Conference on Korean Americans – Session 2

Professor Pyong Gap Min: So we are about to start Session 2. Let me introduce Dr. Jang Sung Hoon. He is an assistant professor at City College of Technology, specializing in Electrical and Telecommunication Engineering Technology. He will introduce the speakers, but I have to say something Dr. Youn-Suk Kim because, personally I invited him. All other participants they were very much CUNY faculty members they are doing for service, but Dr. Youn-Suk Kim teaches at Kean University. He is an expert on the Korean economy and he just came back from Korea. He just gave a lecture in Korea and three days ago he came back. It was very difficult, but he very graciously accepted our invitation, so I’d like to appreciate him.

 

Dr. Youn-Suk Kim: Thank you very much for the introduction. I am an economist; however, when I look at the audience, I have to change that approach. I’d prepare content—an economist is obsessed with numbers and data—that’s the way we are used to talking. Today, I am changing the style, I’ll change it into a more descriptive way; however, sometimes I have to substantiate something, so I will come back to the prepared text.

 

About two weeks ago, a couple of faculty members came to me, the [inaudible] saying that Koreans need to be experienced [inaudible]. Is it true? That is my question. Can we develop how Koreans’ incomes are different from other ethnicities? As you know, in American education institutions, there are South Americans, so Americans that essentially develop from Latin Americans. They are very limited in their passport. So I told them, look to East Asia. First Japan developed, then Korea or Taiwan, then Hong Kong and Singapore. Now China is almost like a driver of the whole world economy. Then we discussed the coordination with each aspect, the physical aspect with Confucian, and this is how we communicate. Today, you have extra comments on that, so I will still come back to economics.

 

Now a good many of you already know about the Korean economy. This is a success story when I teach about developing economies. When I give a talk, they ask us, “Teach us Taiwan’s economy or the Korean economy.” I’m not going to go back to historical courses, although at the end of the presentation, I may touch upon it.

 

Today, what is the Korean economy? The fact, as also Dr. Min just mentioned, I came from Seoul, Korea and I don’t want to go there again; certainly, [inaudible] I was worth it. I would finish and at least I got the sense. Let me just get into what Korean economies are today. Korea in 2005 is the eleventh largest economy in the world and third largest trading country in the world. Korea having successful industrialization and economic development, many Korean investors are now looking abroad to achieve comparable growth rate from rising exports and maintaining the domestic market. In this context, you hear that the Korean economy has Chinese foundations. Could you believe this? It is not know here that Korea is the largest investor in China, in 2004, the largest investor. Why don’t we know? There are three forces in the Chinese economy, investment forces: Hong Kong, British Virgin Islands, to South Korea. Hong Kong is China so we just discount them. British Virgin Islands investments have so many countries involved. [inaudible] Korea is ahead of which it came, so this is interesting for us to know.

 

Now going into another factor, Korea is showing that industrialization is possible and changing reasonably rapidly under proper conditions. It took the United Kingdom fifty eight years to double its output per worker; the USA was forty seven; even Japan thirty four years; however, Korea only took eleven years for the amount of that. We have to know how this thing happened. The reason was technological progress because Korea has relatively easy access to the technology from Japan and the United States, which were its important sources for importing technology.

 

Again, Senator [name inaudible] argued why is East Asia such a success story. Why China went so long until suddenly it becomes almost a superstar today? Look at South and North Korea: South Korea has twenty four times a larger GDP than North Korea. To begin with, they are bigger than South Korea. It has something to do with democracy; it has something to do with the market economy and free markets. How do you prove? Look at China, look at East Asia—it is coming strong. So I don’t want to backtrack so I might [inaudible] so to speak, talk about the Korean economy today and its trends. I will move on then.

 

When you see how Korea achieved its remarkable economic success story, we will have to go through Korean industrial policy. We have the state and associated time factors, and discretely put more focus on current situations and more focus on the logistic aspects, namely technology. The Koreans are industrial [inaudible]. Korea focused on using Malaysia’s economic base and it involved channeling economic clauses into specific targeted industries that will be viewed at being vital or strategic in industrial Asia. And you want to know what it is in New York (on our website, you will see a lot of education is involved with that argument). The technology aspect I will elaborate much deeper and what happens to be much [inaudible].

