뉴스레터

Photo 1 Kim, Young-ho, Co-leader, Join Statement by Intellectuals Worldwide
Photo 2 Seo, Young-hee, Professor, Korea Polytechnic University
Photo 3 Lee, Tae-jin, Professor Emeritus, Seoul National University

On November 20, 2015, the Northeast Asian History Foundation jointly held an international academic conference with the Research Institute of Korean History at the Seoul Museum of History to review the meaning Eulsa joyak (乙巳勒約 1905 Protectorate Treaty) holds for world history in the year of the treaty's 110th anniversary.

The year 2015 also marks 120 years since the Shimonoseki Treaty was signed and 110 years since the Portsmouth treaty was signed. After the First Sino-Japanese War (1894-1895), a Russian-Japanese joint protection system was formed over the Korean peninsula, which turned into one exclusively run by Japan after the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905). It is therefore necessary to conduct a comparative review of how Japan turned Korea into its protectorate within the context of the above two instances of war. Revealing the treaty's violent and illegal nature this way is important for historicizing the 1905 Protectorate Treaty, which became the onset of an aggressor nation's violence toward the Korean peninsula under abetment and condonation from other imperialist nations.

The outline of the conference indicates that research on proving and comparing historical cases have become more diverse and in-depth concerning the forcibleness, illegality, and invalidity of the 1905 Protectorate Treaty, which were major topics discussed at the academic conference on the treaty's centennial anniversary. This illustrates that it has become academically impossible to continue arguing for the treaty's legitimacy.

Academically Impossible to Continue Legitimizing the Eulsa Treaty

The presentation by Professor Sasakawa Norigatsu (笹川紀勝) of Japan focused on the patriotic martyr An Jung-Geun's rationale for resistance in order to redress the disadvantages Koreans suffered from Japanese aggression. That rationale was based on An's understanding of international law, which would render the 1905 Protectorate Treaty as invalid and illegal because Korea was forced by Japan into entering it. Professor Sasakawa suggested in conclusion that the assassin of Ito Hirobumi seems to have been carried out by the patriotic martyr An Jung-Geun under his official authority as a leader of Righteous Armies in combat mode. Meanwhile, Professor Emeritus Lee, Tae-jin's presentation was about "The Korean Delegation's Argument for Nullifying Korea's Annexation to Japan at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference." The presented research was considered useful historical proof for extending the boundary of research on the 1905 Protectorate Treaty up to the 1920s and 1930s and for incorporating a comparative review of the role played by Syngman Rhee, who had been dispatched by Min Yeong-hwan to the United States ahead of the Portsmouth Conference.

The case study Professor Totsuka Etsuro (戶塚悅朗) presented about a 1963 United Nations Report of the International Law Commission reconfirmed the invalidity of the 1905 Protectorate Treaty. The presentation that came next by Professor Alexis Dudden was inspiring for suggesting a new methodology of approaching the treaty with perspectives based on post-colonialism and cultural history. She argued for the need to take a comparative approach based on the 2001 Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, which calls for a "transnational" approach that reaches beyond an orientation to the West to combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. She thus pointed out that Japan's legitimization of a history of colonization that turned the Korean peninsula into a stage of unlawfulness and barbarism is an unjustified act of distorting history. She took as an example of this the speech the Japanese Prime Minister Abe Shinzo gave on August 15, 2015 to commemorate the seventieth anniversary of the end of the Second World War. The speech used the word "encouraged" to describe how colonized people in Asia and Africa must have reacted to Japan's victory against Russia. Professor Dudden's suggestion may be worth considering in that it is a reflective alternative against the colonization framework of the Japanese who acted like the white for the white.The case study Professor Totsuka Etsuro (戶塚悅朗) presented about a 1963 United Nations Report of the International Law Commission reconfirmed the invalidity of the 1905 Protectorate Treaty. The presentation that came next by Professor Alexis Dudden was inspiring for suggesting a new methodology of approaching the treaty with perspectives based on post-colonialism and cultural history. She argued for the need to take a comparative approach based on the 2001 Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, which calls for a "transnational" approach that reaches beyond an orientation to the West to combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. She thus pointed out that Japan's legitimization of a history of colonization that turned the Korean peninsula into a stage of unlawfulness and barbarism is an unjustified act of distorting history. She took as an example of this the speech the Japanese Prime Minister Abe Shinzo gave on August 15, 2015 to commemorate the seventieth anniversary of the end of the Second World War. The speech used the word "encouraged" to describe how colonized people in Asia and Africa must have reacted to Japan's victory against Russia. Professor Dudden's suggestion may be worth considering in that it is a reflective alternative against the colonization framework of the Japanese who acted like the white for the white.

