DOCSLIB.ORG

The Partition of Korea After World War II This Page Intentionally Left Blank the PARTITION of KOREA AFTER WORLD WAR II

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Partition of Korea After World War II This Page Intentionally Left Blank the PARTITION of KOREA AFTER WORLD WAR II The Partition of Korea after World War II This page intentionally left blank THE PARTITION OF KOREA AFTER WORLD WAR II A GLOBAL HISTORY Jongsoo Lee THE PARTITION OFKOREA AFTER WORLD WAR II © Jongsoo Lee, 2006. Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 2006 978-1-4039-6982-8 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles or reviews. First published in 2006 by PALGRAVE MACMILLAN™ 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10010 and Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, England RG21 6XS Companies and representatives throughout the world. PALGRAVE MACMILLAN is the global academic imprint of the Palgrave Macmillan division of St. Martin’s Press, LLC and of Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. Macmillan® is a registered trademark in the United States, United Kingdom and other countries. Palgrave is a registered trademark in the European Union and other countries. ISBN 978-1-349-53150-9 ISBN 978-1-4039-8301-5 (eBook) DOI 10.1057/9781403983015 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Lee, Jongsoo. The partition of Korea after world war II : a global history / Jongsoo Lee. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Korea—History—Partition, 1945– 2. World War, 1939–1945— Diplomatic history—Soviet Union. 3. World War, 1939–1945— Diplomatic history—United States. 4. Korea—History—Allied occupation, 1945–1948. I. Title. DS917.43.L44 2006 951.904Ј1—dc22 2005054895 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Design by Newgen Imaging Systems (P) Ltd., Chennai, India. First edition: May 2006 109876 54321 To thlhe loving memory of my mot her, Chi-Hae Park (1939–2000) This page intentionally left blank CONTENTS Acknowledgments ix Romanization and Abbreviations xi Korean Division and Reunification: A Timetable of Modern Korean History xiii Introduction xvii Part I U.S. and Soviet Policies toward Korea, 1945–1948 1 U.S. and Soviet Policies toward Korea until August 1945 3 2 U.S. and Soviet Policies in August–December 1945 37 3 U.S. and Soviet Policies, December 1945–August 1948 69 Part II U.S. and Soviet Occupation Policies in Korea and the Korean Responses, 1945–1948 4The Koreans, the USSR, and the United States 129 Conclusion 155 Notes 171 Bibliography 205 Index 217 This page intentionally left blank ACKNOWLEDGMENTS n working on this book, I received help and inspiration from numerous Iindividuals. Carter Eckert has been a joy to work with. Mark Kramer provided expert guidance on Moscow archives and Cold War history. Akira Iriye and Bill Kirby sparked my initial interest in international history. The manuscript, at various stages, improved after helpful advice and feedback from: Norman Naimark, John E. Haynes, Geoffrey Roberts and reviews by anonymous referees. I gratefully acknowledge financial and institutional support for research from the following research centers at Harvard: the Korea Institute, the Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies and the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs. My editor at Palgrave Macmillan, Toby Wahl, has been most gracious and patient. Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to family and friends whose love and encouragement were crucial. My Dad, in particular, has been an unfailing source of support. I received much emotional and spiritual sup- port from the Kuumba Singers of Harvard College. Jessie and Judy, my newly-born nieces, added joy to the process. Last but certainly not least, I thank my God, who made everything possible. This page intentionally left blank ROMANIZATION AND ABBREVIATIONS adhered, whenever appropriate, to the standard systems for Romanization: IMcCune-Reischauer for Korean and Library of Congress for Russian. AVP RF Arkhiv Vneshnei Politiki Rossiiskoi Federatsii (Archive of Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation) CPSU Communist Party of the Soviet Union FRUS Foreign Relations of the United States KPG Korean Provisional Government KPR Korean People’s Republic RGASPI Rossiiskii Gosudarstvennyi Arkhiv Sotsial’no-Politicheskoi Istorii (Russian State Archive of Socio-Political History) SCAP Supreme Commander [for] Allied Powers [in Japan] UNTCOK United Nations Temporary Commission on Korea USAFIK United States Army Forces in Korea This page intentionally left blank KOREAN DIVISION AND REUNIFICATION: A TIMETABLE OF MODERN KOREAN HISTORY 1392 The Founding of Chos=n Dynasty (1392–1910). 1910 Korea annexed by Japan. 1941 (December) Japan attacks Pearl Harbor. 1943 (November) At the Cairo Conference, the United States, Britain, and China declare future Korean independence “in due course”; at the subsequent Tehran Conference, Stalin agrees. 