동아시아라는 번역공간

윤여일(Yel-Yl, Yoon) 비판사회학회 2012 경제와 사회 Vol.- No.93

이 논문의 목적은 한국의 동아시아론에 관한 지식사회학적 분석을 통해 동아시아론의 의의를 해명하는 데 있다. 한국에서 동아시아론은 근 20년 동안 여러 학문 분야에서 논의되어 왔다. 그 까닭은 동아시아가 지리적 범주를 지시하는 것을 넘어 다양한 문제의식과 연결되었기 때문이다. 동아시아론에서 동아시아는 지역 범주이자 지적 지평이자 문명권이자 경제적 권역으로서의 의미를 가지며 다양하게 활용되었다. 그러나 그 결과 동아시아론은 내적 논리를 잃고 모호 해지고 말았다. 따라서 이 논문은 동아시아론의 인식론적 토대를 묻고 동아시아론의 발생 배경을 분석해 현재 상황에서 동아시아론의 필요성을 검토한다. 아울러 이 논문은 동아시아를 번역공간으로 정의하고, 세 가지 수준에서 동아시아론의 방향을 모색한다. 첫째, 동아시아론은 서양 중심적 지식 체계를 극복하고 세계체제의 주변 사이의 번역을 기도해야 한다. 둘째, 동아시아론은 동아시아 역내의 타국의 지식계와의 상호 번역에 나서야 한다. 셋째, 동아시아론은 한국의 지식계 안에서 내부 번역의 과정을 거쳐야 한다. 이러한 과정을 거쳐야 한국의 동아시아론은 사상적 원리성을 벼리면서, 타국의 지식계에 번역될 만한 가치를 지닐 수 있을 것이다. The purpose of this paper is to explore the significance of the discourse of East-Asia by analyzing the discourse of East-Asia in Korea through the perspective of sociology of knowledge. The discourse of East-Asia has seen growth in various academic fields in the last 20 years in Korea, as East-Asia indexes not a mere geographical notion but a field that forms links between diverse problematics. East-Asia in the East-Asia discourse has been used as a regional category, an intellectual horizon, a civilization and economic bloc. However, the discourse of East-Asia lost its ideational cohesion and its argument became ambiguous. This paper examines the need for the discourse of East Asia today by questioning the epistemological foundations of the discourse of East-Asia as well as analyzing its origin. Furthermore, this research defines East Asia as a space of translation and explore the direction for speech-East Asia at three levels. First, the discourse of East-Asia must overcome the Eurocentric order of knowledge and make a commitment to the act of translation between the peripheral regions. Second, the discourse of East-Asia has to consider the mutual translation between intellectual spheres of East-Asian countries. Third, the discourse of East-Asia has to be translated between different academic fields within Korea. Only by going through such a process, the discourse of East-Asia in Korea may have ideological foundation and deserves to be translated into other languages.

