Earticle

현재 위치 Home

1920년대 초 중국 지식인이 본 코민테른과 중러 현안
The Comintern and Sino-Russian Issues as Viewed by Chinese Intellectuals in the Early 1920s

첫 페이지 보기
  • 발행기관
    동북아시아문화학회 바로가기
  • 간행물
    동북아 문화연구 KCI 등재 바로가기
  • 통권
    제88집 (2026.09)바로가기
  • 페이지
    pp.23-55
  • 저자
    조세현
  • 언어
    한국어(KOR)
  • DOI
    https://doi.org/10.17949/jneac.1.88.202609.002
  • URL
    https://www.earticle.net/Article/A493522

※ 원문이용 방식은 연계기관의 정책을 따르고 있습니다.

원문보기

원문정보

초록

영어
Soviet Russia, following the end of the Civil War and the implementation of the New Economic Policy (NEP), began to actively pursue foreign policy, seeking to restore diplomatic and economic relations with capitalist countries and neighboring states. As socialist revolutions failed to spread across Western Europe, the Comintern shifted its strategy toward the “East,” attempting to build revolutionary alliances in Asia, including China. This policy was concretized through the establishment and operation of institutions such as the Far Eastern Peoples’ Congress and the Communist University of the Toilers of the East, which exerted significant influence on communist movements and national revolutions in East Asia. This article analyzes these policies from a multi-dimensional perspective through the travel accounts of three figures?Jiang Kanghu, Qu Qiubai, and Baopu. All three traveled to Moscow via the Trans-Siberian Railway in the early 1920s and left written records, directly or indirectly experiencing the Far Eastern Peoples’ Congress and the Communist University of the Toilers of the East. Jiang Kanghu observed the congress with a relatively detached attitude, whereas Qu Qiubai, participating as an interpreter, actively affirmed the significance of the Comintern. In contrast, Baopu critically exposed the underlying contradictions and inner workings of the congress. Their accounts vividly illustrate major diplomatic conflicts between China and Soviet Russia at the time, including issues concerning Chinese migrants in Russia, the Chinese Eastern Railway, and the Mongolian question. Jiang Kanghu, from a nationalist perspective, criticized the Soviet stance on Mongolia, while Qu Qiubai showed sympathy toward the Comintern’s position. Baopu, adopting an anti-Bolshevik stance, criticized what he perceived as the imperialistic nature of the Soviet regime. These differing interpretations of a shared experience demonstrate the complex interplay between revolutionary ideology and national consciousness.

저자

  • 조세현

참고문헌

자료제공 : 네이버학술정보

간행물 정보

발행기관

  • 발행기관명
    동북아시아문화학회 [The Association of North-east Asian Cultures]
  • 설립연도
    2000
  • 분야
    복합학>학제간연구
  • 소개
    동북아시아 문화의 다양성과 정체성을 연구 토론하고, 지역내 문화 교류의 다양한 모습을 연구하고 문화변동의 큰 틀을 집적함으로써 우리 민족 문화 및 상대 민족의 문화적 터전을 이해하여 문화공동체적 특성을 계발하고 상호 관련성의 강화를 유도하는 학술활동을 통해 동북아시아의 문화발전에 이바지함.

간행물

  • 간행물명
    동북아 문화연구 [Journal of North-east Asian Cultures]
  • 간기
    계간
  • pISSN
    1598-3692
  • 수록기간
    2001~2026
  • 등재여부
    KCI 등재
  • 십진분류
    KDC 910 DDC 950

이 권호 내 다른 논문 / 동북아 문화연구 제88집

    피인용수 : 0건 (자료제공 : 네이버학술정보)

    함께 이용한 논문 이 논문을 다운로드한 분들이 이용한 다른 논문입니다.

      페이지 저장