This years symposium focuses on korea the first forever war. And while americans think of the war as forgotten, intend to remember and to consider the legacies of the war for the peoples and the nations who fought the war in korea. Inaugural aided Police Action is a new kind of warfare. It made the cold war hot and it began a series of forever wars that continue Shape International politics and diplomacy. Today were honored to have with us some of the leading of the war who bring a variety of scholarly expertise and Public Policy experience to bear on the wars causes, experiences and its legacies will begin a panel on the wars causes. And i am delighted to introduce our panelists, to you. So to my immediate left is gregg brazinsky, who is professor of history and International Affairs at George Washington university, a historian, u. S. And east asian relations, east Asian International history. Hes the author of winning the third world and nation building in south korea. Steven casey is professor of International History at London School of economics and political science. Hes a professor of Foreign Policy and the author of several, including selling the korean war and when soldiers fall how americans have divided combat casualties world war one to the war on terror. Marielle dusek is the Asa Griggs Candler of law at emory university, a leading scholar of legal history in the United States in the world is the author of wartime an idea its history and its consequences and her next going to war an American History is under contract with Oxford University and is very eagerly anticipated by some of us in this room. So as a saw, as a historian, ill for myself as a historian, i like to start at beginning. And if we start at the beginning, maybe we could talk and today with a little bit of discussion, the beginning of the korean war, its partly, i think for many americans, its an episode of the cold war. But its also war of decolonization. Its a war of nationalism. It is a war with so many individual threads, each of which become magnified and intensified as. They become entangled. So it might be an unfair question, but i love the question anyway. And i wanted to just ask each of our panelists, when did the korean begin . Would you should i start . You can go right ahead. Thank you. Thank you, for inviting me to this colloquy. Its a great privilege to be here amongst so many other fantastic scholars so. I think, you know, even today when the korean is taught in american schools, a lot of times still emphasized that it began on june 25th, 1950, when north korea invaded, south korea. But i think over the last 30 years, its become pretty commonly accepted among that, if you to understand the origins of, the korean war and how it started, you cant really just start with that date in 1950. You to look at the previous years and understand what was on in korea. Between 1945. In 1950, because there already a lot of social conflict within korea by the end of World War Two, in part because japanese colonialism had created such sharp divisions between some koreans who had benefited from japanese colonialism different ways and some koreans who had suffered partially because had resisted japanese colonialism. So when japanese colonial wisdom and, you know, japan surrender its colonies in 1945 when this long suddenly comes to an end all of these tensions, frictions between and among koreans are rising to the surface very quickly. And so a lot of the histories know a lot of whats been written about korean war in the last 30 years, as that there probably would you know, there was an emerging civil conflict in korea in, you know, in the years between. 1945 and 1950. And there were already a lot deaths in borders, issues between north and south korea, between 1948 and 1950. So so, you know, theres historians of sort of debated what is relation between this ongoing conflict and the korean war is is what we call the korean war. Did it grow out of this civil that was occurring korea . Did it occur at the expense of this ongoing civil conflict or was it some combination of both and. I think thats thats what historians who study the war have been talking and debating. Thanks greg. And im historian of america so my starting place actually would be this nasty sort of waste. It will talk because i think for for the treatment, the thing that really struck when i was first researching this is that unlike americas other 20th century wars, where were long leading times of the months, even years of debate about should america go to war in world war one, World War Two, vietnam and so forth. Outbreak of the korean war in the korean on june 24th, 25th does really take the Truman Administration by surprise and there is a real shock there. And i think the lack of awareness of of the issues that historians are now debating about whats going on in the Korean Peninsula, i think is quite striking. The Truman Administration and pretty much everybody in washington over that weekend almost emphatically disagree that this is a korean civil conflict. The first instinct is that this is directed by stalin. And the big question is why stalin now seeking to expand military force . And i think thats the thing that really washington by surprise. Yes. Theres been a cold war from trumans perspective for the past three years. But that cold war quite limited. The american seen the threat as being largely economic, growing out of the dislocation of World War Two and the american response have largely economic aid. The Marshall Plan is sort of the signifier