Tokto stirs debate on the Korean left
The Korean socialist newspaper Ta Hamkke was inaccessible for a couple of weeks for some reason so I've got quite a bit of catching up to do. The latest issue has a section on the 'changing imperialist powers in northeast asia.' With articles like 'Why is Japan winding up its neighbours?' (일본은 왜 인접국들을 자극하는가?) it looks like it'll be good reading.
The last issue (no. 52) had some very interesting pieces about the debates that the Tokto issue stirred on the left. I'd really like to translate some of this stuff, but I'm not sure I'll have time. If you can read Korean there's a good article by Chông Chin-hûi entitled 'Tokto, Imperialism and Resistance' as well as a letter about whether it is chauvinistic to burn the Japanese flag.
To put it very briefly, Chông Chin-hûi's piece is a critique of people she calls 'abstract internationalists' (추상적 국제주의자들) and autonomists (not sure whether this is the correct translation of 자유주의자들 in this context) who have strongly criticised the role of the Democratic Labour Party (민노당) in leading protests over Tokto. They have called the actions of the party chauvinistic and argued that it could lose its reputation as a progressive party. Chông however, argues that they are wrong and that the nationalistic response of Koreans to the Tokto issue is not necessarily rightwing or something that will benefit the Korean ruling class. The article also contains passing criticism of Han Kyu-han's article on the history of Tokto from last year that I've quoted from before, which is closer to the 'abstract internationalist' view.
From the perspective of an outsider, one of the interesting things is that this sort of debate can occur on the Korean left. Now there is not only a debate between the nationalist left and the internationalist left over how to respond to this sort of issue, but also between internationalists and those who take a more extreme anti-nationalist position.