동아시아 문명공동체 로드맵

전홍석(Jeon, Hong-seok) 한국양명학회 2018 陽明學 Vol.0 No.50

현 동아시아권의 제반 분쟁과 균열 현상들은 초국가주의적 평화협력구상으로서의 ‘국제 공공성’ 공백이 불러온 결과라고 할 수 있다. 동아시아는 일국적 근대화 기획이 착수된 이후 동아시아공동체의 문화적 소통과 연대적 실제상들이 파편화ㆍ기형화되어 역내 국가 간 상호 대결과 분쟁이 일상화되고 있다. 따라서 동아시아에 지속가능한 ‘문화와 평화 질서’의 출현이 무엇보다도 절실한 때다. 인권과 평화 보장을 위한 초국가적 연합체 강화는 ‘동아시아시민’, 곧 역내 인권주의자와 평화주의자의 상호 빈번한 교류와 공감 속에서만 가능하다. 바람직한 동아시아의 문명공동체는 ‘보편적 인권’과 ‘평화 이념’을 지향하는 시민세력이 그 정체성 구성의 주체가 되었을때 견고해질 수 있다. 이것이 바로 초국적 시민사회로서의 ‘인문 · 종교 · 문화예술 네트워크’를 통한 ‘동아시아 평화공동체’를 제안하는 이유다. 이제 동아시아인들은 맹목적이고 그릇된 ‘국가’ 관념에서 벗어나 보다 포괄적이고 개방적인 ‘문명’에 터하여 타자와 호응하는 상호주체적인 공존공영의 ‘동아시아공동체 구성’을 구체화해야 할 것이다. 이런 점에서 본고에서는 역내 인문 · 종교 · 문화예술 네트워크의 활성화와 그에 따른 동아시아 문명공동체, 평화공동체 구상의 제반 사항들을 논구해보았다. 이 제안은 크게 보아 동아시아 시민사회 지역구상 노선에 합류한다. 그 발상은 ‘동아시아시민주의’라는 새로운 협력모델로서 정치 · 경제영역보다는 동아시아를 매일매일 체험하면서 살아가는 동아시아시민의 탈권력적 · 탈시장적 생활세계에 바탕을 둔다. 때문에 이 네트워크는 동아시아인의 공통된 생활유전자인 ‘동아시아 생명주의’를 시민사회의 문화영역에 구현하고자 하는 구상이기도 하다. 요컨대 본 ‘동아시아 문명공동체로드맵’은 동아시아 생명문화운동의 핵심인 인문인, 종교인, 문화예술인을 역내 연결망의 ‘생명주의 데모스’로 격상시켜 동태적이고 역동적인 ‘동아시아의 정체성’을 모색하는 데 목표를 둔다. 그 궁극적 지향점은 현재 세계적 담론인 예술 · 공감 · 영성 · 생태문명의 동아시아적 의미를 진작시키고 그로부터 각성된 ‘동아시아 평화공동체’를 정식화하는 데 있다. Disputes and ruptures arising in East Asia are caused by the absence of ‘international public spirit’ as supranational cooperation for peace. In East Asia, since national modernization planning started, cultural communication and solidarity among countries in East Asia have fragmented and deformed and confrontation and disputes between countries in East Asia are common. Therefore, there is an urgent need for appearance of sustainable ‘order of culture and peace’ in East Asia. Strengthening supranational consortium for securing human rights and peace requires frequent communication and sympathy among people who advocate human rights and peace living in East Asia. Desirable East Asian civilization community can be strengthened when citizens aiming for ‘universal human rights’ and ‘peace’ become the leading force of formation of its identity. This is the very reason for which the author of this paper proposes ‘peace community in East Asia’ through ‘humanitiesㆍreligion · culture · art network’ as supranational civil society. It is high time for East Asians to endeavor to organize autonomous ‘East Asia community’ that can exist and prosper together based on more comprehensive and open ‘civilization’ breaking away from blind and wrong ideology of ‘nationalism’. In this regard, this paper studied particulars to promote humanities · religion · culture · art network in East Asia and articles of idea of civilization community and peace community in East Asia. This proposal joins a line of East Asian civil society in a broad sense. This idea is based on non-power and market oriented everyday life of East Asians who experience East Asia as new cooperation model called ‘East Asia Civicism’. Therefore, this network is an idea of realizing ‘respect for life’ which is common to East Asians in the area of culture in civil society. To sum up, ‘road map for East Asia civilization community’ aims to seek dynamic ‘identity of East Asia’ by promoting humanists, men of religion and artists who serve as leading force of life culture movement in East Asia to ‘demos of respect for life’ in network within East Asia. ‘Road map for East Asia civilization community’ ultimately aims to boost artㆍsympathyㆍspiritualityㆍecology civilization which is global discourse in a sense of East Asia and form ‘East Asian peace community’ awakened from it.