of that and also the areas of the cold war have become familiar and been fought over a divided germany. Berlin when americans are thinking about asia in . The first half of 1950, its very much the end game with the chinese civil war. Whats going to happen in taiwan and, the fact that all of a sudden north korean troops are going across this recognized border that does shock, surprise as and horror. Truman, in his first press statement, says that the threat has gone from internal subversion to direct military attack. And i think that really explains the american response, which is to send Ground Troops within a week, which i think is an unusual response. Ten years earlier, france had fallen in World War Two. An american pretty much done nothing. Now, exactly ten years later, north korea, south korea, according to the truman, within a week, Ground Troops are being sent. This is a new transformed nation and that american involvement does transform this civil conflict into something much bigger, which then subsequently gets transformed in something even bigger in sort of october, november, december, when the peoples of china then also intervenes. So there is an escalation of what the korean war is over course of 1950 from the civil conflict into the United States, being at war with the communist regime of china and so thank you all for being here morning and thank you for including me in this conversation usually the question of when a war that the United States is involved when it begins for the United States. Its an easy question, right . When was the war declared . The thing about the korean war is not only did truman not seek a war, a very action going forward, but he also to even call it a war. And so, you know, at a press conference, a reporter says, well, is a Police Action. And he says. Oh, yeah, its a Police Action. So he called it by euphemism. Interestingly, the war never began in the at the Truman Administration, because when you look at the folder titles in the boxes and they retain usually the folder titles from the administration they say korean emergency. And so the korean, the Truman Administration is basically deep denial about fact that theyve started a war without asking congress to authorize it, without it, you know, and then, you know. Not only sending troops, deciding to send troops quite quickly, even before the u. N. Security council authorized the use of. So he was acting on president ial power alone. So, you know, you know, theres another date of, u. S. Action thats important which is in 1945, american officers chose 38th parallel as a place divide who, you know, who would be occupying which part of korea. And so on some level its american from the beginning that helped create this division that then the conflict in that was ongoing ends up being sort geographically organized pursuant to artificial pick. You know, they wanted seoul to be the capital in the south. So lets find a line above that. And they knew that there were actually no geographic or cultural reasons for that line. But thats on some level part of how things how things affected the conflict on the peninsula going forward. Thats fascinating think because the one area of course this is not just the civil conflict, not just the cold war conflicts. Is it the first United Nations war as well which is which is interesting and actually when because of the time difference state Department First learns about north korean attack saturday the 24th and the first instinct of acheson before he informs the president is to convene this emergency as the security council. The next day. And so exactly why that kneejerk reaction there, why the u. N. Almost is taking priority over congressional is an interesting fact of and the way in, i think, the issue of congressional is relatively muted in america the summer of 1950s, because of the un. But the fact that truman hasnt gone and got a congressional declaration becomes increasingly controversial as the war drags on and as the war unpopular. Yeah there was deep concern about to war with the out of declaration at the time. There is no constitute there is no Legal Authority for what he has done you know was of the arguments so you know many in the internal meetings within the white house the blair meetings sometimes would have a Congress Member there who would say, wait a minute, you know, you know, you know, it was whether it was a war and whether it was something which truman needed authorizing action was something, although it didnt rise to, the level of Congress Standing up and saying, no on some level, he didnt have an opportunity to do that. But, you know, once troops are on the ground, what always happens is, is political figures are going to their troops and going to rally behind the president. And thats so ends up being what happens initially. You see why i like this question. Right. Theres not one easy answer. Its all of the above. Perhaps maybe it depends on ones perspective, right to the date. If there is a date might be different for the United States or the u. N. Or china or or you know, weve talked sort of about the korean perspective here. Right. Why how would koreans the beginning of this war . So historians will just say its complicated and leave it there may be. Right . Well, i mean, i think i again, i mean, i think it it depends a lot on on the perspective that youre taking and sort of, you know, which National Experience youre viewing it through the lens of primarily. And i mean i think historians may still have work to do in terms of you know how do you