Number of results to display per page
Search Results
102. Is Pyongyang Different in Washington and Seoul? English and Korean Language Policy Discourse on North Korea
- Author:
- Jeffrey Robertson
- Publication Date:
- 04-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
- Abstract:
- During 2017-18, international attention turned to the Korean Peninsula as the threat of conflict reached new heights. This led to an explosion in the growth of “North Korea watchers”— the community of scholars, analysts, government officers, NGO advocates, and journalists who commit a portion of their lives to following events in North Korea. Divides emerged in overlapping regional, professional, institutional (political), and linguistic differences that saw individuals take conflicting positions on key issues. This paper investigates just one of these divides—how language and culture impact policy discourse on North Korea. The study explores language as a source of division in the North Korea watching community. It uses Einar Wigen’s argument that international relations should be conceptualized as inter-lingual relations, which suggests that despite the narrowing of political vocabularies, residues of politico-cultural differences remain in how concepts are contextualized into discourse, even between close partners. The study assesses compatibility between English and Korean language conceptualizations of North Korea, through an assessment of core inputs into policy discourse. The study then discusses the implications for U.S.-South Korea relations, and ongoing efforts to strengthen Korean Peninsula security.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Asia, North Korea, Korea, and United States of America
103. Renewable Energy in Trade Wars: Solar Power in South Korea’s Energy Mix and the Impact of Protectionism
- Author:
- June Park
- Publication Date:
- 01-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
- Abstract:
- This paper examines the impacts of global competition in solar panel production and the conflict of domestic interests among solar-related industries in the U.S. on South Korea’s solar-focused renewable energy policy. Examining the Moon Jaein administration’s energy policy amid the impact of the U.S. safeguard on South Korean solar panels, the paper argues a) the U.S. safeguard is a hindrance to South Korea’s path forward on solar panel production, and b) Moon’s sole focus on sustainability and his ambitious solar energy target will result in further adoption of lower-cost Chinese solar panels, foregoing the opportunity to upgrade South Korean panels. As South Korean firms announce their decisions to relocate to the U.S. to avoid U.S. safeguard tariffs, the paper recommends the destinations of South Korean solar panel exports be diversified and the goals of South Korean energy policy be centered on balancing cost, stability, and sustainability. The paper does not necessarily recommend a full-fledged drive on expanding solar energy use in South Korea; rather, it calls for the strategic reevaluation of energy policy upon which a clear and sound strategy for solar energy should be formulated.
- Topic:
- Energy Policy, Bilateral Relations, Trade Wars, Renewable Energy, and Solar Power
- Political Geography:
- Asia, South Korea, North Korea, Korea, and United States of America
104. Advancing human rights in Asia through trade after Brexit
- Author:
- Katarina Schwarz, Todd Landman, and Katrina Peake
- Publication Date:
- 06-2019
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Asia Research Institute, University of Nottingham
- Abstract:
- How can the UK best protect human rights in Asia, an area historically weak in protecting and promoting human rights, when it comes to securing new trade deals after exiting the European Union (EU)? This policy brief assesses potential pathways for the UK to protect human rights in Asia through trade after exiting the EU, accounting for the specific challenges of advancing human rights in the region. It draws on existing practice, with a focus on the EU, to make suggestions for future UK trade policy through both unilateral and bilateral arrangements.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, Bilateral Relations, European Union, Brexit, Trade, and Trade Policy
- Political Geography:
- United Kingdom and Asia
105. Advancing Human Rights in Asia through Trade after Brexit: Background Report
- Author:
- Katarina Schwarz, Todd Landman, and Katrina Peake
- Publication Date:
- 06-2019
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Asia Research Institute, University of Nottingham
- Abstract:
- Throughout the period of the United Kingdom’s membership in the European Union (EU) and under the status quo, the EU possesses exclusive competence of its Common Commercial Policy. It therefore does not have to consult the UK when developing trade agreements, and the UK’s part in these processes is defined by its role within the EU. The UK alone does not determine the existence, scope, or terms of trade relationships with third countries. However, after exiting the EU, the United Kingdom will exercise more substantial, and ultimate, decision-making power over the nature of trade with external partners. This creates an opportunity for the development and evolution of new, direct trading relationships with countries beyond the EU—relationships that are likely to have increasing significance in the UK economy after withdrawal and over time. As Prime Minister Theresa May recognised in a speech in Florence: "Our relations with countries outside the EU can be developed in new ways, including through our own trade negotiations, because we will no longer be an EU country, and we will no longer directly benefit from the EU’s future trade negotiations." Many aspects of these agreements are open to negotiation, creating new possibilities for the UK to expand its influence in a variety of areas, and to address particular challenges faced within the borders of trading partners.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, Bilateral Relations, Brexit, Trade, and Trade Policy
- Political Geography:
- United Kingdom and Asia
106. The United Kingdom's Belt and Road Initiative strategy after Brexit
- Author:
- Benjamin Barton
- Publication Date:
- 06-2019
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Asia Research Institute, University of Nottingham
- Abstract:
- As China’s President Xi Jinping’s signature foreign policy programme, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has become one of the world’s most active infrastructure development drivers. The BRI is helping to meet the increasing demand for infrastructure development in emerging markets across the world. This policy is unlikely to change due to the importance that the Chinese government attributes to the BRI, with it now being formally enshrined into the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) constitution. For the UK, the BRI stakes are high; it matters both domestically and internationally. It is impacting the wellbeing of countries that are of strategic importance to the UK. It also contributes to the emerging geopolitical rivalry on infrastructure financing. The government should explore bilateral and multilateral venues to seek to cooperate with China on the BRI by developing a UK BRI strategy post-Brexit.
