 Okay, we're back, we're live, I'm Jay Fidel, it's a given Monday, here we're going to do Think Tech Asia, and we're going to talk about inter-Korean relations and the Pyongyang Winter Olympics with two Korean professors who just happened to know each other. Actually they're married. One is Professor Yoon Kyung-na, that's the lady at my left, and Siok Woo Lee, Yoon Kyung-na is at Yonsei University, and Siok Woo Lee is at Inha University, and they're close enough so they can actually be husband and wife, live together, was it near Seoul, no, near Incheon? Near Seoul. Near Seoul. Near Seoul, okay, okay. The funny thing is that we all know that Korea is of interest in Hawaii, and it's of interest maybe lesser in the United States. But recently, and thanks to Kim Jong-un, I suppose we should thank him for this, people have paid more attention to Korea than ever before, really, since the war, actually. And that's why the Korean Games, the Olympic Game, Winter Games now in Pyongyang are so important and interesting to everyone because it's a magnet, it's a lightning rod for everything, okay? And that's what we're going to talk about today. And if you don't mind, I'm going to talk to the lady first, okay? Because lady's first, right? So let me explain what I mean by that. Yoon Kyung-na is studied, and you've been on the show before to talk about this, yeah? About feminism and women's rights, and women's rights play into the Olympics. So let's talk about that first. And this is about comfort women during World War II, right? How does that play into the Olympics right now? Actually Japanese Prime Minister Abe came to Korea to participate in an opening ceremony of Pyongyang Olympics. And the issue that he raised with our President Moon was, you know, a comfort woman. Actually in 2015, our ex-President Park and Abe made kind of agreement about how to solve the comfort women issues between two nations. And the way that they reached agreement was not agreed by the Korean people in general and comfort women themselves. So many of Korean people just want to make it redone and redo it again, redo it. So what was the flaw? What was missing from the agreement made earlier? They didn't participate in these comfort women's opinions in the agreement. So it wasn't reflected in the agreement itself. But how is the agreement less than accurate? Actually they never asked for money from the Japanese government, but they agreed to give them money. It wasn't that big money, nonetheless. Reparations. Right, right. But they didn't ask for the money. They did ask apology, since the apology from the Japanese government. But the agreement didn't include that part. So most of Korean things that you have to be redone by this newly born government. I mean, the regime of President Moon. But Abe is quite angry about it and he would never take the request of Korean citizens. But he this time brought about the issue again with President Moon. But he said, but we don't know how it goes. You mean it's not done yet? No. They're still talking? Yes. In the past, during the Olympic Games, the Korean government and the U.S. government agreed upon delaying the U.S., how do they call this, both sides of regular exercise. Even the military exercise? Right. Right. We decided to delay the military exercise during the Olympic Games. But Abe didn't want it. He wanted to go ahead with the exercise. Right, right. So he asked President Moon that you shouldn't delay the exercise. And President Moon said, that's our domestic matters. You shouldn't be involved in this kind of decision. So there is an issue between two nations. And when you say issue, you mean they don't agree? Right, right. They don't agree. So this is very interesting. As I was speculating earlier, the Olympics is a kind of magnet for all these issues and anything could come up, even if it wouldn't otherwise come up. So you have here what, President Moon is asking Abe to re-do the agreement, or is Abe asking Moon to re-do the agreement? So what are their respective positions then on how the agreement should be redone? It should be more inclusive of comfort women's opinions. Ah, okay, okay. And that would be specifically what points? I mean, as I told you before, since the apology from the Japanese government. So the comfort women would be entitled under the new agreement to an apology from the Japanese government? Mm-hmm. That didn't happen before? No. Interesting that it didn't happen before, because it would seem obvious. Right. I guess it was some interesting negotiations that went on before. Actually, it was before, but Abe's regime kind of reversed it. Okay. Mm-hmm. So Abe wants to be conciliatory about this, am I right? Is it? True. No, the Japanese position and Abe's position is that they want to close this issue as early as possible. He wants to. He wants to close it. Right. He wants to satisfy the expectations of the comfort women. Yes. That's good of him, isn't it? Yes. And from that agreement, so-called that this, you know, we don't have any tax version of the agreement. It's the post-conference, they buy the two ministers of the foreign affairs to countries that make a speech statement what they agree, right? And in the agreement, so that the agreement, they want to close that the comfort women issues, they completely and inversely. So that as you mentioned, that that agreement does not reflect fully about what the victims they want, so that after change of the government, the South of Korea, the government, they investigate what is going on at the time. And that the team declared that there is some issues to come out to that issue, so that they have to say that it is unable, they are not able to comply with the agreement. So that is now one of the hard issues between Korea and Japan. And over the issues where the Abe