[Kim Seong-kon] The importance of diplomacy

Korea used to be called “a country of courteous people in the East.” According to the epithet, the Korean people valued politesse, courtesy and propriety in the past. Korea was also known as the “Hermit Kingdom” and “the Land of the Morning Calm.” Such descriptions indicate that the Korean people were traditionally a peaceful, reclusive people living in a serene country unknown to the rest of the world. 

Modern Koreans, however, seem to be neither particularly courteous, nor reclusive. Indeed, few Koreans display decorum or shyness these days. Instead, Koreans tend to be blunt, impetuous and aggressive. When a plane is delayed, for example, Koreans immediately rush to the airline counter to complain, request apologies or demand a refund. I have traveled to many countries and have noticed that foreigners seldom complain when a plane is delayed. For example, I was at the Minneapolis Airport last year when a flight was delayed for four hours due to bad weather. Amazingly, no one complained, most likely because you cannot blame an airline for bad weather. Also, perhaps Americans are more understanding of unintentional inconveniences. Koreans, however, tend to demand that airlines assume full responsibility for delays, no matter the cause.

Generally speaking, Koreans are not good at diplomatic gestures. Rather, they tend to be outspoken, impulsive and antagonistic. When there is a meeting between management and labor, for example, few Koreans attend the meeting to negotiate; they go in with the intention of winning. Thus, diplomatic solutions are hard to come by in Korean society. Koreans do not seem to be good at hiding their feelings and prefer straight talk. Once, a foreigner pointed out that Koreans regularly use the expression “frankly speaking” when conversing in English. It seems the frequent use of the word shows Koreans’ preference for blunt dialogue. Sadly, Koreans do not realize that our tendency for bluntness often results in serious disadvantages.

A few years ago, when I was a visiting professor at an American university, I witnessed Korean graduate students organize a meeting to protest the department’s inclination to award teaching assistantships to American students. The Korean students demanded equal treatment and opportunities to teach. While I was sympathetic to their plight, the problem was that the Korean students could not speak English well enough to teach American students. In fact, professors often complained they could not understand Korean students in their graduate seminars because of their poor English proficiency. Besides, teaching assistants in the English Department teach English composition courses. How, then, could the Korean students possibly teach college-level composition courses? To make matters worse, the Korean students did not try to persuade administrators diplomatically. Instead, they were cantankerous and even belligerent. I was astonished by their bravado and wished they would approach the issue tactfully. But they just doggedly pressed on.

Initially, both the chair of the department and the director of the English composition program were hesitant to award teaching assistantships to the Korean students. But because they were persistent in their demands, the administrators finally gave them a chance to teach. After reviewing course evaluations at the end of the semester, the department chair found that the Korean teaching assistants performed far below a satisfactory level, and they were subsequently relieved from their teaching duties.

The Korean students were not on great terms with the department for another reason. At the time of admission, the students had promised the department that they had sufficient funds for their study and would not request financial support for the first two to three years of their graduate careers. Within one year, however, they began rather audaciously demanding financial assistance, breaking their initial promises. Nevertheless, even such a big problem may have been resolved if approached diplomatically and discreetly. Unfortunately, however, the students failed to solve the problem suavely and proceeded to raise hell. The outcome was bitter; the next academic year, the English Department did not admit any applicants from Korea, perhaps for the first time in its history.

I hope our politicians will rise above the temptation to be brash, and will handle complex international conflicts skillfully and diplomatically, instead of creating friction and enmity. Many knowledgeable strategists and scholars have commented on the importance of diplomacy.

For example, as Sun Tzu wisely wrote, “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.” Scholar Will Durant once said, “To say nothing, especially when speaking, is half the art of diplomacy.” Henry Kissinger, too, wrote, “Diplomacy is the art of restraining power.” And Bo Bennett sensibly advised, “Diplomacy is more than saying or doing the right things at the right time. It is avoiding saying or doing the wrong things at any time.” There is also a saying that diplomacy means never having to say “No.” I hope our politicians learn from these wise men and safely steer the nation through the treacherous storms of international conflicts. Otherwise, we will end up stranded in the stormy sea.

By Kim Seong-kon 

Kim Seong-kon is a professor of English at Seoul National University and president of the Literature Translation Institute of Korea. ― Ed.