Special lecture by Simon Bureau (Chairman of Canadian Chamber of Commerce)

Simon Bureau, Chairman of Canadian Chamber of Commerce in Korea, came to Hanyang University on May 2, 2012 to give a special lecture to the Department of International Studies. Mr. Bureau is from Montreal, Canada and is the founder and CEO of a private consulting firm, Vector. He is also the author of Global Business Mind-Set. The term “MIND-SET” stands for: Mobility, Independence, Novel approach, Diversity, Hyphen (looking for values of links), Situation awareness, Equality (creating equal relationships) and Two-way street (two-way business deals). Like his book, Mr. Bureau’s lecture was intended to give direction to students in developing a global career.

He began the presentation by asking students questions such as, “What makes you get up in the morning?” “Who are you?” and “Where do you want to be?” The reason he asked students these questions was to emphasize the fact that it is not important what one wants to do; what is important is rather how it is done. According to Mr. Bureau, the only thing that limits people from reaching their goals is imagination, determination, and focus. He further explained that when developing a global career one must…

• Sharpen one's analytical skills and articulate presentation skills
• Become an autonomous and creative problem solver
• Gain confidence by understanding one's role and not being afraid to take a stand
• Set oneself apart from others
• Develop the ability to adjust to a new environment quickly

Mr. Bureau’s last piece of advice to the group of students was to L.T.C., which means, Leave The Country because “Korea is great, but experience new countries and merge in new cultures and ideas.”

Special lecture by Rob Edwards (Senior Vice President of Standard Chartered Bank)

Rob Edwards came to the Division of International Studies on April 25 to give a presentation under the Special Lecture Series. Mr. Edwards is not only the Chairman of the British Chamber of Commerce in Korea, but also Senior Vice President of Standard Chartered Bank in Korea. His first posting in Standard Chartered is what brought him to Seoul in 1978. Mr. Edwards shared his knowledge of Korea’s economy from an international viewpoint and recommended how we, as young students, can have a successful career and aid the growing Korean economy. He spoke about six main areas of competitiveness: availability of skilled personnel, regulatory environment, corporate tax regime, culture and language, quality of life, and personal tax regime. He believes that all areas can and should improve in Korea by promoting international experience and gender equity, changing to a negative law system, solving the lame-duck presidency, and by improving educational and medical systems. He praised Korea’s culture and language, which is a great example of Modern Confucianism.

Mr. Edwards taught students about the elements of success and urged students to take psychometric tests to determine whether they have type A or B personality. He also stressed that students must focus on the five values of being ‘courageous’, ‘responsive’, ‘international’, ‘creative’, and ‘trustworthy’. Being ‘courageous’ means that, “you accept accountability, take calculated risks and that you are able to challenge ideas with manners.” Being ‘international’ means that, “you must be sensitive, understand, and adapt to situations.” Being ‘trustworthy’ means that you are reliable, open, and honest; and the highest level of trust is earned when “you did as you said you would.” These values were taught to help students’ communication skills and to continue on a successful career path. He concluded with the quote: “Life is indescribably full, unfalteringly real, unfailing good.”

Special lecture by Steve B. McKinney (President of McKinney Consulting)

The guest speaker for Special Lecture Series on April 4, 2012 was Steven B. McKinney, the Founder and President of McKinney Consulting, Inc. The business, established in 2001, is an executive search firm, which has placed hundreds of bi-lingual middle-senior level executives for multinational companies in Korea and throughout all of Asia.

Mr. McKinney began the lecture by introducing himself and his achievements in the educational, business, and political field. He has an educational background of a Bachelor of Music Education and a Master of Business Administration. He has had over twelve years of experience as an Executive Search Consultant and is a Certified Master Coach since 2007. He currently serves on the American Chamber of Commerce-Korea Board of Governors and was bestowed Honorary Citizen of Seoul in 2007. He has also worked as a Senior Global Manager for well-known athletic companies such as Reebok, Adidas, and Converse.

Mr. McKinney explained that he became a successful entrepreneur in the international business community by always remembering how his father told him, “If you work hard, you’ll never go hungry.” This inspired him to always try his best in every goal he set. To help students achieve their goals, Mr. McKinney recommended 10 important steps of career planning which include “Step 3: Update your resume” and “Step 7: Invest in yourself.” He stressed the fact that competition today is tougher than before, thus planning ahead gives a competitive advantage. He also told students that his mindset of McKinney Consulting, Inc. is staying true to the “golden rule” and that it is “more profitable to be ethical.” The inspiring lecture left students with a deeper understanding of what kind of attitude to have to pursue in a career in the international field.

