The Japan–Korea Treaty of 1910, commonly referred to as the Japan–Korea Annexation Treaty, was a significant and contentious agreement signed between the Empire of Japan and the Korean Empire on 22 August 1910. This treaty marked the formal annexation of Korea by Japan, following a series of prior agreements that gradually eroded Korean sovereignty. The Treaty of 1910 effectively placed Korea under Japanese imperial rule, setting the stage for a harsh period of colonization that lasted until the end of World War II in 1945.

Historical Context Leading to the Annexation

The Treaty of 1910 did not emerge in isolation; it was the culmination of years of escalating political influence exerted by Japan over Korea.

The first pivotal moment occurred in 1905 with the signing of the Japan–Korea Protectorate Treaty, which established Korea as a protectorate of Japan. This treaty effectively placed Korea under Japan’s control, though it remained nominally independent.

The second key moment was the 1907 Japan–Korea Treaty, which further diminished Korea’s autonomy by removing its ability to administer its internal affairs.

By the time the Treaty of 1910 was signed, Korea had already been reduced to a puppet state, its sovereignty severely compromised.

Japan’s annexation of Korea was also in part driven by its broader ambitions to expand its empire in East Asia. The Treaty of 1905 had been facilitated by Japan’s growing power following its victory in the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905), which enhanced Japan’s standing as a dominant regional power. The United Kingdom, a key global player at the time, had already acquiesced to Japan’s growing influence in Korea through the Anglo-Japanese Alliance of 1902 and 1905. The United States, for its part, had endorsed Japan’s actions in the region through the Taft-Katsura Agreement.

Despite the international recognition of Japan’s actions, Korea’s political leadership and the public were vehemently opposed to these developments, which ultimately led to the formal annexation in 1910.

Proclamation of the Treaty and Its Terms

The Treaty of 1910 was officially proclaimed on 29 August 1910, marking the beginning of a period of Japanese rule in Korea. The treaty had eight articles, with the first article being the most significant. It stated that the Emperor of Korea would cede all rights of sovereignty over the Korean Peninsula to the Emperor of Japan. This clause, which formalized Korea’s complete loss of sovereignty, marked the end of the Korean Empire and its transformation into a colony of Japan.

The political leaders of Korea, especially Emperor Sunjong, were forced to accept the treaty under duress, and many Koreans viewed the treaty as a humiliating imposition. Emperor Sunjong, who did not personally sign the treaty, referred to it as a “neugyak” (늑약), meaning a forced treaty. The term “neugyak” was used to convey the idea that Korea had been coerced into accepting the annexation under extreme pressure, rather than agreeing to it voluntarily. The annexation was also referred to by Koreans as “Gyeongsul Gukchi” (경술국치), or the National Humiliation of the Year of Gyeongsul, and 29 August 1910 was memorialized as “Gukchi-il” (국치일), or National Humiliation Day.

Japan’s Justification and International Support

Japan’s annexation of Korea was met with widespread international approval, particularly from Western powers. The United Kingdom, having forged close ties with Japan through the Anglo-Japanese Alliance, had already accepted Japan’s expanding influence in Korea. The United States, under the Taft-Katsura Agreement, had effectively acknowledged Japan’s dominance over Korea. These international endorsements played a crucial role in legitimizing Japan’s actions on the world stage, despite the lack of Korean consent.

Japanese officials, meanwhile, argued that the annexation was a natural and inevitable outcome of Korea’s increasing reliance on Japan, and that the merger would benefit both nations. Some Japanese commentators believed that the assimilation of Koreans into the Japanese Empire would be smooth and beneficial for Korea, a sentiment that would be proven wrong in the years to come.

Legal Controversies Surrounding the Treaty

The legality of the Japan–Korea Treaty of 1910 has remained a subject of intense debate, especially in the years following Korea’s liberation from Japanese rule in 1945. One of the key issues surrounding the treaty was that it was signed not by the Korean Emperor, but by Prime Minister Ye Wan-yong of the Korean Empire, who was a collaborator with Japan. Emperor Sunjong, despite his nominal position as head of state, did not sign the treaty, making its legitimacy even more questionable in the eyes of many Koreans.

This issue became a point of contention when South Korea and Japan engaged in diplomatic negotiations in the 1960s. In 1965, the Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and South Korea was signed, which sought to resolve lingering issues between the two countries. Article II of the treaty stipulated that all agreements and treaties between Japan and Korea prior to 1910, including the annexation treaty, were considered null and void. This clause reflected South Korea’s stance that the annexation had been illegal from the outset, although Japan contested this view.

