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 divergence of overseas Chinese policies between the People's Republic of China and the Republic of China (commonly known as Taiwan) arises from the asymmetric conditions of two countries. The overseas Chinese has now become a debt, not an asset, to CCP who won the Chinese Civil War and came into power in the mainland. The reason for this is that Chinese residents abroad with dual nationality are becoming an obstacle to improving CCP's relationships with its neighboring countries. The Communists needed to abolish dual nationality in order to get rid of the neighboring countries' worries about the spread of China's communist revolution. Since CCP could not have been enjoying a legal status in the international community as well as the United Nations, it couldn't help but place weight on improving its international relations. It is particularly important that there was an intention to settle the issue of Taiwan's sovereignty behind mainland China's strategic decision to give up the overseas Chinese. Indeed, China's situation itself as a divided country was the essential cause of bringing about great change in its overseas Chinese policy. However, the abolition of overseas Chinese's dual nationality rather gave the Kuomintang (Nationalist Party) a golden opportunity to revive its influence. The support of Chinese residents in Southeast Asia was urgently needed by the Nationalists who had retreated to Taiwan after defeat in the civil war. It was indispensable to obtain support from overseas Chinese for securing the legitimacy of their political power in Taiwan and defending the national existence of the country. The Nationalists focused most of their efforts on the policies of permitting overseas Chinese to maintain dual nationality and granting them special benefits, and as a result Taiwan could be reborn as a new fatherland of overseas Chinese. Such a close relationship between Taiwan and overseas Chinese, who had have almost no connection to each other until 1950s, was a paradoxical outcome of the divided country's situation represented by “two China”.
However, attention should be paid the fact that when viewed in light of the history of China-Asia relations, the abolition of dual nationality takes on a different meaning. The reason that the Qing Empire identified overseas Chinese as its citizens at first was based on its previous presence in Southeast Asian countries. The nationality law of “jus sanguinis” was the empire's final attempt to maintain its status as a great nation when it began to decline. If this is accepted, the abolition of overseas Chinese's dual nationality has a new significance in that there was a major modification to China's great-power diplomacy that had been taken over to both the Nationalists and Communists since the late Qing Empire. The Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence agreed to by China and India was also a declaration guaranteeing that major and minor powers in the region would coexist with equal rights.
When we look back on it, the Bandung Conference was the first conference where Southeast Asian countries met under equal conditions as sovereign nations within the modern international system. It was the first stage to reform the traditional relations between major and minor powers in Southeast Asia. One thing confirmed from the conference is that the Southeast Asia region's prototypical nationalism(nationalism from China), had been already converted into nationalism for or against China with the emergence of newly independent countries. The abolition of dual nationality was a gesture of friendship that the People's Republic of China made to remain a neighbor to Asian countries in the new international environment. Further, the effect of the action was to remove the legal system that had resulted from the colonial idea about Southeast Asia, in order to build ‘neutral Asia’. Consequently, China's Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence and participation in the Bandung Conference indicate that traditional Chinese profiles of recognizing and guaranteeing its neighboring countries' autonomy worked in exquisite combination with the characteristics of a modern nation-state system.
The Cold War order in Southeast Asia was internally dominated by the frame of identifying anti-China, anti-overseas Chinese sentiments with anti-communism, which was formed as a result of above-mentioned reasons. The traditional memory of the Chinese empire resulted in a synergistic effect in interactions with cold-war politics. In conclusion, it seems more realistic to understand the conflict or confrontation exposed in Bandung as an expression of a dilemma disclosed in the transition period of converting the relationship between China and Asia into a modern international system, rather than a conflict between ideologies.
However, attention should be paid the fact that when viewed in light of the history of China-Asia relations, the abolition of dual nationality takes on a different meaning. The reason that the Qing Empire identified overseas Chinese as its citizens at first was based on its previous presence in Southeast Asian countries. The nationality law of “jus sanguinis” was the empire's final attempt to maintain its status as a great nation when it began to decline. If this is accepted, the abolition of overseas Chinese's dual nationality has a new significance in that there was a major modification to China's great-power diplomacy that had been taken over to both the Nationalists and Communists since the late Qing Empire. The Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence agreed to by China and India was also a declaration guaranteeing that major and minor powers in the region would coexist with equal rights.
