 Thank you very much, Chairman, for your introduction to Irish audiences here. It's my pleasure to be here. I was hosted by the Korean Embassy to explain about South Korea's policy toward North Korea or unification issues. So I prepared a PowerPoint presentation, but it's got like 27 slides. It's too long to cover all the slides here. So I thought about this morning. So I'm going to have about 20 minutes. Certain aspects of Korean unification so that you can understand. This is not going to be a completely official interpretation of South Korea's policy. In some part, this is a reflection of myself, my research during the last 25 years since I joined my institution. Actually, I need to talk about the foundation of my institution. So Korea Institute of National Unification was formed in 1991. It reflects at the time Germany was unified in 1990, and Korean people thought about why it's not us. So it was too late to establish a think tank to prepare for Korean unification. But during those times, our institution was formed in 1991. We are completely, I mean, 100% fully funded by government. So I joined my institution after I started in the United States in the 1980s. I explained during our lunchtime. And I had a vision to build an institution like the economic European community in the Asia-Pacific. So that we can have a permanent peace in Korean Peninsula. So I started my study in 1982, and I earned my PhD in 1989. During those times, it was colder war era. And I thought, well, probably I can break these eyes with the formation of economic entity in the Asia-Pacific. Unfortunately, or because I lack my predictive capability to see the future. In 1989, APEC, Asia-Pacific Economic Community was initiated among the countries of capitalist countries. So this is my limitation. So after I joined my institute institution, I tried to have some solution to Korean question. If I exaggerate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week during the last 24 years, 25 years. But I regret I didn't have capability to move our countries too close together to unify. Even an inch. So this is my limitation. So let me begin with my slide. I will briefly talk about, this is about governmental position. And then number two is my research. Number three is my vision. Or a group of colleagues who was sharing my ideas. So it responds slowly, sometimes fast. Okay, as everybody knows, South Korean peninsula was divided in 1945. The time China and Russia. And now in 2015, still we are surrounded by four powers. During those 70 years, we had achieved economic development and democratization. But what happened to North Korea? They are proud of having the third succession from the grandfather to son and grandson. Maintaining extreme dictatorship. And the unification in the environment is we launched six party talks in 2000. And we had a very important agreement among the six parties in 2005. But North Koreans do not keep the promises. And the sixth party is stolen. South Korea has tested nuclear bomb three times already. And the thing is that these relations among these four countries are also very complicated. They have different interests in the Korean peninsula. Except that maintaining status quo or maintaining peace or the unstable peace. I'll explain that then come back here. And inside North Korea, Kim Jong-un inherited his power from his father, Kim Jong-il, three, four years ago. And then, but as you know, the North Korea has been reliant on the self-reliant economy. Is having big trouble with this economy. It's also society is dismantled. And come back to the policy environment for South Korea. Perhaps many people think that South Korea's people would like to have Korean unification. But the problem is how. We do not have consensus on how to achieve Korean unification. Everybody thinks Korean unification is desirable and is necessary. On the question of how we have a division between the conservatives and the liberals. And about the will to pursue unification. This is another problem. Well, think about the time when Korea was unified. Which in 1945, the situation was Korea was colony of Japan. And we lived very poor. And we divided because South Korea, I mean the Korean Peninsula was the colony of Japan. All those generations who lived, who were born before 1945. When that population occupies majority of South Korean people. It was rather easy to pursue the Korean unification. For them, it's almost like no question. But for those people who have not experienced unified Korea. But if you look at the demography of South Korea. Surprisingly, those people who were born before 1945. It says it's only about less than 10%. It's that the population, the percentage of the population is decreasing. But if you think of, you have, you, those people are less than 10% of population. So for those people, the younger generation, they do not know what the unified Korea was. My generation, I just heard from my father, talked about the unified Korea. How it looked. So for the younger generation, they do not know exactly why. And so this is another problem for South Korea. Whether do we really have capability to change North Korean behavior so that we can unify. That's the problem. So this is why the South Korean president, current president Park Geun-hye came up with the idea. Saying the unification of Bonanza. So in 2013, when she came into the office, the presidential office. Well, she found out that there's a widespread apathy toward unification among Korean public. It's surprising. I'm running the regular survey towards Korean people. When