participated in the Pyeongchang Olympics, the Japanese that that issues was big obstacles for Japan, so Abe to participate in the opening ceremony. So when they have a meeting between the Japan and Korea, they talk about the issues or said, but as you mentioned that they had, you know, they have disagreements on the issues still, right? Now the agreement only concerns the comfort women or is there more to it than that? The debt issues are about the comfort women issues. That is so interesting. So how is this going to wind up? I mean, right now, is it an active negotiation right now or is it waiting for the Olympics to be over? Where are we going on this? Maybe not during the Olympic Games because it's a peaceful day. Everybody should be smile, happy, okay, but after the games are over, they'll get to it. I suppose there's plenty of pressure that they should finish the job. So what do you think will happen? Will the comfort women, will they be represented in this deal? Will there be an appropriate topology? For the time being, it should be very difficult for both sides of nations because Japanese citizens and Korean citizens are not agree upon the agreement that Abe and our ex-president made. So I think it will go on for the time being. Oh gee, too bad. I mean, it seems clear what should happen. Is it a matter of face? Is that what we're talking about here? I mean, are there other diplomatic issues under the surface that make it hard for them to come together or is it just a question of national face? Not only comfort women. The comfort women is one of the issues derived from the Japanese colonization over Korea. And we also have some territory that many time issues between two countries. And also forced labor issues. So that when I come here to talk about the legacy of the late Professor Jombandai, I briefly mentioned about the what kinds of issues we have with Japan. And all the issues derived from that colonial period is not solved at all. Still at this moment, you know, we got independence in 1945. It's still, in the 70 years, more than 70 years have passed. But still we're talking about the past issues. Yeah. Well, to take this out for a minute, take the comfort women issue out. Take this agreement out. Can you tell me what the current diplomatic and popular relationship is between Korea and Japan? Is it friendly? How friendly? Aside from this issue, are there other points of contention? I think the diplomatic and also the strategic perspective is quite hard. Because as you know, that traditional alliance should go to the United States, Japan and Korea at the one side. And the other one is maybe Russia and China and the North Korea. But at this moment, it's quite a different posture we experience in these days. Because the United States wants Korea to talk with Japan in a more favorable condition. But the dead issues are still to the side that cannot overcome easily. So that stands in the way. Yeah. And also, you know, in terms of the issues of the U.S. soil deployment in the Korean Peninsula, it carries the tension between Korea and China. But as you know, the economic ties between China and Korea is very strong in these days. So that the one aspect of the economic relations and the other relations based on the security issues, it's a little bit difficult to pin down how these self-critical governments to put that diplomatic, the posture for the future. So in a sense that this Pyeongchang Olympics, they provide us with a very good momentum in some sense. Although we have to see what will happen after the Olympics. But the Korean government in particular, the President Moon's emphasis on the Korean Peninsula issue is that, you know, so-called the sit-in-the-driver-sit. He wants to sit-in-the-driver-sit to drive the, want to be a main driver for the Korean Peninsula issues. But the issue is that the atmosphere surrounding the car is not quite easily to navigate. So that the issues also give us some of the difficulties for the United States how give South Korea to navigate idea, how to move. So what's the, what's the sea change on this? I mean, I take it that the Olympics and an opportunity for discussing this kind of issue. The Olympics in general causes people to look at it and see what, you know, what is the nature of the relationship we're working together on this, we're together in Pyeongchang. But what's the sea change? Are things getting better? Are they getting more friendly? Are they getting less friendly? Are they the same? It's quite interesting thing to start looking back the history between inter-Korean relations. We had two inter-Korean summit meetings, a trend year 2000 and year 207. The time the Korea was governed by the Democratic, or so-called the progressive regime, which emphasized the engagements rather than isolation of North Korea. And this Pyeongchang is, I think, in a sense, quite a good moment, because only when South Korea has the progressive regime, in the Olympic games, either Olympic games or the sports games, we have a chance to have a united team, right? No chances we can see that when conservative parties, the words are ruling a party, the governing party. So that this is maybe a good moment to change the whole situation, because it's the beginning of the new government. But the thing is that the atmosphere will change whenever the North Korea, a little bit, you know, give us the, you know, different signs. You know, this Pyeongchang participation, this Pyeongchang from the North Korea, gave us some sense. North Korea wants to talk, maybe talk to South Korea, through the South Korea to the United States, give us some message how the sphere will be changed for the future. But like what North Korea did, like the launch of the missiles, or the development of the nuclear system, they may be, you know, very