70년 전 우리의 광복이 일본에게는 어떻게 인식되었는가? 근대초기부터 형성되었던 일본의 한국에 대한 비하와 경멸 의식은 식민지 지배를 거치면서 한국인의 정체성을 무시한 동화정책 속에서 확대 재생산 되었다. 사회적으로는 멸시와 차별의 대상이자 수탈의 대상이었다. 전시동원령이 내려지자 동일한 자격으로 ‘천황의 군인’이자 제국의 신민으로 징병되고 동원하는 이중적인 인식구조를 형성하게 되었다. 이러한 의식은 패전직후의 일본이 어지러웠던 시기에는 철저한 무관심으로 전환되었다. 그러나 자신들의 이해관계가 걸린 재일 한국인 문제와 전후처리에 있어서는 한국인 피해자들에 대해 일본시민도 아니고 연합국 시민도 아닌 식민지 국민으로만 인식하였다. 이러한 시각은 샌프란시스코 평화조약의 체결과정 뿐 아니라 패전 후 20년 뒤에야 마무리 된 한일협정의 체결과정에서도 지속되어 법체계 속에 반영되었다.
샌프란시스코 평화조약에서 연합국의 일원으로 서명에 참가하지 못한 한국은 청구권 협정에서 불리한 입장에 놓일 수 밖에 없었다. 식민지 피해에 대한 배상 요구는 제외되고 전시피해에 집중된 배상요구에 국한되었으나 그나마도 해결된 바 없이 한일 양자 회담에서 해결할 과제도 넘겨졌다. 한일협정에서도 한일병합조약의 불법성은 확정지어지지 못하고 논란의 소지를 남긴 채 봉합되었다. 그로 인해 조약의 타결은 자금제공의 규모에 대한 타협으로 마무리지어졌으며, 그에 대해서도 우리 측은 청구권 자금이라고 해석하는 반면 일본 측은 독립 축하금으로 해석하게 되었다. 식민지 지배의 과거를 청산하지 못함으로써 한일협정 이후에도 보상문제는 계속남아 있게 되었다. 일본은 식민지 시기에 발생한 우리 측 피해에 대해서는 당시의 제국의 신민으로서 감수해야 하는 것이라면서도, 보상에 있어서는 일본인이 아니라는 이유에서 배제되었다.
우리에게 광복 70년은 단순히 일본의 지배에서 벗어난지 70년이 되는 시점이 아니라 지금도 계속되고 있는 일본의 역사관이 바뀌기를 기다리면서 노력해 온 70년이다. 그 숙제가 해결될 때 우리의 광복이 완성될 것이다.
What did the Korean liberation of 1945 mean to Japan? Why is it important to Korea of today? Japanese perception of disparagement and degradation on Koreans, which began to be formed since early modern period had been expanded and reproduced throughout the colonial period. Koreans were discriminated as an inferior being but they were mobilized during the war on an equal basis as one of Emperor's soldiers and as one of Empire's subjects. Japanese has been perceiving Koreans based on double standards. When the war was over and Japan had to embrace its own defeat, Japanese society went through with apathy toward Koreans. When its own interest is at stake, as was in war reparations and the treatment of Koreans in Japan, they viewed Koreans only as the subject of its own colonial rule but neither as Japanese citizens nor as the citizens of Allied powers. This perception is reflected into the legal frameworks of the San Francisco Peace Treaty and Korea-Japan Treaty of 1965. Excluded from the list of signature countries in San Francisco Peace Treaty, Korea had to face the negotiation table for property claims against Japan in a disadvantageous position. Even though Korea's limited claims on war-time damages excluding the reparations on Japan's colonial rule was not considered in the pearce treaty and had be dealt in the separate bilateral negotiation. The illegality and invalidity of the Annexation Treaty of 1910 was not confirmed in the Korea-Japan Treaty and the issue was stitched up without final decision. The economic aid, which was the main topic in the process of negotiation was interpreted as the fund for the claims against Japan by Koreans and as the congratulatory donation for independence. Because of this ambivalence, Japan has kept avoiding its legal responsibility for individual reparations and compensation during the last 70 years. Korean liberation, as long as the bilateral relationship between Korea and Japan is concerned, will be completed only when Japan changes its perception on Koreans and accepts the invalidity of the Annexation Treaty of 1910.
What did the Korean liberation of 1945 mean to Japan? Why is it important to Korea of today? Japanese perception of disparagement and degradation on Koreans, which began to be formed since early modern period had been expanded and reproduced throughout the colonial period. Koreans were discriminated as an inferior being but they were mobilized during the war on an equal basis as one of Emperor's soldiers and as one of Empire's subjects. Japanese has been perceiving Koreans based on double standards. When the war was over and Japan had to embrace its own defeat, Japanese society went through with apathy toward Koreans. When its own interest is at stake, as was in war reparations and the treatment of Koreans in Japan, they viewed Koreans only as the subject of its own colonial rule but neither as Japanese citizens nor as the citizens of Allied powers. This perception is reflected into the legal frameworks of the San Francisco Peace Treaty and Korea-Japan Treaty of 1965. Excluded from the list of signature countries in San Francisco Peace Treaty, Korea had to face the negotiation table for property claims against Japan in a disadvantageous position. Even though Korea's limited claims on war-time damages excluding the reparations on Japan's colonial rule was not considered in the pearce treaty and had be dealt in the separate bilateral negotiation. The illegality and invalidity of the Annexation Treaty of 1910 was not confirmed in the Korea-Japan Treaty and the issue was stitched up without final decision. The economic aid, which was the main topic in the process of negotiation was interpreted as the fund for the claims against Japan by Koreans and as the congratulatory donation for independence. Because of this ambivalence, Japan has kept avoiding its legal responsibility for individual reparations and compensation during the last 70 years. Korean liberation, as long as the bilateral relationship between Korea and Japan is concerned, will be completed only when Japan changes its perception on Koreans and accepts the invalidity of the Annexation Treaty of 1910.
