There is an opinion that the year 1945 is the standard of \u201cJapan-Korea postwar relations\u201d. \u00a0In human history, war has always been a big issue, and , there is also the opinion that colonialism has been a defining issue of human history. \u00a0<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Mass-militant wars between Germany and France, which broke out many times in the past, are different from the relations between Japan and Korea. Postwar Japan\u201d, which came about after defeat in the Pacific War, is different from postwar Korea. The Korean postwar came after the Korean War which occurred in 1950. There have been problems caused by colonialism both in Japan and Korea during the period of the Pacific War and these problems continued up until 1945. There are different perceptions and experiences in both countries, and specific differences in the histories of Japan and Korea that cannot simply be explained using the term \u201cpostwar\u201d.\u00a0<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The word \u201cpostwar\u201d possesses special significance in Japan, both as a period in Japanese history and as a conceptual turning point. For example, November 3, 1946 is the birthday of Emperor Meiji. \u00a0The Constitution of Japan was announced officially on November 3, 1946 and it is said that the political leaders back then decided on the day considering the Emperor\u2019s birthday. We can say that Japan, which was not directly involved in the Korean War, could be considered a \u201cpeace-loving nation\u201d despite the fact that Japan has played an important role as a base country during the Korean War. \u00a0It was also Japan that proposed the so-called \u201cpostwar regime\u201d of the 21st<\/sup> century.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n In the \u201cpostwar regime\u201d, Japan proposed shifting to a social framework suitable for the 21st<\/sup> century – if basic frameworks under the constitution like systems in administration, education, economy, employment, relations between central government and local, diplomacy and security etc. are deemed unsuitable for the 21st<\/sup> century. Given this, history just after the year 1945 in Japan is directly connected with the present.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n In November, 1946, then Prime Minister Kij\u016br\u014d Shidehara established the War Research Committee.\u00a0 It was necessary for Japan to investigate autonomously actual events from the war to \u201cestablish a new, peaceful and highly civilized Japan.\u201d In the Committee, they researched not only the Japan-China War and the Pacific War, but also the First World War, the Russo-Japanese War and the Meiji Restoration (\u660e\u6cbb\u7dad\u65b0).<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n However, there was no regard given to the Korean Peninsula. Such treatment was not unusual. \u00a0The International Military Tribunal for the Far East (the Tokyo Trials) which started in 1946 judged cases of unlawful actions by Japanese leaders during the time from 1928 to 1945. \u00a0As many people know, colonial problems were not taken up in these trials and liberal Japanese researchers have pointed out the problems of this. However, if you read the decision carefully, you would know that the Allied Powers approved the Annexation of Korea in 1910 as a right of Japan prior to 1928.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n On the other hand, the word \u201cliberalization\u201d in Korea is synonymous with \u201cpostwar.\u201d<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n On July 26, 1945, the Allies presented the Potsdam Declaration. Prior to Japan\u2019s acceptance of the Declaration, the United States carried out the atomic bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Japan is the only country to have experienced atomic bombs, but the Japanese are not the only race that were affected. Those with roots in the Korean Peninsula, Taiwan and the Mainland China were also the victims of atomic bombs.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n At 11pm on August 14, Japan accepted the Potsdam Declaration, and the Pacific War (the Great East Asian War) ended with the Emperor\u2019s announcement on August 15.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n The date of the Emperor\u2019s mandate was August 14\uff0eAfter August 14, the battle between Japanese and Soviet armies was still going on, and it was on September 2 that this battle ended with the signing of the Japanese Instrument of Surrender.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n In many countries, September 2 is the Victory Day over Japan. However, in Japan, August 15 has two meanings \u2013 the end of the war and the beginning of the postwar period.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n In the Korean Peninsula, the Emperor\u2019s mandate had another meaning – liberalization.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Three years later, on August 15, 1948, Korea declared their independence and got international recognition by Resolution 195 (III) at the United Nations General Assembly on December 12 1948.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n In Korea during this period, they were arguing about claims for compensation and referred to the Treaty of Versailles between the Allied and Associated Powers and Germany. The Treaty was very severe on Germany and concluded in 1919. Korean\u2019s claims for compensation were not \u201cpunishment\u201d nor \u201cretaliation\u201d against Japan, but rather \u201crecovery from damages\u201d which came from \u201cviolence\u201d and \u201cgreed.