본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

창과 방패의 딜레마: 1929년 제3회 IPR회의의 만주 논쟁

Dilemmas between Spear and Shield: Sino-Japanese controversy on Manchuria in 1929

박선영
중국사학회|2015.10|중국사연구 (CHUNGGUKSA YONGU; The Journal of Chinese Historical Rsearches)|제98호|pp. 145-190

0

조회

0

다운로드

8

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

21개조1929년제3회 IPR(Institute of Pacific Relations)만주논쟁동아시아의 벨기에아시아의 발칸松岡洋右徐淑希1929年IPR(太平洋问题调查会太平洋国交讨论会)满洲争论东亚 之比利时亚洲之巴尔干21个条

초록

This article analysis on Sino-Japanese controversy on Manchuria in 1929 use of conception with dilemmas between spear and shield, which was main discussion topic for the third IPR(Institute of Pacific Relations) conference. Arguments mainly discussed by China and Japan because of direct connection to Manchuria historically and emotionally. Discussion was clearly showed that how far difference they had between China, who argue about historical legacy in Manchuria, and Japan who consist rights and oder by modern international law. Arguments focus on 3 aspects: First, What factors can support Manchuria economic development; Second, How and whom to protect social order in Manchuria; Third, Japanese grounds for treaty and misuse of rights in Manchuria. Even though the IPR conference discussed those topics but no meet the point. Naturally Sino-Japan had different solution for Manchuria problem although both countries agree to the idea that making of compromise committee to solve the problem. However China ask Japan to declare 21 demands abolition as a precondition but Japan couldn't buy the idea. The spear can penetrated any shield and the shield can block up any spear which was situation China and Japan had, their arguments never find point of agreement, on the other hand still trying to make peaceful mood continuously. Although they clearly recognized that no way to solve the Manchuria problem in this way still using this kind of dilemma to discussed at the IPR conference internationally and broaden their own benefits. Western countries thought Manchuria not just belong to China and Japan, it can be for world’s Manchuria, through open door policy trying to make Manchuria belong to everybody’s. Controversy of Manchuria was happened not just only time for the third IPR conference, it can be show up whenever Manchuria’s strategic and economic position stand. Dilemma of Manchuria will be ruminated historical meaning when the importance still live in geopolitically, geoeconomically and strategically.

Abstract

This article analysis on Sino-Japanese controversy on Manchuria in 1929 use of conception with dilemmas between spear and shield, which was main discussion topic for the third IPR(Institute of Pacific Relations) conference. Arguments mainly discussed by China and Japan because of direct connection to Manchuria historically and emotionally. Discussion was clearly showed that how far difference they had between China, who argue about historical legacy in Manchuria, and Japan who consist rights and oder by modern international law. Arguments focus on 3 aspects: First, What factors can support Manchuria economic development; Second, How and whom to protect social order in Manchuria; Third, Japanese grounds for treaty and misuse of rights in Manchuria. Even though the IPR conference discussed those topics but no meet the point. Naturally Sino-Japan had different solution for Manchuria problem although both countries agree to the idea that making of compromise committee to solve the problem. However China ask Japan to declare 21 demands abolition as a precondition but Japan couldn't buy the idea. The spear can penetrated any shield and the shield can block up any spear which was situation China and Japan had, their arguments never find point of agreement, on the other hand still trying to make peaceful mood continuously. Although they clearly recognized that no way to solve the Manchuria problem in this way still using this kind of dilemma to discussed at the IPR conference internationally and broaden their own benefits. Western countries thought Manchuria not just belong to China and Japan, it can be for world’s Manchuria, through open door policy trying to make Manchuria belong to everybody’s. Controversy of Manchuria was happened not just only time for the third IPR conference, it can be show up whenever Manchuria’s strategic and economic position stand. Dilemma of Manchuria will be ruminated historical meaning when the importance still live in geopolitically, geoeconomically and strategically.

