Research By Year

The 2018 Survey on the Perceptions of Peace in East Asia

The consensus on a liberal international order, which has been the basis of postwar international relations, is being challenged all over the world following the election of Donald Trump as U.S. President and the rise of separatism and rightist politics. In Northeast Asia, the deployment of THAAD in South Korea and the increasing nuclear threats of North Korea have raised tensions in bilateral relations, which have been stable thus far. Therefore, the next few years are likely to go down in history as the period of the highest tensions and uncertainties, both internationally and regionally, since the end of the Cold War. The “Survey on the Perceptions of Peace in East Asia” which systematically investigates the perceptions of policymakers, experts and ordinary citizens of Korea and its neighboring countries about the international order and bilateral relations, and tensions and uncertainties, in particular, is designed to establish public diplomacy and foreign policies and to explore their implications in the pursuit of peace and prosperity in the region.

Inter-Regionalism and Track II Diplomacy: the Role of Think Tanks to Promote ROK-ASEAN Cooperation

There are increasing moves in Korea, such as the New Southern Policy and the New Northern Policy, to strengthen regional cooperation. The question is who will drive regional cooperation and how will this be accomplished. This study seeks to explore the role of think tanks as a mechanism to pursue cooperation between Northeast Asia and Southeast Asia. Korea and ASEAN have both the possibility and the need to cooperate in a variety of fields, from non-traditional security to social issues such as aging societies and low birthrates. The roles of think tanks as well as the government are important in gathering the opinions of various strata and actors. In the case of ASEAN, in particular the role of Track II actors, and especially that of a think tank council, the ASEAN-ISIS (Institutes of Strategic and International Studies) is important. Hence, it is necessary to explore measures to promote cooperation between Korea and ASEAN think tanks, including ISIS, so that they may push for cooperation between the Northeast and Southeast Asian regions.

Peace Index on the Korean Peninsula for 1979-2013 Based on Big Data: An Analysis of ROK-US Relations

Amid the various incidents continuously occurring between South Korea and the U.S., changes in the actors, policies and the environment of bilateral relations might be viewed as variables in the relationship or the result of other variables, thus requiring an objective analysis. In the absence of time series analysis, existing studies on the ROK-US relationship mainly apply analytical methods that focus on policies during certain time periods and/or incidents that are considered to have policy implications. It is admitted that the biggest obstacle to an objective analysis of bilateral relations between Korea and the U.S. is the lack of objective information. This study is one of the alternatives to overcome the information shortage found in research on ROK-US relations. It utilizes the GDELT data in big data form that has collected and analyzed various documents quoted by news reports related to ROK-US relations. This study aims to create a peace index for the Korean peninsula by using big data, to discuss the policy implications of major events that are meaningful to the ROK-US relationship using the index, and to suggest policy implications through a time series analysis.

Reflections on Inter-Regionalism and Development Strategy: Towards Inter-Regionalism beyond the Northeast Asian Community

In 2018, the department of Regional Integration Program at JPI examined inter-regionalism. Because of Brexit and the “America First” slogan in 2017, many are concerned about a crisis in liberal internationalism, which has maintained the post-war international order. Although the crisis in liberalism is not as serious as was originally thought, it is still uncertain which direction the international order will take. This study suggests the advent of “inter-regionalism” as an alternative to overcome this uncertainty. In the meantime, empirical studies have been conducted mainly by researchers overseas on inter-regionalism focused on cooperation among regional communities such as Asia-Europe, Europe-Africa, and Europe-South America. But there are no detailed theoretical or empirical studies in Korea. This study regards the concept of Northeast Asia shared by domestic institutes and researchers as the outcome of the initial stage of a discussion to formulate regionalism, and explores inter-regionalism in the supposition that Northeast Asia, East Asia, Europe, Asia Pacific and other regions are partners in cooperation and co-prosperity. Based on these premises, this study claims that regional cooperation schemes such as the Northeast Asia Plus Community of Responsibility, the New Southern Policy, and the New Northern Policy of the incumbent government can produce more positive results when establishing political, economic, social and cultural relationships with other regions based on common interests. Theoretical and empirical data accumulated through this research are expected to serve as a reference for formulating government policies and strategies as well as making an academic contribution.

The 2017 Survey on the Perception of Peace in East Asia

To promote peace and cooperation among countries, it is necessary to systematically probe the perceptions of policy makers, experts and ordinary citizens of one’s own country and its neighboring states about peace and cooperation and strive, when necessary, to change the way they perceive peace and such inter-state cooperation. The legislation of the Act on Public Diplomacy, or measures to support public diplomacy projects, indicates the heightened recognition of the need to better understand public perceptions of peace in neighboring countries, and to transform them in positive way. The Jeju Peace Institute has analyzed public perceptions of peace in neighboring countries since 2010. The 2017 survey was designed to enhance understanding of East Asian perceptions of peace by expanding the research scope and improving their use so that they might be utilized in formulating diplomatic and public diplomacy policies.

The Analysis of the Status Quo of Terrorism Using the Global Terrorism Database

A systematic understanding of and response to terrorism are necessary to protect Korean business enterprises and nationals. As a middle power, Korea should not overlook terrorism perpetrated in other countries and regions. It needs to conduct active studies on and make preemptive responses to terrorism by collecting information about and systematically analyzing terrorist activities. Using the global terrorism database, this study has compiled the status quo and trends of terrorism in each region and country. The risks of terrorism analyzed through quantitative data exposed wide differences by time, region, state, pattern and target. The threat of terrorism has recently increased and is concentrated in certain regions and states. The difference in the threat by region and state was found to be consistent irrespective of period.

The Conflict between the Two Koreas and Change in Inter-Korean Relations: Time Series Analysis of the Period 1979-2013 Based on Big Data

Amid the continued outbreak of incidents between the two Koreas, changes in the actors in inter-Korean relations, policies and environment have been viewed either as causes of the changes in relations or as results from other variables in the ties, thus necessitating an objective analysis. Conventional studies on inter-Korean relations lacked the time series analysis, relying mainly on methodology to analyze inter-Korean policies during certain crucial periods or incidents. It is admitted that the greatest obstacle to an objective analysis of North Korea’s moves was the lack of objective information. This study has utilized the GDELT (Global Database of Events, Language and Tone), big data containing various news reports about inter-Korean relations, as a measure to overcome the dearth of information on these. Using big data, this study has produced a peace index for the Korean peninsula in connection with inter-Korean relations, discussed the meaning of major incidents in relations, and suggested implications for inter-Korean policies, based on a time series analysis. According to the results of the analysis, North Korea is seen to have not intended to jeopardize its regime from the strengthened cooperation with the South. So, the concept of “hostile interdependence” can realistically explain inter-Korean relations. In terms of reciprocity, the South has taken a more active and cooperative stance toward the North, while the latter has remained passive toward the South. In the case of South Korea, the governments of Chun Doo-hwan, Kim Young-sam, and Roh Moo-hyun maintained reciprocal cooperative relations with the North; while the Roh Tae-woo, Kim Dae-jung, Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye governments kept a reciprocal relationship of conflict. Meanwhile, North Korea took a more active posture for cooperation than the South when Kim Il-sung was at the helm of the country; but during the rule of Kim Jong-il, the South showed a far more dominant cooperative posture than the North.

