A recent topic of dispute among commenters at the Marmot’s Hole is the alleged American sell out of Korea to Japan with the mutual signing of the Taft-Katsura Agreement. This piece of history, little known to everyone else in the world, is treated with almost Dokdo like reverence in Korean society. This agreement is often used by Koreans to blame the US for the Japanese colonization of Korea. You think I’m exaggerating? Let me remind everyone what the South Korean Unification Minister had to say on this subject:
A hundred years ago, the Philippines became a U.S. colony and the Korean Peninsula a Japanese one owing to the Taft-Katsura Agreement†of 1905, Chung said. The division of the nation and Korean War were not our will either, nor was the failure of the Gwangju Uprising. A century later, Chung promised a hot summer in which our fate will be decided not by North Korea, China, the United States, Japan or Russia, but by our own pride and self-determination.
Unification Minister Chung Dong-young, July 2005
I will focus this posting on just the Taft-Katsura Agreement, though much of the rest of Minister Chung’s comments are just as equally ridiculous as blaming the US for Japanese colonialism. This view is so indoctrinated into Koreans that many foreigners in Korea end up believing it as well because they hear it so often from Koreans they work with. So is this Korean claim true? To determine this you have to first look at the historical context of the era.
The Japanese had been effectively interfering with Korea’s internal affairs since the 1880’s, but China continued to wield the most influence over the country due to it’s protectorate status over Korea. The Japanese were eager to gain a main land Asian colony to where natural resources could be accessed in order to continue the Japanese modernization of both it’s economy and military. The Japanese felt quick modernization was needed in order to prevent the western powers from exploiting and colonizing Japan like they had China. Gaining control of Korea’s natural resources was critical along with securing strategic territory that had long been used as an invasion point into Japan. Plus acquiring a Korean colony would send a huge international message that Japan was a nation ready to colonize, and not be colonized by anyone.
Map of Sino-Japanese War troop movements
The Sino-Japanese War (June 1894-April 1895) between Japan and China was Japan’s first attempt to forcibly wield it’s new power. It is important to note the long time Korean ruling class, the Yangban, did not want to lose their privileged place in Korean society and had long tried to keep Korea isolated from the rest of the world. Thus the term the “Hermit Kingdom“. They feared that the opening up of the country and the economy would dilute the power they wielded within Korea.
Plus the Yangban suspicious of a military coup that would end their power, had not raised and funded a strong national military and had instead relied on their long time protectors the Chinese for national security. The strategic incompetence of not forming a strong domestic army became quite evident when in 1871 American Marines defeated Korean defenders of Kangwha-do island at the mouth of the Han River and occupied it for a short time. This embarrassment of the Korean military eventually led to the signing of the 1883 Jemulpo Agreement between the US and Korea. This treaty confirmed friendly relations between the US and Korea. The easy defeat of the Korean military by the US Marines is probably what began to give the Japanese rulers ideas of an easy conquest and colonization of Korea.
The 1894 Donghak Rebellion, a peasant uprising in the Cheolla province of southern Korea, was used by the Japanese government as an excuse to deploy 8,000 combat troops to Korea to quell the uprising. Before quelling the uprising the Japanese troops seized the Korean capitol of Seoul and captured the Korean emperor. Obviously the Chinese government was not happy about the Japanese power play to gain influence over Korea and began to deploy a force of soldiers to Korea. While this was going on the Japanese installed pro-Japanese Koreans to run the government who legitimized the Japanese use of force to protect Korea from the Chinese. Thus this began the Sino-Japanese War.
The Chinese ultimately lost the war and signed the Treaty of Shimonoseki in 1895 that effectively granted Japan imperial influence over Korea and parts of Manchuria without Chinese objections. With the Chinese military weakened after it’s bitter defeat by the Japanese; the European powers took advantage of the situation by occupying strategic areas of Manchuria before the Japanese could move in. Most notably the Russians who occupied a huge area of Manchuria and the entire Liaodong Peninsula. The occupying of strategic areas of Manchuria by the Europeans enraged the Japanese rulers who felt the plunders of their hard earned victory over China was stolen from them. The deployment of over 100,000 Russian soldiers into Manchuria after the 1900 Boxer Rebellion only furthered caused tensions to raise because the Japanese felt that the deployment meant that the Russians were there to stay. A series of treaties were signed between the Japanese and the Europeans in an effort to quell the building tensions in the area. These treaties gave Japan recognized control of the Korean peninsula to Japan while the Europeans would continue to control Manchuria and other areas of China.
