Korea

Trump's warnings are only escalating tensions with North Korea: �鶹��Ƶ expert

ullahnor — Thu, 10 Aug 2017 20:28:27 +0000

Trump's warnings are only escalating tensions with North Korea: �鶹��Ƶ expert

ullahnor Thu, 08/10/2017 - 16:28

Cutline

Replicas of a North Korean Scud-B missile and South Korean missiles at the Korean War Memorial in Seoul. The North Koreans detailed plans to send missiles towards the U.S. territory of Guam (photo by Jung Yeon-Je/AFP/Getty Images)

Noreen Ahmed-Ullah

Author legacy

Noreen Ahmed-Ullah

Topic

Global Lens

Korea

Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy

Global

International

U.S. President Donald Trump raised tensions Thursday, refusing to back down and telling reporters that his threat to bring “fire and fury” on North Korea may not have gone far enough.

The latest war of words came as North Korea derided Trump's warning as a “load of nonsense” and announced a detailed plan to launch missiles aimed at the waters off the coast of the U.S. Pacific territory of Guam.

“Frankly the people that were questioning that statement, was it too tough? Maybe it wasn’t tough enough,” Trump told reporters. “They’ve been doing this to our country for a long time, many years. It’s about time that somebody stuck up for the people of this country and for the people of other countries. So if anything, maybe that statement wasn’t tough enough.”

�鶹��Ƶ News spoke with Tina Park, a history PhD candidate who focuses on Korean-Canadian relations, about the latest exchange between the two leaders and how to de-escalate the situation.

“If the purpose of deterrence is to convince the adversary that the costs of aggression outweigh any benefits, President Trump's rhetoric is achieving the exact opposite – and such lack of strategy and prudence is dangerous and even reckless,” says Park, co-founder and executive director of the Canadian Centre for the Responsibility to Protect at �鶹��Ƶ's Munk School of Global Affairs.

Should we be worried? Is there a real threat that North Korea will launch missiles into Guam? Is Kim Jong-un capable of acting on impulse in a situation like this?

We should be worried, not so much about the actual probabilities of a war breaking out on the Korean peninsula but the complete lack of a coherent policy on the part of the U.S. administration when it comes to dealing with North Korea.

President Trump's use of rhetoric, which tends to be inconsistent, bellicose and mercurial in nature has only served to escalate the tensions between the U.S. and North Korea. Such hyperboles and an ad-hoc approach leave a lot of room for misinterpretation, and it harms the credibility of the United States, both in terms of how they are seen by Pyongyang and by the allies of the U.S.

We should also be concerned about the speed with which Pyongyang has advanced its military capabilities. From intercontinental ballistic missile to nuclear weapons to conventional weapons, North Korea is making significant improvements every month and every year.

Ultimately, however, an actual attack on Guam or parts of the U.S. remains unlikely. The Korean peninsula is located at the geostrategic centre of Northeast Asia, with the highest concentration of military capabilities in the world and with neighbours like China, Japan and Russia who have vested interest in the political and economic stability of the two Koreas. There are some 28,500 U.S. troops stationed in Korea – the U.S. Forces Korea and the greater U.S. Pacific Command are all combat-ready, in addition to the Republic of Korea Armed Forces and its allies. The small size of the Korean peninsula also means that no surgical military option is viable, in terms of attacking any part of Korea.

Is Trump’s strategy the right one in this situation? Is this just a war of words?

Frankly, President Trump's lack of experience in politics and diplomacy – and his role as the commander in chief – is on full display here when we hear messages like “fire and fury.”

He is speaking to a vary narrow group of supporters. This is the kind of rhetoric that appears in North Korea's propaganda materials. Such rhetoric essentially helps the North Korean regime to demonize the U.S. and justify its position about an existential threat from the U.S.

If the purpose of deterrence is to convince the adversary that the costs of aggression outweigh any benefits, President Trump's rhetoric is achieving the exact opposite – and such lack of strategy and prudence is dangerous and even reckless. So while it is easy to dismiss North Korea as an irrational actor, it is important to actually confront the realities on the ground – and significant military capacities – and remember that any military confrontation will be extremely costly.

What needs to happen to de-escalate the situation?

It would be very helpful for the United States to have a coherent position and policy on North Korea and focus on de-escalating tension rather than sending mixed signals, which is what we have seen with President Trump's tweets.

