남북 역사학(자) 교류와 역사인식의 공존을 향한 전망

정태헌(Jung, Tae-hern) 국제고려학회 서울지회 2009 국제고려학회 서울지회 논문집 Vol.12 No.-

The exchange between North and South Korean historians represents a seemingly small and yet very significant step toward the coexistence of different historical perceptions of the Korean history. Although somewhat limited at this moment, the exchange between the two, through its continuous progress, will contribute to the better understanding of each other by providing with the various prospects on the historical conception and background for the academic discussion. For the past ten years, the exchange between North and South Korean historians has extended to diverse areas, including the cosponsored academic conference, exhibition, preservation of the historical landmarks, and co-excavation. The level of the contents discussed during the exchange has also been developed drastically. The fundamental issue between the North and South Korea in the 21st century has already surpassed the ideological conflicts. Approached from a different angle than the power struggle between the North and the South, the objective condition has no other choices but to choose the coexistence and symbiosis at the crossroad of the war. To this end, the exchange between North and South Korean historians based on reconciliation and cooperation forms the base for the cultural communication. In fact, it has now been extended to the extent where the mutual understanding of the different historical concepts has been made instead of the mere exchange of the scholars. If North and South Korea succeed to manage the balance in their relationship and establish the peace treaty, not only the quality of their exchange categories will change but also shall the awareness of the coexistence of different historical perceptions be extended.

전시체제 초기 夢幻의 선전소재, 조선해협철도터널案 실상과 報道 실태

정태헌(Jung Tae-hern) 고려사학회 2021 한국사학보 Vol.- No.82

만주를 침략한 일본 육군은 세계 최초의 해저철도터널인 간몬(下關~門司)터널 건설을 밀어붙여 착공 계획을 확정하자마자 1935년 7월, 철도성과 내무성을 통해 ‘조선해협터널’ 계획안을 발표하도록 했다. 그러나 이는 기술수준, 재정적 뒷받침, 일본철도망과의 연결방법 등 구체성이 결여된 실현 불가능한 계획이었고, 일본철도망과의 궤간차이조차 고려하지 않은 미숙한 발상이었다. 1939년에 일본 혼슈 지역의 광궤(표준궤) 신간선 부설 계획과 조선해협터널을 연계시킨다는 구상이 제시되었지만 이후 다시 큐슈 지역의 협궤철도망을 연결역으로 설정하는 혼선을 벗어나지 못했다. 그러나 報國언론은 이 계획이 곧 이뤄질 것처럼 반복선전하면서 ‘현실’로 만들어 일본에서 시작되는 ‘興亞’교통망을 찬양했다. 어쩔 수 없이 계획의 실현 불가능함이 노출되자 선전 소재로서 페이퍼 계획의 용도가 폐기(1942년 중단)될 때까지는 성사시켜야 한다는 사명감과 정신승리를 강조했다. 부실한 지질조사만 간헐적으로 진행되면서 페이퍼 계획상 터널입・출구가 수시로 바뀌는 동안 곳곳에서 일어난 입・출구 유치 운동은 해당 지역은 물론 독자들에게 침략전쟁에 빠져들도록 분위기를 조성하는 데 일조했다. 터널계획은 일본이 침략전쟁에 승승장구하는 것으로 비춰졌던 전시체제 초기에 ‘과학일본’의 ‘웅대한 힘’을 과시하는 몽환의 정치 선전 소재로 기능했다. The Japanese Army, which invaded Manchuria, confirmed its plan to build the world’s first undersea railway tunnel called the Kanmon Tunnel(Simonoseki~Monji). Straight afterwards the Japanese Army announced plans for the Joseon Strait Railway tunnel through the Ministry of Railways and the Ministry of the Interior in July 1935. This plan was an immature idea of linking it to the narrow-gauge railway, the Kanmon Tunnel, without considering the specificity of technology, financial support, and a means of connection with the Japanese railway network led by the Army’s impatience. It was not until 1939 that the project changed to link it to the Joseon Strait Tunnel when the plan to replace the Japanese mainline railway with a broad-gauge railway (a standard rail line) was established. However, the plan for the new broad-gauge railway was suspended in 1943 due to the deterioration of the war situation. The plan for the Joseon Strait Tunnel was also suspended in 1942 after a poor and intermittent geological survey. The plan for the Joseon Strait Railway Tunnel did not go beyond the level of the desk plan. However, ‘patriotic media’ advertised the plan loudly as if it would be accomplished soon and praised the plan as a transportation network that makes science Japan’s Asia prosperous. While the entrance and exit of the tunnel frequently changed by desk plans, the entrance and exit installation movement occurring in Joseon and Japan contributed to creating an atmosphere buried in the illusion of a war of aggression. In the end, the Joseon Strait Tunnel plan, which had no substance, served as a dreamy political propaganda tool that only imprinted readers with mental victory, a sense of duty, and justification.

