Institutions and Organizations
Authors
Heather Ahn
Heather Ahn
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

The Koret Foundation of San Francisco has approved a $300,000 gift in support of the Korean Studies Program at Stanford University.

The two-year gift allows the Center to establish a Koret Fellowship and to bring leading professionals in Asia and the United States to Stanford to study United States–Korean relations. The fellows will conduct their own research on the bilateral relationship, with an emphasis on contemporary relations with the broad aim of fostering greater understanding and closer ties between the two countries.

“As a Korean American, I am pleased to support efforts to strengthen the bilateral relationship between Korea and the United States,” said Susan Koret, chairman of the board of the Koret Foundation. “The strength of Stanford’s program is a strong indicator that our foundation’s support will have a positive impact.”

“This is a very important and timely grant, as the two allies seek to repair the strains of the past and to strengthen their long standing relationship for the future,” said Professor Gi-Wook Shin, Center director. “Equally, we value our relationship with Koret, and we believe this is the beginning of a long-lasting relationship between the Foundation and our Center.”

The Korean Studies Program (KSP) focuses on multidisciplinary, social science-oriented, collaborative research on policy-relevant topics on Korea. KSP's mission is to be a research center in the truest sense, with its own research fellows and collaborative projects.

An entrepreneurial spirit guides Koret in addressing societal challenges and strengthening Bay Area life. Investing in strategic, local solutions, Koret helps to inspire a multiplier effect – encouraging collaborative funding and developing model initiatives.

In the San Francisco Bay Area, Koret adds to the region’s vitality by promoting educational opportunity, contributing to a diverse cultural landscape, and bolstering organizations that are innovative in their approaches to meeting community needs.

The Koret Fellowship is expected to commence with the 2008/2009 academic year.


About the Korean Studies Program at Shorenstein APARC

The Stanford Korea Program was formally established in 2001 at the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center with the appointment of Professor Gi-Wook Shin, as the founding director. The Stanford KSP offers courses on Korea, hosts seminars related to the study of Korea, sponsors workshops and conferences, conducts research projects, supports fellowships, and collaborates with a broad range of visiting scholars.

All News button
1
Authors
Daniel C. Sneider
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
%people1%, associate director for research at Shorenstein APARC, gives a few cautionary lessons on U.S.-Korea relations.
Earlier this month I visited Seoul as a member of “New Beginnings,” a study group of former American policymakers and experts on Korea, co-organized by the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at Stanford, and The Korea Society. We formed this group last year, anticipating that the upcoming Korean elections and the American presidential elections afterwards would offer an opportunity to embark upon a “new beginning” in our alliance.

After several days of meetings in Seoul, most importantly with President-elect Lee Myeong-bak and his senior advisors, we came away convinced that our hopes for a “new beginning” were more than justified. As President Lee takes office, it is clear that his administration is deeply committed to restoring the alliance to its previous place as the foundation of Korean foreign and security policy. Equally important, the new government is focused on the need to boost economic growth based on the free flow of trade and investment, and sees the conclusion of the Free Trade Agreement with the United States as central to that goal.

For those of us who have long argued that a vibrant Korea is vital to America’s interests, these were welcome words. It is no secret that there was a perception in the United States that President Roh Moo-hyun, backed by a significant portion of the Korean people, no longer saw the alliance as a strategic imperative for Korea. Unfortunately, many Americans, particularly in Congress, had begun to share this view of the alliance, fueled by a mistaken belief that Koreans were “anti-American.”

This view of President Roh and of Korea was unfair and even distorted. President Roh deserves credit, particularly in the last two years, for taking important steps to improve alliance relations, not least his promotion of the negotiation of the FTA. He made unpopular decisions, such as the dispatch of troops to Iraq, in order to preserve a cooperative atmosphere. And as we saw demonstrated in the election, public opinion in Korea regarding the United States has shifted dramatically since the emotional days of 2002.

The Lee administration can anticipate a warm greeting in Washington, as is already clear in the preparations for his visit next month. The new President has sounded all the right notes – seeking closer cooperation on North Korea policy, restoring positive ties with Japan, America’s other vital ally in Northeast Asia, and building a broader strategic partnership with the U.S. beyond the Korean peninsula.

