AJU PRESS ASIA FIRST NEWS AGENCY

Journalist

Lee Jung-woo
Lee Jung-woo이정우
ReporterMinistry of Unification & North Korea, Politics, Foreign Affairs
I studied philosophy in college, and sociology and journalism in graduate school. I cover North Korea, South Korean politics, foreign affairs and films. I enjoy Nordic cinema, Indian cuisine and Japanese detective novels. I have a cat and like bright, acidic coffee.
"Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter."
Latest by Lee Jung-woo
  • Türkiyes NATO moment arrives, but the price of trust remains unpaid
    Türkiye's NATO moment arrives, but the price of trust remains unpaid SEOUL, July 09 (AJP) - For years, Türkiye occupied an uncomfortable place inside NATO: too important to expel, too difficult to embrace. It was the ally that bought a Russian air defense system over Washington’s objections. The country that refused to join Western sanctions against Moscow after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The state that could sell drones to Kyiv while keeping open channels to the Kremlin. The government whose president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, jailed critics at home while presenting himself abroad as a broker among presidents, generals and strongmen. But at this week’s NATO summit in Ankara, the old language of irritation gave way to the language of necessity. Türkiye was not the problem child standing outside the room. It was the host. That fact alone captured one of the central shifts in the alliance since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022: NATO’s most awkward members can also become some of its most useful. And few countries have turned wartime disorder into strategic leverage as effectively as Türkiye. The summit brought together the leaders of NATO’s 32 member states at a moment when the alliance is trying to rearm at speed, prepare for a diminished American security guarantee, sustain Ukraine, contain Russia and widen defense-industrial cooperation beyond Europe and North America. It was also attended by partner countries, including South Korea, whose president, Lee Jae Myung, used the gathering to pitch Seoul as a reliable supplier and co-producer in NATO’s expanding defense market. Yet the summit’s deeper story belonged to Turkey. More precisely, it belonged to the strange return of Turkish power inside an alliance that had spent much of the past decade wondering whether Ankara was drifting away from the West. The clearest sign came from President Donald Trump, who met Erdogan on the sidelines of the summit and said the United States would move to lift sanctions on Türkiye imposed over its purchase of Russia’s S-400 air defense system. Trump also said he would consider allowing Turkey to acquire F-35 fighter jets, though he stopped short of announcing a completed sale. For Ankara, that was not just an arms issue. It was a symbolic reopening of a door that had been slammed shut in 2019, when the United States removed Türkiye from the F-35 program over fears that the Russian system could expose the stealth jet’s vulnerabilities to Moscow. For NATO, it was something larger: a test of whether the alliance’s need for Türkiye has grown strong enough to overcome its mistrust of Türkiye. The return of the indispensable ally Türkiye’s rise has not come from a sudden ideological return to the West. It has come from the opposite: Ankara’s insistence on not fully belonging to any camp. That ambiguity once made Türkiye suspect. Now, in a world of overlapping wars and unstable alliances, it has made Türkiye useful. Türkiye sits at the hinge of the Black Sea and the Mediterranean. It controls the Bosporus and the Dardanelles, giving it influence over naval access between Russia’s Black Sea fleet and the wider world. It has the second-largest army in NATO after the United States. Its defense industry has become faster, cheaper and more export-oriented. Its drones, ships, armored vehicles and air defense systems are increasingly visible in conflicts from Ukraine to the Caucasus, Africa and the Middle East. And unlike many Western governments, Ankara has kept open channels to Moscow. That has allowed Erdogan to play a role that few other NATO leaders can plausibly attempt: arming one side while talking to the other. “The initial boost to Türkiye’s role was the result of its efforts to mediate between the two sides, despite Ankara being inside NATO and providing TB2 drones to Ukraine to defend itself from Russia in 2022,” said Matteo Fumagalli, director of the Institute of Middle East, Central Asia and the Caucasus Studies (MECACS) at the University of St Andrews. “These included high-level meetings in Istanbul, which culminated in the Istanbul Protocol. Nothing came out of it in the end, but the efforts made Turkey an actor regarded as legitimate and acceptable by all parties.” The Istanbul talks did not end the war. But they changed the diplomatic perception of Türkiye. Ankara was not neutral in the strict sense. It was a NATO member. It had sold weapons to Ukraine. It had blocked some naval movements through the Turkish Straits. But it also did not close its door to Russia. That combination — partial alignment, partial distance — has become the core of Türkiye’s post-Ukraine-war influence. Timo Kivimäki, professor of international relations at the University of Bath and a senior non-resident fellow at the Sejong Institute, described Türkiye as part of a new category of states whose value lies not in unquestioned loyalty but in diplomatic independence. “I think Türkiye has earned its peace superpower role by working independently and competently for peace,” he said. “They are a NATO country, yet, in many international conflict they can take distance from their NATO commitments, and that is what makes them valuable.” For decades, Western alliance politics rewarded predictability. The Ukraine war has rewarded a different quality: access. Access to Moscow. Access to Kyiv. Access to Washington. Access to the Middle East. Access to military production capacity. Türkiye has all of them. A war that weakened Russia and strengthened Türkiye The Ukraine war has helped Türkiye in both direct and indirect ways. Directly, it made Türkiye a necessary actor in the Black Sea. Ankara helped broker the Black Sea grain corridor, one of the few diplomatic arrangements that temporarily eased the war’s global economic fallout. It also launched a minesweeping initiative with Romania and Bulgaria to keep parts of the western Black Sea safer for shipping. Rick Fawn, professor of international relations at the University of St Andrews, said Turkey had emerged as one of the clearest beneficiaries of the war’s strategic disruption. “If there is one single conclusion it is that Türkiye is the ‘winner.’ Ankara cleverly does its own thing,” he said. Fawn said Türkiye had become the “lynchpin to Black Sea security and that of NATO’s eastern flank,” but always “on its own terms.” That phrase — on its own terms — is essential. Türkiye’s usefulness to NATO has not made it more obedient. It has made it more demanding. Ankara has used its leverage to seek relief from defense restrictions, access to European security initiatives and the revival of a weapons relationship with Washington. At the summit, Erdogan called for NATO allies to remove defense-industry restrictions against one another, arguing that exclusionary practices, including those linked to European Union membership, risked creating artificial divisions inside Europe. The indirect effects of the Ukraine war may be just as important. Stefanie Ortmann, professor of international relations at the University of Sussex, said Russia’s weakening has opened strategic space for Türkiye beyond Ukraine itself. “Some of this is a direct effect, as Erdogan has been able to maintain and indeed extend good relations with Russia, while also maintaining and extending relations with Ukraine," she observed, while noting the war weakened Russia’s ability to sustain influence in other regions. “Russia has been weakened by the invasion insofar as it has been unable to maintain its engagement in other parts of the world,” she said. “Russia has stopped supporting Armenia in the conflict with Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh, which has led to the ethnic cleansing of the enclave in 2023 by Azerbaijan, supported by Türkiye both militarily and diplomatically.” She also pointed to Syria, where Russia’s reduced capacity to support Bashar al-Assad has created room for Türkiye to shape outcomes more directly. In other words, the Ukraine war did not merely increase Türkiye’s value inside NATO. It weakened Türkiye’s rivals in regions where Ankara had already been competing for influence. Trump and Erdogan, two transactional leaders Erdogan’s fortunes have also been helped by the return of Trump, a president who often treats alliances less as institutions than as negotiations among leaders. Trump’s relationship with Erdogan has long been unusually warm compared with Washington’s broader view of Türkiye. In his first term, Trump sometimes expressed sympathy for Ankara’s frustration over the F-35 dispute, even as U.S. officials warned that Türkiye’s S-400 system posed unacceptable risks to the stealth fighter program. Now, in his second term, Trump appears more willing to reopen the issue. Michael Plouffe, professor of international political economy at University College London, said the potential F-35 sale should be understood within Trump’s transactional approach to foreign policy. “Trump’s well-known affinity for strongman leaders put Erdogan in a rather favorable position when Russia invaded Ukraine, and he’s managed to leverage this affinity quite well to increase Türkiye’s regional influence,” he said. He added that Türkiye’s outsider status in Europe may have become an advantage. “Türkiye’s outsider status when it comes to Europe was something he was able to use to great effect when acting as an intermediary between Trump, Zelenskyy and Putin, as something of a less hawkish and more moderate voice in comparison to European members of NATO, and perhaps more closely attuned to Trump’s and Putin’s desires.” The relationship is not built on shared democratic values. It is built on a shared preference for leader-to-leader bargaining, visible strength and short-term deals. Plouffe was blunt about the F-35 question. “I would view the F-35 sale as a reward for Türkiye’s support for the Trump administration over the past couple of years, and as a warning to Netanyahu over Israel’s repeated sabotaging of the U.S.-Iranian efforts to de-escalate conflict,” he said. That interpretation highlights the complexity of the issue. A possible F-35 sale to Türkiye is not only about Türkiye and NATO. It is also about Israel, Iran, Syria, the balance of air power in the Middle East and Trump’s shifting relationship with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel. Israel has long enjoyed a qualitative military edge in the region, and the spread of F-35s to other Middle Eastern powers would raise difficult questions in Washington. Türkiye is a NATO ally, but it is also a regional competitor whose relations with Israel have deteriorated sharply under Erdogan. That is why the F-35 issue remains a signal rather than a settlement. Andrew Scott, lecturer in the department of political science at University College London, cautioned against treating Trump’s comments as a done deal. “I’m also not entirely sure about the F-35 part,” he said. “He’s said he would ‘certainly consider’ selling them but nothing was actually approved yet. It was a signal, rather than a deal and I’m not sure how much you can trust Trump here." The F-35 as a measure of trust The F-35 is not merely another aircraft. It is a flying intelligence platform, a stealth strike system and a symbol of the most sensitive tier of American defense cooperation. That is why Türkiye’s removal from the program was so damaging. Ankara had been a partner in the F-35’s international development network and had invested heavily in the program. Turkish companies had expected a role in the jet’s supply chain. Türkiye had expected to modernize its air force around the aircraft. Instead, the S-400 purchase triggered sanctions and exclusion. The American concern was straightforward: If Türkiye operated both the Russian S-400 system and the F-35, Moscow might gain insight into how to detect or defeat the jet’s stealth capabilities. Ankara argued that the punishment was unjust. Washington insisted the risk was intolerable. The dispute became one of the clearest signs that Türkiye’s relationship with the United States had moved from alliance tension to strategic mistrust. Now, Trump’s willingness to revisit the issue suggests that the balance of pressure has shifted. Türkiye is no longer asking from a position of isolation. It is asking while hosting NATO, contributing to Black Sea security, expanding defense production and positioning itself as a mediator in multiple conflicts. But legal and political obstacles remain. Congress could resist any F-35 transfer. Israel could lobby against it. U.S. defense officials could insist that the S-400 system be removed, dismantled or transferred before any sale proceeds. That means Türkiye’s NATO comeback is real, but incomplete. Scott noted that Türkiye still faces major constraints. “It’s not all good though,” he said. “Israel still has air dominance over Syria, the economic situation is still very fragile and even in spite of their leverage in certain areas their EU accession has been frozen for years and shows no sign of being revived.” Türkiye may be more powerful than it was in 2022. But power has not erased vulnerability. South Korea enters the NATO market While Türkiye used the Ankara summit to demonstrate geopolitical leverage, South Korea used it to demonstrate industrial relevance. President Lee Jae Myung arrived in Ankara on July 7 as the leader of a NATO partner country at the invitation of Secretary General