Literary View towards Unresolved Territorial Conflicts in Northeast Asia: Focusing on Inherent Community Memory between South Korea and Japan and Collective Perception of South Korean

Jinwoo Lee,Jiwon Yun J-INSTITUTE 2023 International Journal of Military Affairs Vol.8 No.-

Purpose: This article is to explore to understand the realistic background of the territorial conflicts, it has limitations in the understanding and resolution of the territorial conflicts at a more fundamental level regarding the humanities approach. In this respect, it is important to analyze the unresolved territorial conflicts based on the literary view from a humanistic approach based on a political and cultural perspective rather than a confrontation based on the logic of power. Method: The humanities approach is especially literature, contains the conflict generation and resolution process at the human level. The literary works representing each country, especially novels and tales, uniquely demonstrate the origin and development of the conflicts through their own plots. Based on which, it will be possible to understand how the territorial disputes will develop by country at the cultural level. Results: This article has not suggested a fundamental resolution for the territorial conflicts of Northeast Asia, and especially the historical issues of Dokdo between South Korea and Japan. However, it is important to take a humanistic approach focusing on the literary works as ideological, economic, cultural, and nationalist conflicts. This is because the memory of intersecting harms and damages as ideological, economic, cultural, and nationalistic confrontations are repeated with a focus on the Korean Peninsula and Manchuria are the factors that continue the conflict. Conclusion: As the historical contexts are different, the cultural and psychological tendencies are also unique, and the territorial disputes develop through the combination of such factors. In order to analyze the collective psychology and conflict of the South Koreans who experienced the loss of sovereignty and division due to Japan’s forced annexation, and the territorial and historical issues surrounding the Island of Dokdo, which has been an obstacle to the normalization of the South Korea-Japan relations to this day, the culture of the time literature works dealing with modern and contemporary history that reflect the culture and language have been considered.

중국의 해양 영토분쟁에 대한 대응방안 연구

김태준 한국국방연구원 2008 국방정책연구 Vol.23 No.4

China has a vast territorial space in land as well as sea and has experienced a variety of territorial conflicts. Analysing the characteristics of China-involved conflicts on sovereign rights over islands, it is possible to classify the Chinese territorial conflicts into 3 stages: disputes(verbal controversy), naval power demonstrations to threat, and finally, armed crashes that involve military forces. China has occupied, through two different armed combats with Vietnam, all of the Paracel Islands and several islets of the Spratly islands. China also has seized an atoll (mischief) from the Philippines. On the other hand, China insisted on the withholding strategy to deal with the conflicts over the Senkaku islands, a Japnese territory. By doing so, China has displayed her dual strategy over teritorial conflicts. So far, China has never reached out to the International Court of Justice for the peaceful solutions over territorial disputes. She has rather tended to use military power against inferior countries to occupy conflicted islands. There has been no severe disputes over the Korean Ieodo between Korea and China yet. However, Chinese specialists are currently accusing Korea for violating their sovereignty in Ieodo, and are also urging their government for a countermove. In this context, we can easily assume there will be a serious conflict in the near future. Now, it is the right time for us to urgently come up with strong strategies that can defend our Ieodo safely from the Chinese offensive ambitions.