Expression of Cooperation in the Summits: An Interpretation of “Cooperation” in the Documents of the Tripartite Korea-China-Japan Summits

This study has extracted the texts from documents produced at the summits of South Korea, China and Japan, and interpreted the meaning of “cooperation.” To accomplish this, it encoded the words of 17 related documents into 310 concepts in the categories of values, tasks, domains, institutions, attitudes and evaluations under the three pillars: perception of realities, challenges and future direction. The study explained them in structural terms and thematized them in consideration of frequency and context of the vocabulary. Through this process, the study reached a conclusion as follows: First, the leaders of the three countries have defined the scope of cooperation very broadly and have had optimism and positive perceptions about cooperation. They also showed a generally respectful attitude toward their neighboring countries. Second, cooperation has been increasingly focused on the domain of the public interest. On the other hand, they had relatively fewer discussions on security issues. Emerging security issues were expressed in other terms – natural disasters, energy, etc. – and vocabulary related to traditional security – disarmament, nuclear weapons and weapons – was very scarce. Stability on the Korean peninsula and North Korea issues were rarely mentioned in their discussions. This indirectly shows that traditional security and North Korea matters were a very sensitive and intractable issue that the summits could hardly address. Although this study had limitations as research focused on documents alone, it is meaningful in that it reviewed trilateral summits on the basis of linguistic data, and elucidated in which terms cooperation was presented at the summits. In addition, this study is also meaningful in that it found out how the three countries described the orientation and limitations of cooperation, and also provided a basis for more systematic and objective follow-up research based on official documents.

Survey on the Perception of Peace in East Asia

The prospect of international peace and cooperation hinges on how countries perceive one another. A lack of trust undermines global peace, whereas a friendly attitude can promote cooperation among countries. In international relations, subjective perceptions indirectly determine the objective reality. Despite the significance of subject perception of other countries, however, there is scarce data or research on how Korea and other countries perceive the international community. It is necessary for us to understand and analyze the perception toward other countries of major countries that may affect our national interests, if not to survey scores of countries on their perception of foreign countries like the US does.
The Jeju Peace Institute (JPI) conducted a survey on ordinary Koreans’ perception of peace in 2010 and 2011, but the survey was put on hold due to lack of budget. In 2016, we plan to conduct a survey among a small group of experts, which requires a relatively small amount of budget. First, a group of Korean experts will be surveyed later, the survey will be extended to include groups of experts in neighboring countries.

Cooperation on the Marine Environment: Success Cases and Implications for Northeast Asia Peace and Cooperation Initiative

The Mediterranean Action Plan, which is considered a model case of international cooperation on the marine environment and has become widely known after being cited in Peter Haas’ research paper 『Saving the Mediterranean: The Politics of International Environmental Cooperation』, was initiated by France alone, driven by its dedication to preserving the Mediterranean Sea. It has evolved into a successful international project for marine preservation as the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) joined the effort and 21 countries followed suit. The research seeks to discover the mechanism of how the initiatives of individual countries garner international support and develop into a large-scale international project by analyzing cases of international cooperation in the area of marine environment preservation and to find implications for cross-border cooperation for peace in Northeast Asia.

Role and limitations of local governments in peacefully resolving territorial disputes in East Asia

In spite of the long history of peace in East Asia, recent territorial and dominium disputes over Dokdo Island, Senkaku Islands, and ‘Ieodo’(Socotra Rock) indicate that, although intense disputes rarely occur, low-intensity ones tend to grow serious. As one of the major tendencies found in territorial disputes involving the three countries in East Asia, i.e., Korea, China, and Japan, local governments are taking a nationalistic approach that warrants in-depth research.

Research on Diplomacy for Partnership

According to the dictionary, “partnership” is a relationship wherein the parties involved agree to cooperate for mutual interests. Partnership is mainly bilateral, but the underlying principles of mutual benefit and cooperation often apply to multilateral diplomacy and form the backbone of regionalism. Still, it is often difficult to grasp the substance of partnership, or some politicians use partnership as a mere rhetoric. Unfortunately, there is no common set of time-tested standards or principles to follow in case of international emergencies. This study reviews in a comparative analysis, based on a review of official diplomatic documents the general mechanism applicable to various types of partnership found in international politics and major facts, purposes, historical changes, and rhetoric of various partnerships involving Korea as a party. The findings of this study are expected to offer a useful summary of concepts and principles of partnerships found in international politics and a theoretical framework that can help Korea build more effective bilateral and multilateral diplomatic relations.

A Survey on Peace Awareness in the East Asian Region

Mutual perception among countries affects the potential for international peace and cooperation. A lack of trust disrupts peace between countries, while favorable perceptions about each other promote international cooperation. Thus, we can see that when it comes to international relations, subjective perception determines objective reality either directly or indirectly. Despite the importance attached to subjective perceptions in international relations, Korea has accumulated hardly any data about Koreans’ perception of external entities and external entities’ perception of Korea, let alone that of its neighboring countries. Nor has it carried out any significant analysis in this regard. In fact, it would not be realistic to expect Korea to conduct a survey on the external perception of scores of other countries, as the United States does. Yet it is necessary for Korea to understand and analyze the external perception of the major countries in close relation to its core interests.
This institute conducted surveys on ordinary Korean citizens’ perspective on peace in 2010 and 2011. It plans to focus its future research on experts in diplomacy and national security who could have an impact on the country’s international relations, measure their external perceptions extensively and empirically, and draw implications for the country’s prospects for international peace and cooperation.
In its research planned for 2015, the institute will place emphasis on experts based in Korea, but it will expand the scope of its research scope to include experts in its neighboring countries, starting in 2016.

Roles of Summit Diplomacy in Peace and Prosperity in East Asia and Policy Alternatives

In international relations of the modern age, summit talks between heads of various states or governments have become a common event, bringing about significant changes in the traditional patterns of diplomatic relations between nations. Consequently, the roles and functions of summit diplomacy are increasing. Most notably, since the dawn of the millennium, a new international order has taken on more of the multilateral characteristics, Korea’s domestic politics have made considerable advances in democracy, interdependency has increased in the field of international diplomacy, and thus policy domains dealing with diplomatic relations have continued to expand. Moreover, as the ties between international and domestic politics have increased, it is becoming commonplace that changes in international politics have an impact on domestic politics. Diplomacy is playing an increasingly large role in domestic politics and domestic political decisions affect international relations in increasingly broad areas. In that sense, summit diplomacy continues to gain importance. Heads of state in fact meet more frequently nowadays. Thus, summit diplomacy has emerged as a significant factor that has a significant influence on peace and prosperity in the region. This institute plans to summit diplomacy – which is rather turning into an ordinary form of diplomacy – as one of its key topics of analysis, conduct theoretical reviews of the significance of summit diplomacy vis-a-vis peace and prosperity in East Asia, and discuss ways by which Korea can promote its national interests by taking advantage of its summit diplomacy.

Security Talks in the Asia-Pacific Region: Development and Limits

Security talks play an integral part in the transition of regional security from ‘competitive’ security depending on military build-up and military alliances to ‘cooperative’ security based on the principles of trust and compromise. Among the more significant attempts made by the public and private sectors of Korea to realize peace in the Asia-Pacific Region through the invigoration of security talks are the Northeast Asia Peace and Cooperation Initiative Forum and the Seoul Security Talks hosted by the Korean government, and the Jeju Peace Forum (recently renamed the Jeju Forum for Peace and Prosperity) hosted by the Jeju Peace Institute. This research aims to analyze the tendency, trends and contents of security talks in the Asia-Pacific region using the data on ‘the Dialogue and Research Monitor,’ carry out case studies about major regional security talks, and identify the implications, limits and development strategies of security talks for the promotion of security cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region.

The Dynamics of International Politics in East Asia: Is It a Resurrection of Geopolitics or an Expansion of Regionalism?

