I am one of the many who think that Japan's claim to these islands is weak. However, having said that, it is clear to me that, despite what the Koreans insist, that claim does indeed stretch back before the Meiji restoration and Japan's imperial expansion at the end of the 19th century.
There has been considerable speculation, in part aided by that nice Japanese Foreign Ministry memo, that Japan has been attempting a bit of diplomatic sumo on its neighbour. Or to use a different metaphor Japan has been playing matador to the Korean bull. If that is the case, and it could well be so, then the Korean government's apparent over-reaction to Japan's recent manoevers means that it is succeeding. Looked at in this light, President Roh's address to the nation (via Marmot) plays directly into the Japanese hands and, since it got considerable coverage on the BBC at least, if Japan has a strategy of making the S Korean government look like a bunch of nationalistic goons with no sense of restraint then they seem to have succeeded.
The address really needs to be read in full because it completely and utterly nails Roh to the belief that Dokdo was Korean before the Russo-Japanese war and makes a lot of bellicose statements basedon that initial premise, which look a little silly if the evidence shows that Japan actually claimed the islands during the Edo era. Now it is true that the Edo era claim is relatively weak; the fact that there is documentary proof that the Shogun in 1618 (and 1661) assigned Takeshima to one of his vassels doesn't mean that the Korean kingdom at the same time did not also think that they were in control, but it does kind of undermine Roh's claim that:
Dokdo is our territory that was first to be annexed to Japan in the course of its usurpation of the Korean Peninsula.
The Russo-Japanese War was a war of aggression that Imperial Japan initiated to secure control over the Korean Peninsula.
Under the pretext of carrying out the Russo-Japanese War, Japan sent its troops to Korea and occupied the Korean Peninsula. The Japanese forces staged a siege around Korean royal palaces, terrorized the royal office and the Government of Korea to force them into signing the Korea-Japan Protocol, expropriated the land and people of Korea as it pleased, and established military facilities. Japan unilaterally proclaimed military rule over part of the Korean territory and eventually trampled on Korea’s sovereignty by taking away our fiscal and diplomatic rights.
As part of this process, Japan forcefully merged Dokdo into its territory, installed an observation tower and electric cables, and utilized them in their war efforts. While continuing the military occupation of the Korean Peninsula, Japan deprived Korea of sovereignty and secured colonial control over the Peninsula.
I think that in Japan, at least, this speech will be regarded by practically everyone as a sign that Roh is a nationalistic idiot who can't be relied on to do anything for Japan. The Japanese may possibly at some point make some concession to Korea in regard to the Dokdo issue but, as a result of this tirade, it will seen as the adult indulging the tantrum-throwing child and clearly will expect that the rest of the world will give it credit.
Indeed going on the latest Koizumi comments I would say that that is precisely what Japan is doing. I agree with people like Plunge (and apparently over 50% of the Japanese electorate) that Koizumi really shouldn't be visiting Yasukuni and that it is clearly intended for (internal) political purposes no matter what he may say publicly, however, the fact remains that to outsiders (i.e. anyone not in/closely associated with either the 2 Koreas or the PRC) it looks like these countries are making a mountain out of a molehill. Indeed the (unspoken/whsipered) subtext of all this is that until recently Japan felt constrained by its early 20th century behaviour to grovel to its former victims, but that it feels that 60 years is quite enough time for such behaviour to last and that it is time for the 2nd largest global economy to be recognised as such and take its rightful place as a world power rather than just being the world's aid chequebook. Indeed the Japanese commentary on this affair, that Dokdo is being used by Roh purely for internal Korean politics (and for that matter the same goes for Yasukuni, textbooks etc.), has enough truth in it that it helpfully diverts world attention away from that fact that Koizumi and Abe, and probably others, are using their responses to these complaints for internal Japanese political advantage.
To put it bluntly I reckon both sides are blustering primarily for internal political advantage, and, in the case of Japan, also to make their case to the wider international community. Witness this (via foreign dispatches):
Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi told reporters Tuesday, "I'd like everyone to deal with the situation in a calm manner, based on the premise of establishing a friendly relationship between Japan and South Korea.
"It will be better off to think about the matter in a systematic, comprehensive and future-oriented manner."
Koizumi also urged the media to refrain from fueling the confrontation.
How will it end? I have no idea, I suspect it will simply be quietly dropped when something more interesting shows up. Neither side wants a real war, but on the other hand, one suspects that neither side wants an internationally mediated solution because the danger is that the international medeiator will rule against them and thus their internal political enemies can blame them for losing. Hence I expect this issue to disappear from view again for a while before resurfacing next time some Japanese or Korean politician wants to wrap himself in the flag (i.e. no more that a year from now) when precisely the same inconclusive shoving match will take place.