 

In Korea, industrialization integrated international product cycles into production export policy, so as to realize dynamic comparative advantages by mixing domestic resources with imported capital goods and technologies. As you know, one of the African professors approached me, and he is a thirty five year old Nigerian. In 1963, Nigeria [inaudible], so Nigerians want to know how you made, and they gave me a specific topic: human capital and the education aspect. So I am more focused on technology, and for this reason I just gave [inaudible] was that computers [inaudible]. They provided me to [inaudible]. Again, [inaudible] was not too sure whether they were [inaudible] or salt, and then invited East Asian economists to talk about that. So again, when you get into developing countries, Korea is at the top. I just want you to know how they are able to reach the top, again how economic jobs provide leverage; it takes too much time, like much more.

 

Today, Korea is in the stages of powerful new industrial structure to adapt to high technology. When you look into the firm, some firms’ byproducts are high technology: semiconductors, chips are products of high technology. Where do they come from? It is interesting. Korea’s industry has been developed from imported technology, and then Korea undercuts its own technological innovations, complemented by technological transfer. Korean industrialization focused on its most advantageous industries, such as semiconductors and information technology as leading sectors for us to realize spillover onto either industries. Semiconductors were an interesting case. Originally, American computer companies didn’t consider Koreans as a candidate. They are, in the 1960s—the middle of the 1960s—they headed to Singapore for assembly plant but the Preston journal gave them the information, and then they stopped by Seoul Kimpo airport and invited them. Could you take a look at our facilities and our workers? And this was the beginning of the boost of Korean semiconductors. The developing countries, we have opportunities everywhere. In that sense, the Korea case is very interesting. I can go on about that matter for one hour, no problem. But since there is a time issue, I would like to cover some more because the audience is a diverse group, so I would like to move on.

 

Semiconductors is the mother of information technology. Today, Koreans have the number one memory chip, computers, semiconductors. The nanochips are number two, but this all began from America. Japan took American inventions and they commercialized. In that sense, I used the international global life cycle. I used to work in East Asia miracle. Japan miracle. Korean miracle. And now you see Taiwan and China coming forward. But if you back up, you see a lot of the social, ethical, or modern—among all those things they are focusing on for these economic prospects.

 

The industrial drive has focused on mostly the Korean government taking a proactive role to accelerate reform and restructure to align industrialization with the ship of information technology, to make it more conducive to realize the international network effect. Korean technology has started from a very simple product to become innovative, world-class, competitive, in steel, shipbuilding, electrons, automobiles, and semiconductors, cell phones as you know. Korea succeeded in assimilating foreign technologies and transforming itself into a controller of advanced technology. Korea’s unique strategy of importing, learning, and improving foreign technologies by itself is first in terms of realizing technological capabilities, which would enable Korea to cooperate and compete head to head with the U.S., Japan, and other advanced nations at the frontier of high technology industries. Korea has so far succeeded in transforming itself from an imitator to an innovator.

 

At the same time, the age of information technologies was creating opportunities for small and medium sized companies. The internet gives small firms the same access to markets and information that larger firms have; it eliminates the advantages of scale in some industries by giving small firms the opportunity to network with other firms. The adaptability, speed of management, and innovation capability that are important to smaller firms are counting to be [inaudible]. Korea has demonstrated itself that small firms can compete in the standard production activities, though principles of economic growth are made possible by information technology.

 

Now we should move on internationally. Now instead of going back, I’d like to talk about East Asia; Dr. Lee talked about how there are a large number of non Korean Asian origins. So maybe we will make East Asia our last topic. How I get into East Asia, just gets me started on what we said earlier, on how is East Asia situation. If you want to know anything on the Korean economy, I have for a long time studied Korea and Japan. So I am a newcomer to the China economy. As for Korea and Japan, I can handle any questions you have.

