Korea's peculiar tribalism

By Jason Lim

So, it was South Korea vs. Japan in the gold medal match for soccer in this year's Asian Games. Besides being a dream match for the game organizers and TV studios, the biggest news seems to be about Park Hang-seo, the South Korean coach of the Vietnamese U-23 team that made it all the way to the semifinals before losing to Korea.

Because Park is Korean and took the Vietnamese team to great success, the Korean press is gushing about how the Vietnamese people's appreciation for Park's unlikely achievement will translate into closer relations between the two countries as well as increased likeability for Koreans in Vietnam.

In a way, this is an application of the social constructivism theory of international relations, which basically says that even international relations are driven by constructed social identities of nation states. Alexander Wendt writes, "that the structures of human association are determined primarily by shared ideas rather than material forces, and that the identities and interests of purposive actors are constructed by these shared ideas rather than given by nature.”

Along these lines, the Korean newspapers are basically saying that: One, the Vietnamese really admire and like Park Hang-seo for his coaching prowess of the Vietnamese national soccer team; Two, Park is an ethnic Korean; Three, Vietnamese' affinity for Park will transfer to ethnic Koreans as a whole and create a shared identity around the “Koreanness” of Park; Four, Vietnam and South Korea will develop better relations.

One and two are basically true. However, making the jump to three and four is definitely a stretch. There is no evidence that a particular person's service to another country automatically translates to some expanded social construction of national narratives that influence international relations.

But I am not interested in delving into international relations theory. To me, this storyline is more indicative of Korea's peculiar brand of ethnocentric tribalism as the driving force for a socially constructed national identity. In other words, Koreans feel an oversized sense of pride for a fellow ethnic Korean's success on the international stage.

I can point to a myriad of examples such as Michelle Wie, Fleur Pellerin, Hines Ward, among others. None of these highly-accomplished people are Korean nationals. However, they are ethnically Korean. And Koreans felt a sense of collective ownership over their successes despite their “Koreanness having nothing to do with their achievements. Excitement over Park's achievement in Vietnam is another expression of this tribalism. It's assuming an outsized influence that the visibility of an ethnic Korean's success would reflect back on all Koreans.

It's not just success, however. It's shame as well. Remember the Virginia Tech shooter, Seung-Hui Cho? I recall all the expressions of regret that ranged from candlelit vigils and religious services to online tributes. South Korea's ambassador to the U.S. even proposed that the Korean Americans take turns in a 32-day fast to honor each of the victims.

I am not sure where such tightly knit ethnocentric tribalism comes from. Just like anything else, there's bound to be an organic mix of multiple historical and sociocultural factors that inform and sustain such a social identity.

And it's apparent that the ethnocentric tribal membership is the primary way that Korean social identity is defined, rather than national citizenship. Remember how Viktor Ahn's gold medal winning performance in the men's 1,000-meter short track competition in the Sochi Winter Games triggered a cascade of self-recrimination over how a corrupt and nepotistic sports authority drove Ahn away and forced him to defect to Russia to continue competing? The public sentiment was certainly with Ahn despite the fact that he defected to another country. In other words, Ahn may have been Russian, but he was still part of the Korean tribe.

What I am more intrigued about is how this tribalism will fare as it continues to meet the changing demographics and increasing diversity of what it means to be Korean in the rapidly globalizing world. If your tribe is primarily defined by how you look ethnically, then what happens when talented white American or a future Steve Jobs from Kenya seeks to join this tribe? Would they ever be welcomed and accepted as fellow members? More importantly, what happens as Korean children don't look traditionally Korean anymore, as is increasingly happening with the prevalence of interracial marriages, and want seats at the table and demand to be recognized as full-fledged members of the tribe, not just token citizens?

Even more interestingly, what happens when South and North Korea unify based on shared ethnocentric tribalism as the primary motivation rather than a transactional quid pro quo over competing national interests? The tribe may have increased in number, but the country would have become that much more parochial and self-centered. That would definitely not be a competitive advantage in today's world.

Jason Lim (jasonlim@msn.com) is a Washington, D.C.-based expert on innovation, leadership and organizational culture.