Prize giving ceremony for the 2014 essay competition was held in Hamilton 28th August. Topics this year were:
1. How can New Zealand attract more students from Korea and ensure they have a rewarding and successful experience? Outline your ideas: or
2. The reunification of Korea would be a positive step for world peace. Discuss.
The NZROK Friendship Society held an essay competition for tertiary and secondary school students in September 2010. The topic was:
25th June 2010 marks the 60th anniversary of the beginning of the Korean War. South Korea and North Korea have been separated for a long time. These two countries should seek reunification and become one country again without delay. Discuss
The competition attracted 46 entries, all of which were of a very high standard - making it hard for the judges to pick the winners. Below are the two winning essays. The essays represent the views of the writers, not of any organization. They remain the property of the writers and should not be reproduced in any form.
Winning Tertiary Student Essay.
Joshua Nahmo Kang University of Auckland, NZ
North Korea. South Korea. Two Koreas. You.d think that the answer to that one was
simple. But it.s not. A plethora of political, social and economic problems circumvents
Korean reunification from being a simple deletion of a prefixing cardinal direction.
Numbers separate the two sides of the thirty eighth parallel; but the important ones
aren.t degrees of latitude, but Wons, indices and guns. Yet, despite the seemingly
infinite chasm between the two halves, the Koreas share an overruling link upon which
the process of mending the scar etched across the land and the people may begin.
First, the indices. Or the socio-politics. There are two men: One lives in Seoul and the
other lives in Hamhung. The former, dressed in a neatly pressed suit with a slim black
tie à la mode, is sipping a shot of espresso with a grimace and watching the day.s
financial summary on his smartphone. The latter, wearing a grimy overall, is hauling the
night.s catch over the side of his fishing boat, also grimacing. Despite the starkly
disparate backdrops of these two protagonists, when they are stripped down of their
social trappings and stand naked, they are remarkably similar. They speak Korean, they
eat Korean and they feel Korean. They are Korean and are passionate about being one
(especially during football games). They probably flicked through similar textbooks of
history (at least up to the point where Kim Il Sung „liberated. Korea from colonial Japan)
and partake in similar matters of culture. They share a link doubly reinforced by blood
and four millennia of history.
However, the problem is, they aren.t very naked. They.re in quite a thick layer of very
different sets of assorted garments. Or politics and social climates. The government in
Seoul is a democratically elected institution of many political parties whilst the one in
Pyongyang is a superficially elected institution of a single communist party. The two
systems are black-and-white antitheses. Although the two governments frequently, and
publicly, confess their undying love for each other and promise to seal this love in holy
matrimony swiftly (the Constitution of the Republic of Korea mentions „reunification of
the fatherland. even before the very first sentence finishes), they stand adamant and
monolithic in the negotiations on who would rule a unified Korea. Furthermore, the
differences in styles of government have emphasised different aspects with regards to
social development. In the sixty years following their violent divorce, South Korea has
clawed up the tables and reached respectable heights in social indices. One need only
look at the charts for the Human Development Index (HDI) measuring standards of
living to measure how far apart the couple has really gone their separate ways. Hence,
in spite of the mutual core that the two Koreas share, the differences in the socio-politics
are so vast that any poorly planned reunification could result in a very sour reunion.
In a similar fashion, the Wons (the economics) only widen and consolidate the chasm
between the two Koreas. Possible the most striking difference between the two
aforementioned men is that the man in Seoul has money – and lots of it. But he wasn.t
always so affluent. In fact, sixty years ago from today, at the breakout of the Korean
War, these two brothers were indistinguishable financially. In the eyes of nineteenth
century American missionaries, poverty was a common, “almost universal condition of
Koreans” (Ryu, 2009). Today, the Republic of Korea is one of the World.s richest
countries and, despite the survival of poverty and growing inequality, it has its place,
sipping nectar and ambrosia, amongst the nouveau Olympus of winners in the tragic
game of global capitalism; the Democratic People.s Republic of Korea, on the other
hand, is synonymous with the edge of the world (not quite in the same sense as New
Zealand) and abysmal poverty. Obviously, something happened to the South Korea in
the past sixty years; something involving a lot of perspiration, blood and money.
