일반논문 : 오키나와의 아리랑 -미군정기 오키나와의 잔류 조선인들과 남북한

임경화 ( Kyoung Hwa Lim ) 성균관대학교 대동문화연구원 2015 大東文化硏究 Vol.89 No.-

본고에서는 식민지기부터 오키나와에 거주했다가 패전 이후에도 잔류하게 된 조선인들이 전후 냉전질서 속에서 방치된 후 발견되는 과정을 분석했다. 오키나와에서 미군의 직접통치가 실시되고 20여 년이 지난 후에 이들이 발견된 데에는, 1965년한일협정 이후 이들의 법적 지위를 둘러싼 ‘국가의 논리’가 있었다. 하지만, 한국정부는 이 문제에 대해 초기에는 소극적으로 대처했으나, 오키나와 반환협정 체결 전후로 갑자기 움직이기 시작했다. 반환으로 인한 총련의 오키나와 진출에 위기감을 느꼈기 때문이다. 총련은 오키나와에 오자마자 오키나와 전투에서 희생된 조선인에 대한 진상조사에 착수했다. 이 조사는 군대의 논리에 의한 오키나와 전투의 역사화에 대항해서 전개된 오키나와 주민 주체의 전투 기록운동을 계승한 것이었다. 오키나와 주민들은 ‘주민의 논리’에 입각한 오키나와 전투 역사화 과정에서 조선인들을 발견했다. 총련은 이 성과들을 이어 받으면서도 조선인이 주체가 된 오키나와 전투의 실상을 그리려 했다. 그 결과 조사단은 오키나와 전투 준비를 위해 동원되었던 조선인들 중에 패전 이후 미군의 전쟁준비에 동원된 사람들도 있었다는 것을 밝혔다. 조선인들에 대한 일제와 미군의 전쟁범죄를 고발함으로써 오키나와에는 식민지주의가 지속되고 있었음을 드러내려 한 것이다. 한국정부와 총련의 잔류 조선인에 대한 인식 차는 남북한의 미군정기 오키나와인식이 반영된 것이기도 했다. 한국은 미군의 오키나와 통치를 적극적으로 지지했고 오키나와에 친미반공 독립국의 형성을 지원하기도 했다. 한편 북한은 제3세계해방운동 속에서 민족 재결합이라는 공동 목표 하에 오키나와의 조국복귀운동과 연대했다. 당시 주민의 다수가 복귀를 희망했으므로 남한은 ‘군대의 논리’에, 북한은 ‘주민의 논리’에 서 있었다고 할 수 있다. 하지만, 미군정기의 오키나와에 접근할 수 없었던 총련의 ‘주민의 논리’는 대다수가 민족 해방이 아닌 귀화를 선택했던 잔류 조선인들의 현실에 부합하지 못했다. 그러한 한계에도 불구하고, 전쟁과 냉전의 틈바구니에서 국가와 역사로부터 망각당한 피해자가 발견되었을 때, 피해자의 존재를 품고 역사 속으로 이끄는 안내자의 논리가 될 수 있었다. This paper aims to analyse how the "leftover" Koreans, who survived the battle of Okinawa and then ended up settling down there, were first left to their own devises and neglected, and then re-discovered. One of the reasons why they were re-discovered 20 years after Okinawa came under the direct control of the US military was the "state logic", to be applied to Okinawa Koreans under the terms of 1965 South Korea-Japan Normalization Agreement. However, in the beginning, the South Korean Government did not show an active interest in Okinawa`s Koreans; it started to do so only after Okinawa`s reversion to Japan was agreed by Japan and USA in 1971. The reason for that was the feeling of crisis, as it was understood that the reversion would allow the pro-North Korean Chosen Soren to move freely into Okinawa. The first thing Soren did on Okinawa was the investigation on the Koreans who died during the battle of Okinawa. This investigation continued the civilians-centred history recording movement which took momentum since the late 1960s as a counterforce to the conventional, military-centred descriptions of the battle of Okinawa. As the movement for re-writing the history with the "residents` logic" put squarely in the centre was booming, the remaining Koreans were discovered on Okinawa. The Soren investigation inherited the successes of this movement, while aiming at creating an alternative image of Okinawa battle, with Koreans being its main subject. It was discovered as a result of the investigation that a number of Koreans mobilized in preparation for war by the imperial Japan, were then re-mobilized again by the US military authorities after the Japanese defeat. The aim of the investigation report was thus to accentuate the persistence of colonialism in Okinawa by denouncing the war crimes committed both by imperial Japan and USA. The difference in the view on the "leftover" Koreans between the South Korean Government and Soren reflected the divergence of South and North Korean views on the American military-ruled Okinawa. The South Korean Government was positive on US military rule in Okinawa, supporting also the idea of establishing a pro-American, anti-Communist independent state there. By contrast, North Korea solidarized since the mid-1950s with Okinawan reversion movement as a part of the Third World liberation movement, sharing the common aim of national re-union with the Okinawans. From this viewpoint, we can define South Korea`s logic as more military-based, while North Korea`s logic was closer to the wishes of the majority of general population, which supported the reversion. Soren, however, could not operate in US military-dominated Okinawa. Its "residents` logic", in fact, did not fit into the realities of Okinawa-based "leftover" Koreans, who mostly wished to naturalise rather than to participate in a national liberation struggle. Despite such limitations, Soren still managed to play the role of an aid organization in relation to the "leftover" Koreans. On the discovery of these people victimized and forgotten by the states and official history amidst the vicissitudes of the World War and Cold War, it recognized them and offered them assistance and solidarity.