Mark Rutte. His schedule reflected Seoul’s ambitions: a meeting with Rutte, participation in talks with the Indo-Pacific Four partners — South Korea, Japan, Australia and New Zealand — and a keynote speech at a NATO defense industry forum titled “Shared Values, Stronger Industrial Base.” In his meeting with Rutte, South Korea and NATO agreed to launch negotiations on a basic procurement agreement that Seoul officials said would create an institutional foundation for Korean companies to participate in NATO’s joint defense procurement market. At the defense forum, Lee proposed what he called a “South Korea-NATO Defense Industry Partnership 2.0,” calling for cooperation to move beyond weapons sales toward joint research, production and operation of weapons systems. The timing was important. NATO is no longer focused only on military readiness in the abstract. It is trying to solve a production problem. Ukraine’s war has exposed the limits of Western stockpiles, ammunition output and industrial mobilization. NATO countries are spending more, but they also need suppliers that can produce quickly and reliably. That has opened space for countries like South Korea, whose defense industry has already expanded rapidly in Europe through major arms deals with Poland and other partners. Lee’s presence in Ankara therefore fit into the summit’s larger theme: the globalization of NATO’s defense-industrial base. Türkiye and South Korea represent two different answers to the same problem. Türkiye offers geography, wartime access and an increasingly capable domestic arms industry. South Korea offers scale, manufacturing discipline and a record of rapid delivery. Both are outside the traditional core of NATO power. Both are increasingly difficult for NATO to ignore. A summit about weapons, not only values The Ankara summit revealed a hard truth about the alliance: NATO still speaks the language of democracy, freedom and shared values, but its immediate needs are increasingly industrial and strategic. It needs ammunition. It needs drones. It needs air defense systems. It needs shipyards, missiles, armored vehicles and production lines that can expand faster than Russia’s. It needs partners that can help fill gaps. That reality has given Türkiye new bargaining power despite concerns over Erdogan’s domestic record. For years, European leaders criticized Türkiye’s democratic backsliding, its crackdown on opposition politicians, its pressure on the press and its expansive use of state power against critics. Those concerns have not disappeared. But at the Ankara summit, they were overshadowed by defense spending, Ukraine, weapons production and the search for new security arrangements. This is one of the uncomfortable lessons of the Ukraine war. Strategic utility can soften democratic criticism. Not erase it, but push it to the margins. Albert Weale, emeritus professor of political science at University College London, said Trump was unlikely to be troubled by Erdogan’s domestic authoritarianism. “Erdogan’s crackdown on the Turkish opposition will not be a problem for Trump,” he said. “Trump is so volatile and transactional that seeking a strategic rationale for his foreign policy may be fruitless.” Weale also warned that Türkiye’s rise should not be seen only through the Ukraine lens. “Türkiye’s rise to prominence in Trump’s eyes not unlikely to be connected with Ukraine,” he said. “Rather Türkiye has been vying with Israel to be the regional hegemon.” That competition with Israel adds another layer to the F-35 debate. If Washington allows Türkiye back into the program, it may strengthen NATO cohesion in one theater while complicating American relationships in another. The appeal of strategic ambiguity Türkiye’s foreign policy is sometimes described as hedging, though that word does not fully capture Ankara’s posture. Hedging implies cautious balancing. Türkiye’s approach is often more assertive: it pushes, bargains, delays, obstructs and mediates, depending on the issue. It blocked Sweden’s NATO accession for months before extracting concessions. It challenged Greece and Cyprus in the eastern Mediterranean. It maintained ties with Russia while selling drones to Ukraine. It presented itself as a Muslim-majority NATO power, a Black Sea gatekeeper, a Middle Eastern actor, a Caucasus power and a Eurasian bridge. To critics, this is opportunism. To supporters, it is strategic autonomy. To many middle powers watching from outside Europe, it may look like a model. Fumagalli said Türkiye’s ability to maintain relations with the United States, Russia, China and regional actors may appeal to countries facing similar pressure to choose sides. “The fact that Ankara has been able to navigate very choppy waters geopolitically, maintaining decent relations with all parties, from the U.S. to Russia, China, and others is perhaps a lesson that other countries in its immediate neighborhood — South Caucasus? Central Asia? — might be interested in, since they face similar constraints,” he said. “It is difficult not to choose in today’s geopolitically fraught world, but hedging remains an appealing, and for the time being, feasible foreign policy strategy for a number of countries. Although Ankara does not quite hedge as such, its foreign policy conduct reminds of us of some of the aspects of this foreign policy strategy,” he added. This may be Türkiye’s most important export: not drones or armored vehicles, but a method. It is a method built on refusing permanent alignment, cultivating personal ties with powerful leaders, developing domestic defense capacity and using geography as leverage. It is risky, but in Türkiye’s case it has produced results. The limits of Türkiye’s comeback Still, Türkiye’s rise has boundaries. Its economy remains fragile, with inflation, currency weakness and investor concerns limiting Erdogan’s room for maneuver. Its EU accession process is frozen and shows little sign of revival. Its relations with several European governments remain strained. Its domestic politics continue to raise concerns among allies that define NATO as a democratic alliance, not merely a military one. Its relationship with Russia is also a source of both leverage and suspicion. The very channels that make Türkiye useful as a mediator also make some allies question Ankara’s reliability. The F-35 issue captures all of these contradictions. If the United States restores Türkiye’s access to the fighter, Erdogan can claim a major victory. It would show that Ankara endured years of pressure and emerged with its strategic importance recognized. It would also strengthen Türkiye’s hand against Greece and reassure its defense establishment that Türkiye has not been permanently downgraded in the American security hierarchy. But if the deal stalls in Congress, or if Washington demands unacceptable conditions on the S-400, the episode could deepen Turkish grievances and reinforce Ankara’s belief that the West will never fully trust it. Either outcome carries risks. For