Amidst the renewed embrace of the alliance, it is worth however keeping a few cautionary lessons from the past in mind:

1. Not everything will be Smooth Sailing

Despite the welcome official rhetoric, it is no secret that the relationship between the United States and the Republic of Korea has never been entirely smooth. From its earliest days, born out of Korea’s liberation and the trials of the Korean War, the alliance has been marked by both close cooperation and by clashes over key policy goals. While bound together by strategic necessity, the national interests of Korea and the United States have not always been identical.

There is nothing unusual about such differences among allies. Look for example at the tensions that plagued U.S.-European relations over the disastrous decision to invade Iraq. Even with the best of intentions, there will be moments of conflict between Seoul and Washington. What is important is how governments manage those differences to protect the underlying relationship. Both Koreans and Americans need to remember the virtues of quiet diplomacy, trying to avoid negotiating their differences through the media.

2. All politics is local

Alliance relations can no longer be managed solely by diplomats or by friends meeting behind closed doors. Those ties are crucial but both Korea and the United States are democracies in which the issues that are at the core of the relationship – from trade to the alignment of military forces – are matters of public discussion. Domestic politics shapes policy decisions but both Koreans and Americans sometimes forget the pressures operating on the other side.

This is particularly important in an election year. The Korean National Assembly election in April is already having an impact, delaying ratification of the FTA. The U.S. election will mean FTA ratification by the U.S. Congress this year may be impossible. Presidential candidates are taking positions that they may adjust after gaining power. On another level, the new government in Seoul needs to remember that the Bush administration is a lame duck affair and begin to prepare for a new government in Washington.

3. Expect the Unexpected, particularly with North Korea

The limited progress on the nuclear negotiations with North Korea has temporarily brought closer coordination between Korea and the US. But it would be foolish to assume that this trend will necessarily continue. The negotiations are already facing a slowdown as negotiators grapple with much tougher problems. If they break down, both Seoul and Washington, along with their other partners in the 6-party talks, will face some hard questions about how to respond. Any attempt to pressure Pyongyang is likely to bring an escalatory response, not least to test the new government in Seoul.

It is possible that Seoul and Washington will once again be somewhat out of synch. Ironically, the Bush administration – and whatever follows it -- may favor greater concessions than the new administration in Seoul would prefer to make.

These differences are manageable. The key is real policy coordination between the US and Korea – and the inclusion of Japan in a revived trilateral coordination mechanism. If both sides keep that commitment, we will indeed have made a “new beginning” in our alliance.

Daniel Sneider is the Associate Director for Research at Stanford University’s Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center. A former foreign correspondent, Sneider covered Korea for the Christian Science Monitor.
All News button
1
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

The Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at Stanford University, with a generous grant from the Academy of Korean Studies, will host "From Democracy to Civil Society: The Evolution of Korean Social Movements," a conference on Korean democratization and social movements, on October 23-24, 2008.

This conference seeks to examine two paths through which Korean democratic movements have evolved: institutionalization and diffusion. Regarding institutionalization, we focus on the increasing legitimacy of the democracy movement’s ideals and organizations as well as a shift toward political institutions as a central locus for movement activity. Regarding diffusion, we explore how democratization has facilitated a variety of new social movements such as the environmentalist movement, women’s movement, and peace movement.

We encourage paper submission from interdisciplinary approaches and junior scholars including graduate students. The deadline for submitting proposals or papers (preferred) is May 15, 2008. We will pay all expenses for travel and accommodation and offer an honorarium for those who will present their papers at the conference. We will only accept electronic submissions.

» Apply via email

All News button
1
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Shorenstein APARC has received a grant from the Academy of Korean Studies in Seoul which enables the center to publish a series of books on Korea's democratization and social change, under the series title: Korean Democracy: From Birth to Maturity.

Under this three-year grant, the center will publish a series of studies which focus on: 1) the role of social movements in Korean democratization, 2) comparative relevance of the Korean experiences, and 3) impact of democratization on social and political changes.

For the first study the center will build upon its on-going research projects, particularly the Stanford Korean Democracy Project. This project seeks to understand the emergence and evolution of social movements and their role in Korean democratization. During the authoritarian years, when former military generals ruled Korea, various social groups participated in the movement to restore democracy and ensure human rights. Their activism was instrumental to democratic reforms that took place in the summer of 1987 and they continued to play an important role even after democratic transition.

