Information and Communications Technologies in the Two Koreas: Contrasts, Commonalities, Challenges

( Tim Beal ) 연세대학교 동서문제연구원 2001 Global economic review Vol.30 No.4

MISSED OPPORTUNITIES AND BLIGHTED PROMISE: PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS FOR DPRK TOURISM

Tim Beal 통일연구원 2001 International journal of korean unification studie Vol.10 No.2

For many countries international tourism has been a significant driver of economic growth, particularly over the last half century. International inbound tourism to the ROK is a relatively recent phenomenon, dating mainly from the Seoul Olympics, but by 2000 it was, according to World Tourism Organization (WTO) data, the 7th largest market in East Asia, outstripping Japan. Although tourism to the DPRK has captured attention recently, with the Hyundai Asan Kumgangsan venture, it is at a far lower level than ROK tourism. Because of the DPRK’s particular international situation, inbound tourism has never been a feasible option until recently, although the country did join the WTO in 1987. Many countries, particularly ROK and the United States, expressly prohibited their citizens from visiting the DPRK and those countries which were friendly, such as the then Soviet Union or China, did not generate outbound tourism. Kim Dae-jung’s ‘sunshine policy,’ and the personal commitment of Hyundai founder Chung Ju-yung, were the catalysts that produced Kumgangsan tourism. However, the number of customers in the early months of 2001 was at half the level of a year earlier, and Hyundai Asan is currently losing 2.5 billion won a month. At this stage, it is uncertain whether the Kumgangsan venture marks the beginning of a take-off for DPRK international tourism, or the end of a brief episode. World, particularly East Asian experience, shows that tourism can produce significant economic benefits. However, it comes at a cost in social, cultural, environmental and political terms. It clearly requires a benign political environment that encompasses the host country and the main source countries. On a practical level it requires certain infrastuctural, transportation and personnel resources, which often need foreign investment and expertise. From a marketing perspective, customer, and travel industry, perceptions of attractiveness, value for money and risk are crucial, and this must be set within the context of competing destinations. This paper surveys the experience of the Republic of Korea in developing international inbound tourism and presents statistics at global, regional and country level, including some countries of particular relevance such as Spain, China, Vietnam and Cuba. It describes current developments in DPRK tourism and attempts to identify the potential for development and the constraints that impede it. In particular, whilst there are formidable infrastructural problems the key constraint is a political one. Pyongyang has not yet moved far enough away from the old, self-defeating approach to tourism which focused on visitors which would eulogize the leadership. It needs to make a firm policy decision that it wants to attract manageable numbers of international tourists, and then analyze rationally how it might achieve that. It is argued that implementation of the June agreement on Kumgangsan - specifically the opening of the land routes and the designation as a special zone - will be an indicator of that decision. The paper was written mid-August 2001 for the conference Korean Studies at the Dawn of the New Millennium held by the Korean Studies Association of Australasia, 24- 25 September at Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. The paper has been revised and amended since then in the light of subsequent events, especially 11 September and the current impasse over Kumgangsan and N-S relations generally. I am grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their comments. For many countries international tourism has been a significant driver of economic growth, particularly over the last half century. International inbound tourism to the ROK is a relatively recent phenomenon, dating mainly from the Seoul Olympics, but by 2000 it was, according to World Tourism Organization (WTO) data, the 7th largest market in East Asia, outstripping Japan. Although tourism to the DPRK has captured attention recently, with the Hyundai Asan Kumgangsan venture, it is at a far lower level than ROK tourism. Because of the DPRK’s particular international situation, inbound tourism has never been a feasible option until recently, although the country did join the WTO in 1987. Many countries, particularly ROK and the United States, expressly prohibited their citizens from visiting the DPRK and those countries which were friendly, such as the then Soviet Union or China, did not generate outbound tourism. Kim Dae-jung’s ‘sunshine policy,’ and the personal commitment of Hyundai founder Chung Ju-yung, were the catalysts that produced Kumgangsan tourism. However, the number of customers in the early months of 2001 was at half the level of a year earlier, and Hyundai Asan is currently losing 2.5 billion won a month. At this stage, it is uncertain whether the Kumgangsan venture marks the beginning of a take-off for DPRK international tourism, or the end of a brief episode. World, particularly East Asian experience, shows that tourism can produce significant economic benefits. However, it comes at a cost in social, cultural, environmental and political terms. It clearly requires a benign political environment that encompasses the host country and the main source countries. On a practical level it requires certain infrastuctural, transportation and personnel resources, which often need foreign investment and expertise. From a marketing perspective, customer, and travel industry, perceptions of attractiveness, value for money and risk are crucial, and this must be set within the context of competing destinations. This paper surveys the experience of the Republic of Korea in developing international inbound tourism and presents statistics at global, regional and country level, including some countries of particular relevance such as Spain, China, Vietnam and Cuba. It describes current developments in DPRK tourism and attempts to identify the potential for development and the constraints that impede it. In particular, whilst there are formidable infrastructural problems the key constraint is a political one. Pyongyang has not yet moved far enough away from the old, self-defeating approach to tourism which focused on visitors which would eulogize the leadership. It needs to make a firm policy decision that it wants to attract manageable numbers of international tourists, and then analyze rationally how it might achieve that. It is argued that implementation of the June agreement on Kumgangsan - specifically the opening of the land routes and the designation as a special zone - will be an indicator of that decision. The paper was written mid-August 2001 for the conference Korean Studies at the Dawn of the New Millennium held by the Korean Studies Association of Australasia, 24- 25 September at Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. The paper has been revised and amended since then in the light of subsequent events, especially 11 September and the current impasse over Kumgangsan and N-S relations generally. I am grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their comments.

INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGIES IN THE TWO KOREAS : CONTRASTS, COMMONALITIES,CHALLENGES

Beal, Tim 연세대학교 동서문제연구원 2001 Global economic review Vol.30 No.4

The contrast between the two Koreas in Information and Communication Technology (ICT) is stark. The South is a world leader in ICT and South Koreans are addicted to the Internet. The Internet scarcely exists in the North and few have access to it. Nevertheless, despite internal and external constraints, the North has many of the attributes, and the aspirations, of developed countries and ICT is a priority area. The North has carved out a niche in computer animation and is pushing to develop software exports. Will it be able to overcome current difficulties and dangers and join the digital revolution?

한국 사드 배치 문제와 미국의 세계 패권 경쟁

팀빌 ( Tim Beal ) 한국정치평론학회 2016 정치와 평론 Vol.19 No.-

미국이 한국에 사드를 배치하려는 까닭은 기본적으로 미국의 세계 패권에 도전하는 중국과 러시아를 겨냥한 광역 미사일 방어 전략의 일환이다. 사드는 크게 두 부분으로 구성되는데, 하나는 요격기 그 자체이고, 다른 하나는 초기에 표적 미사일을 식별해 주는 AN/TPY- 레이더이다. 이 논문에서는 요격기 그 자체가 한반도의 지정학적 상황에서는 대단히 비효율적 수단이지만, 레이더의 위치에 따라서는 중국과 러시아의 발사장(launch sites) 동향을 사전에 감시할 수 있게 해준다고 주장할 것이다. 미국에서 도널드 트럼프가 갑작스럽게 대통령에 당선되고, 박근혜 행정부가 붕괴되는 뜻밖의 상황이 사드 배치 문제에 불확실한 요소를 추가하고 있다. 하지만 박근혜 후임으로 대단히 진보적인 후보가 대통령으로 당선되지 않는 한 당초의 사드 배치 계획은 그대로 이행될 가능성이 높다. 또한 미국의 세계 패권을 유지하기 위해서는 미사일 방어체계가 너무도 중요하기 때문에 대격변이 없는 한 미국의 계획을 수정하기는 어려울 것이다. The deployment of an initial THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) battery in South Korea is part of a wider missile defense strategy which is primarily aimed at the main challengers to US hegemony, China and Russia. The THAAD unit has two principal components - the interceptors themselves and the AN/TPY-2 radar which provides initial identification of the target missile. The literature suggests that the interceptors themselves will be largely ineffective in the context of the Korean peninsula, but the location of the radar offers forward surveillance of launch sites in China and Russia. The surprise election of Donald Trump and the unexpected implosion of the Park Geun-hye administration brings an element of uncertainty to the deployment. However, barring the election of a forceful and determined progressive candidate with a large mandate to succeed Park Geun-hye it seems likely that the initial deployment will go ahead, with more to follow. Missile defense is too important to US global hegemony to be deflected by anything other than a major upheaval.