NATO, the dilemma is familiar but sharper than before: Türkiye is often difficult when it is weak, but it may be even more difficult when it is strong. What Ankara showed The Ankara summit did not resolve NATO’s Turkey problem. It reframed it. Türkiye is no longer just a source of friction. It is a source of capacity. It can shape Black Sea access, influence talks over Ukraine, complicate Russia’s naval posture, expand defense production and act as a bridge to regions where many Western governments have limited reach. That makes Türkiye valuable. It does not necessarily make it trusted. The same independence that allows Ankara to talk to Moscow makes allies nervous. The same defense industry that strengthens NATO’s capacity also gives Turkey more autonomy. The same personal diplomacy that appeals to Trump may weaken the institutional predictability on which alliances depend. Kivimäki argued that Trump’s “deal-orientation” has a positive side because it focuses on relationships between countries rather than dividing the world into democracies and autocracies. “There is research that show that such relation-orientation does help foster peace,” he said. But he also warned that Trump’s disregard for supranational institutions creates long-term risks. “At the same time, Trump does not have any respect for supranational realities such as the international law and the UN,” he said. “The development of supranational governance is the long-term hope for world peace, and thus Trump’s attitude that does not respect the UN or the law is problematic.” That tension — between deal-making and rules, between usefulness and values, between power and trust — ran through the summit. Türkiye has learned to thrive in that space. A new NATO, whether Europe likes it or not The image of NATO as a tidy club of like-minded democracies has always been partly myth. During the Cold War, the alliance included authoritarian members when strategic necessity demanded it. Today, the return of large-scale war to Europe has again made necessity more powerful than discomfort. Türkiye understands this. So does South Korea, though in a different way. Ankara is selling NATO its geography, its access and its ambiguity. Seoul is selling NATO its factories, its technology and its reliability. Both are beneficiaries of a new defense era in which production capacity has become a form of geopolitical power. 2026-07-09 13:52:08
  • Aju Media launches AI-focused business channel as Korea pushes AI ambitions
    Aju Media launches AI-focused business channel as Korea pushes AI ambitions SEOUL, July 08 (AJP) - South Korean media company Aju Media Group launched what it described as the country's first television channel dedicated exclusively to artificial intelligence on Wednesday, seeking to establish a platform covering AI policy, business, investment and technology as competition in the sector intensifies. The company officially launched ABC (AI Business Channel) at an opening ceremony in Seoul, kicking off a two-day series of events bringing together government officials, business leaders, investors and academics to discuss the future of South Korea's AI ecosystem. The launch comes as South Korea steps up efforts to strengthen its competitiveness in artificial intelligence, which the government has identified as a strategic growth engine and a key driver of future industrial development. Aju Media said the new channel will provide specialized coverage of AI-related policies, technological advances, investment trends and industry developments. Wednesday's opening ceremony featured a joint presentation by a human anchor and an AI-powered robotic anchor, followed by opening remarks from Aju Media Group Chairman Kwak Young-gil and a congratulatory video message from President Lee Jae Myung. Guests also participated in a ceremonial launch marking the start of the channel's broadcasts. On Thursday, the company is scheduled to host an AI Innovation Forum under the theme, "A New Media Era: Industrial Transformation Driven by the AI Ecosystem." The forum will bring together policymakers, technology executives, investors and researchers to discuss South Korea's AI competitiveness and industrial strategy. Vice Minister of Science and ICT Ryu Je-myung is scheduled to deliver a keynote address outlining the government's ambition to make South Korea one of the world's three leading AI powers. Former professional Go player Lee Sedol, whose 2016 matches against Google's AlphaGo drew global attention, is also expected to speak about the impact of artificial intelligence a decade after the landmark contest. NVIDIA Korea Country Manager Jeong So-young is scheduled to present her outlook on AI-driven industrial transformation. Aju Media said it plans to expand its operations beyond newspapers, newswire services and digital platforms into television broadcasting through the new AI-focused channel. 2026-07-08 16:28:35
  • UNDP, Hyundai foundation name winners of Asia-Pacific start-up programme
    UNDP, Hyundai foundation name winners of Asia-Pacific start-up programme SEOUL, July 08 (AJP) - Ten impact start-ups from five Asia-Pacific countries presented solutions linked to the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals at a Demo Day in Seoul this week, concluding a three-month accelerator programme co-hosted by the UNDP Seoul Policy Centre and the Hyundai Motor Chung Mong-Koo Foundation. The programme, Global ImpactPreneur, ended with a networking event and final pitch session held on July 6 and 7 at ONDREAM SOCIETY in Myeong-dong, central Seoul. It was organized by the UNDP Seoul Policy Centre and the Hyundai Motor Chung Mong-Koo Foundation and implemented by Impact Square. Launched in March, the accelerator drew applications from 126 start-ups in 23 Asia-Pacific countries. After a review process, 20 teams were selected in April for a three-month online acceleration programme. Ten companies from five countries were then chosen through an online pitch evaluation in June to take part in the final Demo Day in Seoul. The finalists were Arummi Foods and Elevarm from Indonesia, DEAFNURI Inc., iGENETECH Inc., NUSEUM Inc. and Seoul Labs Co., Ltd. from South Korea, Global Cerah and Stratetics Experts Sdn Bhd from Malaysia, Nicha Carbon Capture Co., Ltd. from Thailand and SUDrain Co., Ltd. from Cambodia. The companies presented business models addressing issues including climate action, the circular economy, healthcare, digital inclusion and access to essential services. The Grand Award, presented by the UNDP Seoul Policy Centre, went to SUDrain, a Cambodian company developing decentralized wastewater treatment technology using coconut fiber-based biofilm filtration. The company aims to address water pollution and public health challenges through locally adaptable treatment systems. The Excellence Award, presented by the Hyundai Motor Chung Mong-Koo Foundation, went to Arummi Foods, an Indonesian start-up producing cashew-based plant milk. The company seeks to expand food