조선인의 조선 연구 ― 코민테른의 1922년 12월 결정서 채택에 참여한 조선인들을 중심으로―

임경석 ( Kyong Sok Lim ) 수선사학회 2015 史林 Vol.0 No.53

This article aims to identify how Korean socialists`` opinions were reflected in The December Decision (1922) of Comintern. Korean socialists had mixed opinions. They were separated into the remaining group of The Verkhneudinsk Convention and the group departing therefrom. Comintern officials responsible for Korean problems were likewise separated into the group supporting the remaining Korean group and the group supporting the departed group. The former``s key member was Comintern``s general secretary O. Kuusinen, and the latter``s key member was Comintern``s Far East Asia Division director G.Voitinsky. Comintern``s internal opinions managed to narrowed their gap. The corresponding December Decision brought confusion to Korean revolution. First, Korean Bureau status was vaguely defined. Regarded as its higher institute was Comintern``s presidium or Comintern``s Far East Division. Second, policy for Koreans`` national unification front was inconsistent. Meanwhile, the decision evaluated the leaders of nationalism as compromising with the colonial rule``s power. The communist party was authorized to join nationalists-led cultural movement. Third, leadership problems of Korean society in Russisan territory brought confusion to the campaign. The decision described Korean Bureau as if it conducted administrative affairs for Korean society in Russia, later fanning friction between Comintern``s Korean Bureau and the Korean department of Russian Communist party in Maritime Province.

중국공산당 항일정책의 변화과정

박정현 ( Jung Hyun Park ) 고려대학교 역사연구소 2002 사총 Vol.55 No.-

어느 코민테른 극동부 대표의 이상과 현실

김영진(Kim Young-jin) 한국역사연구회 2011 역사와 현실 Vol.- No.82

This article took notice of the case of a Comintern representative who served as a mediator between the Comintern and the communist movement in East Asia. The person in question is Joseph (or Joe) Fineberg, who was appointed as representative of the Far East Bureau of the Comintern in Vladivostok. During his term from July 1923 to February 1924, Fineberg was involved in the revolutionary movements in East Asia and also chaired the Korean Bureau. The Korean Bureau was established to unite opposing Korean communist groups, as instructed by the resolution of the Fourth Congress of the Comintern. Unlike his predecessors, Fineberg is not a well-known figure, as his term was short and ended in failure. Through examining his failure, however, this study will be able to describe the mutual relationship that existed between the Comintern and the revolutionary movements in East Asia. In this study, the given conditions in which Fineberg found himself is first examined, and then historical accounts containing information pertaining to his failure, for which he and his individual incompetence was often blamed, will be examined as well. The fundamental conditions under which the Comintern operated at that time, will be thoroughly discussed.

1926년 조선공산당의 코민테른 가입 외교

임경석 ( Kyong Sok Lim ) 수선사학회 2011 史林 Vol.0 No.39

In this paper I have attempted to explain the diplomatic activities of Jo Dong-Ho, the representative of the Korean Communist Party, sent to Moscow to seek entry into the Comintern. For his efforts the March Decision was adopted by the 6th Plenum of the Executive Committee of Comintern. The Decision provided for the Korean Communist Party to became an official member of the Communist International. Mr.Jo was in stiff competition with the delegates, sent to Moscow by the allied non-mainstreamer communist groups. He won competition against the opposite delegate with the help of the Comintern bureaucrats headed by Voitinsky. According to the earlier studies, the decisions of Comintern on Korean Problem had been to be decided unilaterally. But as things have turned out Korean delegates participated in the decision-making process of Comintern. Jo Dong-Ho set up a cooperative system with Voitinsky group, on the oter hand, the opposite delegate entered into the partnership with Kuusinen group. The March Decision was reached after a last minute compromise between the Jo-Voitinsky group and the opposite-Kuusinen group.

조봉암의 모스크바 외교

임경석(Lim Kyong Sok) 역사비평사 2011 역사비평 Vol.- No.95

In this paper I aim to explain the diplomatic activities of Jo Bong-Am toward Comintern. The assistant representative of Korean Communist Party, Jo Bong-Am performed the diplomatic feat. Actually he initiated the September Decision, adopted by the presidium of ECCI on September 21, 1925. The Korean Communist Party became the provisional branch of Comintern by the decision. On the other hand, the Preparatory Committee for establishing Korean Communist Party in Vladibostok(PCKCP), which had been in stiff competition with the KCP, was dissolved. The main cause of his achievement was the right-about-face of his competitor, Nam Man-Chun. He was sent by PCKCP to improve relationship with Comintern. Nevertheless, he betrayed PCKCP’s trust in him and worked for the opposite party. Futhermore, a group of high-ranking Comintern officials, such as Voitinsky, Basiliev, supported Jo Bong-Am as best as they could. They was called ‘the Zinoviev group’ in Comintern. Without their assistance, the adoption of the September Decision would have been impossible.

