Korea And The Treaty Of Annexation

The colonial systems seen in both Korea and the Philippines in the early 20th century share similarities that are typical of colonial states. However, the differences in how Japan and the United States, respectively, ruled over them are stark. Government, religion, education, and nationalism all played important roles in both systems, but how those roles affected the nation as a whole differ in comparison. In this essay I will compare the two systems of colonization and examine the similarities and differences in the approaches taken by the colonizers in their method of controlling both Japan and Korea.

In conclusion, Korean had suffered to overcome the challenges in the period between the late 19th to the early 20th century because of the foreign countries’ forces to take the benefit out from Korea. Starting with the forced treaties and wars of China, Japan, and Russia on Korean peninsula, Korea even lost its independence in 1910 by Japan. Korean government’s reaction to these events was disappointing: emperor Gojong even ran away to Russia after the first Sino-Japanese war, which is also called as Agwan Pacheon. As a result of continuous invasion of foreign forces and irresponsible government’s reactions, Korean showed three major responds to the depressing situation: depending on Japan to take control of Korea to modernize, studying abroad

When the Koreans are forced to change their family names to Japanese ones, their Korean identity is weakened. Going through this traumatizing experience is

Despite Korea and Japan’s current relationship that is cordial to a certain degree, the effect of the brutal regime Japan established on Korea is yet a contentious issue. Bruce Cumings, an American historian of East Asia claims, “Koreans never saw the Japanese rule as anything but illegitimate and humiliating,” and this commonly held belief exists for a reason. During the Japanese occupation, thousands of comfort women, students, and civilians were tormented and tortured by the Japanese; however, this crucial period of time shaped Korea’s future significantly. It is therefore vital to question what exactly Korea benefited from the Japanese occupation, and consider whether the positive outcomes outweighs the negative. Was it really colonialism, or could the years be considered as a time of modernization? Perhaps it was both, or perhaps there exists a very fine line between the two beliefs. Many evidences manifest Korea’s development in various essential aspects such as education, tenancy, industrialization, and modernization in communication and transportation, but there are also evidences proving that the occupation was rather unfavorable. Although many argue that the arduous period of 35 years for the Korean civilians served rather an auspicious time for Korea’s future, when weighing both sides of the argument, Korea in truth did not benefit significantly during the occupation.

During the period of Imperial Japan Koreans suffered. Imperial Japan This period claim lots of Korean lives.

After the wars in Korea and Japan’s assimilation into the Korean government, they created a treaty between the two. This treaty was known as The Japan Korea Treaty of 1910, also known as the Japan Korea Annexation Treaty. This formally annexed Korea forcing them to be a formal colony of Japan. This lead to Many Japanese settlers were interested in acquiring agricultural land in Korea begin move migrate there. The Governor-General at time helped these settlements through land, which initially was accepted by most of the Korean population. The Korean land ownership system was a system of a form of an absolute power landlord. The level of that these peasants were just as was similar to that of farmers in Japan. However, in Korea, the landowners

Under the Black Umbrella tells the many captivating stories about the 35 years of Japanese occupation in Korea through both world wars. The memories are all from the perspective of Korean men and women who lived through some or all of it. Many of their stories and the history during that time are influenced by several factors, some of which include their location in Korea or surrounding areas and the government’s involvement in recording history. The Japanese were not all awful to the Koreans, since they were humans all the same, but they committed enough atrocities to have a bad reputation with the Koreans. In attempts to unify, North Koreans employed nationalism and ethnocentrism to fuel their way to become a strong nation again. South Koreans did not rally around such extreme ways and did not utilize their northern brethren’s methods of fear for power. Back then and now, globalization is a part of life and it should not be stifled. Nationalistic thinking will bring about more pain and suffering rather than just trying to coexist. Korea faced many hardships with the Japanese occupation. In recovery to their rule, issues arose when it came to accuracy in history, nationalism, ethnocentrism, and the different roles they all took between the north and the south.

The Great Revival Movement occurred during one of the darkest periods in Korean history. Politically, there were continual wars for territorial authority over Korea between Japan and China and between Japan and Russia. Eventually Japan was victorious over both countries. Western countries such as Great Britain, France, and America also played an influential political role in Korea. Under this oppression, Korea was extremely weak socially, economically, and politically. After Japan was successful in defeating China and Russia, Japan forced Korea to sign a treaty in 1904 that resulted in the loss of freedom in all aspects of Korean life. As a result of Japanese aggression and oppression, Koreans were devastated by war and suffered from extreme

The colonization of Korea under Japanese rule from 1910 to 1945 was one of controversial histories as it shaped Korean society in both positive and negative ways. This paper examines Korea’s colonial relationship with Japan. In this paper, I argue the Japanese influence of modernity was a positive gain to Korean society by referring to some examples. First of all, this paper shows a brief history of the colonization from 1910 to 1945 to explain what was going on during that period. Secondly, this paper discusses economic development in Korea society as a positive effect because Japanese economic policy had an important role in the economy of the colony. Thirdly, this paper analyzes three types of authority through new political system which were created by Japanese in Korea. At the same time, this paper shows local autonomy which was developed due to those types of authority as a positive effect. Fourthly, this paper describes the rise of nationalism during that period as their nationalist movements affected their independence in a positive way. In conclusion, this paper summarizes main ideas of these examples and main argument.

