Kazuhiko Kimijima, a professor of history at Tokyo Gakugei University.

In the column, he slams the Japanese government for dragging a matter that has not been solved either politically or diplomatically into the educational arena. Kimijima is a leading Japanese historian with expertise in Korean affairs, a key force behind "The History of Exchange between Korea and Japan," a history textbook published in March last year after 10 years of joint research by Korean and Japanese scholars. He answered questions from the Chosun Ilbo.

―You have criticized the Japanese government for dragging the question of Dokdo into the educational arena.

"The issue of dominion over Dokdo has been unsolved since the two countries signed the Korea-Japan Normalization Treaty of 1965. Is it right for the government to teach students about an international conflict that it has not solved? The government should conclude the matter first and then teach children about it."

―Part of the teaching guidelines read, "There is a difference in views (between Korea and Japan) over Takeshima (the name the Japanese have given to Dokdo). It is necessary to help students have a better understanding of our country's territories." These sentences sound vague enough.

"All Japanese people know what they mean. The sentences mean that Dokdo 'belongs to Japan.' This means the Japanese government has taken the matter of Dokdo to the same level as the Kuril Islands,” which are held by Russia and claimed by Japan.

―In the column, you said it was a "temporary expedient" for the Japanese government to use a vague expression in the teaching guidelines, and claim that the Korean position was taken into consideration. What did you mean?

"Precisely speaking, it is a hoax. Chief Cabinet Secretary Nobutaka Machimura has said himself that schools will teach that Dokdo belongs to Japan. Consideration for Korea is meaningless if teachers actually teach that Dokdo is Japanese territory in school."

―Who do you think played the major role in the decision?

"During the Shinzo Abe administration, the Basic Education Law was revised to the effect that priority should be given to patriotism. In these circumstances, teaching guidelines were revised in such a way as to make a reference to Dokdo. No matter who played the major role, the latest decision was made under that prevailing educational trend."

―As a historian, what do you think of dominion over Dokdo?

"As I'm not a Dokdo expert, I've never reviewed any primary data on it. But I agree with the view of Seichu Naito, a professor emeritus at Shimane University (who asserts that Dokdo historically belongs to Korea). I think it is right to say that Dokdo is Korean territory. The opposite view is unconvincing."

(englishnews@chosun.com )