몽골과 중국의 다리강가 領有權 분쟁
The Territorial Dispute over Dariganga Area between Mongolia and China
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study considers the territorial dispute over the Dariganga area between Mongolia and China that began after Mongolia declared its independence in 1911. Upon the declaration of independence, the regional domains of the Bogd government was limited to four, while all the other Mongolian settlements, including the frontiers of Khovd and Inner Mongolia, were still under the rule of the Qing Dynasty. Thus, as the Qing Dynasty collapsed in February 1912, with the exception of four Khalkha Aimags, the status of the Mongolian settlements that had been ruled by the Qing Dynasty remained ambiguous. Therefore, after the declaration of independence, the most important challenge that lay ahead for the Bogd government was to integrate the whole territory of the Mongolian settlements and then to make the Qing Dynasty (later the Republic of China) and the international community recognize the independence of Mongolia. To this end, the Bogd government had integrated the whole area of Western Mongolia by the end of August, 1911, and sent a letter recommending Inner Mongolia to revert voluntarily. While trying to invalidate the independence of Mongolia in an effort to succeed to the territory of the Qing Dynasty,the Beijing government also tried to include Mongolian settlements,especially Inner Mongolia, in its territory through appeasement, preference, and force. The intervention of Russia and Japan in Inner Mongolia made the issue more complicated. Russia and Japan signed agreements in 1907and 1910, respectively, stating that Outer Mongolia and northern Manchuria belonged to the Russian sphere of influence, and the Korean Peninsula and southern Manchuria to the Japanese sphere of influence. On July 8, 1912, the two countries signed the third Russo-Japanese agreement to expand their interests in Inner Mongolia and to mediate the issue. Both agreed to divide Inner Mongolia based upon the longitude at which Beijing was situated, establishing the area east of Inner Mongolia as the Japanese sphere of influence and the area west of Inner Mongolia as the Russian sphere of influence. Thus, the Mongolian territorial dispute appeared in a complicated manner by Russia and Japan in addition to the Bogd government and the Beijing government. In this situation, Mongolian nobles from many areas including Inner Mongolia were in awkward positions, and some sought to find a breakthrough, leaning on the power of foreign countries. To join in the Bogd government would be right in upholding a cause, but it would be difficult to turn their back on the Beijing government due to the close geographical location and practical interests. In fact, the responses of the Mongolian nobles to the request of reverting to the Bogd government varied. There were various types of responses: people who actively participated in the national integration initiated by the Bogd government from the beginning;people who sent someone to check on the course of events in the Bogd government; people who rejected the Bogd government’s request to revert; people who drifted between the Bogd government and the Beijing government; and people who sought a way out by relying on the foreign powers. One typical case is the Dariganga area located on the border of Mongolia. There had been an imperial pasture under the rule of the Qing Dynasty. Dariganga sum of Sukhbaatar Aimag, the southeastern part of today’s Mongolia, is relevant to this place. From ancient times,this place has been considered as a commercial and military hub due to the abundance of water and grass, and the narrowest width of desert among the Gobi areas between Inner Mongolia and Outer Mongolia. The imperial pasture, highly valued by the Qing Dynasty, had been managed by Chakhar tu-t’tung living in Zhangjiakou. While it was geographically located in Khalkha, the pasture of Dariganga was administratively under Chakhar tu-t’tung’s contol. Because of this, the status and affiliation of Dariganga had become ambiguous since the collapse of the Qing Dynasty and the establishment of the Bogd government. When neither the influence of the Bogd government nor the concern of the Beijing government could afford to reach the Dariganga area, its local residents split. Some tried to revert to the Bogd government while others tried to find a breakthrough in Zhangjiakou, where the Bogd government and the Beijing government had a territorial dispute that continued until 1962. Dariganga is the representative place where a conflict over sovereignty between Mongolia and China occurred in the modern and contemporary periods. The reason why that it took several decades for Mongolia and China to insist upon their own sovereignty over this area and eventually resolve the conflict is attributed not only to the superficial structure of the unique governance of the Dariganga pasture, but also to the historically special relationship between the two sides and the role of Russia (later the Soviet Union) as a moderator between the two sides. Thus, the territorial dispute over the Dariganga pasture is a significant challenge to understand the nature of the relationship between Mongolia and China. In fact, the issue of Dariganga reflects in some ways the attempt of China to have Mongolia under its sovereignty and the reactive nature of Mongolia in response, which has continued from 1911 until today, rather than just a territorial dispute. This study thus sought to understand the nature of the special relationship between Mongolia and China in the modern and contemporary periods, to explore the successive Chinese governments’ will of territorial expansion and its case, and to look for clues to the historical backgrounds of the “Chinese Threat” that recently proliferated among Mongolians. This study considered the territorial dispute over the reversion of the Dariganga pasture between Mongolia and China that had occurred since Mongolia’s declaration of independence in 1911, its conclusion, and the historical meanings of a series of consequences. Accordingly, this study covers the entire process beginning from the formation of the Dariganga pasture under the Qing Dynasty to the settlement of the territorial dispute over this place between Mongolia and China in 1962.
