KJCKorea
Journal Central

@article{ART001913329},
author={Jinhee Park},
title={The Understanding of United States on Korea-Japan Talk Based on Declassified documents of Diplomatic missions of the State Department},
journal={The Review of Korean History},
issn={1225-133X},
year={2014},
number={115},
pages={423-462}

TY - JOUR
AU - Jinhee Park
TI - The Understanding of United States on Korea-Japan Talk Based on Declassified documents of Diplomatic missions of the State Department
JO - The Review of Korean History
PY - 2014
VL - null
IS - 115
PB - The Historical Society Of Korea
SP - 423
EP - 462
SN - 1225-133X
AB - One of the most important documents in Korea-Japan Talk, the United States government document materials. This is because the relationship between Korea and Japan, there is a need to look at in the United States in Northeast Asia policy. Therefore, the United States talks about Korea and Japan have expressed interest. Each show was different about the current issues in the Korea-Japan Talk is recognized and the corresponding United States. The United States has expressed the official position for the Property Claims issue and peace line issue. Whereas the United States was not based on the Japan’s Property Claims. Also pointed out that peace line was in violation of the international law. Property Claims issue was directly related to the issue of how the past relationship between Korea and Japan should be viewed, perceived and evaluated. So it remained one of the most controversial topics for the duration of the negotiations between the two countries, and it served as a significant variable for the outcome of the talks. Korea sought for a new relationship with Japan to be established, a relationship based upon the Japan people's officially admitted regret and remorse regarding their deeds and actions committed in the past during the Japanese occupation period of Korea. But Japan perceived their past relationship with Korea and all their deeds to be justifiable ones, and they also thought that their influences upon Korea were not always negative but in fact most of the times positive. These differences in opinions, perceptions and positions led to fiery debates over the Property Claims issue, and also the incident of the so-called reckless remarks by Kubota. But the United States did not comment on the Kubota’s reckless remarksIssue of returning Korean residents inside Japan to North Korea was discussed and settled between Japan and the North Korean government, and such settlement became a major hurdle for the continuation of the Korea-Japan talks and not to mention the efforts to better the diplomatic relationship of those two countries. Japan had always tried to expel the Koreans inside Japan as soon as possible since their defeat in the war, and apparently the settlement was also part of those efforts. The Korean government strongly protested to Japan's expulsion of Korean people to North Korea, and the South Korean public held anti-Japanese demonstrations, trying to inform the rest of the world of Japan's actions. But in the end, Korea was not able to prevent Japan from continuing to expel Korean citizens to North Korea. Washington sought to support the Japanese Prime Minister Kishi Nobusuke, who prioritized the U. S.-Japan Alliance and sought to revise the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan. The way to support Kishi, who was then facing enormous resistance from those who argued against the revision of the treaty, was to remain silent about the repatriation—something most Japanese agreed on across the ideological spectrum. Although it was wrapped in humanitarian rhetoric, no one cared about their human rights. That is the truth of repatriationAfter all, the factor that substantively determined the nature and shape of the Korean government's Japanese policy turned out to be the United States of America. U.S. also served as a prominent factor in the Japanese government's devising of their own policies regarding Korean matters. In other words, the Korea-Japan relationship cannot be appropriately addressed by discussing only these two countries. The Korea-U. S. relationship, the Japan-U.S. relationship and the triangular relationship among Korea, Japan and U. S. should all be considered at the same time.
KW - Korea-Japan Talk;Property Claims;Peace Line;Kubota’s reckless remarks;Repatriation of Koreans in Japan
DO -
UR -
ER -

Jinhee Park. (2014). The Understanding of United States on Korea-Japan Talk Based on Declassified documents of Diplomatic missions of the State Department. The Review of Korean History, 115, 423-462.

Jinhee Park. 2014, "The Understanding of United States on Korea-Japan Talk Based on Declassified documents of Diplomatic missions of the State Department", The Review of Korean History, no.115, pp.423-462.

Jinhee Park "The Understanding of United States on Korea-Japan Talk Based on Declassified documents of Diplomatic missions of the State Department" The Review of Korean History 115 pp.423-462 (2014) : 423.

Jinhee Park. The Understanding of United States on Korea-Japan Talk Based on Declassified documents of Diplomatic missions of the State Department. 2014; 115 : 423-462.

Jinhee Park. "The Understanding of United States on Korea-Japan Talk Based on Declassified documents of Diplomatic missions of the State Department" The Review of Korean History no.115(2014) : 423-462.

Jinhee Park. The Understanding of United States on Korea-Japan Talk Based on Declassified documents of Diplomatic missions of the State Department. The Review of Korean History, 115, 423-462.

Jinhee Park. The Understanding of United States on Korea-Japan Talk Based on Declassified documents of Diplomatic missions of the State Department. The Review of Korean History. 2014; 115 423-462.

Jinhee Park. The Understanding of United States on Korea-Japan Talk Based on Declassified documents of Diplomatic missions of the State Department. 2014; 115 : 423-462.

Jinhee Park. "The Understanding of United States on Korea-Japan Talk Based on Declassified documents of Diplomatic missions of the State Department" The Review of Korean History no.115(2014) : 423-462.