Some Problems of Military Government

1944 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 460-474
Author(s):  
A. C. Davidonis

The United States Army officially defines military government as “that form of government which is established and maintained by a belligerent by force of arms over occupied territory of the enemy and over the inhabitants thereof.” “It is a government imposed by force and the legality of its acts is determined by the laws of war.” An application of this definition in the formulation of an adequate and enlightened civil affairs policy brings many difficult problems in its train, and particularly is this true in the modern, complex organization of society and warfare.Thrown into prominence by the war, such problems of military government at present occupy the attention not only of American political and military authorities, but also of numerous scholars and publicists. That the latter should display so keen an interest in what is apparently a strictly military matter is a sign of the growing realization that solution of the problems of military government is vital for the successful prosecution of the war and for establishing the conditions which will make possible an equitable peace settlement. American public opinion, to some extent led and moulded by scholars and publicists, is unmistakably concerned with civil affairs administration of allied occupied territories across the sea and with plans for those yet to be occupied.

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inhan Kim

The conventional wisdom regarding land reform in South Korea implemented by the United States Army Military Government in Korea (USAMGIK) is that it was a partial and short-term palliative driven by the exigent Communist threat and the free-land program adopted in North Korea. This article offers a new interpretation of the motives, process, and impact of the land reform program under the U.S. military occupation, highlighting three points. First, the United States was serious about conducting a land-to-tiller program because of its desire to stop Communism and pave the way for democracy in South Korea. Both goals were important. Second, the partial reform in March 1948 is explained by volatile political circumstances in South Korea: strong Communist activity at the beginning of the occupation and the rise of intransigent conservatives at the end. Third, the U.S.-sponsored land reform catalyzed further reform by the new South Korean government by setting a precedent and establishing guidelines for land redistribution parcel sizes, prices, and payment schedules.


This chapter charts the infrastructure of intelligence created by the US military on the ground in southern Korea and positions this project within a larger story of Korea's position relative to the global shifts of sovereignty, recognition, and warfare through the twentieth century. Language is an especially pivotal realm for power in this chapter, as close readings of diplomatic memoranda and military government ordinances show how US agents and officials attempted to fashion and control a Korean subject suitable for their project of military occupation. But the Korean populace were neither passive readers nor silent listeners, and Korean political organizations distributed their own pamphlets and lined walls with posters. In front of the Koreans' undeniable demands and harvest uprisings, the United States Army Military Government in Korea depended on the Counterintelligence Corps to provide certainty and knowledge about the Korean individual subject.


1919 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 476-476
Author(s):  
No authorship indicated

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document