Search

Begin New Search Political Geography United States Journal International Journal of Korean Studies

51. Korean Population in the United States, 2000: Demographic Characteristics and Socio-Economic Status

Author:
Eui-Young Yu, Peter Choe, and Sang II Han
Publication Date:
03-2002
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
The U.S. Census Bureau reported 1,076,872 Koreans residing in the United States as of April 1, 2000 (http://www.census.gov). These are the respondents who identified themselves as "Korean alone." If those who reported themselves as "Korean in combination with other Asian or other race" are added, the total amounts to 1,228,427. The figures for mixed-heritage persons belonging to two or more ethnic and/or racial groups should be used with caution, especially for comparative analysis, because categories containing these individuals are not mutually exclusive. For this reason, in this analysis the "Korean alone" population figure was mainly used.
Political Geography:
United States, Asia, and Korea

52. Peace and Arms Control on the Korean Peninsula

Author:
Yong-Sup Han
Publication Date:
09-2001
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
South Koreans did not recognize the importance of "the positive peace" until the Kim Dae-jung Administration came to power in 1998. Before then, the concept of "the negative peace" had long been engrained in the minds of South Koreans and Americans. The United States and South Korea have been successful in deterring war up to now. Although North Korea insisted that they should conclude a peace treaty with the United States, their true intent was not to establish "the positive peace" on the Korean peninsula. Herein, the positive peace means that there is neither a war nor a competition, and there is cooperation toward similar or common goals between different states. The Kim Dae-jung Administration began its reconciliation and cooperation policy to create conditions favorable to making positive peace on the Korean peninsula.
Political Geography:
United States, America, South Korea, North Korea, and Korean Peninsula

53. The Role of U.S. Forces in a Unified Korea

Author:
Ralph A. Cossa
Publication Date:
09-2001
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
The geopolitical landscape in East Asia has changed dramatically, and one would hope permanently, as a result of last year's sudden and largely unexpected thaw in North-South Korean relations. The appearance of North Korea's formerly reclusive leader, Kim Jong-il, in the international spotlight through the much-heralded June 2000 inter-Korean summit in Pyongyang and his high-profile meetings with Chinese leaders in Beijing and Shanghai and with Russian President Putin in Pyongyang have resulted in a remaking of both the North Korean leader's and his nation's international image. As one senior U.S. official noted at the time, North Korea has gone, almost overnight, from the "hermit kingdom" to the "hyperactive kingdom."
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Shanghai, Beijing, East Asia, North Korea, and Korea

54. The North Korean War Plan and the Opening Phase of the Korean War: A Documentary Study

Author:
Kwang-Soo Kim
Publication Date:
03-2001
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
No war in modern history is so obscure about its beginning as the Korean War. From the very first day of the war, both the North Korean and the South Korean governments accused the opponent of being guilty of an invasion. In the early morning of June 25, 1950, the North Korean government charged that the South Korean Army had made a surprise attack into its territory by 1-2 km across the 38th parallel at four points, the west of Haeju (Ongjin), the direction of Kumchon (Kaesong), the direction of Chorwon (Yonchon and Pochon), and Yangyang, and announced a counterattack to repulse the attack.1 The South Korean government announced on that day that the North Korean Army had invaded all along the 38th parallel at dawn. Based on the South Korean Army's reports, Ambassador Muccio reported to the U. S. government that the North Korean Army invaded the South by bombarding Ongjin around 4 o'clock in the morning and began to cross the 38th parallel at Ongjin, Kaesung, Chunchon, and the East Coast. In the United Nations, the U. S. government condemned the North Korean government for unlawfully invading South Korea and made a move to admonish North Korea to take back its army.
Political Geography:
United States, South Korea, North Korea, and Korea

55. The South Korean Military and the Korean War

Author:
Chang-Il Ohn
Publication Date:
03-2001
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
Immediately before the Japanese surrender in the Pacific War (1941-5), there was one Korea, though it had been under Japanese colonial rule for 36 years. The 38th parallel, which the American policymakers hastily picked out as the operational boundary between U.S. and Soviet troops in the Far East at the last stage of the Pacific War, divided one Korea into the two, North and South.1 Soviet troops occupied North Korea, Americans entered the South, and the two sides began military occupation in the two Koreas. The latitude, which Washington policymakers conceived to be a temporary line to halt the further southward advance of Soviet troops and thereby physically eliminate the possibility of Soviet participation in the Japanese occupation, and to facilitate the process of establishing a Korean government "in due course," however, began to embrace new political and military connotations. The two Koreas, even on a temporary basis, thus appeared. The status of and situations in the two Koreas were almost the same at the beginning of the military occupations. In both parts of Korea, people were very poor mainly because of the harsh Japanese mobilization for conducting the Pacific War. There were neither major factories, nor organized indigenous troops, nor influential political groups except the strong popular desire to establish a Korean government right away. Almost every well-informed Korean had a distinctive idea about the future of Korea and the nature of its government. As a result, "too many" political organizations and parties were formed, and, especially, the American military government judged that the Koreans were "too much" politicized. All in all, the situations in the two parts of Korea were almost identical as much as the status of being the occupied. The policies and strategies of the two occupiers—the United States and the Soviet Union—toward Korea, however, were different. Despite the wartime agreement with the United States that Korea should be independent "in due course," which meant that a Korean government should be established after the period of multinational trusteeship, the Soviet Union was not enthusiastic about the idea of multi-tutorship for Korea. Instead, the Soviet authority was busy in communizing the northern half of Korea, trying to make it a stronghold for securing the entire Korean peninsula. The Chief Soviet Delegate, Colonel General T. F. Shtykov, made it clear, at the Joint Commission convened in Seoul on March 20, 1946, that Korea should be "loyal to the Soviet Union, so that it will not become a base for an attack on the Soviet Union" in the future.2 This Soviet position was directly contrary to the primary objective of the United States in Korea, that is, "to prevent Russian domination of Korea."3 Unable to find a compromised solution on Korea through the Joint Commission, the United States internationalized the Korean issue by turning it over to the United Nations. The Soviet Union, however, did not accept the U.N. resolution that a Korean government would be established through holding a general election throughout Korea, and the Soviet authority in North Korea rejected the entry of U.N. representatives. As a result, the two Korean governments were created, one in the South blessed by the United Nations and the other in the North brewed by the Soviet Union, in August and September 1948 respectively.
Political Geography:
United States, Japan, America, Washington, South Korea, North Korea, Soviet Union, and Korea

