[DeCal] Why Should I Care About Korea - Spring 2010?

This is an outline of the presentaiton I gave this past Tuesday.

Objective of the presentation:

1. The United States is committed to defending South Korea with twenty thousand U.S. soldiers, who by design, are supposed to die in the event of a North Korean attack. And, the committment is enormous (half a million soldiers - OPlan 5027 (original link was bad). There is also a OPlan 5029 that South Korean President Lee Myung Bak recently agreed to that outlines what the United States and South Korea will do in the event of the North Korean regime collapsing). 

2. The events that are unfolding in the Koreas have a direct historical explanation and that during the rest of this semester, we will examine the historical dimension behind these events.  

Why should I care about Korea?

The United States is bound to goto war, moreso than by treaty, but by the continuing presence of U.S. soldiers that serve as a "tripwire." In the event of a North Korean attack on South Korea, the United States would instantly find that about 20,000 American soliders would be dead and the country will instantly be at war. The United States is actually then committed to sending half a million soldiers to Korea (Operational Plan 5027).

According to the 04 December 2000 South Korean Defense Ministry White Paper, the United States would deploy up to 690,000 troops on the Korean peninsula if a new war breaks out. The United States apparently had considerably increased the number of troops that would be deployed in any new Korean conflict. The figure had risen from 480,000 in plans made in the early 1990s and 630,000 in the mid-1990s. The latest Time Phased Forces Deployment Data for any contingency on the Korean Peninsula is comprised of 690,000 troops, 160 Navy ships and 1,600 aircraft deployed from the U.S. within 90 days (OPlan 5027-00, GlobalSecurity.org).

This is a very scary thought, especially in light of current U.S. committments to Iraq and Afghanistan and potential problems that may arise with Iran and China (as the U.S. is committed to defending Taiwan as well). Moreover, as the United States is currently in a position of seeing rising government deficits for the forseeable future, it becomes even scarier that those in control of U.S. foreign policy with respect to North Korea could actually fail to form a single, coherent policy as happened during the first half of the first George W. Bush administration ("A Long Road to Pyongyang" : Foreign Affairs Nov/Dec 2007). This is probably the number one reason why Korea should be important to all Americans and that students such as ourselves should take an interest as to first what is going on over there and what it is the United States government is actually doing about it. Not many Americans or South Koreans actually think war is possible, but, as pointed out in class that is exactly what was said about World War I. World War I did in fact occur and Europe has yet to regain its position in the world that it had enjoyed in the time leading upto the Great War.

Past fifteen years or so...

Major trends and events on the Korean Peninsula in the past fifteen years were also explored -- the most significant of which was the belief that North Korea was indeed interested in giving up nuclear weapons and introducing market reforms. However, I pointed out that informal markets that did spring up in North Korea did not mean that North Korea was actually interested in reforming its economy (as many in South Korea, Europe, and some in the United States believed), but rather that it was a loss of North Korean state control over its people that led informal markets to spring up as they replaced the food distribution regime that collapsed during the famine. This did not become apparent until the twilight years of the second George W. Bush administration (Also, I did refer to a large market area in the northern outskirts of Pyongyang and I couldn't remember its name. The market district I was referring to is: Pyongsong (not to be confused with the city of the same name)). Moreover, the significance of the famine was also pointed out in that it has for the first time since the end of the Korean War, made it possible to get some idea of what is actually going on in North Korea.

A point that I also touched upon:

Voice of America:

America does indeed have a government owned, news broadcasting agency that was formed after the end of World War II. However, as the United States Federal Government is prohibited by law of broadcasting directly to American citizens -- a form of propoganda, it is not widely known to Americans. However, in the 21st century and with access to the Internet, Americans can at any given time go and check it out.

[DeCal] UPDATED* February 16th, 2009

Note: I've edited this posting as I was rereading, I saw a great deal of grammatical mistakes, particularly with respect to indefinite and definite articles. I was born, raised, and educated in the United States, so I find these mistakes to be particularly inexcusable.  Also, I rewrote the conclusion of the differing views part of the post. - Joseph: 02/12/2010, 12:14am

Decal Update

Next week, February 16th, 2009, is the second time we'll meet and the last meeting before the add/drop deadline. With this in mind, the Spring 2010 DeCal Team decided to put off the presentation of how the past twelve or thirteen years have played out on the Korean peninsula. The presentation will pay particular attention to both halves of the peninsula. The purpose of the presentation will be to jump directly into topics that have yet to run its course and how these events are relevant to those in the United States. This will now be given next week.

Differing political views in the classroom...