The world’s new political order in the post-Cold War era is characterized by the expansion and intensification of regionalism in the European Union, among others. However, at the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 2014, both Henry Kissinger and Mikhail Gorbachev defined the current international situation as ‘the beginning of a new Cold War’. To them, Russia’s annexation of the Crimean Peninsula was an incident that led to a rupture in the partnership built up between Russia and the West following the end of Cold War. They declared that although Russia should play a significant role in such compelling global issues as the civil war in Syria and the nuclear issue of Iran, international situations were becoming increasingly volatile. In East Asia, sovereignty disputes over the Senkaku (Diaoyudao) Islands in the East China Sea between China and Japan and over the islands in the South China Sea between China and Vietnam are becoming more serious. Conflict may erupt in East Asia following the resurrection of China’s military power, the relative decline of Japanese influence, and the return of the United States to Asia. On the other hand, regionalism continues to expand and flourish all across the world. For instance, Macedonia and Kosovo, among others, are gearing up to join the European Union, while ASEAN is set to launch the ASEAN Economic Community in 2015. At the same time, Northeast Asia is engaging in a variety of efforts designed to strengthen regional cooperation through such arrangements as RCEP and TPP. The question is whether the world is entering a new Cold War era, having put an end to 25 years of regionalism following the end of the Cold War. If so, what will be the main characteristics of the new Cold War era? Or, are what we now consider the symptoms of a new Cold War in fact part of the reorganization of the regional orders we used to know? Will regionalism continue to survive? If so, what direction will the new regionalism take in the future? What will be the implications for East Asia of the potential changes in regionalism across the world and how will such changes progress in the region? In this context, the institute intends to analyze the current international situations and review the future direction of changes in East Asia under a variety of conditions through a research paper entitled The Dynamics of International Politics in East Asia: Is it a Resurrection of Geopolitics or an Expansion of Regionalism?

Institutionalization for Multilateral Cooperation in East Asia: Multilateral International Cooperation & Korea’s Diplomacy as a Middle Power

The international order is still dominated by superpowers in military security. When it comes to civilian areas such as human rights, environment, finance, and trade, however, multilateralism-based international cooperation is gaining momentum. Born in response to the global financial crisis, G20 is the most outstanding example of multilateral international cooperation in non-military affairs. ARF (ASEAN Regional Forum) and six-party talks are examples of multilateral approaches to security issues in a limited sense. Such movements toward multilateral international cooperation require Korea to shift the focus of its diplomacy away from superpower-oriented bilateral relations.

Most notably, worldwide increases in multilateral international cooperation could offer Korea opportunities to promote its national interest while contributing to the welfare of the international community as one of the world’s pivotal middle powers. This research seeks to review the trends toward multilateralism gaining power in various fields and geographical areas and present strategies that Korea must pursue as an influential middle power in world politics.

• Proliferation of multilateralism and implications for diplomacy of a middle power
• Multilateral cooperation in security and strategies of Korea as a middle power
• Multilateral cyber cooperation and strategies of Korea as a middle power
• Multilateral cooperation in culture and strategies of Korea as a middle power

Characteristics of Nationalism & Conflict Resolution Measures among Korea, China & Japan

Although Korea, China, and Japan will likely enhance cooperation with one another in line with their increasing political and economic needs to do so, nationalism continues to play a significant role in the countries amid the worsening territorial disputes and flaring history tensions in the region. Explosive conflicts might catch everyone in the region off guard. Therefore, for a cooperative system to be on the right track among Korea, China, and Japan, the national characteristics of the three countries must be identified, based on which they must make wholehearted efforts to ease conflicts among themselves. This research is significant since it is aimed at figuring out viable strategies and policy alternatives to the dangerous situations in Northeast Asia.

East Asia’s Arms Race & the Prospect for Peace & Security

The potential for new arms race in East Asia is growing due to the shift of Japanese political power to right-wing politics, increasing tendency of nationalism in China, and return of the USA to Asia. Arms race in the region should be recognized as a crisis by South Korea not only in terms of national security but also with regard to economy since Korea falls behind in the region when it comes to overall national strength. This research is intended to address the ongoing arms race in East Asia, analyze the reasons for such, and present alternatives to Korea’s policy directions.

Track II Diplomacy as Conflict Resolution & Promotion for Cooperation: Cases & Implications

Alongside Track I diplomacy, which refers to official government diplomacy, Track II diplomacy pertaining to non-government contacts by individuals, think tank personnel, and NGO representatives as well as government officials participating in the capacity of individuals has expanded. Delicate matters that are hard to address in Track I diplomacy can be effectively dealt with in Track II diplomacy. In that sense, Track II diplomacy can contribute to enhancing the country’s diplomatic capabilities and promoting peace in the international community. Northeast Asia faces a host of sensitive issues such as territorial issues and disputes over historical grievances, which can hardly be expected to be solved through official diplomatic channels. As such, the potential for Track II diplomacy is greater in the region than anywhere else in the world. This study aims to find ways to enhance the utility of Track II diplomacy in Northeast Asia based on the experiences of Southeast Asia, where Track II diplomacy began to develop quite some time ago.

Institutionalization for Multilateral Cooperation in East Asia: Reinvigorating Multilateral Approaches for Peaceful Resolutions to East Asian’ Disputes

The international relations in East Asia are characterized by the emergence of China and the return of the USA to the region combined with the strengthened international status of Korea and counteroffensive of Japan. Conflicts continue to expand. Disputes persist. Tensions expand in the region. It is most appropriate for JPI to conduct research on ways to use multilateral cooperation as a viable option to solve the disputes in East Asia through peaceful means on the part of Korea and to develop policy alternatives to meet the goal. The research project consists of the following:

1) Current state of the disputes in East Asia, causes of the disputes, and possibility of dispute settlement through multilateral cooperation

2) Conflicts in traditional security areas and usefulness and limits of multilateral cooperation as a solution mechanism

3) Conflicts in non-traditional security areas and usefulness and limits of multilateral cooperation as a solution mechanism

4) Conflicts in economic cooperation and usefulness and limits of multilateral cooperation as a solution mechanism

5) Roles of public diplomacy in conflict resolution

Study on Current Status of Territorial Disputes in East Asia & Peaceful Resolution

East Asia is undergoing diverse types of disputes complicated by a combination of various countries’ domestic and international political and economic factors with the region’s cultural similarities, historical scores to settle, and geographical proximity.

Conflicts flare up in the region due to regional powers’ longstanding sovereignty disputes over hundreds of islands in the region. Historical and cultural conflicts between countries involved in the territorial disputes have created a vicious cycle of disputes in the region, serving as a major obstacle to the development of cooperative relations in East Asia.

In the international relations in East Asia, territorial disputes continue to increase their weight. JPI seeks to grasp various countries’ positions on the disputes, explore solutions through the analysis of underlying causes of the conflicts, and present viable policy alternatives. Thus, the research will deal with the following issues:

1) Current state of territorial disputes in East Asia, causes of the disputes, and alternative solutions to the disputes

2) Core of the Dokdo issue and pursuit of strategic alternatives for Korea and Japan

3) Core of the Northern Islands issue and pursuit of strategic alternatives for Russia and Japan

4) Core of the Senkaku Islands issue and pursuit of strategic alternatives for China and Japan

5) Conclusion: Problems with Japan’s East Asia strategies and Korea’s responses

Promotional Plan for a Middle Power’s Soft Power: Focus on Korea’s Cultural Diplomacy

As one of the world’s top 10 economies and a member of the Group of Twenty, Korea is consolidating its status in the international community as a strong middle power. One of its immediate challenges, however, is expanding the spectrum of the so-called “New Hallyu” from the country’s modern cultural aspects including K-Pop to the entire range of the country’s traditional cultural heritage as part of the country’s efforts to grow into a global powerhouse in soft power. To this end, JPI will review the current status and future tasks of Korea’s cultural diplomacy and present practical ideas to make improvements. It is timely and significant to conduct research on ways to improve not only the national image but also beef up the country’s overall diplomatic capabilities.

Searching for Peaceful Use of Cyber-space: Theory & Strategy

Dependence on cyberspace is on the rise in line with developments in information and communications technologies. Securing and promoting the peaceful use of cyberspace have emerged as a compelling issue. Various threats ranging from hacking to cyber warfare have emerged as present and potential challenges to the peaceful use of cyberspace. Traditional research studies on peace and security have limited implications in terms of the prevention and settlement of disputes taking place in the space called cyberspace. The research project is aimed at making improvements in traditional research studies on the subjects of peace and security and developing theories and strategies applicable to the peaceful use of cyberspace.