1945 (August 8) The USSR declares war on Japan; (August 12) The United States proposes to the USSR the 38th parallel as the line of demarcation for accepting the surrender of Japanese troops in Korea: the USSR agrees; (August 15) Japan surrenders; (December) At the Moscow Conference of Foreign Ministers, the USA, Britain and the USSR agree to place Korea under a four-power United Nations trusteeship for a period of up to 5 years. 1946 (March–May) The First U.S.-USSR Joint Commission to implement the Moscow trusteeship agreement adjourns without an agreement. 1947 (May–October) The Second U.S.-USSR Joint Commission fails; in September, the United States takes the Korean question to the United Nations General Assembly: the USSR protests. 1948 ( January) A UN delegation to supervise general elections in the Korean peninsula arrives; (February) The UN Temporary Commission on Korea decides to hold elections only in the U.S.-occupied southern half of the peninsula; (August 15) The Republic of Korea (South Korea) established, with Syngman Rhee as President; (September 9) The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) established, with Kim Il Sung as Premier. 1950 ( June 25) The Korean War begins with a large-scale invasion of South Korea by North Korea. xiv K O REA N DIVIS I O N A ND REUNIFICATI O N 1953 ( July) The Korean War ends in an armistice without a peace treaty; the DMZ (demilitarized zone) created. 2000 ( June) South Korean President Kim Dae Jung visits Pyongyang, the capital of North Korea, for a historic summit with Chairman Kim Jong Il, the North Korean leader. Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit.␣ Prudens quaestio dimidium scientiae.␻ ␣ “Perhaps, one day it will give us pleasure to recall even these things.” (Virgil, Aeneid, i.203) ␻ “Half of science is putting forth the right questions.” (Bacon) This page intentionally left blank INTRODUCTION ixty years after the partition of Korea into South Korea and North SKorea, we still do not have a full understanding of how this partition occurred. With Korea’s reunification looming as a challenge today for the international community, such an understanding cannot be more timely. This book seeks to facilitate such an understanding. As a way of introduction, it might be worth noting that the international community is currently facing, or might be facing, tasks of nation-building in places as diverse as Iraq, Palestine, Somalia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, to name a few. In most of these places, nation-building is an exercise in overcoming the legacy of imperialism, as imperialism gave birth to unstable nation states caged within borders that were arbitrarily drawn without due consideration of existing ethnic, tribal, religious, and other boundaries. Indeed, a major challenge to international peace in the post–Cold War era is the transition to viable nation states in parts of the world where the legacy of imperialism combined with weak or predatory government has led to failed or failing states. In some corners of the Islamic world, poverty and alienation from the modern world have bred a deeply disaffected populace and a fertile soil for political or religious extremism. While Korea is not usually mentioned as a case illustrating the challenges of nation-building after imperialism, the peninsula’s modern history per- fectly fits this description. Though not colonized by Western imperialism, Korea nevertheless underwent 36 years of colonial rule under Japan, a country that fully joined the ranks of modern imperialist powers at the turn of the twentieth century. When World War II ended with Japan’s defeat, Korea found herself in a situation similar to Arabia at the end of World War I. Just as the defeat of Ottoman Turkey in World War I did not lead to Arab independence but led, rather, to arbitrary partition of the ex-Ottoman territories into French and British spheres of influence, Japan’s defeat in World War II did not lead to Korea’s independence but led, rather, to the arbitrary partition of Korea into two halves occupied by the United States and Soviet Russia. The partition of Korea along the 38th parallel in August 1945 was as arbitrary as any artificial border drawn by the European xviii INT R O DUCTI ON colonial powers during the partition of Africa in the late nineteenth century. Just as such arbitrary national borders in postindependence Africa gave rise to wars and political instability, the foundation of the two Koreas in 1948 as a result of the arbitrary partition flared into an all-out war, the Korean War (1950–1953), and many years of tense confrontation afterward under the Cold War. Although South Korea’s nation-building efforts since the 1950s have generated successes in economic development and democ- ratization that have eluded nation-building efforts in many other parts of the world, North Korea stands today as a failure of nation-building. Moreover, the true test of South Korea’s success in nation-building yet lies ahead, as this hard-won success might still be derailed by a failure to over- come the even greater challenge of nation-building called for in Korean reunification. The United States and the international community have a crucial role to play in determining whether Korea’s exercise in building a united nation succeeds peacefully.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Legal Study of the Korean War Howard S
