By Heo Mane
The traditional diplomatic model falls quite short of establishing sustainable conditions for positive peace in the face of numerous challenges.
The challenges stem from the constant nuclear threat by North Korea; the new waves of Chinese and Japanese nationalism; the rapidly rising Chinese preponderance in the world; and Japan's persistent efforts toward a normal state involving a possible revision of its peace constitution, to name but a few.
In addition, the two countries have been engaged in a constant arms race, which could disturb the existing balance of power in Northeast Asia. Given this regional situation, incoming President Lee Myung-bak has a difficult task to transform the past crippled diplomacy into a dynamic global diplomacy.
First, the next government needs, among other things, to promote human rights in efforts to spread universal values and make a greater contribution to democracy. The left-tilted governments have abstained from North Korean human rights-related resolutions proposed both by the U.N. Commission on Human Rights and the U.N. General Assembly.
Such actions taken up by the left-oriented governments tarnished the image of the Republic of Korea as an important state of the ODA group and a council member in the Human Rights Council.
Second, the newly born government should, as an essential job for viable security structure, focus on revitalizing the current Korea-U.S. alliance relationship by gradually transforming it into a comprehensive alliance ― a political, diplomatic, security- and economic- orientated one by exercising military operational control power in common at a time of crisis under the cooperation of South Korea and the U.S. Its location does not matter. Its effective and timely use really matters much.
Third, it should boost capitalist culture in the Korean economy, which, in turn, would attract more foreign direct investment (FDI) in the Korean economic and financial circles. FDI has decreased over the past 10 years mainly due to both heavy regulations and a leftist-oriented economic mood.
The new cabinet is most likely to wash down the past economic policies by displaying a global economic diplomacy. A global economic diplomacy will dynamically increase national interests in the interdependent economic network.
Fourth, the new cabinet has to make intensive efforts to find a quicker and complete solution to the pending nuclear development ambitions of North Korea for the sake of making positive peace on the peninsula which is closely related to that of Northeast Asia and the international community.
This job is a basic part of the non-proliferation regime which is aimed at deterring proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Since 2006, the proliferation of WMD has continued to pose a serious threat to the international community.
The United Nations Council has adopted various resolutions to restrain the proliferation of WMD, including the resolution on North Korea's missile launches and nuclear test and the resolution on Iran's uranium enrichment-related activities.
A quicker and complete non-proliferation regime alone can bring denuclearlization of the Korean peninsula. As pronounced during his electoral campaign, Lee's commitment to Pyongyang is clearly understood as bringing about denuclearlization first and then economic aid.
On the other hand, new policy-elites would have to think, according to circumstantial change and its needs, about putting the European Union as a means of exercising stronger influence and a strategic leverage upon the nuclear issue. This is a global security policy that the new government has to pursue as part of steps to construct conditions favorable for positive peace on the peninsula.
Fifth, with their more independent and leading diplomatic initiatives, new policy-makers are required to seriously ponder declaring the end of the Korean War, with the closer cooperation of the U.S., the support of the UN and the 18 participating countries in the war.
The current cease-fire system has lasted for 54 years, which has remained quite the anti-thesis of positive peace. The diplomatic maneuverability of the new government would produce a firm, lasting condition for positive peace.
North Korean, U.S., and Chinese military representatives participated in the talks of the cease-fire and signed it on July 27, 1953, but South Korea should make strenuous efforts to take the leading role in making a declaration of the termination of the war which, in turn, will officially terminate hostilities. The number of countries in the talks for ending the war is not important, but it is important who will take the leading role in them.
A heavy dependence or low-profile diplomacy on this issue will lead South Korea to be a passive partner rather than an active one in peace talks. Sixth, they have to pay more keen attention to counter terrorism from occurring, regardless of time, space, and nationality in the international community. Terrorism is a serious threat to positive peace and security. Following September 11, a fundamental change occurred in international security perception of peace. The world has constantly made a greater call for international counter-terrorism cooperation.
South Korea in particular has be on guard against terrorism and to positively join counter-terrorism operations, and at the same time should be ready to positively join the activities of the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) launched by the Bush administration in 2003. This is a global security policy which is aimed at the preemptive interdiction of WMDs and their delivery to terrorists.
Lee's new administration should maintain the balance of power in Northeast Asia by performing global diplomacy with a flexible cooperative mind. The regional balance of power has heavily depended on the balance power structure on the Korean peninsula.
In other words, this means that the stability of Japan and China is also a factor capable of influencing the stability of the peninsula at anytime. The U.S. role is still, however, considered essential although U.S. forces have continued to diminish in the South.
A flexible, persuasive global diplomacy is needed to construct a balanced condition favorable for positive peace through better neighboring relationships with the three regional powers on the one hand, and other countries throughout on the other. It is required to absorb all of them into our diplomatic mindset, our main political goals, and, as a last resort, to our permanent moral appeals.
Lastly, new policy-makers must spread Korean traditional culture abroad, so as to enhance the image of Korea and its manufactured goods. They have to foster a long-term cultural policy which can promote the proliferation of Korean culture, which will gradually enhance the image of Korea and later its products as a spillover effect. The export of Korean products is in proportion to that of cultural proliferation.
It is needed that they should make most of Korea Cultural Centers abroad to effectively propagandize. Simultaneously they must further study the export of cultural contents through the Korean Wave (hallyu), a Korean pop culture boom abroad.
This writer thinks that the continued export of it will contribute to raise the Korea brand through ``Korea premium," while they must pay attention that an anti-Korean Wave has recently arisen in Japan and China. This is a global cultural diplomacy that must be launched with civil artists' innovative participation and the government's systematic help.
In a word, the Lee government is required to design global diplomacy in efforts to accomplish the above eight national goals in the 21st century. This is the only way to recover from the diplomatic setbacks that the previous governments committed, and to place South Korea on the first rank in the international community.
The writer taught international politics and foreign policy at Pusan National University in 1982-2004 and Rene Descartes University in 2005. He is currently president of the Korea-EU Center. He can be reached at mane398@naver.com.