 

South Korea is quietly becoming a major investor in East Asia. These multinationals like [name inaudible] and Samsung have proven matches for Japanese, American, and European companies in China and elsewhere in East Asia. South Korea is estimated to be the largest single source of foreign investment in China. Making 6.25 billion dollars fixed have been invested in China in 2004. East Asia becomes ripe for regional integration. This is the chance, the only way East Asia can continue to match as we expect it is that East Asia must to cooperate. East Asia, I can tell you about China, Japan, and Korea—that’s the key battle. If the three countries came together, and then ASEAN will follow through, then we Asians can match European unions, NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement). If these kinds of divisions all separate, then eventually they will run into difficulties. This is where political wisdom, economic wisdom, business wisdom get together. We don’t know if we can overcome the lot of overhang, the history of the political interest. But economists are pretty much united in how East Asian economic regions are formed and shaped. Next year, the Asian development, for the first time will include Asian currency, kind of similar or trying to emulate European currency. We’ll see how that leads us. We tried Asian monetary policy—it didn’t go much—but this one is a giant step to European currency, very successful.

 

China, Japan, and Korea have been promoting free trade agreement. While Japan and China are in competition to secure leadership within the league, [inaudible] is being contested. The energy of the Chinese economy on the global market has also had one important new development within this league. China’s industrial testing financed by East Asian nations such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan. In the last two decades, trade investment has been undertaken among East Asian regions at an increasing rate. Northeast Asia has a population of 1.5 billion, four times the population of Europe, and they also share cultural and historical backgrounds. With this geographically [inaudible], this location at the heart of Northeast Asia and at long last high technology infrastructure. Within the region, it will become the center for communication and logistical and financial hub for the league. Therefore, Korea wants to be the center of Northeast Asia in finance, transportation, and communication. Thank you very much.

 

Dr. Sung Hoon Jang: Thank you very much Professor Kim for the talk on the Korean economy today. So this is Sung Hoon Jang. I am working at City College of Technology. So let’s say that we talk about the generations in previous sessions, I’m sure that I am first generation as a Korean immigrant. I’ve been living here for ten years, but I’ve was born and raised in Korea in my college years there. If I go back to Korea, I have no other generation title, like the 386 because there is something in college in the 80s they called 386. I remember my college years, so I’m sure I spent more time on the street than in the classroom because of political issues. That is why I’m sure as soon as I came over to this country for a graduate program, I had a lot of problems besides language and culture and even majors because I never learned poetry; but I worked. That’s why, these days, if you could connect the problems in Korea to our generation I don’t think we would do a very good job. My personal idea in both economics and politics, it is like a foundation of their major, because I’ve learned myself how; one of my friends who found a job when they graduated because in all honesty, I did not feel very learned, but I got two or three jobs offered when I graduated. But what pops up these days in the new generation, they’re working very hard, they’re working the entire four years, day and night I’m sure, but still having a hard time finding a job. One out of one hundred, one out of two hundred; that’s a very low number but these days they are very used to it. I never heard of it when I was in that position, so I think maybe because of we didn’t do a good job. The whole of this problem is solved by another ten years hopefully. Anyway, that’s my story. So Friday is a very busy day for me. I have many classes to cover and I have to go back as soon as I finish this session because I have evening classes to cover, so I have to run back to my college.

 

Anyway, I am very first honored to be working as a presider for this session. But as you know I’m a director of engineers; I’m not that close to politics and economics, but I will try my hardest to cover this session.

 

Let me introduce the next speaker, Ms. Bihn Seo, currently working at the Consul, with the Korean consulate general. She will be talking about democracy and reconciliation, review of political development of the public career, and its relations with democratic papers of the public career—it may be known as North Korea edict. She graduated from college in Korea, and did her Masters and graduate degree at the University of Virginia. So please give her a good welcome, Council Bihn Seo.

 

Consul Bihn Seo: Thanks for the warm introduction. I’m very pleased to here in remembrance of the first Korean conference, to be participating in this conference as Koreans from Korea. As I heard from these sessions, Korean peoples are a very politically conscious peoples, and even though I lived more than 20 years in Korea, maybe you would know much better about the Korean cultural situation and development. But I would like briefly touch upon the Korean political development, and in time I can share with you some of the thoughts on the peninsular issues, we can discuss the relations between North South, and pretty much steer you through issues regarding North Korea in the program.