Abstract
This study considers the territorial dispute over the Dariganga area between Mongolia and China that began after Mongolia declared its independence in 1911. Upon the declaration of independence, the regional domains of the Bogd government was limited to four, while all the other Mongolian settlements, including the frontiers of Khovd and Inner Mongolia, were still under the rule of the Qing Dynasty. Thus, as the Qing Dynasty collapsed in February 1912, with the exception of four Khalkha Aimags, the status of the Mongolian settlements that had been ruled by the Qing Dynasty remained ambiguous. Therefore, after the declaration of independence, the most important challenge that lay ahead for the Bogd government was to integrate the whole territory of the Mongolian settlements and then to make the Qing Dynasty (later the Republic of China) and the international community recognize the independence of Mongolia. To this end, the Bogd government had integrated the whole area of Western Mongolia by the end of August, 1911, and sent a letter recommending Inner Mongolia to revert voluntarily. While trying to invalidate the independence of Mongolia in an effort to succeed to the territory of the Qing Dynasty,the Beijing government also tried to include Mongolian settlements,especially Inner Mongolia, in its territory through appeasement, preference, and force. The intervention of Russia and Japan in Inner Mongolia made the issue more complicated. Russia and Japan signed agreements in 1907and 1910, respectively, stating that Outer Mongolia and northern Manchuria belonged to the Russian sphere of influence, and the Korean Peninsula and southern Manchuria to the Japanese sphere of influence. On July 8, 1912, the two countries signed the third Russo-Japanese agreement to expand their interests in Inner Mongolia and to mediate the issue. Both agreed to divide Inner Mongolia based upon the longitude at which Beijing was situated, establishing the area east of Inner Mongolia as the Japanese sphere of influence and the area west of Inner Mongolia as the Russian sphere of influence. Thus, the Mongolian territorial dispute appeared in a complicated manner by Russia and Japan in addition to the Bogd government and the Beijing government. In this situation, Mongolian nobles from many areas including Inner Mongolia were in awkward positions, and some sought to find a breakthrough, leaning on the power of foreign countries. To join in the Bogd government would be right in upholding a cause, but it would be difficult to turn their back on the Beijing government due to the close geographical location and practical interests. In fact, the responses of the Mongolian nobles to the request of reverting to the Bogd government varied. There were various types of responses: people who actively participated in the national integration initiated by the Bogd government from the beginning;people who sent someone to check on the course of events in the Bogd government; people who rejected the Bogd government’s request to revert; people who drifted between the Bogd government and the Beijing government; and people who sought a way out by relying on the foreign powers. One typical case is the Dariganga area located on the border of Mongolia. There had been an imperial pasture under the rule of the Qing Dynasty. Dariganga