A little old, but last week the KT reported on the efforts of ten NGOs to petition the International Court of Justice to recognize Gando as a part of Korean territory.
For those of you who may remember, the whole issue of Gando came into attention when China’s Northeast Project claimed that Koguryo, a kingdom long thought by Koreas as one of their ancient kingdoms, was actually a kingdom established by ancient Chinese “ethnic groups.”
Coincidentally, Sunny Lee wrote an interesting article about South Korean tourists to Jilin, Northeast China, where many Koguryo archeological remains are on display. Although South Korean tourists have brought welcomed cash to this more backwoods part of China, they have also been at times, for lack of a better word, less than diplomatic in their expressions.
Per the article:
Sometimes, a language barrier is a good thing. If the Chinese and the Korean had known what the other was talking about just a few steps away, the scene might have escalated into something confrontational.
Now Jilin, being home to the Yanbian Korean Autonomous Prefecture, has a significant ethnic Korean population, quite possibly the largest ethnic Korean population outside of the peninsula. However, these Koreans typically get along very well with their Chinese neighbors and it’s doubtful that they will join hands with their peninsular brethren to reclaim the “lost territory.”
{ 55 comments… read them below or add one }
Completely baseless, even more so than Dokdo (at least there were no residents in Dokdo to deny they are Korean).
1. Koreans present in Yanbian (called Gando by Koreans) are the result of Korean emigration in the 19th and early 20th century. Some went independently, others were encouraged by the Japanese government to do so.
2. Yanbian was never administered by Korea and has always been firmly a part of the historical state of China. Chinese control of the area was only broken for 2 years from 1907 to 1909, when Japan invaded. Japan withdrew and recognised China’s sovereign right to the area in 1909. It was later controlled by the Manchurian puppet state under the Qing Emperor until the end of WW2.
3. The native people of the Yanbian are not Korean. The native people are various Manchurian (and related) tribes, including the Qing, a people that came to rule all of China.
4. The Tumen river is a natural boundary between China and Korea. Korea definitely did not control parts of China.
5. China regularly deported Koreans that came across the border into Yanbian. Only in the late 19th century did the Koreans start to be welcomed as laborers and workers.
Korea was a vassal state of China. The idea that Korea administered areas of China is ludicrous on the face of it.
You passed the chance to entitle this “Here We Gando Again…”??
Shame, you’re slipping!
Shak, Yanbian and Gando are not the same place. You are confused. Gando is on the north east of North Korea, overlapping with what is now Russia.
Having said that, the Gandoists are a show on their own – they are just a fantasy movement of Korean nationalists angrily reacting to China’s North East History project. They won’t get any support from anybody in Korea if they start antagonizing China and Russia and start affecting Korea’s relationship with those two countries for real.
Gandoist antagonism has my support. Koreans do a wonderful job antagonizing the Americans and Japanese w/o any consequence, so it’s time to kick it up a notch. C’mon lads, tell the Chinese to piss off. That there is Korean land, so skedaddle. You know the Chinese are afraid of ‘ya. Conquered them countless times, you have.
cm,
http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/间岛
shakuhachi, all your link tells me is that there has always been a territorial dispute between Korea and China over Gando. So? Where’s your proof that Koreans want to reclaim the entire Yanbian area?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiandao
cm,
Yanbian is an administrative structure set up by the Chinese government. It approximates, but not exactly, the Gando. Koreans base their claim on the area by the area that Japan “gave away” to China (actually an area that Japan invaded, as I explained in my comment above).
http://www.rjkoehler.com/2009/09/12/gando-here-we-go-again/#comment-345755
Everything I wrote there stands.
BTW, I was out with a Chinese friend (mainland) the other night. I asked about what she thinks about what Koreans say about North China, without elaborating. She said she is from North China and the Koreans are just making things up, and Chinese people think what they say is ridiculous. I think so too.
Why not claim LA, Englewood NJ and Hawaii too?
Korea is essentially a peninsula inhabited by a tribe that has also historically established emigrant settlements to various other places, including China, Japan, Hawaii, LA, etc. Some Koreans have decided to make outlandish claims of soverignty in cases where historical documentation is not clear. It is one of those distortions of history for which Koreans famously blame the Japanese. It is posturing at best and a naked land grab at best. Few people are concerned about this given the general reputation Korea has abroad as an insignificant mouse of a country populated by emotionally immature mental dwarfs.
The real job of Korean patriots is to disprove this sterotype by encouraging mature attitudes and behavior. An overhaul of the
brainwashingeducation system and would be a good start to overturn this tendency to distort history.“BTW, I was out with a Chinese friend (mainland) the other night. I asked about what she thinks about what Koreans say about North China, without elaborating. She said she is from North China and the Koreans are just making things up, and Chinese people think what they say is ridiculous. I think so too.”
