지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The Japanese army’s strategies are divided into two: the first is pro-war strategy(決戰論), which was insisted by the land forces with the supports from the reformers among officers; the second is reconciliation strategy(講和促進論) by navy forces with the supports from the senior members or ministers in the Imperial House. The true purpose of the pro-war strategy was not in the suggestion of consistence of the war against the U.S.: it was raised to strengthen their power or status in the reconciliation after the war with the U.S. It can be said that the first strategy group also knew the result of the war, reconciliation. The latter strategy group first suggested their reconciliation strategy form the beginning of 1944, and then in summer that year the power in the Imperial House and task forces in China positively examined the possibility of the reconciliation strategy in secret. The group who insisted the pro-war strategy had an intention to depend on the power of Soviet Union and to ally with China; the second group wanted an immediate reconciliation with the Allies.
Even though the second group wanted reconciliation with the Allies and peaceful end of the war, they could not raise the strategy in public. The group of reconciliation strategy was afraid of the possibility of the communization of Japan after the war because the Imperial House already lost the name and power to retain the structure of the country; the pro-war group strongly depended on the power of the Soviet Union, which alerted the probability of the communization of Japan among the reconciliation group. Ironically, the atomic bomb attack by the U.S. to the mainland in Japan saved the political justification of the Japanese Emperor and those whose intention laid on the reconciliation strategy and stop of the war. The reconciliation group also got power to keep their high political status as a ruling class after the war.
The reconciliation strategy did not determine to the mainland in Japan, it also was adapted to the colonial Chousen. Under the name of the reconciliation strategy which was devised to maintain the Emperor rule structure over not only the mainland but also the colonial Joseon the innocent Korean people was forced to give the labor to keep the war, and to sacrificed their lives uselessly.
Even though the second group wanted reconciliation with the Allies and peaceful end of the war, they could not raise the strategy in public. The group of reconciliation strategy was afraid of the possibility of the communization of Japan after the war because the Imperial House already lost the name and power to retain the structure of the country; the pro-war group strongly depended on the power of the Soviet Union, which alerted the probability of the communization of Japan among the reconciliation group. Ironically, the atomic bomb attack by the U.S. to the mainland in Japan saved the political justification of the Japanese Emperor and those whose intention laid on the reconciliation strategy and stop of the war. The reconciliation group also got power to keep their high political status as a ruling class after the war.
The reconciliation strategy did not determine to the mainland in Japan, it also was adapted to the colonial Chousen. Under the name of the reconciliation strategy which was devised to maintain the Emperor rule structure over not only the mainland but also the colonial Joseon the innocent Korean people was forced to give the labor to keep the war, and to sacrificed their lives uselessly.
목차
서론
본론
결론
참고문헌
논문초록
필자 인적 사항
참고문헌 (16)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
교양소설(Bildungsroman)의 종언과 진 리스의 『어둠속의 항해』
외국문학연구
2020 .02
-
Meta-reconciliation and a Reconciliation through Healing
신학연구
2008 .12
-
Meta-reconciliation and a Reconciliation through Healing
시대와민중신학
2009 .12
-
The Strategy for One Korea, and the Third War
신학논단
1994 .06
-
Reconciliation of Nations for the Survival of Humankind
Korea Observer
2019 .01
-
Divorce and Reconciliation
신학과 목회
2002 .05
-
`한` 사상과 和解問題
종교연구
2006 .12
-
The Korean Experience of Division and Conflict, and the Meaning of Reconciliation
시대와민중신학
2008 .04
-
The Korean War 1950-1953
Korea Journal
1967 .07
-
한국전쟁기 전쟁시의 국가주의의 시선
한국시학연구
2008 .04
-
한국전쟁 60년, 한반도와 세계
역사비평
2010 .05
-
한국전쟁의 기본개념으로서 제한전(limited war)의 성립과 분화 : 한반도에 대한 전략적 가치 평가와 관련하여
한국사연구
2004 .06
-
How to Cross the Border of Historical Perceptions in the History Textbooks of Korea, China and Japan : Liquidation of the Asia-Pacific War and Historical Reconciliation
Korea Journal
2008 .09
-
Educating in Justice and Reconciliation in the Perspective of Victim
Journal of Christian Education & Information Technology
2005 .10
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-913-017445140