뉴스레터

'Modern and Contemporary History of East Asia' Books 1 and 2, written by co-authors from the three East Asian countries (South Korea, China, and Japan), have been published after six years of their painstaking collaborative efforts. This is the second book of its kind after 'History That Opens the Future' that was written in response to Japan's distortion of history and reflected the co-authors' nervous excitement in their first attempt to find common ground on historical perception. In this second collaborative project, as is often the case in any relationship, the co-authors got to know one another better and, in the process, realized the differences among the three countries in historical experience, historical sentiment, and historical perception. And the outcome of the project, 'Modern and Contemporary History of East Asia,' reflects the years they spent trying to overcome those differences.

Finding Common Ground on Historical Perception Begins with Historical Dialogue

It has been over a decade since civil societies, historians, and history teachers of the three countries joined forces to write 'History That Opens the Future.' The members of the East Asian History Compilation Committee have spent the last ten years on historical dialogue through dozens of international conferences held in the three countries and numerous e-mails exchanged among them. In those ten years, they have realized and understood how their countries differ in historical experience and historical sentiment that form the basis of historical perception. At the same time, they have struggled endlessly to find common ground in historical perception within the framework of East Asia.

Let me summarize those ten years of collaboration into one sentence: 'Interaction spawns friendship.' By interaction I mean incessant historical dialogue. And by friendship I mean finding common ground on historical perception. Historical dialogue is a process by which people with different historical experiences and sentiments are brought gather and become friends. My observations in historical dialogue with the Chinese and Japanese members in those ten years of friendship are as follows. From the Chinese members, I have sensed China's experience as a longtime leader in the area of Chinese culture, vestiges of a prolonged war during the first half of the 20th century, and changes resulting from its recent economic rise. From the Japanese members, on the other hand, I have felt Japan's dynamic experience in the formation and destruction of the Japanese empire in modern times, the trends of civil movements in the Japanese society today, and even the effects of the Great East Japan Earthquake last year. The Korean members, though their passion as strong as their dynamic historical experiences gave rise to conflict from time to time, have been also equally passionate in resolving such conflict. This experience has opened my eyes to the simple truth that historical dialogue is not an insurmountable mountain as it may seem, as long as we share our thoughts and hearts through continued interaction. In other words, I have confirmed that continuous and consistent historical dialogue, above all else, is the basis of expanding common ground on historical perception.

Expanding Common Ground on Historical Perception

There was progress in format from the first to second collaborative books. If the multinational authors had described the history of their own countries in 'History That Opens the Future,' they provided material and reviewed and revised the text together for 'Modern and Contemporary History of East Asia.' What about progress, if any, in terms of contents that expanded common ground on historical perception? Upon reflection on my own experiences with both projects, I am reminded of a debate over the influence of the March 1st Movement of Korea on the May 4th Movement of China.

Of the two, only the March 1st Movement was included in the table of contents of 'History That Opens the Future' when the book was in its conceptual stage. And at the end of the section under this heading, there was a statement that the March 1st Movement had influenced the May 4th Movement. It gave rise to a debate as the Chinese authors demanded conclusive evidence for this statement. The debate culminated in the decision that the May 4th Movement, which was initially not included in the table of contents, would be also included as a separate section. But in 'Modern and Contemporary History of East Asia' Book 1, there is a section that describes the characteristics of both movements and states that the March 1st Movement influenced the May 4th Movement. This section was written based on materials provided by the Chinese authors. Extremely valuable is this experience of the East Asian History Compilation Committee expanding common ground on historical perception through continued historical dialogue.

The experience of continued historical dialogue has also brought about a personal change in my historical view, from understanding historical events only in the context of national history to reevaluating them from the perspective of East Asian history, i.e. in terms of history of international relations in East Asia. For instance, when I examine the contemporary society of Korea, I take not only Korean history but also the entire historical experience of East Asia into consideration.

Historical Dialogue as the Foundation for Peace in East Asia

There is a mountain we are yet to surmount. We have not reached the common historical understanding of the memories of perpetrators and victims formed through the experience of colonial rule and war during the first half of the 20th century. Instead, we have confirmed once again that having a common memory of our painful experience of facing life-and-death situations is the key to finding common ground on the perception of East Asian history and the ultimate goal of historical dialogue. Peace cannot be built on a historical perception characterized by compassion toward self and hatred toward others.

Historical conflict can be a great obstacle to establishing peace in Asia, not least in the rapidly changing political environment of East Asia today. In fact, the issues of territorial disputes, controversy over distortion of history, sexual slavery by Japan and settlement of the past still remain unresolved and constantly appear on the news. In this context, I can say that historical dialogue that seeks common ground on the historical perception of 'our East Asia' beyond 'I' as the concept of single country or single people is a peace movement.

I have experienced that historical dialogue is never easy but also absolutely necessary. In in seeking what we could do 'together' through dialogue, I could feel a sense of unity and identity as East Asians built within us. A sense of unity and identity as East Asians is the psychological foundation for peace in East Asia. In other words, finding common ground on historical perception can bring peace to East Asia. And finding common ground on historical perception is a result of continued historical dialogue. This is why I believe more historical dialogue is needed.