Is Korea Destined to Rejoin the Chinese Empire?
by Tom Coyner
August 13, 2004

(Coyner's Comment: One of the perks of providing this service is the opportunity to put into print what journalists dare not - even when some things are common knowledge. One of these matters is the special relationship between Korea and China.

The real relationship is the one that most Koreans have difficulty in accepting as it goes against the grain of their indoctrination from schools and government propaganda. Or, to put it another way, this relationship may be considered in how the Chinese view Korea and its inhabitants. Rather than view Korea as a truly foreign neighbor, the Chinese consider the Koreans as their cousins. Similar, I suppose how Americans view Canadians - much to the chagrin of most Canadians.

While superficially Canadians and Americans have much more in common than Koreans and Chinese, from the long-term historical perspective one may argue the reverse may be true. And this long-term view may equally apply to the future.

Historically Korea has been a vassal state of China during most of the past one thousand years. During that time, Eastern nations did not have colonies as colonialism is more of a Western political/economic term. But in many ways the vassal states were colonies. While Asian vassal states had their own monarchies, they dare not cross the line with the Chinese emperor - and annually they paid tribute with Chinese troops not being not uncommon visitors. (reminds me of the Japanese incongruence of the single-state Japanese "emperor" who would be all other accounts be regarded as merely a king - but I digress...)

So it may be argued to what degree did Korea truly lose its independence a century ago as opposed to swapping masters. Political powers of that time - China, Japan, Russia, England and the US - viewed the latter has what happened. American missionaries and Korean patriots argued to the contrary. Objectively this minority had their own agendas that may have been out of the mainstream but today given the post WWII establishment of the two truly independent Korean states, these early patriots and their sympathizers have been deemed in current history books to have been politically correct.

The action recently by China to drop any historical reference on its web sites to Korea until 1945 can be viewed as being more than a minor, political tit-for-tat maneuver. A political scientist, to the contrary, could make the argument that the modern, independent Korean political state did not in fact exist until 1945. That whilst there was a strong Korean cultural entity anchored on the peninsula, a genuinely independent political state had not existed for several hundred years. It is like saying that had the Irish not seized their independence from Britain during a moment of English weakness during WWI, Ireland today would entirely be still as British as the Welsh. In the case of Korea, there is not even a claim of having won their own independence. Consequently from the macro historical perspective, Korea may be much more vulnerable than many young Koreans may be aware to this kind of tactics by their gargantuan neighbor.

Be that as it may, history does not come to a stop and it tends to follow to a large degree a prior established trajectory. In this regard, Korea should be more concerned with what is transpiring in the Chinese claim to Goguryeo. While some may regard current events as the Chinese simply laying the groundwork for the long-term defense of its Manchurian territory, some Sinologists would say that in the Chinese view all of Korea - within the greater, Big Picture perspective - to be part of Greater China. Unlike China's neighbors, regardless of political ideology, the Chinese are (in)famous for taking the long-term view that may extend beyond generations at a time.

Ironically as the following two newspaper articles illustrate, the South Koreans seem to be pursuing exactly the worst possible activities given the rise of China (and the rebound of Japan). Out of short-term political expediency, the Roh government is soft-pedaling Korea's national identity to its giant, chauvinist neighbor while pursuing economic policies that are aimed for purely internal consumption without adequate regard to how Korea is rapidly loosing its international competitiveness.

It would be dangerous enough for Korea at this time to initiate its activist agenda of attempting wealth redistribution, conduct a Japanese collaborator witch-hunt and needlessly shift its capital down country at a projected deficit of 1.5% of the GDP during the lengthy transfer. However, with a rambunctious neighbor who may view Korea's past and future as more or less being part of its domain, the current set of national priorities is arguably ludicrous.)

 

Why hasn't Korea gone hard-line with China?
By Kim So-young
Korea Herald
Aug. 13, 2004

When Japan glossed over its colonization of Korea in history textbooks in 2001, the Korean government threatened all possible diplomatic means to correct the problems.

Korea warned it would delay opening its market to Japanese popular culture, curtail bilateral businesses, stop high-level exchanges and oppose its neighbor's attempt to become a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council.