 

As in most policies, Korean political development pretty much was heavily influenced by external affairs. It is especially so because of the geographical location of the peninsula. Since the inception of the first republic in 1948, and passing through the two military dictatorships in the 1960s and 70s along with the 1980s. Until the participatory government that was established in 2003, Korean holdings were affected by Cold War confrontation, post war reconciliation, and globalization and opening up the markets.

 

Post war gave an excuse sometimes for political leaders to squeeze democratic movements; therefore, the Korean people had to suffer a lot for a very protected time of authoritarian rule. However, the Korean people in some ways were committed mostly by very the intrinsic nature of the Korean people to mobilize their power and try to participate, even through grassroots movements. So this strong desire for justice and democracy was realized in the present, very mature democracy in South Korean now.

 

We have witnessed the April 19^th uprising in 1960 which brought down the first republic tainted by the Washington fraud election at the 18 months [inaudible]. In the 1980s, we also witnessed another student uprising in the city of Kwanjgu. In 1987, the huge student demonstration for the change of the constitution to enable the direct election of the president, passed through the democratic transition and gave it the momentum to put the democracy to a very stable based society.

 

Right after the liberation in 1945, there was an ideological confidence as you might know between left and right. And the first republic was led by [name inaudible], he had the personal discordance with the Marxist movement, especially with the [inaudible], so it changed the political involvement of the first republic to very strong anticommunist ideas, and very strong operative rule. This was overturned by the student uprising that I mentioned before. Also, the third republic, which was led by [name inaudible] after [name inaudible], the third republic had to compete with North Korea in an international arena and domestically the government had to go through the long process of economic development. This too required a strong control of the society; that is why, unfortunately, we had to have the Confucian constitution of 1972. This constitution very much restricted labor rights and the general standpoint. Under this constitution, a third of the general assemblymen were directly appointed by the president; it was not a direct election by the people. However, in the 1980s and early 1990s, with the Post Cold War phenomena happening in Northeast Asia, this strong reconciliation process influenced very heavily in the journalistic politics in Korea and we had the new government installed. Because of the strong demand by the people, and also the strong demand from international politics, [inaudible] had to adjust, had to bring up the liberation and new measures such as price and labor unions and change the law. That is why we a sixth republic which continued so far. The democratic movement peaked in 1992 and strongly continued until 1998, and of course we have a very mature democracy right now since the presidential election of 2003.

 

I would like to mention a couple points that were very important to this process. The first civil government in 1992, led by [name inaudible], tried to eradicate the Russian problems in South Korea and also in the government, the government is told and the tripartite commission (which was fairly new and was not know in Korean politics) tried to discuss about labor issues between government and management in labor unions. Since the early 1990s, the democratic movements began very peacefully. There were very rarely violent movements. So we are witnessing now in South Korean politics, is that if they wanted to advocate certain ideas, they don’t just go to the street, they use tactful methods and try to break through peacefully to follow the rules, because right now people are very accustomed to the rule of law and they don’t try to change the law, but they try to follow the law and follow the general discipline.

 

The presidential election of 2002 epitomizes the participatory democracy in South Korea, with its civilians, citizens who are volunteering, who are fundraising, and campaigning for the president. And right now, the participatory government by President Roh Moo Hyan tries to embrace the current issues such as paternalism and a more equal based society, and try to eradicate the injustice that has happened every corner of society.

 

Right now, there have been many discussions about the ideological generation change that took place obviously in the Korean American community here. In South Korea right now, there has been much discussion about the general relation of GAB and ideological changes and social polarization. Because we had this unfortunate event in 2002 when two high school students were killed by the U.S. army motor vehicles, there was a huge candlelight movement. Also we had this very important enragement by the Korean people against the sports events and we also had some of the arguments separate groups in order to remove the [inaudible] to a different part of Korea. Some people try to call these events as new ideological conflicts and social polarization, but I would like to point out that ideology is—I have this definition here—ideology is set by tears and symbols of the social movement. That is, explains how society should work and offers some political and cultural bullet print for a certain social order. So it is not based on a certain incident or a certain issue; it should be about the general ideas; it should encompass various sectors and various ideas to bring about how we need to reinforce on society in a better way. So I would like to say that what we see from these events is not a social polarization or ideological conflict; it is very issue specific, very incident specific, it is emotional breaking out. I think we need to see what these events are. This is a true mutation of a mature democracy.