I recently received a question about my political leanings as I have posted my opinion on a large number of fairly controversial issues, such as, how I view [The People's Republic of] China's treatment of her citizins in both Xinjiang and Tibet. And, while this is the first time I heard a student that express concern over how this may influence how the course is instructed,  it did make feel that it warranted a thorough response.

In this course, and as I will show in my presentation next week, I do make an active effort to avoid editorializing. However, when there are issues that invite controversy, especially on ongoing issues that have yet to play out -- I will not avoid them. As the DeCal takes place in an academic setting -- and one in which the grading system is highly skewed towards encouraging discussion -- I will not hesitate to make claims that might not be agreeable to everyone. For example, Communist China, which is a signatory of the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refuge, claims that North Koreans crossing into China are is adhering to not subject to the UN protocol on political refugees as the nation claims that these North Koreans crossing over into its country are not political refugees, but rather economic migrants. This is a claim that is rejected by many in the United States, though I cite a figure, who here that may be considered by some to hold views that lie on the may hold views on other issues that do not reflect those held by most fringe of those held by the Americans, as well as NGOs and their affiliated student groups on campus, such as Liberty in North Korea (LiNK).

For example, Paul Wolfowitz writes:

The key with the Chinese will be working, on the one hand, to reassure them that they would not be stuck with a permanent refugee population and, on the other, to remind them, as a signatory to the U.N. refugee protocol, that China needs to comply with its provisions, including allowing access for the UNHCR. Starting slowly, with smaller numbers, could also help. Even relatively modest levels, for example 25,000 per year, could permit resettlement of a quarter of a million refugees over a 10-year period ("How to Help North Korea's Refugees" || Wall Street Journal Online)

However, I reject this view as the work of Yooknok Chang, Stephen Haggard, and Marcus Noland's "Exit Polls: Refugee Assessments of North Korea's Transition" shows that an overwhelming majority of North Koreans crossing into China would like to go back to North Korea after making some money. Even if their assumption that refugees in North Korea reflect a representative sample of the populace in North Korea were false, it looks as if -- provided that their sample groups are representative of the (illegal) North Korean population in China, that these migrants are indeed crossing over for economic reasons and, thus, China is not subject to the UN protocol on political refugees sample were not taken to be representative of all (North) Koreans, then at the very least -- provided that their samples are more or less representative of the view of at least those North Koreans in North Korea, then China is indeed correct. As their surveys of North Koreans that have crossed over into China show, an overwhelming majority of North Koreans that have illegally crossed over into China see their stay as transient and would like to go not to places such as South Korea, Japan, or the United States, but rather back home to North Korea. Thus, most North Koreans are indeed economic migrants and not subject to the UN protocol on political refugees.

[DeCal] The Spring 2010 Semester DeCal Team

Spring 2010 Semester, Breaking Down Borders: DeCal Team

We will have two new facilitators this semester, Leah and Tori.

 

Lead Facilitator:  Leah Yi

 

I am a second year, intended Chemical Biology major. I grew up in Seoul, Korea (Republic of Korea) and attended most of my school years at the public school in a very large US military base- a base that represents a “mini-America,” if you will, and hence a misfit in a quickly growing and developing Korean city. As you will learn in this class, the origins of this military base go back to the days of Japanese colonialization (1910-45) then was taken over my by US as a result of the subsequent US military occupation of South Korea. Although I lived in Korea for about 8 years, I was never very aware of the history of North and South Korea and the fact that they were once, in fact for a great majority of the time, a unified country. This was the incentive for me to take this class last semester, taught by Joe Chang, who in this spring semester will be assisting me and Tori (the other facilitator) in teaching this class. I hope this class will be as valuable of a learning experience for you as it was for me and look forward to a great semester (Leah Yi).

Facilitator: Tori Bazz


You will have to come to class to find out what she studies and why she is doing this decal. :)

Facilitator: Joseph Chang

I am graduating this coming May with a double major in economics and applied mathematics. I grew up in Southern California, at the boundary line between La Crescenta and La Canada-Flintridge. I attended both La Canada and Crescenta Valley High School, which by the way have very different cultures. Though I grew up or lived in areas with sizeable Korean minorities or absolute majorities (if South Korea is given consideration), I myself was not aware of how there are direct historical explanations as to why I would address my parents a certain way or even as to the way banks are named. For example, I think in South Korea I remember seeing a Shinhan Bank, which was a merger of two defunct banks during the IMF period -- though I wonder if Shinhan Bank is still around. The name of this bank is in English New Korea Bank, but in Los Angeles, I see quite a few Saehan Banks (versus Shinhan), which also means New Korea Bank; of course, the difference between the latter and the former is that Shin is a Sino-Korean word -- 新(신), whereas Sae (새) is a native Korean word. By the way, this is something I just thought of when I was driving when I was in Los Angeles this past winter and I'm not actually sure if transcribed in Sino-Chinese characters Shinhan is really this 新(Shin) character, but this would be an example of why I'm a student instructor for this course. I thought this was interesting. As this is my last semester at UC Berkeley, I'm also going to try and ensure that there is a smooth transition between the semesters I have been facilitating this course and the semesters I will not (Joseph Chang).