패권과 저항, 강제와 억지 : 북한 ‘위협’ 해체와 미국의 전략적 대안 확인

팀 빌 ( Tim Beal ) 한국정치평론학회 2017 정치와 평론 Vol.21 No.-

우리는 북한이나 이란과 같은 나라들의 위협 속에서 미국 관리, 장군, 정치인들의 말과 미디어 기사들로 융단폭격을 받고 있다. 그 이전에는 이라크였고, 더 이전에는 소련이었다. 이런 선전은 많은 사람들이 믿기 때문에 명백해 보이는 잠재력이 있어서, 종종 숙고하는 가운데 자라난 주요 전략적 개념들 사이의 혼란에 의존한다. 공격과 방어 수단들, 강제와 억제 수단들이 같다는 사실이 문제를 복잡하게 만든다. 개념을 분명히 하는 것은 근본적인 일이다. 이는 실제 데이터(얼마나 많은 ICBM과 비행기를 북한이나 이란이 갖고 있는가에 대한 데이터)를 통해 보완된다. 연기가 자욱한 스크린을 걷어내고 보다 안전한 미래를 위한 방법을 확정할 수 있다면, 개념들과 그 개념들의 차이와 유사성 및 중복성에 대해 엄격히 이해하고 그것을 컨텍스트 속에 대입하는 것은 근본적이다. 반복되는 선전에 대한 경계, 상식의 사용, 인종주의적 고정관념을 피하는 것은 모두 도움이 된다. 미국과 북한 사이의 대결을 상황적인 다이나믹스 속에서 분석함으로써, 우리는 미국의 전략적 대안들을 확인할 수 있다. 북한으로부터 심각하고 실존적인 위협에 직면해 있는 미국의 정치인, 관리, 장군, 분류된 전문가를 인용하는 미디어의 기사들 속에는 어떤 지속적인 흐름이 있다. 이것은 수십 년 동안 여러 형태로 지속되어 왔고, 때때로 파도처럼 밀려온다. 때로는 북한의 핵실험이나 미사일 혹은 심지어 인공위성 발사에 의해 발생한다. 또 때로는 2년마다 일어나는 거대한 침략이나 정부교체와 같은 미국 칼렌더에서 일어나는 사건들의 결과로 나타난다. 2017년 봄에는 아마도 세계역사상 비견될 수 없는 군사력의 표현인 30만 군대와 F-22, F-35 비행단이 참가한 군사훈련이 있었다. 나치독일이 소련을 침공한 바르바로사 작전과 노르망디 상륙작전 당일에는 더 많은 군대가 있었으나 현대 무기체계와 같은 파괴능력은 없었다. 동시에 미국 행정부에는 변화가 있다. 트럼프대통령과 틸러슨 국무장관은 아직 모르고 있다면 미국이 이 작은 아시아 국가로부터 어떤 위험에 직면하고 있는지에 대해 계속 되짚어봐야 한다. We are constantly bombarded with articles in the media and statements by officials, generals, and politicians that the US is under threat from countries such as North Korea and Iran. Before that it was Iraq, and before that the Soviet Union. The propaganda trope relies for its potency - and potent it clearly is since so many believe it - on confusion, often deliberately fostered, between key strategic concepts. The problem is compounded by the fact that the instruments of aggression and defence, of compellence and deterrence, are essentially the same. Thinking clearly about the concepts, complemented of course by actually looking at the data (just how many ICBMs and aircraft carriers does North Korea or Iran have?) is essential if we are to blow away the smoke screen and chart a way to a safer future. It is essential to have a rigorous understanding of the concepts - their differences, similarities and overlaps - and place them into context. Wariness of repetitious propaganda, use of common sense and an avoidance of racist stereotypes all help. By analysing the situational dynamics of the confrontation between the US and North Korea we can identify America’s strategic alternatives. There is a constant stream of articles in the media, quoting politicians, officials, generals and assorted pundits that that the United States is under dire, existential threat from North Korea. This has been going on in various forms for decades but it surges from time to time. Sometimes these are occasioned by a North Korea test of a nuclear weapon, a missile or even the launch of a satellite Sometimes it is a product of events in the American calendar such as the massive biannual invasion exercises or by a change of administration. So we have the spring 2017 war exercises, 300,000 troops, an aircraft carrier fleet, F-22s, F-35s an expression of military power probably unequalled in world history. Operation Barbarossa, in which Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union and the Normandy D-Day landings involved more people but didn’t have the destructive capability of modern weapons systems. At the same time we have a change in administration in the United States and President Trump and Secretary Tillerson have to be constantly reminded, in case they did not already know, what danger the United States faces from this small East Asia country.

살인적인 폭격의 역사 속에서 계속되는 한국(조선) 전쟁

팀 빌(Tim Beal),김범수(번역자) 노동사회과학연구소 2021 정세와노동 Vol.- No.175