimate reasons:
First, the sea is in fact to the east of something; mainly, the majority of Asia, similar to how the North Sea in Europe still manages to be east of some countries and west of others. We don't call it the British Sea even though the British Isles take up a chunk of what borders the sea.
Second, although there is some controversy over exactly when the English name "East Sea" first appeared, certainly it's first appearance in the IHO maps were in fact directly resulting from the colonial state of many of the nations involved.
Of course, maps not being completely standardized, you can make the argument that the Korean case for "East Sea" is weak because there's a plurality of maps of various accuracy with myriad other names. Just because other regional groups share a similar name (it is similarly "East Sea" in Chinese, for example) doesn't make for a perfect case. Of course, this also means that ALL arguments based on maps for naming conventions are suspect, and that Sea of Japan is equally incorrect.
I understand that for many foreigners, hearing and reading these arguments gets tiresome and old, but lets not say that there is no force whatsoever to them.