The Jeju April Third Tragedy saw an estimated 14,000 and possibly many thousands more Jeju Islanders killed amid the political turmoil of a re-merging Korean stated after the Japanese occupation. US troops were stationed on the island province before and during the Tragedy which lasted from 1947 to 1954. The aim of this article is to present theoretical and practical issues of the unfnished business of reconciliation and social healing for the victims of the April Third Tragedy; for survivors, for family members, and for the memories of the decreased. This process requires the engagement of as many of the actors at that time, in order to conclude the story of April 3rd Tragedy. Based on 13 years of’ collaborative efforts setting up a vision of Jeju as World Peace Island, there is now formal recognition of the April 3rd Tragedy event. We have hoped for a future beyond the trauma and tragedy of the Mass-killing of Korea Jeju Islanders during and after the US Peacetime Occupation ( 1947-1954). Even though it has taken 10 years to translate the Jeju April 3 Incident Investigation Report of 2003 into an English edition in 2013, I believe, it provides a cornerstone for Jeju islanders to open a new Age of Social Healing for the Mass Killing of Korea Jeju Islanders ( the Tragedy) while under and then after US Military Peacetime Occupation (1947- 1954).

I want to explore some of the efforts that people living on small islands on this Island Earth have used to manage peace in their often remote places, distant from state government as all of us know it and very immediate in consequences. At the end of my conceptual survey, I propose that a space for peace could be created on Jeju Island, the Peace Island, and that an appropriate mechanism could be something we might call the “Jeju Peace Island Peace Bultuk” where interested parties can come to discuss in cultural calm and natural beauty their seeming diffculties. I give my reasons throughout the paper why I have selected Jeju Peace Island as a place for peace not only for its conditions today, but owing to features of its special cultural history. Looking at a map again, Jeju is quite separate from its neighbours in East Asia. Whilst being politically a part of the Republic of Korea, it is an autonomous region where constitutionally it could create special conditions that would permit it to assume a global role in peace negotiations. That crucial location in East Asia is a symbolic shift from the European Atlantic to the Asian Pacifc as the new locus of world power, culture and economy. Jeju’s location is very much in accord with Asia’s growing importance in world affairs. By establishing a World Peace Tribunal or “Bultuk” on Jeju Peace Island it would acknowledge this power shift as the reality that it is. On 27 January 2005, the Government of South Korea declared Jeju “Peace Island” laying the foundation for this proposal. A little over a year later, on 1 July 2006, the Republic of Korea advanced even further by declaring Jeju Peace Island an “Autonomous Self-Governing Province”, providing the basis for the place to assume an international and independent role in world affairs. Unlike existing European focused places of peace, Jeju is a small island with a small population, without global commercial, economic or political interests as is the case with The Netherlands, Switzerland and the USA, respectively. Apart from being an island with restful scenery and many pleasant places where such a World Peace Tribunal could be established, there are characteristics of the ancient Jeju culture that I think make it an appropriate place for the twenty-frst century experiment in world problem solutions.

There are many reparations cases in East Asia, especially relating to Japanese invasion and colonization, such as those on forced slave labor, comfort women, Chinese massacres; and a number of related lawsuits have to date been filed. However, most of these legal cases have been turned down, even though a limited number of cases (e.g., the Hanaoka and Nishimatsu Chinese forced labor cases) have been resolved outside of the courts. In this paper, the Jeju April 3rd massacre has been taken close up as one of the Asian reparations cases. Thus I’ll try to discuss how to deal with this past injustice compared to other related reparations cases and point out the challenges we are facing relating to this horrifying historical injustice in the 1940s-50s in this peaceful Jeju island. First, international as well as domestic reparation cases will be surveyed in depth. Second we’ll deal with why the legal cases have been unsuccessful so far in Japan, and the ways to overcome legal obstacles. Then we will discuss the mechanism of reparations and its goal: reconciliation and a change of the international and racial relationship. The important role of an apology will also be considered.

The Ministry of National Defense designated Gangjeong Village located on the southern shores of Jeju Island as the site for the construction of a naval base in 2007. Since then, the decision has brought about severe confict among the people concerned, Navy and Jeju local government. This paper examines the issue of public interest judgment in case of public confict such as Jeju naval base construction. The fundamentals of the conflict in the case come from the justification on the part of the government’s decision. In the case of the navy, through the construction of its base, it purports the abstract concept of national security as its goal. On the other hand, it proceeded with its goal without suffcient evidence and justifcation as to why there is a need for a naval base in Jeju and why the ideal site has to be Gangjeong Village. The government (navy) is looking at the construction of the base from a national project point of view as a policy while the residents are approaching the problem from the matter of principle of community interest as a whole. This forms the fundamentals of confict and ultimately has resulted in a practical failure and postponement in the execution of the government policy. Following the Flathman’s argument, this paper has the perspective that securing justification in a public confict is the fundamental element in judging whether it is for the public interest or not. In order to do this, this paper focuses on the evidence and validity of various arguments surrounding the naval base construction and through them, look closely into the cause and effect of public confict and ultimately the alternative meaning of public interest. In addition, it seeks to point out the limits of policy approaches and conficts that appear due to differences in opinions regarding public interest when dealing with public issues that are lacking in values.

The purpose of this study is to present many polices of transportation demand management and ways to institutionalize them in order to actively introduce the total number of vehicles system as a strategy to solve the traffc problems in the Jeju area and protect the environment on Jeju Island. Various measures and polices of transportation demand management as well as the total number of vehicle system are presented. These are considered as long-term policies which need to be applied to the Jeju area. Implementing these policies will need some time to attract the public’s policy compliance and they need to be institutionalized through a variety of ways. Below are the ways to achieve this goal: (1) Introduction of the total number of vehicles system, (2) introducing motor fuel tax on energy consumption, (3) differentiation of parking fees based on types of vehicles, (4) charging for mileage, (5) collecting congestion fees and levying garage option, and (6) managing license plates through auction.