Articles , Books and Media

Reconciliation studies, as an emerging academic discipline, seeks to extend the trajectory of peace studies during the Cold War and conflict resolution studies in the post-Cold War era. It aims to construct an interdisciplinary framework that integrates insights from international relations, sociological studies of nationalism, and normative theory, in order to address conflicts entangled with historical memory, universal justice, and collective emotion. Alongside theoretical development, the field also engages in fieldwork and empirical/historical research. In August last year, the International Association for Reconciliation Studies was established with its headquarters in Germany. In Japan as well, a major research initiative supported by a large-scale grant under the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology’s “new academic domains” program commenced in 2017, under the name of the Reconciliation Studies Project.

Even within the span of the past five years, the world has undergone profound transformations. The rise and fall of the Trump administration, the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union, and the worsening of U.S.–China and Japan–South Korea relations are but a few notable examples. These challenges cannot be adequately addressed through the conceptual frameworks of existing academic paradigms alone. Even in the Western world, where sovereignty and nation-states originated, popular nationalism, called populism, is on the upsurge, leading to internal divisions over issues of race and justice.

Looking back, the era around the collapse of Japan’s economic bubble circa 1990 was also a period during which the centrality of economic growth came into question, prompting debates over the political and diplomatic foundations of national policy (to which the author contributed in a volume on the Korean Peninsula in Iwanami’s Security Studies Series). In response to such concerns, the Miyazawa administration convened the Conference on Japan’s Path in the 21st Century, which concluded with a recommendation asserting that, “in order for Japan to develop as a nation contributing to the international community, it must confront its responsibility for past aggression toward the peoples of Asia.” This led to a cooperative endeavor between conservative and progressive forces, culminating in initiatives such as the establishment of the Asian Women’s Fund and the issuance of the Murayama Statement.

Coinciding with this period was a wave of democratization that began in Latin America and extended to countries such as South Korea and Taiwan. Populations that had long suffered under authoritarian regimes began to raise their voices in protest. Among the victims neglected by those regimes were individuals who had been forcibly mobilized during the final phase of Japan’s colonial rule. These individuals had been left without adequate compensation, excluded from developmental progress, and forced to live in silence and hardship on the margins of society.

As Asia democratized, these victims came to symbolize the concrete meaning of human rights and freedom. The question of why such victims had been created and left unacknowledged became a central point of contention in struggles over the right to interpret history. The people’s historical narratives, which underpinned democratization movements, illuminated the undemocratic and militaristic nature of existing regimes, shedding light on how such regimes were internationally supported, particularly by the United States and Japan. These narratives awakened the populace to its role as the principal actor in politics. Events such as the February 28 Incident in Taiwan, the Gwangju Uprising and Jeju April 3 Incident in South Korea, as well as the issues surrounding comfort women and forced laborers during the Second World War, came to serve as symbols connecting historical memory to systemic reform and democratization.

Moreover, this issue has extended beyond the boundaries of domestic politics, expanding to encompass the economic relationships—rooted in prioritizing growth—formed under previous authoritarian regimes in alliance with Japan, as well as the legal foundations and legitimacy of governments and treaties that supported them. The rise of anti-Korean emotion in contemporary Japan can also be interpreted as a byproduct of these democratization processes. Together with shifting dynamics of power and national interest precipitated by China’s ascent and the deepening of economic development, the situation in East Asia has grown increasingly complex.

In this context, reconciliation studies must provide both a theoretical foundation for considering across the dual dimensions of domestic and international politics, and robust empirical research to support such inquiry.

As part of the effort to build the intellectual infrastructure necessary to examine these interwoven issues—including “emotion” and “memory,” which will be discussed in the following article—a digital Encyclopedia of Historical Conflicts and Reconciliation in East Asia is currently under development. Furthermore, in collaboration with students who have responded to this project’s call, we are planning to host the East Asia Reconciliation International Film Festival in July of this year. Within the context of this film festival, “reconciliation” is conceived as “the intense confrontation, compromise, and what lies beyond,” with the content left entirely to the creative discretion of participants. The second world conference of the International Association for Reconciliation Studies is also being organized this August, centered in Tokyo, through a collaborative effort between the University of Jena in Germany, George Mason University in the United States, and this very project. Further details can be found on the official website: https://reconciliation.w.waseda.jp.

Even if academia succeeds in providing an intellectual foundation, that alone is insufficient for addressing issues where emotion, memory, and justice are deeply intertwined. This is precisely why we seek to disseminate the latest scholarly insights in an accessible manner through platforms such as the film festival and the online encyclopedia. We welcome the cooperation of all who support this endeavor, particularly through engagement with the dedicated research institute established for this purpose.

While “compromise” may be reduced to a mere transaction of power and interest, “reconciliation” fundamentally transforms the negotiating parties themselves—reciprocally and often without conscious realization. Through profound dialogue, parties may discover that they have mutually changed. It is our aspiration that such transformative experiences be shared and institutionalized across the Asian region, by establishing theoretical and practical frameworks for dialogue. We aim to be at the forefront of this endeavor.

Note: This text was originally published in Toki no Hōrei. Minor editorial discrepancies may exist between this version and the published article.