So without “elaborating” you ask your Chinese friend what she thinks about Koreans claiming Northern China… wow.. doing your little bit to inflame the situation (to rile up the Chinese) much? What she’s going to say when you ask her what she thinks about Koreans claiming part of China as Korea? Why didn’t you also ask her what she thinks about Koreans claiming Confucius as a Korean, while you’re at it?
Some NGO’s claiming Gando, is not exactly the same thing as Korean government endorsing Dokdo and Japanese government endorsing Takeshima, so don’t you and 2ch friends try to use this to further your Takeshima cause.
The article on Korea Times spoke of “Maps produced in the 16th century and 1910 have supported Korea’s case on Gando, clearly defining the area as part of the Korean territory”, however I wonder how Gandoists are able to explain the Korean maps shown on Wiki, which clearly didn’t include “Gando” as Korean territory?
I guess it’s also not the same as the Korean govt. occupying Dokdo despite the fact that it had no credible historical claim on it, right?
Correct. As for Dokdo, Koreans have it. As for Gando, the Gandoists may or may not have a case, but it doesn’t matter because Korea taking over Gando is a zero possibility and everyone knows that. It’s just fantasy. The ethnic Koreans that are loyal to Bejing (they think of themselves as Chinese) that live in those areas will never support any real action to claim the land by South Korea, nor any Koreans in South Korea who have half a brain would back any actions that will piss off the Chinese and the Russians at the same time. Unlike Japan, they buy a lot of South Korean products. But you wish though. The enemy of your enemy is your friend, right?
I wouldn’t get your hopes up that Koreans will shoot themselves in the foot, especially considering how South Korean government acts when Chinese illegal fishing ships can fish rampantly in Korean waters without repercussions, nor when thousands of Chinese can riot in Seoul, beating up Koreans, without any repercussions, not even a nary of a protest.
Juchechosunmanse,
A Korean historian looks at maps and sees all kinds of amazing things. I have not studied ‘gando maps’ but in the case of Dokdo I have seen dozens that they say defines Dokdo as part of Korean territory, when in reality it doesn’t show that at all.
cm,
Koreans always back down when the Chinese get annoyed. It’s 사대주의. Nor is what Koreans do always about territory – for example, there is the East Sea issue. No, what is interesting to me is the psychology (ok, pathology) of the people that are doing this.
I think Gando is a red herring to these particular Korean nationalists. Their real goal is to protect Koguryo.
Korean nationalists? I just logged into wikipedia to see what they are saying about Koguryo in English and found you are one of the main Korean activists on that page. You friends with ‘wikimachine’?
Review my specific changes. I’m the one that keeps erasing “Korean kingdom” from the first line (I replace it with simply “ancient” kingdom) and I’m the one who deletes references to said kingdom as “empire.”
Do a little due diligence before you speak. You’ll look more competent.
Heh. Foolish gaijin.
(emphasis added).
Bollocks. Their main goal is the same as the Chinese – to commit the anachronism of assimilating and subordinating Koguryo to their own respective myth of national origins. Just the obverse of the same bogus binary dialectic.
Bravo, Sperwer! Take a bow. Your cheque is in the virtual mail.
I refuse to take this issue seriously until someone cuts his own fingers off and/or slaughters several birds in protest. Or at least makes a shitty music video about magical seagulls or something.
Granfalloon, there is the flag eater munching on the Chinese flag.
http://www.occidentalism.org/?p=341
so what?
I prefer flag eating to setting oneself on fire – too little too late.
I think the Viennese school of performance art finds its home with the Korean the protesters. Beats Nancy Lang or whatever that girl’s name is, anytime- I rather like it, as long as they don’t kill some innocent animal.
I thought you hadn’t heard of 백두산 dispute, yet the picture you linked to show the guy with 백두산 around his head. Doesn’t matter-you’ll say something like, yes you thought I’d meant the naming dispute, or something vague.
Mizar5:
Thanks, I assume that it’s a virtual check too, unless you’ve mastered the technology of dematerializing and reintegrating a paper bank check so that it’s still a negotiable instrument (those damned fax copies just don’t seem to cut it with the Bank, and I can’t get Frank Abagnale to help me).
Good old Frank. I met him once – or was that an imposter? Checks are so yesterday. Trust me, promisory notes in street name, rather than bearer bonds are the way to go. A Mizar IOU is nearly as valuable as a share of Fannie Mae.
I once had USD 680 Million in bearer bonds in my possession for a weekend after collecting them in Philadelphia from an Ivan Boesky takeover type operator on behalf of a client in exchange for what I don’t remember and returning well after midnight to New York to find that no one in the office had a clue about how to get into the safe. What a Walter Mitty weekend that was.
Sperwer, I love your references – Walter Mitty!