The Stanford University Korea Democracy Project traces the dynamic of this social movement from 1970 to 1993. Based on sourcebooks obtained from the Korea Democracy Foundation, project researchers led by Dr. Gi-Wook Shin have created novel quantitative data sets. Specifically, they have coded the main features of nearly five thousand protest and repression events from 1970 to 1993, using a comprehensive coding scheme developed expressly for this purpose. In addition, researchers have coded an organizational directory that includes characteristics associated with 387 social movement organizations active during this same period. While there are many informative studies of particular movements - such as the Kwangju uprising - in Korea's democracy movement, the Stanford Korea Democracy Project aims to provide a systematic overview of the movement as it developed through the most authoritarian period (1972-84), democratic transition (1987), and the democratic period (post-1987). Two books are expected from this project.

The second study will address the comparative relevance of Korean experiences. The comparison between Korea and other non-Western societies raises many questions about the conditions necessary for democratic transformation, including the role of culture, national identity, social organization, labor politics, and economic modernization. There is also a need to understand how Korea's particular example provides lessons regarding effective democracy promotion. The center plans to host a conference on labor politics in Korean democracy that is designed to develop a theoretical challenge to the Euro-centric theoretical paradigm in labor studies and draw implications for other non-Western societies. In advancing comparative perspectives, the researchers will work closely with Stanford's Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law (CDDRL). The coordinator of their Democracy Program, Larry Diamond, has already published two books that looked at Korea's experience in this comparative framework.

Finally, the third study will assess the impact of democratization on broader social and political changes in South Korea. This will include not only domestic issues but also Korea's relations with other nations. The latter is particularly relevant since Korean democratization took place in the post-cold war era. As such, democratization has provoked Koreans to rethink their views of the North, US-ROK relations and Korea's role in the world. Clearly democratic change has significantly altered the environment in which Korean government policy is made, broadening the public policy dialogue to include non-governmental actors, new media, and politicians who are sensitive to the shifts of public opinion. Researchers at the center will explore this dynamic in supporting the research and publication of a new book on South Korea's democratization and the anti-American wave of 1999-2002, authored by a former senior American official, David Straub, currently a 2007-2008 Pantech Research Fellow at the Center. 

All News button
1
-
Some people said North Korea would not survive the end of the USSR and dissolution of the Soviet bloc. Some people said Kim Jong Il's likely tenure could be measured in months. Some people said that North Korea was on the verge of collapse in 1997; some people, in fact, proclaimed that the economy had already collapsed.

What sorts of myths and misperceptions do we entertain and perpetuate that make it difficult for us to deal with North Korea coherently?

Robert Carlin is a 2007 Pantech Fellow at Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center and has been a visiting fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University since 2005. After receiving an A.M degree from Harvard University's East Asian Regional Studies program, he joined the Central Intelligence Agency in 1971. From 1974 to 1988, he was a senior North Korea media analyst in the Foreign Broadcast Information Service (FBIS), where he received the director of the CIA's Exceptional Analyst Award. From 1989 to 2002, he was the chief of the Northeast Asia Division in the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research. Concurrently, from 1993 to 2002, Mr. Carlin served as senior policy advisor to the U.S. special envoy for talks with North Korea, taking part in every significant set of U.S.-DPRK negotiations of which there were many--during those years. He was on the delegation accompanying Secretary of State Madeline Albright to Pyongyang in October 2000. From 2003 to 2005, Mr. Carlin was senior political advisor to the executive director of the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO), leading numerous KEDO negotiating teams to the DPRK. Altogether, he has made 25 trips to North Korea.

Much of Mr. Carlin's analysis on North Korea from his years at FBIS has been declassified and is available either in the "Trends in Communist Propaganda" or "Trends in Communist Media". Over the years, he has written chapters for several books on the Korean issue including, most recently, "Talk to Me, Later," appearing in North Korea: 2005 and Beyond. In 2006, he co-authored an IISS Adelphi paper "North Korean Reform: Politics, Economics and Security." His essay on negotiating with North Korea will appear in Korea 2007 - Politics, Economy, Society. Over his career, Mr. Carlin has lectured at the Harry S. Truman Presidential Library, the State Department's Foreign Service Institute, foreign ministries and intelligence organizations abroad, and numerous universities.

