Editing Gando Convention (section)

== In the modern era ==

When the [[Japanese occupation of Korea]] ended in August 1945, the Soviet administration in the north of Korea and the American administration in the south of Korea hampered any unified Korean attempt to recover Gando. However, Gando Convention was [[de jure]] nullified and North Korea started to control the area south of [[Paektu Mountain]]. 

In 1961, PR China claimed a boundary dozens of kilometers south of Mt. Paekdu.<ref>金得榥,「백두산과 북방강계」, 사사연, 1987, 27쪽</ref> North Korea protested by publishing a national map with the claim on Gando included.<ref>북한연구소, 북한총람 (1982) 85쪽.</ref> However, the North Korean claim on Gando and the Chinese claim on the area south of Gando Convention line were not serious. Seriously disputed area was the area between Gando Convention line and [[Paektu Mountain]].

Between 1962 and 1963, North Korea signed [[Sino–North Korean Border Treaty|two treaties with China]], which settled the boundary between the two at the [[Amnok River|Yalu/Amnok]] (Chinese/Korean names) and [[Tumen River|Tumen]] Rivers, and stipulated that around three-fifths of [[Heaven Lake]] at the peak of [[Baekdusan|Mt. Baekdu]] would go to North Korea, and two-fifths to China.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Gomà Pinilla |first=Daniel |date=2004-03-01 |title=Border Disputes between China and North Korea |url=https://journals.openedition.org/chinaperspectives/806 |journal=China Perspectives |language=en |volume=2004 |issue=2 |doi=10.4000/chinaperspectives.806 |issn=2070-3449|doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Fravel|first=M. Taylor|date=2005-10-01|title=Regime Insecurity and International Cooperation: Explaining China's Compromises in Territorial Disputes|journal=International Security|volume=30|issue=2|pages=46–83|doi=10.1162/016228805775124534|s2cid=56347789|issn=0162-2889}}</ref>

However, the boundary between North Korea and the People's Republic of China continued to be contested, in spite of the 1963 agreement. In response to North Korea's perceived lack of support in the [[Sino-Soviet split]], China demanded that North Korea cede its portion of the peak of Mt. Baekdu to China, and between March 1968 and March 1969, a number of border clashes between [[Korean People's Army|North Korean forces]] and [[Chinese People's Army|Chinese forces]] took place in the Mt. Baekdu region. PR China wanted to restore the Gando Convention boundary. Chinese demands for the rest of Mt. Baekdu were eventually dropped in 1970 in order to repair relations between North Korea and China.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Gomà Pinilla |first=Daniel |date=2004-03-01 |title=Border Disputes between China and North Korea |url=https://journals.openedition.org/chinaperspectives/806 |journal=China Perspectives |language=en |volume=2004 |issue=2 |doi=10.4000/chinaperspectives.806 |issn=2070-3449|doi-access=free }}</ref> China has recognized North Korea's sovereignty over some 80% of the islands in the [[Amnok River|Yalu/Amnok]] and [[Tumen River|Tumen]] Rivers, and also accepted North Korea's control of some 90% of the mouth of the [[Amnok River|Yalu/Amnok]] River.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Gomà Pinilla |first=Daniel |date=2004-03-01 |title=Border Disputes between China and North Korea |url=https://journals.openedition.org/chinaperspectives/806 |journal=China Perspectives |language=en |volume=2004 |issue=2 |doi=10.4000/chinaperspectives.806 |issn=2070-3449|doi-access=free }}</ref> While not openly discussed anymore, it would appear that the 1963 agreement is only something of a framework and not exactly a binding contract for either North Korea or China.{{fact|date=October 2020}}

South Korea did not recognize these agreements, but did not made a serious attempt to assert Korean sovereignty on Gando either. South Korea did not officially renounce its claim on Gando, but the Sino-Korean boundary on South Korean national map loosely follows the 1961 line except for Mt. Baekdu, and largely accepts this boundary on the map as de facto boundary.

In 2004, the [[South Korea]]n government issued the following statement: "Our government takes the position that the 1909 Gando Convention, signed by Japan illegally without Korea's consent, is null and void, to the extent that the [[Eulsa Treaty]], which deprived Korea of its diplomatic rights in 1905, is a null-and-void treaty obtained through duress." On October 22, 2004, South Korean foreign affairs minister [[Ban Ki-moon]] also remarked on the voiding of the Gando Convention.<ref>{{in lang|ko}} [http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=100&oid=002&aid=0000014115 반기문 외교, “간도협약, 법리적 측면에서 무효”]</ref> Ban also stated that "nullity of the Gando Convention does not automatically resolve [[Gando dispute]] and international politics harden our attempt to resolve Gando dispute"