DOCSLIB.ORG

The Ashgate Research Companion to the Korean War South Korea

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Ashgate Research Companion to the Korean War South Korea This article was downloaded by: 10.3.98.104 On: 29 Sep 2021 Access details: subscription number Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG, UK The Ashgate Research Companion to the Korean War James I. Matray, Donald W. Boose South Korea Publication details https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315613611.ch2 Jinwung Kim Published online on: 18 Aug 2014 How to cite :- Jinwung Kim. 18 Aug 2014, South Korea from: The Ashgate Research Companion to the Korean War Routledge Accessed on: 29 Sep 2021 https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315613611.ch2 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR DOCUMENT Full terms and conditions of use: https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/legal-notices/terms This Document PDF may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproductions, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The publisher shall not be liable for an loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. 2 South Korea Jinwung Kim Shortly after Korea was liberated from Japanese imperialist rule in August 1945, southern Korea below the 38th parallel came under U.S. military occupation. On September 9, Lieutenant General John R. Hodge and his 72,000-strong XXIV U.S. Army Corps landed in Korea. On September 11, the Americans established the U.S. Army Military Government in Korea (USAMGIK) and began their three-year military rule. This would be the first step toward creation of the Republic of Korea (ROK) in August 1948 that came after the United States and the Soviet Union refused to agree on a plan for restoration of sovereignty to a reunited Korean nation. Perhaps the best source of information about the ROK’s history from its creation until the end of the Korean War is the U.S. State Department’s Foreign Relations of the United States, which reprints in annual volumes primary documents that report on internal events in South Korea. With few exceptions, most authors who have examined U.S. occupation policy have been critical.1 In particular, John Merrill judges it a “failure by any standard,” because it solidified Korea’s tragic division, destroyed the spontaneous outpouring of popular participation represented by the people’s committees, entrenched in power unpopular rightist elements, and intensified the polarization of Korean politics that caused the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950 (Merrill 1989: 55). Kim Chŏm-kon thinks that it was simply “a miserable failure” (Kim 1973: 81). James I. Matray (1985) stresses that U.S. Korea policy suffered from illogic and inconsistencies. Revisionist writers understand the failure of U.S. occupation policy from a different perspective. Frank Baldwin sees U.S. policy in southern Korea as a “conscious counterrevolution” (Baldwin 1974: 10). Similarly, Bruce Cumings (1981) criticizes the Americans for failing to meet the expectations and wishes of Korea’s people. They did not take account of widespread Korean demands for thoroughgoing political, economic, and social change and sought only to build a bulwark to stem the tide of Soviet-inspired and domestic revolution in southern Korea. Jon Halliday also blames the United States for ignoring the wishes of the Korean people in attempting to set up a reactionary regime in southern Korea (Halliday 1974). Overall, to most historians, U.S. occupation policy in southern Korea suffered from inconsistencies, uncertainties, confusions, and failures.2 1 An official history presents a detailed and valuable account of the U.S. occupation of Korea. U.S. Armed Forces in Korea, History of the United States Armed Forces in Korea (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1948). 2 A few writers assess U.S. occupation policy affirmatively. For instance, Jongsuk Chay writes that despite many mistakes and problems, the Americans made “important and positive accomplishments” in southern Korea. He believes that no nation could have done a better job than the United States did during the difficult years (Chay 2002: 66–7). Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 06:50 29 Sep 2021; For: 9781315613611, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315613611.ch2 THE AshGatE RESEARCH COMPANION TO THE KOREAN WAR A fundamental problem that the USAMGIK faced was unpreparedness. Most historians believe that the Americans lacked any definite plan of action for the task of governing Korea (Cho 1967, Henderson 1968). Lack of an informed, consistent, or effective policy later resulted in frustration, fumbling, and a half-hearted commitment to South Korea’s defense. Matray (1985) explains that the Truman administration did not anticipate occupation of a portion of Korea on short notice and therefore, on the eve of U.S. entry into southern Korea, it had not completed a definite set of directives for the U.S. occupation commander. On the other hand, Cumings (1981) contends that at the time the United States had definite goals and policies regarding Korea. The Americans wanted to block the southward flow of Soviet power in Korea, and this dictated the logic of the occupation in the first place. Those who stress American preparedness for occupying and administering southern Korea insist that the United States not only was well-informed about Korea, but made preparations for Japan’s premature surrender and fully considered the possible deterioration of Soviet–U.S. relations in formulating its Korea policy. In particular, they emphasize that in 1945, U.S. forces and civil affairs teams had considerable knowledge of Korea because they had a massive, detailed study entitled “Joint Army–Navy Intelligence Study of Korea” (JANIS-75) (Cumings 1981). However, left revisionist views constitute a minority opinion. Moreover, the course of U.S. military occupation provides little evidence of American preparedness for it. Assignment of the XXIV U.S. Army Corps to occupy southern Korea represents a prime example of an absence of U.S. preparations. Washington selected Hodge’s force because it was stationed relatively nearby—600 miles away—on Okinawa, not because it had any specific qualifications to administer Korea affairs.3 Most historians agree that Hodge was definitely not suitable for the job he would hold in Korea. He had no training or experience in the administration of civil affairs or knowledge of Asian, not to mention Korean, culture or politics (Matray 1995, Cumings 1981). Joyce and Gabriel Kolko even criticize Hodge for perceiving Korea as a part of enemy territory and coming to the country as a “conqueror,” not a “liberator” (Kolko and Kolko 1972: 282). E. Grant Meade, who served in the USAMGIK, rightly reports that Hodge had no well-qualified advisor with him to moderate his shortcomings. H. Merrell Benninghoff and William R. Langdon, Hodge’s political counselors, were just as ignorant about Korea and lacked “an adequate caliber” to perform their duties in Korea satisfactorily (Meade 1951: 225, 228, 235). On the other hand, Allan R. Millett judges Hodge to be realistic, specifically regarding the U.S. trusteeship proposal and the U.S.–Soviet Joint Commission. Hodge thought that unification was a dead issue, while having no illusion that democracy would come to southern Korea as a result of elections (Millett 2005). Many historians believe the United States definitely applied the containment policy to the Korean peninsula (Meade 1951, Pelz 1983, Matray 1985). Representative of this group, Cumings defines the pre-1946 U.S. actions in Korea as a “de facto containment policy” (Cumings 1983: 16). Jongsuk Chay (2002) also claims that the U.S. government began to take measures to prevent Communist expansion, waging the Cold War in Korea much earlier than 1946 with unfortunate consequences. As the United States sought to build a barrier against Soviet expansion at least in the southern half of the Korean peninsula, it abandoned its original objective of seeking to establish a democratic, unified nation. Acting on Cold War logic and eager to stop the spread of Soviet power and influence, the officers of the USAMGIK sought to maintain the social status quo and build a political bulwark against communism 3 Initially, Joseph W. Stilwell and his U.S. Tenth Army were scheduled to occupy Korea, but Generalissimo Jiang Jieshi vetoed Stilwell. U.S. leaders had believed that presumably because Stilwell had spent years in Asia, he therefore would be much more sensitive and flexible than Lieutenant General John R. Hodge to the Korean conditions and effective in dealing with Korean affairs (Stueck 2002). 24 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 06:50 29 Sep 2021; For: 9781315613611, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315613611.ch2 SOuth KOREA in its occupation zone. Criticizing U.S. policy and especially Hodge for inflexibility, William Stueck contends that had the Americans supported the leftist Korean People’s Republic (KPR), thus encouraging “coalition” rather than “class politics,” Koreans might have taken the lead in realizing the vision of a united, independent nation (Stueck 2002: 35).4 Chay (2002) believes that 1946 was a critical year for Korea, as well as for Korea–U.S. relations. A number of important actions and events in the political arena took place, notably the USAMGIK’s efforts to create a moderate left-right coalition, establishment of an interim legislative assembly as a step toward Korean independence, and the eruption of massive popular rebellions in southern Korea. Arguably the most important development, however, was the first Soviet–American Joint Commission meetings to agree on a plan for reunification.