Philippines Conference Room

Robert Carlin Pantech Fellow Speaker Shorenstein APARC
Seminars
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

On October 11, the Stanford Board of Trustees approved the appointment of Shorenstein APARC's Director, Gi-Wook Shin, as the Tong Yang, Korea Foundation, and Korea Stanford Alumni Chair of Korean Studies.

An endowment was established in 1999 through the donations of alumnus Jae-Hyun Hyun, the Korea Foundation, and KSA, to enable the university to recruit a social science scholar whose work focuses on Korea from the perspective of contemporary policy issues. In addition to broadening Stanford's teaching and research programs in Asian studies, the holder of this chair is expected to conduct research on the political economy of Korea, trade and finance, security relations, politics, or other topics of importance to understanding Korea in the context of today's world.

When Professor Shin left UCLA to come to Stanford, he left the largest Korean studies program in the nation. With true entrepreneurial spirit, he has built an impressive and dynamic Korean studies program. It hosts luncheon seminars, workshops, and conferences, and has sponsored many Korean scholars, government officials, and business leaders who spend time at Stanford as visiting scholars. It also supports an active research program. Stanford is steadily becoming a world-class center for contemporary Korean studies.
-- Coit D. Blacker, Director FSI

In 2005, Dr. Shin was appointed Director of the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at FSI. Since becoming director of the center, Shin has been laying a strong and dynamic foundation for interdisciplinary research, training, and outreach, both through his leadership of the Korean Studies Program and his efforts to bring focus to the center's wide-ranging affiliation of Asia-related projects, programs, and initiatives.

About the Donors:

Jae-Hyun Hyun received his MBA from Stanford in 1981. He is the chairman of Tong Yang Group, a diversified business conglomerate of Korea. The Tong Yang Group, which originally built its foundation as a manufacturer of cement and confectionery goods, is a fully integrated financial services group that offers virtually every financial service available in Korea, such as securities, merchant banking, life insurance, mutual funds, credit cards, venture capital, and asset management. Prior to joining Tong Yang, Mr. Hyun served as a public prosecutor at the city of Pusan's Public Prosecutor's Office. He has four children; three have attended Stanford (Jenny '99, Richard '03 and Tina '05).

The Korea Foundation was established in 1991 to promote an understanding of Korea throughout the world and to enhance international goodwill and friendship through a multitude of international exchange programs. The foundation promotes interest in Korea by supporting Korean studies at universities, research institutions, and libraries. The foundation also provides Korean studies materials to individuals and organizations, and provides scholarships for foreign scholars, students, and experts.

The Korea Stanford Alumni (KSA) Association, a group of dedicated Stanford alumni who have returned to Korea, hosts various events for its more than 500 registered members.

All News button
1

Shorenstein APARC
Stanford University
Encina Hall E301
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

0
YoonWeb.jpg

For the past 15 years, Tae Il Yoon has been in media and automotive industries in Korea. He was a vice president and planning director of YTN, 24 hour TV news company, and was a vice president of Hyundai KIA Motors Group.

-

The talk will explore the seven years of OhmyNews in its effort to popularize what its founder, Mr. Yeon Ho Oh, calls "citizen journalism." Oh will discuss his vision to increase citizen participation in news reporting with the launch of OhmyNews 2.0, a radically revamped on-line news platform.

Oh's long-dreamed media experiment OhmyNews was launched in February 2000. Since June 2007, the on-line based news outlet boasts nearly 60,000 "citizen reporters" worldwide and 65 full-time staff reporters. Citizen journalism gained mainstream recognition during the 2002 presidential election in Korea.

Oh says, "Every citizen can be a reporter. Journalists aren't some exotic species, they're everyone who seeks to take new developments, put them into writing, and share them with others."

After finishing college, Oh joined a liberal Korean monthly magazine as a staff reporter and continued his work until 1999 as the magazine's chief of staff. Six years before Associated Press correspondents were awarded a Pulitzer Prize for their report on No Gun Ri massacre by American soldiers during the Korean War, Oh conducted comprehensive interviews with the survivors and reported an in-depth story. Oh received a doctoral degree in journalism from Sogang University in Korea in 2005.