- Topic:
- Development, Bilateral Relations, Infrastructure, Geopolitics, Brexit, Multilateralism, Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and Economic Cooperation
- Political Geography:
- Britain, China, United Kingdom, and Asia
107. The United Kingdom's Belt and Road Initiative strategy after Brexit: Background Report
- Author:
- Benjamin Barton
- Publication Date:
- 06-2019
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Asia Research Institute, University of Nottingham
- Abstract:
- As China and President Xi Jinping signature foreign policy programme, the BRI has become in a very short space of the time one of the world’s largest and most active international infrastructure development drivers. The BRI is helping, in a significant manner, to meet the increasing demand for infrastructure development and upgrades in emerging markets – a trend that is unlikely to slow anytime time soon, especially given the initiative’s current importance to the Chinese government. For the British government (from here onwards ‘government’), although the UK is unlikely to be a prime destination for BRI projects (for now), the BRI stakes are high. Not only do BRI projects impact the economic wellbeing of a number of countries of strategic importance to the UK, but the government cannot remain passive in the emerging geopolitical context of infrastructure development and financing rivalry. In addition, in light of its relative post-Brexit geopolitical isolation, the government needs to adopt a firm and unequivocal political stance in dealing with its Chinese counterpart should the UK itself become the recipient of BRI projects.
- Topic:
- Economics, Bilateral Relations, Geopolitics, Brexit, Multilateralism, and Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)
- Political Geography:
- China, United Kingdom, and Asia
108. From Geopolitical Competition to Strategic Partnership: Turkey and Russia after The Cold War
- Author:
- Evren Balta
- Publication Date:
- 09-2019
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Uluslararasi Iliskiler
- Institution:
- International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
- Abstract:
- This article examines different analytical perspectives on Turkish-Russian relations and provides a conceptual history of developing connections between Turkey and Russia since the end of the Cold War. It first reviews evolving political relations, including military cooperation, and then focuses on economic relations, including energy cooperation. Finally, it discusses the socio-cultural aspects of bilateral relations, focusing on the movement of people. It shows how conflicting geopolitical interests have overshadowed the increasing economic cooperation and cultural exchange that had marked the previous two decades of bilateral relations. Although Turkey and Russia have competing regional interests, their dissatisfaction with and resentment of Western policies is one of the major reasons for their reluctant geopolitical cooperation. This article emphasizes the need for a multi-causal and analytically eclectic approach to analyzing Turkish-Russian relations that selectively recombines analytic components of causal mechanisms in competing research traditions.
- Topic:
- Cold War, Bilateral Relations, Military Affairs, Partnerships, and Economic Cooperation
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Eurasia, Turkey, Middle East, and Mediterranean
109. Turkey between Qatar and Saudi Arabia: Changing Regional and Bilateral Relations
- Author:
- Birol Baskan
- Publication Date:
- 08-2019
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Uluslararasi Iliskiler
- Institution:
- International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
- Abstract:
- This paper discusses how Turkey’s bilateral relations with Saudi Arabia and Qatar have changed after the Arab Spring erupted and assesses how the Syrian conflict affected them. The paper argues that Turkey had developed excellent relations with Saudi Arabia and Qatar in the 2000s, but eventually fell out with Saudi Arabia and strengthened its relations with Qatar as the Arab Spring unfolded. The Syrian conflict, in which the three countries colluded to overthrow the Assad regime, has alleviated the deleterious impact of the differences between Saudi Arabia and Turkey on the bilateral relations or, to put it in another way, slowed down the deterioration of Turkey-Saudi Arabia relations. The paper also argues that the geopolitical landscape that pushed Turkey and Saudi Arabia apart also pushed Turkey and Qatar closer.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Regional Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, and Geopolitics
- Political Geography:
- Turkey, Middle East, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Qatar
110. Russian and Turkish Foreign Policy Activism in the Syrian Theater
- Author:
- Inan Rüma and Mitat Çelikpala
- Publication Date:
- 08-2019
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Uluslararasi Iliskiler
- Institution:
- International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
- Abstract:
- Russia and Turkey have been involved in remarkable redefinitions of their foreign policies while navigating through turbulent times in the Post-Cold War era. This has manifested in a search of being recognized as a great power. The tragic civil war in Syria has been the theatre of these ambitions of these two states in highly controversial ways. They have been on the opposite sides until recently on the essential question of the regime change in that country. The risk of a direct fight has even been observed when Turkish air force got a Russian jet down. However, a rapid rapprochement started due to Turkish priority shift from the regime change to the prevention of Kurdish autonomy and the alienation from US; and Russian enthusiasm to get the cooperation of an ardent anti-regime NATO member like Turkey. It can be said that Russia and Turkey have been more process-oriented than result-oriented because they have been compelled to see the limits of their power and influence. As a result, they seem to prefer to focus on the process since they seem to reach their primary objective of showing their salience. All in all, one can only hope for a peaceful and democratic life for Syrians whom tremendously suffered also as a result of an imbroglio of all these global and regional powers’ policies.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Political Activism, and Kurds
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Eurasia, Turkey, Middle East, and Syria