When we look back on it, the Bandung Conference was the first conference where Southeast Asian countries met under equal conditions as sovereign nations within the modern international system. It was the first stage to reform the traditional relations between major and minor powers in Southeast Asia. One thing confirmed from the conference is that the Southeast Asia region's prototypical nationalism(nationalism from China), had been already converted into nationalism for or against China with the emergence of newly independent countries. The abolition of dual nationality was a gesture of friendship that the People's Republic of China made to remain a neighbor to Asian countries in the new international environment. Further, the effect of the action was to remove the legal system that had resulted from the colonial idea about Southeast Asia, in order to build ‘neutral Asia’. Consequently, China's Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence and participation in the Bandung Conference indicate that traditional Chinese profiles of recognizing and guaranteeing its neighboring countries' autonomy worked in exquisite combination with the characteristics of a modern nation-state system.
The Cold War order in Southeast Asia was internally dominated by the frame of identifying anti-China, anti-overseas Chinese sentiments with anti-communism, which was formed as a result of above-mentioned reasons. The traditional memory of the Chinese empire resulted in a synergistic effect in interactions with cold-war politics. In conclusion, it seems more realistic to understand the conflict or confrontation exposed in Bandung as an expression of a dilemma disclosed in the transition period of converting the relationship between China and Asia into a modern international system, rather than a conflict between ideologies.
목차
1. 서론
2. ‘두 개의 중국’과 ‘국공외전’
3. 중화인민공화국, 아시아의 이웃되기
4. 대만, 화교의 새 조국으로
5. 결론
참고문헌 (3)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
1950년대 북한의 반둥회의와 비동맹운동 인식 : 잡지 『국제생활』 기사를 중심으로
동북아역사논총
2018 .09
-
동아시아 냉전의 세 가지 평화 모델 : 판문점, 제네바, 반둥의 평화 기획
역사비평
2013 .11
-
냉전시기(1950~1971) 중화민국 僑務정책의 성격과 한계 : 동남아 화교교육을 중심으로
동북아역사논총
2014 .03
-
중국의 화교(華僑)정책에 대한 연구 - 대만의 화교정책과의 비교를 中心으로
민족연구
2009 .01
-
한국화교의 디아스포라적 다중정체성 고찰
국제언어문학
2012 .04
-
중국과 대만의 화교화인 교육 비교
민족연구
2015 .01
-
중국공산당의 동남아화교에 대한 정책의 변화와 그 사상적 배경
중국학논총
2017 .01
-
‘중화성’모색을 위한 시도들 : 서구권 및 동남아시아 지역 화교 화인 디아스포라 연구 경향 분석
중국근현대사연구
2017 .03
-
화교학교의 역사를 통해서 본 화교문화의 형성과 변화
지방사와 지방문화
2010 .05
-
중국 중산계층의 성장과 新華僑의 제주도 유입
역사와 세계
2016 .06
-
20세기 초(1910~1931) 인천화교의 이주 네트워크와 사회적 공간
중국근현대사연구
2010 .09
-
중국의 화교화인 정책: 변화와 전망
민족연구
2015 .01
-
1945년 이전 仁川의 華僑敎育과 華僑社會 : 仁川華僑小學을 중심으로
역사교육
2012 .12
-
결여의 증언, 보편을 향한 투쟁 - 1960년대 비동맹 중립화 논의와 민족적 민주주의
한국문학논총
2016 .01
-
1930年 前後 仁川華僑小學을 통해 본 華僑社會의 動向
중국사연구
2016 .01
-
신화교의 국내 이주와 정체성의 정치
민족연구
2014 .01
-
해방 후 조선 화교들의 북한 사회 정착 과정
한국학(구 정신문화연구)
2019 .09
-
중국의 화교화인 역사·교육·문화 네트워크 연구
재외한인연구
2015 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-912-003395495