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]
  • CKS NEWSLETTER Fall 2008
    CKS NEWSLETTER Fall 2008 Center for Korean Studies, University of California, Berkeley Message from the Chair Dear Friends of CKS, Colleagues and Students: As we look forward to the thirtieth anniversary of the Center for Korean Studies (CKS) in 2009, we welcome our friends, colleagues, visiting scholars, and students to a year of new programs that we have scheduled for 2008–2009. In addition to continuing with the regular programs of past years, we began this year with the conference “Places at the Table,” an in-depth exploration of Asian women artists with a strong focus on Korean art. We presented a conference on “Reunification: Building Permanent Peace in Korea” (October 10) and a screening of the documentary film “Koryo Saram” (October 24). “Strong Voices,” a forum on Korean and American women poets, is scheduled for April 1–5, 2009. We are in the early planning stages for a dialogue on Korean poetry between Professor Robert Hass of UC Berkeley and Professor David McCann of Harvard, in conjunction with performances of Korean pansori and gayageum (September 2009). Providing that funding is approved by the Korea Foundation, an international conference on Korean Peninsula security issues (organized by Professor Hong Yung Lee) is also planned for next year. The list of colloquium speakers, conferences, seminars, and special events is now available on the CKS website. (See page 2 for the fall and spring schedule.) We welcome novelist Kyung Ran Jo as our third Daesan Foundation Writer-in-Residence. Ms Jo, whose novels have won many awards, will give lectures and share her writing with the campus community through December of this year.
    [Show 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Park, Albert-CV 2020.Pdf
    Albert L. Park Department of History Claremont McKenna College 850 Columbia Avenue Claremont, CA 91711-6420 909-560-2676 [email protected] Academic Employment Bank of America Associate Professor of Pacific Basin Studies, May 2018 to Present Associate Professor, Department of History, Claremont McKenna College, May 2014 to May 2018 Co-Principal Investigator, EnviroLab Asia at the Claremont Colleges, March 2015 to Present Co-Founder and Co-Editor of Environments of East Asia—a multi-disciplinary book series on environmental issues in East Asia that is published by Cornell University Press, November 2019 to Present Extended Faculty, Department of History, Claremont Graduate University, 2010 to Present Assistant Professor, Department of History, Claremont McKenna College, July 2007 to April 2014 Luce Visiting Instructor, East Asian Studies Program, Oberlin College, July 2006-June 2007 Education University of Chicago, Department of History, Chicago, IL Ph.D. History, August 2007 Dissertation Title: “Visions of the Nation: Religion and Ideology in 1920s and 1930s Rural Korea” Dissertation Committee: Bruce Cumings (Chair), James Ketelaar, Tetsuo Najita, William Sewell Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea Korean Language Institute, June 1998-June 1999 Columbia University, Department of History, New York, NY M.A. History, October 1998 Park, 2 Keio University, Tokyo, Japan Japanese Language Program, September 1996-February 1997 Northwestern University, Evanston, IL B.A. History, May 1996, Departmental Honors Publications --Authored Books Building
    [Show full text]
  • With the Inauguration of the Bush Administration in 2001, South Korea
    THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION CENTER FOR NORTHEAST ASIAN POLICY STUDIES LOOKING BACK AND LOOKING FORWARD: NORTH KOREA, NORTHEAST ASIA AND THE ROK-U.S. ALLIANCE Dr. Hyeong Jung Park CNAPS Korea Fellow, 2006-2007 Senior Research Fellow, Korea Institute for National Unification December 2007 The Brookings Institution 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036-2188 Tel: 202-797-6000 Fax: 202-797-6004 www.brookings.edu Table of Contents 1. Introduction 2. ROK-U.S. dissonances in 2001-2006 2.1. How to understand the surge of anti-American sentiment in 2002-2004 2.2. North Korea policy 2.3. Redefinition of the ROK-U.S. military alliance 2.4. South Korea’s relations with China and Japan 3. Exploration for a ROK-U.S. Joint Strategy 3.1. Signs of a new beginning 3.2. Challenges for the United States Three-track strategy The crisis of the San Francisco system and the crisis of ROK-U.S. relations in 2001-2006 Establishing a convergent security regime in Northeast Asia 3.3. Challenges for South Korea Starting points for South Korea’s North Korea policy after the presidential election in December 2007 Elements of South Korea’s strategic thinking in previous years Policy challenges for the new president of South Korea 4. Summary and policy recommendations 2 Hyeong Jung Park North Korea, Northeast Asia, and the ROK-U.S. Alliance CNAPS Visiting Fellow Working Paper 1. Introduction1 Following the inauguration of the Bush administration in 2001, South Korea and the United States entered into a period of dissonance and even mutual repugnance.
