One of the things that I have been thinking about lately is the migration and displacement of Koreans--not just during the Korean War, but before and after--and what this means in the context of war and nation building. There was a specific passage in Bruce Cumings' book that triggered my interest in this recently, where he wrote:

"The social and political forces that spawned the Korean civil war went back into period of Japan's colonial rule in Korea and Manchuria, particularly to land inequities, to the anti-Japanese resistance of some Koreans and the collaboration with Japan of others, and to the staggering dislocation of ordinary Koreans, particularly in the decade 1935-45, when millions were moved around to service Japan's vast industrialization and war mobilization efforts. By the end of the war fully one fifth of the population ended up abroad (usually in Japan or Manchuria) or laboring in a province other than their own (usually in northern Korea). The "comfort women" and the 200,000-plus Korean soldiers were the obvious victims, but millions of ordinary Koreans were exploited in mines, factories, forced labor details, and the like; tellingly, 10 percent of the entire population (2.5 million) was in Japan in 1945, compared with only 35,000 Taiwanese. Since the migrants were unlikely to be under twelve or over sixty, this was a very large chunk of a people that theretofore had clung tightly to the towns and villages of their birth. They all wanted to return to their hometowns when Japanese rule collapsed, and the vast majority were from southern Korea, home to major 'surplus' populations" (104).

Cumings is of course referring to World War II here, which reminds us that the Korean population was in a vulnerable position even before the Korean War because they were mobilized to fight for another country and exploited by its industry. The numbers presented are staggering and it is strange to even consider that such a large portion of the population (10 percent!) was in Japan by the end of WWII. This made me think about the Korean War in terms of the displacement of Koreans and how this must have affected their relationship to both the war and national identity. How does a group who have been essentially used as political and economic pawns, once by the Japanese and again by both the U.S. and Soviets, begin to prepare itself for its own war? Given the fact that there was not much room for complete self-autonomy and to purely use "civil war" seems inaccurate, what does it mean for a country with a very fractured, uprooted population to fight a domestic war for, yet again, other countries? 

Not to mention that, between WWII and the Korean War, migration and the formation of alliances (even against itself) were also forced on the Korean population several times. This repetition of displacement at the intersection of colonial world powers is reminiscent of "Kapitan Ri" and raises questions about how these circumstances change national identity. How do you lay claim to a national identity when your country is consistently exploited/controlled by outside powers, and there is seemingly no room for domestic growth? From the beginning of Japanese rule, Korea was prevented from maintaining its own nationhood and, instead, left to be divided by outside powers. Such precarious circumstances place Koreans in a position of multiple fractures, physically displaced from their homes and with no solid ties to a cohesive national identity. 

I think this discussion could go in several directions, but my mind keeps coming back to this forced movement of Koreans through space, across national and physical borders, their exploitation via war, and how this has shaped their current divide. I guess I am ultimately curious to see what others have to say about it and what sort of discussion (about war, identity, migration, etc.) it can generate.

- Sarah K.