New Russian Policy towards East Asia Under Medvedev’s Presidency

바실리 미카예프 (사) 한국전략문제연구소 2008 전략연구 Vol.- No.43

The conceptual philosophy of power-transition process in Russia from Putin to Medvedev is continuity of policy. It is more related to domestic policy where Putin, on the eve of his resignation, succeeded in introducing a three-year budget plan and a number of long-term economic, energy and social programs. Nevertheless, the philosophy of policy-continuity will cover Russian foreign diplomacy as well. In regard to East Asia, it means that Medvedev will have to follow Putin’s course on, slowly but truly, paying more attention to the region. However, as Putin failed to present a comprehensive strategy of Russia–East Asia relationship, Medvedev will have to do this job by himself. A few more factors will push Medvedev to introduce diplomacy innovations towards East Asia. Firstly, as new President, Medvedev will have to say his own word in Russian policy, including the foreign policy. Russian and international communities are expecting that Medvedev will make Russian domestic policy more liberal and Russian foreign policy – more cooperative towards the USA and Western countries. Secondly, economic and political situation in East Asia is developing very quickly presenting to Russia new risks, challenges and opportunities to which new Russian President will have to respond in one way or another. Russia will have to adjust its policy to rapid rise of China and to look for opportunities how to enter East Asian energy market and how to use East Asian economic integration potential in order to develop Russian depopulated and low-developed Far Eastern regions. Thirdly, the APEC Summit in 2012 will take place in Russia (Vladivostok) – pushing Russian leaders to think over what new ideas of regional development and integration Russia could have worked out. In one of his pre-elections’ speeches, Medvedev stressed the importance of Russia’s “multi-vector diplomacy”, including the West, East Asia, as well as, Africa, Latin America, etc. However, it will not be an easy job. The problem, which Medvedev succeeds from Putin, is that Russia, in its national development strategy, is barely implementing the East Asian factor. Although Russia has stepped up its military and political presence in East Asia, it has not yet gained the required levels of influence in the region; it fails to take into account the geopolitical changes there, while it views the changing situation in a simplified, outdated way: through the prism of its rivalry with the United States. In the economic realm, despite Russia’s energy companies’ increased interest in East Asia, the major changes taking place in the region’s economy have not yet prompted the Russian government to include East Asia in a list of strategic goals for the Russian economy. Russia does not take into account its geo-economic position as a bridge between the European and East Asian integration zones. Russia’s economic strategy lacks “spatial economic thinking” that would enable it to see the problems of the depressive regions in Eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East in a cross-national, “natural,” geo-economic context, rather than within the narrow framework of state borders. Also lacking is a “two-vector” development model that would allow for the orientation of the Russian economy, extended in space, toward parallel integrative interaction with the European Union and East Asia. By 2020, these shortcomings in Russia’s vision of its place in the East Asian region may result in missed economic gains, not to mention political troubles. Irrespective of Moscow’s reaction, East Asia’s dynamic and intricate development will objectively have an increasing influence on the development of Russia. This will affect, first of all, its East Siberian and Far Eastern regions, causing Russia, under new President Medvedev, not only to adapt to challenges and opportunities coming from East Asia, but also to look for mechanisms to influence the region in a way advan... The conceptual philosophy of power-transition process in Russia from Putin to Medvedev is continuity of policy. It is more related to domestic policy where Putin, on the eve of his resignation, succeeded in introducing a three-year budget plan and a number of long-term economic, energy and social programs. Nevertheless, the philosophy of policy-continuity will cover Russian foreign diplomacy as well. In regard to East Asia, it means that Medvedev will have to follow Putin’s course on, slowly but truly, paying more attention to the region. However, as Putin failed to present a comprehensive strategy of Russia–East Asia relationship, Medvedev will have to do this job by himself. A few more factors will push Medvedev to introduce diplomacy innovations towards East Asia. Firstly, as new President, Medvedev will have to say his own word in Russian policy, including the foreign policy. Russian and international communities are expecting that Medvedev will make Russian domestic policy more liberal and Russian foreign policy – more cooperative towards the USA and Western countries. Secondly, economic and political situation in East Asia is developing very quickly presenting to Russia new risks, challenges and opportunities to which new Russian President will have to respond in one way or another. Russia will have to adjust its policy to rapid rise of China and to look for opportunities how to enter East Asian energy market and how to use East Asian economic integration potential in order to develop Russian depopulated and low-developed Far Eastern regions. Thirdly, the APEC Summit in 2012 will take place in Russia (Vladivostok) – pushing Russian leaders to think over what new ideas of regional development and integration Russia could have worked out. In one of his pre-elections’ speeches, Medvedev stressed the importance of Russia’s “multi-vector diplomacy”, including the West, East Asia, as well as, Africa, Latin America, etc. However, it will not be an easy job. The problem, which Medvedev succeeds from Putin, is that Russia, in its national development strategy, is barely implementing the East Asian factor. Although Russia has stepped up its military and political presence in East Asia, it has not yet gained the required levels of influence in the region; it fails to take into account the geopolitical changes there, while it views the changing situation in a simplified, outdated way: through the prism of its rivalry with the United States. In the economic realm, despite Russia’s energy companies’ increased interest in East Asia, the major changes taking place in the region’s economy have not yet prompted the Russian government to include East Asia in a list of strategic goals for the Russian economy. Russia does not take into account its geo-economic position as a bridge between the European and East Asian integration zones. Russia’s economic strategy lacks “spatial economic thinking” that would enable it to see the problems of the depressive regions in Eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East in a cross-national, “natural,” geo-economic context, rather than within the narrow framework of state borders. Also lacking is a “two-vector” development model that would allow for the orientation of the Russian economy, extended in space, toward parallel integrative interaction with the European Union and East Asia. By 2020, these shortcomings in Russia’s vision of its place in the East Asian region may result in missed economic gains, not to mention political troubles. Irrespective of Moscow’s reaction, East Asia’s dynamic and intricate development will objectively have an increasing influence on the development of Russia. This will affect, first of all, its East Siberian and Far Eastern regions, causing Russia, under new President Medvedev, not only to adapt to challenges and opportunities coming from East Asia, but also to look for mechanisms to influence the region in a way advantageous t...