President Kim Dae-jung himself stepped in to urge Japan to correct the distortion and "have a right perception of history." He also summoned his ambassador in Tokyo back to Seoul in strong protest.

Three years later, another bitter historical dispute has erupted - this time with China - but Korea's response falls far short of its barrage against Japan.

Despite China's continuing claim to the ancient Korean kingdom of Goguryeo, the government has failed to apply diplomatic pressure on Beijing, saying only it would resolve the controversy through joint research on the history of the kingdom with China and Japan.

President Roh Moo-hyun has refrained from any comment about the issue, perhaps out of fear of diplomatic friction.

Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon said he would sternly cope with any Chinese attempt to distort history but came up with neither concrete measures nor diplomatic threats.

Prime Minister Lee Hae-chan told his cabinet to monitor closely any distortions of Korean history in other countries.

"There seem indeed to be differences in the government's attitudes toward Japan and China. Private Japanese sources say the Korean government is maintaining a lower profile toward China; they have expressed discontent," said Lee Myeon-woo, a Northeast Asia expert at the private Sejong Institute.

Experts suggest the Goguryeo issue is much more complicated and harder to resolve than the dispute surrounding Japanese history books, and also that Korea has much to consider in its relationship with China at the moment.

China's growing economic influence on Korea was underlined when the country overtook the United States as Korea's largest trading partner last year.

Beijing is also playing a crucial role in international efforts to settle the crisis over North Korea's nuclear weapons program, hosting three rounds of multilateral talks that also include South Korea, the United States, Japan and Russia. A fourth round is scheduled before the end of September.

"Since the nuclear issue still drags on, the government has difficulties in applying harsh diplomatic measures that may cause diplomatic friction. Korea also has to think that it is now enjoying a trade surplus with China," said international relations professor Kim Woo-joon at Yonsei University.

More importantly, the latest historical debate is not something that can be settled with emotions but is a long-term issue that requires years of thorough study on ancient history, experts say.

While there has been enough knowledge and evidence of the 1910-45 Japanese colonial rule of Korea, many remains from the Goguryeo kingdom have already been lost or risk disappearing because of poor management by Pyongyang and Beijing.

The ancient dynasty controlled the upper part of the Korean peninsula and what is now Manchuria from 37 B.C. to 668 A.D. Much of it is now in China's Manchuria, still home to millions of ethnic Koreans.

"Most worrying is the possibility that the Chinese government will destroy or fabricate Goguryeo remains in order to erase evidence showing that the kingdom belonged to Korea," professor Lee of Sejong Institute said.

"Korea knows little about Goguryeo. Korean scholars have not visited China until recently because it was a tightly controlled communist state. If China plays with the remains while we have yet to acquire much knowledge, we may lose our ancient history."

The dispute first erupted last year when a state-funded Chinese research agency claimed Goguryeo was a provincial government of China.

In April, the Chinese Foreign Ministry deleted from its Internet homepage all references to Goguryeo. Amid continuing Korean demands for the Goguryeo references to be restored, China last week excised all references to Korea prior to 1948, when South Korea was formed.

Sections of the Korean public are becoming increasingly angered at what they see as a systematic and intentional distortion by Beijing of ancient history.

The Chinese research center began in 2002 a five-year research program on Northeast Asia. Since much of this has been dedicated to the study on Goguryeo, Korean experts believe it was designed to lay the groundwork for the country's claim over the ancient kingdom.

"There seem to be several reasons behind China's action, but perhaps the most important point is that China needs to unify its diverse ethnic groups in preparation for possible changes in Northeast Asia's security circumstances," Lee said.

"The country is worried a unified Korea may claim its Manchuria territory where millions of ethnic Koreans reside now. Also, it may be seeking ground to justify its intervention if North Korea collapses or a similar major change takes place in Northeast Asia."

International relations professor Chang Joon-young at Kyungnam University agreed and urged the government to urgently come up with a systematic and long-term project to protect its ancient history.