잡지 《콤무니스트》와 국제선 공산주의그룹

임경석(Lim Kyong-Sok) 한국사연구회 2004 한국사연구 Vol.126 No.-

The magazine, 《Communist》 was published by the Korean committee of the East Secretariat of the Comintern. In other words, the 《Communist》 was a bulletin put out by the Korean committee, whose members were referred to as the International communist group . Therefore, researchers who have regarded the members of this group as belonging to the Tuesday Group have been mistaken. International Group was the only communist group which was recognized by the Comintern following the dismantlement of the Korean Communist Party. Just as it had recognized only the Korean Communist Party during the 1920s, the Comintern recognized only the International communist group in the 1930s. The International communist group was not a party but a group. As the International communist group was not qualified to be a member of the Comintern, it could not hold any position or represent Korea at the Communist International. Nevertheless, domestically the International communist group had a powerful influence within the Korean revolutionary circles. The theories and policies published in the ≪Communist≫ influenced the Korean socialists during the Great Crisis. As the International group was based on the authority of the Comintern, the 《Communist》 had a more powerful influence over Korean socialists than any other bulletin.

연해주 시절 조명희 문학의 재인식

김재용 ( Kim Jae-yong ) 한민족문화학회 2017 한민족문화연구 Vol.60 No.-

조명희 후반기의 활동 즉 소련 연해주에서의 문학에 대해서는 냉전종식 이후 여러 연구들이 나왔지만 여전히 자료와 시각 등의 문제로 인하여 핵심적인 접근이 되지 못하고 있다. 소련으로 이주한 것에 대해서는 여러 의견이 분분하게 제시되었지만, 일본의 첩자로 살해당한 것에 대해서는 여전히 태부족이다. 소련으로의 망명과 처형을 함께 읽어내는 작업은 거의 없는데 그나마 나온 것은 민족주의의 시각을 벗어나지 못하고 있다. 이 논문에서는 조명희가 소련의 연해주로 가기 직전에 쓴 단편 ‘아들의 마음’(1928)과 처형 직전에 쓴 시 ‘아무르를 보고서’(1937) 두 작품의 분석을 통하여 연해주에서의 문학활동을 전반적으로 평가하고자 한다. 조명희의 문학을 식민지 조선의 문맥만이 아니라 당대의 국제주의 연대의 활동의 맥락에 비추어 해석하되 소련중심주의와 코민테른의 유럽중심주의를 비판적으로 바라보면서 설명한다. 조명희가 소련으로 가기 직전에 쓴 ‘아들의 마음’은 당대 조선의 사회주의자의 머리를 장악하였던 코민테른의 국제주의 혁명 정책에 기반을 두고 문학적으로 재현한 작품이다. 일본에서 노동운동을 하는 조선출신의 남자와 중국에서 북벌전쟁의 비행사로 활약하고 있는 조선 출신의 여자를 나란히 놓고 그 연대를 말하는 것은 당시 코민테른의 정책을 거의 그대로 옮겨 놓은 것이라고 할 수 있기 때문이다. 처형당하기 직전에 발표한 시 ‘아무르를 보고서’는 소련중심주의와 코민테른의 유럽중심주의에 대한 강한 반발을 표현한 작품으로 읽을 수 있다. 스탈린하의 소련은 오로지 일국 사회주의와 소련 방어에만 치중하고 있었고, 코민테른은 이러한 소련의 지휘 하에 있었기 때문에 1920년대 중반까지의 국제적 혁명과 이에 기반한 조선의 해방이란 것은 거의 관심 밖이었다. 조명희는 심한 내적인 갈등을 겪었고 이러한 것을 표현한 것이 바로 이 시이다. 이러한 조명희의 활동은 조선인들의 중앙아시아 이주 정책과 정면으로 배치되게 된다. 소련의 이러한 정책에 대한 조명희의 저항은 결국 처형으로 이어졌다. 후반기 조명희의 문학은 단순히 식민지 조선의 맥락만이 아니라 이렇게 소련과 코민테른으로 이어지는 국제주의적 맥락에서 설명할 때 그 내적과정을 제대로 읽을 수 있을 것이다. The literature of Cho Myounghee in the Soviet Union was oppressed for a long time because of cold war censorship of South Korea. Recently so many researcher start to study it after the fall of Soviet Union. But the research was almost based on ideology of nationalism ignoring the socialist idea of him in Soviet Union. Cho moved to Soviet Union to acquire the free intellectual atmosphere of socialism and socialist realism of Maxim Gorky and create his own style form of novel. At that time, most socialist writer of KAPF was searching of international solidarity of Comintern. Cho also moved to Soviet Union to find new sphere of international solidarity. But he was excuted by in Khabarovsk regarded as th spy of Japanese empire. Cho resist always against colonialsim of Japanese empire before his his movement to Soviet Union. Cho was frustrated by eurocentrism of Soviet Union disregarding the historical context of colonial Korea. In this essay, the motivation of his movement to Vladivostok and his resistance against Soviet Union of being accused the pro-Japanese spy. Before his escape from colonial Korea to Soviet Union, he published last short story called The Heart of Son. We can find easily his intention of international solidarity based on Comintern through solidarity between man of activity of labour movement in Japan and women of pilot who fight against chinese warlord in China. This is an typical representation of international solidarity based on Comintern. Before his execution of 1938 in Khabarovsk he published poem called In Front of Amur River. We can find easily his agony between socialism and national liberation. Stalin thought that the destiny of international revolution depended on the fate of Soviet Union while Lenin thought that The fate of Soviet Union had depended on international revolution. Stalin's policy of socialism in one nation was spread on that time. Cho can not trust Stalin's policy disregardsing international revolution including national liberation of colonial Korea. We can understand the literature of Cho in the Soviet Union in context of the policy change of Comintern and Stalin's policy of one nation socialism not based on the national context of Korea.

