Fresh Korea-China Baekdusan Battle on the Horizon
by Richardson ~ July 30th, 2006. Filed under: China-Korea Relations, History. 
Update: The Korea Times has an editorial on the subject, `Mt. Paekdu Project’ Koreas Should Unite to Keep Sacred Mountain.
Original Post: So far I’ve only seen this Dong-a Ilbo article, China Seeks U.N. Title to Mt. Baekdu, but there is bound to be a nationalistic flurry of activity over this:
The Chinese Government is hurriedly working on making the world recognize Mt. Baekdu (or Mt. Changbai in Chinese) as Chinese territory… China has decided to register Mt. Baekdu on the World Geopark list designated by the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
The Jilin Provincial Government of China has so far made efforts to get Mt. Baekdu registered as a world natural heritage site by the year 2008 when Jilin hosts the general assembly of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee. It might be fair to call this the “Mt. Baekdu Project” of incorporating the old territory of Goguryeo, an ancient Korean kingdom, into Chinese history, as it follows the Northeast Asia Project that focused on incorporating its history into China’s.
[…]
Meanwhile, the Chinese government is reportedly seeking to register as UNESCO world cultural heritage the remnants of the Sanggyeong Yongcheonbu, which is the old capital of another ancient Korean kingdom—Balhae—located in the Bohai Bay, Ningan City, Heilongjiang Province. (emphasis added)
This despite the 1962 agreement with North Korea that split ownership of the mountain sacred to both sides. The author has rightly tied this to China’s efforts to portray Goguryo as Chinese history, which caused outrage in the ROK.
Why is China doing this? Perhaps preparing for the collapse of North Korea:
A latent territorial dispute between China and South Korea persists and could become a serious point of friction in bilateral ties in the future. Some South Koreans dispute a “secret” 1962 boundary treaty that divided Changbai / Paekdu mountain on the China-North Korean border and lay claims to other ethnic Korean areas in Manchuria. Chinese participants said that once unified, Korea would be emboldened to press these claims. A South Korean expert also raised the prospect of friction emerging between South Korea and China over the ethnic Korean population residing in China, which shares a common heritage with the Chosun tribes. The expert noted South Korean objections to China’s Northeast Asian Project, a five-year government research program, that seeks to prove that the Goguryeo Dynasty (37BC to 668AD) was a Chinese state and its people originated from China’s Han tribe. (emphasis added)
Future arms race anyone?
A brief bit on Goguryo, more detailed history, about Baekdusan, Baekdusan travel accounts, and a map of the kingdoms territory:
—–
July 30th, 2006 at 10:48 pm
What China is doing is not completely bad. I think it’s a good idea to register Mt. Baekdu with UNESCO, because it will make the mountain more famous, and increase the world’s interest in the region. Tourism to Mt. Baekdu can financially benefit both China and NK. When Mt. Baekdu is registered as a World Geopark, China will be strongly committed to preserving the ecology of the mountain.
The fact that China is taking the initiative shows how pathetic North Korea is in not taking advantage of its natural assets and mismanaging the country.
July 30th, 2006 at 10:55 pm
‘Mt. Baekdu?’ What’s that? China will register ‘Mt. Changbai.’
Also, I think mismanaging assets like Baekdusan is at the very bottom of the list of things that make the North Korean leadership pathetic.
July 30th, 2006 at 11:26 pm
Alas, only if Yeon Gaesomun had captured Tang Taizong after the Battle of the An-shi Fortress!
In all seriousness, I have two questions, partly derived from the fact that I haven’t followed the war over Koguryo that closely, because of the multiple silliness that the issue raises:
1. Perhaps I am not to date, but I thought the Chinese position is actually a compromise position where it seeks to assign the Kuknaesong period to China and post-Changsu Wang Pyongyang period to Korea? Is this no longer the case?
2. Which came first, China’s “Northeast Asia” project or Korea’s revisionist claims on Gando? I realize that the Gando revisionism is not the official Seoul government position, but do we have reason to believe that China’s more aggressive position on Koguryo was inspired by Gando revisionism?
July 30th, 2006 at 11:29 pm
Looking at the map reminds me: It’s always surprised me that Japan’s historic claims that Kaya was its colony does not raise more irrational outbursts in Korea.
July 30th, 2006 at 11:43 pm
Are you kidding? The issue of Mimana (Imna) Command Post brings out hair-twisting, cheeck muscle-twitching, spittle-flying rage from Koreans.
Richardson wrote about it in a quite detailed fashion. Let me see if I can find it… unless he gets to it first, of course.
By the way, this anachronistic assigning of China, Korea and Japan labels to a historical period when such a nation-state concept did not exist must stop. Or for that matter, these color-coded maps showing neat territorial boundaries in the fashion of modern international boundaries.
Though there have always been “natural” boundaries (mountains, rivers, deserts, etc.), there were no “official,” legally-binding territorial demarcations in this period. Zones of influence outside large (walled) towns fluctuated based on various political and economic conditions, or weather, sometimes, or what semi-nomadic tribes (that often “controlled” border areas as such) were allied to which settled populations.
