메인메뉴 바로가기본문으로 바로가기
네이버 공유 카카오 공유 트위터 공유 페이스북 공유

'Wiseman Round Table on Soft Power in Northeast Asia’

A panel of 14 prominent international scholars gathered for a “Wiseman Round Table” event held at the Seoul Plaza Hotel, on February 12, 2008. The workshop session was part of a series of events that sought to promote an understanding of the concept of “soft power.” The overall goal of this conference was to encourage scholars, policy makers, and the public in Korea to engage in comprehensive debate on this subject in order to advance the development of Korea’s soft power and to facilitate closer cooperation throughout the East Asian region. The participants also expressed a hope that, as the newly inaugurated administration formulates a strategic direction for Korea’s diplomatic interests, these discussions might contribute to a more productive public policy for Korea, based on the application of soft power principles.



'Smart Power’
In the morning session, Professor Joseph Nye delivered a keynote presentation on “Smart Power and the War on Terror” at the Korean Chamber of Commerce and Industry. The lecture event attracted a large audience that included professors, business leaders, students, diplomats, policy makers, NGO representatives, and the media. Professor Nye primarily discussed matters related to the U.S. use of smart power, along with clarifying that smart power involves “the ability to combine the hard power of coercion or economic influence, with the attraction of soft power, into a successful strategy.”
Professor Nye pointed out that for the U.S. to effectively implement a smart power strategy, it will be necessary to apply so-called “contextual intelligence” in foreign policy, or “the intuitive diagnostic skill that helps you align tactics with ives to smart strategies for varying situations.” Professor Nye emphasized that the ability to utilize contextual intelligence begins with an understanding of the strengths and limits of American power at home and abroad, but also recognizes the growing importance of Asia.
The audience listened intently to the descriptions of the conceptual principles, but they were especially interested in Professor Nye’s assessment of the soft power initiatives currently being undertaken by China, Japan, and Korea.



Soft Power in East Asia
Following the lecture presentation, in the afternoon, a group of scholars and policy makers convened a “Wiseman Round Table” session to discuss related matters in more detail, at the Seoul Plaza Hotel. A panel discussion focused on efforts to explain the principles of soft power and smart power in regard to their application to an East Asian context. The participants, from Europe, the U.S., Korea, Japan, and Taiwan, represented various research institutes, NGO groups, universities, and foundations. Of note, these specialists, many of whom had previously served in senior government or diplomatic positions, were selected to in order to present a wide range of political and ideological perspectives on soft power and East Asian cooperation.
The first discussion session included the presentation of papers by Yonsei University Professor Yul Sohn, Korea University Professor Shin-wha Lee, and Jan Melissen, Director of the Diplomatic Studies Programme at the Netherlands Institute of International Relations. Professor Melissen’s paper focused on public diplomacy and its potential to help develop soft power. Professor Melissen noted that there have been many new developments in public diplomacy, especially in terms of the combined impact of globalization and the technology or communication revolution, which has boosted the creation of global networks.
This change requires countries to find ways to adapt to this new environment of diplomacy and to fully take advantage of public diplomacy tools. Therefore, when countries develop strategies for public diplomacy and soft power, they must adapt to the growing complexity of multilateral decision making, respond to the emergence of multiple ps in international affairs, and figure out ways to positively engage diverse societies abroad. Professor Melissen noted that Korea, as a strong middle power with a healthy economy, stable political institutions, and a positive country image in the international community, possesses significant potential to develop effective public diplomacy resources and to broaden its influence through the promotion of soft power.
Thereafter, Professor Sohn and Professor Shin-wha Lee engaged the panel in a discussion about the soft power efforts of China, Japan, and Korea. Professor Sohn expressed a view that the development of soft power in East Asian countries presents opportunities for cooperative as well as competitive relations. While there is fierce competition between countries in key industrial sectors, the political networks and economic relations that have developed over the past several years have also made regional cooperation a more potent reality than ever before.
However, because these three countries are likely to pursue competition and/or cooperation, based on their own national interests, this could present problems for the steady growth of soft power in East Asia. According to Professor Sohn, Korea has the potential to play a role as an arbitrator or broker in the region, to mediate the conflicts of larger powers, and can ultimately help to avoid a futile zero-sum game situation. This will require Korea to maintain credibility with the competing powers, foster regional networks and dialogue, and build an infrastructure that facilitates the growth of soft power in various areas.
As for Professor Lee, while also contrasting the soft power strategies of China, Japan, the U.S., and Europe, he proceeded to bring attention to certain fundamental matters. While agreeing with professors Sohn and Melissen, Professor Lee asserted that to have a truly effective soft power strategy, countries must acknowledge not only the government’s role in promoting soft power but also recognize that diverse ps in a complex international environment can play a role in the spread of soft power.
Touching on both conceptual principles and practical examples of the application of soft power, Professor Lee also called on the panel members to carefully consider the conceptual difficulties associated with using soft power as a diplomatic resource. Professor Lee contended that “an adequate definition of soft power is important, but an understanding of the complications and limitations to the use of soft power, as an instrument of national policy, is much more important in developing strategic thought, resource allocation, and tool kits to increase the soft power potential of a country.”



Soft Power in Korea
The second discussion session sought to address the conceptual problems of soft power, as had been identified by various presenters. A few panelists questioned whether the concept of soft power could really be a useful tool or resource for diplomatic purposes in East Asia, or in the case of Korea’s situation. In particular, they pointed to the fact that soft power is still an elusive concept that tends to considerable confusion.
Of note, this lack of understanding is mainly rooted in such questions as: What sources can produce soft power? What are the most productive ways to apply soft power? How can the effectiveness of soft power be measured? Other participants made note of a potential pitfall of analyzing soft power from only a unilateral perspective, without properly considering the impact of soft power on the originator and the intended target. It was also suggested that the application of soft power needed to be more carefully examined and then tailored to the East Asian and Korean context.
Professor Nye stated that a country’s soft power can come from three resources: its culture (for places where it is deemed attractive), its political values (when they are respected at home and abroad), and its foreign policy measures (when they are deemed as being legitimate and having moral authority). He asserted that Korea possesses the three basic resources necessary to produce and apply soft power: an attractive culture, values that coincide with this culture, and policies that are accepted as being legitimate.
However, Korea’s means of applying hard and soft power may be limited by virtue of its unique geopolitical situation, in regard to the U.S., China, and Japan, and its relations with North Korea. Therefore, Korea must make important policy choices to maintain a balance among the surrounding powers or pursue multilateral efforts to assure a balance of differing interests. In other words, Korea should not approach the development of soft power as a zero-sum game, but should instead a smart strategy that is focused on building international networks and resources, which can lead to closer cooperation. This in turn will make Korea a much more significant and secure nation in the future.
It is clear that the individual participants maintained a notable diversity of views on soft power in Korea. However, there was a general consensus that Korea should acknowledge both the limitations and potential benefits of its unique geo-political position in order to further develop its soft power resources. Korea must thus strive to overcome several key obstacles that have curtailed the potential of Korea’s soft power initiatives.
In essence, Korea’s foreign policy horizon must be expanded beyond its primary focus on the Korean Peninsula, along with learning to promote soft power as more than a cultural phenomenon and grasping the full extent of soft power in today’s information age, in which diverse groups of ps are capable of exerting soft power. In conclusion, the “Wiseman Round Table” participants also agreed that broader policy consensus and understanding of soft power are essential, which will require more extensive dialogue, cooperation, exchange, and building of networks in Korea, East Asia, and the international community.

SEARCH

통합검색

통합검색버튼
통합검색닫기

전체메뉴

전체메뉴 닫기