By Kim Ji-soo
It’s funny how November of 2010 invoked the days leading up to the 1988 Seoul Summer Olympics. Obviously, the deepening and fast fading foliage was not the reason.
As Seoul prepared for the Nov. 11-12 G20 Seoul Summit, there was a massive police presence: regular police, riot police and officers in plain clothes.
While their presence may have been unnerving to the unfamiliar eye, to the “familiar” eye that witnessed the 1987 democracy protests and the preparations for the 1988 Seoul Olympics, it invoked a sense of nostalgia of days gone by.
The heavy presence of the police also rendered an odd sense of security that the ongoing joke during that time was even the thieves were taking a break during the G20 Seoul Summit.
There was also a sense of the upmost orderliness, and a sense of anticipation hung over the year.
Just like in the summer of 1998 when South Korea a nascent democracy and rapidly growing Asian tiger economy played host to the Olympics; in November of 2010,a much more mature South Korea played host to the group of major economies.
We saw world leaders walking a red-carpet-like walk for a dinner at the National Museum of Korea, while the attending first ladies were dined by first lady Kim Yoon-ok at the Leeum Museum in Hannam-dong, Seoul.
Fears of possible terrorist attacks were effectively squashed by tight security in Seoul. In and around the official summit venue, the Coex, security was even tighter and most Seoulites largely stayed away unless they had to go that way.
People voluntarily responded to a no-car drive. Official statistics showed that more than 60 percent of cars in Seoul refrained from driving for the two days. In sum, civic participation during the G20 summit was akin to that demonstrated during the 1998 financial crisis where anyone with gold came out to donate it to save the country.
The outcome of the summit itself met with mixed responses, as nations remained split on financial matters including the prevailing currency issue.
But by agreeing to make indicative guidelines to identify big trade imbalances; to commit to moving toward more market-determined exchange rate; and to resist protectionism in all its forms, the participants were able to “climb out” of the currency war as President Lee Myung-bak put it.
It’s interesting to note how the domestic press including this piece right here, has been reassessing Seoul’s hosting of the G20 summit. Most of the commentaries noted how South Korea, perhaps for the first time has become part of a rule-making process instead of just merely rule-taking in the hegemonic international world order.
There is a mix of pride of having hosted such an event as a non-G7 and the first Asia country, peppered with righteously wary calls for the government and opinion leaders to now follow up to the new standards that we set for ourselves. There were letters-to-editors about how there may have been too many volunteers available and other faux pas.
One column noted, albeit in hindsight, how a once humble past of having been a recipient country of aid, particularly from the U.S., and the proximity to neighboring Japan eventually worked to the benefit of our economy. Such an analysis was eyebrow-raising, for it could have come from a mindset that has let go of its past.
Thus, with regard to what outcome the G20 Seoul Summit will ultimately be, we will have to wait and see. And perhaps it is for this reason the G20 has its critics. But consensus is a very elusive thing to reach, even between just two people; expecting it to be easy between more than 20 nations is a tall order.
The efforts to do so, however, remain inspiring.