On April 27, Dr. Gi-Wook Shin presented a paper entitled "North Korea and Contending South Korean Identities: Analysis of the South Korean Media and Policy Implications for the United States," co-authored with Kristin C. Burke, at the Korea Economic Institute in Washington, D.C. This paper is part of a larger study of American and Korean media coverage of the U.S.-ROK alliance and the DPRK.

This paper argues that while U.S. officials approach the alliance and the DPRK as matters of national security policy, these issues are fundamental to the evolution of South Korean national identity in the post-Cold War, post-authoritarian era. Using data on media frames used by two prominent Korean newspapers from 1992 to 2003, this paper examines how Korean conservatives and progressives have advocated their views of North Korea and how the terms of this debate have changed since the implementation of the Sunshine Policy.

As South Koreans seek to redefine their national identity in the context of a developing regional and global order, there is deep and bitter division within South Korea over North Korea and the alliance. The process of reformulating national identity can be contentious and conflict-ridden and is not likely to be resolved soon. The nature of this political division on the question of identity, explored in this paper, means that even if South Korean conservatives win the upcoming presidential election, there is not likely to be a dramatic change in policies or attitudes. The debate over North Korea is a durable feature of the political landscape in the South, and the U.S. faces distinct policy challenges in coordinating with a government that represents a starkly divided polity.

For the full text of this paper, please visit the link to KEI, KEI Academic Paper Series.

On Thursday, June 7, 2007, Daniel I. Okimoto, director-emeritus and co-founder of the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center in the Freeman Spogli Institute at Stanford University was awarded The Order of the Rising Sun, Gold Rays with Neck Ribbon. Professor Okimoto was chosen for "his contribution to the promotion of scholarship and academic exchange between Japan and the United States."

According to the Consulate General of Japan in San Francisco, Professor Okimoto was chosen for the following contributions to Japan:

1. Walter H. Shorenstein Asia Pacific Research Center

In 1978, Prof. Okimoto established a multi-disciplinary research center called the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (Shorenstein APARC) at Stanford University which focuses on the study of key issues in public policy involving the United States and Asia. Prof. Okimoto served as the Director of APARC for 12 years from 1985 to 1997 during which time he held many conferences and seminars on the political economy of both Japan and the United States. Through those activities, Shorenstein APARC contributed to deepening the mutual understanding for people in the field of politics and economics of both countries.

2. Japan-U.S. Legislative Leaders Meeting and Asia Pacific Roundtable

Prof. Okimoto approached some U.S. Congressmen and organized a Japan-U.S. Legislative Leaders Meeting. For 14 years from 1984 to 1998, this annual meeting helped to promote exchanges between political leaders in Japan and the United States and advance mutual understanding between the two countries. In 1999, the Japan-U.S. Legislative Leaders Meeting became the Asia Pacific Roundtable and included leaders from the entire Asian region as well as from Japan and the United Sates. The Asia Pacific Roundtable has been instrumental in enhancing exchange among the political leaders of Japan, the United States and other Asian countries.

3. Asia Pacific Scholarship Program

Prof. Okimoto established the Asia Pacific Scholarship Program at Stanford University in 1997. Stanford University selected the best and brightest college graduates from Asian countries as well as from Japan and gave them an opportunity to study in graduate programs at Stanford University on scholarship. Highly promising young Japanese scholars were also selected and had an opportunity to study at Stanford University through this scholarship program.

In the aftermath of last week's Virginia Tech massacre, the national Korean-American community has reportedly suffered a backlash similar to that unleashed against Muslims in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, but Asian Americans on campus largely agree that they are being treated with respect and sympathy and credited the media's portrayal of the attack as objective and fair.

A number of Facebook groups, such as "Cho Seung-Hui does NOT represent Asians," are continuously amassing new members, while a YouTube post with the words "I belong in Korea" over Cho's face is receiving hundreds of hits per day.

While the Virginia Tech shooter, Cho Seung-Hui, was South Korean, other ethnic groups have expressed empathy for Asians in the wake of last week's attack. Ahmed Ashraf '07, vice president of the Muslim Student Awareness Network, said he had similar fears before the identity of the shooter was disclosed.

"I know that when I first heard about the Virginia Tech tragedy, I was very, very nervous about the gunman's background," Ashraf said in an email to the Daily. "If a Muslim student were involved in the massacre, it [would have] hit way too close to home."

Media coverage of the shootings has drawn an ambiguous reaction from Asian students and faculty members at the University.

"This shows that race and ethnicity is still a key source of collective identity in the United States," said Sociology Prof. Gi-Wook Shin. "Non-white ethnic groups and females can be self-conscious and extra careful precisely because they are still minorities in American politics of identity."

Others said they were pleased with the focus on Cho's mental state, rather than his ethnicity.

"The media has been pretty good at being neutral," said Kenny Kim '08, co-president of the Korean Students Association. "As a member of the Asian-American community, I was inclined to think of the worst possible outcomes, but the discussion has now turned more to Cho's mental health than to his ethnic background."

"This, sadly, is not a new crime in America and is not seen in new terms now that the latest perpetrator is of Korean origin," Shin added. "Experts have compared him to the Columbine shooters, saying that he fits the same profile. This is a judgment about mental state and behavior patterns that have nothing to do with race or ethnicity."

In South Korea, reaction to the Blacksburg, Va. tragedy brought up deeper, cultural issues.

Shortly after the shooter's ethnicity was revealed, the South Korean government and media went into a frenzy, debating whether Cho's actions warranted an official national apology.

Such a phenomenon has raised discussion of collective guilt. Yet Kim emphasized the importance of a clear-cut distinction between guilt and shame.

"Koreans are a unique race," he said. "We often blur the lines between the nation and the people. Thus when we found out that the shooter was Korean, every Korean felt a bit of shame that one of 'us' committed a horrible act."

"However, this is not to say we feel any guilt for what happened," he added. "The act that Cho committed is an isolated event and has no linkage with him being Korean or Korean American."

On campus, students and faculty said they have faith in the community's power to overcome the blame and guilt.

"This tragedy was not about Korean or Asian Americans, and I am sure the Stanford community is well aware of that," Shin said. "In a sense, Cho himself was a victim and we have social responsibility to make sure that this kind of tragedy won't happen again."

Reprinted with permission by the Stanford Daily.