Actually Gando was Korean territory before these Japanese sold off to Chinese for rail project, and there was no Koreans at the time of deal so this deal should be re-negotiable. Anyway, this talk will be come again once North and South Korea unites. By then China have to give something to Koreans in return for keeping these territory. China doesn’t want war with Korea in middle of economic development.
Koreansentry,
If Gando was ever Korean territory, then it should be easy name the Korean laws, Korean administrators and governors that ran Gando. You won’t because you can’t because the area is and was administered by China because it is Chinese territory.
The deal was to get back Chinese land that was invaded by the Japanese military. When Koreans bring up the land they “lost” in the deal, they are basing their claim on Japanese military action against China.
Actually the “deal” in issue was the demarcation of the boundary between Joseon and Ching China in 1712 that, although agreed to by the Joseon government, was subsequently criticized by some dissident scholars, whose complaints got some actual “traction” on the ground as it were from Korean squatters who later settled in the area, in contravention of both Ching and Joseon law, in the mid to late 19th century.
Walter Mitty? I had to google that. Must be a baby boomer generation thing.
Sperwer, I think you misunderstand my original intent. I’m not excusing Korean or Chinese attempts to misconstrue Koguryo history to their own designs. What I am saying is that Gando may be an East Asian negotiation ploy. East Asians (Chinese, Japanese and Koreans) tend use red herrings when trying to leverage their negotiation strength/weakness. They do this A LOT in trade/economic negotiations. For example take the Chinese and their discussions regarding making the yuan the majority global currency. There is no way in the near term (or even the foreseeable future) one can consider the yuan as equal to the dollar as a global trade currency, but it’s a good way for the Chinese to stop U.S. harping about PRC artificial protection of the yuan from devaluation. Same thing with Japanese limiting U.S. agricultural imports due to some obscure fungus found in Florida oranges or Korea’s objections on U.S. beef because of microscopic cases of Mad Cow disease.
To me, it appears that several non-governmental Korean organizations have throw red herrings at the Chinese. There is no way on earth any sane person can consider that the Koreans have a chance with their claims on Gando. Some other Korean academics have made claims that the Jurchens who established the Chinese Ching (or Qing) Dynasty had Korean origins. In my mind, absolutely ludicrous. But look at the timing of these topics and you’ll see that they didn’t really sprout up until the Northeast Projects thoughts on Koguryo (as well as Gochosun and Parhae) became public. The tactic here appears to have some Chinese apologists (government and non-government) waste their time and energy on these red herrings while they virtually ignore Koguryo. I was once a moderator in a Chinese history centric forum (run by a group of pretty cool and moderate Singaporean ethnic Chinese) and saw this ploy done all the time. However, to be fair, the Koreans are, by far, not the only ones that engage in this kind of negotiations in the East Asian region. Not everyone in the world is versed in Western methods of organized debate and may argue their point in what appears to be very odd and even bizarre ways to someone raised in the Western tradition.
Another example of Chinese (and by extension East Asian) negotiation tactics:
http://chinablogspot.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/china_us_talk_money.jpg
Sperwer, I am talking about the retreat of Japanese forces from China, that part of Gando as defined by Japan (invasion 1907 to 1909). That was the only time it was not controlled by China. Koreans say that the Japanese “gave” Gando to China, and that is based on the fact that Japan military occupied Gando at that time. Without the Japanese occupation forces, there is nothing to give because it was controlled by China.
To put it another way, Korea didn’t lose any land that they actually had sovereignty over. So the idea that it was “lost” can only be based on the fact that they are using the Japanese invasion of China 1907-1909 as a proxy for their claim.
Shak: I know, but the theory to which you advert — which, I realize, is the theory advanced by wingnut Korean irredentists — is simply preposterous. The claim to Gando (in the expansive notion of that area that Japan propounded) that Japan asserted, and made good on through territorial occupation for a couple of years, was a Japanese claim, founded first on Japan’s status under the Protectorate as the minder of its Korean wards and later as the sovereign of its Koran subjects. Japan could compromise or surrender it; it’s doing so is without any significance to whatever claims are put forward on Korea’s behalf. Korea had nothing to lose in Japan’ surrender of its claim because it simply didn’t have a dog in the hunt; Korea itself wasn’t even in the hunt. Although, its case is not in the least persuasive, Korea (actually the predecessor Joseon polity) itself at least had standing in the 1712 deal to which it was a party.
WangKon:
Inguess you didn;t read carefully enough to note th publication date of 1939, making Thurber’s The Secret Life of Walter Mitty an artifact of the two generations preceding the Boomers, of whom I am at best a straggler.
And re your disquisition on East Asian negotiation tactics, I’m more than familiar with them, having been involved in business/legal negotiations all over East Asia starting in 1984, extensively so in Korea. The kind of blatantly disingenuous and dishonest nonsense you describe is all too prevalent and goes a long way to explaining the contempt in which many Western negotiators (justifiably in my few) often hold those of their East Asian counterparts who engage in it.