오키나와의 ‘독자적인 평화인식’과 동북아 평화공생

유지아 한일관계사학회 2024 한일관계사연구 Vol.83 No.-

본 연구는 류큐처분과 오키나와 전투를 통해 맹아한 오키나와의 독자적인 평화 인식을 고찰하였다. 특히 오키나와 평화공원에 조성된 ‘평화의 초석’에 나타난 오키나와 평화인식과 현재까지도 거론되고 있는 ‘오키나와 독립문제’의 역사성을 검토하였다. 오키나와는 냉전 종식 후 한반도 위기, 대만해협 위기에 대처하는 데 있어서 요충지로 지목되고 있다. 또한 최근에는 남중국해와 동중국해에서 공세로 나오는 중국 해군에 대처하는 데 요충지로 간주되어 오키나와의 전략적 중요성이 확대되고 있다. 그러나 오키나와는 류큐처분으로 인한 일본의 내부 식민지, 오키나와 전투, 그리고 미군 점령기를 거쳐 현재까지 150여 년 동안 차별을 받았다. 이러한 역사를 배경으로 오키나와인들은 일본인들과 차별화된 ‘독자적인 평화인식’을 가지게 되었다. 첫째가 오키나와 기지반환과 독립의지에 나타난 휴머니즘이며, 둘째는 ‘평화의 초석’에 나타난 반전사상이다. 이처럼 오키나와 현민들은 오키나와의 자주권이나 자기결정권 획득, 군사기지가 아닌 평화요구 등을 통해 독립적인 의지를 표명하고 있다. 그럼에도 불구하고 오키나와인들이 잊지 말아야 할 과제가 남아있다. 오키나와가 내부 식민지적 환경에서 차별을 받았다 하더라고, 그들 또한 식민지 국가에 대해서는 ‘제국인’이었다는 사실이다. 따라서 ‘평화의 초석’에 깃든 미군 철수와 냉전의 문제를 극복하는 방식에 ‘반전과 평화’뿐만 아니라, 현재까지도 동북아의 화합을 저해하는 ‘제국과 식민’의 문제를 어떻게 해결해 나갈 것인가에 대해 더욱 고민해야 할 것이다. This study examined Okinawa's independent perception of peace. In particular, the perception of peace in Okinawa's "Heiwa no ishiji" and the "will for independence of Okinawa" in Okinawa's historicity were reviewed. Okinawa has been pointed out as an important point in dealing with the Korean Peninsula crisis and the Taiwan Strait crisis since the end of the Cold War. In addition, Okinawa's strategic importance is expanding as it has recently been regarded as a key point in dealing with the Chinese navy that is on the offensive in the South China Sea and East China Sea. However, Okinawa has been discriminated against by Japan for more than 150 years from Japan's internal colonies due to the Ryukyu disposition, the Okinawa War during the Asia-Pacific War, and Japan's 'return' during the US occupation. Against this background of history, the Okinawa people have an 'independent perception of peace' differentiated from the Japanese. The first is the humanism that appeared in the return of the Okinawa base and the will to independence, and the second is the anti-war ideology that appeared in the 'Heiwa no ishiji'. As such, Okinawa residents are expressing their independent will through Okinawa's sovereignty, self-determination, and peace demands rather than military bases. Nevertheless, Okinawa has its own perception of peace and a task that should not be forgotten. It is the fact that Okinawa was discriminated against in its internal colonial environment, but they were also 'imperial people' to the colonial state. Therefore, it is necessary to think more about how to solve the problem of 'imperial and colonial' that hinders harmony in Northeast Asia, as well as 'reversal and peace'.

