Special Article

 

Interdisciplinary Postgraduate Course for Jeju 4·3 Studies Urgently Needed at Jeju National University

Kim Dong-choon

Professor, Sungkonghoe University

On Aug. 25, 2022, the Jeju Special Self-Governing Provincial Council organized a special forum to discuss the significance and promotion of the opening of a regional postgraduate program on Jeju 4·3 studies. Dr. Heo Sang-su, head of the Seoul-based association for families of Jeju 4·3 victims, said that the global, historical, and educational conditions of Jeju 4·3 studies are mature enough to open an interdisciplinary course awarding degrees. He stressed, “With the concerted determination of the president and the professors, Jeju National University will have great potential to run a course for Jeju 4·3 studies and emerge as a hub for the studies of human rights, peace, and ecosystems in Korea and in East Asia beyond.” As pointed out in the forum, there is a growing demand for a course where undergraduate and graduate students can study Jeju 4·3, in addition to conducting relevant research and archiving materials. Voices have been raised over the need to draw academic attention to Jeju 4·3 issues by creating an educational ecosystem that could encourage young intellectuals to get postgraduate degrees and continue their research.

This is not the first time that the request for an educational course on Jeju 4·3 studies was made. In 2018 when Jeju 4·3 marked its 70th anniversary, the Association of the Bereaved Families of Jeju 4·3 Victims and the Commemorative Project Committee for the 70th Anniversary of Jeju 4·3 proposed opening a department specializing in Jeju 4·3 at Jeju National University. Several years ago, scholars urged the university to employ full-time personnel for specialized research on Jeju 4·3. Even these early steps are deemed somewhat belated. As is widely known, Chonnam National University in Gwangju established the May 18 Institute decades ago to archive research materials and publish an academic journal. Should there have been any such groundwork completed in Jeju, the opening of an interdisciplinary course on Jeju 4·3 studies could have gained greater momentum by now.

The Jeju provincial government and victims’ families have striven towards the resolution of Jeju 4·3, including maintaining the historical sites, building a memorial hall, and performing memorial ceremonies. Still, sufficient attention has yet to be paid to establishing a research institute, training researchers, and educating students that could allow systematic studies of Jeju 4·3. This makes it difficult to set its history right at the state level despite the public awareness to a certain degree. What is worse, memorial events have taken place in Jeju, with informative video images distributed mostly targeting its residents and national recognition of the incident achieved to an unsatisfactory level, let alone international awareness of its significance. The prime causes would be deficient academic recognition of the historic, universal, and global nature of Jeju 4·3, a limited pool of researchers with expertise in the subject, and the elementary level of education of students and ordinary citizens.

Understandably, it would be difficult for Jeju National University to open a postgraduate course, given the nation’s decreasing birth rate and the rising need to reduce the number of students, especially with the insecure career opportunities for those who complete the course. In other similar cases, however, research and education have long been conducted by the UN-affiliated University for Peace, as well as peace institutes at universities in the Netherlands, Ireland, and more. Researchers with masters’ or doctoral degrees from these institutions have actively studied in the United Nations and other international organizations. It is rare that institutions for this purpose are established in Asia; however, South Korea could be one of the few candidates to fulfill the role, considering the historical experiences, international recognition, and economic power. Over the years, my university has run a postgraduate program for civil activists from Korea and abroad to study human rights and peace, and its graduates have played a significant role in the public and civilian sectors of various countries in Asia.

Early in the 2000s, I attended two international academic conferences on genocides, as an observer for the first one held in Ireland, and as a speaker in the other, convened in Sarajevo. These conferences provided good opportunities for me to meet internationally prominent scholars in the field of genocide studies and listen to their ideas and thoughts. Still, I found neither of the events very pleasant because the participants were rarely from Asia, and seemed as if they were listening to arguments from the ‘indigenous people’ for the first time when massacres in Korea or in other Asian countries were mentioned. More than half the presentations addressed the topic of the Holocaust. In addition, I heard that Jewish communities sponsored the conferences to a great extent. Supposedly, thousands of articles discussed massacres of which at least hundreds would have addressed the Holocaust while memorial museums are established worldwide, such as the one situated at a critical location in front of the White House in the United States. Under these circumstances, it is understandable that the world, especially western countries, perceive as representative the European genocides such as the Holocaust and the case of Yugoslavia.

When my term as a standing commissioner for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission ended in 2009, a donor was willing to sponsor an international conference on genocides after being compensated as a family member of a victim of the nation’s past misconduct. I had no choice but to refuse the generous offer, regardless of how grateful I was, because it seemed difficult to form a team of peer researchers and students who were capable of preparing and organizing such a conference in Korea. Despite the full capability of raising necessary funds, it would have been meaningless to host any such event in Korea if without academic infrastructure, that is, researchers. Unfortunately, I failed to make the kind-hearted person understand the situation, and he died a few years later.

Jeju 4·3 determined the contemporary history of South Korea, which involved a resistance and violence during the nation’s state-building process after liberation and marked the prelude to the subsequent Korean War. Globally, it took place in the greater context of decolonization, the worsening Cold War, and the foundation of new countries that resulted in political upheaval, conflict, and mass killings. The historical event, with the greatest significance in regional history, brought about the overall situations in the local community across the sectors of its politics, economy, and society. Therefore, it is a repository of research materials that can serve as a lens with which the values of human rights and peace can be spread not just in Korea but also in East Asia and the world beyond.

