Newsletter

The year of 2018 marks 1,100 years since the ancient Korean kingdom Goryeo’s foundation as well as 1,000 years since Goryeo’s great victory against the Khitan at Gwiju. Hence, to gain further insight about circumstances in Northeast Asia and which direction the Northeast Asian History Foundation should head toward, this month’s interview turns to Professor Emeritus Ahn Byung-woo who serves as chairman of the Northeast Asian History Foundation’s advisory committee and has long been studying Goryeo history in the context of historical issues in East Asia.

Interviewee: Lee Chang-wook (Director, Department of Exchange and Public Relations)

Ahn Byung-woo (Professor Emeritus, Hanshin University)

After receiving his doctoral degree in Korean history from Seoul National University, Professor Ahn Byung-woo taught Korean history at Hanshin University until his retirement in 2017. He served as commissioner of the National Archives of Korea’s task force for innovating national archival management and now serves as professor emeritus for Hanshin University and as chairman of the Northeast Asian History Foundation’s advisory committee. He is the author of “The Fiscal Structure of Early Goryeo” and a co-author of “North Korea's Understanding of Korean History Vol. 1 & 2,” “Politics and Society of 14th Century Goryeo,” and “Chronicling the Formation of China’s Territory and its Borderlands.”

Q1. We would like to begin by asking how you’ve been these days and what research projects or activities you have either been interested in or are taking part in.

Ahn Byung-woo It’s true that there are no more strings attached to me since I retired in February last year. I thought I’d be left with plenty of time after having devoted 33 years at the university, but it turns out the idle may get overworked to death. I'm still giving lectures to graduate students and working on projects with civic groups. And in the second half of last year, I was in charge of the task force for innovating national archival management, which involved investigating the negative effects that have so far materialized from national archival management and devising new ways to eliminate such effects.

Q2. Since this year is the 1,100th anniversary of the kingdom of Goryeo’s foundation, are you planning to participate in any special events or research projects? Please do share any major themes or issues you’ve become critically aware of.

Ahn Byung-woo I believe the Korean Medieval History Society will play a central role in hosting various events and conducting research projects. A monograph about Goryeo history will be published, international academic conferences and a joint academic conference between the two Koreas will be held, and a tour of lectures will be organized as well. Arrangements are being made to compile an outline of Goryeo history that covers both source material fundamental to researching Goryeo history and research findings from studies done over the past one hundred years. Also, the National Museum of Korea is preparing to launch a large-scale exhibition about Goryeo.

Arriving at the 1,100th anniversary of Goryeo's foundation has made me become more critically aware of "division and unification" and respecting "diversity and open-mindedness." Goryeo's foundation occurred when the Korean peninsula had been divided in the early tenth century. Nevertheless, Goryeo managed to achieve unification and form a society and politics based on diversity and open-mindedness. A country that preserved unity on the Korean peninsula since 936 became divided in two for more than seven decades with less than remote prospects for unification. This is what makes it necessary to go back 1,100 years to when Goryeo was founded and review the policies and efforts Goryeo employed to achieve unification. A closer look at the relations between the two Koreas and at a democratic South Korean society growing increasingly open and respectful of diversity will reveal the coexistence of a grave degree of insularity, discrimination, and even hate. So, we should closely examine how Goryeo shaped its society into one respects human dignity and ideological, cultural diversity, and opens its doors to other countries and different social classes.

Q3. Some regard Goryeo as a kingdom that openly and proactively dealt with diplomatic issues from gaining experience under a pluralistic international order as well as a unitary one. What lesson might we take away from such historical experiences?

Ahn Byung-woo The 1,100th anniversary of Goryeo's foundation offers an opportunity to consider several aspects of the kingdom, one of them being the fact that non-aristocrats from border areas took the lead in founding Goryeo. Provincial people stepped up to become the new ruling class, replacing the existing ruling class. Goryeo made apt use of both force and diplomacy to achieve unification on the Korean peninsula, and upon doing so, evolved into a more sophisticated society by embracing and hiring people from Later Baekje and Silla regardless of their social class. Goryeo also became the first kingdom in Korean history to implement a merit-based appointment of government officials, which opened up opportunities for regional talents to serve as officials working for the central government. The kingdom's open stance allowed various ideas and cultures from Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism to coexist under mutual respect for their respective roles. Such openness from within and willingness to accept advanced cultures and products from abroad served as a basis for sustaining and developing a country throughout an extended period of time. Diplomatically, Goryeo considered itself as a pivot in East Asia when it came to interacting with foreign countries. It decisively resisted wars of aggression, yet tried its best to avoid going to war whenever possible, because it had been well aware of how damaging wars can be.