powerful strong the backlash inside of the Korea too. So that I want to see that if North Korea, they give us the South Korea to play a room, they give us the very good benefits that many, many stakeholders in this region. Although, you know, we are kind of suspicious of North Korea's strategy, giving kind of confusing messages all the time. You know, reunification is not just political matters, it is also cultural matters. We know that they are sending two confusing messages. But, you know, whenever we see the two nations combined into one team, the mood or our, you know, emotional level toward North Korea is changing. What is it changing to? I mean, we feel more friendly about not North Korean regime, but North Korean people, right? We kind of feel a lot of sympathy or... They're family. Yeah, we are. So it's not just political matters, it's just, it is very emotional and cultural matters too. So, you know, although they are sending two confusing messages, having this kind of event as a one team is very important. Well, yeah. On the other hand, you know, Kim Jong-un is not a stranger to playing games. And I don't mean sports games. I mean, diplomatic games. And I mentioned to you that there was a discussion on National Public Radio on Saturday, which I thought was very interesting, where they were making this comparison between the sports games and the Kim Jong-un games, and saying that, you know, he knew how you feel, you, the South Koreans, feel about North Korea, how tantalizing it is for you to think that in our lifetimes, there's a possibility of reconciliation of one Korea. Wouldn't that be fabulous? Just thinking about it now today with you, it's fabulous. But maybe he's just taking advantage of that. But we are not being misled by his strategy. We know there's another mess. You know, he plays games. But I want to enjoy this moment, you know, after the two nations between one, this kind of emotional cultural unification is very important. After the two nations become one, without, what if I have just antagonism or enemy kind of feelings about them, how can we beat one nations, you know? Yeah, yeah. We're going to take a short break. Okay, when we come back, I really want to hear about how you think this is going to play out after the Olympics. You know, it's really nice to see, you know, the touchy-feely things happening during the Olympics. But the question is, what is the long game? Or even the intermediate game that he's playing? So exciting. I can hardly wait till this break is over. Good afternoon. My name is Howard Wigg. I am the proud host of Code Green, a program on Think Tech Hawaii. We show at three o'clock in the afternoon every other Monday. My guests are specialists, both from here and the mainland, on energy efficiency, which means you do more for less electricity and you're generally safer and more comfortable while you're keeping dollars in your pocket. Hey, aloha, standing energy man here on Think Tech Hawaii, where community matters. This is the place to come to think about all things energy. We talk about energy for the grid, energy for vehicles, energy and transportation, energy and maritime, energy and aviation. We have all kinds of things on our show, but we always focus on hydrogen here in Hawaii. Because it's my favorite thing. That's what I like to do. But we talk about things that make a difference here in Hawaii, things that should be a big changer for Hawaii. And we hope that you'll join us every Friday at noon on Stand the Energy Man and take a look with us at new technologies and new thoughts on how we can get clean and green in Hawaii. Aloha. Okay, we're back. We're live and now we get to the most interesting part about speculating into the future. Two professors to help us do this. So we're in suspended animation. Okay, the exercises that were planned are, I guess, being suspended for a little while. We're talking about sort of olive branch kind of messages that have been sent. At the same time, we have nuclear threats that have been sent. And somehow the Olympic Games, as they often are in the world, become a lightning rod, a pivot point. And you have to look down the other side of that and figure out how the Olympic Games have affected these issues, what's going to happen on the other side. So I guess my question is, what is going to happen on the other side? Where are we going to go? I mean, they don't last forever. You know, they end. They're going to end pretty soon. What's going to happen? Who's going to know the right answer? But I think after we have good mood between North Korea and South Korea, I think it will be very hard for Kim Jong-un to find very good rationale to shoot a missile again, right? He sent his sister, you know, try to talk. He's going to look bad. If he starts making threats right after the Games are over, it's going to depreciate any value that he might have had in the world view. They're going to think he's just, you know, playing games. I don't think he want to look like a kind of irrational, I mean, towards the world. I mean, he tried to look good. I mean, especially better than Trump does. So I think after having good atmosphere and mood and cultural reunification and seeing each other's cultural performance, I think it will be very hard for him to, you know, shoot a missile again. So I personally think it's quite a good idea to make him difficult to find out a good reason to, you know, shoot a missile. On a moral level, or at least an appearance level. Now, you've been writing about and studying security, maritime security and other security. And that, I guess, you know, refers a lot to the security between the two Koreas and in that region. So how do you feel about this? You know, if I had something about the discussion, is that, you know, if we look at the history of