[KS] Koreanstudies Digest, Vol 152, Issue 16

Yong-Ho Choe choeyh at hawaii.edu
Thu Mar 31 18:59:37 EDT 2016


Thank you all for your helpful comments, and I get a better understanding
of the issue. Also I felt that Bruce's comment having examined the original
papers of FDR sheds a new light, at least to me. .

Having said this, I still remain unsure what might be the best Korean
translation for the phrase.

Thank you all again.

Aloha.

Yong-ho



On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Donald Clark(Hist Dept) <
dclark at trinity.edu> wrote:

> I have studied this too, in the context of Roosevelt's delicate balancing
> between not wanting to offend Churchill with a blanket condemnation of the
> idea of Great Powers taking care of "unstable" areas, but then instead of
> supporting "colonialism" as Churchill preferred, shifting to the idea of
> collective responsibility in the form of international trusteeship.  FDR's
> support for the idea of trusteeship, something like the mandates after WWI
> but not necessarily limited to a single responsible trustee (e.g. France in
> Lebanon, Britain in Palestine), suggests that the "in due course" phrase
> simply means that they would put Korea in the category of somebody's
> potential trusteeship, but that it hadn't yet been worked out. Of course
> it's a case of what's said isn't always the same thing as what's heard.
> Don Clark
>
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:00 AM, <koreanstudies-request at koreanstudies.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Send Koreanstudies mailing list submissions to
>>         koreanstudies at koreanstudies.com
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>
>> http://koreanstudies.com/mailman/listinfo/koreanstudies_koreanstudies.com
>>
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>         koreanstudies-request at koreanstudies.com
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>         koreanstudies-owner at koreanstudies.com
>>
>> !!!!!!!!! When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
>> specific than "Re: Contents of Koreanstudies digest..." !!!!!!!!!
>>
>>
>> <<------------ KoreanStudies mailing list DIGEST ------------>>
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. In Due Course (Yong-Ho Choe)
>>    2. Re: In Due Course (Mark Caprio)
>>    3. Re: In Due Course (Sperwer Accipiter)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 15:53:22 -1000
>> From: Yong-Ho Choe <choeyh at hawaii.edu>
>> To: Korean Studies Discussion List <koreanstudies at koreanstudies.com>
>> Subject: [KS] In Due Course
>> Message-ID:
>>         <
>> CAM5LYP6Ba_Z3Kd8tzmxvy9uupBDAXaZV7t7FDU8chNvThhsYcw at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Dear colleagues:
>>
>> The Cairo Declaration issued by Roosevelt, Chiang Kai-Shek, and Churhill
>> in
>> 1943 states: "The aforesaid three powers, mindful of the enslavement of
>> the
>> people of Korea, are determineds that in due course Korea shall become
>> free
>> and independent."
>>
>> My questions are:1) What does it really mean by "in due course"?  2)What
>> would be the most appropriate Korean translation for the phrase?
>>
>> Does it mean "at an appropriate time (??? ??),"  or "after proper
>> procedure(???  ??? ?? ??)"? Or others?
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Yong-ho Choe (???)
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://koreanstudies.com/pipermail/koreanstudies_koreanstudies.com/attachments/20160224/bc919030/attachment-0001.html
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 07:02:14 -0500
>> From: Mark Caprio <caprio at rikkyo.ac.jp>
>> To: Korean Studies Discussion List <koreanstudies at koreanstudies.com>
>> Subject: Re: [KS] In Due Course
>> Message-ID:
>>         <
>> CAHGqTPWKK4A+CA3CSH_x4XON3KUTbKZ7HbZ2jNpO3F7+DBbKBw at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Yong-ho,
>>
>> This is a good question. I have been looking at this period and one of my
>> focuses regarding the Cairo Communique is how it might have affected
>> Japanese rule in Korea. Where wartime promises of compulsory education
>> etc.
>> to appease the Koreans after the war was over--either for future
>> diplomatic
>> relations (as British documents suggest) or to demonstrate their right to
>> govern the peninsula after the war (as certain US officials were
>> advising).
>> Regarding your question, I believe that I found a Korean translation
>> similar to the first one you offer ??? ??) but could
>> not find it in my search. While this is important to help us understand
>> what Koreans believed the US and its allies meant by "in due course," it
>> is
>> also immaterial in a sense because the US would be determining what it
>> meant. I wonder if officials had a sense of the meaning of this phrase. It
>> only appears in the final draft, with the phrase "at the earliest possible