Q4. Korea has lately met challenges in developing various aspects of its relations with China due to different perceptions and solutions suggested on how to respond to North Korean nuclear issues. The situation somehow seems to share similarities with the predicament Goryeo was in a thousand years ago between the Chinese dynasties of Liao, Northern Song, and Southern Song.

Ahn Byung-woo Forces that posed a direct threat against Goryeo were tribes to the north such as the Khitan, Jurchens, or Mongols. Fortunately, China had been divided at the time and Goryeo successfully took advantage of such international circumstances. Yet, the Khitan chose to invade Goryeo ahead of conquering the Song dynasties, and the Mongols and Red Turbans followed suit. Goryeo actively countered such invasions, but at the same time always sought to end war and restore peace through negotiations. Goryeo went under the investiture of Liao and Jin and paid tribute to the dynasties according to the international order at the time, but it was also bold enough to accept cultures from Song through exchanges with the dynasty.

The circumstances we are now in are, of course, much more difficult and complicated than they were during the times of Goryeo. Korea is divided in two, left with much fewer options to choose from, and most of all, a sharp clash of interests exist between the four countries involved in issues regarding the two Koreas. Fulfilling our diplomatic goal, not to mention the goal of our nation's history, while duly accommodating the stances and interests of surrounding countries is not an easy task. Goryeo wasn't able to overcome repeated crises by overpowering other countries. The Khitan and Jurchens were more powerful than Goryeo. Whenever threats emerged from the Khitan or the Jurchens, Goryeo would actively engage in exchanges with Song, and as international circumstances entered a transitional phase, it didn't waste the opportunity to benefit from the change. What we need to take note of is Goryeo's approach of not relying entirely on a single country for support, quickly yet accurately assessing international affairs, and audaciously acting upon its assessments. More than anything, Goryeo remained proactive in dealing with international affairs rather than passively responding to them.

Q5. Chinese and Japanese academia lately seem to be highly interested in considering their national interests through studies on the idea of a "Northeast Eurasia" or on maritime history that focuses on East Asia. Perhaps Korean academia should join its Chinese and Japanese counterparts since Goryeo used to be active in carrying out maritime and northward policies within the East Asian international order?

Ahn Byung-woo The history of a single country or nation cannot be complete on its own. Whatever the period, exchanges take place with other countries and they become influenced by one another. That is why examining or teaching history should not be limited to the viewpoint of a single country and should rather be reviewed alongside the histories of neighboring regions. This would require an "East Asian perspective" of considering the history of East Asia in the context of exchange and relations. The Northeast Asian History Foundation is well aware of the perspective and has been pursuing it. And I believe giving shape to it may be something the Foundation should be involved in. Encouraging research to adopt such a perspective requires the steady training of scholars, which isn't easy under our current system of training. Such a limitation, in my opinion, is also something the Foundation should take an interest in trying to overcome.

Q6. Since you've long been actively involved in academic exchange between the two Koreas, what would you regard as the most notable achievement among those made so far?

Ahn Byung-woo Various academic exchanges indeed took place between the two Koreas, although they have unfortunately been discontinued for the moment. I would have to say the joint compilation of a unified Korean language dictionary and the joint excavation of Manwoldae in Gaeseong are the most notable achievements. The excavation of Manwoldae took seven trips between 2007 and November 2015 to cover the western cluster of constructions spread over a site of 10,000 pyeong (approximately 33,000 square meters). The excavation was able to identify traces of the palace that used to exist during the time of Goryeo and uncover more than 20,000 relics, including metal type blocks.

Q7. Since relations between the two Koreas have recently been showing signs of improvement, what prospects for academic exchange might there be, particularly for Gaeseong and Ganghwa Island?

Ahn Byung-woo I foresee academic exchange being resumed as circumstances change between South Korea and North Korea. I actually think humanitarian aid and academic exchange, especially in history and archaeology, carry relatively less risks. I suppose the discontinued compilation of a unified Korean language dictionary and Manwoldae's excavation could be the first to be resumed, and since this year is the 1,100th anniversary of Goryeo's foundation, we could hope for a jointly hosted event to celebrate the occasion. The North and South Korean Council of Historians is preparing an exhibition on the Manwoldae excavation's achievements to be held during the Pyongchang Winter Olympics and has already proposed for North Korea to participate. If it does turn out to be a jointly held exhibition, it would count as the first academic exchange in years.