International Order & International Political Theory in the 21st Century

JPI chose four major issues surrounding the Korean peninsula China-initiated reshuffling of international order, changes in alliance in East Asia, changes in international economic order in East Asia, and 2013 crisis cases in the Korean peninsula and consolidated the perspectives of 12 competing international political theories on the four issues. To review external appropriateness and internal consistency, JPI has reviewed the relevance of each of the 12 international political theories by applying them to each and every one of the aforesaid political phenomena.

As for the major contents of the endeavor, first, it introduces the major contents and development processes of major international political theories. The development of each international political theory is triggered by specific international political situations and is related to specific intellectual traditions. Therefore, the history of international political theories shows how a given theory develops from certain international political phenomena, complementing the simplicity of international political theories imported into Korea as if they were developed overseas. JPI intends to prove the possibility of adoption of international political theories through the research work and help convince other research institutes not to throw out imported international theories that have failed to account for specific international political situations before trying hard to develop them into international political theories embracing Korea’s international political experiences.

Second, JPI seeks to use the opportunity to assess the extent to which major international political theories effectively account for the same issues. To date, different cases have been used to assess the explanatory power of international political theories. Therefore, mutually competitive theories have not been assessed precisely. Through the research project, JPI intends to evaluate the explanatory power of 12 major international political theories about major compelling issues in and around the Korean peninsula such as China-initiated reshuffling of the international order, changes in alliances in East Asia, changes in the international economic order in East Asia, and 2013 crisis cases in the Korean peninsula. More specifically, each international political theory will present its focus of attention, account for phenomena that have already occurred, and predict situations that will develop down the road so that one can evaluate the viability of each theory in terms of the explanatory and predictive power with regard to the same issue.

Diplomatic Research & Policy Consultation Council on North Korea’s Nuclear & Peace Issues

Under the sponsorship of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, JPI held an advisory council meeting for the Diplomacy Research and Policy Council on North Korea’s Nuclear Weapons and Peace in Jeju on Monday, December 2 and a general meeting at the Orchid Room of Plaza Hotel, Seoul on Wednesday, December 18.

Purposes

⊙Quality improvements in policies and expansion of consensus through enhanced links between research and policies
– Research should reflect the government’s policy demand precisely, and research results should be reflected on the government’s policies effectively.
– Various policies should be promoted such that synergy is created.

⊙Enhanced information exchange and cooperation between research institutes
– Research should be promoted to avoid redundancy and waste and prevent the omission of key research subjects through more active communication between research institutes.

Results

Briefing by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on current compelling issues and introduction of its policy demand briefing by JPI on its research results and policy proposals discussions on ways to boost communication between JPI and the ministry

Research Project: Unification & Peace Study

JPI conducted the study for the Institute for Peace and Unification Studies, Seoul National University for a year (Sept. 1, 2012 ~ Aug. 31, 2013). The study attempted systematic analysis of the country’s unification-related public opinion on grounds that previous analysis of numerous polls among South Koreans on issues of national unification and North Korea ended up in a simple introduction of poll results instead of basing the analysis on an in-depth understanding of the fundamental characteristics of public opinions. To understand the inherent characteristics of public opinion on national unification, the study has applied structural equation modeling (SEM) so as to identify the relations among various unification-related perceptions based on a schema theory claiming that there is structural hierarchy in the human consciousness.

The observed variables related to the prospect of unification an endogenous latent variable include the necessity of unification, expectations of unification, and anticipated time of unification. Exogenous latent variables in the study consist of three factors, such as economic preparations, political preparations, and social expectations together, they indicate people’s assessment of the ongoing unification preparations and expectations of unification. The observed variables are established in relation to each latent variable. Exogenous latent variables that indicate unification preparations and expectations have a positive correlation with unification prospects. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to further discussions in the area.

Although analysis of unification-related opinion poll data using SEM is still far from complete, more elaborate models are expected to be established soon, accelerating proposals for unification policies and promoting systematic understanding of the directions of public opinions. Such in turn will promote empirical studies on matters related to North Korea. The result of the SEM-based analysis suggests that unification consciousness has a positive relationship with the consciousness of political, economic, and social unification conditions.

Research Project: “Multilateral Approaches toward East Asia’s Territorial Disputes”

JPI implemented the research project for the government of the Republic of Korea from Apr. 1 to Nov. 30, 2013 (8 months). The increasing importance of marine resources development and maritime security becoming complicated due to multiple countries’ sovereignty claim over several islands in East Asia served as the backof the study. In particular, the territorial disputes over islands in the region are complex, tending to be exacerbated by the negative influence of a series of factors involved such as the countries’ cultural similarities, historical experiences, and geographical proximity. In this context, Korea needs to make the best use of region-wide multilateral cooperation as a new tool for solving the territorial disputes in East Asia to shift its focus to strengthening its position while weakening Japan’s position through the establishment of a multilateral cooperative regime in East Asia based on the “One nation, one policy standard.”

To achieve its policy goals, this study has focused on the following: First, statistical analysis using “empirical data regarding disputes over territorial land and waters” published by international political circles together with theoretical approaches to the benefits of multilateralism Second, benefits of multilateral approaches to the disputes over sovereignty in East Asia compared to bilateral approaches.

The study has analyzed the issues associated with Dokdo Island, Kuril Islands (Japan: Northern Territories), and Senkaku Islands (China: Diaoyu Islands) in each of the three chapters. It has chosen the Kuril and Senkaku cases because they are related to the dispute over Dokdo between Korea and Japan. To maintain consistency in research in general and case studies in particular, each chapter begins with an objective description of the sovereign dispute concerned followed by political analysis, interests of the countries involved, grounds for territorial claims and strategies, connection between domestic politics and territorial disputes, implications of the disputes on international politics, implications on regional security, and, finally, implications on the multilateral mechanism concerned with the solution of territorial disputes concerned.

Research Project: “Risk Factors & Situational Awareness Level on the Korean Peninsula”

JPI carried out the study commissioned by the Research Institute on National Security Affairs (RINSA) of the Korea National Defense University for three months (Sept. 1 ~ Nov. 30, 2013).

The concept of security has expanded from conventional security including war, military provocations, and local conflicts to comprehensive security embracing non-conventional elements that threaten people’s safety. The new concept has already been widely accepted.

In the beginning, comprehensive security was focused on the safety of people’s lives such as natural disasters, diseases, and food safety. The current concept of comprehensive security has expanded significantly to include not just long-term sovereign integrity but also the sustainability of a country’s fundamental values and systems as well as capability to identify all the obstacles to the country’s future development and prosperity and take actions on them. Based on the latest concept of comprehensive security, the research team conducted a survey on people’s perspectives as to the country’s internal risks, external risks, and risks associated with unification. The survey sought to identify all the intentional security threats to the Korean peninsula, passive (unwilling) hazards, and weaknesses inherent in the relevant security subjects.

The study has identified a total of ten security threats to the Korean peninsula. Along with some theoretical discourse on them, JPI began analyzing the survey results and their implications. The study has produced notable results, which could be summarized as follows:

First, in the socio-cultural area, the following are cited as the most serious security threats to the Korean peninsula: traditional regional rivalry, increasingly malicious cyber crimes, and risks involved in the integration of the North Korean economy into the South Korean market economy in a unified Korea.

Second, it is worth noting that, regarding the security risks in the Korean peninsula, experts at home and abroad hardly differ in their points of view as to the potential security risks in the Korean peninsula. One outstanding difference between domestic and overseas experts is that the former consider regional rivalry to be a very high risk, whereas the latter regard class conflict as an extremely high risk.

Nonetheless, they concur that cyber crimes and post-unification market integration between the two Koreas are high risks for the Korean peninsula.

Third, external risk factors and unification risk factors are basically similar. They tend to alleviate rather than aggravate each other. On the other hand, internal risks including those from the country’s rapidly progressing internationalization and moves toward a multicultural society will remain a serious issue in a unified Korea and combine with lots of other problems to aggravate the situation in the recently unified Korea.

사회문화영역 한반도 위험요소 및 수준판단 연구

제주평화연구원은 국방대 안보문제연구소 수탁연구사업으로 3개월간(2013. 9. 1 ~ 11. 30) 본 연구를 수행하였음.