Since the 1990s, many international and domestic academic events on Jeju 4·3 have taken place annually in Jeju. An abundance of research papers that enable productive discussions have been released and internationally renowned scholars have been invited several times. Despite the astronomical budget spent for these events, I am skeptical about what has changed in the process of identifying responsibility for Jeju 4·3 and raising its awareness nationally and internationally, specifically its theorization and universalization. Searching for articles on Jeju 4·3 in internationally renowned academic journals would result in only a few papers written by Korean scholars, not to mention that no works on the topic published by internationally eminent publishers can be found.

Those victims’ families who have long suffered since the outbreak of Jeju 4·3 and those activists who have devoted themselves to the discovery of its truth must be enraged when facing the denial by the United States government of its responsibility. However, it is necessary to understand that the Holocaust has become worldwide common sense for reasons beyond the systematic support and investment from Jews, even referred to as the “Holocaust industry”. Above all, enormous investment and effort has been brought into creating key research institutes, publishing papers and books, and educating students at major universities around the world, including the United States. The perspective of the international community never changes overnight. However serious an incident may be, resonating with prominent experts and citizens of the world and sharing with them any lesson requires the combination of scientific and objective research, faithful reconstruction of facts, and effective marketing and promotion strategies.

In other words, at least dozens of outstanding studies or hundreds of papers must be written and substantively discussed for Jeju 4·3 to convey historical lessons for human rights and peace. Once achieved, on the basis of that, documents and films, as well as accurate textbooks, can be produced to ensure that the memories of victims and the history of Jeju are legitimately recognized as belonging to Korea and its people and shared in East Asia and the world beyond.

Although Jeju 4·3 took place in Jeju, it bears significance in Korea’s modern history, and furthermore, in the history of East Asia and in the early stages of the Cold War. Thus, it is a comprehensive topic that is difficult to cover within the framework of individual disciplines such as history, sociology, anthropology, and jurisprudence. A complete understanding of Jeju 4·3 should also involve the studies of literature, psychology, medical science, women’s studies, social welfare, psychoanalysis, and geography. Inevitably, the graduate program for Jeju 4·3 must be jointly operated by professors and researchers from various relevant departments of the humanities, social studies, and natural sciences. Being more than a simple historical event, it should be studied in a universal framework for human rights, peace, reconciliation, and healing, establishing “Jeju 4·3 studies” as a field of Korean studies, Jeju studies, and East Asian studies. Graduates with a postgraduate degree in Jeju 4·3 studies must also be capable of conducting research on general Korean studies, Jeju studies, East Asian history, and social sciences. This will qualify the researchers to work for domestic or international institutes in the public and private sectors committed to the promotion of human rights and peace. If opening the course is deemed unachievable for now, it will be an alternative first step to at least establish a research institute and employ a few full-time researchers.

My other suggestion is that if Jeju National University fails to open a research institute or graduate course due to administrative issues or dissent between its departments, Jeju’s public and private sectors should consider creating the University for Peace in Asia, a graduate-only research university. Inviting renowned Korean and international scholars as visiting professors or researchers, the local government and civic groups of Jeju will be able to join the executive board to operate the institute much more flexibly than general universities. In this case, research and education on Jeju 4·3 should be the pillars, broadening the fields of interest from regional studies of Jeju 4·3 to studies of disputes, conflicts, massacres, and human rights violations in Asian countries.

A research and education institution established on or off the campus can run a degree program, as well as a short-term training course, for young intellectuals from Korea, Taiwan, Okinawa, and Vietnam with experiences similar to Jeju 4·3. This will encourage promising scholars, politicians, journalists, and artists to learn about Jeju 4·3 and become experts with sensibility for human rights and peace. We should no longer postpone the establishment of a research and education institution on Jeju 4·3. I look forward to a decision being made soon in any form.

 

Kim Dong-choon

Kim Dong-choon is a professor in the Department of Undeclared Majors in Converged Social Studies, Sungkonghoe University. As a critical sociologist, he has actively engaged in academia and the citizen campaign bloc. He also edited South Korea’s renowned academic journals as an editor for Critical Review of History and as the chief editor for Economy and Society. As a social activist, he chaired the Policy Committee of the People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy and led its Institute for Participatory Society. Also working as an inaugural standing commissioner of South Korea’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, he won the 20th Danjae Prize and the 10th Song Geon-ho Journalism Awards.

He is the author of Anti-Communist Liberalism, Why Korea? 1945-2020, Familism: The Source of Energy for Koreans, A Sociologist Answers the Times, This Is a War over Memory, War and Society (The Unending Korean War in English), Engine of America: Market and War, Does Independent Intelligence Exist?, Division and Korean Society, A New Approach to Korean Social Sciences, A Study of Korea’s Working Class, and more.

 

 

++ The Jeju Special Self-Governing Province, Jeju Special Self-Governing Provincial Council, Jeju National University, and the Jeju Free International City Development Center met in the provincial office building on Oct. 26, 2022, to sign “A Memorandum of Understanding on Educating Specialists for Master’s and Doctoral Degrees in Jeju 4·3 Studies”.