세계 영토 갈등사례의 독도 시사점 분석 -도전국의 영유권 주장 포기 및 영토반환 사례 조사를 중심으로-

배진수,김동욱,강성호 영남대학교 독도연구소 2017 독도연구 Vol.- No.23

This study aims to research on cases of territorial sovereignty restoration by plundering (occupying) nations who ceded or returned their ruling territories occupied during colonial period or by war to plundered nations. Through these cases, this research could give insights as to how to promote international discourse to advise Japan who irrationally claims the territorial sovereignty of Dokdo to give it up as well as this research is intended to find factors to induce Japan to renounce its irrational claims over Dokdo. The purpose of this study lies in finding policy implications with which we will be able to persuade disseisors such as Japan to renounce their absurd territorial claims by examining which factors or influences played in the cases of plundering nations' return or cession of their occupied territories. This study analysed factors and backgrounds for plundering nations' cession of their territorial sovereignty or return of their plundered territories into three categories such as economic factors, political factors, and diplomatic/security factors out of 19 cases of territorial conflicts selected through thorough examinations of similar cases from all over the world covering Asia, America, Europe, Middle East and Africa. Through this research, diplomatic & security factors were found having effect on many cases and in particular, the case of Jubentud Island dispute between the USA and Cuba draws our attention in that the USA as a disseisor returned its plundered territory by its national resolve. As a result, this research presents significant implications toward disseisors in the international society including Japan maintaining irrational territorial claims. 본 연구에서는 식민시대 또는 전쟁점령 등에 의해 영토를 침탈(점령)한 국가들이 영유권 주장을 포기함으로써 침탈당한 국가에게 원래의 영토주권을 되돌려 준 사례들을 발굴하고자 하였다. 이를 통해 독도 관련하여 억지 주장을 해 온 일본의 영유권 주장 포기를 유도하기 위한 국제사회의 담론을 주도하는 한편 일본의 억지 영유권 주장 포기를 유도할 수 있는 요인들을 도출해 보고자 하였다. 침탈한 국가들이 침탈한 영토를 되돌려 주거나 아니면 억지 영유권 주장을 포기할 경우 어떤 계기로 어떤 요인이 작용되었는지를 살펴봄으로써, 독도의 경우처럼 억지 영유권 주장을 해 온 일본과 같은 침탈국의 억지 영유권 주장 포기를 유도해 낼 수 있는 정책적 시사점을 제시해 보는 것이 본 연구의 목적이다. 아시아, 중남미, 유럽, 구미 등 전 세계 거의 모든 지역의 유사 사례들의 조사를 통해 20개의 영토갈등 사례들을 추출하였으며, 영유권 주장의 포기 및 침탈한 영토를 되돌려 준 요인 내지 배경을 경제적 요인, 정치적 요인 및 외교안보적 요인 등으로 구분하여 분석해 보았다. 분석결과 많은 사례들이 외교안보적 요인들이 적지 않게 작용한 것으로 보이며, 특별히 미국-쿠바 간 후벤투드 도서영유권 사례 등 침탈한 국가의 국가적 결단에 의해 침탈한 영토를 되돌려 준 사례들도 일부 도출됨으로써 일본 등 억지 영유권 주장을 하는 침탈국가들을 대상으로 국제사회에 주는 시사점도 제시되었다.

International Political Implications of Language: The Linguistic Puzzle of “Inherent Territory”

이탄 로버트 요르가슨 한국국제정치학회 2018 The Korean Journal of International Studies Vol.16 No.3

The term “inherent territory” is commonly used to claim disputed lands within the Korean, Chinese, and Japanese languages. It is not common in English. This paper explores the phrase for the first time as a multi-lingual phenomenon, focusing especially on its implications for English. The term became internationally prominent after 1950 because of Japan’s territorial dispute with the Soviet Union over the Northern Territories/Southern Kuril Islands. Japan gradually applied the term to its territorial conflicts with Korea and China. Over time, it became more prominent in both Korean and Chinese, as well. In addition to the Japan-Russia dispute, it now is used in official language in the Dokdo-Takeshima, Diaoyu-Senkaku, and South China Sea territorial disputes. With its increased usage across Northeast Asia, including in English translation easily available on the Internet, the term has strong potential to become common usage in English with respect to territorial conflicts outside of Northeast Asia. Yet, that potential has not been realized. This paper explores possible reasons why English speakers are reluctant to use “inherent territory” through a close political-discursive-linguistic analysis. This paper also discusses the term’s potential power if it becomes more popular in English. The article addresses “inherent territory’s” lack of status within international law, translation issues, the multiple meanings of inherent, connections between “inherent” and “inherit,” the metaphysics of inherent, and the issue of standards through which to evaluate claims to “inherent territory.” The paper explains why the English “inherent territory” is simultaneously vague, potentially powerful, and deeply problematic.