you're asked whether it is necessary to pursue unification, almost everybody says yes. Then when you're asked how much money would you put into, how much effort would you make? And their answer is $100,000 which is like $100 per year, which is very small money for the unification. So President Park suggested that this unification Bonanza idea. So it was quite a success. She drew attention from the Korean public and mass media and also from the international community. So she launched the unification preparation committee in 2014 and they are doing extensive research on how to unify South Korea. And I don't know whether we can actually have this kind of opportunity. Another interaction and exchanges in cooperation during this Park Geun-hye administration. Not certain, but South Korea's policy is about that. The fundamental difference between previous administrations unification policy and the current administration policy is our attitude towards North Korea or towards unification policy is more proactive. We are reactive because North Korean problem is a headache. So those previous administrations, they just reacted toward North Korea's behavior. President Park Geun-hye decided to move forward. So that's why she is emphasizing more international support for our effort for Korean unification. This is about last year's unification preparation committee, her speech. And then she made a speech at Dresden in Germany last year. The recent speech and the 70th anniversary of liberation. This is the important stuff. What she said was we want to achieve another miracle. Because the South Korea's economy, what we call it, the miracle of Han River. Another miracle on the Korean peninsula. Also mentioned about the 100th anniversary probably we can realize. Many pundits say, well, we're going to have unification today or last year, 2015. But this kind of nonsense. It's going to take time. So South Korea's basic policy is to lay your foundation for peace for unification. That's what the policy goal of South Korea is. So current administration. You're not going to see the, well, it can happen tomorrow. But that's not a rational way of thinking. So she mentioned about this 100th anniversary. She wanted to see the actual unification in reality. Mentioned in the 70th anniversary, the address by the president. Okay, this is a very rational or about 30 years we can achieve the actual unification. This is about today's title of unification. This is more of idealistic kind of structure or architecture for unification. We need first nuclear free. We need to get rid of nuclear bomb from North Korea. That's for the nuclear free peace. This is advocated by President Obama. And market economy piece, they should adopt market economy. So the whole world runs under the principle of market economy. And as you know, the democratic piece, the theory. Those regimes who have run under the principle of democracy do not fight this democratic piece. And market economy, the less prone to go to war. Those capitalist countries. This is a foundation for our new peace structure. And then we can have the tasks for unification preparation period and unification process period and normal state period. I will explain this a little bit. Obviously our government or our research community did not break down specifically this unification process. Because it's complicated process and also it's about the future. And it raises a lot of disputes or quarrels among the conservatives and between conservatives and the liberals about how to achieve unification. So a group of scholars, including myself, thought about how to do away with this unnecessary debate. So this is kind of a generalized model. If you were to unify certain countries, one party to the other. So focused more on the temporal dimension. This is where I call the put it more simply and sort of help your understanding. This is current or the time where we were divided. We started to make an effort to unify at the time when we were divided. You can say that way. Or you can think of the current. And this is the time when the two parties decided to go for unification more seriously. So I call it the engagement. And this is definitely marriage. Unification declaration. So you need at least this kind of period, time period. Seriously, two parties agreed to go for actual unification. That's necessary. Unless that kind of measure is taken, it's impossible. I researched on almost all cases of unification cases. In Vietnam or Yemenis and Germany and other research. All other cases. We need this period. This is very critical. And then after the unification we'll have a system integration. Here comes the, we're going to learn a lot from the integration effort made during the process of having integration, European integration from EC to EU and so on. Then I see the whole process here is nation building. So that's why I called the subtitle a new career. I do not like to use the word reunification. Because I would say like those people who are older than 70, 80 years old who lived under, like I said before, under the unified Korea, probably except, probably including those people. Nobody inside South Korea want to go back to the situation where we were unified. We are very poor. We are a colony of Japan. We do not want to go back. We're going to have to move forward. So I do not want to use the reunification. So it's going to be, it should be a new unification. Well, this is about, so many people asked me about how we can enter into that kind of situation. To actually pursue a unification. So this is a very complicated