How to make Korea 21st century leader
By Stephen Costello
Standing back, looking at the Northeast Asian region, looking at the current and expected limitations and internal emergencies of the surrounding and great powers, what could Korea’s strengths be for the next 50 years in East Asia?
It is easy enough to list Korea’s current problems and self-defeating social and political dynamics. The embrace of democratic institutions and habits had a difficult birth in the late 1990s. After Kim Dae-jung, leaders in Korea, Japan and the U.S. failed to understand and articulate a vision that would carry the democratic evolution in a progressive direction. (note: I worked with and knew Kim Dae-jung from 1991 to his death in 2009) Push-back from the old protected sectors, political small-bore thinking, and ideological rigidity combined to prevent more steady civilizational advancement. Korea still devotes less than half the average OECD percentage of GDP to social welfare.
In all this the public has been both remarkably prescient and predictably easy to manipulate. They fully supported the Korea-led South-North engagement in 1998-2008, but followed confrontation and division when it was offered by their political leaders. Since the end of the 1990s, however, a robust civil society has emerged. A young head-strong activist described to a visitor in 1997 the power of transparency in collecting the speeches and positions of the nation’s politicians and judges. He is now mayor of Seoul. Public interest law is now an indelible part of South Korea’s democratic landscape, and that is owed to both thousands of dedicated individuals and a few far-sighted leaders.
Legislative empowerment and activism was long practiced by the democratic opposition, and the independence of the judiciary and press continue to be, appropriately, hotly contested arenas of power and governance. The slow but steady increase in social cohesion, public policy discussion and national self-evaluation has been continuously interrupted, sometimes by outside forces, mostly by internal battles.
Despite all that, Korea stands today as the most dynamic and capable power in the region, and this is important. To appreciate Korea’s unique status and potential it is important to grasp its soft power, geographic realities, hard power and internal capacities.
First, Korea lacks the particular ingrown and structural impediments of its neighbors. China imprisons half a million without charge or trial. It imprisons and internationally denigrates Nobel laureates. It is intent on growing its regional influence, though it lacks much of the requisite soft power attractiveness to do so. Vietnam, the Philippines, Japan and Korea are all on guard against Chinese bullying. Japan is politically fragile and conflicted. It economy is stagnated and self-contradictory. Though its post-War history is rich and attractive, elements of society wish to return to an imagined belligerent/victim identity. Recent elections have confirmed an unpopular government and a divided, ineffectual opposition. The U.S. continues in a 13 year policy paralysis regarding the Northeast Asian region. It is incapable of strategic over-the-horizon planning. Consumed by balancing against a hard-power rising China, the U.S. cannot see, much less take advantage of, opportunities on the Korean Peninsula with regional implications. Internally, political warfare has surpassed policy formulation, and foreign policy implications for Korea’s U.S. ally are dim.
Secondly, Korea possesses unique strengths that are both urgently applicable to regional problems and less available to its neighbors. Korea is located at the nexus of three relatively high-capital economies: China, Japan and South Korea. It controls the routes that can open up the region and change the economics of transportation. Energy choices by Korea will be powerful models for the region, since global warming and weaknesses of nuclear energy have become too great to ignore. Small and medium companies plus technological deftness can help drag Korea into a sustainable and high-employment energy sector. South Korea’s standing armed forces are over 3.5 million (639,000 active and 2.9 million reserve), its budget is 12th in the world, and it uses some of the most sophisticated U.S. and European equipment available. Together with Japan, Guam, the Philippines, Thailand and Australia, Korea is part of the strongest hard power defense anywhere. Economically, Korea is a young democracy, albeit with a complex past that has yet to be fully addressed. Its alliance with the U.S. has been in some ways a security guarantee, allowing development that is healthy, outward-looking and deep. It has survived both the 1997 Asian financial crisis and the 2009-10 global financial crisis in better shape than many others. Internal contradictions and political/power group trade-offs must be addressed, but the opportunity for advancement is clear.
Thirdly, Korea has the leadership potential to capture this decade and become a leading example of how to posture for coming millennia. Potential leaders must do their homework, best thinking and practices must be actively sought out. Technology must be leveraged to service national and industrial goals. Old intellectual impediments to modern thinking must be identified, examined, and set aside. To some degree modernism must replace “progressive” and “conservative” approaches to progress. A new generation of NGO leaders, businesspeople, women, journalists and others are now rising to power positions in Korean society. The older generation still has extensive advice for how to reposition the country for coming events. Read points made by Lee Hong-koo, former prime minister and ambassador to the U.S., and by General Kim Kwan-jin, a former NIS head, who has a balanced and modern appreciation for Korea’s role in the region. Many of those who led the democratic revolution in Korea, which is still admired around the world today, have valuable advice to give.
For Korea to assume its potential role as a model of progress, modernization and advancement, its leaders have much work to do. Can it modernize its military for basic ― and realistic ― defense, plus robust climate and other-than-war operations in the region? Can it embrace smart-energy grids, rapid expansion of renewable energies and a quick evolution away from expensive and dirty nuclear energy? Can it begin to evolve an economy that takes the best aspects from European social justice models, enhances entrepreneurial incentives, and leverages North-South interests and capabilities? And can it confidently set the terms for enduring support from its great power partners, the U.S. and China? Shouldn’t it expect and even demand that support? Can it find a way to discuss and embrace its new middle power status, alongside Japan and Australia, so as to provide relief and confidence for its allies and partners? Ideas come from Yoshihide Soeya of Japan and Kevin Rudd of Australia, to name a few.
Leadership ― badly defined and poorly understood ― is hungrily desired by social leaders and the public in Korea and in the region. With the right hard work a new generation can show the way forward.
Stephen Costello is producer of AsiaEast, a Web and broadcast-based policy roundtable focused on security, development and politics in Northeast Asia. He previously directed the Korea program at the Atlantic Council of the U.S. He writes from Washington, D.C. He can be contacted at cosetllos@asiaeast.org.