    The University of Akron IdeaExchange@UAkron Akron Law Review Akron Law Journals July 2015 How It All Started - And How It Ended: A Legal Study of the Korean War Howard S. Levie Please take a moment to share how this work helps you through this survey. Your feedback will be important as we plan further development of our repository. Follow this and additional works at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, and the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Levie, Howard S. (2002) "How It All Started - And How It Ended: A Legal Study of the Korean War," Akron Law Review: Vol. 35 : Iss. 2 , Article 2. Available at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol35/iss2/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Akron Law Journals at IdeaExchange@UAkron, the institutional repository of The nivU ersity of Akron in Akron, Ohio, USA. It has been accepted for inclusion in Akron Law Review by an authorized administrator of IdeaExchange@UAkron. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Levie: A Legal Study of the Korean War LEVIE1.DOC 3/26/02 12:29 PM HOW IT ALL STARTED - AND HOW IT ENDED: A LEGAL STUDY OF THE KOREAN WAR Howard S. Levie A. World War II Before taking up the basic subject of the discussion which follows, it would appear appropriate to ascertain just what events led to the creation of two such disparate independent nations as the Republic of Korea (hereinafter referred to as South Korea) and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (hereinafter referred to as North Korea) out of what had been a united territory for centuries, whether independent or as the possession of a more powerful neighbor, Japan — and the background of how the hostilities were initiated in Korea in June 1950.
    [Show full text]
  • Soviet-American Relations and the Origins of Containment 1941-1946: the Force of Tradition
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1988 Soviet-American relations and the origins of containment 1941-1946: The force of tradition Anita Louise Coryell The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Coryell, Anita Louise, "Soviet-American relations and the origins of containment 1941-1946: The force of tradition" (1988). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 5179. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/5179 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COPYRIGHT ACT OF 1976 Th i s is an unpublished m a n u s c r ip t in w h ic h c o p y r ig h t s u b s i s t s . Any f u r t h e r r e p r in t in g of i t s c o n t e n t s m u st be APPROVED BY THE AUTHOR. Ma n s f i e l d L ib r a r y U n i v e r s i t y of Mo n ta n a Da t e : , 1 , SOVIET-AMERICAN RELATIONS AND THE ORIGINS OF CONTAINMENT, 1941-1946: THE FORCE OF TRADITION By Anita Louise Coryell B.A., Rutgers, The State University, 1974 Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA 1988 Approved by: Chairman, Board of Examiners Dean, Graduate School lusrt/J Date UMI Number: EP40643 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
    [Show full text]
  • Molotov and the Moscow Conference, October 1943* Introduction
    1 Derek Watson Derek Watson, "Molotov et la Centre for Russian and East European Studies Conférence de Moscou, Octobre The University of Birmingham 1943." Communisme, no. 74/75, 72-99. Original text in English. Molotov and the Moscow Conference, October 1943* Introduction Molotov served as head of NarkomIndel from May 1939 until 1949, and then again in the early Khrushchev era. He is often remembered as being involved in some of the most infamous episodes in the foreign policy of the USSR: the Nazi-Soviet pact, the dismemberment of Poland, the take-over of the Baltic states and the creation of the Soviet satellite empire in eastern Europe after 1945. His style was equally notorious: he was rude and abrupt, and the net over the smallest matter came to represent the inflexible and stubborn nature of Soviet negotiating techniques, at the post-war conferences of foreign ministers. He seemed to be insensitive to and lack understanding of western opinion, which unlike his predecessor Litvinov, and subordinates, like Maiskii, he was not prepared to make any effort to represent to his Kremlin colleagues.1 There was, however, a much more positive side to Molotov as commissar for Foreign Affairs. If the Triple Alliance negotiations of 1939 with Britain and France failed, their success might have prevented the Second World War; during his visit to Britain and the USA in 1942 the Grand Alliance which was responsible for the defeat of Hitler war was forged; and the Moscow foreign ministers conference of October 1943, which is generally taken as marking the peak of Molotov’s diplomatic career, was crucial in laying the foundations for the post-war world.
