STATEMENT
BY H.E. HONG SOON-YOUNG
AT 
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
KOREA UNIVERSITY

 

Foreign Policy Agenda of the Republic of Korea in the New Century

December 11, 1998  Seoul

 

Thank you, Mr. Dean, for your kind introduction. I am delighted to have this opportunity to speak to the
Graduate School of International Studies of Korea University on Korea's foreign policy directions in the
world order of the coming century.

My style of speech is not flowery, and my style of diplomacy is not very ceremonious. I prefer to get down
to business right away. So, let's get right down to the subject at hand.

Let me start with a survey of the primary trends shaping the world order for the new century and move on
to some of the key issues of global concern within the new order. Then, I will review the changing
environment in Korea's immediate regional surrounding, and what all this means for Korea's foreign policy
in the new century. In ending, I will say a few words on what I think diplomacy is and should be.

I. The World Order in the 21st Century

1. A Global Age - A Global Village

The 21st century will be characterized as the global age. The next century will see accelerated
globalization consolidating the global age, where the entire world will be bound into a single global village.
Already no country is an island, and no place is too far from us. Even the dirty war in Somalia and the
genocide in Rwanda are not far from us.

Globalization is the result of advances in communication and information technologies. But the implications
for the ways people live and countries relate to one another have been revolutionary. On the one hand, it
has strengthened the chances for prosperity around the world, as nations become increasingly
interdependent. On the other hand, it has erased the barriers that in the past had contained problems in a
country or a region from spreading to others. More and more issues and problems are becoming global
issues and problems.

But while globalization is rapidly proceeding, nationalism has not entirely subsided. In fact, nationalism
has made a come-back as the rationale for ethnic disputes and parochial conflicts that persist in many
corners of the world.

During the Cold War, different peoples were bound by ideology. The iron curtain had suppressed
nationalistic sentiments and prejudices. When the curtain was suddenly lifted, the seeds of discontent and
strife burst out and quickly developed into violent conflicts. This is what happened in Bosnia and Kosovo.
Thus, while globalization and globalism will be the dominant order of the day, nationalism and national
identities will continue to be a defining factor of dynamics of global events.

The rise in globalism has also been accompanied by a rise in regionalism. In particular, the advanced
countries have been the leading agents of regionalism. The EU has been the most successful example.

With the birth of a single currency, the euro, with 11 of the 15 EU members participating at the beginning of
next year, the regional integration of Europe will make a huge leap forward. The euro and EMU(European
Monetary Union) will be a monumental accomplishment.

2. Universal Values - Spread of Democracy and the Market Economy

The end of the Cold War in the final decades of the present century has freed the world from the bi-polar
division along two hostile, ideologically opposing blocs. The end came with the collapse of the
communist bloc, due not to outside attack but to implosion within.

The fall of communism has meant victory for western-style liberal democracy and capitalist market
economy. After seven decades of clinical testing in the old Soviet empire, the communist model of
command economy was proven to be a failure, and the market economy emerged as the only alternative.
The capitalist market economy excels in creating wealth and elevating the average standard of living for
the whole society.

More and more countries have come to accept democracy and market economy as the prevailing
ideology. The countries of the world are becoming increasingly bound together in shared values and
aspirations for political democracy and economic affluence.

However, the capitalist market economy has inherent deficiencies, such as inflation, unemployment,
speculation, and growing gap between rich and poor. And the democratic ideals of human rights and
dignity can easily be slighted in the blind quest for ceaseless economic growth. And the answers to these
problems are being found in such socialist precepts as equality, social justice, social welfare, and
government initiative. The task of inventing a new mix of economic growth and social justice will be the
major challenge facing economists and policy-makers of the future.

3. Primacy of Economics

a. Economic strength as main source of national power

b. Economic interest as primary goal of foreign policy

Armed conflict persists in many corners of the world. But the world as a whole has moved beyond wars
over territory and spheres of influence. The military rivalry between the superpowers is a thing of the past.
Non-proliferation and disarmament is the dictate of the times. Military might still counts, but more and more
the primary determinant of a nation's power is seen to be its economic strength. Indeed, economic
strength is the basic of strong military power.

