Newsletter

Between the ROK and Japan, what happened in the past still affects what is happening now in cultural exchanges as well as sports matches, most recently in Olympic soccer last year. The deep chasm rooted in history is hard to bridge. The disputes between the ROK and Japan over history and territory are the results of their relations in modern times. Since they forged a new relationship in 1965, the ROK and Japan have advanced their relations in terms of commercial trade or human and cultural exchange. Only their political and diplomatic relations remain in a stalemate, which is likely to continue for a long time to come because their disputes are rooted in a very structural and fundamental cause.

Gradual Changes in Japan's Perception of History

The conflicts between the ROK and Japan arose from Japan's forced annexation of Korea in 1910 and the colonial rule that followed. In other words, these were among the issues that needed to be settled when the ROK and Japan restored diplomatic ties in 1965. Unfortunately, those issues weren't handled properly and still remain an obstacle to the bilateral relations. The ROK representatives are thought to have done their best and gained a lot from the talks with their Japanese counterparts that led to the restoration of diplomatic ties, but the same cannot be said at least about historical issues. They have agreed to disagree over the interpretation of the term 'already' in Article 2 of the ROK-Japan Basic Relations Treaty: "It is confirmed that all treaties or agreements concluded between the Empire of Korea and the Empire of Japan on or before August 22, 1910 are already null and void."

Since the 'history' was glossed over, Japan's attitude expressed toward its colonial rule over Korea has been an important issue in the ROK-Japan relations. The ROK government has demanded an apology from its Japanese counterpart for the colonial rule, and Japan, on the premise that its colonial rule was effective and justified, has accommodated the demand from the ROK a little bit and revised the expressions in its statements accordingly. After all, the Japanese government couldn't afford to jeopardize the active social, economic, and cultural exchanges between the ROK and Japan.

In the process, progress has been made one step at a time in resolving differences over the 'history.' At first, Japan used very ambiguous expressions such as "It is indeed regrettable that there was an unfortunate past between us for a period in this century and I believe that it should not be repeated again tory between the two countries in a period of this century and I believe that it should not be repeated again"(by Emperor Hirohito in 1984) or "Reflecting upon the suffering that your people underwent during this unfortunate period, which was brought about by our nation, I cannot but feel the deepest remorse"(by Emperor Akihito in 1990) but gradually began to use the word "apology," for example in the statement by Prime Minister Murayama in 1995 and in the 'Japan-South Korea Joint Declaration: A New Japan-Korea Partnership towards the Twenty-first Century' by ROK President Kim Dae-jung and Japanese Prime Minister Obuchi in 1998.

In 2010, the year that marked the centennial of Japan's forced annexation of Korea, South Korean and Japanese intellectuals issued a joint statement that Japan's annexation had been forced, and therefore unjust and wrongful. And President of DPJ Kan Naoto, on top of the Japanese government's existing position, issued the following statement, which, even though it didn't use the word 'apology,' was thought to have improved on the previous ones.

"As demonstrated by strong resistance such as the Samil (March 1st) independence movement, the Korean people of that time was deprived of their country and culture, and their ethnic pride was deeply scarred by the colonial rule which was imposed against their will under the political and military circumstances. (...) Those who render pain tend to forget it while those who suffered cannot forget it easily. To the tremendous damage and sufferings that this colonial rule caused, I express here once again my feelings of deep remorse and my heartfelt apology."

Japan's Recent Shifts to the Right Attempt to Reverse History

At the turn of the 21st century, with the changing political landscape of Northeast Asia, Japanese politics began shifting increasingly to the right. The reckless remarks and deeds by Japanese political leaders regarding what Japan had done in the past became more blatant, especially as Japan strove to become a military power and strengthened its alliance with the U.S. For instance, former Prime Minister Koizumi has continued his visits to the Yasukuni shrine despite the concerns of China and South Korea. A number of political leaders have also made 'reckless remarks' regarding the Dokdo and textbook issues. It is against this backdrop that in 2005 the ROK and Japan had wrangling over the authorization process of Japanese history textbooks.

Recently, Japan's shifts to the right became more blatant than ever. Shifting to the right was the tactics adopted by the LDP during the campaigns last December in order to defeat the DPJ and regain power. Prime Minister Abe (安倍晋三) has pledged to revise the statement made by then-Chief Cabinet Secretary Kono (河野洋平) twenty years ago where he (Kono) made an apology to the 'comfort women.' Abe has also pledged to even amend the 'Peace Constitution' which forbids Japan to maintain armed forces. Japan Restoration Party, which emerged as 'third force,' is also in support of this move, pledging even to develop nuclear weapon technology. If we recall how Meiji Restoration inspired Japan with militarism, the name 'Restoration Party' itself sends chills down our spine. Without doubt, this is Japan's pledge to wipe out their 'orignal sin' of the Second World War and reinvent itself as a militaristic country contending for supremacy. If this is the Japanese government's position, then it comes as no surprise that Japan's sovereignty claims over Dokdo and distortion of history in the textbooks are becoming increasingly blatant and the territorial disputes with China are intensifying.

The Northeast Asian History Foundation Expected to Play a Role in Sharing the Perception of History

We often argue that what happened in the past shouldn't interfere with the paths to the future. In other words, the issues of the past must be handled properly. The disputes in Northeast Asia are rooted in the history of the region up until throughout the 20th century, which, in most part, can be blamed on Japan's imperialist aggression. Therefore, without Japan's genuine repentance for its past wrongdoing, it would be difficult for Northeast Asia to be reconciled. Even if Northeast Asia could maintain an friendly atmosphere, it would be only temporary and could turn hostile at any time unless Japan truly repented of what it had done wrong in the past. This is where the Northeast Asian History Foundation starts, and the same goes for our history education.

The first step toward resolving disputes over history is to have a common perception of history, which is possibly only if the nations and peoples have a common prospect of the future. This is a long-term goal. but it takes more than time to achieve it. More than ever, the Northeast Asian History Foundation has important roles to play. And we also need to strive to do our part, whether as the government, scholars, or private institutions. Those who participate in all kinds of organizations or committees shouldn't make the mistake of thinking that they are 'members of the national team.' And whatever they do, they must take North Korea into consideration. Although North Korea's third nuclear test recently have considerably strained inter-Korean relations, exchange with North Korea at civilian or academic levels is crucial to building peace in Northeast Asia. Though it will be a challenge without doubt, organizing a meeting of historians from Korea (including North Korea), China, and Japan is an idea worth trying.