    [Show full text]
  • Matt Byrne's Leadership Role in Dialogue with the USSR
    Pepperdine Law Review Volume 34 Issue 2 A Tribute to Judge Byrne & Symposium: Balancing Career & Family: A Work/Life Article 2 Symposium 1-20-2007 "Momentous Changes Taking Place" Matt Byrne's Leadership Role in Dialogue with the U.S.S.R. Weyman I. Lundquist Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/plr Part of the Judges Commons Recommended Citation Weyman I. Lundquist "Momentous Changes Taking Place" Matt Byrne's Leadership Role in Dialogue with the U.S.S.R., 34 Pepp. L. Rev. Iss. 2 (2007) Available at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/plr/vol34/iss2/2 This Tribute is brought to you for free and open access by the Caruso School of Law at Pepperdine Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pepperdine Law Review by an authorized editor of Pepperdine Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. "Momentous Changes Taking Place", Matt Byrne's Leadership Role in Dialogue with the U.S.S.R. Weyman I. Lundquist * A warm and exciting chapter of my life involved the Cold War, cold places, and the Honorable William Matthew Byrne. "The Judge's" warm and understated but powerful Irish presence played an important role in a legal diplomatic success that began during the Cold War. A number of Americans think of Matt Byrne as a close friend. Less well known is that a number of Russians, ranging from the former Procurator General of the Russian Federation, Alexander Sukharev, to the current Chief Justice of the Russian Supreme Court, Vyacheslav Lebedev, to Veniamin Yakovlev, Head of the Russian High Court of Arbitration, also regard Matt Byrne as a close friend in America and the exemplar, for Russians, of what an independent judge should be.
    [Show full text]
  • No Progress in NATO-Russia Relations Without US Leadership
    Ap: 2017nr3 9 Special Section: Analysis No progress in NATO-Russia relations without US leadership Tony van der Togt This article examines the US-Russia relationship and its consequences for NATO. It also explores “European alternatives” to address the lack of US leadership vis-à-vis Russia. Moscow’s high hopes for an early deal at the recent mini-summit in Brussels underlined. Moscow squashed seems to be as surprised as Western capitals and just as un- certain about who really calls the shots in Washington and After Donald Trump’s surprise election to the US Presidency, what policies to expect. Russian Duma members celebrated with champagne. Expectations in official circles in Moscow were high and Although some high-level political visits have taken place, some pundits were already predicting a possible US-Russian including by Secretary Tillerson to Moscow and Foreign “Grand Bargain”, including on Ukraine. An anti-terrorist coa- Minister Lavrov to Washington, no early summit between lition of Russia, the US and possibly other (Western) powers Presidents Trump and Putin has taken place. Furthermore, against ISIS/Daesh in Syria also seemed to be just around Trump’s first foreign tour to the Middle East and Europe has the corner. This would somehow resemble the earlier “Re- failed to open up any new opportunities for dialogue or set” under President Obama, but this time on Russian pre- cooperation with Russia: conditions and taking the form of some “Yalta/Potsdam-2” arrangement: a multi-polar world with Great Powers working On Ukraine any talk coming out of Washington or from the in tandem and respecting each other as equals, including US in the UN Security Council has toughened and the pos- in their respective “spheres of influence/interests”.