오키나와 폭력에 대한 문학적 보복과 `오키나와 리얼리즘` -메도루마 슌의 초기 작품을 중심으로

고명철 ( Ko Myeong-cheol ) 제주대학교 탐라문화연구소 2017 탐라문화 Vol.0 No.54

현재 활동하는 오키나와의 작가 중 오키나와의 독립론을 뚜렷한 정치의식으로 표방하면서 그것을 직접 행동으로 실천하는 메도루마 슌(目取眞俊, 1965~)에 대한 이해는 그의 문학과 분리시켜 생각해서 곤란하다. 이것은 메도루마의 초기 작품부터 매우 중요한 문제의식으로 자리하고 있다. 초기 작품은 메도루마의 문학적 행동주의와 결코 무관할 수 없는바, 오키나와의 폭력 양상과 그에 대한 문학적 대응이기 때문이다. 그의 작품 속에서 드러나는 폭력은 오키나와를 덧씌운 전`후`의 위선적 현실-평화 그 자체가 얼마나 폭력을 은폐하고 있는지, 이는 오키나와전에 대한 기억과 투쟁의 정치를 순치시키고 무화시키려는 국민국가의 제도적 폭력을 드러내는 것으로 그려진다. 물론 이 과정에서 메도루마는 오키나와전의 트라우마를 드러내고 천황제를 과감히 비판할 뿐만 아니라 미군점령이 야기한 숱한 폭력에 대한 대항폭력(counter violence), 즉 문학적 보복을 가한다. 뿐만 아니라 그는 오키나와의 일상에 깊숙이 침전된 온갖 폭력의 양상을 응시함으로써 오키나와를 일방적 폭력의 피해자로서 인식하는 것을 넘어 오키나와 내부에 똬리를 틀고 있는 오키나와에 침전/전도된 제국의 폭력의 양상과 이러한 현실 속에서 분열증적 증후를 앓고 있는 오키나와에 대해서도 매서운 비판을 보인다. 따라서 우리는 메도루마의 작품 속에서 주목되는 오키나와를 에워싼 폭력의 양상이 그의 문학적 행동주의로 어떻게 드러나고 있는지를 살펴본다. 메도루마는 그만의 독특한 문학적 보복을 통해 표면상 오키나와의 일상을 위태롭게 하고 있는 미국-미군 기지와 이것의 이해관계에 편승한 일본을 겨냥한 대항폭력을 실천한다. 물론 여기에는 오키나와 폭력의 기제에 대한 발본적 문제제기와 합리적 해결책 없이 일본이 기만적으로 포장하는 평화의 쉼터와는 거리가 먼, 그래서 유무형의 폭력으로 점철된 지옥도가 바로 오키나와의 현실로 도래할 수 있다는 문제의식이 자리한다. 따라서 메도루마의 문학적 보복-대항폭력을 단순히 판단해서 안 되는 이유가 바로 여기에 있다. 이러한 메도루마의 문학적 보복은 `오키나와 리얼리즘`의 한 양상에 대한 이해를 돕는다. Among the Okinawa`s working novelists what the understanding about Medoruma Shun who has not only independent agenda of Okinawa in terms of absolute political consciousness but also practices directly it for himself can`t be consider being separated from his literature. This has been placed the most important problem from his early works. Medoruma`s works can never be indifferent to his literary activism. It is the literary correspondence on Okinawa`s violence aspects. What the violence emerging in his works is described how to hide violence through hypocritical reality of post war being covered Okinawa, the politics of memory and struggle on Okinawa War tamed are revealed by nation state`s systematic violence. Meanwhile Medoruma does not only criticize the Emperor System of Japan, shows the trauma of Okinawa War, but also performs counter violence i.e. literary revenge on something kinds of violence being influenced by USA dominates. Besides he gazes diverse Okinawa violence aspects sanctioned deeply in Okinawa daily lives that`s why beyond acknowledgement recognition as victim for unilateral violence shows sharp critical position towards Okinawa being troubled schizophrenic symptoms in this reality. Therefore we inspect how to emerge the violence aspects surrounded Okinawa being focused on Medoruma`s works through his literary activism. He practices counter violence against Japan of which is related to the interests with USA-USA military base risking Okinawa`s daily lives. Of course there is a significant watch on what the hell will approach to Okinawa`s reality unless the radical questions and reasonable solutions on the mechanism of violence in Okinawa will be submitted for us. Hence there is the very reason why we don`t simply recognize his literary revenge-counter violence. So, his literary revenge helps the understanding on Okinawa Realism.