Russian controlled Manchuria in dark red.
However, the tension did not subside and open warfare would break out between Russia and Japan. The Russo-Japanese War (Feb. 1904 – May1905) ended with the defeat of the Russian military and the destruction of nearly the entire Russian navy by the Japanese. This victory gave the Japanese undisputed control of not only the Korean peninsula but all of Manchuria as well. This victory had also showed the world that the Japanese were a country to be respected as the equals to any western nation with their defeat of the Russian military.
The Russo-Japanese War was officially ended with the signing of the Treaty of Portsmouth in the United States between the Russian and Japanese representatives. It was few months before this treaty was signed that the Taft-Katsura Agreement so remembered today by Koreans was agreed upon. This agreement effectively recognized that the US would not interfere with Japanese ambitions in Korea and Manchuria and that Japan would not interfere with American ambitions in the Philippines. The US leaders wanted official recognition of this reality from the Japanese so they would not have to spend the money fortifying the US colony in the Philippines from possible Japanese attack.
Plus this agreement and the following Treaty of Portsmouth would ensure regional stability after a decade of constant warfare in northeast Asia. All this agreement did was recognize reality at the time. How is recognizing reality a sell out?
Russian and Japanese delegates meet to sign the Treaty of Portsmouth
Also Koreans often site the 1883 Jemulpo Agreement as not being a mutual friendship treaty, but as a defensive pact between Korea and the US. They feel that the US was obligated to come to the defense of Korea against Japan. Here is the passage in the treaty they try to argue is a defensive pact:
Article I.
There shall be perpetual peace and friendship between the President of the United States and the King of Chosen and the citizens and subjects of their respective Governments. If other Powers deal unjustly or oppressively with either Government, the other will exert their good offices, on being informed of the case, to bring about an amicable arrangement, thus showing their friendly feelings.
Only in Korea is “exert their good offices” considered a defensive pact. Here is the meaning of “good offices” from dictionary.com:
1. influence, esp. with a person in a position of power: He got the job through the good offices of his uncle.
2. services rendered by a mediator in a dispute.
No where in this definition do I see defensive pact, but this is what many Koreans believe “good offices” means though the definition of it is quite clear. The only obligation the US had was to speak on Korea’s behalf if requested; no where in there does it say the US is obligated to deploy the 7th Cavalry to Korea to take Japanese scalps. However, this didn’t stop Koreans leaders after the signing of the Portsmouth Treaty to try and argue this same point that “good offices” meant a defensive pact with then President Teddy Roosevelt, but Roosevelt refused to meet them and discounted their claims. Can you blame him? Maybe he wasn’t showing “good offices” by refusing to meet them, but no where in the agreement does it say either that the Koreans have exclusive access to the American President. If the United States didn’t come to the aid of Korea during both the Sino-Japanese War and the Russo-Japanese War what made the Korean leaders think that the US would be willing to go to war with Japan now?
A defensive pact would be a formal document all in itself much like what the US and Korea has today, that lays out clear responsibilities of each side. Almost certainly if Korea wanted a defensive pact with the US at the time the US would have requested a military presence within Korea which the Yangban rulers did not want. The US did not have the naval ability that it has today or nearby colonies from which to quickly move troops to defend Korea from external attack thus the signing of a mutual defense pact would be pointless without a forward deployed American troop presence. Even if the Yangban rulers allowed a US troop presence I don’t think the US military could have supported it with it’s already large deployment of forces in the Philippines to put down the insurgency there from Moro guerrillas.
Too many Koreans confuse the US military might of today with the US military of 1905. In 1905 the US military was at the most equal to, if not weaker than the major European powers. If the Japanese had so decisively defeated the Russians whose country is located adjacent to both Korea and Manchuria, how can the United States located on the other side of the world, be expected to sail over to Korea and conduct a 1905 version of the Inchon Landing Operation?
To blame the US for Japanese colonization of Korea is ridiculous. Saying that the US didn’t do anything to help Korea I could agree with, but to blame the US for the Japanese colonization is just another absurd attempt at historical revisionism so prevalent in Korea today. If Koreans are looking to assign blame they should first look at themselves.