[DeCal] Spring 2010 Syllabus

The Spring 2010 Syllabus is available here. The course begins this Tuesday, February 9th at 6pm, 20 Wheeler. The reader will unfortunately not be available until the following Tuesday at the earliest -- it becomes fairly thick to put it mildly if I include all the optional reading. So, I'm still revising and collecting the various articles that will at one point be included in the reader.

So, I bought a Japanese "Monitor"...

My Japanese Lesson

In sixth grade, I remember my best friend and I, we both read and then, watched and re-watched, Rising Sun. We had just hit puberty and well, the movie with Sean Connery was ... But, anyways that's the period in which I grew up. I was raised at a time when the Japanese economy was thought to be a threat and that Japan would one day take over the U.S. economically. Of course, this was before Microsoft turned most Japanese products into commodities, such as televisions. Though, I wonder what happened to Softbank? Did it go the way of Yahoo? On a side note, I remember the last U.S. television manufacturer, Zenith, was bought out by LG or (Lucky) Goldstar as that company was known around that time. You see, this was before what the Economist now calls Japan's two lost decades. Rising Sun is an oft cited example of this.

"Japan’s economy has barely grown in nominal terms after two “lost decades”, and is again suffering from deflation. Where Japan was once bearing down on America, it now feels the hot breath of China on its neck. Remember “Japan as Number One”? These days the country’s chief claim to fame is having a gross government debt burden approaching 200% of GDP" (Economist, "An end to the Japanese lesson").

Well, I recently sold my old 23" 720p Samsung LCD to a friend and went into Fry's Electronics thinking I would buy, well, a little larger Samsung LCD HD monitor. I was thinking 32". However, as I was looking around and checking the specifications, I couldn't help, but notice that well, the Toshiba 42", yes, a Toshiba monitor with much better specifications than Samsung's 40" 6B series was actually cheaper and looked much brighter. Specifications are below. I mean I did read -- somewhere -- that in the winter of 2008 Samsung LCDs made up about a quarter of all LCDs sold in the United States (as compared to, say, 8% or so for Sony). Ironic, if you consider that up until recently Sony's LCDs actually were manufactured by Samsung in South Korea (in Asan, I believe).

Here are the main specifications I compared:

	Samsung 40" LN40B650 1080p 120Hz Flat Panel LCD HDTV	Toshiba 42zv650u 42” diagonal 1080p HD LCDTV with ClearScan 240
Screen Size:	40”	42”
Contrast Ratio	100000:1	100000:1
Refresh Rate:	Auto Motion Plus 120Hz™	ClearScan 240
Audio	2x10w	2x10w
MSRP Price: (I paid roughly half this).	$1,499	$1,299

(from Samsung's and Toshiba's respective websites)

Anyways, the connection with this is how I thought it was so crazy that Toshiba had a slightly larger LCD that was technologically superior -- it was newer and larger, yet cheaper. Here was a Japanese company resorting to competing with Samsung by price. Anyways, I did pay a different price for this. I am now deskless as the 42" monitor broke my desk and so I come to the library at school to use the computer. Perhaps, I'll stick with Samsung come four years from now or perhaps even go Taiwanese...

[DeCal] Spring Semester 2010 - Breaking Down Borders: Korea

UC Berkeley's ASAMST 98/198 Section 9, Spring Semester 2010

Tuesdays, 6pm - 8pm

2 units pass/no pass

Breaking Down Borders: Korea will again be offered this semester. The spring semester DeCal team can be contacted here. I am creating a reader, which at this point may or may not be mandatory, for this class. This will, of course, mark the first time a concrete reader has been made available and with good cause -- having a reader will reduce the burden on students enrolled in the course and student instructors alike of having to try to locate the readings each week. The structure of the class will follow very similarly to the fall syllabus (an updated spring semester syllabus will be put up shortly) except in the way grades will be calculated. However, as a new group of student instructors take the lead and make this course their own the class could take a markedly different path. We all do share the vision of a smaller class size this semester; we opted at this point to limit the class size to 30 students so we wouldn't run into the problem of hindering discussion to the point where I felt it was unreasonable for students to remember sixty-five names or give a presentation in front of sixty pairs of eyes.

