UC San Diego

The aftermath of state violence calls for reconciliation between victim groups, perpetrators, and the broader society to avoid further conflicts and ensure lasting peace and stability. In transitional justice, reconciliation is crucial yet challenging elements due to their multifaceted nature. This dissertation conceptualizes reconciliation as a processual concept, distinguishing between “thin” and “thick” reconciliation. “Thin” reconciliation involves basic agreements to coexist, while “thick” reconciliation encompasses deep societal healing and understanding. This dissertation addresses why variations in reconciliation outcomes occur despite similar reparations programs, focusing on the emotional complexities of victim groups. By examining the redress of Taiwan 2.28 incident and the Jeju 4.3 incident in South Korea -- both civilian uprisings in late 1940s leading to brutal massacres and violence -- it investigates how cultural, institutional, and communal dimensions influence reconciliation depth. Through a comparative analysis, it highlights the significance of monetary compensation, legal proceedings, and trauma care programs in shaping reconciliation processes. In Taiwan, the premature distribution of compensation for the 2.28 incident victims led to secondary victimization and fragmented victim organizations, resulting in ambivalent feelings toward government efforts. In contrast, the compensation process for Jeju 4.3 victims involved long-term engagement and trust-building, demonstrating the importance of socio-cultural meaning in reparations. The dissertation introduces the concept of “restorative money acts” to describe how monetary compensation can foster trust and acknowledgement when designed and implemented meaningfully. Legal proceedings are analyzed through the lens of “judicial communalism,” highlighting how victim-centered legal processes can empower victim groups and foster collective identity and solidarity. The comparison between Taiwan and Jeju illustrates the impact of active victim participation in legal actions on reconciliation outcomes. Finally, the dissertation explores the role of trauma care programs in reconciliation, using Durkheim’s distinction between the “profane” and the “sacred.” Taiwan’s profane approach to trauma healing is contrasted with Jeju’s sacred approach, which recognizes and venerates victims’ suffering, contributing to thicker reconciliation. The findings extend beyond East Asia, offering insights for global reparations movements, such as calls for reparations for the descendants of slaves in the United States. By emphasizing the symbolic meaning of reparations, the empowerment of victims, the importance of victim identity, this study contributes to the theoretical understanding of historical reparations and reconciliation as ongoing processes. Future research should further explore the divergence of meaning in reparations to advance thicker reconciliation in various contexts.