access for lactose-intolerant consumers while supporting income opportunities for smallholder farmers. The CVC Innovation Award, presented by CVC Capital Partners, was given to two companies: DEAFNURI, a South Korean start-up developing a sign language-based accessible tourism platform for deaf and hard-of-hearing people, and Seoul Labs, which is working on SuperWallet, an AI and blockchain-based digital identity platform designed to improve access to formal finance and public services for underserved groups. The final evaluation was conducted by six experts in impact investment and development cooperation: Anne Juepner, director of the UNDP Seoul Policy Centre; Choi Jae-ho, secretary general of the Hyundai Motor Chung Mong-Koo Foundation; Doh Hyun-myung, CEO of Impact Square; Kim Chul-hwan, representative of CVC Capital Partners; Na Young-joo, director of Korelya Capital; and Lee Jun-hee, center head at Barun Law LLC. The Demo Day opened with remarks on the progress made by participating entrepreneurs during the acceleration period. Juepner and Choi delivered messages of support to the 10 finalists, which later pitched their solutions to investors and partner organizations. Booth exhibitions were also held to allow more detailed discussions between start-ups, investors and ecosystem partners. A day earlier, about 50 participants attended a networking event involving the 10 finalist companies, Korean entrepreneurs from the UNDP-Impact Square SDG Sprint programme, alumni of the Hyundai Motor Chung Mong-Koo Foundation’s CMK Impact Runner programme and representatives from venture capital firms and accelerators. The event was designed as a peer mentoring session, bringing together emerging impact start-ups from the Asia-Pacific region and experienced Korean social innovators. Participants exchanged views on fundraising, market entry, business validation and the challenges of expanding social impact across borders. One participating start-up representative said advice from senior entrepreneurs during the networking session helped strengthen the team’s final pitch. “It was meaningful to stand on the same stage with peers from different countries who have been addressing similar social challenges, and to directly validate our solution before investors and partner organizations,” the representative said. Juepner said impact start-ups are important innovation actors in achieving the SDGs. “This programme provided an opportunity for entrepreneurs across the Asia-Pacific region to share their challenges and solutions, and to build a foundation for collaboration to scale social impact,” she said. “UNDP will continue to support the wider dissemination of innovative solutions to more communities through partnerships with the private sector.” Choi said the foundation would continue supporting young innovators seeking to expand beyond their home markets. “The Foundation will continue to build a solid platform for future generations and innovators to grow on a broader stage, rooted in Honorary Chairman Chung Mong-Koo’s spirit of challenge and entrepreneurship,” he said. Global ImpactPreneur is part of a broader effort by the UNDP Seoul Policy Centre, the Hyundai Motor Chung Mong-Koo Foundation and Impact Square to strengthen the impact start-up ecosystem in the Asia-Pacific region. The organizers said they plan to continue working with international partners to help young entrepreneurs lead social change. 2026-07-08 10:55:55
  • Newly uncovered U.S. military report identifies Dokdo as part of Korea after WWII
    Newly uncovered U.S. military report identifies Dokdo as part of Korea after WWII SEOUL, July 07 (AJP) - A newly uncovered U.S. military report has revealed that American authorities recognized Dokdo as part of Korea in 1948, offering fresh documentary evidence that could strengthen the historical basis for South Korea's sovereignty over the East Sea islets. The document, titled Report of Bombing of Liancourt Rocks, was prepared by the Far East Air Forces (FEAF) on June 24, 1948, after a U.S. Air Force bombing exercise mistakenly struck Dokdo on June 8 that year, killing 14 Korean fishermen and injuring many others. Although the report was originally classified as "SECRET," it was later declassified and preserved by the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). The 222-page collection of previously undisclosed U.S. government records was discovered by Jeon Gap-saeng, a research professor at Sungkonghoe University's Institute for East Asian Studies, during archival research at NARA. He recently donated the materials to the Northeast Asian History Foundation, which announced the findings Monday. The most significant passage appears in the section titled "Mitigating Circumstances." It states: "Although definitely established in September 1947 that Liancourt Rocks was a part of Korea..." The sentence continues by explaining that some U.S. military personnel mistakenly assumed the islets belonged to Japan because that understanding had never become general knowledge within the military. South Korean researchers say the wording is particularly significant because it was written by U.S. military officials themselves during an internal investigation, rather than by Korean authorities. The report also indicates that the U.S. military regarded Korean authorities as having jurisdiction over Dokdo when planning bombing exercises. According to the document, the Fifth Air Force was required to notify the commanding general of the U.S. Army Forces in Korea (USAFIK) 15 days before using the bombing range. The report further notes that before each bombing exercise the Fifth Air Force carefully informed the Eighth Army so that the information could be passed to the military government in Korea. Researchers at the Northeast Asian History Foundation said the notification requirement demonstrates that U.S. authorities considered Dokdo to fall under Korean administration rather than Japanese jurisdiction. The report ultimately concluded that the tragedy resulted from failures to follow notification procedures and inadequate reconnaissance before the bombing mission. The newly discovered records also include official documents submitted by the administrator of Ulleung Island, the local government with jurisdiction over Dokdo, as well as statements from local residents. One document jointly signed by the Ulleung administrator and local officials explicitly states that residents received no prior notification of any military exercise before the bombing occurred. The archive contains another historically important document titled Confirmation of Sovereignty over Dokdo Belonging to Ulleungdo, submitted by the Ulleung administrator to the governor of North Gyeongsang Province in 1946. It also includes, for the first time in its original standalone form, a handwritten copy of a report prepared by Sim Heung-taek, magistrate of Uldo County, after Japan unilaterally incorporated Dokdo into its territory in 1905. Historians have long known