Shouldn’t the first responsibility of a government be to ensure national security? Obviously the Yangban were more interested in their own security than national defense. If the Korean government had opened up their economy and simultaneously built up and modernized their army after the embarrassing defeat to the Americans on Ganghwa Island over 20 years prior they may have been able to prevent what happened to them. Remember during the Sino-Japanese War only 8,000 Japanese soldiers were able to occupy Seoul and capture the government. 8,000 for crying out loud. Why should the US be expected to defend a country that isn’t even willing to protect itself from an invasion force of 8,000 soldiers? If the Koreans fought a protracted war against the Japanese to keep them out of Korea maybe the US would have done more to help the Koreans. As it turned out the Koreans did very little to expel the Japanese during both the Sino and Russo-Japanese Wars thus why would the US government feel an obligation to free Korea when it appeared they didn’t want to be free themselves?
The bottom line is that the corrupt and incompetent Korean rulers created the conditions that led to the Japanese colonization of Korea. In their quest to keep their own domestic status quo they ignored the changes in the power structure in northeast Asia, mainly that China could not be depended on to defend the peninsula from invasion. China could not even defend themselves from the western powers at the time, much less Korea. However, the Korean rulers kept their heads in the sand and did little to develop international relations and build their own domestic military to defend the nation. By gambling that the Chinese military would protect them was a bet that they lost. It was an even worse bet if they thought the Americans were obligated to come save them after that.
The Taft-Katsura Agreement is just one of a long line of historical revisionism endorsed by Korean politicians like Minister Chung I mentioned earlier that seek to blame foreigners, in particular the United States, for all the failings of the Korean government. If the failures of prior Korean governments was the fault of foreigners and the big, bad United States; then all the failures of the current Korean government most also be the fault of foreigners and the big, bad United States now. That is why the Korean government finds it so necessary to create a historical context in order to blame current problems on the US. So when the North Koreans detonate a nuclear weapon, who does the South Korean government blame for it? The United States of course, while totally remaining silent about the fact the South Korean government are the ones that financed the nuclear weapon by giving massive amounts of aid and hard cash to the North Koreans.
When the economy is sagging that must be the fault of the foreigners as well, so witch hunts against companies like Lone Star are undertaken in order to shift blame for the sluggish economy when in fact all this does is create further drag on the economy by drying up international investment into the country. That doesn’t matter though because the government has officially shifted blame once again to the big, bad foreigners. Don’t even get me started on Dokdo. I and others have shown over and over again how the Korean government has demagogued this issue for their own political advantage and once again Minister Chung was leading the way on this. Heck even the lack of English language skills, drugs, and defiling of women in Korea are blamed on “low quality foreign English teachers”. The list of outrageous claims against foreigners goes on and on.
What concerns me most is these backwards views are slowly but surely making it possible for history to repeat itself. Korean politicians today are becoming more and more like the Yangban of the Josen dynasty of the late 19th century. They are more interested in keeping the status quo and cementing their own power than ensuring the national security of the country. The current leftist government much like the Yangban are highly suspicious of the military and have thus sought to limit the power of the ROK military as much as possible. Thus you see massive cut backs in soldiers, a lack of national military strategy, along with deliberately causing a complacency within the ranks towards the nation’s main enemy North Korea.
Now combine this with the simultaneous steady degrading of the US-ROK alliance which may ultimately end up with the exit of US forces from Korea and you have a country that has exposed itself to an external military attack, much like in the late 19th century. There is one main reason why for over 50 years that northeast Asia has been so peaceful, the US military presence.
Another eerie similarity is the fact that Japanese agents had infiltrated and manipulated the Korean government long before the actual Japanese occupation in order to set conditions for the eventual take over of Korea by Japan to happen. The same thing is happening today as North Korean agents have infiltrated not only the government, but South Korean society as a whole in order to set conditions for a future North Korean take over of the country. The Japanese were infiltrating Korean society 20 years before the take over of Korea, imagine where South Korea will be in 20 years if North Korea is allowed to continue to manipulate the direction of the country.
If the North Koreans ever did invade and occupy South Korea 20 years from now long after the exit of US forces from South Korea; I can picture the Korean leaders coming to Washington demanding the US to come and save them though they ended the US-ROK alliance years ago and replaced it with a friendship treaty instead. Would the US president be morally obligated to help a country that independently chose to create the conditions that allowed their defeat to happen in the first place? There is plenty that can be learned from an objective look at history and unfortunately it appears that the current Korean government is only interested in following the path of the Josun Yangban at the expense of the national security of the country. If the Korean government reaps what it sows 20 years from now, any bets they will blame America for selling them out then too?