 

There are some in the younger generation who are inclined to push for a more equal based alliance with the United States. More simply, they Korean young generations do the peaceful demonstrations and they try to ask the government to be more independent, to be a more equal partner of the alliance. But it doesn’t mean they are looking to break the alliance. They all try to embrace the economic and social and political and military alliance. In a recent survey April this year, most of the Korean people chose the United States as the most important partner of the Korean security in the independent world as well as Northeast Asia; 62% of the young generation told that the alliance should be maintained and strengthened.

 

In conclusion about the Korean democracy, I would like to say that we have to recognize the different voices, we have to encompass different ideas. What we see from the present society, and especially the Korean American society here too is a mature democracy where a lot of voices can be discussed, and try to improve, and try to make the best out of the whole event.

 

I was asked to give a presentation about the Korean democracy and North and South relations too. I will just give you some sentences about the North and South relations. There has been an increased number of people to people exchange between the North and South. The trade volume has usually increased. The statistics say in 2000, there were 8,000 people went back and forth between North and South. The number increased in 2004, the number was 26,000 people, and as of August this year, the number was 51,000, it almost doubled. Even though the problem with nuclear issues, the people to people exchange has been hugely increased especially after the summit in 2000 and we have this June 15^th declaration.

 

With regard to the trade volumes, the average trade volume in 1989 to 1997, it was 170 million dollars. Then we see in 2003, the trade volume increased to 700 to 720 million dollars. And now, as of August this year, the present rate of volume is already 700 million dollars. South Korea is the second largest trading partner with North Korea, right after China. Many people did not recognize this trade volume going forth; but right after the industrial compact that was established, the trade volume will be much more increased I guess.

 

In regarding the issues with North and South relations, the South Korean government tried to build up trust, which is the first reality to solving all the issues. In order to solve the nuclear programs, in order to solve the family reunions, we need to try to put a lot of measures to build trust. As you have seen in the newspaper, in solving their nuclear program, the United States and North Korea were always asking “you” the first, then “I” will do this, and “if you do that, then I will do this.” So I have to wait for other people’s response. That happened because there was no trust that was built between North Korea and the United States. We think that becoming used to our partners, to have more popularity, to have more friendship with the partners, is important to solving the issues. That is why the South Korean government has been very actively engaged at following cooperative measures, has tried to have a very regular based dialogues, and has tried to increase the humanitarian aid to North Korea.

 

I will briefly review some projects about the North and South. There have been highway and railroad building of the projects. The railroad is underway, but the highway is already built. There was an exchange of readily mixing resources and people along this highway. As you know, we already started a long time ago with the [inaudible]. In 2004, we started the Kessen industrial complex, and already three companies in South Korea are already doing business in this complex and another nine companies are going to open their factories as soon as possible. There have been various levels of talks on a regular basis. We had ministerial talks, we had vice ministerial talks, we had economic talks, we had military generals’ talks, and we even had the talks on a regular basis to make possible the bringing of dispersed families. The ministerial talk that took place in June this year gave us a new opportunity when the North Korean nuclear program was at stalemate. So this very irregular based talk sometimes is breakthrough, but at the same time its gives us involvement to have breakthroughs on some other issues. So we think it is very important to continue the dialogues.

 

Also, the South Korean government has given humanitarian aid to North Korea directly, indirectly; indirectly through international organizations and directly to North Korea in the form of food and in the form of fertilizers. The North Korean government, as you remember last May, asked for about 500,000 tons of fertilizers and throughout the long discussion with North Koreans, we already promised them 200,000 fertilizing tons to North Korea. So the bilateral relations between North and South has pretty much been institutionalized. We have these channels and following up these channels and pressing these channels, we think that we can solve all the problems regarding the ministerial and domestic issues.

