Executive Summary
This report provides an objective examination of the forced labor issue, one of the most significant points of contention in current Japan-South Korea relations, from historical and international legal perspectives. It particularly analyzes the divergence between South Korea’s claims regarding the “illegality of Japanese colonial rule” and historical facts.
1. Overview of the National Mobilization Ordinance
1.1 Background of Enactment
- Date of Enactment: July 8, 1939
- Enacted by: Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe
- Legal Basis: Imperial Ordinance supplementing the National Mobilization Law
1.2 System Details
- Compulsory conscription system for securing labor in strategic defense industries
- Exemptions only for physically or intellectually disabled persons
- Implementing Agency: Ministry of Health and Welfare
- Peak conscription numbers: 1.6 million (new) + 4.5 million (reclassification of existing workers)
1.3 Termination of the System
- March 1945: Replaced by the National Labor Mobilization Ordinance
- December 20, 1945: Abolished by GHQ (General Headquarters of the Allied Powers)
2. Structure of the Forced Labor Issue
2.1 Basic Positions of Japan and South Korea
Japanese Position
- “Completely and finally resolved” by the 1965 Agreement on the Settlement of Problems concerning Property and Claims
- Recognition that all claims issues, including individual claims, have been resolved
South Korean Position
- October 30, 2018: South Korean Supreme Court orders Japanese companies to pay compensation
- Position that individual claims have not been extinguished
- Argues that “anti-humanitarian illegal acts” require separate consideration
2.2 Negotiation Process of the 1965 Agreement
Critical Historical Fact
- Japanese Proposal: Individual payments to victims
- South Korean Proposal: Lump-sum payment to the government (for economic development funds)
This negotiation history was kept from the South Korean public for many years and was not known domestically in South Korea until documents were disclosed in 2005.
2.3 South Korean Government’s Response
- Initially did not provide individual compensation for claims included in the agreement, using funds for economic development instead
- Paid only 300,000 won per person to deceased forced laborers
- After the 2005 document disclosure, criticism of the South Korean government of that time erupted within South Korea
3. Legality of the Japan-Korea Annexation under International Law
3.1 Conclusions of the 2001 Harvard University International Conference
Nature of the Conference
- Held at the strong initiative of the South Korean side
- South Korean side aimed to gain international recognition of the “illegality” of the Japan-Korea annexation
Views of International Law Scholars
- Professor J. Crawford (International Law), Cambridge University
- “It was common at the time for surrounding countries to incorporate countries that could not survive on their own from the perspective of international order”
- “The Japan-Korea Annexation Treaty was not illegal under international law”
- On the Issue of Coercion
- “The argument that it is illegal because it was coerced is post-World War I, and was not an issue at the time”
Conference Conclusion
- No international consensus was reached that the Japan-Korea annexation was “illegal”
3.2 Legal Character of the Japan-Korea Annexation Treaty
- Treaty in which the Korean Emperor ceded all sovereign rights of the Korean Empire to the Japanese Emperor
- Formal interstate treaty based on international law of the time
- Legally an “annexation,” not “colonization”
4. Examination of South Korea’s Claims of “Illegality”
4.1 Content of South Korean Claims
Assimilation Policies
- Implementation of Name Order (Sōshi-kaimei) (1939)
- However, Korean-style “surnames” and “ancestral seats” remained in family registers
- “Name changes” were only for those who wished (for a fee)
- Encouragement of Shinto shrine visits
- Encouragement of bowing toward the Imperial Palace
Language Policy
- Use of Japanese was strengthened from the late 1930s
- Legal enforcement of Japanese use in schools near the end of the occupation
- However, Korean was not completely prohibited throughout the entire 35-year period
4.2 Problems with Application of “Modern Human Rights Standards”
Ignoring Historical Context
- The concept of national self-determination was established after World War I
- Japan-Korea annexation (1910) predated the establishment of the concept of self-determination
- It was a common form of governance during the age of imperialism
Problem of Retroactive Application
- Questions about the validity of retroactively applying modern human rights concepts to the past
- Applying the same standard would make many state actions of that era “illegal”
Discrepancy with Actual Policy Content
- Name Order was not completely forced
- Korean language was not completely prohibited
- Contributions to modernization such as infrastructure development and expansion of the education system
5. Historical Status of the Korean Peninsula
5.1 Tributary Relationship with China
Korea under the Tributary System
- From around the 3rd century BCE (early Han Dynasty) to 1895, approximately 2,000 years as a Chinese tributary state
- Maintained a “suzerain (China) – vassal (Korea)” relationship
- Tributary-investiture relationship was an international order based on nominal lord-vassal relations
5.2 Sino-Japanese War and Korean Independence
1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki
- Japan forced China to recognize Korean independence
- Korea became a modern independent state for the first time
1897 Establishment of the Korean Empire
- Changed national title from Kingdom of Joseon to Korean Empire
- Transition from tributary state to independent state
Period as an Independent State
- From 1895 (or 1897) to the 1910 Japan-Korea annexation
- Only 10 to 13 years
5.3 Importance of Historical Context
History of Korean Peninsula Governance
- Approximately 2,000 years of Chinese rule: Treated as “tributary-investiture relations”
- 35 years of Japanese rule: Condemned as “colonial rule”
This double standard suggests that South Korea’s historical perception is based on political and emotional factors rather than objective facts.
