미국 외교정책이 독일과 일본의전후 주변국 정책에 미친 영향: 전후 배상책임에 대한 인식을 중심으로

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to find out the reasons why Germany and Japan, the war criminals of World War II, differ in historical perceptions of post-war treatment and liability in US foreign policy. The United States, a hegemonic power that had an absolute influence in the international community after the war, tried to prevent the spread of communism by the Soviet Union in Asia during the Cold War and to spread liberal democracy. The US and the Allies imposed strict and fair post-war treatment and liability on Germany. Through this, they intended to prevent the recurrence of World War and to prevent Germany from being absorbed into Soviet communism. It also hoped for integration with Europe, where democratic ideology was established. On the other hand, the Allies, except the United States, were less interested in Japan's post-war treatment, which did not cause direct damage to Europe. Therefore, Japan's war crimes trial and post-war treatment had no choice but to be handled by the United States alone. Rather than fair punishment for crimes, the U.S. focused on the U.S. national interests to check the Soviet Union and spread democracy in Asia at a low cost using Japan's economic and military infrastructure in this region. In addition, the pro-Japanese propensity of General MacArthur, the Allied Commander-in-Chief who led Japan's war crimes trial, was relalted with generous liability for compensation. As a central country and leader of the European Union, Germany has overcome its past as a war criminal state and has been integrated into Europe. However, despite being an economic powerhouse, Japan has not been recognized as a leader by its Asian neighbors and is still in conflict with Asian countries. This study confirms that differences in post-war attitudes between Germany and Japan is considerably due to US treatments.