전통적인 국가안보의 영역으로 다루어지던 전쟁, 무력도발, 국지적 분쟁과 같은 전통적안보(conventional security)에서 국민의 안전을 위협하는 비전통적인 요소들을 종합적으로 고려하는 포괄적 안보(comprehensive security)를 고려하는 안보개념의 확대가 일반적인 추세가 되었음. 포괄적 안보 개념의 초기에는 자연재난, 질병이나 식품의 안전과 같은 생활 안전에 중점이 맞춰져 있었지만 최근의 포괄적 안보는 장기적으로 국가의 생존뿐만 아니라 국가의 기본적인 가치와 제도의 운영과 유지는 물론 미래의 발전과 번영에 장애가 되는 요인을 종합적으로 인식하고 대처하는 것을 기본적 개념으로 설정하고 있음.

포괄적 안보 개념에 기초하여 본 연구는 사회문화영역에서 한반도의 안보를 위태롭게 하는 의도적인 위협과 무의지적인 위해요소, 그리고 안보대상이 가진 취약성을 동시에 파악하는 시도로 대내위험요인, 대외위험요인, 통일위험요인으로 분류하여 설문조사를 실시하였음. 연구를 통해서 한반도의 안보에 위해가 되는 요소 10가지를 확정하여 이에 대한 이론적 논의와 더불어 설문조사 자료의 분석을 통해 안보문제에 대한 분석을 실시하였음.

본 연구를 통해 제시할 수 있는 연구 성과는 첫째, 분석결과 사회문화영역에서 심각하게 고려해야할 한반도 위험요소로 전통적인 지역갈등, 그리고 현재 심각하게 나타나고 있는 사이버 범죄의 급증, 그리고 미래 통일한국에 나타날 시장경제로의 효과적인 통합을 들 수 있음. 둘째, 사회문화영역에서 한반도의 안보위험요소에 대한 국내외 전문가들의 인식에 큰 차이가 존재하기 보다는 공통점이 더 많이 존재하는 것으로 드러남. 국내 및 해외 전문가들의 차이는 국내전문가들은 지역갈등을 해외전문가들은 계층갈등을 높은 위험도가 있는 것으로 평가함. 이를 제외하고 국내외 전문가들은 공통적으로 사이버 범죄와 통일 이후 시장경제로의 통합을 주요한 위험요인으로 인식하고 있음. 셋째, 대외위험요인과 통일위험요인은 본질적으로 유사한 경향을 가지는 요인으로 대외위험요인과 통일위험요인은 문제를 서로 악화시키기보다는 완화시키는 관계에 있다고 할 수 있음. 이에 반해서 전통적으로 존재해오던 대내적 위험요인은 현재의 국제화와 다문화사회에서 오는 위험과 통일 한반도의 통일국가에도 여전히 상존하면서 다른 문제들과 복합적으로 작용하게 될 것이라는 사실 등이 논의되었음.

Institutionalization for Multilateral Cooperation in East Asia: Multilateral Cooperative Strategy to Prepare for a Re-unified Korea

Research on multilateralism closely linked to the identity of JPI has entered a new level. More than a decade into the new century, the absolute superiority of the United States has begun to chip off, while a number of countries have started voicing their opinions on a range of global issues, called multilateralism in international politics. In this region, multilateralism has emerged as a key concept for the realization of peace and prosperity in East Asia including the Korean peninsula through peaceful means. The importance of multilateral cooperation in the region has gained further momentum with the death of Kim Jong-il in December 2011. JPI intends to conduct in-depth studies on the desirable multilateral responses to the changes taking place in the Korean peninsula following a similar study conducted in 2011.

The Expansion of Theory through the Analysis of Cases of Multiparty Collaboration in East Asia

In theories on international relations, the activities of a country, carried out to promote its external policies, are considered to be the aggregate of its abilities and commitments. This study has applied the theoretical assumptions to individual countries’ actions in relation to the concept of establishment of a new multinational organization. First, countries are divided into two groups: countries leading the initiative and countries responding to the move. Leading countries make decisions as to whether to include the given countries or not, whereas the latter determine whether to participate or abstain. A total of four types of actions are produced by the countries cooperation, looking on, obstruction, and disinterest. As for the establishment of a new international organization, the total gap in the national strength of countries collaborating and looking on constitutes the driving force behind the establishment of the organization. On the other hand, the strength of the countries opposing the establishment of the organization is believed to function as a negative force wielding a multiplier effect.

This study is based on the membership game theory related to multilateral cooperation. It has come up with four major membership game variables: balance between superpowers’ disinterest and participating countries’ mandate superpowers’ power balance strategies and competition regional powers’ strategies and efforts for the balance of interests, and countermeasures. It has applied the variables to the movement toward the establishment of a new multilateral organization in East Asia and attempted to give some analytical explanations about the movement.

The Methods of Invigorating Public Diplomacy through New Forms of the Korean Wave

Nowadays, the “New Hallyu” centered on K-pop is spreading quickly throughout the world beyond its traditional turf, East Asia, thanks to the explosive growth of social media usage worldwide. Meanwhile, Korea has fully realized the importance of “public diplomacy,” which is roughly defined as “the total diplomatic efforts made by a country’s government and all of its non-government individuals and organizations” to enhance dialog with the foreign public. Therefore, it is timely and appropriate to engage in research on policy tools that can help beef up Korea’s diplomatic abilities through the effective combination of the country’s public diplomacy and new Hallyu, which is establishing itself as a supranational cultural phenomenon.

International Cooperation & National Image

As an aggregate of the perceptions shared by the outside world toward a given country, national image is one of the most salient concepts in the era of globalization since it can seriously affect not only the economic competitiveness of a country but also its overall status in the international community. Despite its significance, the theoretical background of the notion of national image is far from sufficient. National image deserves more studies so that one can say with certainty how it is formed and altered, what consequences it could have, and how it can best serve a nation’s interests. Moreover, Korea lacked empirical studies on specific contents and characteristics of the image of Korea as perceived by the external world as well as those of the image of the external world as perceived by Korea. The purpose of this study is to help resolve the country’s shortage of theoretical and empirical studies on national image and present research results that will be instrumental in the establishment of national strategies in this area.

The 9th Korea-Middle East Cooperation Forum

Korea and the Middle East began trading with each other over 1,200 years ago. It has been some time since they became crucial partners in politics and economy in the post-war era. The close relationship between Korea and the Middle East has expanded enough to active cultural exchanges between them in recent times. International situations and trade environments are changing rapidly, with the Middle East standing at the forefront of such changes. It is critical for Korea and the Middle East to maintain their mutually beneficial relations and do their best to enhance them. In this context, providing opportunities for the leaders and experts in Korea and the Middle East to meet and deepen their understanding is a must.

The Korea-Middle East Cooperation Forum was launched in 2003 to promote dialog and enhance networking between the high-ranking officials of Korea and the Middle East. The forum has been held alternately in Korea and the Middle East. To date, a total of nine forums have served to enhance their understanding of a broad range of issues relevant to their bilateral relations through in-depth presentations and discussions by present and former high-level officials, key business executives, and experts in a variety of fields.

The 9th Korea-Middle East Forum held in the UAE was co-hosted by JPI (Jeju Peace Institute) and ECSSR (Emirates Center for Strategic Studies and Research) of the UAE.

The forum featured intensive discussions on the recent changes in the Middle East and the current status and future of the bilateral relations of Korea and the Middle East. The topic was “Forging a Partnership for Today’s World.” Specific constructive discussions were held under subtopics such as “Promoting the Safe, Secure, and Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy,” “Beyond Trade: New Areas of Economic Cooperation,” and “Cultural Exchange: Building Bridges between Korea and the Middle East.”