6. Validity of the Term “Colonial Rule”
6.1 Comparison with Taiwan
Case of Taiwan
- Typical colonial economic structure
- Supply base for agricultural products to mainland Japan
- Clear structure of economic exploitation
Case of the Korean Peninsula
- Large-scale infrastructure investment (railways, ports, roads, etc.)
- Development and expansion of the education system
- Promotion of industrialization
- Different character from typical “colonial exploitation”
6.2 Characteristics of Japanese Governance Policy
- Development and integration policy rather than exploitation
- “Mainland Extension Policy”: Developed the Korean Peninsula as an extension of mainland Japan
- Economically, significant capital flow from Japan to Korea
7. Structural Analysis of the Issue
7.1 Essence of the Japan-South Korea Historical Perception Issue
Level of Legal and Historical Facts
- Legal annexation based on international law of the time
- Liberation from approximately 2,000 years of Chinese rule
- Japanese rule after only 10+ years of independence
Level of Political and Emotional Perception
- Retroactive application of modern human rights concepts
- Evaluation based on nationalistic values
- Historical interpretation against the background of anti-Japanese sentiment
7.2 Changes in Perception in South Korea
Changes in Government Interpretation
- 1965: “Substantive rights were also extinguished”
- 1995-2000: Changed interpretation to “Only diplomatic protection abandoned, individual claims remain”
- 2018: Supreme Court ruling that “Claims for damages for anti-humanitarian illegal acts are not included in the agreement”
Information Disclosure to Citizens
- From 1965 to 2005, details of the agreement were kept from citizens
- 2005 document disclosure revealed the negotiation process, leading to government criticism within South Korea
8. Conclusions
8.1 Summary of Historical Facts
- Legality of the Japan-Korea Annexation
- No clear illegality is recognized under international law of the time
- No consensus has been reached in the international legal community that it was illegal
- Historical Status of the Korean Peninsula
- Was a Chinese tributary state for approximately 2,000 years
- Period as an independent state was only 10-13 years
- There is an aspect that Japan liberated it from Chinese rule
- Nature of Governance
- Not typical colonial exploitation, but development-integration type
- Implementation of large-scale infrastructure investment and modernization policies
8.2 Structure of Current Issues
Essence of the Forced Labor Issue
- Legally resolved by the 1965 agreement
- South Korean government at the time prioritized economic development over individual compensation
- South Korean judicial decisions effectively invalidate international agreements
Essence of Historical Perception Issues
- Divergence between legal facts and political perception
- Retroactive application of modern values to the past
- Reinterpretation of history based on ethnic sentiment and political factors
8.3 Future Challenges
The following points are important for resolving this issue:
- Objective Recognition of Historical Facts
- Confirmation of facts without ideology or emotion
- Evaluation in the international context of the time
- Respect for Legal Stability
- Compliance with international agreements
- Problematic nature of ex post facto diplomatic changes by the judiciary
- Constructive Future-Oriented Approach
- Building cooperative relationships for the future rather than settling the past
- Relationship improvement based on mutual understanding
Reference: Chronology of Related Events
| Year | Event |
|---|---|
| c. 3rd century BCE | Korea enters Chinese tributary system |
| 1895 | Sino-Japanese War, Korea gains independence through Treaty of Shimonoseki |
| 1897 | Establishment of the Korean Empire |
| 1910 | Japan-Korea Annexation Treaty signed |
| 1939 | National Mobilization Ordinance promulgated |
| 1945 | Japan surrenders, Japanese rule of Korean Peninsula ends |
| 1965 | Japan-South Korea Basic Treaty and Claims Agreement signed |
| 2001 | International Conference on Reexamination of Korea Annexation at Harvard University |
| 2005 | South Korean government partially discloses Japan-South Korea Agreement documents |
| 2018 | South Korean Supreme Court ruling on forced labor compensation |
Position of This Report
This report attempts an objective analysis of the Japan-Korea annexation and forced labor issues based on available historical materials and academic research. It does not advocate for any particular political position, but aims to promote understanding based on historical facts and legal logic.
Historical perception issues are complex matters with differing views depending on each country’s position, and this report should be understood as providing one analytical perspective.
Date of Preparation: October 27, 2025
This document may be redistributed for educational and research purposes