American Imperial Sovereignty and Militarised Land Dispossession During the Korean War

IF 3 1区 社会学 Q1 GEOGRAPHY Geopolitics Pub Date : 2022-10-05 DOI:10.1080/14650045.2022.2124159
B. Martin
{"title":"American Imperial Sovereignty and Militarised Land Dispossession During the Korean War","authors":"B. Martin","doi":"10.1080/14650045.2022.2124159","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT During the Korean War (1950-53), the American-led United Nations Command requisitioned vast areas of land and property in Korea for the purpose of constructing military infrastructures. Requisitions occurred not only in the war’s combat zone, but also in parts of the country understood by the United States to be under the sovereign control of the Republic of Korea. Many of these requisitions formed the basis of a permanent US military base network in Korea. This article responds to conventional scholarship on militarization and military bases and engages critical conceptions of territory and sovereignty to examine the constellation of forces that made American militarized dispossessions possible during the Korean War. It draws on archival evidence to show that the United States and Korea never reached a bilateral agreement on land or property requisitioning during the war, but that the US military nonetheless wove its own system of requisitioning through a certain conception of Korean sovereignty even in the face of contestation from the Korean government. The US military mobilized Korean forces under its operational control through the UN Command to carry out civilian land expropriations while contending that the Korean soldiers under its control were agents of their own state acting in accordance with domestic law. It then portrayed militarized dispossessions as Korean domestic problems and domestic liabilities. Evidence from the Korean War opens broad questions about the nature of American imperial sovereignty and territory both through and beyond the spatial unit of the military base.","PeriodicalId":47839,"journal":{"name":"Geopolitics","volume":"28 1","pages":"2111 - 2141"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geopolitics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2022.2124159","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT During the Korean War (1950-53), the American-led United Nations Command requisitioned vast areas of land and property in Korea for the purpose of constructing military infrastructures. Requisitions occurred not only in the war’s combat zone, but also in parts of the country understood by the United States to be under the sovereign control of the Republic of Korea. Many of these requisitions formed the basis of a permanent US military base network in Korea. This article responds to conventional scholarship on militarization and military bases and engages critical conceptions of territory and sovereignty to examine the constellation of forces that made American militarized dispossessions possible during the Korean War. It draws on archival evidence to show that the United States and Korea never reached a bilateral agreement on land or property requisitioning during the war, but that the US military nonetheless wove its own system of requisitioning through a certain conception of Korean sovereignty even in the face of contestation from the Korean government. The US military mobilized Korean forces under its operational control through the UN Command to carry out civilian land expropriations while contending that the Korean soldiers under its control were agents of their own state acting in accordance with domestic law. It then portrayed militarized dispossessions as Korean domestic problems and domestic liabilities. Evidence from the Korean War opens broad questions about the nature of American imperial sovereignty and territory both through and beyond the spatial unit of the military base.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
朝鲜战争时期的美帝国主权与军事化土地剥夺
摘要朝鲜战争(1950-53)期间,美国领导的联合国军司令部征用了朝鲜境内大片土地和财产,用于建设军事基础设施。征用不仅发生在战争的战区,而且发生在美国认为受大韩民国主权控制的该国部分地区。其中许多征用构成了美国在韩国的永久军事基地网络的基础。本文回应了关于军事化和军事基地的传统学术,并运用领土和主权的批判性概念来研究在朝鲜战争期间使美国军事化剥夺成为可能的力量。它利用档案证据表明,美国和韩国在战争期间从未就征用土地或财产达成双边协议,但即使面对韩国政府的质疑,美国军方仍然通过某种韩国主权概念构建了自己的征用制度。美国军方通过联合国司令部动员其行动控制下的韩国军队进行民用土地征用,同时辩称其控制下的朝鲜士兵是根据国内法行事的本国特工。然后,它将军事化剥夺描述为韩国国内问题和国内责任。来自朝鲜战争的证据引发了关于美国帝国主权和领土性质的广泛问题,无论是通过军事基地的空间单位还是超越军事基地。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Geopolitics
Geopolitics Multiple-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
10.30%
发文量
50
期刊介绍: The study of geopolitics has undergone a major renaissance during the past decade. Addressing a gap in the published periodical literature, this journal seeks to explore the theoretical implications of contemporary geopolitics and geopolitical change with particular reference to territorial problems and issues of state sovereignty . Multidisciplinary in its scope, Geopolitics includes all aspects of the social sciences with particular emphasis on political geography, international relations, the territorial aspects of political science and international law. The journal seeks to maintain a healthy balance between systemic and regional analysis.
期刊最新文献
From ‘Territorial Peace’ to ‘Total Peace’ in Colombia: A Geopolitical Balance Between ‘ Trochas ’, Orphans and Mourning: Migrant Mobilities and the Effects of US ‘Soft’ Remote Control in Ecuador Regionalism and Alliances in the Middle East, 2011-2021: From a “Flash in the Pan” of Regional Cooperation to Liquid Alliances Veterans, Families and the Domestic Geopolitics of Remembering War Entangled Vulnerabilities: Gendered and Racialised Bodies and Borders in EU External Border Security
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1