International Relations

FSI researchers strive to understand how countries relate to one another, and what policies are needed to achieve global stability and prosperity. International relations experts focus on the challenging U.S.-Russian relationship, the alliance between the U.S. and Japan and the limitations of America’s counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan.

Foreign aid is also examined by scholars trying to understand whether money earmarked for health improvements reaches those who need it most. And FSI’s Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center has published on the need for strong South Korean leadership in dealing with its northern neighbor.

FSI researchers also look at the citizens who drive international relations, studying the effects of migration and how borders shape people’s lives. Meanwhile FSI students are very much involved in this area, working with the United Nations in Ethiopia to rethink refugee communities.

Trade is also a key component of international relations, with FSI approaching the topic from a slew of angles and states. The economy of trade is rife for study, with an APARC event on the implications of more open trade policies in Japan, and FSI researchers making sense of who would benefit from a free trade zone between the European Union and the United States.

News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

On April 27, 2018, the Shorenstein APARC Korea Program held a special public panel discussion following the dramatic summit that took place but hours earlier that day between North Korea’s Kim Jong-un and South Korean President Moon Jae-in at the village of Panmunjom. Titled “North Korea Summit Diplomacy: Round 2,” the panel featured Gi-Wook Shin, director of APARC; Kathleen Stephens, the William J. APARC fellow in the Korea Program and former ambassador to South Korea; Philip Yun, executive director and chief operating officer of Ploughshares Fund; and Yong Suk Lee, Korea Program deputy director, who moderated the discussion.

Same Movie, Different Actors?

Panelists admitted to feeling a sense of déjà vu. “We’re watching a replay of an old movie,” observed Professor Shin. “There are new actors, but will it be more than that?” They agreed, however, that the fact the summit happened at all was still a sign of progress. “It’s great that inter-Korean dialog is back after a decade of confrontation,” stated Professor Shin. “But is it really possible to achieve complete denuclearization?” he continued. “How far will the North go, and what will it get in return?”

Noting that similar optimism surrounded talks held by the Koreas in 2000—only for it to ultimately amount to little—the panel argued that a key difference between this summit and previous ones was the nature of the actors, particularly the North Korean representation.

“What has changed from past efforts?”, Shin asked the audience. “Kim Jong-un grew up; he was groomed to behave like a king, and we saw him [at the summit] acting like one.” Ambassador Stephens added that “Kim wants to present himself as a different kind of Korean leader, a respected leader of a normal state; the complete opposite style from his predecessors.”

Breaks from the past exist on the South Korean side as well. “This was a process driven by South Korea in a way we’ve never seen before,” said Stephens. “For South Koreans, it’s amazing to see that the leaders were not using interpreters, they were just speaking Korean; it underscores the nationalist issue underpinning this conflict, which the Americans need to be aware of.”

No seats at the Table

The U.S. administration’s reaction to the summit was swift, with President Trump tweeting both that the U.S. people should be proud and, perhaps more interestingly, praising President Xi of China for his support that has made the recent breakthrough possible.  

However, Yun expressed concern about “Japan and China feel[ing] left out.” He noted that this might yet again prove to be another instance of a Kim dynasty member setting other actors against each other for North Korea’s benefit, and that regional actors have doubts about the American level of commitment. “I think the Japanese are afraid the United States is going to cut a deal on long range missiles and then go home.”

“What we’re going to see regionally is a competition or a battle for Trump’s word,” he continued. “Who can be the last person to talk and convince him that their perspective is the correct one.”

Korea Summit Panel From left to right, Yong Suk Lee, Korea Program deputy director; Philip Yun, executive director and chief operating officer of Ploughshares Fund; Kathleen Stephens, the William J. APARC fellow in the Korea Program and former ambassador to South Korea; and Gi-Wook Shin, director of APARC.

(From left to right, Yong Suk Lee, Korea Program deputy director; Philip Yun, executive director and chief operating officer of Ploughshares Fund; Kathleen Stephens, the William J. APARC fellow in the Korea Program and former ambassador to South Korea; and Gi-Wook Shin, director of APARC.)

What Comes Next

Any optimism expressed by the panelists was further tempered with calls for patience on further progress. “Denuclearization of the North isn’t only difficult, it will take time,” said director Shin. “I want to be optimistic, but I must also be cautious.”

Additionally, change in the North will likely need to happen at a measured pace. “[I]n a place like the North, you can’t move from zero to 100,” said Yun.

Ambassador Stephens looked to the Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland as a hopeful precedence. While the sentiment of “we’ve tried this before” very much surrounded that process, it ultimately paved the opportunity for a final breakthrough, noted Stephens.

Time will only tell whether the summit is a true success or simply a repeat of the past. At the panel’s conclusion, Shin swapped out the earlier film analogy for one about sports. Comparing the recent diplomacy to a soccer game, Shin observed that “President Moon did a nice pass to Trump. But can Trump now score the goal?”

 

Watch their Coverage

http://abc7news.com/politics/whats-next-after-north-south-korean-leaders-meeting/3400659/

 


ABC 7 News reported on the panel event. Watch their coverage.

 

 

 

Hero Image
Kim and Moon
Korean Summit Press Pool / Getty Images
All News button
1
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

"Moon's proposal of a trilateral summit between the two Koreas and the United States, undermining China's influence, turned out to be nothing more than a pipe dream," said researchers at the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center in a recently published article. "The series of summits that began with Kim's visit to Beijing should lead to Four Party Talks — involving the two Koreas, the United States, and China."

The full article in The Diplomat is available here.