North Korea will feel compelled to retaliate if they are provoked. The old rule of diplomacy – that of saving face – is very important when it comes to dealing with North Korea.

We found a way to use that premise with Iran on the nuclear question. Principles like inspection of a frozen nuclear programme in the North, in return for sanction relief, would be a good place to start.

It would be helpful to send a high-level envoy from the UN or the U.S. administration and ultimately convene a talk amongst the key players in the region. If we are serious about changing North Korea's behaviour, dialogue and diplomacy will be the key, and we should be serious about offering real concessions in return for freezing North Korea's nuclear or missile developments. The new South Korean administration under President Moon Jae-In is very much committed to engaging with North Korea. Canada, as a country with a reputation for being an honest broker, also has an important role to play in terms of finding diplomatic solutions to the crisis with North Korea.

While we are often preoccupied by North Korea's latest military developments, it is important to also remember the underlying humanitarian crisis unfolding in North Korea. Millions of people are dying from hunger and malnutrition, and there are crimes against humanity taking place under daylight. We have a collective responsibility to protect these people in peril who are suffering under the Kim regime, and there is so much more that the international community can do to provide humanitarian aid and speak up for ordinary people in North Korea.

South Korean president's removal has broader implications for the world, says �鶹��Ƶ expert

ullahnor — Fri, 10 Mar 2017 21:31:47 +0000

South Korean president's removal has broader implications for the world, says �鶹��Ƶ expert

ullahnor Fri, 03/10/2017 - 16:31

Cutline

A South Korean man reads an extra edition of a newspaper reporting that the Constitutional Court has upheld the impeachment of President Park Geun-hye (photo by Chung Sung-Jun/Getty Images)

Noreen Ahmed-Ullah

Author legacy

Noreen Ahmed-Ullah

Topic

Global Lens

Korea

Global

Faculty of Arts & Science

A South Korean court removed President Park Geun-hye, the nation’s first female president, from office on Friday – a first in the nation’s history, kicking off uncertainty in the region.

For weeks, protesters have taken to the streets, upset about a sprawling corruption scandal that reached the highest levels of government and business. Choi Soon-sil, Park's longtime friend and the daughter of a cult leader, has been accused of quietly pulling government strings and misusing her friendship with Park for personal gain. The president could face charges of bribery, extortion and abuse of power in connection with allegations of conspiring with her friend to collect tens of millions of dollars in bribes from companies like Samsung.

Tina J. Park is a PhD candidate in history and a researcher at the Asian Institute at �鶹��Ƶ's Munk School of Global Affairs. Park talked to �鶹��Ƶ News about how Park's downfall will shift South Korean politics, where opposition leaders are already looking for greater engagement with North Korea.

With the president being removed from office, what does this mean for South Korea?

The eight judges of the South Korean Constitutional Court made a unanimous decision to remove President Park Geun-Hye from office, thereby upholding the legislative body’s impeachment in December. The acting chief justice noted that her systematic violation of law throughout her presidency “seriously impaired the spirit of... democracy and the rule of law” and “betrayed the public’s trust.”

Practically, this means that an election must now be held within 60 days in South Korea, while the president awaits charges on abuse of power, corruption and bribery, to name a few. The general mood in Korea is a mix of festivities and a bit of chaos, with pro-Park protesters demonstrating on the street. Koreans will have to strive for unity and reconciliation in the weeks to come. One Korean broadcaster noted that, “We lost a president, but gained a victory for the rule of law.”

Since the president was very right wing, it is expected that a more liberal candidate (such as Moon Jae-In) with a conciliatory approach towards North Korea will be the likely candidate for the next election.

How surprising was this decision for the Constitutional Court?

Everyone in Korea was anxiously waiting for the court’s decision, which was broadcast live on TV across the nation.

The legislative assembly had presented thirteen causes for impeachment to the court, which were later condensed to four main issues like misuse of authority for appointing civil servants, misuse of presidential authority, violation of the freedom of press, most of which the court dismissed as insufficient.

Ultimately, it came down to one issue: Choi Soon-sil’s meddling of government affairs and the president’s misuse of power for Choi’s personal financial gains showed a serious violation of the constitution. The court agreed that this issue alone was sufficient and made an unprecedented decision to go forward with impeachment.

This decision proved loud and clear that even the president is not exempted from the rule of law, and throughout the political controversy, key roles played by the judiciary and the legislature, as well as peaceful public participation and a free press – all demonstrated the robust nature of democracy in Korea.