the inter-Korean relations, and I think South Korea already paid a lot of tuition. So we know what will be going on after Olympics. I think it is a bit premature to say that North Korea, they abandoned the nuclear program. That is my personal understanding. However, if you look at, right now, the geopolitical, the security dynamics in North Asia, I don't think that North Korea is only a key player to contribute to the instability of the region. Who else? Right. I believe that it's the United States. You heard it here on Think Tech. Right. And it's quite odd to hear about support. You know, the bloat knows the policy and preventive the attack against North Korea, despite the fact that the strong ally in South Korea, they want to be a seat in the driving seat. And I think the law of the United States should be limited, as I mentioned, as the navigation. So if you drive your car, you pretty much refer that to the navigation, right? But if you know the way, and also you can sometimes refer that to what the navigation says, but who decides the driver? But if the navigation is to say too much, I don't think that is a good thing for the driver. So my understanding of the whole situation is that after Olympics, still there is some concerns. North Korean tactics of strategy is not what we think, but I think despite the fact that we have to engage more with North Korea rather than isolation and give us the more time for inter-Korean relations to talk directly, bilaterally. You know, since then maybe United States feel a little bit uncomfortable, so-called the Trump passing, do not refer to the Trump march, and directly talk to the inter-Korean to decide a very important one, let's say more of the concrete pathway for the future of the inter-Korean relations. They may be a bit uncomfortable to the United States, but however that if that is what really people want to live in that area, I believe the United States give the way for them to move again. Now there was a piece in the New York Times today for the proposition, and I can't give you the detail on this, but for the proposition that to the extent that there's the possibility of rapprochement between North and South, this actually undermines American influence, the Trump administration's influence in North Korea, and especially with South Korea, with whom the United States has had a very close relationship for many, many years. So do you agree or disagree with that? No, I partially agree with that, and there is a possibility, you know, the United States, the government, just strongly believe that what happened in Korean Peninsula currently is not good with the U.S. national security interests. However, as I mentioned, what will be the future of the national interests of the United States, the stability of the region is, I believe, the best, so that do not provoke much against what North Korea is doing. And in a sense, looking back at the small story about what happened in the Pyongyang Olympics, the vice president, the Pan's, do not even talk to the people that came from the North. I don't think that he didn't need that. That was silly, wasn't it? Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. He missed a really good opportunity. He came out of a very small on that. Right, I think he would have been restful about it. I mean, it was a great opportunity, you know, to initiate the relationship between North Korea and the U.S. And it wouldn't have hurt anybody, you know? Right. It's just being friendly, what's wrong with that, you know? Look for a possibility of peace. Right, right. His personal emotion could be like that, but it's diplomatic side. You know, he should have been more diplomatic with that matter. Well, this administration is not known for the nuance of his diplomatic policy. But let me ask you one last question, okay? And I think I have part of the answer. We only have a minute or two left here. What is your advice to the United States now? It's as I mentioned that the repeatedly I want to emphasize is that United States do not provoke that the stakeholders in the region, like South Korea and North Korea. South Korea want to do based on what they believe. I mean, back out? Is that what you mean? No, not the back out. But as I mentioned that the law of the navigation, right, to give us some advice, but not the provoke directly using the term of the so-called the broad-nose policy or the prevent. The Twitter approach. Right, right. So that as I mentioned that who is a key player in the make instability in North Asia, I believe that the Kim Jong-un and North Korea is one of them, right? But I really hope that Trump will be, not will be the second. More reserved. Yeah, more. The key player for the purpose. So what about Kim Jong-un? He's complex. He's a very interesting man. They will be writing about him for a thousand years. Right. But what is your advice to him? What do you think he should do for the benefit of his country and for the benefit of the possibility, however large or small it may be of reunification? I just want him to be serious about the destiny of the peoples of the peninsula. Don't take advantage of the fact that two nations are divided. I don't know if he has that kind of ability, but he should be. He should be very sincere, more sincere. As a Korean person. Right, right, right. And Mr. Moon, what's your advice to him? It's not an easy question. Actually, I think he tries to make a balance between progressive citizens and very conservative citizens. He tries to be balanced, but sometimes he'll listen to what he's heart saying. So, yeah. He can't go too far wrong if he listens to your heart. Thank you, professor. Nice to meet you. Thank you, professor. So nice to have you here. Our conversation is only starting this morning, I'm sure. Okay, thank you. Aloha. Aloha.