Yes, there are times when it is crucial to have military force and a firm security stance, as against Iraq,
Serbia and north Korea. But these are exceptional instances, like a lingering problem from the old days.
And when it is mobilized, the use or the threat of the use of force is a collective action of many nations to
rein in a rogue state or terrorist entity, rather than among individual nations vying over land.

More than ever before, money talks in relations among nations. Where there is mutual economic benefit to
be gained, cooperative ties are easily formed between nations, regardless of the past history of political
alliance or animosity. Political ties can come later.

The primacy of economic strength has also been clearly displayed in the current financial crisis. In bailing
out the crisis-stricken countries of Asia, the IMF and its key donors have called the shots on what the
countries needed to do to reform themselves. And the major economies of the region - the United States,
Japan, and China - are being called upon to take the leading role in coordinating policies to facilitate
economic recovery in the struggling countries.

Under the circumstances, economic management is the critical test of able government, and the promotion
of the nation's economic interest has become the primary goal of foreign policy.

4. Single Superpower (Unipolarity) with Multiple Poles

a. American supremacy in economics and politics

b. EU integration, emergence of China as global power

The fall of the Soviet Union and its much weakened successor Russia has made the United States the
sole military superpower.

In economics, too, the United States has become the uncontested leader, thanks to its thriving information
and knowledge-based industries. It is also the largest market for imports and thus the machine for
economic growth around the world. This is why it can be so demanding in trade disputes. If the United
States decides to limit access to its market, whole industries of the exporting country can be crippled, if
not washed out.

In military might, too, the United States is the only power with a global reach and presence.

However, the United States cannot lead with power alone. It must have moral force. It must constantly try
to persuade the world of the legitimacy of its policies and values. In Cuba, Kosovo, and the Middle East,
we see how difficult this task can be.

Furthermore, there is room for the emergence of multiple poles that could challenge American supremacy.
The European Union will certainly be an economic rival, especially after the launch of the euro.

Japan, although weakened by the prolonged recession, is still the world's second largest economy, and
is increasingly called upon to play a leadership role, especially where money is needed. China, too, is
growing into a major economic power, and it is showing a propensity for military grandeur as well.

Thus, there will be a number of poles around which global affairs will evolve. However, the United States
is likely to remain the sole superpower with both the economic and military clout to steer the global order
as it sees fit.

II. Global Issues of the 21st Century

In sum, in the global village of the 21st century, the countries of the world will be closely interconnected.
There will hardly be any distance between countries in time and space. The proximity can be exciting, but
there will be problems as well.

1. Gap between Rich and Poor

Globalization and global standards mean that all the countries of the world must compete on equal-footing
in the global market. Domestic industries can no longer hide behind the safety of protectionist measures.

Unmitigated competition will lead to a further widening of the gap between the rich and poor nations of the
world. Left to run its course, further marginalization of the underdeveloped countries can become a grave
threat to peace and stability in the 21st century.

The problem will have to be seriously addressed in the global fora. Poverty eradication and assistance for
the sustainable development of the world's poorest countries will be a major challenge for the global
community in the 21st century. In partaking in the task, nations will be required to balance their concerns
for their own national interests and the collective interest of humankind as a whole.

The gap between the rich and poor is likely to intensify within nations as well. Deregulation and small
government is the dictate of the market economy. But equitable distribution and social justice will continue
to be an area where effective government action is necessary.

2. Clash of Civilizations: Christianity vs. Islam

In general, I don't subscribe to the theory on "the clash of civilizations", as forwarded by Prof. Huntington.
But at least in one area, there is such a danger, namely a clash between the Christian world and the world
of Islam.

Islam is a diverse entity, and it is misleading to make sweeping characterizations about it, or about what
makes it so at odds with the western world. What can be said is that the two worlds have frequently
clashed during this century, and the antagonism could make for the most unsettling divide in the world of
the 21st century.