What does this mean for the region?

This ruling comes at a time of heightened tension in northeast Asia, and South Korea's acting president has put the country on a higher state of military readiness.

In the past year alone, the North Korean regime has been intensifying its offensive military capabilities with hydrogen bombs, nuclear testing, payload capacity rocket launches on land and from mobile units and submarine missile launch technologies.

President Park, a conservative hardliner, preferred sticks over carrots in dealing with North Korea, and cooperated closely with Washington DC, advocating for tougher sanctions against Pyongyang.

There are serious implications for South Korea’s relationship with the United States, China, North Korea, and for the broader international community.

First, the deployment of the American missile defense system (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense or THAAD), which Park had approved, has become a thorny issue between Seoul and Beijing in recent weeks. The Trump administration is intent on placing this missile defense system, and the THAAD is seen by some Koreans as a defence mechanism against North Korea. However, the Chinese have expressed visible discontent and placed a ban on travel, which is already affecting South Korea’s tourism industry. The next presidential candidate will likely try to reverse this decision.

Second, dealing with North Korea’s nuclear program will be a key election issue in South Korea moving forward. Park was decidedly against any conciliatory approach towards North Korea, while Pyongyang has been stepping up with missile and nuclear tests recently. It is likely that the next presidential candidate will try to reverse or at least significantly change the policy on North Korea, most likely providing more carrots than sticks.

Third, events on the Korean peninsula have implications far beyond just the Pacific rim. For the first time in its history, NATO issued a statement on Dec. 15 that “strongly condemned” North Korea’s continued development of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles.

For a NATO member state like Canada, which fought for South Korea’s freedom during the Korean War, political and economic stability in South Korea will serve as an important safeguard against new threats from the North Korean regime, both rhetorical and real. The shared borders with China and the Republic of Korea create a joint and shared priority between Beijing and Seoul around stability, humanitarian reform and nuclear restraint in Pyongyang.

Recalling the Samsung Galaxy Note 7: �鶹��Ƶ expert explains the blow to Korean society

lavende4 — Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:54:12 +0000

Recalling the Samsung Galaxy Note 7: �鶹��Ƶ expert explains the blow to Korean society

lavende4 Wed, 10/26/2016 - 08:54

Cutline

A Samsung store in the Gangnam district of Seoul (photo by Ed Jones/AFP/Getty Images)

Terry Lavender

Author legacy

Terry Lavender

Topic

When Samsung announced earlier this month that it was stopping production of its flagship smartphone, the Galaxy Note 7, and recalling all existing phones, the jolt was felt around the world. But in South Korea, where Samsung is the largest conglomerate or “chaebol” in the country, controlling everything from chemicals to electronics, health care and life insurance, there's a lot more at stake.

Tina Park is a PhD candidate in the department of history at the University of Toronto, focusing on the transformation of Canadian-Korean relations & history of globalization.

She spoke to �鶹��Ƶ News about Samsung and the role of the chaebols in Korean society.

What is the chaebol system?

The “chaebol” refers to conglomerates that dominate South Korea’s economy. The word “chae” means “wealth” and “bol” means “clan” in Korean. In South Korean culture, the chaebols are like dynasties. Over the years, the descendants of the founders have retained control of the management of these companies, and the families have remained very wealthy. Among the largest chaebols are Samsung, LG, Hyundai, and SK Group, but there are dozens of others. These conglomerates are also very powerful in how much control they exercise in the South Korean economy – in the early 21st century, the chaebols produced roughly two-thirds of South Korea’s total exports and attracted a large part of the country’s foreign capital inflow. Last year, Samsung Group alone accounted for roughly 20 per cent of South Korea’s $527 billion in exports.

The chaebol structure originated in the 1960s. In the aftermath of the Korean War, the South Korean economy was impoverished, with the national GDP per capita at around US$67. When Park seized power in 1961, the South Korean government adopted an export-led industrial policy that favoured and strongly supported chaebols, such as guaranteed loans from the banking sector, protection from competition, and other legal and institutional mechanisms, which enabled them to take big risks, especially in the heavy and chemical industrialization industry in the '70s. In addition to heavy exports, these companies invested very heavily in R&D, recruited the best of South Korea’s brains and quickly emerged as competitive players in the international market. The close collaboration between the state and the chaebol was instrumental for South Korea’s economic miracle. South Korea today has the world’s 13th largest national GDP. From Koreans selling Samsung radios to Canadians in the 1970s, bilateral trade between South Korea and Canada has grown exponentially by about 3,000 times to where we are today.

