뉴스레터

A lot of Korean people will think that Saigo Takamori (1828-1877) was the person who proposed the Conquer-Korea Plan in which he claimed that Japan should invade Korea with its unhappy warriors. In the overall stream of facts, it is historically true. Well, then, what kind of person is Saigo who insisted on sending a delegation to Korea?

In October 1873, when the Iwakura delegation was making a round of calls on European countries, a political incident happened in which about 600 government officials resigned including half of the cabinet, the brain of the Meiji Government, and military and government officers. At that time, there had been an issue with regard to the diplomatic relations with Korea, and Japan's local government areas had just been reformed into a system of centrally administered districts. The political situation in Japan was unstable, and in this situation, Saigo Takamori's insistence on sending a delegation to Korea directly contributed to the occurrence of the incident. This is called 'Political Incident in the 6th Year of Meiji Government (also called Conquer-Korea Incident). After this, Korea and Japan made an agreement called 'Korea-Japan Treaty of Amity' in 1876, and Japan had the Southwest War, the largest war of all between factions of warriors.

Korean people may think that Saigo was the head of those who insisted on the invasion of Korea, and perhaps they do not even think or want to know further about him. Korea was repeatedly pushed back into the corner in diplomatic negotiations with Japan until the country was finally forced to be annexed into Japan. Therefore, this view is partly because there has been anti-Japan attitude and hatred among Korean people and they think, under the emotional influence, Japan should be looked at with the attitude and hatred for the period after Korea opened its port. It can also be attributed to the idea that digging into individual events and people involved is not so important.

Saigo Takamori was one of the leading members of the cabinet of the Meiji Restoration Government, and was the uppermost figure except Sanjo Sanetomi, a member of the Imperial family, and Iwakura Tomomi, a member of the noble class. Saigo regarded 'just cause' as of great importance in his view of foreign relations. In his self-calling mission statement submitted to the government during the Conquer-Korea Incident, he wrote "If we do not trust the other party and send our delegation accompanied by armed guards, we will lose the right manner. I really wish to achieve our aim of deepening the friendship." His motto was 'Worship the Heaven and Love the People'. In the collection of his teachings he left behind, he repeatedly says, "Step in the right way and devote yourself from the heart." In October 1873, Saigo Takamori, one of the most influential figures with a view of foreign relations based upon the principle of just cause, failed in his plan to go to Korea as a diplomatic envoy.

What if Saigo had met Korean officials?

In February 1876, Japan sent Kuroda Kiyotaka as ambassador plenipotentiary who was also the director of the Hokaido Colonization Office and Inoue Kaoru as a deputy to Korea. Kuroda was a man called 'mad' because of his bad behavior such as killing his wife in a drunken state. Inoue was called 'a manager of Mitsui, a businessman with political connections, because of his inappropriate relationship with Mitsue. In contrast, when Japan reached the Treaty of Amity with China in April 1871 in order to find a way to have diplomatic relations with Korea, Japan sent Date Munenari (a feudal lord) as head of the delegation and deputy foreign minister Yanagihara Sikimitsu as a deputy and a great scholar Tsuda Mamichi. One can easily imagine how Japan regarded Korea and how they wanted to treat Korea at that time simply by comparing the figures sent to China and Korea.

Even though Saigo Takamori was a man of Confucian virtues and insisted on unarmed delegation to Korea and maintained a view of foreign relations based upon the principle of just cause, the purpose of conquering Korea was undoubtedly to lead unhappy warriors out of the country to invade Korea. In spite of this point, I regret the failure of his plan of sending a delegation to Korea in October 1873. If scholarly Korean officials who used to recite so called 'the ways of Confucius and Mencius' and 'the ways of model kings' had met with Saigo whose motto was 'Worship the Heaven and Love the People' to discuss the diplomatic relations between the two countries, we would have retained at least 50% of the diplomatic hegemony. After entering into the Treaty of Amity with Japan, Korea was pushed back again and again by Japan and lost its sovereignty at the end. I happened to imagine this meaningless hypothetical case while I was thinking about the incapable diplomacy of Korea.