    [Show full text]
  • Yalta, a Tripartite Negotiation to Form the Post-War World Order: Planning for the Conference, the Big Three’S Strategies
    YALTA, A TRIPARTITE NEGOTIATION TO FORM THE POST-WAR WORLD ORDER: PLANNING FOR THE CONFERENCE, THE BIG THREE’S STRATEGIES Matthew M. Grossberg Submitted to the faculty of the University Graduate School in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in the Department of History, Indiana University August 2015 Accepted by the Graduate Faculty, Indiana University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. Master’s Thesis Committee ______________________________ Kevin Cramer, Ph. D., Chair ______________________________ Michael Snodgrass, Ph. D. ______________________________ Monroe Little, Ph. D. ii ©2015 Matthew M. Grossberg iii Acknowledgements This work would not have been possible without the participation and assistance of so many of the History Department at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis. Their contributions are greatly appreciated and sincerely acknowledged. However, I would like to express my deepest appreciation to the following: Dr. Anita Morgan, Dr. Nancy Robertson, and Dr. Eric Lindseth who rekindled my love of history and provided me the push I needed to embark on this project. Dr. Elizabeth Monroe and Dr. Robert Barrows for being confidants I could always turn to when this project became overwhelming. Special recognition goes to my committee Dr. Monroe Little and Dr. Michael Snodgrass. Both men provided me assistance upon and beyond the call of duty. Dr. Snodgrass patiently worked with me throughout my time at IUPUI, helping my writing progress immensely. Dr. Little came in at the last minute, saving me from a fate worse than death, another six months of grad school. Most importantly, all credit is due Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Yalta Conference, 1945
    Yalta Conference, 1945 DIRECTOR CRISIS MANAGER MODERATOR Roberto Fusciardi Lucy Faria Leila Farrow CRISIS ANALYSTS Tammy Cheng Sheldon Stern Rachel DeGasperis Maeve Redmond UTMUN 2020 Yalta Conference, 1945 Contents Content Disclaimer 2 UTMUN Policies 3 Equity Concerns and Accessibility Needs 3 A Letter from Your Director 4 Background 5 The War 5 Previous Conferences 7 Setting 10 Topics 11 Germany 11 Poland 11 Japan 12 Eastern Europe 12 The United Nations 13 Points to Remember 15 Allies and Loyalty 15 War and Diplomacy 15 Leaders and Subordinates 15 Characters 15 Bibliography 16 1 UTMUN 2020 Yalta Conference, 1945 Content Disclaimer At its core, Model United Nations (MUN) is a simulatory exercise of diplomatically embodying, presenting, hearing, dissecting, and negotiating various perspectives in debate. Such an exercise offers opportunities for delegates to meaningfully explore possibilities for conflict resolution on various issues and their complex, even controversial dimensions – which, we recognize, may be emotionally and intellectually challenging to engage with. As UTMUN seeks to provide an enriching educational experience that facilitates understanding of the real-world implications of issues, our committees’ contents may necessarily involve sensitive or controversial subject matter strictly for academic purposes. We ask for delegates to be respectful, professional, tactful, and diplomatic when engaging with all committee content, representing their assigned country’s or character’s position, communicating with staff and other delegates, and responding to opposing viewpoints. The below content warning is meant to warn you of potentially sensitive or triggering topics that are present in the formal content of this background guide, as well as content that may appear in other aspects of committee (e.g., debate, crisis updates, directives), so that you can either prepare yourself before reading this background guide or opt-out of reading it entirely: Some of the content discussed in this guide and this committee deals with sensitive subject matter.