Recently, at the heart of the many regional conflicts in the final decades of the present century - as in
Bosnia and Kosovo - has been the religious passion of certain ethnic groups to get rid of other ethnicities.

This is why the Middle East peace process to bring about a lasting peace between Israel and Palestine is
so important. It is a test case of whether the two different worlds can work together toward a future of
coexistence and prosperity. If the process fails, and the vicious circle of violence returns to the Middle
East, the clash of civilizations may become a recurring phenomenon. The virtue of tolerance should be the
virtue of the new century.

3. The Environment

The environment will continue to be high on the global agenda in the 21st century. For the economic cost
involved and the destruction of the eco-system they entail, environmental issues such as climate change,
the depletion of the ozone layer, pollution of water resources, and the reduction in biodiversity have
emerged as a common, urgent concern of the global community.

The Rio environment summit of 1992 put the official stamp on the environment as a priority concern of the
global community, and crystallized its vision for a environment-friendly future of humankind in the concept
of "sustainable development".

So far, sustainable development has been more of a slogan than action. But promises have been made for
future action, such as target years to cut down emission of greenhouse gases that lead to global warming.

But much more is needed, and will be pressed for in the coming century, to restore the balance between
economic growth and the integrity of the earth's natural environment.

4. Weapons of Mass Destruction & Terrorism

Another challenge for the global community as it enters the 21st century is the threat of the proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction and their delivery means.

To meet the challenge of non-proliferation, the global community established instruments against nuclear
proliferation, such as NPT and CTBT, which demand constant vigilence in preventing the transfer of
nuclear weapons-related materials, equipment, and technology to third countries.

The proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is another source of grave concern, particularly
because they are so destructive and easily accessible. Countries like Iraq are desperate to get their hands
on the weapons, since they would provide a powerful leverage against the world. Global instruments have
been established to prevent their proliferation, such as the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical
Weapons (OPCW) and its Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), as well as the Biological and Toxin
Weapons Convention. But not all countries in possession of these weapons have acceded to the
Conventions.

Furthermore, missiles, the delivery means for the weapons of mass destruction, are as threatening as the
weapons themselves. The danger is that they are being developed and sold by secretive regimes such as
north Korea.

Closely linked to the concern over the weapons of mass destruction is the possibility that they could fall
into the hands of terrorist elements. Being the frequent target of terrorism, the United States has made the
fight against terrorism one of the world's top agenda.

But the criminal mind of terrorists is hard to fathom, and the motive behind terrorist acts is complex and
diverse. The fight against terrorism is likely to continue well into the 21st century.

III. Changing Environment in Northeast Asia

Now, lets turn our attention to the conditions in Northeast Asia, i.e. the immediate context for Korea's
foreign policy

1. Shifting Balance of Influence

The years since the end of the Cold War has entailed much change in the dynamics of Northeast Asia.
With the certainty of the bi-polar order suddenly lifted, the regional powers groped about for new
alignments. The situation is still in a flux. Recently, however, the period of probing seems to be giving way
to the emergence of a new equilibrium in the region.

In the process, China is emerging as a power to be reckoned with. At the present rate of growth, it is
almost assured of a future as an economic giant. By maintaining the value of its Yuan during the current
financial crisis in Asia, China has shown that it is worth its stature as a regional leader. China will replace
the United States as the number one trading partner of Korea within a decade, and come to have as much
influence on Korea as the United States.

Meanwhile, Japan is suffering a prolonged recession, but it is still the world's second largest economy. It
is called upon to play a regional and global leadership role befitting of its economic profile. When it emerges
from the current restructuring with its economic powerhouse revitalized and with a more mature view of its
place in the global scheme of things, Japan is likely to feel more confident in having a major voice in
regional and global affairs.

