Newsletter

Governmentality during the Colonial Period in Korea and Vietnam

  On September 7, the foundation held its fourth joint academic conference with the History Research Institute of the Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences. The theme of this conference was ‘Governmentality during the Colonial Period in Korea and Vietnam’. Three speakers from the Vietnam History Research Institute, Director Chan Ti Phuong Hoa, Nguyen Duc Nhu, and Nguyen Thi Le Ha, participated in it. From the Korean side, Lee Byungtaek and Yang Jihye, researcher fellows from the Foundation, and Yoon Hyunsang, a research professor at Korea National University of Education, participated. Additionally, Yoo Insun, a former professor at Seoul National University who has been studying Vietnamese history in Korea, delivered a keynote speech on the topic of ‘Vietnamese Studies in Korea.’ The discussions were moderated by Kim Hyunchul and Jeon Youngwook, research fellows from the Foundation, and Eo Sungchul, a professor at Seoul National University of Education. A total of 6 speakers gave presentations, and the speakers and presentation titles are listed below.

  The Foundation has been engaged in academic exchanges with the Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences since its establishment, as the two countries currently have active economic exchanges and share many similarities in geopolitics as well as historical experiences. In 2016, the foundation initiated a research collaboration with the History Research Institute of the Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences, aiming to start full-scale joint historical research. As a result of those efforts, the first joint academic conference with the History Research Institute was held in Vietnam on the theme of ‘Re-examination of Research on East Asia.’ Subsequently, in June 2019, the foundation held another joint academic conference titled ‘The Process of State Formation from the Perspective of Time and Space: A Comparison between Korea and Vietnam’ and in December, they held ‘The Power of the Sea: State Governance and Community Attachment in the History of Vietnam and Korea,’ alternating between Korea and Vietnam. Due to the impact of COVID-19, three years have passed since the last conference. This recent joint academic conference is noteworthy in that it paved the way to reactivate research exchanges that had been on hold.

Speakers and Presentation Titles

Vietnam: Still an Unfamiliar Country

  “Despite active economic exchanges, Vietnamese research in Korea is still insufficient.” as noted by Professor Yoo Insun, who has devoted his life to studying Vietnam. If you attempt to look for books related to Vietnam in the library, you will realize the lack of resources. Above all, what makes academic exchanges challenging are the language barriers, as well as different ways of thinking and customs. I, therefore, believe that we can expect that a door of a higher level of exchange will be opened by becoming familiar with different languages and embracing diverse ways of thinking and customs. Enhancing mutual understanding is essential in order to prepare for potential misunderstandings and conflicts in the future.

  In this academic conference, there were significant comparisons of geopolitical similarities and historical experiences. Both the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam have been recognized as strategic bridgeheads for powers seeking to expand from the continent to the ocean or vice versa. Hence, there was a presentation on Vietnam’s diplomacy within such geopolitical conditions. Furthermore, comparisons were made between educational policies during the French colonial period in Vietnam and the Japanese colonial period in Korea, including the reactions and resistance of local residents. It’s interesting to note that the Confucian legacy, which views ‘human education’ as traditional rather than modern Western education, played a significant role in both Korea and Vietnam. It is said that this belief still persists in Vietnamese society today. Compared to Vietnam, Korean society seems to have been more rapidly embraced by modern education. Additionally, there was a presentation on the impact of Japanese ‘development’ governance on the multi-layered power of local societies, as well as the various reactions and resistance to it. It was suggested here that the elements of ‘capital’ along with the form of governance need to be regarded as variables of analysis. This presentation offered diverse perspectives on colonial governmentality.

  On the other hand, still, areas where mutual understanding is challenging exist, particularly when it comes to traditional aspects. It is widely known that the tradition of ‘republicanism’ was transmitted from the West. Republicanism has not resonated much in China and Japan. The assertion that the republican elements also existed in East Asia is somewhat accepted in academia. However, it is not thought as mainstream opinion. Vietnam has believed that its republican traditions originated from the governance of local Vietnamese villages. They assert that the elderly governance centered on local bigwigs took root as a ‘grassroots republicanism’ tradition. While French ideologies may have been disseminated during the colonial period, the presentation did not mention such French influence. The French thinker Montesquieu, in particular, is an essential figure when discussing modern republicanism, but it seemed challenging to trace his influence in Vietnamese intellectual history.

  Grassroots republicanism sounded quite exotic and unfamiliar to those of us who are familiar with the idea of grassroots democracy. It felt like listening to the story of the American democracy told by the French philosopher Tocqueville. These aspects are parts that require improvement. Meanwhile, there has been research on village code in Korea, but it seems likely that we have never regarded local bigwigs-centered governance as republicanism. Vietnamese local villages appeared more as a form of regional community rather than republican elements to me, someone who majored in Western political thought. In this regard, it is considered that a fundamental process of concept-sharing is needed to lay the groundwork for joint research for quite some time.

Future Directions for Joint Research

  As mentioned before, there are many geopolitical similarities in Korea and Vietnam. Therefore, research cooperation related to territorial and maritime issues is likely to continue in the future due to these shared concerns. Furthermore, it seems that there are many historical experiences that can be meaningfully compared. I believe that integrating geopolitical interests into historical research can lead to broader insights and richer results. In terms of time periods, joint historical research can be divided into pre-modern and modern periods. In the modern era, there was a significant change in geopolitical space as sea routes opened up, expanding the world’s space. Encounters with new civilized worlds through the oceans not only shook the existing world of experience but also expanded it. In simple terms, the conditions of experience underwent significant changes.

  Under these altered conditions, Korea and Vietnam initiated sincere exchanges. Despite similar experiences of fighting with China, there was no comprehensive exchange during the pre-modern period. During conversations with Vietnamese participants, we heard some stories. They said there was an increase in family troubles, including extramarital affairs, as the residents around the factories built by Korean companies experienced an increase in incomes and improved living standards. This marked the beginning of wavering trust in traditional family values. For everything, there are both positive and negative aspects. The matter lies in maintaining the positive effects while minimizing the negative ones as much as possible. From a historical perspective, Korea now also faces the risk of falling into post-colonialism, whether they like it or not. Hopefully, the joint academic cooperation between the Foundation and the Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences will contribute to preventing the relationship between Korea and Vietnam from falling into that risk and reducing the room for mutual misunderstandings as much as possible.