오키나와현호국신사의 창건과 재건 과정

김민화 일본사학회 2017 일본역사연구 Vol.45 No.-

This study examines the construction history of Okinawaken Gokoku Shrine which had gone through demolition and reconstruction in the course of and after the Asia Pacific War since its birth in June 1, 1940 to define the intentions and goals of the region’s leaderships to have allowed the Gokoku Shrine in Okinawa from the beginning to later days. Before the Second World War, Okinawa had little to do with the Japanese war with foreign countries. Only a small number of Okinawa residents had perished in the war and the number had remained lower than that of other regions’ people even after the Manchurian Incident, one of the momentums that had triggered Japan to expand the wars against foreign powers. Such circumstance, however, wasn’t a concern for the leaderships of Okinawa to push forward the construction of the Gokoku Shrine for which the dwellers were obliged to give financial support. Instead, the leaderships were obsessed with the desire to overcome the internal and external recognition of Okinawa as an inferior existence, which could be traced back to so-called Ryukyu Annexation followed by obliteration of Okinawan culture and introduction of assimilation policy and Japanizing education. Such mindset drove the local leading class to accept the mainland’s policy with passion. The establishment of Okinawaken Gokoku Shrine may also be studied in the similar context. The shrine was set upon the goal of the Okinawan leading class to transform its region into the one closely related to the mainland, to be a perfect part of Japan. After 1945, Okinawaken Gokoku Shrine failed to resist Battle of Okinawa and the occupation of GHQ, bereft of all but an office area and some part of Torii. The shrine remained neglected due to the prolonged occupation of the US army in the region until January 1958 when the rebuilding project was ignited by the visitors from Yaskuni Shrine. In April, 1959, a temporary shrine was completed by the Okinawan leaderships with the support from Yaskuni Shrine. Unlike the first spring ritual ceremony in which only the fallen soldiers from Okinawan background was enshrined, the following autumn ritual marked the change of the characteristic of the shrine by moving the body of Mita Mashiro, a mainland-born soldier who died in Battle of Okinawa, from Yaskuni Shrine to the place of the dead souls of Okinawa. Such change offered Okinawa with involvement of Yaskuni Shrine and accompanying nationwide supports to renew the temporary shrine to a longstanding perfect structure. The reestablishment of Okinawaken Gokoku Shrine was the consequence of the mutual interests of the two concerned parties to seek integration of mainland and Okinawa against the prolonged occupation of the US army in the island. Such correlative is the key to understanding the shrine’s distinction from other gokoku shrines in general, in terms of the collective enshrinement of all the dead soldiers regardless of background or the war they had participated in.The shrine was reborn as another Yaskuni Shrine, not its subordinate shrine like other common gokoku shrines. The construction of Okinawaken Gokoku Shrine before World War II was made upon the spontaneous movement of the leading class of Okinawa, of which people were subject to Japanese assimilation policy, in pursuit of their identity as Japanese. However, after the war, the demand of rebuilding the devastated shrine was met by Yaskuni Shrine which gave ardent support and guide to Okinawa in the hope of completing the commemoration of the dead soldiers in mainland which left imperfect due to the occupation of the US in Okinawa. In other words, Okinawaken Gokoku Shrine was reconstructed upon the request made by the mainland and accepted by the leading class in Okinawa, to play a role as a political mean of the dream of the mainland “to restore the power of Japan” and of Okinawa “to return to the mainland”.