Special lecture by Dr. Ra Jong-Yil

On March 28 2012, the Special Lecture speaker was Dr. Jong-yil Ra, a University Distinguished Professor at Hanyang University. Dr. Ra shared with the students of Division of International Studies his life story, and how it made him the strong, successful man he is today. Dr. Jong-yil Ra was born in 1940 and grew up experiencing the effects of the Korean War firsthand. He had a difficult childhood with very little entertainment and proper education. Through this, Dr. Ra was able to find strength and a stronger will to represent the Republic of Korea. As a young man, he participated in multiple political protests and always took an interest in national and global politics. Dr. Ra graduated from Seoul National University he also earned a doctorate degree in international relations from Cambridge University. He was a former ambassador of the Republic of Korea to the United Kingdom and to Japan, and former head of the Republic of Korea's National Intelligence Service. His early career was as a Professor of Political Science at Kyunghee University in South Korea. He also served as Senior Advisor to the President on National Security during the administration of President Roh Moo-hyun. His success even after facing many obstacles during his childhood was very inspirational and gave students a message that opportunities are not given to you; you must make them happen yourself. Dr. Ra concluded his lecture a quote by Mark Twain: “A discriminating irreverence is the creator and protector of human liberty.” This left us thinking that we must actively participate in shaping the future we have because it does not matter what gender or age we are or what kind of childhood we had, but how we act. Being judged is inevitable and it could be tough to earn respect, but we should never give up and always try our best.

The End of NATO and the Decline of American Influence in Europe

By Joon Suh

Once a solution to many of the post-Cold War security conundrums among the constituents of the western hemisphere, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is now facing problems from within. US Defense Secretary Robert Gates poignantly enunciated the American grievance in his latest policy speech. Apparently, impatience and discontent is brewing in the US Congress with “expending precious funds [three quarters of total NATO expenditure¹] on behalf of nations that are apparently unwilling to devote the necessary resources or make the necessary changes to be serious and capable partners in their own defense.”²

Gates’ remark offers much food for thought that belongs to the realist school of international politics. Uncle Sam is frustrated with free-riders. In the language of international politics, the act of free-riding would be referred to as “buck-passing” – a spontaneous transfer of strategic liability to another player in the survival game. In fact, realism – particularly the kind professed by John Mearsheimer – predicts that the seductiveness of buck-passing grows within an alliance structure (This practice can also be seen in scenes of ordinary social life when, for example, a group of friends find it easier to get one friend to assume the responsibilities of arranging trips, events, etc. than it is to get a stranger to bear the burden).

Is NATO on decline? Yes. But, more importantly, so is American influence in Europe. NATO has been the centerpiece through which American power was projected to balance against rival powers in Europe. Not only has it been a guise of multilateralism, it has also been a pretext for a significant US military presence in Europe. With NATO falling apart, the United States will see its European privileges gradually diminish, along with its leverage.

What is happening to NATO? The most obvious propellant behind the division would be that NATO members, both US and European, are simply less willing, thus less cohesive. While the US has relied on its “coalition of the willing” since the onset of its war on terror in 2001, many European countries – especially Germany – have simply lost the appetite to join the American cause, enervated from the difficult and protracted war in Afghanistan. Not only that, the western response to the recent Libyan crisis also attests to the American reluctance to further expand its commitment to policing actions. Add that to NATO’s post-Cold War identity crisis. The sum of that equation is a slowly tarnishing band of western powers.

Moreover, there is a continental power on the rise. Not only is it a global economic dark horse but it is also the heir to old Soviet’s formidable military prowess. While the United States is an imported counterweight, impeded by the stopping power of water, Russia is a continental power with an unfettered geographic access to Europe. Geographic access is tantamount to a strategic edge that will allow Russia to continue expanding its orbit westward. In fact, Russia has relentlessly wielded its economic and military power. In early 2009, Gazprom ceased its natural gas supply to Ukraine over a payment dispute which provoked responses from Germany and other European heavyweight figures. In 2008, Russia instigated a ground operation against Georgia, a country agreed to be accepted as a member of the NATO. In 2007, Russia suspended the Conventional Weapons in Europe (CFE) Treaty – a post-Cold War pact designed to limit the amount of conventional weapons within a certain area – as a corollary of US plans to deploy missile elements in eastern Europe. Many more Russian maneuvers for power during the past few years suggest that Russia is a major powerhouse at large with prolific ambition to underpin its position on the European stage.

American supremacy in international politics remains a galvanizing force around the world. The United States has been able to build its unrivaled military prowess and second-to-none economic wherewithal because it was an isolated power. However, isolation comes with its own set of woes. Although the United States may have the capability to make its forces virtually omnipresent, it must be noted again that its role in the main theaters of contested power – Northeast Asia and Europe – will be limited to the name of an “offshore balancer.”³ This is definitely something that will occupy at least a noteworthy place in the trajectory of Russia’s continental quest.