EU-Korea: Policy Proposal Research to Boost Relationships, Crisis Management, & Stability

On July 1, 2011, the Korea-EU Free Trade Agreement went into effect. Economic exchanges between the two have increased significantly. Beyond the economic front, the overall bilateral relations between Korea and the European have become more solid through summit talks in particular, asserting their common interests in pursuit of the principles of democracy, human rights, and rule of law in a wide range of international and global issues such as proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, terrorism, climate change, energy security, and aid for developing countries. As the executive body of the EU, the Commission of European Communities has proposed conducting research on the overall relations between the EU and Korea including the security issue to present policy alternatives to both parties. A joint academic forum was launched by JPI and International Security Information Service. Another international academic conference is slated for the first half of 2013 in Brussels, Belgium for the presentation of the final research results.

Institutionalization for Multilateral Cooperation in East Asia: Multilateral Cooperation in East Asia & Constructing an Environment for Re-unification on the Korean Peninsula

The term multilateralism is frequently mentioned not just in academic papers but also in the media, enabling one to conclude that it is the notion dominating international relations in the 21st century. The international order of the new century is characterized by the emergence of China and relative decline of the United States, implying greater changes in East Asia where China belongs. Against such backdrop, JPI strives to conduct intensive research on the potential of greater multilateral cooperation in the region.

Research on Korean Public Perspectives on Peace

The Jeju Peace Institute is committed to carrying out empirical research from the perspective of peace among East Asians over an extended period of time in a bid to come up with a peace initiative that can make practical contributions to building a peace community in the region. As the first step toward such effort, JPI intends to conduct a survey from the perspective of peace among South Koreans following its initial survey among them in 2010. The ultimate goal of the initiative is to identify the values cherished by various governments and peoples in East Asia in the field of diplomacy and deliver scientific analytical tools for the country’s diplomatic policies for the region, in particular.

Korean Wave in North Korea & Broadcasting Media’s Influence in the Process of German Re-unification

As it turns out, “the sunshine policy” toward the North might very well enhance exchanges and cooperation between the two Koreas from the short-term perspective but cannot lead to a change of North Korea’s “nuclear and military-first” policy. In other words, North Korea will not change its fundamental policy on grounds that it feels warm due to some sunshine (aid) from the South. It will give up that approach only when its DNA has changed. Recently, Hallyu (Korean Wave) dramas and movies have gained widespread popularity among North Koreans. This enabled a number of North Koreans to get a glimpse of the standard of living and cultural values of South Koreans. Some North Koreans have even begun to imitate part of the South Korean cultural aspects they watch on screen clandestinely. In Germany, West German TV broadcasts and other visual media played a pivotal role in fueling East Germans’ aspirations for unification over an extended period of time. In that sense, it is timely and significant that JPI has conducted a study designed to review carefully the contributions of visual media to the German unification process, compare them with those of Hallyu contents in the Korean peninsula at present, and draw the implications on the future courses of action by South Korea.

Study on Nuclear Security Cooperation

While the 2012 Nuclear Security Summit scheduled for 2012 in Korea will include the “NGO Nuclear Security Summit” in addition to the summit talks among the heads of states, the civil society of Korea has yet to deepen its understanding of the exact meaning of nuclear security as well as its significance and the specific means to realize it.

The study seeks to make contributions to the development of agenda for “the NGO Nuclear Security Summit Talks” slated for Seoul in 2012 by carefully reviewing and analyzing debates on the issue overseas including the significance and necessity of nuclear security along with ways of promoting it in reality.

Research Projection: Studying the Groundwork for Re-unification

In his National Liberation Day Speech in 2010, the president of the Republic of Korea said, “Korea must now pursue peaceful unification as its goal instead of being complacent with the successful management of the national division.” In preparation for a unified Korea, South Koreans need to start having public discussions on how to prepare for it.

The Ministry of Unification launched a project designed to lay the foundation for national unification. In the project, civil society will play the leading role instead of government agencies in producing a new vision for peaceful national unification through active discussions about “peace,” “post-unification economy,” and “post-unification national identity” among citizens as well as civil activists.

To support the ministry’s efforts and further studies on the settlement of peace on the Korean Peninsula, The Jeju Peace Institute held two unification forums and two NGO unification seminars for NGO activists and ordinary citizens. It also conducted a survey on the people’s perception of the issue of national unification and published a policy report based on the survey results.

The 8th Korea-Middle East Cooperation Forum

Korea and the Middle East began trading some 1,200 years ago. They have become crucial partners in various areas including economy and politics. The world is undergoing unprecedented changes in both politics and economy, and the Middle East stands at the epicenter of such transformation. It has become more important than ever for Korea and the region to strengthen their mutually beneficial relations in such a tumultuous era. Therefore, dialogs between the leaders and experts of Korea and the Middle East can play a crucial role in furthering their mutual understanding and enhancing bilateral relations.

The Korea-Middle East Cooperation Forum is a valuable opportunity for the leaders in Korea and the Middle East to have in-depth discussions on a whole range of compelling issues as well as strengthen networking between them. Since it was launched in 2003, the forum has been held annually in Korea and the Middle East alternately. The past seven forums have been attended by present and former high-ranking government officials of Korea and the Middle East together with a number of prominent entrepreneurs and experts in various fields.

The 8th Korea-Middle East Cooperation Forum was held in Korea’s Jeju-do, inscribed on UNESCO’s World Heritage List and most likely to be chosen as one of the world’s New 7 Wonders of Nature in 2011. It was co-hosted by the Jeju Peace Institute of Korea and the Emirates Center for Strategic Studies and Research of the UAE.

The forum covered the recent widespread changes in the Middle East and discussed the future of the bilateral relations between Korea and the region. Under the theme “Strengthening the Korea-GCC Relationship in a Time of Change,” specific and constructive discussions were held on subtopics such as “Implications of Regional Geopolitical Challenges for Korea-GCC Relations,” “Asia’s Rise and its Implications on Korea-GCC Economic Cooperation,” and “Strengthening Cultural & Educational Exchange between GCC and Korea.”

Research Seminar: Enhancing Regional Cooperation in East Asia

Since the dawning of the 21st century, the construction of an East Asian Community has gained momentum in line with the increasingly closer multinational relations in the region. Thus, the Jeju Peace Institute (JPI) has launched a seminar designed to promote in-depth discussions on various ways to enhance regional cooperation in connection with the Korea-ASEAN summit, ASEAN+3 summit, and East Asia Summit (EAS) talks. Under the theme “Changes in the Situations of Northeast Asia and Peace on the Korean Peninsula,” diverse perspectives were presented at the seminar.

Prominent scholars and foreign policy experts delivered their perspectives as to the desirable directions of the Korean government’s future diplomacy with various Asian countries and the current status and prospects of regional economic integration in East Asia.

EU-Korea: Policy Suggestions to Boost the Relationships, Crisis Management, & Stability

Economic exchanges between the Republic of Korea and the European are on the rise. The Korea-EU Free Trade Agreement went into effect on July 1, 2011. In non-economic terms, the Korea-EU summit talks have reaffirmed their common fundamental values such as democracy, human rights, and rule of law in dealing with a variety of compelling international and global issues including proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, terrorism, climate change, energy, and aid for developing countries.

Against such backdrop, the Commission of European Communities has proposed implementing a research project designed to deliver policy proposals to both Korea and EU member countries in the area of overall bilateral relations including security. To further the relevant discussions, international academic conferences are scheduled for the first and second halves of 2012 in Jeju (Jeju Peace Institute), Korea and Brussels, Belgium, respectively.

Institutionalization for Multilateral Cooperation in East Asia

Research on institutionalization for multilateral cooperation in East Asia is a shared medium/long-term project for the research team at Jeju Peace Institute. As alternative to the traditional approaches (the engagement policy towards North Korea and the Korean Peninsula peace regime strategy), the current administration has put forth a much-upgraded form of strategy, “Peace Structuring in the Korean Peninsula”, that is large enough to encompass namely denuclearization, South-North Economic Community, 21st century Korea-US strategic alliance, and East Asia multilateral security cooperation establishment. The Jeju Process models itself after Europe’s Helsinki Process, and its mission is to establish multilateral security cooperation in East Asia. As such, instead of responding to ever fast-changing affairs on the Korean Peninsula, JPI hopes to investigate more in-depth into longer term visions of establishing peace structures in the peninsula and the Jeju Process, as hints of resuming the Six Party Talks and South-North summit conferences have recently resurfaced.