Personally, in retrospect, I wished we could have gone more into what North Korea is today at the end of last semester and how they have been acting recently and, fortunately, it seems not much has changed in North Korea since the end of the fall semester (a lot has actually been going on in North Korea in the past decade or so) and in the first class, scheduled for February 9th, I will give a short presentation on what has happened in North Korea in the past year and why we should generally care about what is going on in North Korea.

More information will be posted as it becomes available.

Of Malibu, 2010, and the puzzling dearth of Korean Nobel Laureates

It's 2010 and it's been twenty-two years since the Dodgers won the pennant, one hundred years since Japan annexed Korea (Joseon/Chosun/朝選), and ten years that I've had the right to vote. And, probably a a little more time than that since I've been to the Rose Parade in Pasadena (the Rose Parade's on TV right now). And, on a side note, it's interesting how there are probably as many floats from Chinese companies as there were from Japanese companies back when I went to the Rose Parades. My younger brother graduated from La Canada High School in La Canada-Flintridge, which would make a float for the parade each year. I attended the school for a semester as well and, well, it's a pretty big thing in that city. 

Anyways, I'm spending the first few days of 2010 at a beach house in Malibu with some close friends (No, the house isn't mine. Well, the owner of the house is actually a very, very wealthy friend of my friend's very wealthy mother). And, it is absolutely beautiful here though these pictures don't do it justice. Everyone is taking a stroll here on the beach and I'll join them soon, but I have a few remaining applications I have to or would like to work on. After all, it is 2010 and I don't want to start off the new decade being behind on my work.

But, to be honest, I have no idea if I'm really going to go onto graduate school this coming fall. I look at my grades and test scores and they're not too bad, but if I reflect back on the past ten years, then I start to worry if a school would really want an individual like myself at their graduate school. It seems like that's what's been on my mind every spare moment I have had for the past few months -- I've either been working on the statement of purpose, writing e-mails, or solving problems for an UG Real Analysis course.

However, I have been a volunteer at the English in Action program at the YWCA in Berkeley for the past couple years, where they match me with an individual, almost always Korean, who would like to practice speaking English on a one-on-one basis. Almost all my conversation partners, well those that I have cotninued to meet, up until this point have been usually Korean men around my age that are either doctoral candidates or post doctoral students at UC Berkeley. The interesting thing is every single time I talk to them they say that they can't study or do research in Korea. And, every single time I ask them, "why do you think that?"

And, the two usual answers I get are:

1. Almost all money invested in research is not in pure research, but applied research, where it's more about commercializing discoveries or trying to come up with ways to make money from contributions nationals from other countries have made.

And, probably, the most often heard answer are:

2. Research universities in Korea are very much like the country in which they are located in. Socializing and colloborating in research is done on a very a vertical basis, where it's socially difficult to criticize a senior faculty member.

So, a question naturally arises. South Korea is probably the most overrepresented country in research universities in the United States, but why is there not a single Korean Nobel Laureate? For example:

Worldwide, Seoul National University in Korea not only tops Harvard as the leading incubator of future U.S. economics PhDs but does so by a factor of more than two. During 1997–2002, 6 of the top 10 undergraduate alma maters of new U.S.-trained PhD economists were foreign universities—2 from South Korea and 1 each from China, India, Italy, and Taiwan. On average, 27 bachelor’s graduates of Seoul National Universityearn a PhD in economics from a U.S university each year, along with 7 from Yonsei University and 6 from Korea University, both also located in Seoul. Based on a dropout rate of 18.5 percent after two years of the Seoul National, Yonsei, and Korea University graduates who entered one of 27 American PhD programs in fall 2002 and assuming no further attrition among the group, an average annual graduating PhD class of 40 Seoul National, Yonsei, and Korea University alumni implies that at least 50 of their alumni enter U.S. economics PhD programs each year ("The Undergraduate Origins of PhD Economists" by John J. Siegfried and Wendy A. Stock).

But, at the same time, a Korean hasn't won a single Nobel Prize yet either, so, perhaps, my English Conversation Partners have a point -- though I hear there is a professor at UC Berkeley's Department of Chemistry that has a good chance to change that at some point. And, no, I don't consider former South Korean President Kim Dae Jung to be a legitimate Nobel Laureate. I believe he deserved it, but not for the reasons for which he was awarded for -- giving North Korea half a billion dollars. Anyways...