How influential are companies such as Samsung in the Korean economy?

The chaebols are hugely influential in the South Korean economy because often one company would have subsidiaries in many different areas, such as electronics, food, amusement parks, hotels, semiconductors, etc. It is entirely possible for an average Korean to be born in a Samsung hospital, buy groceries from CJ &Foods, ride a Hyundai car, work for LG electronics and enjoy shopping at Lotte department store. So within South Korea, it is impossible to escape the chaebol influence.

What about their cultural influence?

In addition to their economic dominance, these conglomerates and their brands serve as a source of pride for many Koreans, both domestically and internationally. Purchasing South Korean brands is considered as an act of patriotism by many Koreans in the diaspora community, in addition to whatever economic or technological value they carry. Many young South Korean students dream of working for one of the big chaebol companies and undergo intense preparation, not only because the job market is very competitive and these jobs pay well, but also because of the social status they symbolize. A “Samsung man” for instance would appear more attractive to Korean women looking for a potential husband because it would imply that he is a well-educated and successful man with stable future. The chaebols are heavy spenders in R&D, various educational programs, the entertainment industry, and even the health care and social welfare sectors, so the latest Hallyu (Korean) wave cannot be fully understood without realizing the capital behind it. South Korea is still a very hierarchical society, so the prevalence of chaebol culture perpetuates the best and worst of capitalism. Chaebols now influence how people relate to each other, the latest trends and even the value system.

Do they have an effect on the political system?

Absolutely. Since the 60s, the chaebols have always had strong collaboration with South Korea’s political leaders and with a cult of personality associated with the founders of chaebol like Lee Kun-Hee, the chairman of Samsung Group. Concerns have been raised about corruption and bribery between the chaebol and leading politicians, and public opinion on the chaebols have tended to fluctuate a lot in the recent past. There is a certain sense of resentment at the concentration of so much wealth and political influence in the hands of leading families. Some would also argue that the dominance of chaebol culture creates an unfair playing field for small- and medium-sized enterprises, and women are still not seen very frequently in top leadership positions.

Are there any signs of the chaebol system weakening or changing?

To be sure, the chaebols are often under a lot of fire and are frequently scrutinized, but they have been slow to change for a number of reasons. First, these conglomerates have proven to be very resilient and made significant contributions to the South Korean economy.

The prevalence of the chaebols in South Korea makes it difficult for any quick change. Millions of South Koreans are involved with the chaebols, either as employees, customers or even competitors. The highly educated, extremely productive workforce, coupled with South Korea’s strong social cohesion, have all contributed to the survival of chaebols. Samsung Electronics, for instance, has long been seen as one the most technologically and commercially progressive players in the international market, largely thanks to its human capital. There are generational changes within chaebol families and a growing number of small- and medium-sized enterprises are entering the competition, but I think it will take quite a while for the chaebol system to change in any meaningful way.

Will Samsung’s setback with regard to the Galaxy Note 7 have a long-term effect on the company and its position in Korean society/economy?

The latest crisis with Samsung Galaxy Note 7 has been very unfortunate. In the quest for making things “faster, better and cheaper,” Samsung has jeopardized the safety of its customers and has not been efficient in providing solutions. South Korean customers, who have generally been very loyal to the Galaxy Android phones, are expressing frustrations about the lack of clarity on the return policy and lack of proper compensation. The full consequences of the Note 7 crisis remain to be seen in the coming years in terms of brand credibility, sales of future models and general safety issues surrounding smartphones. Samsung Electronic is the biggest subsidiary of Samsung Group, and the investors have already shaved off roughly $20 billion in Samsung’s market value. The recall will cost at least $5 billion or more and most surely affect Samsung’s market share in the smartphone industry. How quickly Samsung adopts the “lessons learned” from the Note 7 crisis will be the real test for this tech giant.