July 31st, 2006 at 12:22 am
Niagara Falls is shared by both Canada and America, and this arrangement has worked out fine. In a similar way, sharing Mt. Baekdu/Mt. Changbai between NK and China is not such a bad thing, as long as China does not try to claim the whole mountain.
Hopefully this controversy will motivate NK and SK to take action on a joint development of Mt. Baekdu.
July 31st, 2006 at 12:51 am
James,
Please do unearth some stuff for me. I’d love to read about it. Perhaps Dok-do, “Comfort Women,” and other modern era-related issues have overshadowed it.
“By the way, this anachronistic assigning of China, Korea and Japan labels to a historical period when such a nation-state concept did not exist must stop.”
I absolutely agree. One of the more bizarre and perverse yet ubiquitous manifestations of this phenomenon is the invective some direct at Silla for “betraying” their Baekjae and Silla “brothers” or “countrymen”!
July 31st, 2006 at 1:01 am
Yikes. I meant to say “their Baekjae and Koguryo ‘brothers’ or ‘countrymen’” [by allying with the Tang to attack them]!
July 31st, 2006 at 5:02 am
Concerning Mimana/Imna/Kaya/etc., I think James was referring to this;
http://www.dprkstudies.org/documents/asia002.html
July 31st, 2006 at 8:57 am
Thanks, Richardson. Is DPRK Studies your own separate Blog? I’ve never run across it before.
July 31st, 2006 at 9:20 am
Yes. James, Joshua, and I merged our blogs, but I decided to mirror my posts there as well (w/comments now disabled). That site also differs in the content/links in the ‘areas.’ And I use it when tinkering with WordPress so that I don’t break TKL.
July 31st, 2006 at 1:36 pm
From Miwha:
“Niagara Falls is shared by both Canada and America, and this arrangement has worked out fine. In a similar way, sharing Mt. Baekdu/Mt. Changbai between NK and China is not such a bad thing, as long as China does not try to claim the whole mountain. ”
Kim Il Sung gave half of Mt Baekdu to PRC as “thank you” gift.
So it’s not such a bad thing to share, huh? I figure you’d say that.
July 31st, 2006 at 1:43 pm
Say why can’t liberals say jack crap about this to Uri’s newly found ally PRC? For that matter waht about Chosun claim to much of land on other side of Yalu river called GANDO? European maps drew even with consent from Qing show GANDO as part of Korea.
Don’t be surprised if PRC lays more ridiculous land claims initiating with perhaps getting rid of Kim and the vices of nuclear weapons and missiles then place one of PRC puppet on charge of DPRK.
July 31st, 2006 at 2:26 pm
I personally like this Gando better.
I think the climate is more agreeable.
July 31st, 2006 at 4:45 pm
I have a question. Could this border dispute between China and a future united Korea errupt into war?
July 31st, 2006 at 4:48 pm
I only have one question. If Korea is ever united, could this border dispute errupt into open warfare?
July 31st, 2006 at 11:46 pm
Land claim or claim of suzereignity by China would be the bigger worry in my mind. Who thinks that China won’t fill in the gap left by Kim’s demise, whether outright annexation or gradual influx under a pro Chinese successor.
July 31st, 2006 at 11:56 pm
If China’s flashing of the revanchist card helps keep North Korea in its box, maybe that should be welcomed. Kim Jong=il will no doubt prefer getting caught (again) cheating on an agreement with the U.S. to really pissing off China with his next inevitable act of bad faith.
August 1st, 2006 at 12:15 am
qbe,
I pointed out the scenario you describe many times including post above. The future of Korea again rests on the superpowers.
Dejavu 100 yrs ago as to the reason of Russo-Japanese and Sino-Japanese wars all fought over control of Korea and who takes over Korea.
Now this is between PRC and USA as US will gladly cut a side deal with PRC. Allow PRC to annex DPRK lands near Yalu or place puppet leader and control DPRK IF PRC drives out Kim and his cronies and destroy nuclear and ballistic missiles. This is what US want and may give away land and control of DPRK to PRC.
So who’s left behind? Koreans… Sadly imbecile NO and Uri commie symphatizers cannot see thru this.
Back to Russo-Japanese and Sino-Japanese war of which Sini-Japanese was fought all over Korea - HISTORY does repeat…
August 1st, 2006 at 7:55 am
Duke: Back to Russo-Japanese and Sino-Japanese war of which Sini-Japanese was fought all over Korea - HISTORY does repeat…
I really don’t see either Russia or Japan fighting to keep North Korea out of China’s clutches. Given the state of the relationship between the two countries, I don’t even see Japan helping South Korea (with logistics and/or money) to keep North Korea out of Chinese hands. Note that in some ways, China has a better claim to Korean territory - which is way more sinified than Tibet ever was, right down to personal names. I don’t know when the Chinese will make their move on North Korea. But it will happen at some point in the future, when the cost is negigible and the risks are low. And the world will shrug when it happens, just as it did when China overran Tibet in 1950.