    [Show full text]
  • From De Jure to De Facto: the Armistice Treaty and Redefining * the Role of the United Nations in the Korean Conflict
    International Studies Review Vol. 2 No. 1. _(Jun.e 1998): I 13~{26 113 From De Jure to De Facto: The Armistice Treaty and Redefining * the Role of the United Nations in the Korean Conflict )UNG-HOON LEE G'radu11te School of1ntem11tional Studies, Yonsei University North Korea has kng tried to undennine the Armistice Treaty of1953 in order to replace it with a comprehensive peace treaty with the United States. With North Korea cksing its territory to members ofthe Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission (NNSC) in 1995, the debate over the practicability ofthe Military Armistice Treaty has been rekindkd in recent years. In a broader sense, at issue is the effectiveness of the United Nations Command in continuing to maintain peace on the Korean peninsuw. How functional has the armistice treaty been in enforcing its ruks? In what ways does the annistice treaty affect the inter-Korean relationship? To what extent would a U.S.-North Korea peace treaty compromise the positions of the United Nations Command and the U.S. armed forces in South Korea? Keeping in mind these and other questions, this article examines first, the chal­ lenges facing the UN-sponsored armistice apparatus, and second, how the involved parties -- South Korea in particular -- may cope with these challenges to ensure pennanent security in Korea. This artick sug­ gests that South Korea should propose to revive the principles raised in the Geneva Conference of 1954, especia/{y concerning the need for the recognition of the United Nations ' authority and competence to deal with the Komm affairs. With the Cold W{zr ended, the Conference stands a far better chance to survive and perhaps to resolve the Korean question once and for all.
    [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]
  • 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]
  • The Korean War and Asian/American Culture
    AMST 238-01: Forgotten/Remembered: The Korean War and Asian/American Culture Professor Terry K. Park, Ph.D. Email: [email protected] Class: Tuesday/Friday, 9:50am – 11am, Founders Hall 126 Office: Pendleton East 123A Office Hours: Tuesdays 12-1pm & Fridays 1-2pm, and by appointment Mailbox: American Studies Program Office, Founders Hall Course Description. The 1950-53 Korean War is often called the United States's "forgotten war." Despite this designation, the war's immense devastation, its transformation of the US's presence in the Asian-Pacific region, and its racialized and gendered effects have produced a number of texts that remember a war without end. This course offers a transnational cultural history of the Korean War, unspooling its multiple threads in order to come to terms with the way it shaped--and continues to shape--the US's sense of its self, its place in the world, and the heartland of Korean America. Thus, rather than reinforce official ideologies of the Korean War as a distant and discrete "police action," students will consider the war as a series of unwieldy discourses--including containment, de/militarization, desegregation, brainwashing, debt, impersonation, red-baiting, and "han"--whose ghostly legacies whisper inconvenient truths about the triangulated relations among, and complexities within, US empire, the US nation-state, and Korean America. Three sets of questions will guide the course: • How did the Korean War (re)shape US empire? How does it continue to shape the US presence in Korea and the broader Asian-Pacific region? • How did the Korean War shape US national culture, or meanings of “America”? In turn, how does the US “remember,” or “forget,” the Korean War? • How did the Korean War shape the Korean diaspora? In turn, how does the Korean diaspora “remember” the Korean War? How do these rememberings contest official narratives of the Korean War, Korean America, and US empire? How do they imagine otherwise new relations, practices, and modes of being? Required Texts.
