A person visits the “Kim Koo: Becoming a Global Value” special exhibition, highlighting the life of independence activist Kim Koo after Korea’s liberation and his role in the independence movement, at Gyeonggyojang in Jongno District, central Seoul, on Aug. 4 to commemorate the 150th anniversary of his birth.NEWS1
Doh See-hwan
The author is a former director general of the Office of Dokdo Research and director of the Dokdo Research Institute at the Northeast Asian History Foundation
Every year on Aug. 15, East Asia encounters two different memories. In Korea, the date is celebrated as Liberation Day, commemorating the end of colonial rule and the restoration of sovereignty and human dignity. In Japan, however, the same date is remembered as the end of the war and the beginning of the postwar nation. The coexistence of these two memories on a single date reveals that the region continues to face unresolved challenges of historical reckoning and reconciliation.
History cannot remain merely a recognition of different memories. Historical justice begins with an honest confrontation with the truth of the past and must be transformed into legal and moral principles directed toward the future. The fundamental question before us is: “How can we overcome these differences and build a shared future and a peaceful order together?”
Modern international law is not merely a technical framework regulating relations among states. It is a universal value system based on respect for sovereignty, human dignity, and peaceful international order. In 2005, when Japan’s Shimane Prefecture enacted “Takeshima Day,” reviving the historical issue of Japan’s invasion of Dokdo 100 years earlier, the challenge of historical justice became a central concern from the perspective of international law.
In 2010, marking the centennial of the forced annexation of Korea by Japan, the United Nations’ Durban Declaration in 2001, which stated the principle of the historical end of colonialism, was applied to East Asian historical issues. Through a joint statement by Korean and Japanese intellectuals, the fundamental invalidity of the Korea-Japan Annexation Treaty and the illegality of colonial rule were reaffirmed.
In 2015, on the 50th anniversary of the treaty, the issues of Japanese military “comfort women” and forced labor victims were defined as tasks under international human rights law aimed at restoring human dignity and rights. By proposing victim-centered approaches in line with the 2005 UN guideline on remedies and reparations for victims of human rights violations, this research contributed to establishing human rights-centered international legal justice.
In 2020, on the 120th anniversary of Imperial Decree No. 41 of the Korean Empire, and in 2021, on the 70th anniversary of the Treaty of San Francisco, the international legal titles of Korea’s territorial sovereignty were reaffirmed against Japan’s distorted claims to Dokdo, establishing logic based on historical facts and legal grounds.
The 80th anniversary of liberation in 2025 became a historic turning point that brought together two decades of research centered on three pillars: sovereignty, human rights and territory. It provided a normative foundation for historical justice.
The year 2026, marking the 81st anniversary of liberation, invites us to reconsider the true meaning of liberation. Was liberation merely a political emancipation? Or was it a civilizational beginning — a moment when Korea chose what kind of nation it would build and what values it would share with the world?
The clearest answer to this question was provided by Baekbeom Kim Koo. The year 2026 has special significance as the Unesco-designated year commemorating the 150th anniversary of his birth. It offers an opportunity to recognize his independence movement and vision of a cultural state not only as Korea’s historical legacy, but also as a universal value to be inherited by humanity.
For Baekbeom, independence was not the completion of restoring national sovereignty; it was the beginning of building a new nation. In the section “My Desire” found in “The Diary of Kim Gu” (1943), he wrote: “What I desire infinitely is the power of a high level of culture.” His concept of cultural power went beyond the advancement of arts and scholarship. It represented respect for human dignity, moral responsibility within a community, and the capacity of a nation to contribute to world peace.
Baekbeom’s vision of the nation is connected with the development of modern international law, which has sought to establish peace through justice, while Baekbeom sought to realize peace through culture. Although their approaches differed, their ultimate goal was the same: the restoration of human dignity and peaceful coexistence.
At this point, international legal justice and Baekbeom’s philosophy converge beyond differences of time and discipline. Both seek to transform historical memory into responsibility and to create a peaceful community centered on human dignity. The historical justice developed through international law over the past 20 years and Baekbeom’s vision of a cultural state represent universal values of humanity — values of dignity, peace and coexistence.