朴壽南映画の表現手法の特徴 —「아리랑(アリラン)のうた―オキナワからの証言」、「ぬちがふぅ(命 果報)―玉砕場からの証言」と「沖縄スパイ戦史」の比較を通して—

박동호 한국일본문화학회 2022 日本文化學報 Vol.- No.94

In postwar Japan, the tide of memory recording regarding the Battle of Okinawa shifted from “the side of mainland (army)” to “the side of Okinawa resident,” which meant it became objectified. This process induced the surfacing of the memories of Korean military laborers and women forced into sexual slavery by the Japanese military, all of which had been buried under Japan’s war history. After the 90’s in the image-related field, there was an active movement for recording Korean’s memory of the Okinawa Battle and Park Soo-Nam, a second generation Korean-Japanese movie director, played a pioneering role. The purpose of this study is to understand the characteristics of Park Soo-Nam's methods of cinematic expression for the recording and presentation of the memory of the Okinawa Battle from the perspective of Koreans. The documentary methods used in three films on the theme of the Okinawa Battle were compared and analyzed. Of them were two documentary films directed by Park Soo-Nam-"Song of Arirang-voices from Okinawa" (1991), and "Nuchigafu-Life is a Treasure 'Gyokusai' Stories in the Battle of Okinawa" (2012). The third was the film "Boy soldiers: The Secret War in Okinawa" (2018) directed by Mikami Chie and Oya Hanayo. The study attempted to reveal that Park Soo-Nam, through the cinematic expression of her films, encouraged viewers to form their own perspectives of the Okinawa Battle as experienced by Koreans. 戦後日本における沖縄戦の記憶記録の流れが「本土(皇軍)側」から「沖縄(住民)側」へと客観化されていく中 で、日本の戦史から葬り去られていた朝鮮人軍属・慰安婦の沖縄戦の記憶も徐々に可視化されるようになる。特に 1990年代以降になると、映像分野において朝鮮人の沖縄戦の記憶を記録する動きが始まるが、そのパイオニア的な役 割を担ったのが在日朝鮮人2世の映画監督朴壽南である。本稿では、沖縄戦をテーマとした彼女のドキュメンタリー映 画2本「아리랑(アリラン)のうた-オキナワからの証言」(1991)、「ぬちがふぅ(命果報)ー玉砕場からの証言」(2012) と三上智恵・大矢英代の「沖縄スパイ戦史」(2018)に用いられている記録映画的手法を比較分析し、朴寿南がど のような表現を駆使し朝鮮人たちの沖縄戦の記憶を鑑賞者に向き合わせているのか、その特徴を見出すことを試みた。 これを通して、朴寿南の映画が独自の表現手法を工夫し、朝鮮人たちが体験した凄惨な沖縄戦に対する鑑賞者自ら の思考と認識を誘導していることを明らかにしようとした。