The future of Russia is less certain. The political leadership is fragile, and the economic reforms have been 
sidetracked. However, a Russia that slides back into its old communist ways will be an ominous
development for the entire world, especially with its massive stockpile of nuclear weapons. Thus, the efforts
led by the western countries to actively assist Russia in its painful transition toward a market economy will
continue. Despite the setback, the market economy is taking root in Russia, and there is no turning back.
Eventually Russia will emerge as a major power.

In the meantime, the United States has consolidated its position as the guarantor of peace and stability in
the region. Most notably, the United States has north Korea engaged in dialogue, over missiles, the
underground construction site, etc. The influence of China and Russia on north Korea has greatly
diminished. Ironically, it is the United States that now has the greatest influence on the north, at least to the
extent that Pyongyang can be influenced by outside forces.

2. Converging Interest of the Four Powers

Among the four powers - the United States, Japan, China, and Russia - there is a kind of homogenization
process underway. The common denominator propelling the process is the market economy. On the basis
of market rules, there are growing exchanges not only in goods and services but also in culture and
education, pointing to a "merging of civilizations"

In their increasingly homogenized outlook, all four powers have a clear stake in securing peace and
stability on the Korean peninsula. They have every reason to support us in our efforts to establish a regime
of peaceful coexistence on the Korean peninsula. They will all welcome a gradual, peaceful unification of
the two Koreas, for this would eliminate a flashpoint and create an expanded market for their goods and
services.

3. Maturity in Relations with Neighbors

Another encouraging development towards the new century is the growing maturity in Korea's relations with
all of the four powers.

Real progress has been made to close the chapter on the strained past and open a new era of genuine
partnership between Korea and Japan. The 43-point action plan agreed upon during President Kim's visit to
Japan in October is being implemented to foster a healthy Korea-Japan partnership for the future. This, in
turn, will be a leading force for stability and prosperity in the region as a whole. The general tone of the
bilateral relations has definitely taken on a more forward-looking, rational tone.

With China, too, the past six years since normalization of ties have concentrated on economic ties. But now,
a new era of comprehensive partnership has been officially declared, clearing the way for cooperation on
political matters as well. Given China's long-standing loyalty toward north Korea, the change is very
significant. The implication is that Chinese leadership will feel more free, less burdened by their concern for
Pyongyang, in supporting south Korea's policies on the global stage and on the Korean Peninsula.

With Russia, too, after the 1990 establishment of diplomatic relations, we have steadily developed
constructive and complementary ties.

Meanwhile, Korea-U.S. relations are stronger than ever. The security alliance remains the cornerstone of
peace and stability in Northeast Asia. The United States continues to be Korea's largest trading partner and
foreign investor. With the new government's firm commitment to genuine democracy and market economy,
the two allies are now closely bound by shared values and ideals.

In sum, the stage has been set for Korea to promote constructive, complementary and unhampered
cooperation in all areas with the four powers in the region. In the greater openness and practical-
mindedness among the four powers, and their homogenized outlook, there is room for south Korea to do
some independent thinking.

4. North Korea

Of course, north Korea remains the great uncertainty in the region. A new leadership was inaugurated in
Pyongyang in early September. But things are likely to remain as they are for the time being.

By all accounts, Kim Jung-il is firmly in control, and the regime is likely to muddle through. There is no
organized opposition, and no alternative force to challenge Kim. The economy continues to deterioriate, and
the residents are suffering the consequences. But totally cut off from the outside world, they have been
indoctrinated to endure the suffering.

Under the circumstances, we do not expect quick progress in our efforts to engage the north in dialogue. But
there is always an element of surprise, and we must prepare for all contingencies, good or bad.

The current policy of engagement vis-a-vis the north is geared toward the long-run. It is aimed at nudging
North Korea into peaceful coexistence and cooperation with us, based upon a solid security stance.

Every time the north does something to provoke us, such as a submarine infiltration or a missile launch, the
engagement policy comes under attack. But we can't be swayed by an incident or two. By the same token,
we shouldn't jump to any conclusions over a small progress, such as the Mt. Keumgang tourism project.
Experience tells us that outward behavior is no measure for the real intentions of the north.