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Notes Introduction 1. Schlesinger, A. ‘Origins of the Cold War’, pp. 22–52. 2. Gaddis, J. L. (1997) We Now Know: Rethinking Cold War History (Oxford: Clarendon), p. 292. 3. Feis, H. (1970) From Trust to Terror: The Onset of the Cold War, 1945–50 (London: Blond), p. 5. 4. Woods, R. and Jones, H. (1991) The Dawning of the Cold War (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press), p. xii. 5. Ulam, A. (1973) Expansion and Coexistence (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston), pp. 12–30. 6. Schlesinger, ‘Origins of the Cold War’, pp. 22–52. 7. Gardner, L. (1970) Architects of Illusion: Men and Ideas in American Foreign Policy (Chicago, IL: Quadrangle Books), p. 319. Horowitz argues that con- tainment policies are to be understood as policies for containing social revolution rather than as national expansion. See Horowitz, D. (ed.) (1967) Containment and Revolution: Western Policy Towards Social Revolution: 1917 to Vietnam (London: Blond), p. 53. 8. Williams, W. A. (1968) The Tragedy of American Diplomacy, rev. edn (New York: Norton), p. 15. 9. Lundestad, G. (1978) The American Non-Policy Towards Eastern Europe 1943– 1947 (Tromsö, Oslo and Bergen: Universiteitsforlaget), p. 424. 10. Kolko, G. (1990) Politics of War (New York: Pantheon), pp. 621–2. 11. Kolko, G. and Kolko, J. (1972) The Limits of Power: The World and U.S. Foreign Policy, 1945–1954 (New York: Harper and Row), p. 709. 12. Paterson, T. (1973) Soviet-American Confrontation: Postwar Reconstruction and the Origins of the Cold War (Baltimore, MD and London: Johns Hopkins University Press), pp. 262–4.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Observer Missions
    THE EVOLUTION OF PEACEKEEPING: EARLY UN OBSERVER MISSIONS (1946-56) Dr. Walter Dorn 13 April 2011 EARLY MISSIONS: OVERVIEW Greek Border - Commission of Investigation: 1946 - Special Committee on the Balkans (UNSCOB): 1947 Indonesia - Consular Commission: 1947 - Good Offices Commission: 1947 - Commission for Indonesia: 1949 Korea - Temporary Commission on Korea (UNTCOK): 1947 - Commission on Korea (UNCOK): 1948 EARLY MISSIONS (CONT’D) Palestine - Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP): 1947 - Commission on Palestine (UNCP): 1947 - Truce Commission: 1948 - Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO): 1948 - Palestine Conciliation Commission (PCC): 1948 Kashmir - Commission in India and Pakistan (UNCIP): 1948 - Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP): 1948 - UN Representative: 1950 CASE: KOREA • Historically, caught between Larger Powers – Chinese tributary – Sino-Japanese War (1894-95) • Fight over Korea • Japanese “trusteeship” – Russo-Japanese War (1904-5) • Russians accept Japanese dominance in Korea – Japanese annexation/colonization (1910-45) • US/USSR accept Japanese surrender after WW II – Beginning of Korean division “Whales fight, shrimp crushed." – Korean sokdam (proverb) POST-WW II SITUATION • Temporary zones: – Soviet zone (North of 38th parallel) and – American zone (South) • Superpowers can’t agree on means of reunification • Issue passed to UN by US www.awm.gov.au UN CHRONOLOGY 1947 Nov 14 GA establishes UN Temporary Commission on Korea (UNTCOK) to facilitate a National Government, election observation and the withdrawal of Soviet & American forces 1948 May 10 UNTCOK observes elections in South Korea only (refused in North) as “expression of free will.” GA approves July Establishment of Republic of Korea (ROK) (claiming all of Korea) with Syngman Rhee as President ELECTIONS 1948 (S. KOREA) AWM P0716/113/003 Chongiu.