일본 전후(역)사학과 『오키나와현사(沖繩縣史)』 편찬의 역설 ― `국민사`에서 `탈국민사`로

김민환 ( Kim Min Hwan ) 한국사회사학회 2017 사회와 역사 Vol.0 No.115

일본 오키나와현의 『오키나와현사(沖繩縣史)』는 1963년 간행계획이 수립되어 1965년부터 간행되기 시작하였다. 이 시기는 오키나와가 일본의 현(縣) 중 하나가 아니라 일본의 `잠재주권(residual sovereignty)`만 인정되고 실질적인 통치는 미군에 의해 이루어지고 있던 때였다. 『오키나와현사』의 편찬을 주관했던 것은 일본정부와 상관없는 류큐정부(琉球政府)였다. 오키나와현(沖繩縣)이 만들어지기 이전에 `오키나와현사(縣史)`가 먼저 편찬되기 시작한 것은 오키나와의 역사를 일본사의 한 부분으로 인식한 `일본 전후사학`의 영향 때문이었다. 그러나 실제 『오키나와현사』 편찬과정에서 일본과 오키나와의 차이가 두드러지게 되어서 오히려 오키나와의 `독자성`이 분명하게 된 역설이 발생했다. 특히 `오키나와전(戰)`의 역사를 `전사(戰史)` 등 `위로부터의 역사`가 아닌, 오키나와 주민들의 관점에서 서술하려는 `아래로부터의 역사`를 서술하기 위해 전쟁을 체험한 주민들의 `구술`을 채록하는 과정에서 이 점이 부각되었다. The plan for the publication of the History of Okinawa Prefecture(沖繩縣史, Okinawakenshi) by Okinawa Prefecture in Japan was established in 1963, and began publication in 1965. During this period, Okinawa was not a Japanese prefecture; only Japan`s residual sovereignty was acknowledged, and the territory was under de facto governance by the American armed forces. The Government of the Ryukyu Islands(琉球政府, Ryukyu Seifu) oversaw the compilation of the History of Okinawa Prefecture, an office unrelated to the Japanese government. Compilation of the History of Okinawa Prefecture began first, before the creation of Okinawa Prefecture, because of the influence of postwar Japanese historiography, which perceived the history of Okinawa as a part of Japanese history. However, during the actual process of compiling the History of Okinawa Prefecture differences between Japan and Okinawa became pronounced, leading to a paradox of Okinawa`s uniqueness. This came to be highlighted, in particular, in the process of recording oral testimonies from the territory`s residents, who had experienced the war. Due to their testimonies, the History of Okinawa Prefecture can describe the history of the Battle of Okinawa(沖繩戰, Okinawasen), as opposed to a war history or history from above.

남방동포원호회(南方同胞援護会)의 오키나와 반환론-‘실지(失地)’ 담론의 형성과 그 의미-

정신혁 한양대학교 동아시아문화연구소 2023 동아시아 문화연구 Vol.94 No.-

This article examines how the Assistance Association for Okinawa and Ogasawara Islands (Nanpō Dōhō Engokai) formulated and reinforced irredentist narratives about Okinawa and discourses on national security, while in effect concealing coloniality in Okinawa-Japan-U.S. relations. Nanpō Dōhō Engokai was one of the key Japanese organizations that contributed to the formation of discourses and knowledge about Okinawa during the U.S. occupation of Okinawa. It was established in 1956 in response to growing concern about the American administration of Okinawa following the release of the “Price Report,” which sparked the island-wide protest (shimagurumi tōsō) against the U.S. authorities’ coercive land expropriation in Okinawa. Until being reorganized in 1973 into its successor, Okinawa Kyōkai, Nanpō Dōhō Engokai continued to handle some of Okinawa-related business, including the commemoration of the Japanese war dead and the publication of various sourcebooks, periodicals, and policy reports. One of the most important aspects of Nanpō Dōhō Engokai’s discourses on U.S.-occupied Okinawa is that they served to frame U.S.-administered Okinawa as Japan’s “irredenta.” But while irredentism is often based on a certain hostility towards the power from which a certain part of the territory should be “taken back,” in this case the United States was, at least for Nanpō Dōhō Engokai, not necessarily an “enemy” to be fought. Rather, the United States was not only a crucial Cold War ally for postwar Japan but also the counterpart with which to negotiate and cooperate for a common purpose: Japan’s national security within the regional and global Cold War context. This particular background and context characterized Nanpō Dōhō Engokai’s irredentism. Predicated upon the necessity and importance of “cooperative” relations between Japan and the United States, Nanpō Dōhō Engokai’s irredentist reversionism functioned to reconfigure the colonial relationship between the United States, mainland Japan, and Okinawa. 남방동포원호회(南方同胞援護会)는 오키나와 내에서 미국 통치에 대한 사회적 저항이 고조된 시기인 1956년 일본 정부의 외곽단체로서 창설되어 오키나와의 일본 반환 직후인 1973년까지 미국 통치하 오키나와와 오가사와라 등에 대한 원호 및 공보업무 등을 수행한 단체이다. 이 논문에서는 남방동포원호회의 다양한 활동 중 오키나와의 일본 반환을 촉구하는 담론의 생산자로서의 측면에 주목하고, 그 특색과 의미에 대해 검토한다. 재경(在京) 오키나와 출신 엘리트 및 정치인, 사회과학자 등의 참여를 통해 형성된 남방동포원호회의 오키나와 반환 담론은 전반적으로 오키나와를 일본의 ‘실지(失地)’로서 자리매김하고, 따라서 ‘회복되어야 할 일본의 영토’로서의 오키나와를 구성하고 정당화하는 지식생산을 통해 일본 본토 내에서의 오키나와 인식 제고를 지향했다. 다른 한편 남방동포원호회는 반환의 현실적 달성 및 일본의 안전보장을 위해 미국의 오키나와 기지 사용권 유지가 일정 부분 필요하다는 입장을 표명하기도 했다. 이런 관점에서 남방동포원호회는 기지의 전면 철수 및 ‘즉시 무조건 전면 반환’ 등을 요구한 오키나와 현지에서의 복귀운동과는 달리 시정권 반환과 기지 사용의 분리 방안을 제시했다. 미군 기지의 기능 유지를 전제한 오키나와 반환의 필요성을 일면 긍정한 것이다. 이러한 남방동포원호회의 오키나와 반환 담론은 여타 실지회복주의 담론과는 달리 ‘실지’의 현재 영유자에 대한 적대성이 순치되었다는 특색을 갖는다. 이는 냉전하 미일관계의 비대칭성이라는 전지구적ㆍ지역적 맥락을 반영하는 것이면서, 동시에 오키나와에 대한 점령상태의 지속 및 재편을 추인하는 역할을 수행하기도 했다.

