Is it the Persian Gulf or the Arabian Gulf? Mount McKinley or Denali? Mumbai or Bombay?
Some geographic names do not just tell us where we live or where we are going. They are also a political statement, or in the eyes of some, a politically incorrect one. They may not spark a war of the worlds, but they can cause a war of words.
China struck back last week after Japan slapped monikers on 158 previously unnamed islands off its shores. Five of them are part of a cluster that both nations claim and is itself the subject of a name dispute: Is it the Senkaku or the Diaoyu Islands?
“No unilateral action undertaken by Japan can change the fact that Diaoyu (釣魚) and its surrounding islands belong to China,” Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Qin Gang (秦剛) said, using his country’s name for the remote tropical islands in the East China Sea.
One of the most cited examples, probably because of the vitriol that ensued, is a 1970s feud over Cyprus that played out in a UN forum. It started after Turkey occupied the northern part of the Mediterranean island and replaced Greek names for villages with Turkish ones.
In a letter to the UN conference on geographic names, Cyprus accused Turkey of committing “all kinds of unprecedented atrocities” against the Greek population, according to retired Israeli cartographer Naftali Kadman, who reviewed the official documents.
“They demonstrate that geographical names can constitute explosive items or, in popular terms, hot potatoes,” he wrote in a 2004 article for the Cartographic Journal in Britain.
The Turkish Federated State of Cyprus, which Kadman noted was not recognized by the UN, responded in kind, saying: “The willful and unjustified change of names has been a political pastime of the Greek Cypriot leaders for a long number of years.”
The study of geographic names is known as toponymy and those who specialize in it say it is more than an academic pursuit.
“In a sense, naming expresses ownership, because it implies both comprehension and the legitimacy of the namer’s historical and cultural legacy,” professor Dan Montello wrote in a 2010 posting on the University of California, Santa Barbara, geology department’s Web site. “Hence, colonizers and claimants to territory usually change toponyms, and the original owners usually change them back if and when they get a chance.”
Saigon became Ho Chi Minh City in 1976 after the North defeated the South and its US allies in the Vietnam War.
Since 1984, it has been Burkina Faso, not Upper Volta, or Haute-Volta, as its former French rulers dubbed the West African state.
In India, part of Britain’s former empire, Bombay became Mumbai in 1995, and the southern city of Madras was renamed Chennai the following year.
Politicians sometimes make these changes to stir national or ethnic pride and some in Mumbai still feel uncomfortable with the name change, which was carried out by a nativist party that rose to power after stoking deadly anti-Muslim riots in the city, said Naresh Fernandes, the author of City Adrift: A Short Biography of Bombay.
“Given the bloody circumstances in which the name was changed, the word Mumbai now smells to me of gloating triumphalism, and I always call the city Bombay,” said Fernandes, who covered the name change as a reporter for The Associated Press in 1995.
East Asian waters are dotted with islands claimed by more than one country, putting even the names of the seas in dispute.
South Korea gained a victory this year when the US state of Virginia, pressured by Korean Americans, agreed that new school textbooks should note that the Sea of Japan is also known as the East Sea, the name it prefers for the waters between the two countries.
The Philippines, locked in disputes with China over several islands and reefs, proclaimed in 2012 that part of the South China Sea would henceforth be called the West Philippine Sea.
For Japan, it was the act of naming the 158 islands last week that mattered, not the actual names. Now most of the 500 islands used to define the extent of Japan’s territorial waters have been named.
“It’s a rather unique mega-naming gambit to lay claim to uninhabited islands, reflecting Tokyo’s concern that Beijing might name and claim for itself,” said Jeff Kingston, a professor of contemporary Japan at Temple University’s campus in Tokyo.
Most of the islands are tiny outcroppings whose one requirement is that their highest point remains above water at high tide. About half of them had names used by fishermen and others, and the government adopted those as the official ones. The others, mainly in more remote waters, were given generic directional names such as Southeast Small Island, indicating their location relative to other geographic features.
The exercise has brought to light some unusual names. An island off the Pacific coast in western Japan is called Soviet Island, though it is nowhere near Russia.
The island, which sits about 500m offshore, is a popular fishing ground. Toshio Horitani, an official in Susami, the nearest town, described it as the size of a living room, and said people can stand on it when the water is calm. There is no record of how it got its name.
“I believe people meant it’s so far away, like [the] Soviet [Union], because it’s the furthest from the shore,” said Horitani, who has been fielding calls from journalists asking about the name’s origins.
Name changes can cause diplomatic angst. The then-military government changed Burma to Myanmar in 1989, but the US still refers to it in official documents as Burma, a name preferred by some in the Southeast Asian country’s opposition. On a visit in late 2012, US President Barack Obama used “Myanmar” when talking to the president, but “Burma” in a meeting with opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
“We’ve said we recognize that different people call this country by different names,” US Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes told reporters afterward. “Our view is that it is something we can continue to discuss.”
As elsewhere in the world, the debate goes on.
Additional reporting by Mari Yamaguchi, Jim Gomez and Grant Peck.
An article on the Nature magazine Web site reports that 22 scientists last month wrote to the daily Dagens Nyheter criticizing Sweden’s no-lockdown response to COVID-19. However, evidence-based analysis shows that a lockdown is not a one-size-fits-all strategy and Sweden is showing the world a sustainable way for everybody to fearlessly live with the virus, which is an inevitable situation that everyone must face and accept for a while. The biggest myth about lockdowns is that they are the only solution when an epidemic worsens. A lockdown is a measure to cordon off a seriously affected area so that people in
On Monday, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) spoke during the opening ceremony of this year’s World Health Assembly (WHA). For the first time in the assembly’s history, attendees, including Xi, had to dial in virtually. Xi made no acknowledgement of the Chinese government’s role in causing the COVID-19 pandemic, nor was there any meaningful apology. Instead, he painted China as a benign force for good and a friend to all nations. Except Taiwan, of course. The address was a reheated version of the speech Xi gave at the 2017 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Xi again attempted to step into the
China’s prevention of Taiwan’s participation as an observer at the World Health Assembly (WHA), the WHO and other UN specialized institutions is misleading the world. China always asserts that UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 established the so-called “one China principle,” in which Taiwan is a province of China. This is fake information that is part of China’s grand external propaganda strategy. Resolution 2758 made clear that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is the sole legitimate representative of China at the UN and its specialized institutions. However, there is not a single word related to Taiwan in the resolution, no mention of the