특집논문 : 1948년 남북한 건국과 동북아 열강들의 인식 ; 탈냉전 역사인식으로서의 분단, 건국 이해

정태헌 ( Tae Hern Jung ),허은 ( Eun Heo ) 역사학연구회 ( 구 고대사학회 ) 2008 사총 Vol.67 No.-

남북 역사인식의 상호 변화와 를 통해 본 역사인식 연합'의 전망

정태헌(Jung, Tae-Hern) 국제고려학회 서울지회 2011 국제고려학회 서울지회 논문집 Vol.14 No.-

Learned circles of history of 21st century South and North Korea has to prepare methodology for 'Union of Historical perception' between South and North Korea in union of nations stage. this process can be connected with settlement for difference of Historical perception and peace building among each country in the Northeast Asia. examining the result of , against common expectations, South and North Korea Historical perceptions thinking about korean history before 1910s, have something in common with each other. Union of Historical perception, based on this kind of commonness, is that pursues methodology coexisting differences. With external changes such as the collapse of the Cold War, recognition for the Japanese Colonial Period, which has 'political difference' understanding history between South and North Korea, is changing after 1990s. South Korean scholars study about anti-japanese armed struggle of Kim il sung. therefore critical Historical perception based on fact is spreaded. North Korean scholars have memoir of Kim Il-Sung which emphasizes on the Union with the nationalist group. It has made the circumstances being able to reinterpret Juche Idea for peace and coexistence.

‘남북 역사인식 연합’을 위한 역사학 교류

정태헌(Jung, Tae Hern) 역사비평사 2012 역사비평 Vol.- No.99

In order to accomplish a union between North and South Korea, a broadening of the homogenous historical understanding must be demanded, ‘The North-South Korean Union for Historical Understanding,’ which is towards a methodology of coexisting with difference, is the essential element at this stage of Union between North and South Korea. It does not mean the absorption of a single historical understanding, which connotes a one-sided nature. Whether the period needed for union between North and South Korea is long or short, it will depend on the level of union between North and South Korean historical perception. Historical exchange will incrementally increase interchange according to the level of the relationship between South and North Korea, following steps such as ‘the Period of Reconciliation and Cooperation’, ‘the Period of Peaceful Coexistence’ and ‘the Period of Union between North and South Korea’. The main contents of history interchange during the Period of Reconciliation and Cooperation, whose first task is composing the foundation of exchange, should be an orientation towards outstanding historical questions shared by both North and South Korea. In addition, ‘The North and South Korean Committee for the Promotion Socio-Cultural Cooperation.’ as an organization that operates between South and North Korea authorities ‘The North and South Korean History Exchange Agreement.’ Likewise, ‘The Account for History Interchange Between North and South Korea’ by the Inter-Korean Cooperation Fund. In the North, the Ministry of Unification’s administration guide, which maintains an ‘anti-market’ policy and which that fails to provide research funds for North Korean scholars, should be changed. Following this an array of ‘cultural agreements’ can be signed between North and South Korean authorities marking ‘the Period of Peaceful Coexistence’. The primary theme of history exchange at this point should be the reexamination of political difference between each history so as to find signs for a methodology that can relieve hostilities. The founding of ‘The Inter-Korea Committee for Historical Interchange and Promotion’ as well as subcommittees classified by each subject of exchange is demanded. Henceforth the biggest theme of history exchange is the completion of the methodology of ‘The North-South Korean Union for Historical Understanding’ and reaching the level of cooperation where ‘The Joint North-South Korean Commission on History’ can compile a collaborated historical outline publication.