There is no pending radical shift in the European balance-of-power. However, it is noteworthy that such tectonic movement could take place more easily in Europe than it could in Northeast Asia. Unlike Northeast Asia, there is no explicit military standoff in Europe. Plus, the US military presence in Europe is not as large as it is in Northeast Asia, and it is said that only 2% of EU countries’ forces are combat-ready (which is something Gates has expressed profound concerns on).⁴ Plus, European economies are dependent to varying degrees on Russian energy sources. Gates’ premonition of a “dim future” for NATO makes it even easier and more compelling for Russia to better relate itself to Europe. All-in-all, without a serious change in the present undercurrent, the future prospect of the European balance of power will favor Russia.

1 Shanker, Thom & Erlanger, Steve (2011) “Blunt U.S. Warning Reveals Deep Strains in NATO” June 10th, 2011 International Herald Tribune

2 Ibid.

3 Mearsheimer, John J. (2003) The Tragedy of Great Power Politics p. 234

4 Merritt, Giles, Niblett, Robin & Serra, Narcis (2011) “Debating Defense” Project Syndicate

The Duplicity of the Communist Pariah: The Political Economy of Armed North Korean Provocations

By Anonymous Writer

North Korea has been a subject of wonder, mostly in the most perplexing and inconvenient ways possible. That is not only because it is one of the most isolated placed on earth but also because the little it exhibits to the outer world lacks logical coherence. The communist pariah, in the views of those outside its walls, is characterized by duplicity.

The duplicity can be described as North Korea’s dual application of armed provocation and gradually apparent political will to unlock its doors to the outer world. However, its economy seems to be steadily deteriorating. Steven Bosworth, the last high-profile US visitor to the North, said “A labyrinth of issues like power transition and currency reform failure is alarming the North Korean leadership that North Korea simply cannot continue like this.”1

In fact, North Korea had been intensifying efforts for economic growth and constructive diplomacy up until the first quarter of 2010. There was hope for the return of North Korea to the 6-party talk in the aftermath of North Korean foreign policy master Kim Gye Kwan’s recent visit to Beijing. Also, North Korea did play a proactive role in re-normalizing the Geumkangsan tourism enterprise and the operation of Kaeseong Industrial Complex.2 North Korea has also allowed Russia 50 years of ship-docking at the piers of Najin (a coastal city located in northwest North Korea) and is actively reviewing the extension of Chinese port usage at the same location for the next 10 years.3

However, these signs of goodwill have been offset by armed provocations towards the end of the first quarter of 2010, along with the sinking of the South Korean naval vessel, the Cheonan. The tension on the halved peninsula, many experts and policy workers say, has never been so high. Some even say that an all-out conventional war is possible, which is unusual to hear outside of North Korea. The South’s accusations and threats of sanctions have provoked more inflammable responses from the North.

What makes North Korea so difficult to pacify?

Superficial analyses would suggest that the North’s provocations are aimed at gaining leverage in future negotiations or at renewing the regime’s grip on internal affairs. But given the integral role the current economic plight is playing in shaping North Korean behavior, it is fair to conclude that armed provocation could carry with it a commercial message. Armed provocations have a few commercially important implications in the black market for arms sales.

North Korea’s cash flow has dried up due to UN sanctions. In dire straits, the North is under tremendous economic pressure that could compel it to marshal all of its resources in raking in much needed dollars to provide a stepping stone for growth.4 Armed provocations are an effective propaganda instrument to advertise North Korea’s military products. Because armed provocations are able to draw a great deal of media attention, demonstrations of North Korea’s capabilities are widely broadcast. To the general public, this is news. To potential buyers – usually rogue states – this is advertising.

This possibility deserves special attention when taking into account that the arms industry claims a lion’s share of North Korea’s production. According to a report by the Congressional Research Service, some 36% of North Korea’s economy, at least until 2003, was based in manufacturing, mining, and construction, all of which are closely related to the military.5 The strategy is to provoke its neighbors, make the headlines, and thereby stimulate the demand in the world black market for arms sales. The interdiction of North Korean arms exports last December in Thailand could be an example of propaganda generated by armed North Korean provocations over the past several years.