Unless we are ready to go to war with the north, or prepared to deal with its sudden collapse, we have no
alternative but to be steadfast in our engagement efforts.

IV. Foreign Policy Directions for Korea

Given the forgoing discussion, the foreign policy of the Republic of Korea at the outset of the 21st century
should evolve along the following guidelines.

1. Basic Mindset

a. Commitment to universal values

b. Independent thinking

c. Diplomat as salesman/woman

First of all, to be a responsible and effective player in the global age, we must have an enlightened
worldview, that enables us to go beyond our immediate frame of reference and commits us to universal
values and norms.

In the past, we have been "frogs in the well". We must strive to climb out of the well and look beyond at the
larger world. This is hard to do. Koreans have lived for thousands of years as a homogeneous people. We
are not skilled in getting along with others. But whether we like it or not, we will have to acquire the skills
and the mindset to mingle with others. This is what globalization dictates to us.

The prevailing values in the global age are democracy and the market economy. We must learn to adhere to
democratic values in both our outlook and behaviour. We have to accept and abide by the rules and
procedures of the market economy. In the global age, the market economy means the open market
economy. We should not regret having joined the OECD, as some have done during this time of economic
crisis. Instead, we must strive to make Korea an active and confident member of the OECD.

We must also nurture independent thinking. In the past, caught at the forefront of the Cold War, we had
little room to maneuver on the diplomatic front. But now, we are friends with all four powers. And we have a
government that is being applauded around the world as a forerunner of democracy and the market
economy in Asia. To an extent unprecedented before, there is room for creative,independent thinking in
foreign policy.

Universal values of democracy and human rights must be a key part of the foundation for our thinking in
foreign policy. As a model practitioner of democracy, we will be called upon to speak out on human rights
issues around the world.

Korea should do more to contribute to the ideals of PKO. As a responsible member of the global community,
Korea is required to do its share to promote the cause of environmental protection and aid to the least
developed countries.

In espousing the accepted code of diplomatic conduct, Korea's diplomats must make honesty the basic virtue.
Contrary to what is commonly said, diplomacy was never the art of lying for one's country. Diplomacy is
based on trust. And trust can't be won with lies. This is even more so in the present age of around-the-clock
news and ever-powerful communication links. What goes on in one corner is instantly known in others.

Therefore, honesty and professional skills, instead of meaningless cliches and rhetorics is the order of the
day. Genuine intentions rather than pompous grand-standing, substance rather than frills will advance the
nation's interest in the global age.

And finally, in the age of global competition for economic gains, the diplomat must be trained and determined
to act as the nation's salesman/woman, promoting its goods, services, and image to others. And we have a
proud democracy and, hopefully, a thriving market economy to sell.

2. Asian Power/Middle Power

a. Modesty of a middle power

b. Cooperation with ASEAN and EU

Korea in the 21st century must stand as an Asian power and a middle power, firmly rooted in the changing
dynamics of the region. It must also have a clear sense of what it can and cannot do as a middle power
situated between the world's most powerful nations.

In other words, it must not presume to be a main player in the global theatre. It should not forget that it is a
middle-size regional power in East Asia with limited resources. Korea will be secure and prosperous only as
part of a secure and prosperous East Asia. It must make every effort to promote the homogenization process
taking place among the regional powers.

In the unipolar order of American supremacy, Korea's foreign policy must unfold within the context of the U.S.
global strategy. In Northeast Asia, nonproliferation and stability on the Korean Peninsula are the key
elements of the U.S. strategic goals. The foreign policy agenda of Korea must be crafted and implemented
to harmonize with those goals. But the global strategy of the United States does not always coincide with
Korea's regional strategy. There can be cases of honest differences. And it is in these cases that Korea
should exercise its independent thinking and employ the art of good diplomacy.

As an Asian power, Korea must also strengthen its ties to ASEAN, and actively take part in the efforts to
strengthen the regional fora for cooperation, such as APEC. ASEAN is Korea's own frontyard. Korea's
economic ties to ASEAN countries are important, not just for their size but also for their complementary 
nature. The ASEAN Regional Forum is an important channel for dialogue on security issues.

