China, Japan and South Korea are three big economies in Northeast Asia that are innegotiations for a trilateral Free Trade Agreement (FTA). A concluded FTA among them willcreate world’s third largest regional market that consists of of 1.52 billion people and thataccounts for 20% of world’s GDP. However the economic cooperation between the threecountries has constantly been interrupted by political issues that root back in the history of thethree countries. In the history the three countries have developed enemy images of oneanother, which have restrained their interaction over the years and influenced their currentrelationship. This thesis uses the enmification theory to explain how these enemy images andenmity feelings have emerged in the history and what impacts they have on political issuesand the economic cooperation between the three. Examples on political issues that are broughtup in this thesis are the recent intensified territorial disputes over Diaoyu/Senkaku islands andDokdo/Takeshima islands.

Takeshima/Dokdo issue is an ongoing territorial dispute between Japan and South Korea. Dispute is being constantly renewed, resulting in clashes in political arena. This issue is represented in various aspects, such as historical, economical or political one. Nevertheless, social construct of Zainichi Koreans are often excluded from the discourse of this issue, though their ambiguous situation may be directly affected by the course of Takeshima/Dokdo issue. Therefore, the hypothesis was raised - in Japan Zainichi Koreans undergo discrimination, which is intensifying according to the course of Takeshima/Dokdo issue. In order to verify the hypothesis, in-depth interviews with Zainichi Koreans were conducted. Nevertheless, mainly because of unreliability of research subjects, no instances of different treatment with Zainichi Koreans were witnessed. / Takešimos/Dokdo salų konfliktas yra vis dar besitęsiantis ir periodiškai atsinaujinantis teritorinis ginčas tarp Japonijos ir Pietų Korėjos. Konfliktas aptariamas ir analizuojamas įvairiuose kontekstuose, tokiuose kaip istorinis, ekonominis ar politinis. Tačiau dabartinė mokslinė bazė stokoja platesnio šio teritorinio ginčo vertinimo, dažnai užmirštant įtraukti socialinio konstrukto, Zainiči korėjiečių, faktorių. Dėl to šiame darbe bandoma patikrinti iškeltą hipotezę, jog Zainiči korėjiečių Japonijoje diskriminacijos lygis priklauso nuo Takešimos/Dokdo salų konflikto eigos. Hipotezei patikrinti buvo atliktas tyrimas, giluminis interviu pagrindu, apklausiant Zainiči korėjiečius. Dėl įvairių priežasčių, tokių kaip tyrimo lauko nepatikimumas, hipotezė nepasitvirtino, neaptikus jokių užuominų apie skirtingą elgesį su Zainiči korėjiečiais ne tik teritorinio ginčo, bet ir bendrame kontekste.

Territorial disputes between Japan and South Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima) and Japan, Taiwan, and China (the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands) are characteristic of post-war East Asian diplomacy. This thesis explores these ongoing territorial disputes, problematizing Realist arguments by which these disputes are analyzed as matters of territorial or resource nationalism, or as the result of legal complications or security concerns. Instead, it is argued that we should look to ideologies of nationalism to understand seemingly extreme emotional reactions over these 'rocks' which threaten to destabilize Northeast Asia. These islands are treated as 'sublime' symbols of the nation and irredentist arguments which support the Japanese, Korean, and Chinese positions read history through a lens of essentialized notions of 'a people' or 'a nation', and in the process help define both.

Territorial disputes between Japan and South Korea (Dokdo/Takeshima) and Japan, Taiwan, and China (the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands) are characteristic of post-war East Asian diplomacy. This thesis explores these ongoing territorial disputes, problematizing Realist arguments by which these disputes are analyzed as matters of territorial or resource nationalism, or as the result of legal complications or security concerns. Instead, it is argued that we should look to ideologies of nationalism to understand seemingly extreme emotional reactions over these 'rocks' which threaten to destabilize Northeast Asia. These islands are treated as 'sublime' symbols of the nation and irredentist arguments which support the Japanese, Korean, and Chinese positions read history through a lens of essentialized notions of 'a people' or 'a nation', and in the process help define both.

Thisthesis examines how different collective memory and national identity of theRepublic of Korea and Japan affect their bilateral relationship. This is also dealwith the role of collective memory and national identity in the bilateralrelationship between the Republic of Korea and Japan. Of diverse conflictingissue between two countries, I studied territorial issue over Dokdo/Takeshimaissue because Dokdo/Takeshima issue is not only territorial matter but alsohistorical matter. So, there are frequent clashes over Dokdo/Takeshma betweentwo countries. To study this topic, in a theoretical framework, I utilizeconstructivism, collective memory and national identity to analyze differentideas of two countries. Furthermore, as I study coverage of media in twocountries, theory of news frame is also utilized. Analyzing media and statementsof two countries about Dokdo/Takeshima, I compared them and produced anintegrated analysis.

With the aim to embark on the theoretical debate on soft and hard power, this study uses the territorial dispute between the ROK and Japan over the Dokdo/Takeshima Islands to illustrate how the common scholarly understanding of the two power concepts are incorrect and misleading. While soft power and hard power are commonly recognized as two antithetical types of power within the theoretical debate, I argue that they are in fact linked and cannot be divided into separate forms of power. Using a Foucauldian approach to discourse analysis, the thesis replaces the concepts of soft power and hard power with the concepts of representational force and physical force to showcase how representational force can enable and legitimize the use of physical force. The thesis is able to identify how the governments of the ROK and Japan exercise representational force and legitimize the use of physical force against each other, despite them being in a trilateral security cooperation with the U.S. Consequently, the study illustrates how the concepts of soft and hard power should be better understood within the theoretical debate.