Sperwer, I 100% agree.
The Secret Life of Walter Mitty, a short story by Thurber was made into a movie starring Dannie Kaye in 1947, again, pre baby boom. A 20th Century Fox remake starring Mike Myers as Mitty is now under production.
# 38,
I did read a little deeper. There was a movie based on the novel in 1947. Pop culture references sometimes last a couple generations after origin… kids mimic their parents. Personally, I’m amazed at how many Y and Z gens like 80′s music and movies.
Myself, I remember Private Gomer Pyle and Green Acres because my older cousins liked to see reruns on cable.
Green Acres…ah, now that was show. Not as good as Get Smart and The Munsters, but there have been few shows that match those classics.
That’s because most stuff on television is crap now, except some original HBO dramas and some CSI episodes. I just watch History Channel, NatGeo, Discovery Channel, Science Channel, movies and sports.
#43
I got rid of cable TV altogether. One less bill to pay.
I asked a Chinese exchange student about Korean historical claims to Koguryo and the controversy surrounding the Northeast project last semester. Specifically I asked her how history was taught regarding Koguryo in Chinese schools. Her answer was quite simple:
“Our history books do not even show an independent Korea. All of Korea was considered Chinese. The Korean peninsula is shown on maps to have beeen an area occupied by ethnic minorities who were subjects of the Chinese Empire.”
In her eyes, the idea of Koguyro being Chinese or Korean is irrelevant if all of Korea was a vassal of China. Let’s not forget that Seoul’s name in Chinese is “漢城” (한성) or Hansung which means something like “Fortress of the Han Chinese”.
Korea now claiming part of China, from the long term Chinese view, would be something like Puerto Rico claiming part of Florida as its own.
I think the Kim clan in Korea should be dragged out and shot in the balls.
Including the Royal Kim family up north.
All of them are a disservice to the country as a whole.
They should be ashamed of distorting even history books to beautify their own ancestors, as Kim Boo Shik has already done.
Too late, however, and all Koreans can claim a Kim bloodline somewhere in their genetic makeups.
We can begin to right history, however, by exposing what Kim Yooshin and Kim Chunchoo had done, and rightfully include them on the same level as Lee Wanyong.
–wjk, the one who will say things no one dares say.
Here ye, oh, Koreans, here is the way it is.
Korea has modified its history. The end result is that
–The Chinese can claim Korea is China.
Japan has modified its history. The end result is that
–The Japanese fell from the sky.
We can clearly say that if you are going to lie, you should lie in a way that makes yourself look good, not bad. In Korea’s case, and the Samguk bullshit 1 and 2, I do not see how losing more than 2/3 of “Korealand” counts as ‘Unification’, along with a vague clinging to ‘Balhae/Gando’ with flimsy ties to Korea and especially a lack of written records to support it. Then, the ancestry argument kicks in and says, “what was our Shilla ancestors supposed to do? Are Koguryo or Baekjae even the same language or bloodline?”
Really? Then how do you claim that Balhae or Gando is even near your bloodline?
You might want to stop doing jaesa, if your ancestor is Kim. It’s a girl’s name and a unpopular one in my book.
KimSuBok,
I don’t know who you are, but let me address some of your thoughts:
Lelang and Taifang was not “all of Korea.” For half it’s history Lelang was independent of any Chinese dynasty and was run by a warlord independent of any Chinese kingdom.
The name Seoul is derived from the old Korean for “capital city” or Sorabol. 漢城 is probably a vestige of Taifang, which didn’t last very long because of “disturbances of the natives” per the Chinese histories.
Your friend needs to be reminded that Manchuria wasn’t Chinese until the Manchurians became Chinese via the Ching Dynasty (1644-1912).
I have in my possession several history books in the Chinese language, all published and bought in the PRC. Two of them are middle school textbooks. I was pretty sure that Chinese history regards Joseon and all other prior peninsular kingdoms, except Goguryo and Balhae, as non-Chinese. I just checked the two textbooks and two other general history books, and yep, save for the Mongol occupation, all of Korea was never considered Chinese. So are you lying or is your friend lying?
Sonagi,
How old are your PRC textbooks?
About 8-10 years old. The middle school textbooks were published around the time the anecdotal exchange student would have been in secondary school.
Well it could be before China’s Northeast Project was in full swing which did affect how China viewed the historiography of Manchuria.
It could be that a PRC kid’s history book has an entirely different view now.
A complete rewriting of Chinese-Korean history would be quite a task, even for the PRC. I have not seen any tangible evidence that any official or mainstream history books now include the Korean peninsula as part of China’s succession of dynasties and empires. Have you?
Well… I’d have to read Chinese fluently to determine that…
Dr. Song Chengyou makes a lot of sense…
http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2006/09/13/2006091361027.html
You must log in to post a comment.