    [Show full text]
  • Humanity Interrogated: Empire, Nation, and the Political Subject in U.S. and UN-Controlled POW Camps of the Korean War, 1942-1960
    Humanity Interrogated: Empire, Nation, and the Political Subject in U.S. and UN-controlled POW Camps of the Korean War, 1942-1960 by Monica Kim A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (History) in The University of Michigan 2011 Doctoral Committee: Professor Penny M. Von Eschen, Chair Associate Professor Sarita See Associate Professor Scott Kurashige Associate Professor Henry Em, New York University Monica Kim 2011 For my parents Without whom, this never would have been written ii Acknowledgements It has been my incredible fortune that a vision shared also means a life shared. And much life has been shared in the fostering and development of this project, as it moved from idea to possibility to entirely unpredictable experiences in the field and in writing. My dissertation committee members have been involved with this project ever since the beginning. I am indebted not only to their commitment to and support of my ideas, but also to their own relationships with work, writing, and social justice. By their own examples, they have shown me how to ask the necessary, important questions to push my own scholarship constantly into a critical engagement with the world. Penny von Eschen has granted me perhaps one of the most important lessons in scholarship – to write history unflinchingly, with a clarity that comes from a deep commitment to articulating the everyday human struggles over power and history. A wise teacher and an invaluable friend, Penny has left an indelible imprint upon this work and my life, and I am excited about working together with her on projects beyond this dissertation.
    [Show full text]
  • BRIEF HISTORY of KOREA —A Bird's-Eyeview—
    BRIEF HISTORY OF KOREA —A Bird's-EyeView— Young Ick Lew with an afterword by Donald P. Gregg The Korea Society New York The Korea Society is a private, nonprofit, nonpartisan, 501(c)(3) organization with individual and corporate members that is dedicated solely to the promotion of greater awareness, understanding and cooperation between the people of the United States and Korea. In pursuit of its mission, the Society arranges programs that facilitate dis- cussion, exchanges and research on topics of vital interest to both countries in the areas of public policy, business, education, intercultural relations and the arts. Funding for these programs is derived from contributions, endowments, grants, membership dues and program fees. From its base in New York City, the Society serves audiences across the country through its own outreach efforts and by forging strategic alliances with counterpart organizations in other cities throughout the United States as well as in Korea. The Korea Society takes no institutional position on policy issues and has no affiliation with the U.S. government. All statements of fact and expressions of opinion contained in all its publications are the sole responsibility of the author or authors. For further information about The Korea Society, please write The Korea Society, 950 Third Avenue, 8th Floor, New York, NY 10022, or e-mail: [email protected]. Visit our website at www.koreasociety.org. Copyright © 2000 by Young Ick Lew and The Korea Society All rights reserved. Published 2000 ISBN 1-892887-00-7 Printed in the United States of America Every effort has been made to locate the copyright holders of all copyrighted materials and secure the necessary permission to reproduce them.
    [Show full text]
  • Washington National Guard Pamphlet
    WASH ARNG PAM 870-1-7 WASH ANG PAM 210-1-7 WASHINGTON NATIONAL GUARD PAMPHLET THE OFFICIAL HISTORY OF THE WASHINGTON NATIONAL GUARD VOLUME 7 WASHINGTON NATIONAL GUARD IN POST WORLD WAR II HEADQUARTERS MILITARY DEPARTMENT STATE OF WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE ADJUTANT GENERAL CAMP MURRAY, TACOMA, WASHINGTON 98430 - i - THIS VOLUME IS A TRUE COPY THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT ROSTERS HEREIN HAVE BEEN REVISED BUT ONLY TO PUT EACH UNIT, IF POSSIBLE, WHOLLY ON A SINGLE PAGE AND TO ALPHABETIZE THE PERSONNEL THEREIN DIGITIZED VERSION CREATED BY WASHINGTON NATIONAL GUARD STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY - ii - INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME 7, HISTORY OF THE WASHINGTON NATIONAL GUARD BY MAJOR GENERAL HOWARD SAMUEL McGEE, THE ADJUTANT GENERAL Volume 7 of the History of the Washington National Guard covers the Washington National Guard in the Post World War II period, which includes the conflict in Korea. This conflict has been categorized as a "police action", not a war, therefore little has been published by the Chief of Military History, Department of the Army or by individuals. However, the material available to our historian is believed to be of such importance as to justify its publication in this volume of our official history. While Washington National Guard units did not actually serve in Korea during this "police action", our Air National Guard and certain artillery units were inducted into service to replace like regular air and army units withdrawn for service in Korea. However, many Washington men participated in the action as did the 2nd and 3rd Infantry Divisions, both of which had been stationed at Fort Lewis and other Washington military installations.
    [Show full text]