개항(開港)이후 동아시아 한문(漢文)네트워크에 대하여

YongTaiKim ( 金龍泰 ) 한국한문학회 2012 韓國漢文學硏究 Vol.0 No.50

본 논문은 개항 이후에도 동아시아에는 한문네트워크가 활발히 작동하였음을 확인하고, 앞으로 한문학계에서 이 분야에 대해 관심을 기울일 필요가 있음을 환기하기 위해 집필되었다. 일반적으로 한문은 근대의 시작과 함께 역사의 무대에서 퇴장한 것으로 인식되고 있지만, 실상을 살펴보면, 개항 이후 동아시아의 인적 교류가 이전에 비해 더욱 활발해지면서 동아시아인의 소통수단으로써 한문은 매우 광범하고도 요긴하게 활용된 것이 사실이다. 말하자면 동아시아의 근대에 한문은 적지 않은 역할을 하였던 것이다. 본고에서는 ‘黃遵憲의 續懷人詩’, ‘姜瑋의 海外體驗’, ‘壬午軍亂期朝淸人事의 만남’, ‘金允植의 日本네트워크’를 중심으로 개항 이후에도 동아시아의 상호 소통에 한문이 활발히 쓰였던 모습을 살펴보았다. 이 네 가지 국면은 최근의 연구사를 수용하면서 필자가 이에서 조금 더 나아가 살펴본 바를 정리한 것에 불과하지만, 이를 통해 개항 이후 동아시아 한문네트워크의 존재를 대략 살펴볼 수 있었다. 이 네 가지 국면에 국한하여 보더라도, 개항 이후 동아시아 한문네트워크는 광범한 지역, 다양한 인물들을 포괄하면서 당대 동아시아 역사의 최전선에 깊숙이 관여하고 있음을 확인할 수 있다. 이처럼 개항 이후에도 동아시아에서 한문네트워크가 활발히 작동하였던 사실은 다음 두 가지 측면에서 중대한 연구의 필요성을 제기하고 있다. 첫째, 동아시아의 근대에 대한 새로운 이해의 가능성이다. 동아시아의 근대가 서구와의 관계에서만 이루어진 것이 아니라, 한문을 통한 활발한 내적 소통을 통해 이루어진 측면에 대한 이해는 동아시아 근대의 이해와 극복에 통찰을 제공할 수 있을 것이다. 둘째는 일국중심적 태도를 넘어 동아시아적 관점의 수립에 기여할 수 있다는 점이다. 동아시아 한문네트워크는 그 자료의 존재양식이나 역사적 의미를 따져볼 때, 절대로 일국중심적 태도로 접근해서는 안 되는 대상이라고 할 수 있으므로, 이에 대한 연구는 결국 동아시아적 관점의 수립으로 귀결되리라 기대된다. This paper sought to confirm the active operation of the classical Chinese literature network in the post-opening East Asia period as well, and to renew the classical Chinese academia`s attention to this category. Generally, classical Chinese characters or literature is considered existing from the historical stage with the beginning of early modern times. However, after its opening to the world, East Asia saw its human exchanges becoming more active, allowing classical Chinese characters to be widely and usefully used as a communication means for the East Asian people. Classical Chinese literature played a significant role in the early modern times of East Asia. This paper examined the active use of classical Chinese characters as a communication means for East Asia after its opening to the world with the study focus on Hwang Zun-Xian`s Serial Remorseful Person Poem, Gang Wi`s Overseas Experience and the Imo Military Revolt-Period Meeting with Korean-Chinese Personnel, and Kim Yun-sik`s Chinese network. These examinations were only part of the writer`s study, but offered a look into the overview of the post-opening East Asia`s classical Chinese network. The East-Asia classical Chinese literature network covered a wide range of regions and a variety of personnel, and deeply got involved in the then East-Asia history. The reason why the post-opening East-Asia`s classical Chinese network was actively operated is based on the following two needs. First, there is a need to have a new understanding of East-Asia early modern times. Since the East-Asia early modern times have relationships not only with the West but also with the active internal communication through classical Chinese characters, which offers insights on the understanding and overcoming of East Asia`s early modern times. Second, understanding of the network can contribute to establishment of the perspective of East Asia beyond one nation. The East-Asia classical Chinese network, given its data existence style or historical meaning, should not be handled with one-nation approach, and relevant studies will eventually result in the establishment of East Asia perspective.

특집 : 아시아의 정치변동과 한국선교 ; 동아시아 국제정치 변화와 미래선교

장훈태 ( Hun Tae Chang ) 한국복음주의선교신학회 2013 복음과 선교 Vol.21 No.-

This article focuses on supremacy rivalry between America and China in East Asia. Now we have so many changing in the world form supremacy hegemony era of Asia. This purposes of study should understand perspectives of future mission in this supremacy competition era. I mentioned that this article explain what is new change in East Asia? The change have so much conflicts among America, China, Japan, North Korea, and South Korea. And then several countries in East Asia evaluates leadership of leader. East Asia has too many dispute in social, economic, political, and religious contest. How to get to changing and stability in East Asia? First, East Asia is making harmony and cooperation in ASEAN community, and respect multiculturalism in East Asia. East Asia is equipping motivation and partnership through leadership of leaders. At the same time, East Asia is entrusted with a ASEAN community of doing mutual respect through meeting and communication. I mentioned that I suggested a several alternatives of future mission strategy in East Asia. First, we have evangelism and mission of mutual communication in each country of East Asia. Second, mission of East Asia know to change cultural and social value. Third, we make new Christian culture in East Asia. Korea church build up mission network with institution, denomination and organization in East Asia for Christian culture. Fourth, we have Christian education in life of people. They should develop Christian education mission field in East Asia. Fifth, we focuses on receiver -oriented practice and plan of ministry in East Asia. Last, we have social role of church in supremacy contest of East Asia.

