earticle

영어

After the May 16 coup, the Park Chung-hee Regime instigated the Korea-Japan Talks, which led to nation-wide resistance in 1964. The talks included discussions in all areas, including Korean politics, economy, and culture. The Korea-Japan talks, however, were not only meaningful in terms of their discussion of Korean domestic issues, but also in terms of international relations. Diplomatic ties between Korea and Japan meaned that Korea became part of the american world order, and Japan was no longer Korea's enemy; also, Korea had become an influential partner in the new world order of the Cold War, and a model of economic development, guaranteed by the US. The first reaction of the Korean people to Japan was the anger. This was directed towards two targets. One was Japan, the colonial ruler that had plundered all of Korea in the past and, as many people thought, would continue to take advantage of Korea's economy. The other target was Park Chung-hee and his regime. After the May 16 coup, most intellectuals had welcomed Park Chung-hee as a nationalist leader. However, the Korea-Japan talks were thought to reveal his betrayal and untrustworthy character. These two targets of Korean anger were politically interrelated and led to social discourses. Alongside the recognition of America's role in the Korea-Japan Talks, intellectual critics, and the Korean government began to focus on economic problems, and presented the discourse as being in the national interests. The Korea-Japan Talks were the vector of the discourses in which Korea met the rest of the world. Korea had two blocs to choose between the nonalignment of Asia-Africa, or the American-centered anti-communist bloc. Initially Park Chung-hee regime was moving toward the former, which was nationalistic and friendly to military regimes. However, this choice was dangerous because people suspected the nationalism of the nonalignment bloc to be a disguised form of communism. The regime therefore chose American-centered anti-communist bloc. National Democracy, which was Park Chung-hee's slogan in the early 1960s, became a sign for the subjectivity of Korea within the world order. With the project for the completion of National Democracy, the Park Chung-hee regime drove the Korea-Japan talks and accused the intellectuals of being anti-nationalist. Under Park's political offensive, the intellectuals lost their discursive basis, and were thrown into incoherence. When diplomatic ties between Korea and Japan became an established fact, this limited Korea's economic national interests as the capitalist economic principle was the core of the America-centered anti-communist bloc. Korea had no choice but to accept the demands of the capital and the US. The roles of the Korean economy within the bloc was fixed in the new world system. More importantly, intellectual critics were not allowed to criticize the US. The intellectual critics therefore focused on the individual practice for the national interests. Anger against Japan was converted into recognitions of national subjectivity, and Japan became the means to those recognitions. Moral superiority was emphasized as a way of overcoming Japanese militarism or imperialism. Journalistic writings in the 1960s described the individual moral superiority of the Korean people. The most significant factors for internal and moral growth were presented as effective resistance to the oppressions in the past and the economic decisions of the present. Japan was very important to Korea in the 1960s, as it enabled Korea could to connect to the world order and introspect on its own subjectivity.

한국어

1964년 4월의 대대적인 반대운동을 통해 한일회담은 한국 사회에서 중요한 정치적 쟁점으로 부각된다. 그러나 한일회담은 한국-일본 양국가의 외교문제 이상의 문제성을 안고 있었다. 일본과의 수교는 과거사의 문제 외에도 세계질서와 연결된다. 한일수교는 미국중심의 세계질서에 한국이 편입됨을 뜻하는 것으로, 자유진영의 일원인 일본은 갈등과 협력의 대상이라는 양가적 관계로 연결되었다. 이러한 일본을 대하는 한국의 첫 번째 반응은 감정적 분노였다. 그리고 이 분노는 박정희 군사정권에 저항하는 감정과도 일치한다. 그러나 한일회담의 배후에 미국이 있고, 세계질서와 연관되었다는 점이 드러나면서 한일회담에 대한 인식은 변화한다. 군사정권은 민족적 민주주의라는 기호를 통해 한국의 특수성과 세계의 보편성이 만날 가능성을 타진했다. ‘민족적’이라는 수사는 한국의 특수성을 실현하는 의의를 가진다. 이를 위한 한국의 선택지 중 하나로 아시아-아프리카 비동맹 체제가 있었지만 한국의 선택은 미국이라는 세계질서였다. 친미-반공의 태도를 취한 지식인들은 군사정권을 비판했지만, 미국이라는 세계질서에는 침묵하는 모순을 드러냈다. 세계질서 속의 한국의 주체성은 경제를 통해 상상될 수 있었다. 경제는 근대성의 중핵이었으며, 한국의 주체성과 세계가 만나는 실천의 영역이었기 때문이었다. 경제의 문제는 탈냉전, 비동맹의 상상력 속에서도 중요한 심급으로 이해되었다. 경제의 장에서도 군사정권은 비판받았지만 세계체제를 인정한 이상 한국의 역할과 국익은 한정적이었다. 이때 글쓰기가 추구한 것이 실력양성과 내면의 완성이었다. 당시의 저널리즘 글쓰기는 일본에 대한 분노와 함께 민족의 실력양상이라는 담론을 구성했다. 일본은 한국의 주체성을 인식하기 위한 경로였다. 그리고 주체성 수립을 위해서는 도덕적 역량이 요구되었다. 수기, 논픽션, 그리고 『조선총독부』속의 인물은 도덕적 우위로써 식민지 지배를 상상적으로 극복했다. 도덕적 우위는 실질적 힘을 가지지는 않았지만 심정적인 보상을 통해 민족의 주체성 형성을 지향했다.