1957년 오키나와총궐기대회를 기점으로 일본 본토에서의 오키나와 일본복귀 담론의 형성 과정: 남방동포원호회(南方同胞援護会)의 발행 잡지를 중심으로

김미영 서강대학교 사회과학연구소 2023 社會科學硏究 Vol.31 No.2

This study aims to examine the formation process of the discourse regarding Japan's return to Okinawa in 1972. Specifically, it focuses on the development of the discourse in mainland Japan in connection with the decision for Okinawa's return through negotiations between the US and Japan. It particularly intends to shed light on the significant influence of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and the collective pursuit of interests between the LDP and the former powerful factions in Okinawa. To verify this hypothesis, the study reviewed the flow of early editorials in a magazine published by the Southern Brethren Support Society, established by the institutional nature of the LDP regime. The discourse surrounding Okinawa's return to Japan after World War II played a significant role in the mainland's perception. It was driven by the Liberal Democratic Party's determination to reclaim both southern, including Okinawa, and northern territories. Simultaneously, the discussions among intellectuals from Okinawa, aiming to maintain the essence of Japanese life within the mainland, formed a vital part of the discourse on Japan's reintegration. Moreover, the fundamental premise of "restoring Okinawa's administrative rights while retaining US military bases" significantly aligned with the US-Japan agreement on Okinawa's return. This alignment implies that the decision wasn't merely a quick consensus but rather a complex process. Okinawa's return played a pivotal role in resolving a long-standing territorial issue before the conclusion of the treaty, maintaining the nuclear umbrella amidst the unpredictable international Cold War context, ultimately fortifying the 55-year regime.

우치난추의 눈으로 본 오키나와

임성모(Im Seong Mo) 역사비평사 2008 역사비평 Vol.- No.85

Perceiving the history of Okinawa from the view(an eye) of Uchinanchu, is a task of examining the oppressive nature of Okinawa's forced assimilation into Japan, and also of exploring the independent and separate nature of the Okinawa region and future possibilities that could blossom on its soils. Through what process Okinawa was assimilated into Japan, and how the residents of Okinawa had to deal with and live with certain racial problems that occurred in the assimilation process, are examined in this article, in terms of the modern and contemporary history of Okinawa. The Japanization' of Okinawa displayed two separate stages, (the Japanese) invasion of Satsuma Han/薩摩藩 and the implementation of the so - called 'Ryukyu Shobun'. What Okinawa went through at the time became a prelude for other East Asian countries' fates, as they themselves were all colonized by the Japanese imperialism later. Here in this article, examples of the modern Okinawa intellectuals criticising colonialism and racism are examined in order to assess the level of fissures that were created inside this ethnically minor, Okinawa society. Also assessed here, through the examination of contemporary novels, is the issue of what the 'post - war' era would have meant to the Okinawa people. Through all these efforts, the Okinawa people's post - colonial imagination and the regional problems of East Asia, and their encounters with each other, are examined as well.