21世紀 東아시아 出土資料 硏究 現況과 ‘資料學’의 可能性 ― 古代 東아시아史의 理解를 中心으로 ―

김경호 수선사학회 2008 史林 Vol.0 No.31

My intention in this paper is to search for a possibility for “textual studies (charyohak)” based on the recent studies on excavated materials of East Asia including China, Japan, and Korea. Also, my paper aims at reconsidering excavated materials as resources for understanding the shared cultures of East Asian society by examining the related “diachronic features” of old texts preserved in East Asia. As a premise for solving these critical problems, I, at first, look through the recent tendencies of academics in East Asia. In the case of Korea, there are studies of Korean excavated materials and of Chinese ones. For the former, the excavation of wooden slips at the Sǒngsan(城山) mountain walls of Haman and the formation of The Korean Society for the Study of Wooden Document (2007) have become a turning point of the charyohak studies, which put the emphasis on the “middle” status of Korean wooden documents in transnational cultural interactions among ancient East Asian societies. For the latter, the focus consists in the reconstruction of ancient Chinese history rather than the interpretation of Chinese materials or their evidential studies. The outcome of the studies from the middle 1970s has been concentrated on the examination of the state power or its institutions through the wooden slips of the Qin and Han dynasties. What has been remarkable from the year of 2000 onward is the institutionalization of study through the establishment of academic societies such as The Society for the Study of Jianbo 簡牘 (2005). In the case of China in the 21st century, the main tendency in the academics is to establish specialized academic institutions, to publish academic journals, and to communicate with foreign scholars from abroad through the websites. Similarly, the Japanese academics have also shown interest in more active studies of excavated materials and the reconstruction of academic societies for research collaboration. In particular, it is undeniable that the Japanese study of Korean wooden slips played a significant role in examining cultural interactions among ancient East Asian societies. Through the studies of excavated materials in 21st century East Asia motivated by scholarly interactions with different fields of study, concern for East Asia has been strengthened without being limited by “nationalized” excavated materials. In consequence, interdisciplinary studies become possible, and new academic tendencies concerning East Asia have arisen from the improved research environments for research collaborations. In other words, a new methodology of study transcending “time” and “space” proposed a possibility for the study of charyohak, which may overcome the theory of or discourse of “East Asia” without any substantial entity. Furthermore, interdisciplinary and collaborative research among international academics in the 21st century will rediscover the truth of history. The “realization” of this kind of study in reality will make excavated materials the basis for charyohak as an independent field of study. My intention in this paper is to search for a possibility for “textual studies (charyohak)” based on the recent studies on excavated materials of East Asia including China, Japan, and Korea. Also, my paper aims at reconsidering excavated materials as resources for understanding the shared cultures of East Asian society by examining the related “diachronic features” of old texts preserved in East Asia. As a premise for solving these critical problems, I, at first, look through the recent tendencies of academics in East Asia. In the case of Korea, there are studies of Korean excavated materials and of Chinese ones. For the former, the excavation of wooden slips at the Sǒngsan(城山) mountain walls of Haman and the formation of The Korean Society for the Study of Wooden Document (2007) have become a turning point of the charyohak studies, which put the emphasis on the “middle” status of Korean wooden documents in transnational cultural interactions among ancient East Asian societies. For the latter, the focus consists in the reconstruction of ancient Chinese history rather than the interpretation of Chinese materials or their evidential studies. The outcome of the studies from the middle 1970s has been concentrated on the examination of the state power or its institutions through the wooden slips of the Qin and Han dynasties. What has been remarkable from the year of 2000 onward is the institutionalization of study through the establishment of academic societies such as The Society for the Study of Jianbo 簡牘 (2005). In the case of China in the 21st century, the main tendency in the academics is to establish specialized academic institutions, to publish academic journals, and to communicate with foreign scholars from abroad through the websites. Similarly, the Japanese academics have also shown interest in more active studies of excavated materials and the reconstruction of academic societies for research collaboration. In particular, it is undeniable that the Japanese study of Korean wooden slips played a significant role in examining cultural interactions among ancient East Asian societies. Through the studies of excavated materials in 21st century East Asia motivated by scholarly interactions with different fields of study, concern for East Asia has been strengthened without being limited by “nationalized” excavated materials. In consequence, interdisciplinary studies become possible, and new academic tendencies concerning East Asia have arisen from the improved research environments for research collaborations. In other words, a new methodology of study transcending “time” and “space” proposed a possibility for the study of charyohak, which may overcome the theory of or discourse of “East Asia” without any substantial entity. Furthermore, interdisciplinary and collaborative research among international academics in the 21st century will rediscover the truth of history. The “realization” of this kind of study in reality will make excavated materials the basis for charyohak as an independent field of study.