August 1st, 2006 at 10:52 am
ZF,
Dude I said on 1st sentence:
“I pointed out the scenario you describe many times including post above. The future of Korea again rests on the superpowers.
”
Last sentence:
“Back to Russo-Japanese and Sino-Japanese war of which Sini-Japanese was fought all over Korea - HISTORY does repeat… ”
Get it? I’m pointing out to the sad state/reality that Korea’s destiny is out of their hand but other superpowers in modern days PRC and US per my post. Scroll back 100 years and it was 3 superpowers - Russia, China and Japan and they all foight eachother for control of Korean peninsula.
Key msg is that it doesn’t matter what imbecile NO and liberal cronies thank shoutinh “dae han min kook” - as fate of Korea and unification rests with superpowers. Sobering reality.
August 1st, 2006 at 2:02 pm
Mt. Changbai was inside China but stupid Mao gave half of it to smart Kim. But that didn’t satisfy Koreans. Now they want the whole Yangbian(Kando) area and are acting on it. But the thing is Chinese leaders of today are much more shrewd than Mao and his equally stupid generals. And the Chinese also started to realize that there are no forever friends but there are forever interests. In a sense, that’s a waking up for Chinese people. I don’t think the Chinese leaders and people will give Mt. Changbai and Northeastern China away, no matter how much the Koreans desire it and how many fake historic evidences they come up with. And for Koreans’ own good, they’d better forget about Chinese territory and be happy with their own land. Sure, the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence, but it’s not yours.
August 2nd, 2006 at 2:21 pm
Korea is happy with it’s own land. North Korea isn’t muscling in on Chinese territory. But if China is claiming that the principle historic player in the Northern Korean region was in fact Chinese, then it coincides with a possible annexation if North Korea. Duke has this scoped out alot better than I do. China is pushing out. Nobody is pushing in.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:48 am
Wasn’t the governor of Jilin province in 1998 a NEAJUA veteran who had been Kim Il-sung’s deputy in the 88th Sniper Bde, and who had an ethnic Korean wife? I seem to recall a news story to that effect, and the wife backed up Jong-ils claim to having been born on mount Baekdu
August 3rd, 2006 at 8:52 pm
If the Korean law-makers had not been making noise to claim Chinese land, the Chinese had no need to be alert and be defensive. China never claims North Korean land, but many Koreans want Northeastern China. IN this case, Koreans are being offensive, and the Chinese has to be defensive. I suspect that Koreans are happy that North Koreans refugees are invading China now. I am sure one day when there is a big enough Korean population in Northeastern China, the Korean government will step up their claim of Chinese land. If you read some Korean forums and blogs, many of Koreans are hoping China disintegrate because they can move on to get Chinese land in the big chaos.
November 4th, 2007 at 12:04 am
China has no right to claim North Korean land, there had long been different historic issues and facts. North Korea was collaborated on the same political issues with China, side effects occured by a moron Kim-Jung-Il, a country was seperated into two. Given the different ethnic things in the historic issues, we, South and North Korea, should never have had those who every year want to miss each other. It is completely different from the political relationship between CHA and NK. Which comes first? China? Korea? I would like to say Korea. However China had good adjustment to be accustom to the new technology on a rapidly changing world environment and Japan did exactly same thing in late 19c and early 20c. In common, they remakably developed such technology therefore it made them to be able to attack Korea Korean politicians were, at that time that China and Japan was concentrating on their technology developement, fighting between different parties. It was so stupid. Korea had bigger land than China had a couple of centuries ago. Gando was Korea’s for 3500 years and 500 by China. Yeon-He-Ju which is Russia’s, upper Russia territory of NK also was Korea’s, much bigger than Japan. In 1909, Japan and China made a treaty that Japan give Gando China, instead of giving Japan raiload construction right in China. In 1952, however, after Japan defeat World War II, every treaties between Japan and China has no effects Which means Gando treaty between Japan and China except for Korea becomes invalid. 2009 is the year that Korea’s right is expired on the claim about Gando because it will have been 100 years since China has from 1909. By the international law, after 1oo years all the right about the land becomes invalid. China should return the land if they know the sadness that lost land.
November 6th, 2007 at 8:46 am
Hi Choi,
I think we all agree that China has no claim on North Korea (or Tibet, or Mongolia, etc.). I don’t see Korea expanding its territory anytime soon, but I do see the it keeping what it has now.
November 8th, 2007 at 12:20 pm
Why argue who owns it? The PRC did not argue this issue when they took Tibet. The PRC says Taiwan is theirs, and ROC says then take it, if you can.
If the PRC wants to declare it a UNICEF Kodak picture moment or whatever, who really cares. If you Koreans out there really want the sacred mountain back, lets take it back. Lets unite the han ban do and take back Baekdudaegan. If PRC refuses to let us have it back, hey lets just buy the mountain. Samsung sponsors Formula 1 racing while not a single Korean takes part in the tour. Lets put our money where it counts for Dae Han People