일반논문 : 고려총국의 위기와 가타야마 센(片山潛)

임경석 ( Kyong Sok Lim ) 성균관대학교 대동문화연구원 2015 大東文化硏究 Vol.89 No.-

이 글의 목적은 1923년 말에 조성된 고려총국의 위기 상황에 임하여 국제공산당전권위원 가타야마 센(片山潛)이 수행한 역할을 해명하는 데에 있다. 그는 고려총국의 위기를 수습하여 그를 정상화하려고 노력했지만 결국은 실패하고 말았다. 그 원인은 다음과 같다. 첫째, 문제의 진단과 처방 사이에 모순이 있었다. 문제의 소재는 국제당 동방부 당료 그룹의 독주에서 비롯된 것이었지만, 그를 수정하려고 하지 않았다. 둘째, 국제당 상층부의 인식과 혁명운동의 현장 사이에 괴리가 있었다. 국제당 상층부는 한국국민위원회를 혁명적인 좌파로 간주했지만, 조선의 민족혁명운동 참가자들은 그렇게 보지 않았다. 셋째, 고려총국에 대한 연합반대파의 영향력을 무시했다. 연해주한인 공산당원들의 여론은 가타야마의 판단과 달랐다. 이러한 여러 가지 원인이 복합적으로 작용했기 때문에 가타야마의 조선 문제 개입은 성공을 거둘 수 없었다. The purpose of this paper is to elucidate the role that Sen Katayama, the plenipotentiary of Comintern, performed in the crisis of Korean Bureau which was created at the end of 1923. He endeavored to control and normalize the crisis of Korea Bureau but his attempts ended in failure. The causes are as follows. First, there was a contradiction between the diagnosis and prescription of the problem. The problem originated from the arbitrariness of the members of Comintern`s East Division, but Katayama did not try to rectify it. Second, there was a perception gap between the upper echelon of Comintern and the field of the revolutionary movement. The upper echelon of Comintern regarded Changjopa as a revolutionary left-wingers but the participants in Joseon national revolutionary movement did not. Third, the allied opposition`s influence on Korea Bureau was ignored. The opinions of Yeonhaeju Korean Communist party members were different from Katayama`s. Thus, Katayama`s intervention in the Joseon problem could not succeed because of these various complex causes.