역사적 전환기 한반도의 국제정치 경험에 관한 연구 - 류큐왕국/오키나와 및 대만과의 비교를 중심으로-

강상규 진단학회 2020 진단학보 Vol.- No.135

The Korean Peninsula has experienced many crises historically. So what kind of approach is needed to progress such a flat understanding as" the Korean Peninsula has suffered several wars through its geopolitical status"? In addition, how can a deeper insight be gained into the historical context and meaning of the “crisis" on the Korean Peninsula? With these issues in mind, this study compares the impact of the changes in hegemonic states and paradigms on the Korean Peninsula throughout the major turning points in East Asian history over the past 500 years, with other geopolitical points such as the Ryukyu Kingdom in present day Okinawa and Taiwan. This study confirmed that the major crises experienced externally by the Korean Peninsula over 500 years were not local and accidental ones, but those that coincided with the changing political terrain in East Asia. This was clearly revealed through a comparative review of the relationship between the Kingdom of Ryukyu/Okinawa and Taiwan, which are considered geopolitical hubs of East Asia. When massive transitional changes occurred in East Asia, they caused ripples throughout the Korean Peninsula, the Kingdom of Ryukyu and Taiwan, which exist between powerful continental and maritime forces, forming a kind of “a chain of pressure transfer" or “a band of pressure transfer." Each of these regions is an important geopolitical hub and a phenomenon that occurs because they form a weak link. In addition, the current study suggests that a new framework like “Japan Empire's 50-year East Asia War" and “East Asia's postwar system" is needed to grasp understanding of contemporary East Asia meaningfully. The framework “Japan Empire's 50-year war on East Asia" is important not only because it allows people to see a full picture of fragmented Japanese imperialism, but also because it permits them to systematically understanding the opposing logic of Japanese imperialism against Western imperialism, and because it allows understanding of the Post-colonial condition in East Asia, namely its continuity with the post-war system. Meanwhile, the “East Asia's postwar system" is a unique Cold War structure in East Asia, which was formed rapidly after the “Japan Empire's 50-year East Asia war." Even now, 30 years after the end of the Cold War in 1990, this is a system that still exists in East Asia. At the international political level, the core foundations of the “East Asia's postwar system" can be summarized as China's “cross-strait relations," Japan's “peace constitution and U.S.-Japan security system," and the “hostile division system" of the Korean Peninsula, despite the end of the Cold War at the global level. In the past 500 years of history, there have been no major political changes in East Asia that have not involved the Korean Peninsula. This shows that Koreans need a special insight and sensitivity into the external situation in East Asia. 한반도는 역사적으로 많은 위기를 겪어왔다. 그러면 ‘한반도는 그 지정학적 위상으로 말미암아 수 차례의 전쟁을 겪었다’는 식의 평면적인 이해를 넘어서기 위해서는 어떤 접근이 필요할까? 아울러 한반도의 ‘위기들’이 발생한 역사적 맥락과 그 의미를 어떻게 깊이 있게 통찰할 수 있을 것인가? 본 연구는 이러한 문제의식 위에서 지난 500년간 동아시아의 역사에서 나타났던 주요 전환기, 패권국가의 변동과 패러다임의 변화에 따라 한반도가 겪게 되는 충격을 또 다른 지정학적 요충지인 류큐왕국ㆍ오키나와, 그리고 대만의 경우와 비교 고찰하려고 했다. 본 연구는 500년 동안 한반도가 대외적으로 경험한 주요한 위기들이 국지적이고 우발적인 사건으로서의 위기라기보다 동아시아 정치지형 혹은 지각이 변동하는 것과 맞물린 위기였다는 사실을 확인할 수 있었다. 이러한 점은 동아시아의 지정학적 요충지로서 함께 고찰한 류큐왕국/오키나와, 대만과의 상관관계와 비교검토를 통해 분명히 드러났다. 강력한 대륙세력과 해양세력 사이에 존재하는 한반도, 류큐왕국/오키나와, 대만은 거대한 전환기적 지각변동 상황이 오게 되면 그 충격의 여파가 이 세 지역으로 밀려들면서 일종의 ‘억압이양의 연쇄’ 혹은 ‘억압이양의 띠’가 형성되는 현상을 통찰할 수 있었다. 이들 지역들이 각각 중요한 지정학적 요충지이면서 약한 고리를 형성하기에 발생하는 현상이라고 해야 할 것이다. 아울러 본 연구는 근현대 동아시아를 의미 있게 포착하기 위해서는 ‘제국 일본의 동아시아 50년전쟁’과 ‘동아시아의 전후체제’와 같은 새로운 프레임이 필요하다는 점을 제안하였다. ‘제국 일본의 동아시아 50년전쟁’이라는 관점은 파편화된 일본제국주의의 전체상(全體像)을 직시하게 해 줄 뿐만 아니라, 일본제국주의의 서양제국주의에 대한 대항논리적 성격을 유기적으로 파악할 수 있게 해준다는 점, 그리고 동아시아의 탈식민지적 상황, 즉 동아시아의 전후체제와의 연속성 속에서 이해할 수 있게 해주기 때문에 중요하다. 한편 ‘동아시아 전후체제’는 ‘제국 일본의 동아시아 50년전쟁’이 빠지고 난 자리에 급격히 형성된 동아시아 차원의 독특한 냉전질서라고 할 수 있다. 그리고 세계적인 차원의 냉전이 끝나는 1990년으로부터 30년이 지난 지금도 동아시아에 아직 끝나지 않고 남아있는 질서체계이다. 국제정치 차원에서 ‘동아시아 전후체제’의 핵심적 근간은 세계적 차원에서 냉전이 해체된 상황에도 불구하고 존속되고 있는 중국의 ‘양안관계’, 일본의 ‘평화헌법과 미일안보체계’, 한반도의 ‘적대적 분단체제’로 요약할 수 있다. 500년 동안의 역사상 동아시아에서 벌어진 거대한 지각변동은 한반도를 거치지 않고 진행되는 경우가 사실상 존재하지 않았다. 이것은 한반도가 동아시아 대외정세에 대해 매우 특별한 통찰력과 감수성이 필요하다는 사실을 보여준다.

