http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : Swartout (검색결과 3 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
HARRY S. TRUMAN AND THE KOREAN WAR : AN ANALYSIS OF SOME RECENT AMERICAN TEXTS
Swartout, Robert R. Jr. 한국외국어대학교 북미 연구소 1995 영미연구 Vol.1 No.-
The opening of new archival materials at the United States NationalArchives in the 1970s helped to produce a dramatic increase in the numberof specialized monographs focusing on various aspects of American policy toward Korea from 1945 to 1953. These monographs, in turn, are causing American historians to re-examine long-held assumptions concerning the nature of America's involvement on the Korean peninsula in the years immediately following World War n . Yet despite the fundamental scholarly importance of these recent studies, one might argue that they have had only a marginal impact on the opinions of the general American public, or even on the opinions of those who might be referred to as the "American elite." Only a few thousand copies of these specialized studies are ever published, and most of those are sold to large research libraries that, as a whole, have but limited public use. Perhaps a better way of measuring the ebb and flow of American thinking concerning United States involvement in Korea is through an examination of influential and widely used textbooks, as well as popular histories that are purchased in large numbers by the reading public. With that in mind, I wish to offer an analysis of some recent texts by focusing on one important aspect of twentieth-century Korean-American relations, the controversy surrounding President Harry S. Truman and the Korean War. Truman had been a United States Senator from the state of Missouri (1934-1944) and waas selected to be Franklin D. Roosevelt's Vice Presidental candidate at the 1944 Democtratic party convention. Truman became President of the Untied States upon Roosevelt's sudden death in April 1945, and was elected in his own right in 1948. It was rcughly halfway through Truman's second term as President that the Korean War broke out, and soon thereafter that Truman made the fateful decision to dispatch American troops to Korea and thus intervene directly in the war. That decision, of course, would have a lasting impact on the destinies of both the United States and Korea. The authors of important American diplomatic textbooks have usua11y depended upon specialized monographs in order to put forward their interpretations of Truman and the Korean War. Perhaps the most influential diplomatinc textbook ever written was Thomas A. Bailey's A Diplomatic History of the American People. Bailey's study first appeared in 1940, ten years before the outbreak of the Korean War. Its final edition, the tenth, appeared in 1980 and included, as had the previous five editions, a lengthy chapter on "the Korean Conflict." Before examing Bailey's views; on Truman and the Korean War, it should be added that he trained many of America's leading diplomatic historians over several decades of teaching at Stanford University, and that his textbook was read by literally thousands of college students well into the 1980s. Bailey offered a classic example of what might be called the "traditional'' American interpretation of the Korean War. Froln the beginning, Bailey contrasted America's benevolent actions in Korea with those of the Soviet Union. Anter mentioning the Soviet-American division of the Korean peninsula at the 38th parallel in 1945, he goes on to say: "In their northern zone, the Soviets set up a pupet Communist clique and trained a Communist army. Determined to prevent the formation of a free South Korean government, the Russians fought against its establistnent; and when they failed in their effonts, they nlatly vetoed its admission to the UN." 4) In the other hand, the Americans, according to Bailey, "attempted to foster a democratic order--despite Communist agitation, international dissension, and economic prostration. The Soviets in their zone only had to make a minority Communists. The Americans had to make a majority democratic and keep them that way--at great expense to the [American] taxpayers back home." Bailey also appears to hold the Soviets largely responsible for the actual ourbreak of the war when he writes: "The lid finally blew off on June 25, 1950. A North Korean army--Russian-trained, Russian-equipped, and presumably Russian-inspired--suddenly 1unged southward across the borderline 38th parallel with the object of engulfing UN-sponsored South Korea." Just a few lines later he adds, "the long-dreaded shooting had now begun in the hitherto cold war, even though the Soviet Union was doing the shooting by proxy through puppets." Just a Truman did in his own memiors, Bailey drew an analogy between Communist aggression in 1950 and what had occurred in Asia in the early 1930s. "The events of 1931 [he writes], when the League of Nations had quailed before Japan's attack in Manchuria, seemed to be repeating themselves like a groove-stuck phonograph record. If the UN failed, all hope of collective security would presumably perish--and World War Ⅲ would become virtually inevitable."
-
-
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
