Newsletter

Q

In February 1876, Korea entered into its first modern treaty, the Korea-Japan Treaty of Amity (also known as the 'Treaty of Ganghwa'), which was also an unequal treaty. The Treaty of Ganghwa is considered to have had a big impact on the course of Korean history. What were the details of the treaty and what is the treaty's historical significance?

A

Since the Meiji Restoration (明治維新), Japan had persistently knocked on the door of Korea for opening, only to be refused by the Daewongun (father of Kojong) regime which could not accept Japan's demand for a new relationship that was far off-course from the traditional one. Frustrated and outraged, some of the Japanese even supported an invasion of Korea. However, after some heated internal debate that reached the conclusion that conquering Korea was not feasible, Japan invaded Taiwan first. Afterwards, Japan was placed on a par with Western imperialist countries, and its dream of invading Korea was revived by the Unyo (雲揚號) Incident in Ganghwa Island, which Japan caused deliberately as part of so-called 'gunboat diplomacy' which they had learned from Western imperialism.

The Korea-Japan Treaty of Amity (also known as the 'Treaty of Ganghwa' consisting of a total of 12 Articles) signed in February of 1876 by gunboat diplomacy recognized an equal status relationship between Korea and Japan, but this provision in the preamble was nothing but an ersatz boilerplate designed to preclude China(Qing)'s intervention in Korea. In fact, the Treaty of Ganghwa, along with the Supplement to the Korea-Japan Treaty of Amity (a total of 11 Articles) signed in August that year and the Rules of Commerce (a total of 11 Rules), essentially constituted a typical unequal treaty system.

Caption: The monument of the Old Site
of Yeonmudang where the Treaty
of Ganghwa was signed

This unequal Treaty gave Japan extraterrestrial privileges by consular jurisdiction, and the rights to establish Japanese concessions or settlements and open three ports in Korea (Busan, Wonsan, and Incheon). What's more, Japan, taking advantage of Korea's ignorance of the modern treaty, even attempted to keep the unequal Treaty in indefinite existence by deliberately omitting the term of validity and the defeasance clause, in violation of the custom of treaty under international law.

The Treaty also deprived Korea of the right to impose duties that was indispensable for protecting the domestic markets and securing an income source for the public coffers. The Korean officials then in charge of negotiating the Treaty, who did not have an understanding of the right to impose duties in a modern sense, ended up permitting duty-free trade. Deprived of its tariff autonomy, Korea could not protect the domestic industries against the influx of industrial products mass-produced under capitalist systems, which, in turn, would hinder Korea's efforts to foster and promote industries independently, resulting in the failure to build up national capital. In addition, the Treaty allowed the free circulation of the Japanese currency within Korea, which benefited Japanese merchants; not only did they gain financial superiority over Korean merchants thanks to the money available from the Japanese banks establishing branches in Korea, but they manipulated the exchange rate between two countries to purchase exports at bargain prices, and even realized foreign exchange gains by lending Korean merchants the money they had loaned from the banks.

The Treaty also deprived Korea of the right to impose duties that was indispensable for protecting the domestic markets and securing an income source for the public coffers. The Korean officials then in charge of negotiating the Treaty, who did not have an understanding of the right to impose duties in a modern sense, ended up permitting duty-free trade. Deprived of its tariff autonomy, Korea could not protect the domestic industries against the influx of industrial products mass-produced under capitalist systems, which, in turn, would hinder Korea's efforts to foster and promote industries independently, resulting in the failure to build up national capital. In addition, the Treaty allowed the free circulation of the Japanese currency within Korea, which benefited Japanese merchants; not only did they gain financial superiority over Korean merchants thanks to the money available from the Japanese banks establishing branches in Korea, but they manipulated the exchange rate between two countries to purchase exports at bargain prices, and even realized foreign exchange gains by lending Korean merchants the money they had loaned from the banks.

As we can see, as early as the beginning of modern relationship, Japan committed what would be considered preposterous and absolutely unacceptable in international relations, even in the era of imperialism subject to the law of the jungle, for their own national interests. Japan's self-serving intentions behind the Treaty are still alive today in the Dokdo issue. Japan's controversial claims to Dokdo, which don't make sense in the historical context, may be traced back to the Treaty of Gangwha 100 years ago which showed that Japan was willing to do anything as long as it served their national interests. The modern relationship between Korea and Japan, which Japan started with the unequal treaty, seems to have changed little in nature throughout the colonial period and over the subsequent years until today.