동아시아 시각의 인식론적 의의

쑨거(孫歌),김월회(번역자) 고려대학교 아세아문제연구소 2009 亞細亞硏究 Vol.52 No.1

The conception of China exists within the discourse on East Asia, but does ‘East Asia’ matter to China? That is, is ‘East Asia’ a definable entity? Or does it have an epistemological value? Traditionally, the discourse on East Asia did not flourish in China, but with the growing discussions on issues such as ‘Confucianism,’ ‘modernization,’ and ‘war wounds and memory,’ East Asia came to be one of the valid discourses which is now regarded as an organically unified entity. The discourse on East Asia in three different regions-China, Japan and Korea- however, exhibits geographical imbalance and tensions. It indicates that the discourse was constructed as a unified entity based on logic, but its epistemological and realistic foundation is still unstable. This explains why the discourse on East Asia is turning into an abstraction despite its realistic significance. In order to move away from abstraction, the discourse on East Asia has to be understood within the historical context of the cold war and the post-cold war. It is also imperative to consider the political climate outside East Asia. The cold war itself has come to an end, but its ideology still continues to govern throughout East Asia at large. For example, American military bases serve as representative remnants of the cold war, while Russian interests to intervene in the region are clearly demonstrated by the publications such as Issues in the East Asia. The obstacles of the discourse on East Asia can only be overcome by such historical contextualization. The obstacles that I address here are issues such as abstraction of problems, its unconfirmed epistemological value and exclusion of regions ranging from Taiwan and North Korea to Mongolia and Southeast Asia. When these obstacles are tackled, we can then realistically hope for the emergence of the discourse on East Asia that goes beyond the boundaries of nation-states and offers a cognitively open and unified paradigm.