참고문헌 (58)

  1. "吉林太平洋國交討論會吉林硏究會ノ硏究問題資料", 機密第286号 1929年8月15日, ~ (1929)
  2. "在局子街副領事田中作 外務大臣男爵幣原喜重郎殿", B02030786200, ~
  3. C. H. Corey, "1929年12月16日オレゴンーチャナル紙所報", B-10-1-0-3_005, ~
  4. Frank C. Atherton, "ホノルルロータリー俱樂部ニ於ケル演說大要", B-10-1-0-3_005, ~
  5. George H. Blackesles, "1929年12月7日Foreign Policy Association主催ノ講演會ニ於ケル演說", B-10-1-0-3_005, ~
  6. Hon. Newton W. Rowell, "新聞記者ニ關スル感想談", B-10-1-0-3_005, ~
  7. H. F. Angus, "1930年1月17日晩香坡商業會議所外國貿易部午餐會席上ニ於ケル講演要領", B-10-1-0-3_005, ~
  8. IPR “Manchuria” Report of Round Table, No. 2, "Rt. Hon. Viscount Lord Hailsham", ~, pp.B10070179900 (1929)
  9. IPR “Manchuria” Report of Round Table, No. 3, "Newton W. Rowell", ~, pp.B10070179900 (1929)
  10. IPR Report of Round Table, No. 1, "James. G.McDonald", ~, pp.B10070179900 (1929)
  11. R. Greene 발언, IPR Report of Round Table, No. 1, "James. G. McDonald", ~, pp.B10070179900 (1929)
  12. IPR “Manchuria”(Rockefeller) Report of Round Table, No. 2, "Viscount Lord Hailsham", ~, pp.B10070179900 (1929)
  13. IPR Report of Round Table, No. 2, "Viscount Lord Hailsham", ~, pp.B10070179900 (1929)
  14. IPR “Manchuria” Report of Round Table, No. 3, "Newton W. Rowell", ~, pp.B10070179900 (1929)
  15. IPR “Manchuria” Report of Round Table, No. 1, 第三回太平洋問題調査会大会支那問題円卓会議議事録｣其ノ二／(満州問題), "James. G. McDonald", ~, pp.B10070179900 (1929)
  16. IPR “Manchuria” Report of Round Table, No. 3, "Newton W. Rowell", ~, pp.B10070179900 (1929)
  17. IPR "Manchuria" Report of Round Table, No. 4, "Roland Boyden", B10070179900, ~ (1929)
  18. IPR "Manchuria" Report of Joint Meeting Round Table, No. 2, "Rt. Hon, Viscount Lord Hailsham", ~, pp.B10070179900 (1929)
  19. IPR “Manchuria” Report of Round Table, No. 1, "McDonald", ~, pp.B10070179900 (1929)
  20. IPR "Manchuria" Report of Round Table, No. 2, "Viscount Lord Hailsham", ~, pp.B10070179900 (1929)
  21. IPR “Manchuria” Report of Round Table, No. 1, "James. G. McDonald", ~, pp.B10070179900 (1929)
  22. IPR Report of Round Table, No. 4, "Roland Boyden", ~, pp.B10070179900 (1929)
  23. IPR “Manchuria” Report of Round Table, No. 1, "James. G. McDonald", ~, pp.B10070179900 (1929)
  24. IPR “Manchuria” Report of Round Table, No. 1, , ~, pp.B10070179900 (1929)
  25. Norman F. Coleman, "1929年12月8日モーニング　オレゴニン紙所報", B-10-1-0-3_005, ~
  26. R. W. Boyden, "1929年12月3日沙港商業會議所主催ノ午餐會ニ於ケル演說", B-10-1-0-3_005, ~
  27. Walter Young, "雜誌Pacific Affairs 1930年3月號所載論文要譯", B-10-1-0-3_005, ~
  28. William M. Birks, "1929年11月20日晩香坡商業會議所午餐會席上ニ於ケル講演要領", B-10-1-0-3_005, ~
  29. William W. Ortor, "オプザーバー紙ヘノ寄稿文", B-10-1-0-3_005, ~
  30. James. G. McDonald, "영국의 Webster 발언, IPR, The Manchurias Question, Round Table, No.1", B10070179900, ~ (1929)
  31. Yosuke Matsuoka, "Reply to Prof. Shuhsi-Hsu's Criticisms and Observations", Third Biennial Conference Institute of Pacific Relations (1929)
  32. Yosuke Matsuoka, "An Address on Manchuria Its Past and Present", Third Biennial Conference Institute of Pacific Relations (1929)
  33. 余日章, "客年12月13日蕪湖支那基督敎靑年會ニ於ケル報告演說", B-10-1-0-3_005, ~
  34. 閻寶衡, "1929年12月24日奉天大南關靑年會館ニ於ケル報告演說", B-10-1-0-3_005, ~
  35. 外務省情報部, "著書‘太平洋問題’送付ノ件", 太平洋問題調査会関係一件 第五巻, B -10-1-0-3_005, ~
  36. 長野朗, "｢太平洋會議ト滿蒙問題｣ト題スル論文要領", 國際知識 1929年12月號所載, B-10-1-0-3_005, ~
  37. 陳衡哲, "1929年12月1日北平大學ニ於ケル新東北學會主催ノ講演會ニ於ケル演說要領, 外務省情報部, ｢太平洋問題調査會第3回大會出席代表ノ同會議ニ關スル演說並感想s」", B-10-1-0-3_005, ~ (1930)
  38. 高石眞五郞, "｢太平洋會議ニ例シテ｣ト題スル論文要領", 東京日日新聞, B-10-1-0-3_005, ~ (1929)
  39. 徐淑希, "支那社會政治學會ニ於ケル報告演說", B-10-1-0-3_005, ~
  40. 蠟山政道, "｢太平洋會議ト滿洲問題｣ト題スル論文要領", 滿蒙, B-10-1-0-3_005, ~ (1930)
  41. 蠟山政道, "滿洲問題", 太平洋問題: 1929年京都會議 (1930), 太平洋問題調査會
  42. 頭本元貞, "京都會議の效果如何", 外交時報, 52(4)통권 : 601 (1929)
  43. 劉馭萬, "最近太平洋問題(上卷)" (1932), 中國太平洋國際學會出版
  44. 美國代表楊華德在大阪之演詞, "近代中国史料从刊续编 第50 辑" (1978), 文海出版社
  45. 新渡戶稻造, "會議の所感", 太平洋問題: 1929年京都會議 (1930), 太平洋問題調査會
  46. 長野朗, "太平洋會議と支那問題", 外交時報, 52(598) (1929)
  47. 齊藤惣一, "太平洋問題調査會の成立と第三回大會の意義", 外交時報, 52(4)통권 : 597 (1929)
  48. 安富正造, "太平洋會議如是我觀", 外交時報, 52(4)통권 : 601 (1929)
  49. 松原一雄, "太平洋會議に就ての所感", 外交時報, 52(4)통권 : 601 (1929)
  50. 半澤玉城, "日滿關係と太平洋會議", 外交時報, 52(4)통권 : 596 (1929)
  51. 副島道正, "再び太平洋會議に就て", 外交時報, 52(4)통권 : 599 (1929)
  52. 小川節, "太平洋會議に於ける日支論爭", 外交時報, 52(4)통권 : 600 (1929)
  53. 松岡洋右, "太平洋問題調査會就我國民望", 外交時報, 59(3)통권 : 639 (1931)
  54. J. B. Condliffe, "Problems of the Pacific 1929" (1969), Greenwood press
  55. Paul F. Hooper, "Remembering the Institute of Pacific Relations: The Memoirs of William L. Holland" (1995), Ryukei Shyosha Publishing Company
  56. 片桐庸夫, "太平洋問題調査會の硏究" (2003), 慶應義塾大學出版會
  57. 张静, "中国知识界与第三届太平洋国交讨论会", 近代史研究, 1 (2004)
  58. 王美平, "太平洋国际学会与东北问题", 近代史研究, 2 (2008)

