The Two Koreas And Their Global Engagements

This book departs from existing studies by focusing on the impact of international influences on the society, culture, and language of both North and South Korea. Since President Kim Young Sam’s segyehwa drive of the mid-1990s, South Korea has become a model for successful globalization. In contrast, North Korea is commonly considered one of the least internationally integrated countries. This characterization fails to account for the reality of the two Koreas and their global engagements. The opening essay situates the chapters by highlighting some significant contrasts and commonalities between the experiences of North and South Korea’s history of engagement with the world beyond the Peninsula. The chapters explore both the longer-term historical influence of Korea’s international contacts as well as specific Korean cultural, linguistic, and social developments that have occurred since the 1990s demise of the global Cold War and greater international integration.

This book explores Korea's place in terms of multiple levels and domains of interaction pertaining to foreign-policy behaviors and relations with the four regional/global powers (China, Russia, Japan, and the United States). The synergy of global transformations has now brought to an end Korea's proverbial identity and role as the helpless shrimp among whales, and both North Korea and South Korea have taken on new roles in the process of redefining and projecting their national identities. Synthetic national identity theory offers a useful perspective on change and continuity in Korea's turbulent relationships with the great powers over the years. Following a review of Korean diplomatic history and competing theoretical approaches, along with a synthetic national-identity theory as an alternative approach, one chapter each is devoted to how Korea relates to the four powers in turn, and the book concludes with a consideration of inter-Korean relations and potential reunification.

The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) has a reputation as one of the worst human rights situations in the world. This book utilizes a unique international law perspective to examine the actions and inactions of North Korea with regard to international security and human rights. Adopting political, military, historical and legal perspectives, the book explores how the two issues of nuclear weapons and the human rights abuses in North Korea are interconnected, and why the international community should apply the same international law framework to find a solution for both. Drawing on eyewitness accounts, such as refugee and defector testimony, Morse Tan offers a real-life story of North Korea that covers the pertinent law, and constructive approaches of its regime. Tan examines the specific objectives and actions of the North Korean government, and measures these according to international legal obligations such as applicable treaty law, jus cogens norms, and customary international law. The book concludes by offering solutions for dealing with international security surrounding the Korean Peninsula, and forwards a proposal for the creation of a tribunal to prosecute those at the top of the regime for international crimes and human rights abuses. As a project exploring the extremes of international law violation, this book will be of great interest and use to readers interested in the history, and political and legal implications of the strategies employed by the North Korea government.

This book represents the first scholarly attempt to summarize and analyze how Korea’s relationship with Africa has been shaped in policy and non-policy aspects. It shows how far it has come and where it goes. The book recognizes that Korea-Africa relations, though relatively new, break ground by acknowledging the importance of a diligent endeavor to carry out post-colonial development, and have continued to grow as we find promising progress and opportunities in the mutual cooperation between the two. This book is all-inclusive, covering Korea’s academic, economic, diplomatic, and civil engagements with Africa. It investigates untold aspects of Korea-Africa relations.