 

As you look into the problems with the nuclear program, there has been huge progress since last September with the joint declaration in four of the six party talks. We are still having the fifth round of talks, and it just finished today. We are hoping that throughout this great breakthrough, the joint declaration, we will able to build the next measures to reduce any tension that had accrued in Northeast Asia. Thank you very much.

 

Dr. Sung Hoon Jang: Thank you very much for that, Consul. We are about a few minutes behind schedule, so let me move straight to this next speaker, Professor Joong Hwan Oh. Professor Joong Hwan Oh is currently working as an Associate Professor at Hunter College. Here he is talking about the globalization of Korean culture. Please welcome him.

 

Professor Joong Hwan Oh: Typically, one dominant discussion of globalization in public and academics in the United States—not only the United States, but all over the world—centers around greater availability and personal accessibility to internet, electronic mail, or cellular phone, because of perpetual improvement in the fast-growing world communication technologies all over the world. In this speedy circulation of telecommunications in the world, another prevailing discussion of globalization seems to be economic globalization. Specially, the emergence of such economic internalization can be seen in the aspects of interconnected international finance and business flows.

 

We already know that Korean society is familiar with the activities of multinational financial corporations, like Citibank and JP Morgan Chase. Not long ago, Korea experienced the influence of the International Monetary Fund in restructuring Korean financial institutions. Furthermore, in Korea, the current activities of multinational business corporations, like Wal-Mart, McDonald’s, Outback, or Starbucks, become quite deeply embedded in the daily life of many urban Korean people.

 

Presently, such unifying forces of global communication and world economy are inseparable from the dissemination of cultural globalization mainly driven by American economic and political powers. Overall, it seems to me that cultural globalization, called Americanization in general, is considered the byproducts of economic globalization and global communications. In a positive sense, the acceleration of cultural globalization infiltrates many countries in the world—the key symbols of American ideology and culture, such as liberty, freedom, human rights, democracy, individualism, or emphasis on education.

 

In a negative sense, another feature of cultural globalization, American pop culture and its accompanying products, flourish rapidly in every corner of the world. Right now, many young generations in the world, including a high proportion of Korean youth, are already ingrained in American pop music, fast foods, Hollywood movies, and Western dress styles.

 

As a matter of fact, the problem is not whether these worldly scattered youths consume and enjoy American cultural products, but the problem is whether these aspects of cultural globalization tend to promote uniform and homogenous norms, values, tastes, or behaviors to youths in all over the world. Otherwise, such internationalization of American commercial and consumer culture outside American youths is a real threat of weakening the authentic cultural tradition of each nation-state.

 

As the more serious backlash of American consumerism, there is a growing sense of anxiety about the gradual loss of national identity that makes their nations distinct from other nation-states in the world. According to the 2003 report of global attitudes survey conducted by the Pew Research Center, South Korea is ranked second highest among forty four countries in support of globalization. This report also reveals that South Korean youths, as compared to her old cohorts, favor American consumer culture.

 

At this point, I do not deny the huge influence of American cultural patterns on choices of Korean youth’s taste that might cause the neglect of their own cultural entities. This view stressing that Korea unilaterally imports American cultural without filter is only a partial story of cultural globalization in Korea. In this juncture, we need to notice that South Korea is in fact the main country to export her national cultural values and products to each nation in the East and South-east Asia. Indeed, South Korea has played a key role in creating and extending another aspect of cultural globalization by introducing the Korean cultural boom, called the Korean Wave (Hanryu), in this region

 

For instance, Korean pop groups, like H.O.T., G.O.D., Shinhwa, and Korean movie and drama actors and actresses like Bae Young-Jun, Chang Dong-gun, Choi Ji-woo, Kim Nam-ju, and Lee Yong-Ae, become national idols of Asian youth in China, Japan, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Vietnam, Indonesia, and the other Asian countries. Likewise, Korean taste in food, like eating kimchi and traditional Korean barbeque, has emerged as a new fad among many Asian youngsters.