56. American Strategy and the Korean Peninsula, 1945-1953

Author:
William Stueck
Publication Date:
03-2001
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
"By strategy," John Lewis Gaddis wrote in his seminal book Strategies of Containment, "I mean quite simply the process by which ends are related to means, intentions to capabilities, objectives to resources."1 My intention here is to employ this definition in examining the American course in Korea from the origin of the war there in the country's division in 1945 to the aftermath of fighting in 1953. My approach is to analyze a series of key US decisions, from the one to divide the peninsula at the 38th parallel in August 1945 to the ones to conclude a military pact with the Republic of Korea and to issue a "greater sanctions" statement immediately following an armistice in July 1953. My argument is that it took a destructive war before US policymakers successfully matched ends and means in Korea in a manner that ensured future stability. Unfortunately, though, that congruence also ensured indefinite division.
Political Geography:
United States, America, Korea, and Korean Peninsula

57. The Impact of the Korean War on the Korean Economy

Author:
Jong Won Lee
Publication Date:
03-2001
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
The three-year long Korean War (June 25, 1950 - July 27, 1953) devastated both South and North Korean economies. It broke out when the two Koreas barely managed to maintain socio-economic stability and restore pre-WWII industry production capability to some extent. The distorted and exploited economy by Imperial Japan was demolished by the brutal war. It started out as the appearance of a civil war, but in effect was carried out as an international war. Thus, it was a severe and hard-fought one between UN forces (including South Korea and 16 other nations) and North Korea and its allies (China and USSR). Although it took place in a small country in Far-Eastern Asia, it developed into a crash between world powers, East and West, and left treacherous and incurable wounds to both Koreas. Nearly four million people were presumed dead, and much worse were the property and industrial facility damages.1 Its impact on the Korean economy was so immense that consequential economic systems and policies re-framed the course of economic development in the following years. In spite of such enormous impacts of the Korean war on the economy, few studies exist. Of those that do, most are centered around describing or estimating war-related damages, while some focus on the long-term effects of US aid on the Korean economy.
Political Geography:
United States, Japan, China, East Asia, South Korea, North Korea, and Korea

58. Monitoring the Dynamics of Democratization in Korea: The Korea Democracy Barometer Surveys

Author:
Doh Chull Shin
Publication Date:
09-2000
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
The past decade has witnessed a growth in major efforts to study mass reactions to democratic regime change on a global scale. Since 1991 Professor Richard Rose, of the Center for the Study of Public Policy at the University of Strathclyde in Glasgow, Scotland, has been conducting the New Democracies Barometer surveys and the New Russia and Baltic Barometer surveys to compare the mass experience of democratization in post-Communist countries. Since 1995 Dr. Mata Lagos, of Market Opinion Research International in Santiago, Chile, has been conducting the Latinobarometro surveys on an annual basis to trace and compare the levels and sources of popular support for democracy and democratic reforms in 15 Latin American countries along with Spain. Most recently, in1999, Professor Michael Bratton of Michigan State University in the United States and Robert Mattes of the Institute for Democracy in South Africa launched the Afrobarometer to map mass attitudes toward democracy, markets, and civil society in a dozen African countries.
Political Geography:
Africa, Russia, United States, Latin America, Spain, Korea, and Scotland

59. Korea-United States Industrial Alliance

Author:
Youn-Suk Kim
Publication Date:
09-2000
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
Historically, Korea has been under the influence of its ambitious neighbors, China, Japan and Russia, which causes Korea's intense concern for its long-term independence. Through the budding signs of North-South Korea unification, Korea perceives that long-term peace and security derive from having a close diplomatic and economic relationship with the United States as the most crucial ingredient. Thus President Kim Dae Jung of South Korea and his counterpart of the North, Kim Jong II, at the June meeting emphasized the continued presence of United States troops in the Korean peninsula for stability and peace in East Asia even after the unification. In association with the United States economy, the unified Korea could play a major role as a regional balancer, giving stability to a new order in Northeast Asia and the Asia-Pacific region as a whole.
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Japan, China, Korea, and Northeast Asia

60. Prospects for Northeast Asian Multilateral Security Cooperation

Author:
Ralph A. Cossa
Publication Date:
03-1999
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
A broad variety of multilateral security dialogue mechanisms has emerged in the Asia-Pacific region in recent years. These efforts at building trust and confidence, both at the official and at the nongovernmental or so-called "track two" level, have the potential for enhancing Northeast Asian regional security. All Northeast Asian nations express support for such efforts. The current trend toward multilateralism is also generally consistent with U.S. foreign policy objectives in Asia, albeit as an important complement to America's bilateral security arrangements (which remain the foundation of U.S. security policy in Asia).
Political Geography:
United States, Asia, and Northeast Asia