중국의 동아시아담론: ‘포아론(包亞論)’적 사유의 전개

고성빈 서울대학교 국제학연구소 2009 국제지역연구 Vol.18 No.3

From the peripheral point of view, it can be argued that the East Asian Discourse in China has yet to be matured theoretically and still remains more sentimental than analytical. This study defines the major characteristic of China's perception of East Asia as “an Embracing Asia Perspective,” which has been embedded in Chinese mind-set and intellectual orientation ever since the early twentieth century. Besides this, China internalizes both the “representing Asia perspective” and the “China and Asia as one-body perspective”, all of which, as this paper insists, fall under the category of the Embracing Asia Perspective. Therefore, China rarely views peripheral states in East Asia on a horizontal perception, and instead sees itself in a hierarchical interrelationship with them. This means that China perceives East Asia, as a device or a means, not as an autonomous entity or a purpose, in order to protest against the US, Japan and the West. In addition, China's hierarchical view of its regional neighbors is mainly attributable to a dichotomous world-view of "China vs. the West" structure that considers China a unique counterpart matched by the West and furthermore, capable of resisting it. In this world-view, China's presence is thought to be equated with the whole of East Asia as such and peripheral states merely fall into a category of cogs or sub-system under China as a whole system. By contrast, China always draws attention to both the US and the West as a good exemplary or a bad enemy, disregarding peripheral neighbors in East Asia. Following the pan-Asianism in the 1920s, further development of China's East Asian discourse entered into a dormant phase because of the civil war and World War II. During the Cold War period, ideological standoff led to a frozen state of discussion of unresolved history questions in East Asia. It is therefore forthcoming of the post-Cold War era that a reasonable and critical debate on a variety of East Asian issues would follow. In fact, recently, critical intellectuals have come to take part in the East Asian discourse enthusiastically than ever before. 주변부의 시각에서 비평해 보면 중국의 동아시아주의는 아직은 정서적 차원에서 전개되고 있으며 이론적 수준으로 체계화되지 않았다. 근대 이래로 중국인의 문화적, 지적인 심리구조에 내면화된 동아시아관을 “포아론”적 지향이라고 정의 내리려 한다. 중국은 아직도 동아시아의 존재인식이 미국/일본/서구에 대항하는 과정에서의 수단적 의미에 머물고 있으며 진정한 의미에서의 주체적인 존재로 인식하고 있지 않다. 중국은 “중국의 동아시아”라는 기본적인 사고에서 “아시아대표의식”과 “중아일체의식”을 내면화 하고 있는데 이 같은 인식들은 “포아론”의 함의에 모두 내포되어 있는 것으로 여긴다. 이러한 중국의 동아시아사고는 동아시아 주변부에 대한 수평주의적 지향을 회피하면서 위계적인 관계성을 내재화하는 특성을 보여 주고 있다. 이러한 중국의 위계적의식이 생성된 배경은 중국의 타자는 유일하게 서구이며 중국만이 서구에 대항할 수 있는 유일한 대표적인 존재라는 “중국 대 서구의 이원적 세계관”도 크게 영향을 미쳤다. 이러한 세계관에서 중국은 아시아 그 자체이며 다른 아시아 국가들은 중국의 하위에 있는 작은 단위일 따름이다. 반면에 서구에 대해서는 항상 중국이 배워야하는 모범으로서 혹은 대치하면서 극복해야 하는 적으로서 주목하고 있다. 범아시아주의의 등장이래로 중국에서의 동아시아사고의 발전적 전개는 내전과 세계대전으로 휴지기를 맞이하였다. 이어서 냉전시대의 이념적 대치상태로 인해서 동아시아지역의 공통적인 주제-동아시아의 근대사문제-에 대한 지적이고 이성적인 토론이 정체되었다. 탈냉전은 이러한 정체상황을 토론이 가능한 상황으로 변화시켰다. 근래에는 비판적 지식인의 동아시아담론이 발전적으로 전개되고 있다.

러시아와 신동북아 문화권

이기주(李基周) 동북아시아문화학회 2014 동북아 문화연구 Vol.1 No.39

This paper is to consider current pressing issues in setting up New North East Asia Culture concept. Today, conflicts among countries in North East Asia are too intense to establish New North East Asia Culture involving China, Japan, Korea and Russia. As they have a different view toward each territory, their position on such issues as missile defense and North Korea’s nuclear problem also varies, which may seriously hampers New North East Asia Culture. Therefore, the countries in North East Asia need to respond to U.S. missile defense system and North Korea nuclear problem in a long-term and forward-looking manner. And, as we can see in the relationship between China and Russia, what it appears in North East Asian countries’ friendship is different what lies within. And I started my research to find out whether it’s possible to include Russia into New North East Asia Culture. But, in the end, I cannot help but doubt whether Korea can be included in New North East Asia Culture, when it’s created. In terms of New North East Asia Culture, it will be obvious to Russia that the Far Est should be the geographic center. As for future prospects of its exchange with Korea, it’s very promising, for example establishing peace in North East Asia, reunifying North & South Koreas, securing resources in the Far Est, setting up logistics linkage to Europe, etc. But, among four main parties of New North East Asia Culture, only Russia, Japan and China except for Korea are very active in cooperation in culture, economy and politics at both public and private levels. Therefore, if Russia’s interest in Korea is far less than China and Japan, then it’s quite doubtful of Korea’s future role and position in this new North East Asia region. In addition, it’s very problematic that Korea is not duly considered in North Korea’s nuclear issue and military force competition. If Korea has just marginal influence over not only cultural, economic and political areas but also diplomatic and military areas which usually draws immediate response, then Korea will be simply dragged by other countries in New North East Asia. That’s why Korea needs to make a wise and practical decision, as it is sandwiched between Japan and the U.S. in the maritime field and between China and Russia in the land area. In addition, to solve the facing challenges, Korea should work hard and come up with policy to strengthen its exchange relationship with Russia, which is far lacking.