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 Korea-Japan talks were a negotiation process ostensibly launched to overcome the rift which existed with regards to the two countries perception of past history and to establish a new amicable and cooperation-based relationship. However, fourteen years of negotiations failed to bridge the fundamental gap which existed between the two countries with regards to their perceptions of history. Realistically, the two countries differences over history, with Korea perceiving the 36 years of colonial rule it endured as an unjustified and illegal action on the part of Japan, while the latter perceived its actions as having been both legal and justified, could not have been expected to be bridged solely through diplomatic negotiations. As such, the serious chasm which existed between the two sides with regards to their evaluation of Japans colonial rule over Korea meant that Korea-Japan negotiations were doomed to undergo a prolonged period of severe confrontation and conflict before a relative calm could be established.
The solution which both sides reached after their lengthy negotiations was to seek out a compromise that would avoid or only gloss over the issue of clearing up the past. As a result, the two governments released contrasting interpretations of previous history and of the issue of war reparations, interpretations which became the primary focus of each government once the Korea-Japan talks reached the point where an agreement had to be ratified. With regards to the Treaty of Annexation of Korea, the Korean government interpreted the treaty as being null and void as The Treaty of Annexation of Korea was null and void to begin with: meanwhile the Japanese government argued that Although now null and void, the treaty was nevertheless legal and justifiable at the time of its ratification. In addition, the two sides also interpreted Japans agreement to provide Korea with development assistance loans and grants differently, as while the Korean government regarded this as justified compensation for Japans colonial rule, its Japanese counterpart maintained that this was in fact economic aid designed to help rebuild the Korean economy, and was in no way or form related to Koreas demand for war reparations. These contrasting interpretations over the core issues related to the clearing up of past history prove that the Korea-Japan Normalization Treaty of 1965 was a twisted post-war settlement signed between two estranged nations.
The solution which both sides reached after their lengthy negotiations was to seek out a compromise that would avoid or only gloss over the issue of clearing up the past. As a result, the two governments released contrasting interpretations of previous history and of the issue of war reparations, interpretations which became the primary focus of each government once the Korea-Japan talks reached the point where an agreement had to be ratified. With regards to the Treaty of Annexation of Korea, the Korean government interpreted the treaty as being null and void as The Treaty of Annexation of Korea was null and void to begin with: meanwhile the Japanese government argued that Although now null and void, the treaty was nevertheless legal and justifiable at the time of its ratification. In addition, the two sides also interpreted Japans agreement to provide Korea with development assistance loans and grants differently, as while the Korean government regarded this as justified compensation for Japans colonial rule, its Japanese counterpart maintained that this was in fact economic aid designed to help rebuild the Korean economy, and was in no way or form related to Koreas demand for war reparations. These contrasting interpretations over the core issues related to the clearing up of past history prove that the Korea-Japan Normalization Treaty of 1965 was a twisted post-war settlement signed between two estranged nations.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 제1차 회담에서 나타난 식민지배 인식
Ⅲ. 〈구보다 발언〉 공방에서 나타난 식민지배 인식
Ⅳ. 청구원 타결과정에서 나타난 식민지배 인식
Ⅴ. 기본관계 타결과정에 나타난 식민지배 인식
Ⅵ. 맺음말
〈ABSTRACT〉
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
한일회담 시기 청구권 문제의 기원과 미국의 역할
한국사연구
2005 .12
-
戰後 韓日관계와 샌프란시스코 平和條約
한국사연구
2005 .12
-
언론을 통해 본 한일협정 인식 50년
역사비평
2015 .05
-
한국 지식인의 대일인식과 한일회담
한국사연구
2005 .12
-
일본의 조선 강점기 성노예제에 대한 국가책임의 해법
일본문화학보
2014 .11
-
Korea and Japan
Korea Journal
1967 .08
-
1910년 한일조약에 대한 법사학적 재검토
동북아역사논총
2010 .09
-
Treaties Leading to Japan’s Annexation of Korea : What Are the Problems?
Korea Journal
2016 .12
-
한국 강제병합 과정에 대한 재조명 : 한일구조약의 불법·무효성에 관한 법학적 연구
동북아역사논총
2010 .09
-
[특집2 : 1960년대 한반도와 국제정세] 한·일협정 체결과 '지역통합전략'의 현실화 - 한·미·일 3국의 인식과 대응을 중심으로 -
역사와현실
2003 .12
-
韓日兩國의 歷史認識問題
사학연구
2003 .12
-
특사 태프트의 제2차 대일방문과 미일조약체제, 1907~1908 : 한국병합을 중심으로
동북아역사논총
2010 .09
-
재일동포 사회의 문제와 북일관계 : '60년대 한일수교 시기를 중심으로
한국사연구
2005 .12
-
한일협정 후 한국 지식인의 일본 인식
동북아역사논총
2011 .09
-
러일전쟁 이후 일본의 한국식민론과 식민주의적 문명론
동양사학연구
2006 .03
-
프랑스의 1960년대 한국 대외정책 인식: 한일협정을 중심으로
史叢(사총)
2015 .01
-
독도 영유권에 대한 전후 연합국의 영토처리
일본문화학보
2020 .05
-
북일수교의 전망과 한일관계
日本學硏究
2006 .01
-
한일관계, 무엇을 할 것인가?
한국여성신학
2019 .06
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
일본의 전후 배상외교에 관한 고찰 : 국제 비교의 관점
이원덕
동북아역사논총
2008
.12
I960년대 한국 냉전외교의 세 가지 유형 : 한일 국교정상화, 베트남 파병, 아시아태평양이사회
기미야 다다시
한일공동연구총서
2002
.02
한일협정 체결 30년 특집 : 새로운 한일관계 위한 한일협정 재검토 한일회담에 대한 미·일의 구도와 대응
홍인숙
역사비평
1995
.02
냉전기 일본 진보파 지식인의 한국 인식 : 『세카이』의 북송·한일회담 보도를 중심으로
임성모
동북아역사논총
2011
.09
한일회담과 청구권 문제의 해결 방식 : 경제협력 방식으로의 전환과정과 미국의 역할을 중심으로
이현진
동북아역사논총
2008
.12
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-911-002267711