\u201d<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n In The Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea\u201d concluded in 1949, it was mentioned that \u201cJapan has ruled over Korea from 1910 to August 15, 1945\u201d.\u00a0 This means that Korea wanted to acknowledge the period of colonization by Japan. In the Treaty, they also mentioned \u201chuman damages which came from the Sino-Japanese War and the Pacific War,\u201d meaning that they considered themselves as victims of war. In other words, Korea wanted to address both \u201ccolonial responsibility\u201d and \u201cwar responsibility\u201d.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n In 1951, however, Japan concluded \u201cThe Peace Treaty of San Francisco\u201d with the Allied nations which brought a conclusion to \u201cthe state of war\u201d and reinstated their sovereignty. Korea was not authorized to sign the treaty.\u00a0 The Peace Treaty of San Francisco, signed during the \u201cCold War\u201d and \u201cHot War\u201d (the Korean War) , formed \u201cthe order after the War\u201d after the Asian Pacific War. However, there were no special rules for the formation of order after the liberation of colonies.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n It is not difficult to criticize the Peace Treaty of San Francisco if we consider the situations mentioned above. However, historically many peace treaties tend to focus on wars and their aftermath.\u00a0 Separation clauses that address the colonies of defeated nations do not consider the colonial issues that come up afterwards.\u00a0 Notwithstanding such examples, Korea, whose sovereignty was approved by the United Nations in 1948, and Japan, which recovered its sovereignty in the Peace Treaty of San Francisco in 1951, have entered into international relations as mentioned in the preamble of \u201cThe Japan-Republic Korea Basic Relations Treaty\u201d in 1965. Since then, both countries have been trying to narrow their divergence little by little. \u201cThe Kono (Chief Cabinet Secretary, in 1993) statement\u201d, \u201cMurayama (Prime Minister, in 1995) statement\u201d and \u201cJapan-Korea Joint Declaration\u201d in 1998 were typical.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n However, we have to realize that \u201cthe past\u201d is still an issue today, and affects the economy as well as security – issues which we should work together on.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n As a nation, they, like all human beings, pursue \u201cprestige,\u201d which is the basis of all fame and desire. It is not easy to find a correct \u201ctheory of practice\u201d and means of overcoming the present crisis in Japan-Korea relations. It is necessary to have a mutual understanding and engage in self-reflection. Both countries have repeatedly emphasized the establishment of trust among political leaders and proposed the sharing of strategies including those regarding security issues, an established order of priority for problem solving, and continued exchange in the private sectors and so on.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n We can explain such opinions from the viewpoint of \u201cinternational politics\u201d as follows (although they may not be solutions):<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n 1. There is a saying in Latin that \u201cwe have to maintain mutual consent,\u201d meaning that promises between national sovereignties precede over individual promises in international laws, stipulated on the premise of \u201cThe Vienna Treaties\u201d (The Laws of Treaties)<\/p>\n 2. Emer de Vattel, a Swiss jurist and diplomat, says, in his famous \u201cInternational laws,\u201d that in order to restore peace there must be negotiation through concession or compromise rather than a strict principle of justice.<\/p>\n 3. The theory of \u201creconciliation\u201d in international politics has been formulated from the study for conciliation. The three-layer structure of reconciliation provides international stability. The \u201cthree-layers\u201d refer to systematic reconciliation by agreements, physical reconciliation by compensation, and ideal reconciliation by mourning or commemorative ceremonies.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n The three viewpoints from international politics mentioned above came from the theses for \u201cwar and peace\u201d.\u00a0 In Japan-Korea relations the viewpoint of \u201ccolonies and peace\u201d is necessary, and both countries require its development for international politics. \u00a0If a war among sovereign nations were to break out in the near future, it would be possible to end it officially via a peace treaty. \u00a0In the modern world, it will not be possible to be a nation under colonial rule. War and colonization are not humane acts. If we compare the sense of crisis against a possible war crisis, the colonial issue will remain an issue of the past. This gap in understanding between Japan and Korea comes from differences in interpretations and perceptions of the past. If there existed an \u201cinternational politics for relations between Japan and Korea\u201d, it would be possible to propose a thesis for understanding war, peace and colonies\u201d not only in Japan and Korea but for the world as well.\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n <\/p>\n