But it turns out that reunification, the alleged Philosopher.s stone of both Koreas, costs
an awful lot: Economists estimate that reunification may cost approximately $70 billion
per annum and up to $700 billion in total (Wolf Jr., 2006). All of a sudden, the oasis of
a unified, independent and affluent Korea that the Southerners had envisaged in their
sixty years of toil becomes less attractive. Moreover, the economic powerhouse that was
West Germany failed to be an assuring precedent, as it continues to struggle with
unification even after thirty years (Beck, 2010). In short, sixty years of incredible
human feats of effort have produced an economic miracle on the Han River, but have
also turned the South Koreans into hard realists. The calculators into which their
accountants had entered higher figures each successive year spell financial disaster for
reunification.
However, if the Koreans have done it once, they can do it again. In a country so mineral
poor, South Korea.s greatest asset in its ascendance from Hades was its people. The full
participation of the entirety of the peninsula.s populace will only bolster this. The future
economic benefits of a more stable, peaceful and populous Korea are as certain as the
short term shock of reunification. One need only look at the percent of public spending
dedicated to military use, as monstrous as the weapons it manufactures, to confirm this.
Korean reunification will bring an economic winter in the short term, but a spring will
come nevertheless.
Now, the guns. It.s in the news. „Nuclear-weapons. is the second part of a single word
that people expect when they hear „North-Korea.. In recent years, North Korea has
rocketed up in global awareness and fear of her has become pervasive in the quotidian
lives of billions. North Korea.s rise as an international celebrity has only heightened the
already tense status quo of stakeholders around the geopolitically strategic peninsula.
Korean reunification has never truly been a domestic issue, as the original markers of
the Korean partition were the United States and USSR; but the North.s development of
terrible weapons threatening humanity as a whole has certainly raised the stakes and
elevated an essentially regional problem to a much more sophisticated, vastly
international problem. Surprisingly, although the increase in risks and stakeholders
certainly does not facilitate negotiations, it could also provoke a surprising global
comradeship in solving the global problem of North Korea. Policy makers and investors
are united in desiring a more stable North Asia (Beck, 2010). Hence, the development
of nuclear weapons in North Korea has certainly added dimensions to the issue of
Korean reunification, but the new international presence may actually lighten the heavy
burden of unification on the small shoulders of the two Koreas.
But getting past the figures, it is crucial to find the human centre of the problem by
dissecting the meaning of the nation state at the grassroots. The theoretical raison d.être
of the state is to protect the happiness of its citizens. The Thirty Eighth Parallel tears not
only the Korean peninsula in half but also the hearts of families split during the War.
.
Millions of litres blood and tears were shed to achieve Korean independence and
millions more for unification during the Korean War. The very survival of the Thirty
Eighth Parallel would turn the dead in their graves. Korean reunification must come
without delay, or the two countries face irrelevance as the number of families split
North and South, waiting for reunification and justice, dwindles and the bonds of
history and blood dilute with time. There may come a day when the two men, one in
suit and the other in overalls, cannot recognise his kin underneath. Reunification is the
human solution to the problem of numbers.
Korean reunification is upsetting. It is traumatic in the short run. However, its longer
term benefits are undeniable and its impact will pervade to every corner of the globe.
Often, it is too easy to conduct a cost benefit analysis and dismiss the issue on the basis
of logistics. But that does no justice to the human left out of the equation. As long as
Korean reunification is considered a human problem, it is possible. But, it.s still not a
breezy trek up north eight or so miles. Some problems will be easy. Others will require
a lot of effort, from both sides. Still others, like Kim Jong Il.s chronic fashion sense,
may be irreconcilable. But Korean reunification must come, and swiftly too, or the
human soul may find no peace.
Joshua Nahmo Kang University of Auckland
REFERENCE LIST
Beck, Peter M. (2010, January 4). Contemplating Korean Reunification. Wall Street
Journal (Eastern Edition), p. A.15. Retrieved August 4, 2010, from ABI/INFORM
Global. (Document ID: 1931940911).
Ryu, Dae Young (2010) « Understanding Early American Missionaries in Korea (1884-
1910): Capitalist Middle-Class Values and the Weber Thesis », Archives de sciences
sociales des religions URL : http://assr.revues.org/20190
Wolf Jr., Charles (2006). KOREAN REUNIFICATION: HOW IT MIGHT COME
ABOUT AND AT WHAT COST. Defence and Peace
Economics, 17(6), 681. Retrieved August 4, 2010, from ABI/INFORM Global.
(Document ID: 1169444021).
Winning Secondary School Student Essay
Jordan Kane Grimmer of Otumoetai College, Tauranga, NZ.