process. So all these thoughts shared my colleagues in Korea. We previously, we had this kind of simple idea about the unification. Because the division itself was made by international parties in 1945 against our will because we had no power. So they, international parties, they decided our fate to become divided. So that South Korea had been one for a long time. So it is divided. We came two. So that's a wrong situation. So we have to correct the wrong. The fundamental approach should come from the politics, political areas. We should make a political deal with the other party. So this is, I call it a one-dimensional approach. And the current administration came up with another idea. Well, this is about politics. We have our own problem. South Korea has problems as all the other capitalist countries have. South Korean population is aging. So demographic demographic is very, you know, so we need another economic vitality to revitalize our economy. So the current administration starts to think about what's good, what kind of benefits we can get from the unification. So put more emphasis on economics. Basically, with the integration with North Korea, we can have access to the Asian continent. We can have Landerwood, I don't know how to say this. And also for some certain job creation for the younger generation. Especially as you know, the younger generation, they are more concerned about their job as has happened in Europe. So that's a big problem for our country. So with unification, probably we can have another dynamic opportunity to provide us a breakthrough of our own problem. This is the fundamental philosophy behind the current administration's policy for proactive forward for unification. And my thinking is still this is two dimensional approach. We need to create a new future so that we can have comprehensive solution to the politics, political relations and economic relations and also societal relations. We're going to suffer from many things during the process of actual unification. Many people will suffer. So we need to provide certain answers or at least we need to be prepared for that kind of thing. This is called the three dimensional approach and somebody called it version 3.0. So this does not mean this one dimensional approach is not important. It should be a foundation for the second, third. And these thinking is shared by older generations. Those people in the 60s and 70s, they primarily, I mean they think that unification issue is primarily a political issue. And this is shared, second dimensional approach is shared by my generation in the 40s and 50s. They're more practical to get another opportunity to revive our own economy. And this is for our next generation, those to 20s and 30s. I'm trying to teach them to get the opportunity in the future. And I ran this unification project, the research project during the last five years. Inviting international parties so that they can think about Korean unification more seriously. So first the target was those research communities in the four powers, United States, China and Japan and Russia. And I published in 2013 containing those thinking in reflecting their ideas. And then last year I asked G20 countries except minus these four powers. Let's say like Argentina and Brazil. Probably you think about whether those countries have any relationship with the Korean unification issues. But they did have actually good ideas. So I requested this G20 countries research community about what kind of things they can get from Korean unification. And what kind of roles they would play during the process of Korean unification. So that was published in 2014 under the title of global expectation on Korean unification. And then I asked a research community who had gone through the integration and unification actually during the last after World War II especially like South Africa about reconciliation. They had a good history of making reconciliation. And Irish scholar had Romania and six, seven different countries research community. I asked them what kind of lessons we can get. So it was published in English. And I asked them what kind of things we should not do and what kind of things we should do. I think I didn't like it. Korea has a middle power and our finish up with just one short comment. I believe that we were divided because we were separated from the outside world in 1945. At the time the South Korea leadership of Korean Peninsula didn't know what the international community is. We didn't have power. South Korea's economic development itself reflects. It goes with the process of globalization. We owe very much because we adopted export oriented economic growth strategy. North Korea, as you know, adopted import substitution policies, self-reliance in common. Cut to their ties with the outside world as South Korea maintains and expands our trade without all the world. So we owe very much from this globalization process. Put it differently. We owe very much to global society. It's not only South Korean people's effort to make our country become G20 or currently in a prosperous economy. Other countries helped us. This is all interconnected economy. So it's time for us to pay back to the global society by implementing our unification policy. In that way we will be welcomed by the international community. Otherwise it will not be easy to pursue our policies here. Well, it's because of our time limitation. It's a very complicated research and I try to be simple. But if you have questions then I'll answer to that during my Q&A session. Thank you for your listening.