The city of Incheon is pushing for academic exchange on Ganghwa Island with Kaesong in North Korea, and I hope it goes well. It might also be worth trying to have palace sites and ancient tombs of Goryeo at Ganghwa Island inscribed as a UNESCO world heritage by tying them to the Goryeo-related historic sites in Kaesong that have already been inscribed on the world heritage list.

Q8. The precedent left by Germany seems to indicate that, for a peaceful reunification, South Korea should pursue cultural, academic exchanges with North Korea to create an environment supportive of overcoming differences and promoting mutual understanding. What aspects should the Foundation take into consideration for such exchanges?

Ahn Byung-woo Since it is called the Northeast Asian History Foundation, it makes perfect sense for the Foundation to pay attention to historical studies in North Korea because North Korea is, after all, part of Northeast Asia, right? Academic exchange between the two Koreas, especially in history, should be pursued since it's impossible to discuss Northeast Asian history without mentioning North Korea. However, not much interest is actually being paid to historical studies carried out in North Korea nowadays. Perhaps it's because North Korea doesn't seem to present any notable research findings, but we still need to professionally study North Korean history as well as historical research and education in North Korea. We should assume the approach of "seeking similarities while acknowledging differences" (存異求同) when it comes to research and find areas or subjects in which exchange can take place. When attempting exchange, there is no need to be obsessed with having to absolutely and quickly overcome differences. Differences rather need to be acknowledged. What we need is an arena for open, academic discussions, and I think it would be great if the Foundation could take on the role of providing such an arena. That way gaps from those differences may gradually be reduced to a mutually acceptable degree as time goes by.

Q9. The Foundation is researching and preparing to publish Korea's diplomatic history in order to understand Korean diplomacy from Korea's point of view and help Koreans embrace a forward-looking approach to history during a historic time of transition. What made it possible for Goryeo to practice a pluralistic diplomacy that served its national interests and what can we take away from Goryeo's example?

Ahn Byung-woo Each country advocates its own national interests in practicing diplomacy. However, it becomes necessary to think about what national interests really are. National interests are ultimately about the interests of the public. At the center of such interests are securing the safety of people's lives and properties away from the dangers of war and allowing a national community's self-respect, self-determination, and unique culture to be preserved. Yet, national interests can turn into the interests of a particular force from time to time. We cannot always make diplomacy work toward what we aim for, so there will be instances where we get forced into doing things or get invaded. Even when facing such instances, Goryeo practiced diplomacy to defend its royalty and people and at the same time develop its culture, so I think that sort of approach was what prompted Goryeo to practice a pluralistic diplomacy of broadly engaging in exchanges with other countries according to its needs.

The Korean peninsula is now placed under trying circumstances. Many countries have different interests at stake in the Korean peninsula, which steers them to establish and execute different policies toward it. That doesn't actually leave us with a whole lot of options to choose from, but we must nevertheless carve out our own destiny. We must forge a long-term unification policy that can gain support from surrounding powers, peacefully manage affairs on the Korean peninsula, and eventually guide us toward unification. And that policy should be based on a national consensus free of political beliefs. The reason Goryeo was able to win the war with the Khitan was not only because outstanding figures like Seo Hui or Gang Gam-chan made remarkable contributions, but because they were firmly supported by the public's willingness to resist. We should be bear in mind the fact that Goryeo ended up losing to the Mongols due to a division between ordinary people and the ruling class of a military administration. So doesn't it make sense to practice a diplomacy that serves what the public recognizes as national interests?

Q10. Finally, as chairman of the Foundation's advisory committee, we would appreciate your opinion on how the Foundation has done so far in performing its role amid rapidly changing circumstances in Northeast Asia and any suggestions you may have for the Foundation.

Ahn Byung-woo The Foundation had a unique purpose and mission ever since it was established. Research on historical issues in Northeast Asia and the proposal of policy alternatives are key to that purpose and mission. I believe the Foundation has done a great deal of what it has been charged with. Each administration has its own diplomatic track and the Foundation's research and policy proposals should be supportive of each track to a certain degree, but the Foundation has not yet been able to fully determine the basic direction of its activities. It needs to conduct research that draws closer to the underlying source of current historical conflicts in Northeast Asia and should use such research to devise and act upon a long-term road map for resolving those conflicts.