sum of Sukhbaatar Aimag, the southeastern part of today’s Mongolia, is relevant to this place. From ancient times,this place has been considered as a commercial and military hub due to the abundance of water and grass, and the narrowest width of desert among the Gobi areas between Inner Mongolia and Outer Mongolia. The imperial pasture, highly valued by the Qing Dynasty, had been managed by Chakhar tu-t’tung living in Zhangjiakou. While it was geographically located in Khalkha, the pasture of Dariganga was administratively under Chakhar tu-t’tung’s contol. Because of this, the status and affiliation of Dariganga had become ambiguous since the collapse of the Qing Dynasty and the establishment of the Bogd government. When neither the influence of the Bogd government nor the concern of the Beijing government could afford to reach the Dariganga area, its local residents split. Some tried to revert to the Bogd government while others tried to find a breakthrough in Zhangjiakou, where the Bogd government and the Beijing government had a territorial dispute that continued until 1962. Dariganga is the representative place where a conflict over sovereignty between Mongolia and China occurred in the modern and contemporary periods. The reason why that it took several decades for Mongolia and China to insist upon their own sovereignty over this area and eventually resolve the conflict is attributed not only to the superficial structure of the unique governance of the Dariganga pasture, but also to the historically special relationship between the two sides and the role of Russia (later the Soviet Union) as a moderator between the two sides. Thus, the territorial dispute over the Dariganga pasture is a significant challenge to understand the nature of the relationship between Mongolia and China. In fact, the issue of Dariganga reflects in some ways the attempt of China to have Mongolia under its sovereignty and the reactive nature of Mongolia in response, which has continued from 1911 until today, rather than just a territorial dispute. This study thus sought to understand the nature of the special relationship between Mongolia and China in the modern and contemporary periods, to explore the successive Chinese governments’ will of territorial expansion and its case, and to look for clues to the historical backgrounds of the “Chinese Threat” that recently proliferated among Mongolians. This study considered the territorial dispute over the reversion of the Dariganga pasture between Mongolia and China that had occurred since Mongolia’s declaration of independence in 1911, its conclusion, and the historical meanings of a series of consequences. Accordingly, this study covers the entire process beginning from the formation of the Dariganga pasture under the Qing Dynasty to the settlement of the territorial dispute over this place between Mongolia and China in 1962.
참고문헌 (45)
- "口北三廳志" (1992), 민속원
- 民國54, "蒙古遊牧記", 文海出版社本
- "人民日報", 1962. 12. 27(1판), 1963. 3. 26(3판), ~ (1962)
- "中俄邊界條約集" (1973), 商務印書館
- "中華人民共和國對外關係文件集 제9집" (1962), 世界知識出版社
- "清史稿", 中華書局
- "恰克圖中俄蒙協約案 第2冊", 中央硏究院 近代史硏究所 所藏, ~
- "欽定外藩蒙古回部王公表傳", 文淵閣 四庫全書 內聯網版, ~
- 유원수, "잠차라노의 다리강가(Dariγanγ-a)", 한몽공동학술연구, 3 (1994)
- 呂一燃, "北洋政府時期的蒙古地區歷史資料" (1999), 黑龍江敎育出版社
- 陳春華, "俄國外交文書選譯關于蒙古問題" (1991), 黑龍江敎育出版社