Daniel and Nancy Okimoto Conference Room

Yeon Ho Oh CEO and Founder of <i>OhmyNews</i> Speaker
Conferences
Authors
Daniel C. Sneider
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

The opportunity to engage Kim Jong-il, the leader of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK), in serious dialogue is inherently attractive. A face-to-face meeting with Kim has the potential to break through a fog of misperception and mistrust.

Given the nature of the DPRK system, the key decisions can only be made at the very top of the pyramid of power. One summit encounter is therefore potentially more valuable then scores of ministerial meetings or talks among senior officials.

These opportunities have unfortunately been extremely rare. Despite some 35 years of intermittent dialogue going back to the South-North talks held in 1972, this would mark only the second time the top leaders of divided Korea have met each other.

The hope for momentum created by the historic meeting of President Kim Dae-jung with Kim Jong-il in Pyongyang in June 2000 swiftly dissipated, disappointing many Koreans.

This may appear to be the right moment to restore the impetus to the North-South summitry. Since the 2000 summit, the process of engagement between the Koreas has deepened dramatically, ranging from extended contacts among officials to the flow of tourists, at least from the South to the North, across the border.

Economic exchanges are widespread, from the Gaeseong industrial park to a growing trade in goods. And the six-party talks to reach an agreement to dismantle the DPRK's nuclear program are at least moving forward, in large part due to the resumption of direct diplomatic negotiations between Pyongyang and Washington.

There are serious reasons, however, to question whether this is the right time for a second inter-Korean summit.

First and foremost, President Roh Moo-hyun is, in every sense of the word, a lame duck. When the summit was scheduled to take place, it was less than three months until the presidential election.

The election campaign is unusually uncertain, with the ruling party and its allies still in the process of selecting their nominee. Polls indicate that a change in leadership --bringing the opposition Grand National Party to power -- is very possible.

While he remains in office, President Roh has every right to exercise his authority and leadership. But given the political uncertainties, and the vital nature of inter-Korean relations, it would seem imperative to secure bipartisan support not only for the summit but also for the policy outcome.

For any gains to be meaningful, there should be some assurance that these policies will continue in place whomever succeeds as president.

Without that broad support, charges that the summit meeting is motivated more by domestic political considerations gain credence.

Even worse, Pyongyang's decision to agree to hold the summit may also be a crude attempt on its part to try to influence the ROK election in favor of the progressive camp. Even if these charges are not true, they undermine the value that this summit may have to shape a long-term future for the peninsula.

The timing of the summit is also problematic because the nuclear negotiations with the DPRK have reached a very delicate moment.

The temporary halt to the operation of the nuclear reactor at Yongbyon and the reintroduction of international inspectors was an important gesture.

But the DPRK has not yet clearly decided to irreversibly disable its nuclear facilities and fully disclose its nuclear programs and arsenals.

The Roh administration claims this summit will reinforce this negotiation. But it also has declared that the nuclear issue will not be on the summit agenda. In the absence of a dismantlement deal, this summit may only serve to recognize the DPRK's claim to the status of a nuclear power.

But all of these problems of timing take a back seat, in my view, to the location of the inter-Korean summit. Kim Jong-il committed himself, in the 2000 joint declaration, to a return visit to Seoul. This was not a trivial matter -- it was perhaps the most difficult issue in the talks, as Kim Dae-jung said upon return to Seoul.

Everyone understands the historic significance of a visit by Kim to Seoul. It would finally signal the DPRK's acceptance of the legitimacy of the ROK and its leadership and the abandonment of its historic aim to force unification under its banner.

The DPRK leadership would be compelled to show its own people images of their leader in the glittering streets of Seoul. That visit alone could go much farther than any peace declaration, any agreement on boundaries, any military confidence-building measures, or any economic investment deals, toward bringing a permanent peace to the Korean Peninsula.

If this summit had occurred in the right place, then the issues of timing would be incidental. No one could object to a breakthrough of that magnitude. Unfortunately, Kim Jong-il was not pressed to live up to his commitment. If this meeting achieves anything, it should make it clear that the next summit will only be held in Seoul.

All News button
1
Subscribe to Institutions and Organizations