해양영토분쟁 대응 시 합동전력 발전방안

김정현 ( Jeong Hyun Kim ) 미래군사학회 2013 한국군사학논총 Vol.2 No.1

Reseacher treats how to manage this problem in this paper, when ROK breaks into conflict with neighboring countries in her maritime t erritory. First of all, this paper contains the reasons of maritime conf licts in the north-east asian countries, the current maritime conflicts, including Dok-do and Yio-do problems. The former researches discu ssing the maritime territorial conflicts were related Dok-do and Yiodo have been mostly enumerated and focused on the sealane commu nication and natural resource problems. Furthermore most of reseach ers have more focused on the only displayed facts than analysis of t he maritime territorial conflicts. Researcher have discussed the prefe rred method to settle the maritime territorial conflict among South K orea, China, and Japan. The discussion course is general the reasons of the maritime territorial conflicts, historial specialty, maritime borde r line, and Dok-do and Yio-do problems. On the on hand, the reseacher objetively revaluated South Korea``s capability through the quantative comparison with South Korea, China, and Japan``s naval current status. As a result of that, the reseacher c ame to a conclusion that complement the deficient Korea Navy``s capa bility by using joint forces, in the maritime conflicts quarrelling with neighboring country. Which level would be constructed ROK navy``s c apability? For arriving this conclusion, this study examines the develo pment of weapon system, joint operation, and joint forces through pri ncipal 7 naval wars at each period from ancient times to the present day. Also this paper examines the victorious countries had the patter n of battle, and how to prepare and execute war for the coming the naval warfare. The victorious country chose the weapon system of th e highest level and the battle method of the new concept at that tim e. As a result, Joint operations would be the general winning pattern from ancient times to the present day. Such this naval warfare trend, it would be happened again in the future warfare. On the other hand, this paper consults the meaning of the jointness, the decision making problem of inner parts of the commanding department in the process is related to the making up a budget, the development method of the jointness mind, and the necessity of harmonious system between civil ian science technology and military science technology to conclude th e development method of joint forces to win naval warfare. Lastly, th is paper focused on the method of joint forces construction to prepar e the Dok-do and Yio-do conflicts for the coming future.

Democracy and Territorial Change

최아진 한국국제정치학회 2022 The Korean Journal of International Studies Vol.20 No.1

This study explores the types and sources of decisions made by winning states toward defeated states focusing on territorial change after international conflicts. That is, it examines the impact of democracy on the settlement process of international conflicts and argues that due to their norm of respect for public sovereignty and consent democratic states as winners are less likely than non-democratic states to impose punitive peace on the defeated states. To test this argument this study analyzes a total of 260 cases of territorial change during the period from 1870-1992 using the ordered probit model. The empirical analysis shows that democratic winners are less likely to conquer or annex territory obtained from defeated states and more likely to construct a new political entity within that territory. The finding can contribute to the literature on democratic foreign policy and territorial change by connecting these two areas and showing how democratic norms and ideas can externalize in the settlement of international conflict via procedures of territorial change.

국제지역분쟁, 종교, 그리고 선교

신경규(Shin, Kyung-kyu) 한국선교신학회 2010 선교신학 Vol.25 No.-

In human history , regional conflicts has been raised physical wars caused by racial, regional, religious and ethnical reasons and wars caused by regional conflict s are acts of the annihilation of human beings in th eir nature. There are two major causes in regional conflict: One is ideological reason which includes ethnic, tribal, religious, and ideological conflict, and an other is economical reason which includes territorial, government-rebellious, and economic transaction conflict. After cold-war era in lat e twentieth century, there happen different types of regional conflict s caused by complicate multi-factors. Religious fact or has been an implicit or explicit cause in regional conflicts mixed with many ocher causes. People and governments have been using religions as the facial cause to justify th eir regional conflicts and wars, and in some sense some religion s include inner doctrinal justification in their religious beliefs. With the development of communication and photographic technology man y horrible pictures and factual films in international regional conflicts give shocks to the people of the world. Especially, since regional conflict destroy human beings in its essence, it can be a critical issue of christ ian theology and mission. In that sense regional conflict and wars are contrary to christian mission of which goal is sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ, the savior, and try to save lives of human beings. Regional conflicts call christians to share God's love with others, to hear God 's voice to show th eir love to those in difficulties. They remind christians of respecting every cultures as their own modes of lives. They also paradoxically teach christians the precious value of peace. Therefore. christ ian church and mission have to best endeavor in prevent ing, in stoping regional conflicts, and also in recover ing states and peoples after conflicts. Christ ian church has to do th eir best in pursuing world peace.

The OSCE's Intervention in the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict: Limit and Remedy

