http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Cho Myung Chul(趙明哲) 일본사학회 2003 일본역사연구 Vol.17 No.-
Although most Meiji leaders shared the view on the importance of education, education policy was rarely on top of their policy lists. One of the reason was that the investment on education was very late in return. Still education reflected the ideology of the nation as the strengthening of the Emperor system proceeded in close relations with the changes in education. In particular, historical education played a big part in sustaining the state. Most societies have put importance on historical education as a means of accomplishing national integration because it gives reassurances on national bondage and patriotism. The problems in prewar Japan was that it removed scientific and rational thinking from historical education and only emphasized patriotism and loyalty to the emperor. Although historical education went though critical changes in the postwar period, the system of textbook certification contains the element of prewar historical education by allowing the state to influence the contents of the education.
Cho Myung Chul(趙明哲) 일본사학회 2001 일본역사연구 Vol.14 No.-
The key premise in Japan’s continental policy between the Sino-Japanese War and the Russo-Japanese War was the rule of the Korean peninsular. Although the colonization of Taiwan produced ‘the policy of maintaining the North and proceeding into the South’ as the general direction of Japan’s foreign policy, Japan never gave up the goal of ruling Korea. Thus, after ‘the policy of maintaining the North and proceeding into the South’ failed to produce concrete outcomes in the Boxer Incident, Japan’s focus on the continental policy moved once more to the Korean issue. In particular, Japan came to realize the difficulties in expanding its own interest in China due to the interferences by the Western powers. Japan was very aggressive in the Korean issue, in contrast to its easy abandonment of South China. In short, Korea was much more important to Japan. There were various opinions over the Korean issues, such as dividing Korea and exchanging Korea with Manchuria, most of them resulted in nothing. Still, it is important to notice that Japan began to discuss the Korean issue in relation to Manchuria, narrowing the major parties in the matter into Japan and Russia. On the other hand, Japan’s continental policy after the Sino-Japanese War failed to get out of the goal of ruling Korea, resulting in limiting its diplomatic choices. Japan’s continental policy was losing flexibility due not only to the inflexibility of its diplomatic goal but also to the way its sought to achieve that goal. In short, the sense of resistance to the diplomacy using military powers was weakening in Japanese society.
義和團事件과 일본의 외교전략 : 만주문제와 한국문제를 중심으로
조명철(Cho Myung Chul) 일본사학회 1998 일본역사연구 Vol.8 No.-
Peking was isolated by the Ching troops and rebel forces during the Boxer Rebellion and public order could not be maintained. By taking advantage of this chaos Russia occupied Manchuria. Japanese foreign policy makers also wanted to solve the Korean problem by taking full advantage of a political chaos in China. Under these circumstances there appeared a policy initiative to occupy part of Korea such as Inchon harbor or the Koche Island. Its strong proponents were Japanese Consul in Korea and non-government associations. When it became apparent that Russian occupation of Manchuria became a settled matter, Japanese foreign policy makers felt a lot of pressure caused by the occupation. At this juncture they began to relate the Korean issue to the Manchurian issue, and this led to the emergence of a policy of exchanging Manchuria for Korea. As the Korean issue became related to the Manchurian issue, Japan was forced to change its previous Korean policy. The two issues became inseparable. The policy could not be realized because of its failed negotiations with Russia but guided the Japan’s Russian policy until the outbreak of the war against Russia in 1904.