박정희정권 시기 지식층의 대만 農政 인식과 그 변화

정태헌(Jung taehern) 고려대학교 아세아문제연구소 2014 亞細亞硏究 Vol.57 No.3

민주화과정에 대한 비판적 성찰 ; 1980년대 민주화운동에서의 학원민주화 쟁취 사례 연구 -인천대 학생운동의 시각에서 본 선인학원 시,공립화 과정

정태헌 ( Tae Hern Jung ) 민주화운동기념사업회 2013 기억과 전망 Vol.0 No.28

1980년대 한국 민주화운동 가운데 학원민주화는 민주화의 내용을 가늠하는 척도가 된다. 개교 이듬해인 1980년에 인천대 ``재단정상화투쟁-학원자주화운동’이 시작된 이래 국가권력-문교부는 언제나 미봉책으로 일관했고, 재단을 국가에 헌납한 교주(校主)는 그 틈에 되돌아와 학원을 파행으로 몰고갔다. 그러나 1980년대 학원민주화 부문에서 유일무이한 성공사례인 선인학원의 시·공립화(市·公立化) 14년 대장정이 1994년 3월에 마무리될 수 있었던 데에는 특별한 이유가 있다. 시작부터 마무리까지 투쟁대상이 “무조건 재단”이었던 인천대 학생운동의 끈질긴 투쟁과 단일대오 구축, 역량의 대중화를 기반으로 교수·교사들과 시민의 힘이 한데 모아졌고 각 주체들의 역할 분배가 조화를 이뤘기 때문에 가능했다. When examining the South Korea democratization movement of the 1980s university democratization was a measure of the contents of larger reform. Since 1980, a year after its opening, Incheon University`s “Struggle for the Normalization of the University Foundation-University Autonomy Movement” would be done away with the inconsistent and make-shift management of the of the Ministry of Education. And the owner of the university who donated the university foundation to the state returned and led the school to a catastrophe. However, an unprecedented victory for the 1980s` struggle for democratization of the university, came at the end of a journey lasting 14 years in the form of Municipalization · Publicization of Seonin School Foundation in March of 1994. This was facilitated by a unique reason. Consistent struggle, popularization of Incheon University`s student movement whose target had been a “foundation without conditions” from beginning to end, made it possible a collective combination of most faculties and the power of the citizenry, and their harmonical role allotment.

진보적 역사학의 상징,『역사비평』25년의 성과와 과제

정태헌(Jung, Tae-Hern) 역사비평사 2012 역사비평 Vol.- No.100

특집 : 평화와 통일의 사건사; 1980년대 정주영의 탈이념적 남북경협과 북방경제권 구상

정태헌 ( Tae Hern Jung ) 고려대학교 민족문화연구원 2013 民族文化硏究 Vol.59 No.-

1970년대 말 이후 1980년대를 지나는 동안 모색된 정주영의 남북경협-북방경제권 구상은 남한 내수시장 또는 수출상품 생산에 필요한 원자재 및 상품 공급기지로서의 북한과 ‘무진장한 자원의 보고’인 시베리아와 만주를 아우른 것이었다. 1989년 1월 그의 첫 방북은 남북관계를 풀어가는 과정에서 애매하고 수동적 입장을 벗어나지 못한 국가의 ‘무능함’에 기대지 않고 자유기업론자로서 적극적으로 ‘북한 열기’를 시도한 것이었다. 정주영은 한국경제의 생산력 저하라는 현실 앞에서 분단의 장벽을 넘어 동북아 대륙에서 민간이 주도하는 자유기업이 활개를 펼 수 있는 조건을 만들고 창의력을 발휘해 장애요인을 돌파하려 했던 ‘상식적’ 기업인이었다. 그러나 상식적 기업인이 한 사람뿐이었다는 것은, 한국사회 냉전의 뿌리가 얼마나 깊고 한국 기업의 내공이 얼마나 낮은 수준인가를 반증한다. As the 1980s passed Chung Ju-yung suggested that North-south economic union and Northern economic zone initiative would connect North Korea and the "limitless vault of natural resources" in Siberia and Manchuria to the South Korean domestic market and to demand for raw materials required for the production of goods and products for export. In Chung``s first visit to the North in January of 1989, he bypasses the ambiguous and passive process of the government`s ``incompetent" to disentangle North-South relations in order to pursue a plan of "opening North Korea" along the principle of free enterprise. Faced with the realities of the Korean economy`s reduction in productivity, Chung quality as a creative and commonsensical businessman can be seen in his push to overcome the wall of national division and confront the mitigating factors in order to create a place on the Asian continent where free enterprises led by the people could unfold. However, this commonsense businessman was only one person, the roots of the Cold War in Korean society were deep and Korea industry`s low level of retrocedence indicates as much.

일제하 조선인 "고문(高文)"합격자들의 학교·관료생활과 시대인식

정태헌 ( Tae Hern Jung ) 고려대학교 역사연구소(구 역사학연구회) 2013 사총 Vol.79 No.-