Home
|
ASCK sponsored two events at the March 2009 AAS meeting in Chicago. First event: March 27, Friday, 10:45 a.m. – 12:45 p.m., Panel Number 48, Long Journey Toward Truth: Findings of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, South Korea.
Second event: Saturday, March 28, 2009, 1 p.m. – 2:30 p. m., Erie Room, A reception for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Republic of Korea (TRCK). The program included opening remarks by Professor Martin Hart-Landsberg (Lewis and Clark College); a brief presentation by Professor Kim Dong-Choon (Sung Kong Hoe University), standing commissioner of the (TRCK); and informal conversations with members of the TRCK. A limited number of free copies of a book documenting the work of the TRCK were distributed. ASCK also helped organize a speaking tour by the TRC that
included stops in six cities: New York, Boston, Portland, Berkeley, Los
Angeles, and Vancouver. ASCK is supporting an important effort by historians in South Korea to defend the principle of political neutrality in education. Statement by Historians in South Korea and Abroad We [the undersigned] demand that the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology stop the revision of [high school] history textbooks, undermining the principle of political neutrality in education. On October 8th, twenty one academic associations related to the field of history held a press conference, criticizing the government’s plan to revise modern Korean history textbooks [used in high schools]. The following day, the Joint Committee for the Resolution of the History Textbook Issue, composed of 39 groups – including the National Association of History Teachers, National University Workers’ Union, and Asia Peace and History Education Network – also held a press conference in front of the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology. They did so because, instead of safeguarding political neutrality in education and respecting historical expertise, the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology has brought about a crisis in historical research and education. But the Ministry has refused to acknowledge such criticism/opposition, and continues to stick to its plans for revision. On October 15th, the Ministry announced that it would “pursue a balanced revision of textbooks by the end of November reflecting the academic and educational perspectives in a comprehensive manner” by utilizing the report submitted by the National Institute of Korean History entitled “Review of modern Korean history textbooks and Proposed Guidelines for Narration” and the participation of the Association of Experts in History Education made up of teachers, educational professionals and professors. The textbooks that the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology plans to revise had already been reviewed in 2004, 2005 and 2006, and [in those reviews] were not judged to be “left-leaning.” If the revisions are carried out [only] because the new President, Lee Myung-bak, proposed such changes as part of his so-called policy of “normalization of textbooks,” will future administrations also revise textbooks whenever there is a change in government? If that were to happen, political neutrality in education will be undermined, and there will be a proliferation of research on modern Korean history that caters solely to the government in power. Moreover, the way the Ministry has pursued the revision of history textbooks does not conform to the Regulations concerning Textbooks. According to these regulations, the Ministry may order the authors or the publishers to revise the contents, and if such orders go unheeded, the Ministry may revoke its official approval or suspend publication and circulation of the textbooks within one year. But even in such cases, the regulations have no provisions for the direct revision of textbooks by the government [as the government threatens to do]. The report submitted by the National Institute of Korean History did make note of 49 different revisions to be made in the textbooks to enhance validity and fairness, avoiding bias in historical interpretation, but did not provide detailed guidelines for the 257 different expressions deemed problematic by the Ministry. It is of grave concern that the current attempt to revise history textbooks appears to be driven by a specific political agenda to homogenize history textbooks, as demanded by the "New Right" and parts of the governing group. First, the Ministry’s revision of history textbooks, by allowing only one historical interpretation, prevents diverse interpretations, based on accumulated historical research, from being reflected in the textbooks. This suppression of diversity leads to the repression of academic freedom in research and publication. Second, the Ministry’s revisions will further narrow the range of historical interpretations that had been guaranteed to some extent under the textbook authorization system. This distortion of the textbook authorization system will result in the publication of authorized textbooks that are no different from the government authored textbooks that were published under the Yushin System. This will result in the infringement of history teachers’ right to teach, and students’ right to learn. Third, the homogenization of history education will undermine students’ creative and spontaneous learning and furthermore hamper the cultivation of open-ended and pluralistic thought necessary in the age of globalization. Because the Ministry’s attempt to revise history textbooks will inevitably lead to the erosion of academic freedom and political neutrality in education, we, the undersigned scholars of history, hereby launch a nation-wide signature campaign and make the following demands:
For an overview of the issue see: Choe
Sang-Hun, "History
textbook causes an uproar in South Korea," International
Herald Tribune, November 17, 2008. The ASCK steering committee authored a letter to the Prosecutor General of South Korea on behalf of Professor Oh Sei-Chull who, along with six other people, was arrested on charges of violating the National Security Law. Korea Peace Day 2007 On November 30, 2007, the ASCK Steering Committee sponsored
(with the support of UCLA’s Center for Korean Studies) a Korea
Peace Day 2007 event at UCLA, with the theme “Ending the War
on Korea, Building Peace for Northeast Asia.” The following is the ASCK statement
in support of House Resolution 121 on the "comfort women" issue. As scholars working on East Asian and
Asian American issues, we call upon members of Congress to support House
Resolution 121 proposed by Congressman Mike Honda. We believe
that the government of Japan should make an official and unequivocal apology.