Another thing armed provocation implicitly expresses is the quality of North Korea’s human resources in the military industry. A similar example could be found in Pakistan, another nuclear-armed country, whose well-known nuclear scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan, exported nuclear technology to Iran and North Korea. This example should be a warning to the world because it means that North Korea is also capable of exporting weapons technology, the same way Khan did. In fact, North Korea may already have been involved in such occasions. In 2007 Israel provided evidence that Syria and North Korea mounted a joint venture in the construction of a nuclear facility.6 Furthermore, it has also been found that North Korea provided “45 tons of uranium to Syria in September 2007 for the production of fuel for an undeclared nuclear reactor.”7

The worsening economy in North Korea is leading to further proliferation around the world. North Korea, I anticipate, will make more provocations to display its capabilities to the world for various purposes. The main purpose to such provocations will be to advertise its military products and technology. This should not allow North Korea’s neighbors to lower their guard and feel complacent. In fact, stakes are high for the world in converting North Korea from an impoverished outcast to a self-reliant economy. However, a modification of North Korean behavior is required. Economic and other humanitarian support can come only when balance-of-power is secure in the region because when the balance-of-power is thwarted, war makes any sort of aid meaningless. Life is the highest freedom of all because without it no other freedom can be enjoyed.

Idols and Corporations: How Idols Are Appealing and Craving Corporate Sponsorship in Korean Pop Culture

By an anonymous writer

Super Junior. T-ara. Girl’s Generation. 2NE1. Big Bang. After School. These are some of the most sensational brands that define Korean pop culture today. Everything from their lyrics to their dance, from their attires to figure of speech, ripples through adolescent minds and shapes the continuously changing trends among teens in Korea. Hence, they are called ‘idol groups’; they are idolized by teenagers.

I like to believe that artists strive to express a broad array of human emotions in a variety of creative ways. Entertainment firms, which have a habit of enslaving their young employees, seem to be more interested in producing content to indoctrinate adolescents with commercial messages rather than inspiring their thoughts and enriching their emotions. Their ammunition is meaningless but highly catchy lyrics, repeated excessively, and embedded in computer-processed electronic sounds—like Super Junior’s 2009 hit that repeated the inane lyrics “Ring Ding Dong” over and over ad nauseum.

After giving some thought to it, I came to the conclusion that the changes in trends derive from changes in the profit model of the music industry. There has been a significant change in the consumer-producer relationship in this industry due to the introduction of mp3 technology and P2P programs. Idol groups have been forced to change their source of income from selling music to selling themselves as appealing instruments of corporate propaganda.

We are no longer the customers of the entertainment firms whose stars we admire and even idolize. Their clients are elsewhere, probably in big offices somewhere along the skylines. The clients of the entertainment firms are corporations. So, whenever T-ara repeats the title of their hit “Bo Peep,” it is seen as a potential advertisement tool. In fact, Yuhan-Kimberly, a leading firm in the sanitations products industry, rewarded Core Contents Media, the firm in charge of managing T-ara, with a truck-load of “Poppee” box tissues because Yuhan-Kimberly’s sales increased due to T-ara’s hit title. Or what about Girl’s Generation and their “kicking-the-shuttlecock” dance endorsed as a part of Shinhan Card’s TV advertisement? 2NE1’s debut title “Lollipop”, sung in partnership with male idol group, Big Bang, was intentionally composed to take part in LG Electronics’ marketing strategy in launching one of its latest mobile phone models, Lollipop. Samsung Electronics followed suit shortly after when they endorsed Son Dam Bi and After School in producing the song “AMOLED” in which they sing how beautiful everything looks with Samsung’s latest mobile phone display technology, AMOLED.

The worse part of this phenomenon is that these marketing strategies are aimed at teenagers with no sense of healthy consumption. They seduce these vulnerable teens into fulfilling their insecurities and desires with consumer products, leading to an even heavier atmosphere of materialism. Another problematic consequence of these marketing strategies is that they induce a ‘race-to-the-bottom’ competition among media providers, who end up substituting true artistic values with sex, violence or anything sensational. Why? Because the more sensational the entertainment the more it attracts corporate clients. The corporate society knows that sex and violence sell their products because they are effective attention-grabbers, especially with adolescents.

I lament two things. The first is that teenagers’ idols are not who the teenagers think they are; they are not true artists with the conviction of enriching human souls but are rather instruments of corporate propaganda. Second, teenagers are being trafficked without their knowledge. Putting these two regrettable facts, we have teenage audiences, assembled by sensual media contents, who are traded for money to corporations by the media industry. As a result, teenagers are indoctrinated with consumerism, and are bombarded with sex and violence as idols race to the bottom to make themselves more favorable to corporations. The depth of the immorality involved in this form of human trafficking on TV is no less severe than that which occurs when people are smuggled into another country to be traded for money. The only difference is that in one case it is the body that is sold; in the other case it is the human soul.