[Korean and Japanese claims to sovereignty over the tiny islets known respectively as Dokdo and Takeshima renewed in intensity this past winter and spring. This is an argument with at least a century's history of conflict and vituperation. Korea's claim is straightforward and meshes with a broader, global post-colonial discourse: “These have long been our islands. You colonized us illegally, and part of that illegal act was the seizure of territory that is demonstrably ours on old maps and in ancient records.” As a sizeable advertisement sponsored in part by the Korean government in the July 27 The New York Times makes clear: “DOKDO IS KOREAN TERRITORY.” Japan counters with a complex, legalistic explanation involving the validity of the 1910 takeover and the terms of the post-colonial emancipation. On top of this, Japan knowingly holds the diplomatic wildcard, meaning that it was the United States’ unwillingness to resolve this issue in 1951 in its peace treaty with Japan that has sustained the mess. In the absence of Japanese renunciation of claims to the islets, any conclusive judgment would, therefore, require the United States to take a stand. In the midst of this, of course, the United States maintains separate — and in the case of these islands competing — national interests in its discrete, bilateral security treaties with Korea and Japan. The following article by Professor Lee Sang-tae presents the numerous historical documents supporting Korea's historical claims to the islets, as well as introducing the issue of American involvement. Japan Focus.]