Newsletters and Essays

Through the activities of Waseda University’s Project on Reconciliation Studies, I had the opportunity to participate in the 7th Annual Conference of the International Association for Reconciliation Studies, held at Seoul National University from July 14 to 18, 2025. At the outset of this report, I would like to take this opportunity to extend my gratitude to Professor Toyomi Asano of Waseda University, the project leader, as well as to Senior Research Fellows Hajime Onozaka and Hiroko Kawaguchi, who devoted considerable effort to the complex preparations, along with all other individuals involved.

If I may begin with a personal note, this conference marked my very first participation in an international academic conference. With some anxiety about whether my research would be meaningful on the international stage, I took part in the event. Contrary to my prior expectations, however, what I ultimately found most challenging was not the “international” character of the conference, but rather its interdisciplinary nature. Having primarily studied within the field of social sciences, I had had few opportunities to engage directly with academic presentations in the humanities, such as literature and philosophy. Consequently, I struggled to adapt to the ways in which problems were framed, arguments were structured, and background knowledge was mobilized. In this respect, I must admit that this was the area in which I faced the greatest difficulty. I deeply regret that I was unable to fully understand many of the humanities-oriented presentations. Yet this very challenge provided me with a powerful reminder of the inherently interdisciplinary character of reconciliation studies and served as a strong admonition not to become a “frog in the well” within the confines of my own discipline, but instead to pursue scholarship with a broader vision.

My presentation was titled: “Ideals and Realities in the Restitution of Looted Cultural Property as a Symbol of Reconciliation between Japan and the Republic of Korea (ROK).” It was delivered as part of a panel on cultural property issues between Japan and South Korea, with a specific focus on the Ogura Collection, one of the most significant cases in this field. More precisely, I examined the year 2013, when the Ogura Collection became a subject of controversy in South Korean public discourse, and sought to identify the factors that triggered this development. I concluded that the reopening of the Tokyo National Museum, the current custodian of the collection, in that same year acted as a catalyst. Particularly important was the fact that some newly displayed items were royal family artifacts of exceptional significance to understanding historical relations between Korea and Japan, which drew unprecedented public attention in South Korea. In other words, within the context of South Korea’s national discourse, certain objects newly exhibited from the Ogura Collection met the conditions that made them prone to problematization in public opinion. Thus, my argument resonated with one of the central themes of reconciliation studies: namely, the collision of forces inherent in nation-state formation.

Following my presentation, I received some questions from the discussant and the floor. In my presentation, drawing on Anderson, I conceptualized a nation-state as an “imagined community” and argued that, in the 2013 case of the Ogura Collection, cultural property functioned as a national symbol. A Korean participant responded by pointing out that while analysis from political frameworks is indeed necessary, it is equally important to clarify historical facts independent of such frameworks. Although not stated explicitly, I interpreted this as a cautionary reminder not to allow my research to lean solely toward analyzing contemporary social phenomena without sufficiently engaging with the empirical verification of possible theft or appropriation. This struck me as an important lesson regarding the mindset required of a Japanese scholar engaging with Japan–Korea issues.

Another question concerned the extent to which global debates on decolonization and cultural property have influenced Japan–South Korea cultural property disputes. Regrettably, I was unable to provide a clear answer on the spot. It is well established that the global wave of decolonization took shape in the 1960s, as exemplified by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1514 of 1960, the “Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.” In terms of cultural property, while individual cases certainly arose earlier, the issue gained global prominence with President Emmanuel Macron’s 2017 speech in Burkina Faso. Considering the phenomenon of “internationalization” in the “comfort women” issue, clarifying how such global currents intersect with Japan–South Korea cultural property issues constitutes an inevitable perspective for future research.

Finally, I was asked whether the “movement of objects” itself constitutes a fundamental solution to Japan–South Korea cultural property issues from the perspective of Reconciliation Studies. I replied that the movement of objects, in and of itself, cannot be regarded as a solution. This is evident from past cases of transfer or restitution of cultural property: the deep fissures in historical consciousness between Japan and South Korea were often left unaddressed, with transfers occurring as mere material movements without the accompanying emotional transformation. At the same time, I personally believe that if such movements of cultural property are accompanied by emotional transformation, they can indeed serve as bridges across these fissures. In such cases, as I argued in my presentation, it is essential to identify the relationship between the cultural property in question and the national discourses in both countries that confer value upon it. Building upon such clarification, I believe that creating a “new value” on cultural property, one that does not provoke conflict between the two countries, may offer genuine hope for reconciliation. I am sincerely grateful to have been afforded such a rich opportunity for learning and reflection.