Reflecting back on the six long decades since the Korean War severed a
people.s kindred spirit, the two nations—sharing a united culture, history, race
and language—persist as hostile enemies. Sadly, reconciliation between the
states remains an elusive prospect, which greatly hinders chances of imminent
reunification. In the joyous event of this however, the new national government
will have to be careful to ensure sure that emotion will not override sensibilities
and dictate politics. History tells us that a hasty, emotional reunification can
cause profound and weighty difficulties. The abruptness of Germany.s
reunification in 1990 has brought significant challenges—cultural, economical
and political—which are still being addressed to this day. Therefore, in order to
minimise burdens and achieve a more prosperous and stable unity, the
reunification of North and South Korea must be a carefully managed process of
incremental integration over many years. In this way the differences that have
been cultivated between the nations can be ironed out, and a greater unity as a
nation can be achieved.
For a long time it has been speculated that the regime in the North will
destabilise, and that a subsequent „collapse. is inevitablei. While „collapse. in the
North may be a quick way to bring about reunification, it must only be seen as a
starting point of achieving an end goal. The chaotic situation which would ensue
in the North and South would make it relatively impossible to bring about an
ordered and stable unification without the undesirable use of military force.
What needs to happen long before a possible collapse is for the two nations to
begin engaging in constructive dialogue- as started under President Kim Dae-
Jung.s „Sunshine Policy.. Therefore; when the chance for reunification arises
(via collapse or reconciliation), difficulties can be addressed by a government
who is already familiarized with the diversities in each region. Then, a holistic
reunification can begin, approached prudently and sensibly- without resorting to
force, and without the danger of abrupt over-emotiveness.
.
Potentially the biggest problem for a government of a newly reconciled Korea is
the large disparity that currently exists between the two completely separated
economies. While the South.s economy has flourished and grown since the
Korean War, the North remains deeply impoverished. Indeed, the estimated
income disparity between the two states is now at a fifteen to one ratio per
capitaii. Because of this, a reconciled government would need to ensure that the
economies are kept economically for a reasonable period, gradually bringing in
changes to unity. Acting suddenly could bring an enormous economic cost to
the Southern people, while their Northern brethren struggle to become
accustomed to the consumerist lifestyle. This problem was evident in the
reunification of Germany, where to this day, large sums of money are still paid
across the old border to realign the economy and equalise the standards of
living. However, the “North Korea[n] situation is far worse than East Germany,
and South Korea is weaker than West Germany”,iii, according to Dae-Jung,
emphasising the need for due caution in the process. A progression of very
gradual economic integration can allow both nations to evolve step-by-step
towards landmarks of final unity-a common market, common currency, and
reduced GDP disparity.
The difficulty concerning North Korea refugees and the cultural differences that
have amassed can too be addressed by an incremental approach to national
unity. Although Korean families have now been separated for six decades, it is
necessary to allow time for the cultures to acclimatise to each other before
complete and free mobility of people can be permitted. While this may seem to
be constraining the joy of a reunification, allowing immediate personal mobility
may create social issues as Northern refugees accustom to the more
consumerist society in the South.
It is evident that although a reconciliation and reunification of the Korean
brethren would be an exciting and desirable time in world history, patience,
positive dialogue and level-headedness must be promoted now to make the
future gradual process successful and robust. We must not be pessimistic about
the difficulties that will slow the process; instead we must look at all moves
towards eventual reunification as positive parts in a long journey. Successful
reunification certainly can be achieved- what needs to be realised is that haste
will bring no reward, and that a united government may not immediately bring a
united people.
References
.
i LtCol. Park, J. W. (1997). Possibility Of North Korean Collapse. Retrieved
August 4, 2010, from globalsecurity.org:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1997/Park.htm
ii Central Intelligence Agency. (2010, July). CIA- The World Factbook--Country
Comparasion. Retrieved August 2, 2010, from Central Intelligence Agency:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-
factbook/rankorder/2004rank.html
iii Lehrer, J. (1998, June 9). Online NewsHour: President Kim Dae Jung.
Retrieved August 3, 2010, from PBS News:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/asia/jan-june98/kim_6-9.html
Other References:
Hoare, J., & Pares, S. (1988). Korea: an introduction. Thetford: Worts-Power
Associates.
Wolf, C. J., & Akramov, K. (2005). North Korean paradoxes: circumstances,
costs and consequences of Korean unification. RAND Corporation.