    [Show full text]
  • Records of the Far Eastern Commission, 1945-1952
    http://gdc.gale.com/archivesunbound/ RECORDS OF THE FAR EASTERN COMMISSION, 1945-1952 All the activities of the multinational Far Eastern Commission (FEC), which oversaw the postwar governing and reconstruction of Japan, are fully documented in this publication. The establishment of FEC was decided upon in late December 1945 at the Moscow Conference of Foreign Ministers. It represented the Allied Powers led by the U.S., the U.K., China, and the U.S.S.R. as the top-level policy formulating body with regard to the occupation of Japan. The FEC was charged with the task of producing policies, principles, and criteria to which Japan would have to fully conform in order to implement the terms of surrender stipulated by the Potsdam Declaration. Date Range: 1945-1952 Content: 187,990 images Source Library: U.S. National Archives Detailed Description: All the activities of the multinational Far Eastern Commission (FEC), which oversaw the postwar governing and reconstruction of Japan, are fully documented in this publication of the records now held by the National Archives. Founded in Moscow in 1945, the FEC was composed of representatives from 11 countries, including the United States, the USSR, Great Britain, and Nationalist China. The body’s two main functions were to formulate policy in accordance with Japan’s obligations under the terms of surrender and to consult with the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, who was in effect the country’s military governor. The FEC set up seven committees: Reparations, Economic and Financial Affairs, Constitutional and Legal Reform, Strengthening of Democratic Tendencies, War Criminals, Aliens in Japan, and Disarmament of Japan.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia and the World: the View from Moscow
    International Journal of Security Studies Volume 2 Issue 1 Article 1 2020 Russia and the World: The View from Moscow Daniel S. Papp Retired, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/ijoss Part of the Defense and Security Studies Commons, Military and Veterans Studies Commons, and the Peace and Conflict Studies Commons Recommended Citation Papp, Daniel S. (2020) "Russia and the World: The View from Moscow," International Journal of Security Studies: Vol. 2 : Iss. 1 , Article 1. Available at: https://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/ijoss/vol2/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in International Journal of Security Studies by an authorized editor of Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository. Russia and the World: The View from Moscow Cover Page Footnote None This article is available in International Journal of Security Studies: https://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/ijoss/ vol2/iss1/1 Introduction In 1939, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill famously observed that Russia was “a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.” Less remembered but equally significant is what Churchill said next: “Perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest."1 Much has changed in Russia and the world since 1939, but in many ways, Churchill’s observation is as valid today as it was then. What is Russia’s national interest? How do Russia’s leaders, especially Russian President Vladimir Putin, view their country’s national interest? And how can their viewpoints be determined? This is a challenging but not impossible task.
    [Show full text]
  • The Causes of the Korean War, 1950-1953
    The Causes of the Korean War, 1950-1953 Ohn Chang-Il Korea Military Academy ABSTRACT The causes of the Korean War (1950-1953) can be examined in two categories, ideological and political. Ideologically, the communist side, including the Soviet Union, China, and North Korea, desired to secure the Korean peninsula and incorporate it in a communist bloc. Politically, the Soviet Union considered the Korean peninsula in the light of Poland in Eastern Europe—as a springboard to attack Russia—and asserted that the Korean government should be “loyal” to the Soviet Union. Because of this policy and strategic posture, the Soviet military government in North Korea (1945-48) rejected any idea of establishing one Korean government under the guidance of the United Nations. The two Korean governments, instead of one, were thus established, one in South Korea under the blessing of the United Nations and the other in the north under the direction of the Soviet Union. Observing this Soviet posture on the Korean peninsula, North Korean leader Kim Il-sung asked for Soviet support to arm North Korean forces and Stalin fully supported Kim and secured newly-born Communist China’s support for the cause. Judging that it needed a buffer zone against the West and Soviet aid for nation building, the Chinese government readily accepted a role to aid North Korea, specifically, in case of full American intervention in the projected war. With full support from the Soviet Union and comradely assistance from China, Kim Il-sung attacked South Korea with forces that were better armed, equipped, and prepared than their counterparts in South Korea.
    [Show full text]