The Wars and Railways of East Asia: A Political History of the Railways of the Korean Peninsula (Published in 2017)

Sang-Won Yun (Professor, Cheonbuk National University)

This book is part of a collection entitled “A Series on the History and Culture of Korean Railways” which was published with the support of the Korean Studies Promotion Service of the Academy of Korean Studies. The collection was completed after three years of research and two years of writing, and consists of five volumes on historical geography, politics, society, culture, and economics. The five authors who contributed to this series shared the common research topic of the history and future of the Korean Peninsula’s railways under the theme of “from invasion to symbiotic development.” Among these five books, this book in particular seeks to illuminate the history and future of the Korean Peninsula’s railways through the lens of politics.
 
As Carl von Clausewitz’s famous quote “war is the continuation of politics by other means” points out, war is the strongest and most destructive way to engage in politics. As wars entered the modern age and were industrialized, railways became part of the foundation of war. This was no different in modern East Asia. The objective of this book is to examine how the railways built on the Korean Peninsula through the present day have been used in the wars of modern Korea, and also how railways changed these wars. Through this investigation, the book also seeks to understand how the order of modern East Asia changed.
 
The Russo-Japanese War served as momentum for railways to be built in earnest on the Korean Peninsula. The Russo-Japanese War was a contest between the imperial country of Russia and the aspiring imperial country of Japan over the Korean Peninsula and Manchuria. The war started in the West Sea and ended in the East Sea, but the fighting was just as fierce along the South Manchuria branch line of the Chinese Eastern railway. The Russo-Japanese War progressed along the lines of railways in East Asia, and it was the first war to involve the seizing of railway stations. Wars in East Asia that occurred following the Russo-Japanese War, including the Manchurian Incident and the Sino-Japanese War, also followed this pattern. That is, wars in modern East Asia were characterized by seizing points (railway stations) and connecting these points with lines (railways). Thus, the connections of railways were critical. The railways of the Korean Peninsula were connected with the railways of Manchuria and China. And the South Manchuria Railway Company mediated these connections. Thus, the South Manchuria Railway Company was the spearhead for imperial Japan’s invasion of China.

On the other hand, another aspect of modern wars, which progressed through railways, is that they stipulated the manner in which nationalistic liberation movements resisted imperialism. The railways of Korea were products of Japanese colonial policy, but they can also be seen as a means of resistance. Those fighting for independence were also products of the modern age, and in the process of creating a nation-wide network, they utilized railways to connect the domestic movement with those working toward liberation abroad. Thus we can say that, in the colonies, railways had an ambivalent nature as they were both a tool for invasion and also a means for resistance.

After liberation and division, the railways of Korea, which were now being autonomously developed, were completely destroyed during Korean War, the greatest tragedy of the Korean people. During the Korean War, railways were again important tools for supply and transportation. However, there was a major difference with previous wars. In the past, wars mainly advanced along railway lines and involved occupying railway stations. Yet, during the Korean War, combat operations involved destroying stations and railways. This was done in order to disrupt the supply and transportation capabilities of the enemy. A pattern of railways being destroyed by aerial bombardments and then repaired was constantly repeated. Those most affected by the bombing and destruction of the railways were ordinary civilians. They were unable to use the railways as they moved across the country as refugees. More disturbingly, bridges and tunnels constructed for railways became stages for the massacres of innocent people.

The reason to ruminate over the past roles of railways during wars surrounding the Korean Peninsula in the modern era is that we must learn from our past mistakes so that a positive role for railways in the future peace and prosperity of the Korean Peninsula can be developed. Importantly, there is a structural contradiction between the properties of railways and the people who use railways during war-time. The use of railways for invasion and violence was clearly evident during the age of imperialism and the Cold War. Now it is important that we learn from our past and recognize the inherent peaceful and developmental nature of railways. In this way, a historical review can serve as a steppingstone to peace and co-prosperity in twenty-first century East Asia. (Translated by Benjamin Engel)