the contents of Sim's report, but researchers said this marks the first discovery of the document as an independent archival record. The Northeast Asian History Foundation described the newly identified materials as important primary sources documenting how U.S. authorities viewed Dokdo during the years immediately following Korea's liberation from Japanese colonial rule. "These records significantly strengthen the documentary evidence confirming both the U.S. military's perception of Dokdo and Korea's sovereignty over the islets during the immediate post-liberation period," a foundation official said. Dokdo has historically been administered as part of Ulleung County in North Gyeongsang Province and has remained under South Korea's effective control since liberation from Japanese colonial rule, with Korean police stationed on the islets. South Korea maintains that Dokdo has been Korean territory for centuries, citing historical records dating back to the Silla Dynasty, continuous administrative control through Uldo County established in 1900, and the fact that Japan incorporated the islets in 1905 during its expansion toward the colonization of the Korean Peninsula. Following Japan's defeat in World War II, South Korea argues that Dokdo was separated from Japan together with other Korean territory and restored to Korea. Korean scholars also point to a series of U.S. military documents and occupation directives issued after the war that treated Dokdo separately from Japan. Japan continues to claim sovereignty over the islets, which it calls Takeshima. South Korea rejects Japan's claim, saying there is no territorial dispute because Dokdo is historically, geographically and under international law an integral part of Korean territory. The newly uncovered U.S. military report is expected to provide additional historical evidence for future research on Dokdo and the U.S. government's understanding of the islets in the immediate aftermath of World War II. 2026-07-07 17:23:52
  • Koreas ruling party dominance wanes as young voters lose faith
    Korea's ruling party dominance wanes as young voters lose faith SEOUL, July 07 (AJP) - On June 16, a woman in her 20s with an American flag wrapped around her waist chained herself to a tape-bound gate at Seoul's Olympic Handball Gymnasium, preventing police from reopening the venue after it had been sealed over a ballot-shortage controversy in the June 3 local elections. Some protesters hailed her as the "Joan of Arc of Olympic Park." The scene is no longer unusual. Increasingly, it is young people—not the elderly—taking to the streets against a liberal government. As President Lee Jae Myung's approval has slipped since the June election, dissatisfaction among younger voters has become increasingly vocal, fueled by record youth unemployment, soaring housing costs and a growing sense that neither major party understands their lives. The Democratic Party, which once counted younger voters among its most reliable supporters, is struggling to explain the erosion. Yet many young voters insist they are neither liberal nor conservative. What increasingly shapes their choices is whether they believe policies are fair. A 22-year-old woman from Busan studying in Seoul said she no longer supports the Democratic Party despite having traveled across the country to join rallies calling for former President Yoon Suk Yeol's impeachment. "The DP cannot put forward women's issues because it wants to win votes from men in their 20s and 30s," she said. She argued the party has shown little interest in women's rights despite rising violence against women and criticized the Lee administration's plan to rename the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family while discussing what it describes as reverse discrimination against young men. Others say the problem goes beyond gender. "There are hardly any young politicians who can truly represent young people," said a 28-year-old nurse in Seoul's Songpa-gu. "In the next general and presidential elections, I'll vote for whichever party recruits young politicians who genuinely represent the lives of young people and women." For many, however, the defining issue is economic opportunity. "Ultimately, it's real estate," said Kim Min-chul, a 27-year-old graduate student in Seoul. "Since the Moon Jae-in administration, housing prices have surged, widening the wealth gap. For people just starting their careers, buying a home in Seoul has become almost impossible." A 32-year-old office worker in Seoul's Jongno-gu also accused the ruling party of widening inequality while pursuing populist policies. "My college friend's father has terminal cancer. An expensive treatment exists, but it isn't covered by national health insurance, so he had to give up treatment," he said. "Yet the government talks about covering hair-loss treatment targeted at younger people. That looks more like vote calculation than caring about people's lives." The Lee administration has responded by placing youth policy at the center of its agenda. The presidential office is preparing to launch a Youth Fellowship, a consultative body that will allow young people to participate directly in policymaking. Lee has repeatedly instructed ministries to prioritize youth in long-term fiscal planning, arguing that younger generations have become the most excluded from opportunities to accumulate wealth. The government has also pledged to expand internships, work-experience programs, student housing and affordable housing. The renewed emphasis reflects growing concern within the ruling camp that South Korea's age-based political alignment has changed fundamentally. For years, younger voters overwhelmingly supported liberal candidates while older generations leaned conservative. That pattern began unraveling during former President Moon Jae-in's administration as controversies ranging from the Incheon International Airport contract-worker dispute and the unified Olympic hockey team to the Cho Kuk scandal and the LH real estate scandal fueled concerns about fairness and equal opportunity. Political analysts say younger voters increasingly prioritize jobs, housing affordability, social mobility and fairness over the democracy and peace agenda that resonated with earlier generations shaped by South Korea's democratization movement. The shift first became apparent in the 2021 Seoul mayoral by-election and continued through subsequent national elections, where younger voters became increasingly divided by both ideology and gender. Seeking to reverse the trend, Lee campaigned last year on 27 youth-focused pledges, including matched savings accounts, support for spot cryptocurrency exchange-traded funds and measures to improve digital-asset investment. The effort has yet to translate into stronger support. Lee won the presidential election with 49.42 percent of the vote, but exit polls showed he received just 41.3 percent support among voters in their 20s, the weakest among all age groups. The pattern