This game wasn’t really a negotiation as people may expect when talking about a negotiation. Indeed, it was more of an introduction between the parties who hadn’t met before, Arlexitalia and Koreamics. We could really see that Shilla had a different role than the two other parties, the members were the ones who had planned the meeting and they were the ones leading the conversation, they played the role of intermediaries, go-betweens. They did all they could to make the two other parties welcome and comfortable so that they could discuss and have a first idea of who they would work with. They also showed their partners that none had the ascendant, they were all equal and everyone’s point of view mattered. They always tried to keep everyone on the same page by reformulating and asking questions too. Nonetheless, at first everyone seemed to be a little stressed and they were not talking a lot. After a while they all relaxed and started to feel more at ease. They all had a soft voice and a collaborative tone. They were stayed very

The next nation that will be discussed is South Korea, whose legal tradition finds its origins from Japan, but is now becoming more American in nature due to increased globalization. Korea’s legal tradition was first established 4,300 ago when the Gojoseon dynasty created its own statutory law, heavily influenced by Confucianism and China’s legal system (SpringerLink and Yŏn 'guwŏn 2). (note that during the retelling of South Korea’s history, the nation will be referred to as Korea until the point at which it became separated into Northern and Southern territories). Korea maintained this particular legal tradition, and aspects of a uniquely Korean brand of Confucianism, until the 19th century. In 1894, the internally induced Kabo Reforms aimed to modernize the whole of Korea in terms of legal and administrative systems, culture, economy, and more (“Emergence of a Modern Society”). The Kabo Reforms resulted in a legal system that closely resembled Japan’s system, which followed a civil legal tradition that was heavily influenced by Germany. Korea’s transformation towards a Japanese civil law system was further intensified and completed when it became a colony of Japan in 1910. Following the defeat of Japan during World War Two, Korea gained its independence in 1945, only for the southern half of the nation to fall under American occupation until 1948, while the northern half was occupied by Soviet Russia (SpringerLink and Yŏn 'guwŏn 5). Now dubbed as South Korea, the

Another big issue the unification faces is the DPRK factor. It is very unlikely for the government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to accept to its own decline and to unify with a South-led government. The most challenging part of the reunification is the Pyongyang regime’s strong determination of not only keeping its own regime upon reunification but to also impose it on the South as they believe they have the best regime, which of course, is impossible and destructive for the South to accept. With the help and agree of the United States, the ROK stressed their goal for reunification in 2009 by issuing a “Joint Vision Statement” with the United States, stressing out their central goal of obtaining a peaceful unification on the principles of a free democracy and a market economy for the well- being of Koreans . To the DPRK, this commitment of the Republic of Korea was nothing more than demonstrating their attempt of absorbing North Korea. One of the strategic goals of the DPRK was to secure “a peace treaty in an effort to remove U.S. forces from the Korean Peninsula ” The DPRK does not like the U.S. forces in the Korean Peninsula and they always wanted the United States to stop intervening in the Korean businesses. In addition, with the United States’ “Joint Vision Statement” with the ROK, it can be clearly digested that the new Korea upon reunification would be South-led and it would mean the absorption of DPRK by the ROK. Thus, with the U.S.’s help on the

From 1910 to 1945, when Japan surrendered after its defeat in World War II, Korea was a colony of Japan during Japan's pursuit towards domination of Asia. Japan’s intent was to erase the Korean national identity. According to a BBC World Service Poll conducted in 2014, 79% of South Koreans view Japan's influence negatively, and 15% express a positive view, making South Korea, behind China, the second country with the most negative feelings of Japan in the world. Among many of the hardships and humiliations suffered by Koreans during this period, Japan’s occupation in Korea affected their education, communications, culture, government, and women negativity.

One of Uchimura Kanzō's essays, “Justification of the Corean War,” contains his reasoning as to why Japan went to war with China, and he legitimates the war by saying that it was necessary for the decision as to “whether Progress shall be the law in the East, as it had long been in the West, or whether Retrogression...by the Manchurian Empire of China, shall possess the Orient forever.” In other words, Uchimura is appealing to the new Western influence that is taking root in Japan, and he sees the war as fundamental for loosening China’s grip on Korea and, in turn, allowing “Progress,” or Westernization, to become the norm in Korea. However, Uchimura’s argument, while seeming to be based in principles of justice and goodwill, neglects to mention the popular sentiment regarding Koreans. According to Peter Duus’ “Defining the Koreans,” a chapter in his The Abacus and the Sword: the Japanese Penetration of Korea, 1895-1910, in the Japanese view, “the familiar-looking Koreans are dehumanized, their exterior stripped away to reveal the beast within.” In other words, Uchimura’s argument presents the Japanese as heroes, and rationalizes the war by appealing to the duty to Westernize them, but his rhetoric cracks when Duus’ work is examined. It is therefore clear that Uchimura’s essay, unknowingly or not, is an attempt to disguise the prejudice against and dehumanization of the Koreans as opposed to vilifying only the Chinese.

At the end of the American Civil War in 1865, the United States was ready for a new beginning. Almost immediately, Manifest Destiny saw a revival once the war between the Union and Confederacy ended. The nation reinforced the Monroe Doctrine, the assertion that the European nations could not intervene in the Western Hemisphere, and restarted the quest for expansion in the North American continent. In the excitement to extend the national land holdings, the United States looked beyond America and towards foreign countries, specifically in Asia and the Caribbean, where there was instability in transportation, communication, and, most importantly, trade. “To the extent that Americans wanted to extend their influence overseas they had two primary goals: pursue favorable trade agreements and alignments and foster the spread of Christian and democratic ideals as they understood them” (“Imperialism and War: American Foreign Affairs 1865-1920”). Revolving around the idea of Manifest Destiny, the United States extended this mindset from its home continent to a more global outlook. Manifest Destiny has always been prevalent in American history, despite the fact that this term was coined in 1845. There was a common belief in the United States that the nation had the duty to go on a land conquest, as John O’Sullivan wrote, “…the right of our manifest destiny to over spread and to possess the whole of the continent which