뉴스레터

Historical Situation and Planning Intention

NAHF has been working to deepen and spread its understanding of historical reconciliation since its establishment. In 2008, he published "Beyond the Divide between Harm and damage: The Way to Historical Reconciliation in Germany and Poland." In 2013, he held an academic conference at George Washington University on the theme of "History Reconciliation and Prosperity in Northeast Asia: 70 Years After the Cairo Declaration". We have continued the project with this interest in this topic.

The new book, The milestone of historical reconciliation, published by NAHF, is the result of efforts to establish a new direction for research on historical reconciliation that has been carried out since 2018, while inheriting NAHF's previous interest and projects. The title of this book contains an attempt to review the efforts for reconciliation and coexistence at this point, and an intention to establish a milestone to move forward.

The deepening of globalization and diffusion of democracy raise the necessity of historical reconciliation not only in Korea but also in international level. The deepening of globalization is raising legal, moral and political standards for national delinquency or crime. And the diffusion of democracy is demanding that injustices committed by power and the concealed and suppressed past be corrected. As freedom expands, the conditions of peaceful coexistence both domestically and internationally increase. The issue of historical reconciliation in Korea, China and Japan is set in the wave of liberalization around the world. In Northeast Asia, this issue is closely related to the collective narrative of each country as well as the past history that is not over yet. The different justifications and visions of each country's political life impose taboos and constraints on interpretations and narratives of past history. This makes it difficult to reflect on the past and to make reconciliation based on it.

The Direction of Research and the Subject of Major Analysis

Not only the NAHF's research, but also other research focused on conflicts between countries caused by the damage that occurred during the modern imperial era. However, other factors affect the historical conflict between Korea and China/Korea and Japan in addition to the victim's experience and facts. Generally, the issue of historical reconciliation is considered a case of conflict resolution. This effort to discover logic in the process of resolving conflicts led to game theory(strategic theory) that emphasizes human rationality. These theories analyze the strategy of conflict resolution from the perspective of transaction or negotiation.

However, there are dimensions that can not be reduced to successful transactions or negotiations in the strategy for historical reconciliation between Korea, China and Japan. There are many problems that are difficult to deal with, such as clashes of national pride, natural jealousy of neighboring countries, and memories of damage. Furthermore, Northeast Asia suffered from the shock of modernization from the West, so the path of understanding and solving it was different. Along with these different experiences of modernization, the legacy from the past was tangled, and the grounds for communicating and understanding each other were restricted.

Human nature, history and civilization, and international order

Considering the above points, the participants of the study made four dimensions as the level of analysis. First, it is the dimension of human nature. We noted that it is difficult to keep distance from the emotions of the revenge, the group-to-group competition, and the world surrounding humans, which are most evident in human nature. Above all, the problem of revenge is the most instinctive and demanding human nature, and the peaceful coexistence beyond revenge is a political idea that has become possible in modern times.

The second is the historical dimension. Memories of past conflicts and fights, elitism for collective identity, modes of presence of the past, and so on are the main elements of historical dimensions. In particular, the issue of membership, which is the core of the identity of the political community, is at the bottom of the conflict over historical interpretation.

Next is the dimension of civilization. Civilization itself includes not only the hierarchy of the world and the composition of discrimination, but also causes communication problems between civilizations. It is difficult to accept the words of Samuel Huntington, who predicted the clash of civilizations, but it is clear that there is a great obstacle to the communication of basic ideas that support each civilization. Regarding the historical conflict, 'modernity' has discrimination that distinguishes 'Western' and 'Non-Western' asymmetric hierarchy. The conflict between civilizations caused by the introduction of modernity raises the issue of historical interpretation. Since Korea, China, and Japan have been undergoing different modernization processes, interpretation becomes very complicated. Different historical interpretations make it more difficult to resolve conflicts caused by past history.

Finally, it is the dimension of the international order. This study accepts the explanation of Henry Kissinger, which divides the two pillars of the world order into power and legitimacy. If we focus on the right order of the world that is common in each culture, the dimension of international order will be closely related to civilization.

Can we achieve peaceful coexistence?

This book is divided into three parts: Western cases, Korean and Japanese cases, and Korean and Chinese cases. The nine studies here covered different topics, but we had four dimensions in mind: human nature, history, civilization, and international order. We also tried to compare and compare different articles to reveal critical mind about revenge, modernity, and historical narrative.

The political community has a history conflict, and has created a solution model, even if incomplete. The peaceful coexistence between countries can be simpler than that within any one country. The closer the relationship is, the more detailed the content of reconciliation. However, it is not easy for each political community to approach reconciliation with other political communities while maintaining their identity and pride. Before reason, there is a problem of persistent passion(or feeling). Both Western cases and those with China and Japan surrounding Korea show the universal problem of communal life. On the other hand, the comparison between the West and Northeast Asia reveals the difference in how to solve the problem of revenge.

Finally, the existing research on 'reconciliation' was mainly focused on 'apology' of the perpetrator or 'forgiveness' of the victim. The perpetrator's apology must be an important factor. However, if the perpetrator remains just a perpetrator and the victim remains a victim, the budding of peaceful coexistence will be difficult to grow. To resolve this problem, it is necessary to step up the perpetrator and victim as partners in equal conversation. This is called 'transversality' in psychological terms. The purpose of this study is to reveal the interest in the other party of reconciliation, the situation of the parties, the limitations of historic imagination, a metaphysical element of historical thinking that weighs them down.

I hope you will look at the limitations of historical imagination and the difficulties of passion hidden behind the beautiful expression of 'Beyond good and evil' or 'Beyond harm and damage' through this book.