Hero Image
kim yong nam
President Moon of South Korea meeting at Cheong Wa Dae with Mr. Kim Yong-nam of the Presidium of the Supreme People's Assembly of North Korea | Cheong Wa Dae
All News button
1
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Under the guidance of the Aspen Institute Congressional Program, thirteen members of Congress convened at Stanford University from March 2-5 to discuss policy options regarding the current North Korea crisis. The representatives deliberated with scholars and practitioners to acquire a better understanding of North Korea and its ruling regime, review the regional actors and their interests, assess the range of potential solutions to the crisis, and determine the role of Congress on this issue.

A report summarizing the program’s dialogue is now available for download. In addition to providing non-attributed comments from the proceedings, the document also includes the itinerary for the three days, the names of participants, as well as a collection of relevant publications.

The Aspen Institute Congressional Program was established in 1983 by former U.S. Senator Dick Clark. The program is for members of the United States Congress, and is both nongovernmental and nonpartisan in design. The program gives senators and representatives the opportunity to delve into complex and critical public policy issues with internationally recognized experts. Lawmakers are given the opportunity to explore policy alternatives in off-the-record settings, while simultaneously building relationships crucial to finding solutions.

 

 

Hero Image
Aspen Institure Logo
All News button
1
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

“…factually Japan has made many apologies; but many Koreans and Chinese at the same time feel that those apologies have not been sincere. So there’s a gap between facts and interpretations or public sentiments.”

Twenty years after the Kim-Obuchi summit raised hopes for “a new Japan-Korea partnership for the 21st century”, the Carnegie Endowment for Internatonal Peace gathered diplomats and scholars, including APARC Director Gi-Wook ShIn, for reflection on what polices and initiatives have succeeded or failed since 1998 and why.

A recording of the panel is available online

Hero Image
Kim-Obchi Summit: 20 Years Later
All News button
1
Paragraphs

This paper examines how the spatial distribution of economic activity evolved within North Korea during a period of economic sanctions. Countries have used economic sanctions to isolate North Korea from the benefits of international trade and finance. China, however, has not imposed the sanctions, and consequentially has offset the trade restrictions imposed by other countries. I hypothesize three channels by which North Korea could have responded in this context: regional favoritism by the ruling elites, reallocation of commerce that reflects the trade diversion to China, and import substitution. Using nighttime lights from North Korea, I find that the capital city, trade hubs near China, and manufacturing cities become relatively brighter when sanctions increase. However, production shifts away from capital-intensive goods, potentially deterring industrial development. The results imply that despite the intention to target the ruling elites, sanctions may increase regional inequality at a cost to the already marginalized hinterlands.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Authors
Yong Suk Lee
Paragraphs

The development community has increased its focus on higher education over the past two decades, recognizing that education can contribute to building up a country’s capacity for participation in an increasingly knowledge-based world economy and accelerate economic growth. The value added by higher education to economies—job creation, innovation, enhanced entrepreneurship, and research, a core higher education activity—has been highlighted by an important body of literature. 

Yet experts remain concerned that investing in higher education in less-developed countries may lead to a “brain drain”--highly educated students and professionals permanently leaving their home countries. In the 2016 Kauffman report on international science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) students in the United States, for instance, 48 percent among a randomly sampled survey of 2,322 foreign doctoral students in the United States wished to stay there after graduation, with only 12 percent wanting to leave and 40.5 percent being undecided. In fact, high percentages of foreign students in the United States with doctorates in science and engineering continue to stay in the United States, creating a brain drain problem for the sending countries. 

Because students tend to move from developing to developed countries to study, brain drain is more problematic for developing countries. In addition, given accelerated talent flows around the world and the increasing integration of less-developed countries into global value chains, the negative impact of brain drain could be further amplified. As demonstrated by the studies reviewed in this paper, the migration of high-skilled professionals from developing countries may indeed create brain drain for them, but at the same time can significantly enhance the social and economic development of their home countries, regardless of whether or not they decide to return home, thus complicating what used to be seen as a straightforward case of brain drain. 

From Brain Drain to Brain Circulation and Linkage examines how brain drain can contribute to development for the sending countries through brain circulation and linkage. It provides an overview of the conceptual framework to map out high-skilled labor flows, identifies empirical cases and policies in Asia that demonstrate high-skilled migrant professionals actually make significant contributions to their home countries (beyond monetary remittances), summarizes key social and economic enabling factors that are important in attracting and motivating migrant high-skilled professionals to return or engage with their home countries, and concludes with policy implications and suggestions for further research based on these findings.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Authors
Gi-Wook Shin
Rennie Moon
Number
978-1-931368-49-0
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

“I don't think [young South Koreans] necessarily want reunification,” APARC director Gi-Wook Shin tells an audience during the World Affairs panel, “Responding to North Korea: South Korea’s Olympic Olive Branch and US Cyber Warfare Options." Joined by Ambassador Kathleen Stephens, the two spoke with World Affars CEO Jane Wales about many of the issues facing the Korean peninsula as it prepares for the start of the Pyeongchang Winter Olympics

The conversation is also available as a downloadable podcast

Hero Image
Wrold Affairs CEO Jane Wales, APARC Director Gi-Wook Shin, and Kathleen Stephens
All News button
1
-

In this eighteenth session of the Strategic Forum, former senior American and South Korean government officials and other leading experts will discuss current developments in the Korean Peninsula and North Korea policy, the future of the U.S.-South Korean alliance, and a strategic vision for Northeast Asia. The session is hosted by the Korea Program in association with The Sejong Institute, a top South Korean think tank.

 

Conferences
-

In this seventeenth session of the Strategic Forum, former senior American and South Korean government officials and other leading experts will discuss current developments in the Korean Peninsula and North Korea policy, the future of the U.S.-South Korean alliance, and a strategic vision for Northeast Asia. The session is hosted by the Korea Program in association with The Sejong Institute, a top South Korean think tank.

The report from this session is avaiable here to download.

Seoul, Repulic of Korea

Conferences
Subscribe to International Relations