Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Person
Browse By Room
Browse By Area of Study
Browse By Session Type
Search Tips
Virtual Exhibit Hall
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Session Submission Type: Roundtable Proposal Application
Seventy years after the end of World War II, East Asia remains embroiled in disputes over wartime atrocities, historical responsibility, and territorial divisions. Despite the fading of these events from living memory, the erosion of Cold War ideological confrontation, and growing regional economic interdependence, historical controversies have become more intense in recent years, linked to rising nationalism in Japan, China, Korea and beyond. The United States, though not geographically part of East Asia, is the country mainly responsible for the post-World War II order as well as the primary ally of South Korea and Japan, and finds itself increasingly caught up in these disputes as well. This roundtable brings historians from the US and the East Asian region to discuss the reasons for this historical contention, the main lines of argument, and the possibilities for resolution and reconciliation. The participants will not only discuss “history wars” between national governments, but address the fact that in each of the countries there are significant differences of opinion within the national publics: history wars are domestic as well as international, even more so when there are rival governments facing each other across the Taiwan Straits and the Korean De-Militarized Zone. Focusing on but not limited to the history of the Pacific War, the roundtable addresses the question of Japanese apologies, the Comfort Women controversy, the An Jung-geun Memorial in China, Yasukuni Shrine visits, the Dokto/Takeshima and Senkaku/Diaoyu islands, and other issues that have been at the center of recent heated disputes. Scholars, educators, critics, and others realize that a single narrative is not a reality for any history; together, however, we understand our crucial role in moving public discourse from political polemic to informed and sustained dialogue.