view it through sort of multiple different of National Experiences at the same time but you know i they were speaking a lot of from the u. S. Perspective and this issue of it being in on, you know, an undeclared war and thats you know, thats often whats on the u. S. Side and lot of those debates, you know, interestingly, the chinese side, they dont the troops that they send to korea are called volunteers. And so theyre volunteering to help the north koreans also not a declaration of war against the United States on the chinese either. So, you know, so so theres some when it comes to the larger powers that got involved in the korean war and what their perspective and how they see it. And i also think you theres just you know so theres multiple dimensions about when people think the korean war began. Also you know what really changes on june 25th, 1950 from the perspective of koreans less changes then from the perspective of americans, i would say yes. So can you talk a little bit about how something that began with roots that were in local conflict and civil conflict sort of starts to escalate after the Second World War and through colonialism why would something particular to the Korean Peninsula become of such significance of such great concern to the United Nations or to china or the soviet or the United States . I think theres lot of reasons for that. One thing a lot, of people look at dean achesons famous defense perimeter speech, where he lays out what he says, you know this is the defense perimeter. It runs from the aleutians and so forth. And on. And he leaves korea out of the defense perimeter. And a lot of people say, well, thats why the korean war started. Its because acheson didnt put korea south korea in the defense perimeter. But if you look at other parts of the one of the things that he says is that the united has already made a significant investment and in trying to build south korea and and even you know in 1948, you have to korean states that represent influence of the cold war superpower. You have the United States try to build liberal in the south, even though it was not very liberal or very democratic in 1948. And of course, you have in the north. And so much like divided germany in europe, a lot of people, you know, americans think that people around the world are going to look at the Korean Peninsula and see it as sort of a showcase or a test where the relative merits of communism versus the free world are going to be to people all around the world. And so i think even in 1950 and so south korea was much more important to the United States and to policymakers in particular larger than is commonly. So so one thing thats interesting is if you go about the defense perimeters, right, where acheson is saying were not going to defend south if, you go to the war memorial of korea, seoul, which is their big their big is you know, museum memory, remembering the war when you go into the exhibit about the war itself, the first thing you see is an exhibit on the defensive perimeter speech. So its as if to say this is why this war happened because because dean, the United States basically said that that theyre not going to defend us, even though the the memorial as a whole. And the grounds are deeply respectful of the american soldiers participated in the war who died. As you walk towards entrance its extremely powerful. You know on all either side you are names of of soldiers who who died in the war by country by country and while i was there you know how go to the the the vietnam war memorial and at nathans i saw a man up on his steps to all edge you know sort of using material to sort of you know etch the name of of of of a soldier who had died doing on behalf of family who who wasnt able to be on the trip with him. So but i you know, in terms of the sort of u. N. And the seeing it as a major cold war battle, you know, the United States, the nations was the that was governing south korea at the time. There were supposed to be elections in, the north and in the south. Instead, there was only an in the south. And so the United Nations thought of south korea as thats the, you know, a United Nations entity were protecting them and the, you know, even now in the legal doctrine, a that its argued that it was appropriate for president truman to unilaterally decide to go to war is that he was protecting an important american interest. And what that interest the United Nations as there was great concern about would the u. N. Survive. You know what happen if this big u. N. Objective failed so thats thats one of the reasons that that action on behalf of the United Nations was seen to be as it seemed to be tremendously important of my perspective. I think one of the things, despite not getting declaration of war, truman is very successfully able in the summer of 1950 to build both a domestic an International Coalition behind the deployment of troops. So that evaporates by the end of the year. But he does, i think, because two overlapping factors here that coincide. One is the cold war, the fact that korea is is important is important strategically because of its geographic position vis a vis japan, as well as its symbol. But its also important when truman is in independence, missouri, on the 24th, when he learns of the attack, he flies to washington the next day. And in his memoirs, he says, as im looking out the window, im thinking about the 1930s and in the 1930s, when the west allow totalitarian dictatorships to expand, the news falls without any comeback. That led to World War Three. So