Beyond the San Francisco System: Re-evaluating Japan's colonial past and East Asian peace

A 2010 joint statement by over 1,000 Korean and Japanese intellectuals declared the 1905 Eulsa Treaty and the 1910 Korea Annexation Treaty illegal, thereby invalidating Japan's colonial rule over Korea. This stance was reaffirmed in subsequent declarations, including the 2019 Korean-Japanese Citizen Joint Declaration marking the 100th anniversary of the March 1st Revolution. However, the rise of the Abe administration in Japan led to a historical revisionism that pushed back against this understanding.

In response to Japan's shifting historical narrative, Korean proponents of the joint statement decided to refocus on the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty, which served as the foundation for the 1965 Korea-Japan Basic Agreement. For over a decade, experts from Korea, the US, China, Japan, Canada, and Australia have convened five international forums to discuss the treaty. Their research and discussions have culminated in a recently published English book titled 'Beyond the San Francisco System.'

“

The Eulsa Treaty and the Korea Annexation Treaty signed between the Korean Empire and Japan were illegal, thus Japanese colonial rule was invalid.

The book argues that the San Francisco Peace Treaty underwent significant transformations. Initially, from 1945-1947, the US aimed to dismantle Japan into an agricultural nation. This shifted between 1948-1950 to a focus on 'Japan reform' as part of a Cold War strategy, excluding the Soviet Union from the peace process. By 1950-1953, Japan was recognized not as a defeated nation but as a partner in the Cold War. Consequently, the pursuit of war crimes was largely abandoned, and colonial issues were not even mentioned, diverging from the intentions of the Cairo and Yalta declarations.

“

The San Francisco Peace Treaty planted the seeds of 'unsolved problems' to induce historical and territorial disputes in East Asia.

Canadian Professor Hara Kimie suggests the US intentionally sowed seeds of "unsolved problems" in the San Francisco Treaty to provoke historical and territorial disputes in East Asia. Japanese Professor Iizona suggests that the strengthening of Indo-Pacific alliances, the Quad framework, and the potential 'NATO-ization' of East Asia represent an evolution of the San Francisco System into 'San Francisco System 2.0' amidst deepening US-China rivalry.

Professor Lee Tae-jin's research into the Eulsa Treaty uncovered evidence of signature forgery by Emperor Gojong. He also cited Harvard professor Manley Hudson's 1935 review, which identified the Eulsa Treaty as a prime example of a treaty concluded under duress, rendering it historically invalid. This aligns with Professor Dotsuga Etsuro's discovery of significant flaws in the original Eulsa Treaty documents stored in Japan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs archives, including the absence of a title and signatures, suggesting potential fabrication or alteration.

“

The strengthening of Indo-Pacific alliances, the Quad system, and the NATO-ization of East Asia show a tendency for the San Francisco system to evolve and materialize into San Francisco System 2.0.

Despite these efforts, the intended outcome of a joint statement by 1,000 global intellectuals to have the Eulsa Treaty's illegality accepted by Japan has not materialized. Nevertheless, the decade-long academic endeavor to re-evaluate the 70-year-old San Francisco System has been a significant undertaking. The authors express hope that this re-evaluation will lead to a new peace system for global prosperity, echoing the spirit of Ahn Jung-geun's 'Theory of East Asian Peace.'

“

The Eulsa Treaty is a representative example of an international treaty concluded under duress, and it was historically reviewed as invalid.