Events

Recent Events

closed

Polish-German Relations Since 1945: A Source of Inspiration for Future Korean-Japanese Relations?

Expert
Bong Youngshik
Hit
225
Date
11-11-30 15:00
  • 프린트 아이콘
  • 페이지 링크 복사 아이콘
  • 즐겨찾기 추가 아이콘
  • 페이스북 아이콘
  • 엑스 아이콘
[Polish-German Relations Since 1945: A Source of Inspiration for Future Korean-Japanese Relations?]



Date/Time: Thursday, December 01, 2011/ 9:30-17:30

Place:Lecture Hall (1F), The Asan Institute for Policy Studies 



“Polish-German Relations Since 1945:

A Source of Inspiration for Future Korean-Japanese Relations?”

 

           written by Yuka Fujioka

(Kwansei Gakuin University and Kobe College)



             The Conference was co-organized by the Asan Institute for Policy Studies,and the Polish and German Embassies in Seoul, with the aim of exploring the relevance of Polish-German reconciliation in advancing Japan-Korea relations. In essence, it can be said that the Polish-German relationship and the Korean-Japanese relationship are both inextricably linked by a complex and traumatic history defined in large part by the Second World War. The Conference was attended by dignitaries from Germany and Poland who have been deeply involved with the reconciliation process and by experts from South Korea, the United States, and Japan.

 

The main objective of the Conference was to see whether the Polish-German reconciliation experience could offer inspiration for Japanese and Koreans to overcome their historical legacies and mutual distrust. Indeed, one highly credits the Asan Institute’s efforts to take the initiative to address these entwined issues and to enhance prospective reconciliatory relations.

 

             The Session I: Political Dimension of Polish-German Relations was opened by the Polish and German speakers’ discussion on their historical path to reconciliation with realism. Rather than only emphasizing the successes of European reconciliation, the speakers defined their case as one that has been full of mistakes and further acknowledged their bilateral relations to still being on a rocky-patch.

 

             Among the various motivating factors for reconciliation, the speakers emphasized the common security, economic, and ideational interests resulting from the demise of the Soviet Union as the indispensable driving forces behind their endeavors, while, at the same time, accentuating and highly crediting the proactive role of the non-governmental organizations and actors with shared religious values that had an influence on the rapprochement process. To be concrete, without these factors, Poland’s desire for democratization, aliberal market economy,to join an integrated Europe under NATO and the EU,andGerman reunification would not have been possible.

 

             One speaker called for developing a new Asian identity and history, and to create common institutions in Asia. This was legitimized and advocated based upon a sharedhistory of Buddhism and Confucianism between Japan and Korea. By praising South Korea as a country that has deep roots in respect for the rule of law and democracy, the two countries’ rich historical and philosophical background would allow the countries to more actively embrace a united Asian identity. Furthermore, rather than touching upon each specific issue in the so-called ‘history problem’ between the two countries, the attempt seemed to have been made to implicitly urgeSouth Koreans to understand Japan’s colonization of Korea by placing the two in the larger context of the historical development of colonialism led by Western powers.

 

             On the other hand, a speaker expressed skepticism in achieving genuine reconciliation between Japan and Korea in the short-term. The Korean speaker elaborated that the absence of an apology by the Japanese government, as well as the absence of political courage from both governmental leaders,has also hindered reconciliation, thereby remaining the major obstacle to ameliorating these tense relations.

 

             In Session II: Historical Experience and Political Rapprochement, knowledge and wisdom were shared by the European speakers based upon their pragmatic experiences without imposing them upon their Asian counterparts. The European reconciliation experience implies that it would still be premature to expect Japan and Korea to achieve full reconciliation overhistorical issues. In contrast topost-Cold War Europe which presented strong incentives for the parties concerned to achieve reconciliation for survival,there are no such imperatives in Northeast Asia. In this regard, one of the central questions raised in the session was, “Why can’t Japan and South Korea accomplish reconciliation when Germany and Poland could?” One might conclude that the crucial factor here is the presence or the absence of the ultimate imperative without which national survival would be at risk.

 

 

             In Session III: Coming to Terms with the Past, much of the discussions were focused specifically on war reparations and compensations. In particular, it was examined how feasible the Japanese government’s position is to settle the historical issues with the Korean victims through financial compensations.

 

The speakers first discussed historical experiences of their home countries such as how Germany made financial compensations to Polish victims and how Germany has made ongoing efforts at atonement through various schemes including humanitarian aid and educational programs. A Korean participant of the conference made a comprehensive proposal towards full-fledged reconciliation where he urged for the need for the Japanese government to offer financial compensation to each Korean victim, including forced laborers. Furthermore, an American panelist pointed out the deficiency of the San Francisco Peace Treaty.

 

             It was also noted that the recent erection of the comfort women bronze statue in front of the Japanese Embassy in Seoul and the Korean government’s refusal to remove it signifies that both governments face a daunting task ahead.









Bong Youngshik

Visiting Research Fellow

Dr. BONG Youngshik is a Visiting Research Fellow at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies. Previously, Dr. Bong was an assistant professor in the School of International Service at American University in Washington, D.C. He was also a Freeman Post-doctoral Fellow at Wellesley College and an assistant professor of Korean Studies at Williams College. His research interests include the interplay between nationalism and security issues such as historical and territorial issues in East Asia, anti-Americanism, and the ROK-US Alliance. He is the author of “Past Is Still Present: The San Francisco System and a Multilateral Security Regime in East Asia,” Korea Observer (2010) and co-editor of Japan in Crisis: What It Will Take for Japan to Rise Again? (with T.J. Pempel, The Asan Institute for Policy Studies, 2012). Dr. Bong received his B.A. in political science from Yonsei University and his M.A. and Ph.D. in political science from the University of Pennsylvania.

Leif-Eric Easley

Non-Resident Fellow

Dr. Leif-Eric EASLEY is a Non-resident fellow at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies. Dr. Easley is also an associate professor of International Studies at Ewha Womans University where he teaches international security and political economics. His research interests include contested national identities and changing levels of trust in the bilateral security relationships of Northeast Asia. He was the Northeast Asian History Fellow at the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (APARC) at Stanford University. He was also a visiting scholar at Yonsei University and the University of Southern California’s Korean Studies Institute. He is actively involved in US-Asia dialogues (Track II diplomacy) with the Asan Institute and the Pacific Forum-Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). Dr. Easley received his B.A. from the University of California, Los Angeles, and his M.A. and Ph.D. in government from Harvard University.

view more
Shin Chang-Hoon

Research Fellow

Dr. SHIN Chang-Hoon is a research fellow in the Nuclear Policy and Technology Program in the Center for Global Governance at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies. Previously, Dr. Shin taught public international law, international organizations, international economic law and the law of the sea at Seoul National University and Myongji University. Dr. Shin has been an active participant in international conferences held at the International Maritime Organization and is a member of the Compliance Group established by the 1996 London Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter. Dr. Shin’s research focuses on dispute settlement, the law of the sea, international environmental law, international humanitarian law and the study of the nonproliferation regime. He received a B.S. and an L.L.M from Seoul National University, and a D.Phil. from the University of Oxford.

scrolltop