 

More importantly, as a major phenomenon of the Korean cultural boom in Asia, many Asian youths are inclined to learn Korean language, history, and culture in order to understand Korean pop music, drama, and movies. At present, the argument that Korea is one Asian country to lead regional cultural globalization based upon expansion of her mass culture in Asia can become weak whenever we recognize such Korean pop culture as a temporal and short lived fad and the Korean wave exists only within the East and Southeast Asian territory. If such a case does occur, Korean might suffer from their national identity conflict in the face of the vanishing Korean wave.

 

In addition to Korean cultural boons like Korean mass media, there are some systematic efforts and long-term plans from some other cultural units in Korea in order to disseminate diverse Korean culture inherent over Asian nations. For instance, we can frequently observe that Korean car owners are taxed to promote Korean culture overseas by sponsoring Korean studies abroad, hosting Korean food festivals, organizing traditional music performances, and exhibiting traditional and modern works of art across many nations in the world. Likewise, the annual Tucson International Film Festival is one outcome of the Korean government’s effort to promote Korean culture to international society. Nowadays, you can also observe the steady effort of Korean universities to introduce Korean language, customs, history, and culture, to their foreign students, mostly during their summer school.

 

In short, so far, South Koreans show some strong resilience against global forces of commercialism and consumerism by circulating Korean cultural wave in Asia. There is no question that Korean cultural wave in Asia has Koreans rearticulate Korean cultural identity and its uniqueness. Once more, South Korean seems to employ an introduction of a Korean culture abroad as of a way of a national strategy to enhance international competition. Though especially restricted, some Korean American communities in the United States, for instance Korean communities in New York, California, Chicago, and New Jersey, launched Korean cultural festivals periodically, and then introduced this Korean food, art, dance, and music to each racially and ethnically different neighbors. Particularly, tensions or conflicts between Korean Americans and the other Americans of different backgrounds can be diffused as the other ethnic group understands Korean culture much more. Besides, access to Korean culture and heritage can provide a breakthrough to second generation Korean Americans, who struggled not only with a dual sense of identity between Korean and American, but also who suffer from a marginal position in the American racial spectrum.

 

In conclusion, once Koreans are proud of Korea’s cultural influence in other nations, despite their Korean citizenship, I can argue that Korean national identity among global Koreans will be far more strengthened. After that, we can make sure that Korean culture has independence from powerful global forces—is it possible to achieve. Thank you.

 

Dr. Sung Hoon Jang: Thank you very much Professor Oh. Before we take a break for the next session, as we are speaking of globalization, so my personal experience is that I used to be comfortable anytime my train arrived in [city name inaudible]–a small city near my hometown. But now I feel more comfortable anytime my plane arrives anyplace in Korean territory—that is my idea about globalization myself. Now please go ahead with any questions.

 

Audience Member: [Question inaudible]

 

Council Bihn Seo: Particularly the six party talks. Before the North Korean nuclear programs or any issues regarding North Korea, South Korea has been one of the most [inaudible] in some way. In the realm of the six party talks, in the beginning of the talks, South Korea was very affirmative, and the role South Korea has, has been appreciated by China and the United States. We try to negotiate between the United States and North Korea; they do not have, like I said in the presentation, they don’t have much trust between these two primaries. We wanted to be the middle person and talk and try to negotiate and try to sort of narrow down the differences between the two governments. Other than the six party talks, in the general international arena, such as in investigating terrorism or global development, in general discussion, South Korea is pretty similar with other industrialized countries. We wanted to promote democracy, and we wanted to promote stability and security. Especially in Northeast Asia we are trying to build up a stable forum for discussion. Actually in the twin statement of the fourth round of the six party talks, the primaries had the idea to build a forum to have a permanent security that will be in Northeast Asia. So I think the conclusion is that South Korea has tried to be a much more active partner in the national arena, and has been pressing all the issues, environmental and other economic issues too.

 

Dr. Sung Hoon Jang: Next question.

