Newsletter

Is it possible for historians to completely shut themselves from the influence of the world they live in? For a starter, no matter how much they strive to maintain an objective viewpoint by keeping a certain distance from everyday lives, their private lives and cultural background somehow find their way into the research direction of historians.

Besides, the current trend emerging in academia is leaving history researchers little room to maneuver. A growing number of scholars are resorting to research methodologies that pay attention to the real economy factors such as international trade when trying to identify a cause of tension between nations. The trend is so prevalent that even the most brilliant experts end up downgrading the study of history somehow abstract. Amid the rise of such ignorant and unqualified critics who are skeptical about the history research, historians are sometimes falsely accused of being a puppet of government solely for their nationalistic stance, or ridiculed as someone who is losing sight of what is really happening in the real world and only clinging to the façade of the past.

Even in this challenging environment, the Northeast Asian History Foundation has raised a range of issues including territorial disputes over Dokdo and Kando, war, peace, fascism and globalization. Out of the belief that history is a study that should remain objective based on an unbiased use of past records, here are some academic suggestions for the Northeast Asian History Foundation to further grow in the future.

First, history research should not be manipulated as a tool for political and diplomatic purposes. The Treaty of Versailles, which ended World War Ι, declared Germany responsible for the cause of the war and required the defeated nation to pay enormous war reparations and award territory to the victors. The arbitrary aspect of the treaty stemming from rules of power politics compelled the German government to order its historians to present the evidence that would find Germany not accountable for the war, and force the participated nations to share the expenses of the war. This led to the publication of pre-war German diplomatic materials, "Die Grosse Politik der Europaïschen Kabinette." Soon, other superpowers including the United Kingdom, the United States and France followed suit.

Understanding Korea in the context of East Asia and world history

Rationalization easily leads to the biggest lies. Diplomatic documents should be respected as a major source of history research and a basic material that helps understand the history of humankind. They should never be used as a device that embellishes history.

Second, breaking from a narrow-sighted notion and research methodologies, the Korean society should be understood as part of East Asia and world history.

Korea is a nation with a history of over 5,000 years. The long-standing heritage should be fully respected. That, however, should not lead Korea's history research into a "patriotic" approach that beautifies facts of history. Such a misguided approach could make the study of history fall into "Korea-centeredness," which results in a misleading explanation of world events, rather than providing an objective view on historical facts.

A growing number of Korean researchers in the humanities and social sciences are going abroad to advanced countries like the US, Japan and European nations, for a short- or long-term study. Despite their obvious academic contribution, some of the scholars appear to accept overseas trends indiscreetly. Research methodologies used in advanced countries like the US were basically devised for the cases facing the nations and regions. Thus, it would not be reasonable to apply such a method into the issues of Korea and East Asia without a thorough consideration. Simply put, "considering the method of advanced countries always the best" is equivalent to assuming that what works for the US would work for every other country.

Taking Korea's international relations from late Joseon to the Korean Empire as an example, a substantial amount of studies based on primary materials about the international relations during the period has been accumulated. That implies that historians are now able to understand the issues Korea experienced for the transitional period in a more complete picture of world history. A future mission commands scholars to attain a holistic view toward the issues of the Korean society in line with the international relations. To accomplish such a grave task, historians are required to take the role of a political scientist, economist and sociologist, doubling the responsibility and burden accompanied by the study of the international relations.

Trap of "analogical inference" in history research

Third, nationalism should be carefully reexamined. As Korean academia achieved a fast growth after the liberation from the Japanese colonial rule, the general direction of history research has been developed into a dichotomy of an extreme case of nationalism and functional cosmopolitanism.

To define the cause of World War Ι, nationalism derived from European economic imperialism should be analyzed first. By the same token, economy, politics and nationalism are all intertwined in the discussion of today's conflicts in Northeast Asia. In the globalized 21st century, developed countries are returning to protectionism to keep the rise of newly industrialized economies in check, and are fully engaged in capital investment to make up for the losing profit of manufactured goods. Such a de facto nationalism enables capital to run over national borders in the name of globalization.

Fourth, historians should not fall into the trap of analogical inference. Lytton Strachey once said that "Ignorance is the first requisite of the historian." His remark advises historians to refrain from the use of analogical inference. Reasoning by analogy has always been a tempting but dangerous trap in the study of history. Conducting research based on analogical inference is almost impossible because a slightly different approach would immediately expose of proof to the contrary.

History does not provide easy lessons. History research is not to see similarities between the past and present, and to find an easy solution to current problems. Rather, the true value of history lies in understanding something new and different.

The mission of the Northeast Asian History Foundation is to contribute to bringing about regional peace. To fulfill its objective, the organization should seek an international collaboration in order for people in Northeast Asia to better understand "themselves" and "others," not only between nations but, ultimately, between people.