뉴스레터

Marking the centennial of Japan's forced annexation of Korea, this research project aimed to introduce the various issues and tasks resulting from the colonial rule by modern great powers and shed light on the realties and nature of colonialism. The work is divided into the two parts. Part 1 looks at the problems brought on by the process of colonization and national integration pursued by Western great powers—i.e., Great Britain, France, and the Soviet Union, while Part 2 looks at issues stemming from Japan's colonial and national integration policies and processes. What is notable about this title is that it features works by a diverse group of specialists in political science, economics, social studies, and cultural studies. As such, the book presents various approaches to each of the subject matters covered.

Groundless justification for colonization

Even without any prior consultation, the researchers involved in the project indentified four common characteristics to the colonial rule of the great powers. First, the colonizers justified their colonial rule and found their self-identity in regarding the colonized as inferior "others". Second, the colonizers attempted to assimilate the colonized into their societies and cultures. However, it was not to give rights or economic benefits to the colonized; it was ultimately to impose duties or forcibly mobilize the subjugated peoples. Third, the colonizers thoroughly ignored the colonized peoples' desire to recover their autonomy and independence and attempted to maintain their rule over the colonized permanently. Fourth, despite the efforts of the colonizers, their colonial policies not only brought on resistance from the colonized but also the measures implemented to assimilate the colonized were sometimes used as tools of resistance by the colonized.

Part 1 deals with the colonial rule of Great Britain, France, and the Soviet Union over Algeria, Vietnam, and Central Asia, respectively. Great Britain justified its colonial rule over India by comparing itself to a rational, courageous man while likening India to a barbaric yet weak woman that requires protection. Lurking behind this conception was Great Britain's deep fear of India. The Bengalis (Indians of the plains), who had developed an understanding of rights through education, started an anti-British rebellion. The British hired Indians of the mountainous regions—i.e., the Sikhs of northwestern India and the Gurkha of Nepal—as soldiers and used them to quell the resistance through the use of force and violence.

The distinctive feature of France's colonial rule over Algeria and Vietnam was that separate legal systems were set up for the French and the colonial subjects, thereby clearly distinguishing between the colonizers and the colonized. It is also worth noting that Quoc-ngu ["national language"; Vietnamese alphabet] education and other measures for expanding the influence of French culture with the aim of assimilating the colonial subjects backfired; it bred resistance and led to the development of the press in the colonies.

Soviet Union's colonial rule over the Uzbeks and Kazakhs of Central Asia was a case in which communization and the Russian rule over foreign peoples were undertaken simultaneously. The coverage of Soviet Union's colonial rule over Central Asia focuses on first-hand testimonies concerning the effects that the colonial political, economic, and social policies have had on the local population. The Russian colonizers always needed political opponents to their agricultural reform, collectivization, ethnic policies, and religious policies because they strengthened their colonial rule by oppressing and punishing the opponents. The paper points out that there is always a gap between "public memory" and "formulaic history" and that oral sources should not be overlooked in "redressing" history.

The Empire of Japan forced Koreans to worship
at Shinto shrines under the banner of assimilation
and integration. A Shinto shrine in Namsan, Seoul.

Part 2 discusses the governance policies and the issue of educational ideology concerning Japan's treatment of the Ainu, colonial rule over Taiwan, and colonial rule over Joseon. Along with Ryukyu (Okinawa), the territory of the Ainu became the first target of aggression immediately upon the establishment of the Meiji government. Subjected to an assimilation policy accompanied by brutal violence, the Ainu were forced to part with their distinctive culture, language, and lifestyle and were relegated to the lowest stratum of Japanese society. After achieving dramatic economic growth, however, the Japanese, who are an agricultural people, began claiming the unique hunter-gatherer culture of the Ainu as their own. That is, the Japanese attempted to stress their superiority by making claims to a culture it had so actively and thoroughly ignored and started depicting Japan as an ethnically homogenous nation. This reveals the arbitrariness of the conception of the so-called "Japanese nation."

Due to the discriminatory educational policy of the Japanese Governor-General of Taiwan, young Taiwanese people had to study in Japan if they wished to receive higher education in the social sciences. Taiwanese students were unable to enroll in a regular degree program as their Taiwanese educational background did not give them the proper qualification for enrollment. Thus, upon completing a preparatory course or vocational program, many obtained minor government posts. This reveals one aspect of the inconsistencies in the Japanese colonial slogan of equality and sameness [一視同仁]. The paper also points out that Taiwanese students awakened to the task of formulating a cultural and national identity through their interactions with Joseon students, Japanese Christians, and Socialists, which speak volumes about the condition in which the Taiwanese students in Japan found themselves.
The paper on the ideologies forced on the people of Joseon by the Japanese Governor-General traces the changes in ideological content and expression from the era of military colonial rule of the 1910s to the era of administrative colonial rule of the 1920s and all the way through the post-1930s era of continental aggression. For each era, Japan gave its colonial policy a different name: "assimilation", "extension of Japanese customs and institutions to Korea" [內地延長主義], and "turning Koreans into citizens of the Empire" [皇國臣民化政策]. What they had in common was that they forced on the Korean people the emperor ideology, which has been artificially created after the Meiji Restoration. In effect, Japan's colonial polices were not aimed at contributing to the enlightenment of the Joseon people but were tools for the large-scale exploitation of Joseon's natural and human resources.

This is made evident in the study of Amnok River development project, pursued as an international project to connect Joseon and Manchuria. In reality, the slogan "linking Joseon and Manchuria as one" [鮮滿一如] did not signify a voluntary solidarity between the people of Joseon and China through a national awakening; it pointed to the building of a system that would contribute to Japan's continental"development".

Need for in-depth, multi-pronged study

Colonial rule and national integration policies—the subject of the work reviewed—were undertaken by Western powers and Japan over a relatively short period of time of some 100 years starting in the mid-18th century. Despite the short time frame, the experiences and effects were diverse given the large geographical scope. Future research on this subject matter should take into consideration similar cases pursued in other countries to arrive at more in-depth findings. In so doing, the common cause of the vicious cycle of colonialism—the colonized being considered inferior because they are colonized and the colonizers justifying the colonization without moral remorse—must be thoroughly explored. This is especially crucial for Northeast Asia where the divergence in historical understanding and interpretation has led to mutual distrust and tension.