- 2013 Yonsei East Asian College English Debate Contest on East Asian Policy

Session 2: The influence of the Korean Wave in East Asia

Vol.3

 

Approach

 

--> The Korean government currently defines the Korean wave into three different waves. The first, being based on famous melodramas spread in the 1990’s through Japan and China. Then, in the 2000s, the trend changed to K-pop and this time it spread much farther into the southeast of Asia. Now, since 2013, the Korean government defines it as the third Korean wave based on a broader aspect including the Korean culture itself. Truth to be told, the Korean wave has indeed proved its power especially in the case of psy, but it is also the reality that the influence of the Korean wave is decreasing in China and Japan. With the increasing disputes on borderland history issues with China and Dokdo issues with Japan, the anti-Korean wave within each country is gathering strength.

--> Hence, our policy takes the form of a bilateral approach.

We aim to regain the influence of Korean culture within China and Japan.

We aim to further the spread of Korean wave through the world.

 

Part A Recovery of the Korean wave in Japan and China

    

--> Compared to the beginning of the 21st century, the Korean wave within East Asia is dying down as the decade passes. The growth in the Korean drama market in Japan showed a growth rate of 72% at its peak in 2006. Ever since, the growth rate started to decline to a point where it is barely 1.6% in 2013. There are many reasons that took a part in this decline of popularity, but some of the major ones are 1) one-way transfer of culture and 2) loss of competitiveness of Korean media contents.

--> China: The Chineses are especially sensitive about the flow of Korean culture into their land. In 2005 and 2006 when the Korean wave was at its peak, some celebrities called the Korean wave a “cultural invasion”. Furthermore, CCTV limited the time Korean contents could be broadcasted. Though censorship is nothing to be surprised of in the current political state of China, such regulations clearly shows the anti-Korean feelings of the Chineses.

--> Japan: In the case of Japan, the situation is a bit more complicated. In 2012, when the countries collided on the Dokdo issue, the NHK banned Korean celebrities from their shows. Like in the case of China, many of the Japanese celebrities made anti-Korean wave comments like “we want a Japanese traditional program”.

 

a) Cooperation in creating movies and songs with celebrities from both countries.

--> The history of coproduction of movies began in 2006 with the movie “착신아리 파이널” which was a cooperation between Korea and Japan. The movie itself was a moderate success, but many of the actors who stared in the movie are now among the top celebrities in each country.

--> In the status quo, many companies do not find the incentive to go through a complicated process to make a movie

in cooperation with a Japanese or Chinese company. It doesn’t show any clear benefits compared to working alone and aiming for the domestic market. Rather, it has a risk that the movie might fail due to cultural differences in each country. Therefore, the government has to step in and incentivize the process. Decreasing the tax rate for those companies that work together with foreign companies, or perhaps direct financial support could be effective.

--> To succeed in both markets, the companies will strive to create new contents for dramas and songs. In the process, the Korean and Japanese and/or Chinese media contents will improve and regain competitiveness. Once companies in each country build up a close relationship and learns the strategy to create profitable media contents that can work in both countries, the cycle will continue even without governmental support.

--> Media contents with celebrities from both countries will create the road for both countries. This could be a way to respond to one of the reasons that causes the anti-Korean wave response. Not only will Korean celebrities gain popularity in Japanese or Chinese market, but the Japanese and Chinese celebrities will also gain popularity among Koreans. Thus we can truly have a mutual relationship.

b)\\\\\\\\\\

 

Part B Spreading the Korean wave worldwide

 

Exposition after or during the winter olympics in 2018

--> In 2012, there was an international exposition held in Yeosu, Korea. However, the exposition was not able to gather a lot of attention due to the economical crisis. The results were just over the goal of the government. However, there is still a problem, whenever such expositions and world cups are held, the infrastructure remains afterwards. For cities like Seoul, these infrastructures are used frequently and thus the city does not have to be burdened by maintenance fees. But yoesu is on the southern corner of our peninsula. Hence, without further plans, it is likely that the infrastructure built for the exposition will be left unused.

--> Our plan is to take advantage of this infrastructure. In 2018, the winter Olympics is to be held in Pyeongchang. The number of tourist will boom around the period and the global community will focus on the event. Thus, if we are able to prepare another exposition, this time focused on the Korean culture, we will be able to exploit our chances in 2018.

