Abstract

The article examines the place of the Korean problem in Soviet-American relations of the first post-war years. It reveals the foundations of Soviet and American policy towards the “Korean ques-tion” and introduces two new actors that operated on the U.S. territory and played a significant role in shaping this policy. Stemming from principles of historicism and scientific objectivity, having carefully analyzed Soviet documents and compared them with those of the U.S., the author concludes that before the beginning of 1950, the Korean question has not been a top priority issue neither for Moscow nor for Washington. Both sides advocated the creation of an independent Korea (albeit with different goals and in their own unique un-derstanding of “independence”). At the same time, at the end of 1945, the Korean question became one of the issues that prevented the Yalta agreements becoming a reality. Like a number of other issues that were considered at the same time and did not receive the expected and rapid solution, the Korean problem was no longer perceived by the Allies as an autonomous one. The emergence of mutual misunderstanding and suspicion between the USSR and the United States was partly promoted by the actions of the future irst president of South Korea, Syngman Rhee, who sought to increase his political capital through ex-citing enmity between the Soviet Union and the United States. A certain role in them was played also by the head of the Sino-Korean People’s League Kilsoo Haan. The change in Soviet policy towards Korea, which became one of the main reasons for the outbreak of the Korean War, occurred only in the early 1950 and was the result of a dramatic change in the political situation in the world, which differed dramatically from that of the Yalta agreements.

Highlights

  • The article examines the place of the Korean problem in Soviet-American relations of the first post-war years

  • Stemming from principles of historicism and scientific objectivity, having carefully analyzed Soviet documents and compared them with those of the U.S, the author concludes that before the beginning of 1950, the Korean question has not been a top priority issue neither for Moscow nor for Washington. Both sides advocated the creation of an independent Korea

  • Like a number of other issues that were considered at the same time and did not receive the expected and rapid solution, the Korean problem was no longer perceived by the Allies as an autonomous one

Read more

Summary

СОВЕТСКАЯ И АМЕРИКАНСКАЯ ИСТОРИОГРАФИЯ

В полном соответствии с общей тенденцией, присущей американской историографии холодной войны, в изучении данного вопроса сформировались традиционалистская и ревизионистская школы. Что определяющим фактором советской политики в отношении Кореи были отношения И.В. М. Шульман полагал, что советский лидер боялся отдавать инициативу в корейских делах в руки китайцев и потерять тем самым то влияние, которое Советский Союз имел в Северной Корее [Shulman 1963: 141]. В их работах вина за раздел Кореи возлагается исключительно на Вашингтон и Сеул, а СССР предстает в роли освободителя корейского народа от гнета японских империалистов [Шабшина 1958: 232]. После окончания холодной войны исследователям стали доступны документы из японских, корейских и американских архивов, что привело к переоценке роли СССР в разделе Кореи и начале Корейской войны. Если еще до окончания войны, то почему он не озвучивал свой интерес к Корее ни на одной из конференций союзников? Однако лишь в соединении с американскими документами по «корейскому вопросу» и мемуарами американских политиков они могут дать более или менее реалистичные ответы на поставленные вопросы

КОРЕЙСКИЙ ВОПРОС В ОТЕЧЕСТВЕННОЙ ВНЕШНЕЙ ПОЛИТИКЕ
КОРЕЙСКИЙ ВОПРОС В АМЕРИКАНСКОЙ ВНЕШНЕЙ ПОЛИТИКЕ
ЯПОНСКИЙ ВОПРОС
ПРОРАБОТКА УСЛОВИЙ ОПЕКИ
БИБЛИОГРАФИЧЕСКИЙ СПИСОК
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call