Newsletter

International Conference at the University of Hawaii, Manoa Revisiting Japan's Annexation of Korea 100 Years Later

An international symposium on "Personality and Politics in Japan's Annexation of Korea," co-hosted by the Northeast Asian History Foundation and the University of Hawaii, was held on April 23-24, 2009 at University of Hawaii's Center for Korean Studies. There were eight presentations by five scholars from Korea, two from Japan, and one from the United States. There were in-depth discussions along with the presentations. The symposium was attended by professors from the University of Hawaii--CHOE Yong-ho, KANG Hee-woong, Jon Van Dyke; Korean students from UCLA; and other students and faculty interested in Asian and peace studies.

Dr. CHOI Deok-gyu gave the very first presentation. His paper "Kan-do Issue and Japanese Annexation of Korea" is an analysis, based primarily on Russian records, of the events leading up to and following the Russo-Japanese War. The paper concludes that Emperor Gojong's handwritten letter urging the Russian Emperor against concluding a treaty with Japan demonstrated Emperor Gojong's intention to resist Japan's annexation of Korea with Russia's help.

Next was my own presentation. The paper, entitled "The Historical Significance of Dispatching Secret Envoys to the Paris Peace Conference: The Last Attempt of Emperor Gojong for the Independence of Korea," traces the little known backdrop, planning, and execution of Emperor Gojong's dispatch of a secret delegation to the second round of the Paris Peace Conference. The paper demonstrates that the key figures involved in this failed venture reconvene in Shanghai and become the founding members of the Korean Provisional Government. The final presentation of the first session was given by Professor YI Tae-jin of Seoul National University. His paper "President Wilson's Fourteen Point Program and the Poisoning of Emperor Gojong" investigates the authenticity of the theories surrounding the poisoning of Emperor Gojong. The analysis is based on a recently discovered "The Diary of Kuradomi Yusaburo (倉富勇三郞)" found on the homepage of Professor NAGAI Kazu (永井和) of Kyoto University.

At the first-session discussion, Professor ARAI Shinichi commented as follows: "Japanese word for rumor literally means 'stories carried by the wind.' It is an ambiguous term, but given the historical environment of that time period, the insinuation of a rumor alone sufficed as evidence." He went on to explain that there are two ways to prove the veracity of history--by means and by motivation. Arai argued that motivation can be a much more decisive piece of evidence than the means.

Motivation, at times more certain evidence than means

Dr. DO Si-hwan of the Northeast Asian History Foundation pointed out, "We have to reexamine the pitfalls in the argument that Japan's annexation of Korea became inevitable because Russia, after losing the Russo-Japanese War, exercised real influence and colluded with other major powers." Professor Lee Sang-chan of Seoul National University proposed, "There is a need to study Japan's annexation of Korea within the larger international context, but there also needs to be a reconsideration of the great powers' positions on Manchuria and Jiando [Gando/Kando]." Choi stated in response, "AHN Jung-geun's assassination of Ito Hirobumi weakened Russo-Japanese relations, and the United States took advantage of this, strengthening its own position. Japan thus compromised with Russia to counter the United States, and this led to Japan's annexation of Korea."

Professor ARAI Shinichi was the first presenter of the second session in the afternoon. His paper "Japanese Armed Forces Stationed in Korea and Enforcement if Treaty" analyzes military records to examine how Japan's Korean Garrison Army handled itself during the negotiation process of the Ganghwa Treaty as a foreign army on Korean soil without a bilateral treaty yet concluded. The paper is a criticism of a claim by former Meiji University professor UNNO Fukuju's claim that "Commander Hasegawa's order to send the Japanese Army into [Korea's] royal court was in accordance with martial law and poses no legal problems."

Next was Professor KANG Hee-woong's presentation, "Top Leadership of the Japanese Imperial Army and Korea." The central thesis was the following: "In order to understand Japanese imperialism, we must analyze the leaders of the various factions within the Japanese army and the process of their formation." Therefore, examining the order to poison Emperor Gojong should not center on individuals such as TERAUCHI Masatake and HASEGAWA Yoshimichi but on Privy Council headed by YAMAGATA Aritomo, the leading force behind the Meiji Restoration.

At the second-session discussion, YI Tae-jin assessed, "The use of military force in the signing of the protectorate treaty is an important theoretical framework that can undermine the justification for the legitimacy of the treaty on the basis of martial law." KANG Hee-woong proposed a comparative study of the poisoning of Emperor Komei and that of Emperor Gojong given the similarities between the two events. Professor SASAGAWA Norikatsu argued there was a need to analyze Seikanron given that the logic of sovereignty and self-interest emerged when the opposition party made it difficult for Japan to increase military spending.

Reassessment of Gojong's Diplomatic Activities

The second day of the conference started with a presentation by Professor SASAGAWA Norikatsu of Meiji University. This first presentation of the third session was entitled "The So-Called Seikanron and Chinese and Western International Law System." Sasagawa points out the lack of Japanese scholars of international law that link the "annexation of Korea" with "civilized nation" in their research, and criticizes that Japanese historians are undertaking research without consciousness. In other words, according to Sasagawa, Japanese scholars are framing their studies along a mechanical and schematic outlook that assumes a complete break between two eras when going from the old to the new. And in so doing, they are only emphasizing Seikanron while ignoring the fact that Korea and Japan had maintained friendly relations until toward the end of the shogunate era, trying to protect each other from the great powers.

Next, Professor LEE Sang-chan of Seoul National University presented a paper entitled "The Question of Form Relating to the 1910 Treaty of Korean Annexation as a Treaty Ceding National Sovereignty" based on materials from Gyujanggak. Lee compares records concerning numerous treaties archived at Gyujanggak and concludes that all treaties between Korea and Japan were null and void because they had been drafted unilaterally by Japan. The next presentation, "The German 'Welt-Politik' and the Japanese Annexation of Korea, 1904-1910" Germany was given by Dr. JEONG Sang-su of Myongji University. He asserts that Gojong was a realistic, levelheaded politician. In response to Japanese scholars' claim that Japan had received the approval of the great powers of Europe and America to annex Korea, Jeong demonstrates that the United States and France had opposed the annexation.

At the third-session discussion, Van Dyke pointed out that even though the treaties signed by the great powers of Europe and the United States with African nations had better formal frameworks than those concluded between Korea and Japan, they have been deemed illegal. As such, he proposed the importance of undertaking a comparative analysis of these international treaties with Korea-Japan treaties.

The fourth session comprised a wrap-up discussion on future research on Japan's annexation of Korea. Many comments followed when YI Tae-jin said, "I have become acutely aware of the need for a new start, rather than a conclusion, to the study of Japan's annexation of Korea." Japanese scholars talked about the possibilities of new areas of research and the importance of fostering young scholars. Korean scholars pointed out the need for further joint research through more international academic conferences as well as the need to edit and publish Korea-Japan treaties and related materials to mark the 100th anniversary of the Japan-Korea Annexation Treaty in 2010.

The two-day symposium came to a close with the concluding remarks of Dr. DO Si-hwan, who is organizing an international academic conference on "Revisiting the Legitimacy of the Japan-Korea Annexation Treaty from the Perspective of International Law," which will be hosted by the Northeast Asian History Foundation on June 22.