>> moment" and "at the proper moment" appearing in earlier drafts. The
>> estimates of Korea's post liberation independence were all over the place,
>> up to a half century (Roosevelt to Stalin in Teheran I believe). Where
>> (and
>> would) Korea would be divided varied by plan, from the US occupying the
>> entire peninsula to the 40th parallel, and finally the 38th.
>>
>> A long answer to your question but I hope it helps.
>>
>> Mark Caprio
>> Rikkyo University
>>
>> 2016-02-24 20:53 GMT-05:00 Yong-Ho Choe <choeyh at hawaii.edu>:
>>
>> > Dear colleagues:
>> >
>> > The Cairo Declaration issued by Roosevelt, Chiang Kai-Shek, and Churhill
>> > in 1943 states: "The aforesaid three powers, mindful of the enslavement
>> of
>> > the people of Korea, are determineds that in due course Korea shall
>> become
>> > free and independent."
>> >
>> > My questions are:1) What does it really mean by "in due course"?  2)What
>> > would be the most appropriate Korean translation for the phrase?
>> >
>> > Does it mean "at an appropriate time (??? ??),"  or "after proper
>> > procedure(???  ??? ?? ??)"? Or others?
>> >
>> > Thank you.
>> >
>> > Sincerely,
>> >
>> > Yong-ho Choe (???)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://koreanstudies.com/pipermail/koreanstudies_koreanstudies.com/attachments/20160225/e5662e3f/attachment-0001.html
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 23:01:36 +0900
>> From: Sperwer Accipiter <sperweractual at gmail.com>
>> To: Korean Studies Discussion List <koreanstudies at koreanstudies.com>
>> Subject: Re: [KS] In Due Course
>> Message-ID:
>>         <
>> CAM_DL1JNk5v4PgdmD7_Ow5nVa9DuU4O-MJrz9YTuneTUAktjeA at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> This reminds me of the issue regarding the meaning of the term "good
>> offices" in the American-Korean Friendship Treaty.  That term, though, had
>> a well-established customary meaning as a result of years of diplomatic
>> practice and precedent and thus a determinate significance as a matter of
>> international law.  "In due course", by contrast was, as the drafting
>> history demonstrates, a new coinage. I doubt very much that the choice of
>> language was in any way influenced by considerations about how it might
>> play to Japanese ears; but it very certainly was affected by the divergent
>> positions of the allies regarding the post-war disposition of colonial
>> holdings - it seems like a bit of diplomatic palaver designed to avoid
>> open
>> disagreement on a subject the language about which could have much wider
>> ramifications than  for just Korea while leaving all the parties with
>> almost complete freedom of maneuver when the topic became more of a
>> priority than it was in 1943. In that sense, it was almost meaningless in
>> itself - nothing more than a temporizing formula.  The real story is in
>> the
>> details of the Allies' respective position on the subject of national
>> liberation generally, Korean national liberation specifically, the clash
>> of
>> those positions in the context of all the facets of the postwar
>> "settlement" and, like Wilson's pronouncements in WW1, the (unintended)
>> galvanizing effect on subject peoples for whom the language became one of
>> the tools of their assertion of their own voice and role in the process.
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> "The purpose of today's training is to defeat yesterday's understanding."
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Yong-Ho Choe <choeyh at hawaii.edu> wrote:
>>
>> > Dear colleagues:
>> >
>> > The Cairo Declaration issued by Roosevelt, Chiang Kai-Shek, and Churhill
>> > in 1943 states: "The aforesaid three powers, mindful of the enslavement
>> of
>> > the people of Korea, are determineds that in due course Korea shall
>> become
>> > free and independent."
>> >
>> > My questions are:1) What does it really mean by "in due course"?  2)What
>> > would be the most appropriate Korean translation for the phrase?
>> >
>> > Does it mean "at an appropriate time (??? ??),"  or "after proper
>> > procedure(???  ??? ?? ??)"? Or others?
>> >
>> > Thank you.
>> >
>> > Sincerely,
>> >
>> > Yong-ho Choe (???)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://koreanstudies.com/pipermail/koreanstudies_koreanstudies.com/attachments/20160225/20da12b2/attachment-0001.html
>> >
>>
>> End of Koreanstudies Digest, Vol 152, Issue 16
>> **********************************************
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Donald N. Clark, Ph.D.
> Professor of History and Co-director of East Asian Studies (EAST)
> Trinity University, One Trinity Place,  San Antonio, TX 78212 USA
> +1 (210) 999-7629;  Fax +1 (210) 999-8334
> http://web.trinity.edu/x9897.xml
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://koreanstudies.com/pipermail/koreanstudies_koreanstudies.com/attachments/20160331/d9229895/attachment.html>


More information about the Koreanstudies mailing list