The EU is a major axis in global affairs. The history of the European Union offers inspiration for peaceful and
gradual integration of the two Koreas. Close cooperation with the EU should be nurtured to balance Korea's
ties with the four surrounding powers. The ASEM meeting in Korea in the 2000 will present a valuable
opportunity to set the tone for closer cooperation and interdependency between Asia and Europe, between
Korea and the EU.

3. Peaceful Unification

a. Managing Inter-Korean relations

b. Peaceful coexistence and cooperation

c. Consensus among the surrounding powers

Peaceful unification of the fatherland will remain a basic motive behind our foreign policy. But two divided
parts can embark on the process of unification only when there is consensus on how to unify and how they
want to live together after unification.

South and north Korea are too far apart at this point. Aside from the small openings in economic exchanges,
the two sides are not even talking to each other on the official bi-lateral level. So for now, and for the
foreseeable future, the task will be to manage developments between the two sides, with the interim goal of
establishing a regime of peaceful coexistence and exchanges.

The task is easier said than done. The two sides are at once two parts of the same fatherland, and at the
same time different states. They are ideologically opposed. Furthermore, the north is bent on diplomatic
brinkmanship. Still, we have no choice but to manage the situation as best we can. And steady engagement,
based on a firm security posture, is the best, safest option.

We have the full support of all four surrounding powers. All four see the wisdom of engagement, and their 
own interests to be served when north Korea opens up and adapts to the changing world. All four see the 
danger of further isolating the north: the result would be Pyongyang crashing down or lashing out against 
the south. It is against the grave consequences of such a development that the value of our patient 
engagement should be weighed.

4. Foreign Policy of a Unified Korea

a. Liberal democracy and market economy

b. Peace-loving middle power

c. Enlightened Nationalism

When it does come, in a peaceful and gradual manner, unification on the Korean peninsula will be a
historical turning-point for the entire global community.

Unification, however, is not an end in itself. It is the means to secure a free and harmonized nation for all
Koreans. A unified Korea must be committed to liberal democracy and market economy. It must be an
honest and balanced society.

A unified Korea should aspire to be a nuclear-free, peace-loving country, respectful of the existing
borderlines and equipped with armed forces confined to conventional weapons.

A unified Korea can be an integral part of the global economy, playing by the global rules and standards.

A unified Korea can be an active force for stability and prosperity in East Asia and the world.

Finally, a unified Korea will not be able to stand alone disengaged from the region. It must thus guard
against the danger of nationalism degenerating into chauvinism. This will be one of the challenges facing
the leadership of the unified Korea.

V. Diplomacy

1. Extension of Domestic Governance

2. Diplomacy as Bipartisan/Nonpartisan Endeavor

Before ending, let me say a few words about the nature of diplomacy.

Diplomacy is the mission of protecting and advancing the national interest in the global arena. But diplomacy
does not take place in vacuum.

Diplomacy is a reflection of a nation's moral and economic strength. Diplomats are products of their own
culture. There are international standards to which diplomatic behaviors must adhere to, but there is more
diversity than uniformity in the ways diplomacy is played out by the different countries of the world. To
switch the argument around, diplomacy can be forceful and effective when based on principles and values
that fully reflect the beliefs and character of the nation. Otherwise, diplomacy can appear to be hypocrisy.

Furthermore, diplomacy is an integral part of governing. The diplomatic agenda is an important part of the
national political agenda, and the President is always the nation's top diplomat. So it is easy for the different
political factions to try to take advantage of diplomatic issues for domestic political gains. We've seen too
much of this in the past.

In fact, foreign policy is too important to be the exclusive realm of the power in government. It should be the
result of thoughtful, responsible input from both ruling and opposition camps. But once a policy is decided,
the nation must speak in a single voice before the world. In other words, for diplomacy to be effective, it must
be a nonpartisan endeavor. As a famous American statesman once said, "politics stops at the water's edge".