Korea, Centre for the Study of

sgupta — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 20:47:19 +0000

Korea, Centre for the Study of sgupta Thu, 01/07/2016 - 15:47

URL

https://munkschool.utoronto.ca/ai/centre-study-korea

Korean officials, scholars strengthen ties with �鶹��Ƶ

sgupta — Tue, 23 Jun 2015 09:54:30 +0000

Korean officials, scholars strengthen ties with �鶹��Ƶ sgupta Tue, 06/23/2015 - 05:54

Cutline

Ambassador Dae-Shik Jo, Massey College Master Hugh Segal and Tina Park (photo by Nicolett Jakab)

Terry Lavender

Author legacy

Terry Lavender

Topic

Subheadline

Diplomats, scholars build on history of collaboration stretching back to 1888

Korea is more than 10,000 kilometres away from Toronto, but it was very much in the spotlight at the University of Toronto earlier this month, with a visit from the president of one of Korea’s top universities and a conference on Canada-Korea relations attended by high-ranking officials from government, academia and business.

The conference, Canadian-Korean Relations in the 21st Century: Opportunities, Challenges & Strategies, was organized by �鶹��Ƶ history PhD student Tina Park, who also runs �鶹��Ƶ’s annual Women in the House program, where female �鶹��Ƶ students job-shadow MPs and senators in Ottawa. (Read about Women in the House here.)

Park said the conference was largely inspired by her doctoral dissertation, which examines a century of Canadian-Korean relations starting with Canadian missionaries sent from �鶹��Ƶ in 1888. “As an international student from South Korea who grew up in Canada – I did both my undergrad and PhD at �鶹��Ƶ – I find it fascinating how our relationship evolved so quickly from a handful of missionaries to such an active one today.” She said she worked closely with Massey College Master Hugh Segal on the conference.

“Hugh became a very close mentor for me when he joined Massey College as the Master and we began brainstorming for this conference last fall. We both felt that there is a huge gap, both at the intellectual level and at the practical level, about the future of Canadian-Korean relations. We felt that it would be important to generate a forum for discussion with high-caliber speakers for some strategic planning on how to move forward.”

At the conference, �鶹��Ƶ's vice-president for government, international and community relations Judith Wolfson spoke about �鶹��Ƶ’s Korean connections, which, she said, date back to the 1800s when alumnus James Gale worked in Korea as an educator, a writer and a translator from 1888 to 1927. In the 1970s, �鶹��Ƶ became the first Canadian university to offer a course on Korea. Today, there are 582 students from Korea studying at �鶹��Ƶ, with many more Canadians of Korean background also attending the university. The Munk School’s Center for the Study of Korea is one of the foremost places in North America for intercultural study about Korea, Wolfson said.

Also speaking at the conference were newly installed Korean ambassador Dae-Shik Jo, federal assistant deputy trade minister Ian Burney, �鶹��Ƶ alumnus Sonny Cho of the Canada Korea Business Council, and �鶹��Ƶ professors Don Brean and George Georgopoulos, who spoke about the implications of the recently signed Canada Korea Free Trade Agreement.

In his speech – his first since his appointment as ambassador – Jo urged increased cooperation between Korea and Canada in the areas of science, technology and innovation; arctic development, forest and agriculture, but cautioned that indifference on both sides could derail increased ties. “Our relationship is like oil and vinegar, if you don’t stir they’ll stay separate; if you do, they’ll combine to create something better – a delicious salad dressing.”

Park hopes the conference signals the beginning of a new tradition. “We hope to set up a new hub for research on Canadian-Korean relations, with an annual conference, publications, speaker series, and public engagement,” she said.

Earlier that week, Yongmin Kim, the president of Pohang University of Science and Technology (POSTECH), toured the �鶹��Ƶ campus and together with �鶹��Ƶ President Meric Gertler signed a Memorandum of Understanding covering joint research collaborations, courses, faculty exchanges and other areas.

Wolfson said POSTECH is “looking for our talent. They’re looking for the depths of our knowledge. And in turn, we’re looking for opportunities to work with them and their research. That leads to cooperation in areas of complementary strength.”

Terry Lavender is a writer with University of Toronto Communications.

picpath

sites/default/files/2015-06-18-korea.jpg

Korea

Trump's warnings are only escalating tensions with North Korea: �鶹��Ƶ expert

South Korean president's removal has broader implications for the world, says �鶹��Ƶ expert

Recalling the Samsung Galaxy Note 7: �鶹��Ƶ expert explains the blow to Korean society

Korea, Centre for the Study of

Tags

Korean officials, scholars strengthen ties with �鶹��Ƶ