War Responsibility and Settlement through an Analysis of the Preamble and Signatory States of the Treaty of Peace with Japan

This study aims to examine the historical and political causal relationship between the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty (Treaty of Peace with Japan) and the 1965 Korea Japan Agreement, and to analyze how the structural limitations inherent in the Peace Treaty have affected the East Asian international order and Korea Japan relations. Although the San Francisco Peace Treaty formally brought an end to World War II, it was concluded under the political objectives of a lenient settlement and the formation of a Cold War order, without clearly addressing Japan’s responsibility for its war of aggression and colonial rule. In this process, Asian countries—including Korea and China, which were among the primary victims of Japanese imperialism—were excluded from serving as principal actors in the treaty or were not included among its signatories. This study seeks to demonstrate that the San Francisco system was not merely a postwar peace order, but rather a political construct shaped by U.S.-led Cold War strategies and geopolitical interests. Furthermore, it confirms that these structural contradictions have had long-term impacts on the regional order in East Asia, including the division of the Korean Peninsula, the U.S. Japan security system, and the issue of “Two Chinas.” By analyzing the preamble of the Peace Treaty and the process of selecting signatory states, this study identifies three key findings. First, it examines the transition in the character of the treaty from a “punitive peace” to a “lenient peace,” along with its political implications. Second, it explores the reasons and background behind Korea’s unique exclusion from the list of signatories and highlights the structural marginalization of Asian victim states in the postwar settlement process, while also considering the responses of Southeast Asian countries. Third, it argues that the exclusion of Korea from the peace settlement process delayed the conclusion of the Korea Japan Agreement and the normalization of bilateral relations, and has contributed to the root causes of ongoing historical and territorial disputes. In conclusion, this study argues that the limitations of the San Francisco Peace Treaty have had lasting effects on the formation of the Korea Japan Agreement and the East Asian international order. It also calls for a reexamination of the roles and experiences of Asian countries that were excluded from addressing responsibility for war and colonial rule. In particular, it suggests the need for further research on China’s exclusion from the treaty, the issue of reparations for Southeast Asian countries, and the unresolved processes of decolonization.