초기 베트남 공산주의운동의 국외 네트워크와 재외활동가, 1928-1934

盧英順(Nho Young-Soon) 동양사학회 2004 東洋史學硏究 Vol.88 No.-

This article examines two rather different contexts for Vietnamese communist movement during the late 1920s and early 1930s. The one is evolved around international communist movement which has been charged by the Third Communist International(Comintern). The early communist movement in Southeast Asia is concerned, the Comintern entrusted its direction to the Nanyang Communist party which was a branch of the Chinese Communist Party(CCP). But this strategy had to be modified as the communist movement in Southeast Asia was developing and the CCP-led communist movement in Southeast Asia turned out to be activities centered by the Chinese and for the Chinese. A remedy for this failure was to promote localization of Southeast Asian communist movement by helping to found a communist party on the national basis. The one who materialized this idea was a Vietnamese international communist, Nguyen Ai Quoc. As the secretary of the Southern Bureau, he presided over the foundations of communist parties in Southeast Asia including the Vietnam Communist Party(VCP), Siam Communist Party and Malayan Communist Party. At the time that the international communist network in the southern China were disclosed and immediately cracked down, communist movement in Southeast Asia was on the verge of distancing from the influence of CCP and more directly of connecting itself to Comintern. The Other theme of this article is about the Vietnamese communists who worked abroad and their activities there. For this the second part of this study was devoted to several 'revolutionary spaces' of the Vietnamese communists ranging from coastal southern China such as Shanghai, inland border areas between China and Vietnam such as Quangxi as far as to northeast Siam through Laos. The Vietnamese revolutionaries in those areas took responsibility of maintaining and reestablishing liaison with Comintern occasionally through the CCP and assisting restoration of the VCP which had been destroyed in the aftermath of the Soviet movements in Nghe-Tinh. The former was carried out by the Vietnamese communists in southern China. The latter task was tried to be carried out by the Vietnamese communists in Siam. More importantly several Vietnamese communists abroad who also were educated in Moscow established an 'Overseas Directing Committee' which was destined to be a provisional central committee of the VCP. In sum the international communist network was a major nutrition for fledging communist parties in South-east Asia including the VCP. Also the Vietnamese revolutionaries outside Vietnam served as a main asset for the VCP by connecting it to helpful international communist networks and by providing inside Vietnam necessary strategies, personnels, and materials in the most needed time and circumstances of the first half of the 1930s.

중국공산당의 “중화민족”에 대한 인식 연구: 중국공산당과 코민테른의 관계를 중심으로

최승현 한국동북아학회 2018 한국동북아논총 Vol.23 No.1

Since the 21st century, there has been a plethora of slogans in China called the “Great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation”. Research in this field is also abundant. In particular, the history, unity of the “Chinese nation" and the contribution of the Chinese Communist Party have already been shared by most related studies as facts. That is to say, the so-called “Chinese nation" is a historical reality and unification from the ancient times, and the Chinese Communist Party has maintained the interests of the “Chinese nation" ever since its establishment. This study examines documents produced by the Communist Party of China prior to the founding of the People 's Republic of China on the “Chinese nation". This course will show how the Chinese Communist Party's perception of the “Chinese nation" has changed. As a result, the following conclusions are presented. First, the Chinese Communist Party emerged in the form of the Chinese branch of the Comintern. Therefore, the perception of the “Chinese nation" of the Communist Party of China was not based on the independent thinking of the Communist Party itself, but on the relationship between the Communist Party and the Comintern. Second, For China, “Ethnic self-determination" means the separation of ethnic minorities, It conflicted with the logic of the “Chinese people" that demanded unity. Therefore the Chinese Communist Party in the period of emphasizing “Ethnic self-determination" could not accept the “Chinese nation". Third, the theoretical underpinnings of “Chinese nation" characterized by historicality, unity, and diversity were formed through the Chinese Communist Party' s independence from the Comintern, or “Sinicization of Marxism". 최근 중국에 “중화민족 위대부흥(中華民族 偉大復興)”이라는 구호가 넘쳐나고 있다. 이와 관련한 학계의 연구 또한 풍성하다. 특히 “중화민족”의 역사성, 통일성 그리고 이에 대한 중국공산당의 공헌은 이미 대부분의 관련연구가 기정사실로서 공유하고 있다. 즉, 이른바 “중화민족”이란 고대로부터 이어온 하나의 역사적 실체이자 통일체이고, 또한 중국공산당은 창당 이래 줄곧 “중화민족”의 이익을 견지해 왔다는 것이다. 본 연구는 중화인민공화국 건국 이전 중국공산당이 “중화민족”에 관해 생산했던 문건의 재검토를 통해 중국공산당의 “중화민족”에 대한 인식의 변화과정을 살펴보고, 그 결과로서 다음의 결론을 제시하였다. 첫째, 중국공산당은 코민테른의 중국지부라는 형식으로 출현했다. 이에 중국공산당의 “중화민족”에 대한 인식과 관련 정책은 중국공산당 스스로의 독립적 사고나 필요에 의한 것이 아니라 중국공산당과 코민테른의 관계로부터 지배를 받았다. 둘째, 중국에게 있어 “민족자결”은 중국 내 각 소수민족의 분리를 지향하는 것으로, 이는 통일성을 요구하는 “중화민족”의 논리와 필연적으로 충돌하였다. 이에 “민족자결”을 강조하던 시기의 중국공산당은 “중화민족”을 부정할 수밖에 없었다. 셋째, 역사성, 통일성, 다양성을 특징으로 하는 당대 중국의 “중화민족”에 관한 이론적 토대는 중국공산당이 코민테른으로부터 독립되면서, 즉 “마르크스주의의 중국화”를 통해 형성되었다.