It should take responsibility for how the Japanese Imperial Armed Force
subjected thousands of girls and women of Asia, as well as those of European
descent, to sexual slavery as "comfort women" during World War II.
The ASCK steering committee authored two letters to the president of Dongguk University in Seoul, South Korea on behalf of Professor Kang Jeong-koo who was indicted in December 2005 and convicted in May 2006 under provisions of the National Security Law for making statements alleged to be pro-North Korean. Professor Kang has been suspended from his teaching and research jobs.
Korea Peace Day 2006 With relations between the United States and North Korea growing steadily worse, the Alliance of Scholars Concerned about Korea declared December 1, 2006 to be Korea Peace Day 2006. On that day ASCK held a major conference at Stanford University which featured a panel of distinguished scholars including Bruce Cumings, John Lewis, Jae-Jung Suh, and Xiyu Yang.
The Future of U.S.-Korean Relations: Profound asymmetries of power and perception haunt U.S. relations with both North and South Korea . Over the last four years, these power imbalances have led to increased tensions among the three countries. An uneasy, eight-year truce concerning North Korea 's nuclear ambitions ended in 2002, and the United States moved closer to a war footing. In South Korea, meanwhile, anger and resentment over an unequal military and political relationship, combined with an ongoing U.S. reevaluation of its military role on the peninsula, have put an enormous strain on a longstanding military alliance. The shifts in U.S. policy toward the two Koreas have taken place against the backup of a radically reconfigured American foreign policy. Upon taking office in 2001, George W. Bush signaled a new direction in U.S. relations with the world. Particularly after September 11, the Bush administration has increasingly broken with a "balance of power" tradition to put greater emphasis on military force and unilateral diplomacy. Dramatic changes have taken place in East Asia as well. These include rising Japan-North Korea tensions in the wake of disclosures of the kidnapping of Japanese citizens; the growing military strength and reach of Japan and China together with China's emergence at the center of a range of diplomatic activities including the Korean nuclear issue; and movement forward in inter-Korean rapprochement. In light of these trends, the United States faces important decisions in dealing with the Korean peninsula and, by extension, East Asia . Along one path lies increased conflict - diplomatic, economic, and even military. Along another path lies the prospect of greater cooperation and mutual benefit that arise from a greater equality in relations and multilateral diplomatic, political, and economic interaction. In The Future of U.S. -Korean Relations, twelve prominent experts on U.S.-Korean and U.S.-Pacific relations explore the many dimensions of this critical choice. They analyze current U.S. foreign policy, how it has changed over the last decade, and, as importantly, how it should change over the next ten years. They chart critical new developments in North and South Korea . And they examine U.S.-Korean relations through such prisms as nationalism, the media, and regional relations. This book will contain essays that were published in the Winter 2004 issue of Asian Perspective and written by Charles Armstrong, Paul Chang, John Feffer, Martin Hart-Landsberg, Samuel Kim, Karin Lee, Adam Miles, Katharine Moon, Gi-Wook Shin, and Jae-Jung Suh. The book will have additional chapters by Gavan McCormack, James Seymour, and Haruki Wada.
With renewed tensions once again raising the specter of war on the Korean peninsula, the Alliance of Scholars Concerned about Korea declared November 10, 2005 to be Korea Peace Day.
On February 25, 2005, the ASCK helped organized a conference at George Washington University to assess the future of U.S. foreign policy towards the two Koreas in light of the reelection of George W. Bush to a second term as U.S. president.
At a time of heightening tensions and increasing threats of war on the Korean peninsula, ASCK organized the first Korea Peace Day to build support for the peaceful resolution of U.S.-North Korean conflicts. On Thursday, November 6, events were held on over forty college campuses in the United States and around the world educating participants about the history of U.S.-Korean relations and calling for a new U.S. policy towards Korea, North and South..
On July 27, 2003, on the occassion of the fiftieth
anniversary of the signing of the armistice ending the fighing in the Korean
War, ASCK issued a statement entitled "Time
to End the Korean War." |