resurfaced in June's Seoul mayoral election, where conservative candidate Oh Se-hoon again led among younger voters, while a pronounced gender divide persisted. Recent polling underscores the challenge. A Gallup Korea survey released July 3 found Lee's overall job approval rating at 54 percent but only 41 percent among voters in their 20s, again the lowest among all age groups. Separate surveys have also shown the conservative People Power Party improving its standing among younger voters even as Lee maintains majority approval nationwide. Lawmakers from both parties broadly agree on the underlying causes. Democratic Party lawmaker Son Myoung Soo said younger voters respond more strongly than other generations to issues of fairness and expect the ruling party to provide credible solutions. People Power Party lawmaker Jung Sung-kook likewise argued that fairness has become the defining issue for younger generations, while fellow party lawmakers Rep. Woo Jae-jun and Rep. Ahn Sang-hoon pointed to worsening economic prospects, soaring asset prices and growing resentment over policies they believe place heavier burdens on future generations. Within the Democratic Party, some have acknowledged the problem. Rep. Min Byung-deok said the party had failed to demonstrate that it understood young people's struggles or could solve them. For Lee and the Democratic Party, the challenge is no longer simply announcing more youth policies. It is persuading a generation increasingly skeptical of political promises that the government understands the insecurity defining their lives. 2026-07-07 16:19:10
  • Bethlehem to name road Korea Street after aid
    Bethlehem to name road Korea Street after aid SEOUL, July 07 (AJP) - A road in Bethlehem will be named Korea Street this week, a symbolic gesture of appreciation for South Korea’s development and humanitarian support for Palestinians as the West Bank city struggles with the economic fallout from the prolonged Gaza war. The Palestinian Authority and Bethlehem Municipality will hold a ceremony Wednesday with the Representative Office of the Republic of Korea to Palestine and the Korea International Cooperation Agency, or KOICA, to sign an agreement on a new startup hub development project, officials said. The road across from the project site will be named Korea Street, officials said. It marks a rare honor for a foreign donor in Bethlehem, one of the best-known Christian pilgrimage destinations in the world. The project comes as Bethlehem’s economy, heavily dependent on tourism and religious pilgrimages, has been battered by the war in Gaza that began in October 2023. Foreign pilgrims and tourists have sharply declined, forcing hotels, restaurants, souvenir shops and travel agencies to scale back or close. Local officials say unemployment has risen above 30 percent. South Korea plans to provide $11 million for the startup hub project through 2032. The program is designed to support young Palestinian entrepreneurs, foster small businesses and create sustainable jobs in Bethlehem, where tourism has long accounted for more than 70 percent of the local economy. A Korean representative office official said the startup hub project is the largest development project carried out in Bethlehem over the past two decades. The official said goodwill toward South Korea has remained strong in the city, partly because Korean pilgrims were among the first organized tourist groups received by the local community in earlier years. Bethlehem, home to the Church of the Nativity, has long hosted development projects backed by countries including France, Spain, Italy, the United States, Britain and Japan. But officials said naming a street after a donor country is unusual in the city. The ceremony will also feature Korean cultural performances, including a traditional sogeum flute performance and taekwondo poomsae demonstration. Officials said a King Sejong Institute, which promotes Korean language and culture overseas, is also set to open at Bethlehem University. The Korea Street designation comes as South Korea has expanded assistance to Palestinians through development and humanitarian programs. South Korea and Palestine established official relations in 2005, and Seoul opened its representative office in Ramallah in 2014. South Korea has not formally recognized Palestinian statehood, but it says it supports a two-state solution and has pledged to consider recognition when it would help advance that goal. KOICA’s work in Palestine predates the formal relationship. UNICEF said in 2021 that KOICA had supported Palestine since 1994, providing about $73 million in assistance focused on education, job creation, public-sector capacity and health care. South Korea has also increased humanitarian support since the Gaza war began. The Foreign Ministry said in late 2024 that Seoul had provided $40 million for Gaza-related humanitarian needs since the start of the Israel-Hamas conflict. In 2025, South Korea announced $30 million in assistance through UNDP, UNICEF and the World Food Programme to support food aid, shelter, health care, education and water services in Gaza, as well as food vouchers for economically distressed Palestinians in the West Bank. More recently, South Korea launched a $10 million support program for Palestinian refugees and displaced people in Gaza and Egypt through the Korean Red Cross and the Egyptian Red Crescent. For Bethlehem, officials say the startup hub is intended to move beyond emergency relief by helping build a more self-sustaining local economy. The road naming, they said, is meant to reflect not only gratitude for South Korean aid but also confidence in a broader partnership at a time when Palestinians face deepening economic and humanitarian pressures. 2026-07-07 13:47:57
  • Seoul high school baseball team seeks forgiveness in Gwangju over May 18 taunts
    Seoul high school baseball team seeks forgiveness in Gwangju over May 18 taunts SEOUL, July 06 (AJP) -Kids or not, South Koreans are learning that mockery of historic tragedies comes with serious accountability, as Seoul-based Paichai High School's baseball team traveled to Gwangju on Monday to offer a formal apology to players of Gwangju Jeil High School and local residents and seek their forgiveness for taunting chants mocking the May 18 Gwangju Democratization Movement. The apology came one week after Paichai players shouted "Let's go to Starbucks!" and "Tank Day!" toward the opposing dugout during a first-round game at the 81st Cheongryonggi National High School Baseball Championship in Seoul. The chants referenced a recent "Tank Day" marketing controversy involving Starbucks Korea that was widely criticized for trivializing the 1980 pro-democracy uprising. All 36 Paichai baseball players, along with their parents, teachers and school officials, arrived at Gwangju Jeil High School to apologize in person. The visitors numbered around 80, according to the school. "We caused the players of Gwangju Jeil High School