The International Legal Perspective

The legality of Japan’s annexation of Korea was also the subject of academic debates. In January, April, and November of 2001, a series of conferences were held at Harvard University, where scholars from around the world discussed the legal aspects of Japan’s annexation of Korea. Legal scholars such as Anthony Carty and Alexis Dudden argued that the international community at the time, dominated by Western powers, lacked a coherent legal framework to assess the legitimacy of treaties like the Japan–Korea Annexation Treaty.

Carty, a professor at the University of Derby, argued that during the height of imperialism, the dominant international legal principles were not necessarily concerned with the sovereignty of non-Western nations. Instead, treaties were often justified based on the political realities of the time. In contrast, Dudden emphasized that Japanese policymakers had carefully studied international law and used it to justify the annexation of Korea, framing it as a legitimate act within the imperialist context.

Despite these arguments, the consensus among many legal scholars, particularly in the West, was that Korea’s annexation by Japan had legal validity. However, this view was firmly rejected by many Korean scholars, who contended that the annexation was an act of force and coercion, not a legitimate legal agreement.

Activism and the Legacy of the Treaty

The legacy of the Japan–Korea Annexation Treaty continues to shape relations between Japan and South Korea to this day. Korean activists have long called for the nullification of the treaty, viewing it as an unjust imposition that deprived Korea of its sovereignty. In the years following the treaty’s proclamation, various groups in Korea have campaigned for a formal recognition of the treaty’s illegitimacy.

In 2007, for example, the Korean newspaper Dong-a Ilbo reported that the Korean monarchs had been forced to adopt a new signing custom, which was seen as another sign of Japanese coercion. In 2010, the issue resurfaced when 75 South Korean congressmen called for the legal nullification of the treaty, and both Korean and Japanese progressive Christian groups gathered in Tokyo to denounce the treaty as unjust.

The debate over the legality and legitimacy of the Japan-Korea Treaty of 1910 continues to influence diplomatic relations between South Korea and Japan, as well as the broader historical memory of the region.

The Korean public’s perception of the treaty remains highly negative, with many viewing it as a symbol of the suffering endured under Japanese rule. The Japanese government, on the other hand, continues to assert that the treaty was valid under international law, and it has not formally acknowledged the annexation as a wrongful act.

Most Influential Emperors of Japan

 

Frequently Asked Questions

Why was the Japan-Korea Treaty of 1910 significant?

The treaty marked the complete loss of Korean sovereignty, and it began a period of Japanese rule over Korea that lasted until the end of World War II. The annexation was a significant step in Japan’s imperial expansion in East Asia.

What were the key terms of the treaty?

The first article of the treaty stated that the Emperor of Korea ceded all sovereignty over Korea to the Emperor of Japan. This clause officially ended the Korean Empire, bringing Korea under full Japanese control.

How did Koreans react to the treaty?

The treaty was seen as a forced imposition, with many Koreans viewing it as a national humiliation. Terms like “neugyak” (forced treaty) and “Gyeongsul Gukchi” (National humiliation day) reflect the deep resentment and anger towards the annexation.

How did Japan justify the annexation?

Japan justified the annexation as a natural consequence of Korea’s increasing dependence on Japan, claiming that the merger would benefit both nations. It was also supported by international powers, such as the United Kingdom and the United States, who recognized Japan’s dominance over Korea.

What were the legal issues surrounding the treaty?

The treaty was signed by Prime Minister Ye Wan-yong, not Emperor Sunjong, which raised questions about its legitimacy. South Korea later argued that the treaty was invalid from the start, and this issue was addressed in the 1965 Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and South Korea.

What was the outcome of academic discussions on the treaty’s legality?

Conferences held in the early 2000s, such as those at Harvard University, debated the legality of the annexation. While Korean scholars argued the annexation was illegal, many Western scholars accepted it as a valid treaty, based on the international norms of the time.

How does the treaty continue to affect relations between Japan and South Korea?

The legacy of the treaty remains a source of tension between Japan and South Korea. Activists and political groups in South Korea continue to push for recognition of the annexation as an illegitimate act, while Japan maintains that it was a legal act within the context of imperialism.

What influence did Korea have on Japanese culture?