 

Professor Pyong Gap Min: I have a question to Consul Seo. According to another survey conducted earlier, 34 years ago, a higher proportion of Koreans consider China as more important than the USA, and you said that in a recent poll most Koreans said the U.S. was more important. It seems to me that you underestimate the seriousness of anti-American sentiment of Korea. It is very strong. Can you make a comment?

 

Consul Bihn Seo: As I was preparing for this presentation, I was very much aware that this issue might come up. In other discussions that I’ve went to, a lot of people, not only American citizens but also a lot of Korean Americans, are worried about strong or sometimes emerging anti-American sentiment in South Korea. I would say, from a representative of the Consul or a personal view, aside from the survey research that I gave you (actually I have the survey results here), but aside from the results, I think we may look at some of the surveys in 2000. When you see these surveys, anti-American sentiment was high after a certain incident. For example, we can give you two. Maybe you remember with the skaters from the United States; there were some scandals with the South Koreans players against the American player. Right after that incident, anti-American sentiment was very highly surveyed, but it reduced after that. And we had the Bush event with high school students, and then anti-American sentiment went up. In every survey, the United States is the most feared, greatest country in South Korea. So you have these answers in specific issues for now, and when the anti-American sentiment was very high. Right now there is an emerging movement in groups of people trying to attack the statehood of different backgrounds in the city of [city name inaudible], and now all the people are worried about anti-Americanism in South Korea. But like I presented in the discussion before, it is very issue specific. Because it’s based on emotion, because it’s based on sentiment, it’s not a general trend of anti-Americanism; rather, it is a specific emotional outburst from a certain group of people. It is not very safe to categorize these incidents or events as anti-Americanism, if that answers your question.

 

Dr. Sung Hoon Jang: Any other questions. Yes, go ahead.

 

Audience Member: [Question inaudible]

 

Dr. Youn-Suk Kim: Very interesting question. It is true the political overtone has played out very much right now, but in terms of economics, America needs Korea (I will qualify that) as much as Korean needs America. You have to see Korea in a historical perspective. Always, Korea is under the influence of China over the thousands of years, then currently Japan is. So Korea could stay where it is, while growing as a regional power source that America favors is fairly new. Now I don’t know if the current students or young people realize that (if you give me time, I will elaborate that). Even in America, as a nation, the 2020, the CIA posted in 2000, now they are short: the Chinese economy will grow, exceeding the US economy—that’s the projection. Now how that happens, with the growth rate we can easily calculate that. To the American psyche, China is a potential rival. American wants to have status quo, and this is what South Korea can hook up. So if there is this scheme, America needs badly Korea, South Korea in particular. Why not Thailand? Thailand, eventually, the Chinese will take it—even America agreed upon that, so Thailand is not a choice. So we know that to maintain status quo, in order to keep East Asia in a peaceful situation, America needs Korea. So the two countries need each other.

 

I’d like to comment about [inaudible] and all that—this is very important. The Chinese Korea has potential problem, always historical, with drawing a borderline, a lot of historical hang-ups these border issues. Today, young people have a sort of [inaudible] in China, because they see this is what comes to mind. And Japan, well I can’t explain how Japan and Korea will play out, but Korea economically needs Japan and Japan would have [inaudible] go with Korea. Having said that, China is playing a very smart game. Right now, Korea exports—number one country—to China, so the economies are interdependent. But the historical example, the old issue, or the Koreans, somehow or other, think China is very [inaudible], but on the inside there is a Chinese government. Koreans are always nervous about that situation. Therefore, Korea needs America eventually as long as America and Korea get along much better than what we say.

 

But we have to realize America made a mistake; there are troops there that give the wrong impression. America is not what young Korean people think there. Again, what Korea today becomes a kind of success. Where it comes from? Who supports Korea as it is? Always, Korea has big countries smother it; it is a small country. Historically, this is Korea [inaudible]. So if they realize and nationalists are thinking about that, I think that America and Korea will eventually overcome this rather unfortunate situation. But again, short run, you got to handle very carefully: We need Korea, Korea needs America—simple as that.

 

Dr. Sung Hoon Jang: So I think, let us have a short break before we move onto the next session. Thank you very much.