Searching for a Cultural Network in East Asia: Focus on how to Promote Broadcasting Content Exchanges among Korea, China, & Japan

In establishing multilateral cooperation in East Asia, Low Politics, such as cultural cooperation, are showing more promising signs than High Politics, such as security cooperation. Culture is indeed a critical component of achieving multilateral cooperation and creating a community out of strongly nationalistic Korea, China, and Japan. In today’s visual-oriented age, shared production and broadcasting between these three countries could be especially influential, making this research effort particularly pertinent. Sharing broadcasting content could improve understanding between Korea, China, and Japan and draw attention to common perspectives. Ultimately, this research would also act as a fundamental research component to establishing a cultural network in East Asia, and by establishing joint broadcasting channels JPI also hopes to cultivate a community-minded spirit.

Asia-Pacific National Risk Analysis

Just as it is necessary for weather forecasting centers to make predictions on chance of rain, it has proven essential for nations to analyze and make predictions on chance of country risk (such as political or economic instability) for an ally in strategic partnership in international cooperation. For instance, it may be much more effective for Korea, once it has set its mind to volunteer economic aid, to direct its aid to countries with lower chance of risk such as political or economic instability. By analyzing country risk, JPI hopes to engineer the most effective ways for South Korea to establish the best possible foreign policies.

Research on Korean Public Perspectives on Peace & a Public Opinion Survey

This research focuses on scientific and substantive investigating into public perception of peace in order to contribute to establishing a shared community in East Asia and settling peace in the Korean Peninsula. By analyzing Korean citizens’ values and perspectives on the country’s foreign policy, this research aims to provide a frame of scientific analysis for setting foreign policy agendas. JPI plans to expand this research in the long run for each East Asian nation.

Research on the World Peace Index

A long-term effort from JPI, research on the World Peace Index is the fruit of investigation into peace in around thirty nations from the years 1990 to 2004. JPI sees diverse uses for the data and other domestic political scientists’ peace indices, from theoretical research to policy analysis.

Basic Research on Soft Power

Current international relations benefits more from research on the concept of soft power, rather than hard power, in enhancing understanding of international politics. Acknowledging the trend, JPI research focuses on soft power’s potential to improve foreign policy and development policies for governments. Research plans to investigate theoretical aspects of soft power (of which peace is a key component) and methods to strengthen soft capability.

Research on how to Improve North Korea Policy Communication

Discord surrounding policies toward North Korea has become especially intense since the current government took office. As an effort to ease tension, reunification policies have prioritized communication as an essential component of a successful unification mission. This research hopes to contribute to actualizing the above goal.

Multilateral Cooperation in East Asia: Research on Inter-Faith Communication

Concerning multilateral cooperation in East Asia, the research on inter-faith communication aims to be of constructive help to strengthen discourse and communication and overcome Samuel Huntington’s clash of civilizations (COC). In particular, various religions, such as Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, or Confucianism, are dispersed throughout East Asia. Reconciliation and cooperation achieved through religious discourse would offer a long-lasting important and solid foundation for achieving the formation of a peace community in East Asia. As such, this research aims to contribute to the beginnings of an opening stage for reconciliation and cooperation between religions in East Asia.

Study on Multilateralization of Asia’s Economic Cooperation

Existing research on Asia’s economic cooperation has emphasized the strengths of multilateralism and the drawbacks of bilateralism, yet has failed to bring attention to when and how bilateral cooperation could be converted into multilateralism. This research supplements existing research in that instead of focusing solely on multilateralism or bilateralism, it studies closely “multilateralization,” the process by which bilateralism can be converted into multilateralism. Moreover, it investigates into the successes of multilateralism and seeks for implications that would allow for regional multilateralism in Asia.

Study on Cooperative Institutionalization with International Peace Organizations

As basic research of UNITAR (United Nations Institute for Training and Research), this study offers an opportunity to contribute to JPI’s missions of settling peace on the Korean Peninsula, achieving security cooperation in East Asia, and expansion of international cooperation through economic integration. This study is preparation for operating UNITAR and other basic investigative research material.

Youth Peace Academy

The Youth Peace Academy develops and runs peace education and training programs for lower and middle school students in Jeju Island. This education program introduces the International Peace Center in Jeju with prepared footages and lectures for basic understanding of peace.

Academic Conference on Recollections & Prospects of Peace Keeping Efforts

By examining and forecasting prospects for current peacekeeping efforts, this academic conference seeks for implications of being involved in international peacekeeping efforts and searches for ways Korea could better contribute to those efforts.

Workshop: Developing & Fulfilling a Project for the Island of World Peace

As most of the seventeen plans to designate Jeju as the Island of World Peace have been completed or well under way, the immediate challenge is to develop new business plans. This workshop hopes to examine existing projects and, depending on their successes, and develop new projects with high applicability and capability for high influence.

Academic Conference on the Execution of the Jeju Process

By inviting experts, this academic conference seeks for realistic measures for trust and security building in East Asia. It offers an opportunity for experts to discuss whether the Jeju Process is possible and what conditions and efforts are necessary for actualizing the Jeju Process.

Research on the Jeju Process

Conditions & Tasks of Local Governments’ Inter-Korean Cooperation

In the current situation of North-South Korean cooperation for exchange under the new administration, the inadequacy of governance on the part of local government agencies’ efforts for cooperation in South-North Korean exchange (taking into consideration the changes in policies toward North Korea) translates to the inadequacy in proposing future direction for the relationship. In that context, it is necessary to realize the realities and then seek objectives for improvement for local autonomous agencies and South-North Korea exchange cooperation enterprises.

Key research includes comparisons on local agencies’ South-North Korea exchange businesses and identifying issues. Doing so would allow for search of a blueprint and possible improvement proposals for future local South-North Korean exchange enterprises, taking into consideration the basis of policies toward North Korea. Research hopes to new governance methods to help Jeju Special Self Governing Province’s South-North Korea exchange business differentiation, etc.

Alliance Theory & Relationship with Neighboring Countries in the Post-Cold War Era

Alliances are and always have been a universal phenomenon in international politics. In the West, much research has been done on alliances, but there has yet to exist a systematic or complete understanding about this phenomenon. Moreover, critics claim that there is limitation on how applicable Western theories can be to foreign policies of non-Western countries, such as the ROK, DPRK, PRC, or Japan, especially considering East Asia’s unique cultural variables. There is need to examine whether this claim holds true. What also needs to be thoroughly investigated is whether the Northeast Asian experience could conversely impact a new formation of international politics theories.

There is tendency to perceive alliance theories as theories on official military and security interests, but alliances in international politics in fact have to be viewed in large as a phenomenon of alignment of a kind. Two non-hostile nations may enter into strong or weak alliances with a third party, or adopt a neutral stance. As in our common understanding, an alliance can also refer to a promise of unity, an official agreement to aid militarily in emergencies.

However, there can also be a situation in which two nations are de jure military/security allies and yet are de facto allies, only in name due to weakened solidarity. On the contrary, two nations in both de jure and de facto alliance are said to enjoy the strongest alliance.

Original alliance theories could be classified into those that theorize on the formation of alliances and those that specialize in studying how alliances are maintained after formed.

Firstly, on the formation of alliances, Kenneth Waltz’s balance-of-power theory, Stephen Walt’s balance-of-threat theory, and the balancing logic theory are in the mainstream. Conversely, Randall Schweller’s balance-of-interests theory lies in the minority, which states that a nation may attempt to maximize benefits by “bandwagoning” with a potential threatening nation, instead of resisting against threat by forming allies.