--> The Korean centre that was held in London during the 2012 London Olympics proved to be very effective. The effect of a similar project in a much larger scale actually within Korea will be incomparable.

 

--> Also considering that Pyeongchang is located in Gangwon province and Yoesu is located in jeonnam province, we will be able to build up the infrastructure in the two most underdeveloped states in Korea.

 

b) Step by step process to build up the infrastructure until then.

 

--> Overall increase

Read More

Obama Administration's Policy on North Korea> - 2013 Yonsei East Asian College English Debate Contest on East Asian Policy

Introduction:

           The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea(DPRK) is known to the world as a strange and dangerous country. Regularly depicted as a symbol of totalitarianism, terrorism, and international uncooperativeness by governments and media around the world, the so-called “Hermit Kingdom”has gained a reputation as a distraught, anachronistic, isolated country living in the wrong century.

           While it would be easy, and perhaps even comforting, to blame the oddities of the DPRK exhibits on the Kim regime’scruelty, lack of sensibility, or excessive violent tendencies, the reality is not that simple. We believe that foreign nations, including the United States of America (USA),also shoulder heavy amounts of responsibility.

           The DPRK shoots down American planes, captures American ships, and threatens the Republic of Korea (ROK) and the USA. But it does so because as much as the DPRK seems to be provoking the USA, the USA provoked the DPRK as well. The USA sent reconnaissance missions in DPRK territory, regularly holds joint military exercises in the East Asian region, and overall maintains a strong military presencein the ROK, practically breathing down the DPRK’s neck.

           Relations between the USA and the DPRK have always been tense, but in the 21^st century, things intensified drastically. The previous president of the USA decided to call the DPRK partof the “Axis of Evil,” alluding to a group of nations that the USA pulverized with planes and atomic bombs during WWII. As if this wasn’t threatening enough, the USA subsequentlyinvaded Iraq, a fellow “member” of the Axis, as if to say “You’re next” to the DPRK. The DPRK, like any nation comprised of human beings, feels threatened, frightened, and desperate.It should now come as nosurprise why the DPRK resiliently refuses to give up its nuclear program when the USA, which happens to control the largest nuclear arsenal on the planet, constantly pressures it to.

           We have seen that the antagonistic approach of the past has failed to yield significant results. We believe that now is the time for change our attitude. Our policy will show how.

 

 

Approach:

The USA should direct an approach of peaceful reconciliation and normalization towards the DPRK through a direct, bilateral, and amiable stance.

 

Goal:

The gradual normalization and development of relations between the USA and the DPRKin diplomatic, military, economic, and cultural aspects.

 

Policy:

Step 1:Diplomatic Normalization

The USA and the DPRK have no formal diplomatic relations as of now.The USA should actively seek to engage the DPRK in direct, bilateral talks in order to swiftly normalize relations between the two nations. In contrast with the somewhat disconnected, hands-off approach of previous years, the USA’s new attitude should be one of cooperationand amiability. The talks could encompass a variety of issues but should generally aim to forge a lasting relationship between the USA and the DPRK through regular meetings.

We believe such talks would be feasible and effective because:

a) Previous talks, including the Six-party talksof 2003 to 2009which involved manynations were largely abortive. Such talks attempted to reflect the interests of multiple nations and thus often lost application and became unsuccessful. The establishment of direct communication between two countries would provide opportunities for more focused, efficient resolutions. UN resolutions and sanctions have also proven to be largely ineffective.

b) Recent hostilities between the DPRK, the Republic of Korea (ROK), and the USA can be attributed to situational factors within the DPRK rather than actually substantialdangers. It is quite possible that aggressivepropaganda and threats recently put forth by the DPRK were merely to disprove notions that the country’s new young leader was “soft” or incompetent, rather than to actually attack either the USA or the ROK.

c) Since April 2013, the DPRK has demonstrated a less aggressive, more communicable stance. The DPRK’s leader Jong-un Kim, incumbent since December 2011, has been shown to be willing to talk and compromise early in his rule. The DPRK also has set forth conditions for compromise, including the lifting of UN sanctions, the discontinuation of propaganda leaflets from the ROK, and reduced jointmilitary exercisesbetween the USA and the ROK. While the USA may not have to fully acquiesce to all of such demands, such declarations by the DPRK demonstrates the possibility for reengagement of discussion.