홍기준 한국유럽학회 2010 유럽연구 Vol.28 No.2

The primary objective of this article is to investigate the main reasons for failure in the Minsk process which is a multilateral mediation effort of the OSCE to resolve the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. As the Minsk process shows, the Nagorno Karabakh conflict has so far displayed all the characteristics typical of the adversarial frame of viewing conflict and its possible resolution. Consequently, the main issues revolve around the normative aspects of a political settlement and any compromise within this framework seem threatening to all conflicting parties. This was mainly due to the irreconcilability between the two universal principles, namely, the right to self-determination and the principle of territorial integrity. Under this situation, the peace plans put forward by the Minsk Group have turned out to be unacceptable to both parties. As a remedy for the dilemma between the two principles, it is pointed out that a more concise and workable definition of the right to self-determination needs to be established. In consideration of the criteria elaborated upon in this article, the right to self-determination seems to prevail over the principle of territorial integrity in the case of Nagorno Karabakh if the entire population of the region comes up with a united will. However, as Johan Galtung suggested, the Nagorno Karabakh conflict requires a creative or transcend approach. This approach means giving up a formal routine procedure out of a realization that it will not work in the given context of conflict. In this sense, the notion of ‘confederal autonomy’ deserves to be considered as a remedy. 본 논문은 아르메니아와 아제르바이잔 간 분쟁인 나고르노 카라바흐 전쟁에 개입한 유럽안보협력기구 (OSCE)의 다자적 중재의 본질적 한계와 그에 대한 개선안을 제시하기 위하여 시도 되었다. OSCE는 민스크 그룹 (Minsk Group)을 조직하여 다년간에 걸쳐 분쟁을 중재하고 타협안을 제시하였으나 모두 실패로 끝나고 말았다. 그 원인으로 지적되고 있는 것은 아르메니아가 주장하는 ‘민족자결의 권리’와 아제르바이잔이 주장하는 ‘영토보전의 원칙’이 충돌하기 때문이다. 보다 근본적인 원인은 특히 ‘민족자결의 원리’를 주장하는 주체가 누구인지에 대한 명확한 개념이 부재하기 때문에 혼란을 초래한 것으로 볼 수 있다. 따라서 두 일반적 규범에 대한 명확한 개념을 재정립할 필요성이 있다. 또한 나고르노 카라바흐 분쟁과 같이 영토와 정체성이 연계된 분쟁의 경우 규범적 접근 보다는 창조적이고 초월적인 접근방법이 필요하다. 이런 의미에서 요한 갈퉁(Johan Galtung)이 주장한 바 있는 ‘연합적 자치’(Confederal Autonomy)를 대안으로 검토해 볼 필요가 있다.

Dispute over Diaoyudao (Senkakuretto) and Its Implications for Dokdo ― Conflicts over History, Relevant Names and Boundaries ―

이창위 서울시립대학교 서울시립대학교 법학연구소 2019 서울법학 Vol.27 No.3

This study surveys the issue of Diaoyudao out of Japan's several territorial disputes, laying stress on geographical names, history, state position, boundaries, and its implications for Dokdo. Today, both China and Japan continue to have a variety of opposing opinions in connection with the territoriality over Diaoyudao. From the perspective of a third party, it may not be easy to regard the opinion of a state party as appropriate. However, provided that one considers the historical aspects only, it seems hard to deny that the Chinese opinion is more persuasive. Since 1971, the territorial dispute over Diaoyudao between China and Japan has been one of the most difficult disputes in the world, as the islands are located in the area rich in hydrocarbon resources as well as strategically important for both countries. China and Japan stick to their respective opinions that the territoriality of its own country over the islands is unquestionable under international law or from historical point of view. As there is a great difference of opinions between the two states, the propriety of territorial dispute around these islands does not look to be resolved in the near future. Anyway, we cannot help paying sharp attention to the progress of this dispute. It is because there is considerable similarity between the territorial dispute over Diaoyudao between China and Japan, and the Dokdo issue between Korea and Japan in many respects. So, after examining relevant historical and legal issues relating to this dispute, we should prepare for the incessant Japan's territorial claim over Dokdo. Japan holds a view that keeping occupation over its own territory is the best policy, whereas it insists that it should keep raising objections to other countries' occupation of the disputed territories. Thereupon, we should have a deep understanding of Japan's self-contradictory attitude towards relevant territorial disputes, and then we should work out a rational countermeasure with regard to Dokdo based on cool judgment.

센카쿠열도를 둘러싼 중·일 간 영토분쟁

정광호(Gwangho Jung) 육군사관학교 화랑대연구소 2013 한국군사학논집 Vol.69 No.2

This study focused on conflict structure theory of C. R. Mitchell about a territorial dispute on Sino-Japan relations over Senkaku Islands. The conflict composed of situation, attitudes, behaviour. Also, the stages of conflict is incipient conflict, latent conflict, manifest conflict. At this study, we verified a territorial dispute on Sino-Japan of manifest conflict stage. In incipient conflict(1969~1992), the conflict made progressed passived actions by a private organization. In latent conflict(1992~2010), actions of conflict have incresed but was not military intervention. In manifest conflict(2010~현재), actions of conflict have rapidly increased and have continued a military confrontation. As a result, territorial dispute on Sino-Japan relations over Senkaku Islands has expanded on the timespace and the prospect of war will be a strong.