A prized first step
March 31The recognition of South Korea's president, Kim Dae Jung, as the sole recipient of the 2000 Nobel Peace Prize by the Norwegian Nobel Committee merits recognition not only internationally but on our campus as well. The announcement of last year's laureate for one of the most prestigious awards in the world surprised few people, despite the record 150 candidates that were considered. Though there are undoubtedly others who have worked ceaselessly in their efforts to uphold peace in their respective regions of the world, President Kim should be regarded as a leader who is an embodiment of the struggle for democracy and human rights, not only in South Korea but also in Southeast Asia. President Kim Dae Jung's political career has been turbulent, to say the least. His first election to the National Assembly in 1961 was a short-lived success, as the National Assembly was dissolved three days later following a military coup d'etat. He was imprisoned or placed under house arrests several times from 1973 to 1985, and was exiled to the United States. It wasn't until 1987 that Kim was fully pardoned of his "crimes of treason" and had his civil and political rights restored. Some compare his tumultuous life to that of Nelson Mandela. Before his return from exile in 1985, President Kim Dae Jung openly fought for human rights and democracy in South Korea, leading various rallies and demonstrations against the somewhat authoritarian regimes of the past. And even after the December 1997 presidential election that led to the first democratic transition of power, President Kim has not faltered in implementing his vision of human rights and peace. He took up the cause of East Timor, and actively supported Aung San Suu Kyi, a Peace Prize laureate in 1991, in her struggle in the former Burma. However, these past achievements may have been overshadowed by the June 2000 summit meeting - the first ever between North and South Korea. This was a well-publicized and historic event since the two Koreas did not sign a peace-agreement after the end of the Korean War in 1953 and are still technically at war. At these historic meetings, it is evident that President Kim played a vital role in the process of reconciliation. His "sunshine policy," emphasizing common interests between the two nations through the gradual increase in interactions, is similar to Germany's Willy Brandt and his Ostpolitik, which won him the Nobel Peace Prize in 1971 (deservingly so, as evident by the important role that Ostpolitik played in the reunification of East and West Germany in 1989). These facts alone raise several questions: for one, why award President Kim for what appears to be only a small step forward towards the reunification of North and South Korea? Second, why not let the leaders of both North and South Korea share the prize? Furthermore, there are critics in South Korea who feel that President Kim has perhaps diverted too much of his attention to the "sunshine policy," and has neglected to deal with the pressing domestic concerns (especially economic problems). To respond to the first question, the "mere" first step is almost always the most difficult one. This Peace Prize recognizes Kim's brave attempt at reconciliation, and seems to encourage further possibilities of friendship that could ultimately lead to reunification. This would surely mark a momentous occasion for Korea and the rest of the world, considering that reunification would bury one of the last remnants of the Cold War. Answering the second question requires analyzing what the Nobel Peace Prize represents. It is more than just an award that praises those who work to create peace. It is truly a global award, one that has been given to many of the major personalities who have had a significant impact in promoting world peace. Though Kim Jong Il, the leader of North Korea, is commended for his part in the summit meeting, that alone does not seem to qualify him to receive this distinction. The international community cannot ignore his authoritarian regime that represses the civil and political rights of most of his citizens. Such a repressive regime does not merit a Nobel Peace Prize. Finally, with regards to the last major criticism that President Kim may face, it should be noted that South Korea was the first country to come out of the Asian financial crisis of 1997 under Kim's structural reforms of the economy. What's more, the democratic reforms that have been enacted and the peace efforts (be it a concerted effort by the two Koreas, the United States, or Japan) made under his presidency point to the fact that he has not neglected domestic issues, but rather that he has succeeded in addressing both foreign and domestic concerns. This is not to say that the democratic reforms have been completed, nor would it be wise to deny the existence of remaining problems with restructuring the different sectors of the economy. Awarding the Nobel Peace Prize may not be the key to the reunification of North and South Korea nor a fully sufficient solution for world peace. It may not even mean much to those who do not concern themselves with the importance of basic human rights. Nevertheless, it gives hope to those of us who are concerned. And the Nobel commission's recognition of the prospects for peace in the region may have far-reaching effects in the future that might not yet be evident to most of us.Jung Park is a senior majoring in economics.