Talks should primarily aim to stabilize relations between the USA and the DPRK to form a basis of further communication in the future. The USA should also encourage the ROK to actively seek reconciliation with the DPRK in a similar fashion.

 

Step 2: Restoration and Development

The normalization of relations between the USA and the DPRK should provide the basis for further cooperative developments in various aspects.Possible categories and agendas for each category could be as follows:

a) Humanitarian

           i) The facilitation and expansion of economic aid from the USA to the DPRK.

           ii) The release of American prisoners detained in DPRK territory.

           iii) The improvement of human rights or living conditions of DPRK citizens.

b) Military

i) Transitioning the current armistice between the ROK and the DPRK in to a full peace treaty, thus bringing about the end to the Korean War

ii) The reductionof joint military exercises between the USA and the ROK and the withdrawal of overall American military presence in the Korean peninsula.

iv)The gradual denuclearization and possible reunification of the Korean peninsula.

v) The return of the USS Pueblo, as proposed in 2005 by the DPRK.

           c) Economic

i) A renewal/rework of the Agreed Framework between the United States ofAmerica and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea of 1994 or the creation of a separate, similar agreement

                      ii) The revival and expansion of the Mount Kumgang Tourist Region.

           iii) The establishment of a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) within DPRK territory, that would allow investment by American corporations based on free tradewith exemption from certain communist policies, located along the Pacific coast of the DPRK in the North Hamgyeong or South Hamgyeong province

           d) Cultural

i) Cultural exchanges like the New York Philharmonic Orchestra’s visit to the DPRK in 2008.

Read More

- TOEFL Essay #2

<In Human We Trust>

 

   Recently, “Instagram”—an application that enables sharing photos with others—was sold to Facebook for $1 billion. “With Instagram, users will be able to share and treasure their precious memories with their friends and families,” says Mark Zuckerberg. As this deal suggests, this century would be an era of ‘human’ and ‘emotion’. The society is tired of the industrial lifestyle, and the 21^st century will look forward to substantial amount of focus on human. This shift of paradigm will bring immense changes especially in the trends of business and economic justice.

 

   Deep inquires in human and related fields of studies will serve as a new growth engine in this century, not a merely interesting subject. As conveyed in Charlie Chaplin’s <Modern Times>, human alienation was a major issue in the 20^th century. Then what makes this era mutually exclusive from before? That is, fusing the interest in human with technology will become crucial for companies to survive. People, who were burdened greatly in the previous industrial era, seek to fulfill emotional dissatisfaction. Those who apply this to business will benefit. Steve Jobs did a fabulous job. “It’s in Apple’s DNA that technology is married with the humanities, and that’s what makes the iPhone so ‘special.’” But there’s more. The emotional values of these ‘marriages’ are now protected by the law—look at the situation of Apple and Samsung. Who expected a ‘round corner’ to be worth millions of dollars? Technological creativity in accordance with the new paradigm will ‘hit the jackpot’, and this is a major change.

 

 

   Humans do not exist to be outliers nor watch the few acquire wealth and power. Changes will not limit on business trends—it will also bring a general change in social justice in terms of economy. ‘Humans’ refer to ordinary citizens, not the exceptionally rich. Obviously, the value of ‘human’ will be prioritized over, for instance, capital. People, who have suffered enough from the polarization and low employment rates since long before, will call for change, for justice—in fact, already are. The 21^st century will strive for both growth and distribution, too. Recent attempts to unveil Swiss banks and redistribute wealth are harbingers of this turnover. In this era of ‘human’, societies willing to flourish would attempt to harmonize individuals and create a synergy effect, thus bringing economic justice. Undoubtedly, this is another big change that this century will bring.

   People began to take care of themselves, in terms of emotions and how they are treated in society. This shift of paradigm will bring new trends of business and economic justice. “You dream…We make.” This was used to advertise the 24” iMAC series. We have always dreamed of emotional satisfaction and justice. This century would realize this—it will bring changes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Below is a video of Jobs, presenting the first iMac in 1998.

 

Read More