관련 논문AI추천

만주를 둘러싼 일본과 미국의 대립에 관한 연구 ―남만주철도 문제를 중심으로―서정기한국일본문화학회 · 日本文化學報2025 · 제106호A study on the origins of territorial disputes in Northeast Asia and a nationalistic approach이진우한국세계지역학회 · 세계지역연구논총2021 · 제39권 제4호미국의 중국 딜레마와 일본의 정상국가화최용, 정일영통일연구원 · 통일연구2015 · 제19권 제2호중･일 경쟁구조의 고착화와 한국의 동북아 정책김향해한국국방연구원 · 국방정책연구2009 · 제25권 제1호중국의 대일본 외교관계 변화 연구곽덕환중국연구소 · 중국연구2014 · 제60권 탈냉전시대 한중일 3국의 미래전략과 역사논쟁이신철수선사학회 · 사림2013 · 제45호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (11건)

唐 玄宗(712-756) 初期의 北伐과 突厥의 對應정재훈pp. 1-38遼代 皇位 繼承을 둘러싼權力鬪爭의 樣相나영남pp. 39-66北宋代 貢瓷에 대한 인식과定窯와 汝窯의 성격김윤정pp. 67-93戰爭與財政 ‐元世祖忽必烈時期的理財官僚-레이 지아셩pp. 95-122论清末的审判监督机制張德美pp. 123-144
원문 보기