2011, Vol.18, No.2

Journal of Asia-Pacific Studies 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 0.61

pISSN : 1225-8539 / eISSN : 2671-5171
https://journal.kci.go.kr/japs

This study is designed to review academic research focusing on “East Sea Studies” and “Japan Seaology” in Japan. There are particular characteristics of East Sea Rim region as an research agenda: the region of four countries (North and South Korea, Russia, China, and Japan)’s interests conflicting area, historical complicated region reflecting of contradiction between modernity and post-modernity, and the Cold War and post Cold War period, furthermore, the space of reality in which each country has implemented its own public policies based on regional situation in terms of political geology and political economy. No matter that there is reciprocal relationship among four countries and whether scholars focus on studying about regional economic and political issues or not, this East Sea Rim region should be considered as an significant area being worthy to be studied in the systemic and empirical research methods. The high level of public concern about East Sea Region has provoked to the necessity of studying the region as an important research topic. It has been recognized in the field of regional studies that, for the sake of searching a new research paradigm for East Sea Regional Studies, reviewing the previous related studies such as Japanese East-Sea Rim studies and research designs can be considered as a prerequisite for the theoretical and methodological development in this academic field. The main feature of Japanese regional studies relating to East-Sea Rim area, Japanese scholars are tend to focus on more practical policy issues such as the issues of dynamic relations rooted in the problems of modern and post modern society. It is appropriate time to search out new research paradigm in the field of regional studies which would help us recognize the nature and reality of East Sea Region.

After the Liberation, the history of the Korea-Japan relations has moved back and forth, from political antagonism to economic cooperation, and again to tensions concerning understanding history. Although the Korean and Japanese governments should maintain their economic cooperation under tripartite alliance led by the United States, understanding history has not been resolved between Korea and Japan. History is not only the memory of the past but also the problem of the present. In this paper, I focus on the role of civil society as the major actor in the Korea-Japan relations under the framework of new governance theory. The premise is that the Korean-Japan relations could be enhanced according to more extensive engagement of civil society on history issues between two countries. Unlike government, which could not change their basic foreign policy doctrines, civil society could be more flexible to make compromises because of its ideal-driven and informal characteristics. This paper examines two cases as the successful cases of cooperations between Korea and Japan civil societies. Firstly, there have been the continuing cooperations between the Korean and Japanese civil society groups for thwarting official adaptations of the right-wing textbooks written by the so-called Tsukurukai (the Japanese Society for History Textbook Reform). In addition, several Korean and Japanese civil society groups have cooperated in order to help the victims by the forced mobilization under the Japanese colonialism including “comfort women” who served as sex slaves for Japanese soldiers during World War Ⅱ. As a result of this research, I argue for the possibility of more desirable Korea-Japan relations throughout the civil societies of the two countries in the 21st century.

This research is to investigate possibility of further change in North Korea, by looking at how much there has been a change in North Korea perspective on South Korea as the ‘Kim Il-sung era’ has turned into the ‘Kim Jung-Il era’ and how much there has been a change on South and North Korean relationship. Abbreviation on analysis, Kim Jung-Il, rather than Kim Il-Sung has used positive/negative vocabulary on South Korea a lot and also there has been in not only a positive relationship but a negative relationship between South and North Korea. It indicates that a lot of negative relation cut a conspicuous figure in ‘Kim Jung-Il era’, rather than ‘Kim Il-Sung era’ though it has increased positive/negative relation not concerned with positive/negative recognition. Especially, it is not convincing that we could recognize it the more positive, the more negative relation. So, these results are not consistant with usual thoughts. Also, Interrelationship analysis of ‘Kim Jung-Il era’ on negative recognition and negative relationship shows us plus linear relationship (0.145). Interrelationship analysis on positive recognition and negative relationship show us much more plus linear relationship (0.455). Putting these various analysis together, Kim Jung-Il is more dynamic and has more hostile attitude toward South Korea than his father, Kim Il-sung. Summing up these objective analysis, this will come to the following tendency that North Korea has taken aggressive action toward South Korea through interchange and cooperation between South and North Korea rather than actual improvement between them. From national liberation to this day, fundamental relationship between South and North Korea has not changed a lot inspite of a number of interchange and cooperation between them. Instead, North Korea take aggressive bussiness action preferentially during South and North Korea relationship and improvement of relationship is used to clear up internal-external criticism just like an expediant accompanied by aggressive state undertakings related to South Korea. If North Korea had wanted to improve relationship between South and North Korea sincerely, they didn't aggressive state undertaking toward South Korea having talks. In conclusion, Kim Jung-Il has succeded like that and also deepend hostile consciousness of Kim Il-Sung during succesion of authority.