戰後 沖縄의 出入管理政策과 出入手續 拒否運動

정신혁 한일민족문제학회 2011 한일민족문제연구 Vol.20 No.-

From the early period of occupation by United States Military Government, traveling into or out of the Okinawa were strictly restricted for the purpose of “military security”. Lying in the core of institutional boundaries dividing mainland Japan and Okinawa were the “entry and exit control policy.” This policy institutionally separated Okinawa by controlling the incoming and outgoing flows of people, functioning as a framework that turned the region into a legally and socio-economically disjoined jurisdiction. United States Civil Administration of the Ryukyu Islands (USCAR), founded in December 1950, continued to exercise a substantial authority by controlling access to or from Okinawa until the reversion of Okinawa in 1972. Such a policy, however, brought about discontent demanding the free access in and out of Okinawa, meanwhile USCAR still continued to have control over the access. This study examines the transformation of “entry and exit control policy” in postwar Okinawa, focusing on the relationship between the policy and social movements against it. As “entry and exit control policy” was coming into effective in Okinawa, it created some controversial issues in Okinwan society. For instance, USCAR imposed travel restrictions on the people such as “reversionists” to repress the social resistances against the authority. However, such a policy triggered protests against USCAR, thus the responses by Okinawan people contributed to a gradual relaxation of regulations on travelling Okinawa. And as the passport control refusal movements in late 1960s became active, the target of movements for abolishment of passport control expanded to the Japanese Government, while maintaining its resistive stance against USCAR’s control. In the process, the movements not only called for Okinawa’s legal integration to Japan, but also was related to the struggles against the immigration control system by foreigners in Japan and self-reflective discussions over other minorities in Japan and discrimination problems they were facing. 米軍の沖縄上陸と同時に開始された沖縄における出入統制は、米国の統治下にあった沖縄を日本とは区別された主権的領域として設定し、管理するための重要な施策であった。占領初期の沖縄において「軍事的安全」のために厳しく統制された沖縄の出入は、1960年代以来徐々に自由化されたが、いまだ複雑な出入手続を必要とした。特に、沖縄と本土との自由な人的移動を防ぐことができるという点で、沖縄の出入管理政策は社会的な反発を引き起こした。しかし、琉球列島米国民政府(ユースカー)の立場から見ると、出入管理政策はそうした反応を抑える対応策でもあった。これを重視したユースカーは、沖縄における出入許可権を1972年の沖縄返還まで維持し活用した。要するに、戦後沖縄における出入管理政策は、ユースカーの政策と社会運動との間で生成された緊張関係の中で形成され、変容していったのである。この点に注目して、本稿では、米国統治期の沖縄における出入管理政策の形成·変容過程と社会運動との間の関係を考察することを目指した。出入管理の方針が、沖縄の政治、社会の各分野に直接的な影響を及ぼし、徐々に社会的な争点として浮上すると、ユースカーは、反米的な動き、特に日本への復帰を主張する人々を制御するため渡航規制を発動した。しかし、このような抑制的施策は、1960年代初頭に入ると社会的「逆風」を招くこととなった。この社会的反応は、沖縄返還に至るまでの渡航規制政策の緩和をもたらした重要な要因であった。さらにその過程で、1960年代後半の出入手續拒否運動は、沖を日本の法域として位置づける役割を担った一方、米国の沖縄統治及び日本政府に対する問題提起を伴うことでもあった。この問題提起は歴史的に存在してきた沖縄に対する差別という文脈とも重なるものであり、また日本の「入管体制」下の他のマイノリティへの視線を確保するうえで大きな役割を果たしたと言える。