Secondly, on complications from burden-sharing between allies from maintaining alliances and on possible solutions, Mancur Olson and Glenn Snyder are among those who offer explanations, with Olson’s theories on public good logic or the collective action problem with its inherent problem of the free riding logic, and with Snyder’s theories on the dilemma of abandonment/entrapment fears of allied nations in alliance politics.

However, perhaps there is fault to be found in differentiating between pre and post alliance formation as separate domains to analyze state behaviors. Is there indeed no consistent theory that could integrate the two realms?

With such a critical approach, this research breaks down Stephen Walt and Glenn Snyder’s theories and identifies their problems for a more expansive “Net Threat Theory” that aims to analyze, explain, and predict relations of neighboring nations. In particular, it focuses, among Northeast Asian relations, on triangular relationships. In other words, in analyzing ties between countries A, B, and C, it intends to evaluate the ways in which nation C affects bilateral relations between A and B.

The primary focus of the research relies on the trilateral relations between Korea, Japan, and the US, namely the influence the US has on changing Korean-Japanese bilateral relations. In such efforts, the research will attempt to answer specifically the following questions.

1. Does the US have a positive or negative influence on Korean-Japanese relations?
2. What effects do America’s engagement and disengagement Northeast Asia policies have?
3. How are history issues between Korea and Japan related to the US?
4. What is the American perspective on current conflict between Korea and Japan regarding territorial disputes, and what influence does it have on Korean-Japanese relations?

In targeting this particular trilateral relationship, this research is by no means disregarding other relations, and will continue to investigate taking into consideration the following questions.

5. How are South-North Korean relations correlated with Korean-Japanese relations?
6. When South-North Korean relations improve, what are the effects on Korean-Japanese relations?
7. What effects does the North Korean nuclear problem have on Korean-Japanese relations?
8. In solving territorial disputes, historical revisionism controversies, fishery clashes, or Korean Japanese social status issues, what efforts are necessary for Japan and Korea to solve these issues without a possible third party’s involvement or influence?

This research begins with the assumption that applying the alliance theories that were developed in the West, and especially in the US, to relationships of nations in Northeast Asia will ultimately benefit and allow Western theories to further develop. If this research successfully concludes until the end of year 2008, it will extend its scopes in the future to include North Korean-Chinese-Russian relations, Japanese-Taiwanese-American relations, and further, Western countries, such as Greece-Turkey ties.

Study on Disarmament

More Details on the Korean Website ▶

Plans to Revitalize Peace-time Industry

The “Island of Peace”, Jeju Island aims to serve as the international stronghold for exchange and cooperation, a special economic district, and a peace zone. Strategically speaking, it seems an appropriate and fitting developmental direction for Jeju to research peace and implement peace to pass down the values and wisdom behind peace to the next generation for a more peaceful world, as the world’s center for peace academics.

As modern education emphasizes objectivity and value neutrality in the transfer of knowledge, there is fear of being overly reliant on knowledge as a response, there has also been an increased call for peace education that focuses on cultivating a firm upright character, value judgment, and healthy lifestyle. Peace education is responsive to the demands of the times and stresses contents development and field education program management.

Peacetime industry is the utilization of theories, knowledge, values, technology and experience accumulated through peace research to bear economic benefits by linking them to business activities. Peacetime industry refers to self-sustainable, competitive economic activity that runs on commodities and services related to peace research, without additional government or civilian funds.

Through peacetime industry revitalization, Jeju hopes to design future development and through it, to ultimately contribute to peace in Northeast Asia and beyond. JPI plans to publish by the end of year 2008 in book form the results of its basic peacetime industry research, and in 2009, plans to establish plans for a more in-depth research.

Analysis on Peace Education Program

Due to the lack of systematic, comprehensive analyses of domestic and foreign peace education programs, this research hopes to fill in the gaps by collecting existing models and assessing their content and technique to develop a differentiated peace education for each audience group (segregated by age group, etc.)

Development of Northeast Asia’s Peace Index: Territorial and History Conflict

On cooperation and conflict with powerful neighboring countries around the Korean Peninsula, where establishing peace structure is becoming more and more important to economic prosperity due to interdependency in the development of international relations, there is a need for thorough understanding of Northeast Asian politics.

In today’s world, where lines have blurred between traditional allies and antagonistic enemies, foreign policies of major actors in the international relations arena are no longer confined to simple action-reaction issues but are directed to various issues, simultaneous and multilateral interactions, between various nations.

Research on simultaneous and multilateral interactions runs under the assumption that research on international peace and conflict must be based on scientific and analytic deductions, for it is limiting, and thus unsuccessful, to consider only specific variables in specific cases. Therefore, this research aims for quantitative data production and analysis founded on systematic planning, in order to yield results on long-term diplomatic behaviors of nations.

Utilizing the results of this research on current foreign policy issues between Northeast Asian nations has allowed to analyze South and North Korean, American, Chinese, Japanese, and Russian foreign policies. Data from this research will not only aid leadership in government to improve the objectiveness of their future foreign policies but will also be of help to experts on foreign policies of neighboring nations. Ultimately, this research will be able to develop systematic and scientific data for understanding multilateral relations from South Korea’s perspective. It will serve to upgrade JPI’s academic status as well.

The Asia-Pacific UN Peacekeeping Operations Center and its Necessity

Why the center is necessary:
– To satisfy the need for an integrated curriculum on civilians, government officials, and military personnel dispatched in conflict areas
– To combine resources on a national level and to develop policies for efficient transportation
– To collect and manage research on peacekeeping and information on relevant areas
– To meet the needs for a peace center representing the Northeast Asian region

Vision for the center’s establishment:
– A nonprofit, independent corporation led by shared efforts of civilians, government, and the military
– An integrated organization supporting a systematic approach to domestic and foreign peacekeeping operations
– A globally active organization comprising experts on the UN and Asia-Pacific region
– An asset for promoting multilateral security cooperation in Northeast Asia, with joint participation from the ROK, PRC, and Japan

The center’s functions:
– Research projects:
o Conflict areas and management
o Policies on participating in peacekeeping operations
o Integrated support for peacekeeping operations resources
– Education activities:
o Curriculum for civilians, government officials, and military personnel on peacekeeping operations
o Integrated education systems and seminars for domestic and foreign participants of peacekeeping
– International exchange:
o Enhance cooperation with UN/regional organizations, individual governments, and peacekeeping centers
o Strengthen international cooperation and global networking
– Knowledge management:
o Acquiring information on conflict areas and building data

The Jeju Process

The blueprint for the Jeju Process inspired by the Jeju Declaration at the fourth Jeju Peace Forum (held by the Jeju Peace Institute, June 21-3, 2007) is closely related to Jeju Peace Institute’s main missions of settling peace in the Korean Peninsula and achieving security cooperation and economic integration in Northeast Asia. In actualizing such missions, intergovernmental dialogue and multilateral cooperation enhancement are key, making the Jeju Process a critical component of achieving said milestones.

The Jeju Process aims to thaw post Cold War relations in Northeast Asia and wishes to construct dialogue, compromise, and cooperation for solving conflicts between nations. It prioritizes sustained efforts for cooperation over short-term problem solving. For now, the Jeju Process will focus on nontraditional aspects instead of directly dealing with security issues, in order to build an atmosphere suitable for dialogue and cooperation. Setting such limitations for the Process may be inevitable, considering current inexperience in policies for multilateral security cooperation in Northeast Asia.

Operating Peace Camp & Peace Education Program

As Jeju Peace Institute aims to be a global peace research institute and as it is conveniently located in Jeju Island, a special self-governing province and UNESCO-designated World Natural Heritage site aspiring to be a free international city, JPI is developing a peace education program that makes the most out of Jeju’s unique characteristics. It aims to enhance JPI’s image as a hub for peace education and has proposed the operation of a peace camp (for-profit, allowing it to sustain itself) as a model of peace business. Programs include mock situations, hands-on experience, group activities, Te-Woo (special boat in Jeju) programs, and the camp will accommodate for one day, or 3 days and 2 nights.