Newsletter

The end of World War II seventy years ago was an event of great significance that brought a new hope to mankind by defeating the forces of evil and closing a chapter in world history dominated by the irrationality of the strong preying on the weak. With the fall of Nazi Germany at the hands of the Allies, Europe was liberated from the grip of totalitarian and fascist dictatorship and the threat of ethnic persecution. The 15th day of August in 1945, when the Japanese Emperor surrendered after the atomic bombings, became the day of liberation that set Asia free from imperialist colonial rule and ruthless exploitation.

But in the next seventy years of postwar history, Europe and East Asia walked on paths that turned out to be vastly different from each other. The countries in Western Europe, victims of enormous damage caused by Nazi Germany's wars of aggression, brought Germany's war crimes to justice, and set about building the European Community after achieving reconciliation by quickly redefining the relations among the European states and peoples that were once enemies. Despite the prolonged Cold War with Soviet-controlled Eastern Europe, there was a continued increase in human and material exchange and cooperation from the 1970s onward with the Helsinki Accords signed at the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). Finally, with the fall of the Berlin Wall came the unification of Germany and the integration of Eastern and Western Europe, and progress toward one Europe began.

The Paths Walked by Europe and East Asia in the Seventy Years of Postwar History

By contrast, East Asia, liberated from Imperial Japan's colonial rule and aggressive wars, went through the Korean War and the Vietnam War where millions of people were killed by their compatriots. Even with the Cold War purportedly over since the 1990s, the state of East Asia has been far from peace because of the lack of inter-Korean dialogue and cooperation and the arms race on the Korean Peninsular, with nuclear development in the North and the deployment of high-tech weapons in the South, which increases the likelihood of conflict.

After the victory of the Allies over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, the world, Europe and East Asia alike, was divided into the East and the West, i.e. the Soviet-led communist camp and the U.S.-led liberal-democratic camp, and started the Cold War as a system of rivalry and competition. In postwar Asia, however, the war criminals, not least the Japanese Emperor chiefly responsible for the war, were not properly punished. and the Korean Peninsula, not Japan, was divided in half, and each half was controlled by the United States and the Soviet Union, which solidified the system of confrontation with the U.S. and Japan on one side and China and the Soviet Union on the other. While dialogue and reconciliation progressed easily between Germany and the rest of Europe in the absence of hot war, there was no peace on the Korean Peninsula where the war had not actually ended and an arms race was solidifying the system of confrontation with South Korea, the U.S. and Japan on one side and North Korea, China, and the Soviet Union on the other.

Another major obstacle to the establishment of a peace system in East Asia is the increasing likelihood of armed conflict because of the territorial disputes that arose after Japan's shift to the right, on top of the historical conflict among Korea, China, and Japan that remains unresolved. The Abe administration of Japan, in particular, is conspiring to make it possible for its nation to engage in wars by revising its pacifist constitution, without candidly admitting to, or apologizing for, the crimes against humanity and atrocities committed during the wartime, such as military sexual slavery, forced labor, the Nanjing Massacre, and Unit 731's human experimentation.

Watching the grim reality of the Korean Peninsula on its seventieth year since liberation and the worrisome crisis facing Northeast Asia, I feel it necessary to review how Europe was able to overcome the Cold War system and the division, and achieve historical reconciliation thereby progressing toward the European Community.

Lessons Learned from Civil Society in Europe as the Leader of Reconciliation and Cooperation

Europe's endeavor to overcome the division and achieve historical reconciliation was not without numerous difficulties and obstacles along the way. There was the persistent civic movement to establish peace in Europe, and the union of civil society across the borders continued to exert pressure on the governments for reconciliation.

In postwar Western Europe, there were many solidarity programs between the countries that were former enemies (e.g. Germany and France or Britain), which started from the 1950s at UNESCO's suggestion and included education programs to promote the understanding of other countries and exchange programs for students and teachers. There was also extensive civic education, which led to the widespread awareness of democracy and human rights. This was a public campaign on a large scale that reflected on their past wrongdoing to make sure that dictatorship or ethnic chauvinism would never rise again.

Major contributors to this campaign were civic colleges established in every city, academies run by Protestant churches, and youth groups. Although Willy Brandt's Eastern Policy (Ostpolitik) met with strong resistance from conservative, anti-communist groups and almost failed, the 1965 Ostdenkschrift of the Protestant churches, which called for historical reconciliation with the countries in East Europe by finalizing the border along the Oder and Neisse rivers, even if it meant giving up on the old German territory, played a major role in changing the people's minds. Civil society involvement and movement as described above caused changes in the people's minds and party policies, which paved the way for the Helsinki Process or reconciliation, and exchange and cooperation with Eastern Europe, and, finally, the unification of Eastern and Western Germany and the integration of Eastern and Western Europe.

In contrast with the unfolding of the history of postwar Europe as described above, East Asia has not yet properly liquidated the past in those seventy years. Furthermore, Northeast Asia has been put in a tough situation where even a peace community is a distant dream as the division of the Korean Peninsula and the system of confrontation have been reinforced by the conflicting interests of the four powers.

It is now time for civil society in Northeast Asian countries, including North and South Korea, China, and Japan, to come forward to overcome the division system and resolve historical conflict for their own security and survival, instead of leaving it in the hands of government or the powers seeking their interests. They should follow the European example and start working toward the union of civil society across the borders and division lines.

This is why we intend to increase opportunities of meetings and exchange for history NGOs for peace in East Asia. We cannot expect peace and development in East Asia without resolving the historical conflict among Korea, China, and Japan and overcoming the division system. Therefore, government and civil society should come forward together to lay down a framework for dialogue and solidarity beyond the borders and division lines. I believe that this is where the Northeast Asian History Foundation should come in and take on the challenge, and that doing so is what the NAHF exists for.