뉴스레터

The International conference on the centenary of Japan's forcible annexation of Korea in 1910

The year 2010 marks the centenary of Japan's forcible annexation of Korea. On the coercive annexation, Japan has made a far-fetched argument that the annexation has no problem in legal and moral terms or the treaty on annexation is legitimate even if some moral issues exist.

In time for the centenary, therefore, it is a duty of our time to identify the root cause of Korea-Japan disputes over historical issues and seek solutions of the situation.

In the 21st century, the two nations would have to come to terms with their past relationships and move forward towards a history of peace and prosperity through mutual understanding and cooperation, contributing to the establishment of a Northeast Asian community of peace. The deep-rooted memory of invasion and the scars of exploitation, however, still remain as an obstacle to their moving on with their new future.

It would not be an overstatement that the two countries' confrontation over historical issues is attributable to Japan's coercive annexation of Korea in 1910, to which most of today's historical issues between Korea and Japan date back.

2On June 22, ahead of the 100th anniversary of Japan's forcible annexation of Korea, the Northeast Asian History Foundation hosted an international conference under the theme of "Reexamining the Legal Validity of Japan's Annexation of Korea from the Perspective of International Law." The research team of the conference consisting of Korean and foreign scholars revisited the annexation 100 years ago from the perspective of "historical justice" through research not only of history but also international law and international politics.

The keynote lecture of Professor Kinhide Mushakoji (Director, Center for Asia Pacific Partnership, Osaka University of Economics and Law) entitled "The Illegality and the Historical Lesson of the Japanese 'Annexation' of Korea" has a resonance for all of us, the members of the international community.

The Korea-Japan Annexation Treaty, invalid from the beginning

Professor Mushakoji stressed that Japan's forcible annexation of Korea was invalid in terms of lex lata on the ground that negotiation for the Japan-Korea Annexation Treaty was carried out under Japan's military pressure and without legitimate procedures. At the same time, he noted that the treaty is a crime against peace and humanity in terms of lex frenda because Japan infringed on Koreans' rights to living in peace even if the treaty is acknowledged as legitimate as Japan insists.

At the same time, he noted that those who do not acknowledge Japan's forcible annexation of Korea as a crime under international law cite as an excuse the fact that a war did not break out, but their argument shows they define international crimes not from the perspective of legal justice but the interests of Western Powers. This perspective is represented by the remarks of Bert Röling, a judge at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, which sat at Tokyo that crimes against international laws were restricted to war crimes because if colonialism of the time is included in crimes against international laws, the United States' slave issue is also raised.

With respect to the lex ferenda perspective, on the basis of such legal definition, the Japanese government has held the attitude that history should be judged from Intertemporales Recht and retroactivity should not be applied. A case in point is the Japanese government's attitude to international human rights standards which started to emerge after World War II. Hannah Arendt (1906-1975), a Jewish German-American political philosopher, however, observed that if a crime unknown before makes appearance in human history, such as the crime of genocide, "justice" in this instance demands a new and unprecedented law.

In this regard, international law research on the Korea-Japan Annexation Treaty from the perspective of Intertemporales Recht, which the Japanese government has insisted on, has greater implications. Since 1990, Korean and Japanese historians have held heated debate over the validity of the treaty including Professor Yi Tae-jin of Seoul National University and Professor Unno Fukuju of Meiji University on the Japanese journal Sekai (The World).

Japan should resolve confrontation with ＂justice＂ and ＂conscience＂

With respect to the Japanese government's position, Professor Paekeun Park of Pusan National University analyzed protocols and procedures of signing a treaty around 1910 when Japan forcibly annexed Korea as explained in major introductory books on international law of the West and Japan and assembled common features, identifying the illegality of the Korea-Japan Annexation Treaty. Books written by J.C. Bluntscli, Theodore D. Wolsey, L, Oppenheim, W.E. Hall, Masanoske Yakiyama, Tetsukichi Kurachi, Nagao Ariga and Sakutaro Tachi explained that a treaty is invalid if it was not signed by a person with Full Powers or was not ratified.

Meanwhile, Professor Emeritus Haruki Wada of the University of Tokyo mentioned the fact that Emperor Gojong exerted all-out efforts for a neutral Korea, ending up caving into Japanese Army's pressure, while French Literature Professor Grotte Pascal of Ewha Womans' University questioned the validity of the treaty, citing that the Emperor protested to identify the illegitimacy of the treaty. In his comparison of Japan's annexation of Korea and the United States' annexation of Hawaii, Professor Edward Shultz of the University of Hawaii also emphasized that Japan's annexation was illegal and illegitimate as it was forced and against Koreans' will.

Ahead of the 100th anniversary of Japan's forcible annexation of Korea, we are to put Korea-Japan history into perspective and come to terms with our past relationships. It was obviously illegal that Japan, based on the invalid, forcible annexation treaty, forcefully mobilized Korean youngsters for war and it was in violation of jus cogens that Japan mobilized Korean women as "comfort women" for the Japanese Armed Forces. Now the Japanese government should accept that denial of its historical wrongdoings constitutes denial of justice and peace and take a sincere attitude to resolve confrontation over historical issues based on universal values of justice and conscience, becoming a responsible member of the international community in pursuit of peace. It is hoped that the year 2010 would become the beginning year of Korea-Japan reconciliation and peace in a real sense.