"Many people want the government to show a stronger reaction but we have nothing to gain from emotional responses. China is now investing huge money in the Northeast Asia project, while we haven't prepared any measures that could fend off the threat. What we need right now is to draw up a long-term plan looking ahead 30 years."

The government and the ruling Uri Party have agreed to form a joint taskforce to counter the Chinese distortion of history, possibly under the National Security Council or the prime minister's office.

But opposition politicians and most Koreans have criticized the government for its perceived lukewarm action, with many wondering why Korea has failed to go hard-line as it did three years ago with Japan.

Some observers point to Koreans' different sentiment toward China and Japan.

"Because anti-Japanese sentiment is rampant among Koreans, the government couldn't but adopt a hard-line attitude toward Japan's distortion of history. This time it looks different," Chang said.

In addition, while many civic groups exist in Korea to demand Japan apologize for its colonial past and offer compensation, which applies great pressure for stern action in history disputes with Japan, there are few activists who concentrate on China.

"An increasing number of Koreans view China as a crucial diplomatic partner that can even replace the United States in the future. It's not the case at all with Japan. And, public emotions seem to be affecting the government's attitude as well," Lee said.

Another major difference is the characteristics of the two historical disputes, experts point out.

In the case of Japanese history textbooks, the dispute was how to interpret the colonial past. For example, Japan attempted to portray its occupation in a positive light while mentioning little about comfort women, the name given to Korean women forced into sex slavery for Japanese soldiers. That may influence the thoughts of Japanese students but can't change hard facts regarding the colonial history.

The dispute with China, on the other hand, is a matter of "hard evidence," which means the ancient history may disappear if China removes or distorts remains which mostly exist within its territory.

Experts say it is most urgent, therefore, to launch a research project as soon as possible and make all-out efforts to secure evidence that can fend off any Chinese attempt to incorporate Goguryeo into its own national history.

"We don't have to react emotionally. The government should support researchers and encourage them to study the Goguryeo history. That's the fundamental approach toward this dispute," Lee said.

As for textbooks, South Korea has warned China not to distort the history of Goguryeo in a planned history textbook revision next year. Foreign Minister Ban said the issue would be "closely monitored and countered in broad government operations."

 

Economist bills Roh administration leftist
Korea Herald
Aug. 13, 2004

A leading economist yesterday denounced President Roh Moo-hyun's administration for pursuing what he called a "leftist" agenda.

"As some political scientists and economists put it, the incumbent government is a leftist regime and is caught in a trap of leftist values," said Ahn Kook-shin, an economics professor at Chungang University in Seoul.

Ahn, a leading figure among self-identified free-market proponents, was addressing a seminar hosted by the Korean Economic Association.

He said the Korean economy was losing growth momentum because of a widespread sense of uncertainty over the ideological leanings of the president and the power elite around him.

"They should stop their leftist and populist experiment of the kind that ended in failure in history," charged Ahn. "We cannot improve our national competitiveness when policymakers are oriented toward fairness and equality rather than efficiency and growth."

Ahn's remarks are the latest in a barrage of criticism from conservative economists amid a growing sense of economic crisis.

Concerns are mounting that Asia's fourth-largest economy may fall into a longer recession amid sluggish domestic spending and signs of slowing exports.

On Tuesday, Jwa Sung-hee, president of the Korea Economic Research Institute, a think tank affiliated with the Federation of Korean Industries, said the Korean economy was trapped in "egalitarianism, the political view supporting equalization of outcomes."

Roh's aides dismissed the criticism of the president's politics.

"Such views are too far removed from reality and do nothing but stir confusion and unease," said Lee Joung-woo, chairman of the presidential commission on policy planning, during the seminar.

He called for a halt to the ideological dispute, saying it was a waste of effort that could be better directed toward reforming the economy.

During yesterday's seminar, Minister of Finance and Economy Lee Hun-jai voiced concern about what he called "growing anti-market and fundamentalist voices" in Korea.

"It is urgent to head off ideological biases and fundamentalism and make efforts to solidify the market economic system," he said.

Lee stirred controversy last month after criticizing young political leaders in the ruling Uri Party and Cheong Wa Dae for lack of awareness of economic issues and being preoccupied with politics.