In the meantime, presentations at the conference all seemed to largely consider Meiji Japan's policy as one of aggression. The underlying premise of such a consideration is that the purpose of the Russo-Japanese War was for Japan to invade Korea. Through his presentation based on historical materials gathered from the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Navy, and Army, Professor Inaba Chiharu (稻葉千晴) described that Japan had already planned to go to war with Russia by May 1903, finalized that decision as of January 12, 1904, and shortly afterward notified the severance of its diplomatic relations with Russia and initiated military actions on February 6. The Japanese army's occupation of the Korean capital Seoul on February 9 therefore marks the beginning of Japan's actual rule over Korea. Such an agenda was not a violation of international law at the time Japan went to war with Russia, but initiating military action ahead of declaring war is deplorable to say the least.

Reevaluating King Gojong's Diplomacy to Preserve Korea's Territory and Independence

According to Professor Xu Yong (徐勇), Japan's unjust military actions were based on a policy of aggression that targeted the Korean peninsula and Northeast China, including Manchuria, one driven by modern Japan's idea that Manchuria and Joseon were indivisible. This idea was also tied to Japan's construction of a railroad connecting Joseon and Manchuria and in line with the Japanese military's Northern Policy, all fundamental to building a colonial system in Asia. Officially incorporating the Northeast Asian region as Japanese territory entailed the process of invading the Ryukyu Islands, Taiwan, the Korean peninsula, and then Manchuria, setting up a full-scale stage for Japanese colonial rule, which eventually extended into mainland China.

Research fellow Choi Deok-kyoo of the Northeast Asian History Foundation described King Gojong's efforts to prevent Joseon from entering the 1905 Protectorate Treaty as active and multilateral resistance against Japan's attempts toward wars of aggression and its measures to secure an illegitimate colonial regime. An example of such efforts was the four country framework Yi Han-eung suggested to Great Britain to ensure Korea's independence. To take action against the protectorate treaty, Korea's call, led by King Gojong, toward the United States and Russia for diplomatic support during the Russo-Japanese War should therefore be examined at macroscopic dimensions of preventing war, preserving territory, and maintaining independence. In that light, Professor Seo Young-hee's presentation would be worthy of attention for reviewing the protectorate treaty in the context of the Hague Convention, to which King Gojong sent special emissaries while on the verge of replacing the United States with Russia as Korea's partner for mutual assistance.

With Professor Emeritus Lee Jang-hie as moderator and with the participation of myself, Research Fellow Kim Min-kyu, Professor Emeritus Miyajima Hiroshi (高嶋博史), and Professor Lee Geun-gwan, the general discussion reconfirmed that the violence, unlawfulness, the violation of human rights and the forfeit of independence due to aggression, and pillaging that took place during the Russo-Japanese War and surrounding the 1905 Protectorate Treaty all contributed to driving East Asia and world order into tension and crisis. The discussion also resulted in a diagnosis that such tension and crisis caused by Meiji Japan's maniacal imperialism and colonization 110 years ago has not changed much in the present times and has left us still in the search for insights to overcome the such circumstances.