The current research aims to provide analytical understandings on the costs and benefits of Korean unification from political, social, and economic aspects. Upon the two years of earlier works, we constructed an analytical model encompassing both spatial and temporal dimensions of the unification process, and built comprehensive architecture, ‘the Guiding Type of Unification.’ Based on this model, we have broaden the scope of the research by collecting diverse perspectives from the worldwide experts of the leading countries. We expect to observe the global trends of world governance. Indeed, the increasing importance of Group of Twenty (G‐20) countries in managing global problems reflects both political and social aspects of the changes occurring in global governance. Another reason for this would be South Korea’s diversified international relations in the recent years. Hence, it seems necessary to take a closer look on the international dimensions of Korean unification. In this vein, we requested thirteen experts of the leading countries to express their opinions on Korean unification. In order to collect international perspectives in a coordinated manner, scholars were provided with a guideline to include their perspectives on the expected effects of Korean Unification and the potential roles of their countries during and after the process. Participants were also asked to present candid implications for Korean unification. Argentina, whose food supply is abundant, laid stress on providing assistance in terms of food security during the unification. Australia, who has special concerns in Asian security, suggested a comprehensive support not only as a mediator but also as one of the U.S. alliance. Due to remote distance to Asia, Brazil is relatively less affected by the unification. Brazil, however, expressed that it has a keen interest in transmission of its experience regarding nuclear issues with Argentina. Similar to Brazil’s stance, the effects of the unification influence is indirect to Canada. Nevertheless, Canada could play a role in providing humanitarian assistance, and could be a potential destination for North Korean refugee resettlement. France, one of the most influential members in the European Union and the United Nations, made a suggestion to promote institution building in East Asia that can promote stability in the region. Germany, the only country who had experienced unification, presented its interest in participating actively in the process of Korean unification through public and private sectors. India assumed that the unification of Korea leads to the denuclearization of the peninsula, and would see this as a positive sign for stability of the region, since it would limit or end North Korea’s nuclear weapon transmits with Pakistan. Indonesia could contribute to regional peace and stability through ASEAN and its extensions as South Korea can call upon Indonesia to engage in the peace process. Italy, who especially pointed out the role of European Union as a whole, is well-poised to contribute to economic and social development with North Korea through technical assistance. Mexico can, and expressed its willingness to play an active role in the unification process through international organizations. South Africa, who had been successful in national reconciliation and denuclearization, is very likely to provide its experience and can be a strong voice for the NPT and arms control in the international society. Advocating South Korea’s policy in Korean unification, Turkey explicitly mentioned that it will side with Seoul if there is a possible conflict in the peninsula. The author emphasized that the international community must be well-informed on how Korean unification will take place. Last but not least, the United Kingdom author suggested that Koreans will have to resolve emotional conflicts for reconciliation. Considering how both Koreas have dealt educational matters concerning the division of the peninsula, this may face a major challenge in the future generation. Thirteen countries’ diversely manifested positions on the unifying process are indicative of perceptual change that the issue of Korean unification is no longer a regional issue, but an international one, in which multiple actors have their own stakes within. Upon the previously suggested implications, we categorized the countries into three groups: bystanders, supporters, and interveners. This categorization reflects the assertiveness of each country, or coercive level of each country’s assistance instrumented towards the two Koreas during the unifying process. In the conclusion, based on our final analysis, we provided recommendations for the policy makers. First, diversified diplomacy creates an amicable international environment for unification policies beyond the power politics of the Four Powers. Second, activation of leading countries’ roles is strategically advantageous to activate the meaningful roles of these leading countries to minimize the Four Powers’ concerns. Third, emphasizing the formation of multilateral system would provide leading countries with an additional motivation to actively participate in the unification process. Furthermore, multilateral efforts to achieve Korean unification are also expected to contribute to the furtherance of democratic elements in the dynamics of international relations as a whole. Fourth, it is now high time for us to conduct more public diplomacy by devising new and creative methodologies. The global research project of this kind could be one of the most effective public diplomatic tools. Lastly, the unification between two Koreas can no longer be considered as a regional issue within Northeast Asia since others, including the leading countries, conceive their national interests along the process of unification on the Korean peninsula in diverse ways. Overall, thirteen countries’ recommendations underline the significance of collective efforts in addressing the unification process and suggest South Korea to learn lessons from the experience that they have undergone in the past. Keywords: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Mexico, South Africa, Turkey, United Kingdom, Expectation, Role, Effect ------------- CONTENTS ------------- Acknowledgments Abstract Ⅰ. INTRODUCTION Ⅱ. EFFECTS AND ROLES 1. Argentina 2. Australia 3. Brazil 4. Canada 5. France 6. Germany 7. India 8. Indonesia 9. Italy 10. Mexico 11. South Africa 12. Turkey 13. United Kingdom Ⅲ. ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION 1. Expected Effect 2. Potential Roles 3. Classification of Leading Countries Ⅳ. CONCLUSION References Recent Publications

What history, pop culture, and diaspora can teach us about North and South Korea today. Korea is one of the last divided countries in the world. Twins born of the Cold War, one is vilified as an isolated, impoverished, time-warped state with an abysmal human rights record and a reclusive leader who perennially threatens global security with his clandestine nuclear weapons program. The other is lauded as a thriving democratic and capitalist state with the thirteenth largest economy in the world and a model for developing countries to emulate. In The Koreas, Theodore Jun Yoo provides a compelling gateway to understanding the divergent developments of contemporary North and South Korea. In contrast to standard histories, Yoo examines the unique qualities of the Korean diaspora experience, challenging the master narratives of national culture, homogeneity, belongingness, and identity. This book draws from the latest research to present a decidedly demythologized history, with chapters focusing on feature stories that capture the key issues of the day as they affect popular culture and everyday life. The Koreas will be indispensable to any historian, armchair or otherwise, in need of a discerning and reliable guide to the region.

One in a series of booklets whose purpose is to stimulate greater and more effective understanding of world affairs among Americans, this seven-chapter report examines the political, economic, and anomalous positions of North and South Korea in the international system. "Traditional Legacies" traces the historical development of the two Koreas. "The Colonial Pressure Cooker" looks at the colonial system's impact on Korea. "Liberation, Separate Regimes, War" explores national division, rivalry, and the Korean War. "The South Korean Political System" examines South Korean political crises and growth. "The North Korean Political System" examines North Korea's socialist corporatism system. "The Two Economies" compares the two Koreas' different economies. "Foreign Relations" discusses the diplomacy of North and South Korea. The "Talking It Over" section offers questions for students and discussion groups. The report includes maps, pictures, and an annotated reading list. (TRS)

As Korea enters a hopeful new chapter in its history, this timely book, with contributions by distinguished experts in the field, addresses the fragility of the political, economic, and military balance within the two Koreas and in Northeast Asia. It provides in-depth analysis of the principal factors that gave rise to the persisting Cold War on the Korean peninsula, and successfully unravels many aspects of the complicated domestic and economic dynamics of the two Koreas, the patterns of relationship between the two rival states, as well as their changing relationships with the United States and other major powers.