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.
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Beyond the conventional dichotomy and teleological, nationalistic interpretation on the Chinese collaboration with Japan during the Sino?Japanese war, this article examines the North China collaborators from the new angle of the recent studies which have stressed the inner power relations of the Japanese occupied local society.
The author suggests that though the ‘Provisional Government of Republican China’(and later ‘Committee of Political Affaires of North China’) of Beijing was client regime directed by Japanese ‘councilors’, the rise of the main collaborators of regime was closely related with the China’s domestic political context existing before the war. The collaborators were largely the politicians or militarists who were to be retired from the political scene due to the Guomindang power from 1927. They tried to recover their lost power in working with Japanese invader. In this means, their collaboration with Japan was an instrument rather than the end.
The regime clearly showed their discontinuity from the Guomindang power through its ‘Declaration’ and ‘Administrative Policy’. The collaborators were searching for their political legitimacy by severely blaming the Guomindang’s misgovernment. The collaborators advocated anti?Communist and pro?Japanese policy which opposes the Guomindang’s united front with the Communist and anti?Japanese war. Nonetheless, the collaborators were not unitary entity, but they were competing with each others for the collaboration with Japan within a pluralistic structure.
The reason of their collaboration with Japan was various, but the author focuses, in particular, on the ‘collaborationist patriotism’ of Wang Kemin, leader of the collaborationist regime. According to the Japanese councilors directing Wang’s regime, he was not a simple puppet but a person of stubborn character and tried to moderate as much as possible Japanese severe rule through the collaboration. This means that his logic of collaboration was comparable with Wang Jingwei group’s ‘Detour Strategy for National Salvation(quxian jiuguo lun)’ and that this logic was not beyond the boundary of nationalism in spite of his collaborationist vision for peaceful regional integration with Japan.
The author suggests that though the ‘Provisional Government of Republican China’(and later ‘Committee of Political Affaires of North China’) of Beijing was client regime directed by Japanese ‘councilors’, the rise of the main collaborators of regime was closely related with the China’s domestic political context existing before the war. The collaborators were largely the politicians or militarists who were to be retired from the political scene due to the Guomindang power from 1927. They tried to recover their lost power in working with Japanese invader. In this means, their collaboration with Japan was an instrument rather than the end.
The regime clearly showed their discontinuity from the Guomindang power through its ‘Declaration’ and ‘Administrative Policy’. The collaborators were searching for their political legitimacy by severely blaming the Guomindang’s misgovernment. The collaborators advocated anti?Communist and pro?Japanese policy which opposes the Guomindang’s united front with the Communist and anti?Japanese war. Nonetheless, the collaborators were not unitary entity, but they were competing with each others for the collaboration with Japan within a pluralistic structure.
The reason of their collaboration with Japan was various, but the author focuses, in particular, on the ‘collaborationist patriotism’ of Wang Kemin, leader of the collaborationist regime. According to the Japanese councilors directing Wang’s regime, he was not a simple puppet but a person of stubborn character and tried to moderate as much as possible Japanese severe rule through the collaboration. This means that his logic of collaboration was comparable with Wang Jingwei group’s ‘Detour Strategy for National Salvation(quxian jiuguo lun)’ and that this logic was not beyond the boundary of nationalism in spite of his collaborationist vision for peaceful regional integration with Japan.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 일본군부의 협력정권 구상
Ⅲ. 대일 협력자 형성의 맥락과 동기
Ⅳ. 협력자의 실체
Ⅴ. 결론
참고문헌
abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
‘만주국’의 통치체제 구축과 현지인 협력자
아세아연구
2006 .12
-
친일반민족행위자 재산의 국가귀속결정에 따른 제3자의 보호를 위한 법정책적 고찰 - 친일반민족행위자 재산의 국가귀속에 관한특별법 제3조 제1항 단서를 중심으로 -
법과 정책연구
2011 .01
-
한국전쟁기 부역 이데올로기의 전환 : 부일(附日)과 부공(附共)의 교차점에서
민주주의와 인권
2017 .03
-
The China Problem in Postwar Japan: Japanese National Identity and Sino-Japanese Relations.
Sungkyun Journal of East Asian Studies
2015 .01
-
프랑스-일본 제국의 협력과 베트남 친일 협력집단
아세아연구
2006 .12
-
2000년대 이후 일본문화의 수용과 반일의식에 관한 양태 분석
아세아연구
2014 .06
-
A Study on the Korean Writing in Japanese - From an Educational Point of View of Japanese -
동북아시아문화학회 국제학술대회 발표자료집
2019 .07
-
日本の政治思想研究の動向と課題
국제지역학논총
2009 .12
-
청일전쟁ㆍ러일전쟁과 아시아주의 : 이인직의 『혈(血)의 누(淚)』를 중심으로
동북아시아문화학회 국제학술대회 발표자료집
2008 .04
-
탈전후 사상의 역사성과 중층성
동북아시아문화학회 국제학술대회 발표자료집
2020 .10
-
Can Apology Serve as a Security Policy? Responsible Scholarship and Breaking the Chains of Negative History in Sino-Japanese Relations
The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis
2008 .01
-
용과 사무라이의 결투 : 중(청)일 전쟁(1894-95)의 군사전략적 평가
국제정치논총
2005 .12
-
일본의 러일전쟁에 대한 인식
아시아문화
2004 .08
-
教師と研究者間の協働による授業改善の試み: 大学の日本語授業の‘制約’を乗り越えて
외국어교육연구
2012 .01
-
처분된 친일재산의 부당이득반환 : 대법원 2011. 6. 10. 선고, 2010다40239 판결
중앙법학
2011 .12
-
中国における日本研究とその情報資源
일본근대학연구
2015 .01
-
만주사변시기 중국 관영언론의 인식과 대응 : 《중앙일보》를 중심으로
군사
2017 .09
-
한 일본인 종군기자가 본 1894년 청일전쟁과 조선 : 니시무라 도키스케의 『甲午朝鮮陣』 분석
군사
2008 .04
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-910-017646993