- Batsaikhan, O, "Khyatad, Oros, Mongol gurvan ulsyn 1915 ony Khiagtyn geree" (1999), Mongol ulsyn ündesni arkhivyn gazar, Shinjlekh ukhaany akademi tüükhiin khüreelen
- Dendev, L, "Mongolyn tvch tüükh , Mongol bichgees khörvüülj, orshil bichij, tailbar nersiin khelkhee khiisen Doktor S. Chuluun" (2006), Mongol ulsyn ikh surguul’
- Emkhtgesen B. Sum’yaa, "Gerel Süüder: Yu. Tsedenbal khuviin temdeglelees" (1992), MAKhN-yn töv khoroony dergedekh erdem shinjilgeenii töv
- "Sbornik dogovorov i drugikh dokumenrov, po istorii mejdunarodnykh otnoshenii na dal’nem vostoke(1842-1925)" (1927), Izdanie instituta vostokovedeniia
- Kazakevich, V. A, "Poezdka v Darigangu" (1930), Akademi NAUK SSSR
- Magsarjav, N, "Mongol ulsyn shin tüükh , Mongoloos kiril bichigt bulgasan O. Batsaikhan, Z. Lonjid" (1994), Mongol ulsyn shinjlekh ukhaany akademi, tüükhiin khüreelen, Mongol ulsyn zasgiin gazryn arkhiv
- Natsagdorj(Redaktorlov), Sh, "Mongol ardyn juramt tsergiin durtgaluud Ded Devter" (1985), Ulsyn khevleliin gazar
- Sudlan khevlüülsen akad, "V. Kotvichiin khuviin arkhivaas oldson mongolyn tüükhend kholbogdokh zarim bichig" (1972), Shinjlekh ukhaany akademiin khevlel
- 손현숙, "외몽고에 관한 3국 협정의 분석", 부산여대사학, 2 (1984)
- 오 바트사이한, "중국 역사학자들의 몽골사 왜곡에 대하여, In 한국사 속의 고구려의 위상" (2004), 고구려연구재단
- 이평래, "민족해방운동기 다리강가 지역의 동향", 한몽공동학술연구, 3 (1994)
- 이평래, "1911년 몽골 독립과 민족 통합 운동의 초기 과정", 동양사학연구, (104), pp.155~190 (2008), 동양사학회
- 이평래, "1912-1913년 복드 정부의 내몽골 통합 시도와 좌절", 중앙아시아연구, 14, pp.55~84 (2009), 중앙아시아학회
- 이평래, "1911년 몽골 독립과 하이산", 대동문화연구, (75), pp.201~234 (2011), 대동문화연구원
- 藍美華, "澤登巴爾時期外蒙與中共的關係(1952-1984)" (2000), 蒙藏委員會
- 烏云畢力格, "蒙古族通史 第4卷" (2002), 內蒙古大學出版社
- 王泰平, "中華人民共和國外交史 第2卷" (1957), 世界知識出版社
- ウルゲダイ·タイブン, "ボグド·ハン政府軍の一九一三年の內モンゴルへの軍事行動についての考察", 蒙古史硏究, 7 (2003)
- 袁森坡, "康雍乾經營與開發北疆" (1991), 中國社會科學出版社
- 李毓澍, "論內外蒙分界問題, In 蒙事論叢" (1990), 里仁書局
- 張時祖, "祖國的陸界" (1956), 新知識出版社
- 周學軍, "達里岡愛牧場被外蒙古占領時間考辨", 中國邊疆史地硏究, 10(4) (2000)
- Batsaikhan, O, "Mongol ündesten büren erkht uls bolokh zamd (1911-1946)" (2005), Mongol ulsyn shinjlekh ukhaany akademi, Olon ulsyn sudlalynkhüreelen
- Haggard, M. T, "Mongolia: The First Communist State in Asia, In The Communist Revolution in Asia: Tactics, Goals and Achievements" (1969), Prenyice-Hall Inc
- Hyer, Paul, "The Role of Inner Mongolia in the independence movement", Proceedings of the first North American conference on mongol studies (1979), West Washington University
- Jamsran, L, "Dar’gangyn süreg khoshuu" (1994), Erdem
- Jadamba Sh, "Mongol tsergiin tüükhiin tovchoon(1911 onoos 1900- eed on) Ded Devter" (1996), Mongol ulsyn batlaan khamgaalakh yamy erdem shinjilgeenii khüreelen
- "Rossiia, Kitai i Mongoliia: vmeste navstrechu vyzovam sovremennosti"[URL]
- Khaisandai, L, "Issues in Ensuring Mongolia’s economic security and cooperation on the Rise of China", 2011 NAHF-MAS Forum (2011), Globalization and Korea-Mongolia Cooperation
- Magsarjav, N, "Mongol ulsyn shin tüükh , Mongoloos kiril bichigt bulgasan O. Batsaikhan, Z. Lonjid", pp.1994, Mongol ulsyn shinjlekh ukhaany akademi, Tüükhiin Khüreelen
- Onon, Urgunge, "Asia’s first modern revolution" (1989), E. J. Brill
- Rupen, Robert, "How Mongolia is Ruled, A Political History of the Mongolian People’s Republic 1900-1978" (1979), Hoover Institution Press
- Shirendev, B, "Mongol ardyn khuv’sgalyn tüükh" (1969), Ulsyn khevleliin gazar
- Sodnomdash, Sh, "Dar’ganga nutgiin domog" (1993), Baruun-Urt
