いわゆる「ラスク書簡」について
投稿者： i_am_not_ill 投稿日時： 2010/04/06 22:05 投稿番号： [164483 / 230347]
アメリカのWikipediaにあって、日本のWikipediaにない箇所とは。
After the Rusk documents
According to the internal report, the U.S. government took the position that "a series of U.S. measures regarding Liancourt Rocks should not be interpreted as saying that the islets' sovereignty lies with Japan" in the early 1950s. the State Department report at the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. The report, dated Aug. 26, 1954 (After the Rusk and Van Fleet document), is entitled "Conflicting Korean-Japanese Claims to Dokdo Island (otherwise known as Takeshima or Liancourt Rocks)." The State Department report first gives a detailed explanation on how Liancourt Rocks was excluded from the list of Korean territory that Japan was to return in Article 2 of the San Francisco treaty. It then points out that whether the accord implies a legal decision that Liancourt Rocks remains with Japan was still a question.
The 1945 Potsdam Declaration stated that "minor islands," along with Honshu and Hokkaido, remain under Japanese sovereignty. So the State Department pointed out that there could be a controversy on whether Japan has rights to all the islands that are not mentioned in the San Francisco treaty, which succeeds the Potsdam Declaration. It added that it was also controversial whether those who drafted the treaty intended to include those minor islands.
On this, the report points out that "it can be considered controversial whether the Rusk documents were based on enough historical understanding."
訳せよ。自力でわからなければ自動翻訳があるから。または英語自慢のqapla_jupに頼めよ。
どこまでも都合のいいところだけ主張する倭猿どもであった。
(爆笑）
After the Rusk documents
According to the internal report, the U.S. government took the position that "a series of U.S. measures regarding Liancourt Rocks should not be interpreted as saying that the islets' sovereignty lies with Japan" in the early 1950s. the State Department report at the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. The report, dated Aug. 26, 1954 (After the Rusk and Van Fleet document), is entitled "Conflicting Korean-Japanese Claims to Dokdo Island (otherwise known as Takeshima or Liancourt Rocks)." The State Department report first gives a detailed explanation on how Liancourt Rocks was excluded from the list of Korean territory that Japan was to return in Article 2 of the San Francisco treaty. It then points out that whether the accord implies a legal decision that Liancourt Rocks remains with Japan was still a question.
The 1945 Potsdam Declaration stated that "minor islands," along with Honshu and Hokkaido, remain under Japanese sovereignty. So the State Department pointed out that there could be a controversy on whether Japan has rights to all the islands that are not mentioned in the San Francisco treaty, which succeeds the Potsdam Declaration. It added that it was also controversial whether those who drafted the treaty intended to include those minor islands.
On this, the report points out that "it can be considered controversial whether the Rusk documents were based on enough historical understanding."
訳せよ。自力でわからなければ自動翻訳があるから。または英語自慢のqapla_jupに頼めよ。
どこまでも都合のいいところだけ主張する倭猿どもであった。
(爆笑）
固定リンク：https://yarchive.emmanuelc.dix.asia/1143582/ffckdca4h4z9qa4n5doc0a4n9adbel_1/164483.html