tremendous emotional pain and suffering," the team captain said while reading a statement. "As fellow athletes, it was something we should never have done, and something that should never have happened. We caused many people deep pain." The captain also apologized to the opposing players, their parents and Gwangju citizens, saying the team had reflected deeply on its conduct. "All of us, including myself, sincerely regret what happened," he said. "This incident has taught us once again that character and attitude are more important than baseball itself. We will continue to live with sincere remorse." The team's head coach separately accepted responsibility for failing to prevent the incident. "I acknowledge that our players' chants disparaging a region are inexcusable," he said. "As the person responsible for guiding and educating these students, I bear the greatest responsibility and sincerely apologize." The coach said he had been too focused on the outcome of the game to immediately recognize and stop the offensive chants. "I forgot that there are things more important than winning," he said. "I feel deeply ashamed that my words, actions and leadership failed to set the right example. I will fulfill my responsibility as a coach to ensure that something like this never happens again." Faculty members also issued a separate statement, saying the school did not view the incident as an isolated act of youthful misconduct. "Paichai High School regards this incident not as a simple mistake or deviation by students but as a case stemming from a broader collapse in ethical awareness and historical understanding," the statement said. The faculty said using chants that mocked the May 18 Democratization Movement to insult Gwangju Jeil High School demonstrated that members of the school community had failed to sufficiently share an understanding of the ethical and historical significance of the issue. The school pledged to strengthen ethics and history education, cooperate fully with ongoing investigations and disciplinary procedures, and work to build a school culture based on respect rather than ridicule. "Democracy begins with respecting one another," the statement said. "We will strive to become an educational community that values consideration over mockery and solidarity over hatred." Following the visit to Gwangju Jeil High School, the Paichai delegation was scheduled to pay tribute at the National May 18 Democratic Cemetery to honor those killed during the 1980 pro-democracy movement. The controversy erupted during the June 29 tournament game in Seoul, when some Paichai players repeatedly shouted "Let's go to Starbucks!" and "Tank Day!" toward the Gwangju Jeil dugout. The chants were widely interpreted as mocking the May 18 Gwangju Democratization Movement and prompted strong condemnation from educators, civic groups and baseball officials. The Korea Baseball Softball Association has already suspended Paichai High's baseball team for six months from national competition and is conducting separate disciplinary proceedings against individual players and coaches. 2026-07-06 16:12:38
  • North Korea tests cruise missile from new 5,000-ton destroyer
    North Korea tests cruise missile from new 5,000-ton destroyer SEOUL, July 6 (AJP) - North Korean leader Kim Jong-un supervised weapons tests from a new 5,000-ton destroyer that had been repaired after a failed launch ceremony last year, state media said Sunday, as he pushed to expand the country's naval combat capabilities. The official Korean Central News Agency said the destroyer Kang Kon conducted a test-fire of "strategic cruise missiles" last Friday, along with tests of "major weapon systems such as naval artillery, automatic machine guns and electronic warfare means." KCNA said the tests were intended to assess the combat systems mounted on the warship and to confirm "the ability to apply various kinds of weapon systems on board the destroyer in combat." South Korea's military said the same day it had detected North Korea firing a cruise missile from the warship toward waters off its eastern coast and that South Korean and U.S. authorities were analyzing the launch. Before the tests, Kim received detailed briefings from members of a weapons assessment group on what KCNA described as a "stepwise plan" to examine the performance of the ship's weapons systems. The tests included inspections of the destroyer's "target-detecting and information-processing capability" and its "combined firepower system," the report said. KCNA said Kim praised the progress of the tests, saying the "combat power and creditability" of the destroyer's anti-ship, anti-submarine and anti-aircraft weapons, as well as its "strategic offensive weapon systems," were being verified "in a responsible manner." Kim said the tests gave North Korea confidence in the "development of naval combat system of our own style," according to KCNA. He said the progress created "a great possibility to bring about a change in the readiness posture" of the country's strategic forces. The North Korean leader also called for speeding up efforts to expand the country's military capabilities, saying it was necessary to "further speed up the projects to maintain and steadily expand the reliable war deterrent and capability to fight a war." KCNA quoted Kim as saying North Korea would demonstrate "through more obvious actions" its political will and determination to possess an "absolute power." Kim also ordered officials to complete the Kang Kon's trial process "in a responsible manner" and commission the destroyer into the navy within two months, KCNA said. The Kang Kon drew outside attention last year after it was damaged during a botched launch ceremony at the northern port of Chongjin, an embarrassment that prompted an unusually angry response from Kim. North Korea later said the ship had been repaired and relaunched, though outside analysts questioned how quickly the vessel could be made ready for active service. The destroyer is part of a new class of North Korean warships that Kim has portrayed as central to his effort to modernize the navy. Late last month, North Korea commissioned another 5,000-ton destroyer, the Choe Hyon, in a ceremony state media cast as a milestone in strengthening the navy's ability to defend maritime sovereignty and deter war. KCNA said Kim recalled that a recent plenary meeting of the ruling Workers' Party had adopted a decision to turn each naval fleet base into “a hub of naval command, culture and combat capability” and to expand shipyard capacity at all levels. He also expressed what KCNA called his determination to take "national steps" to build up the navy, which he said plays an important role in defending North Korea's maritime sovereignty and exercising war deterrence. North Korea has increasingly emphasized naval development after years of focusing heavily on ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons. Kim has called for building two 5,000-ton-class warships each year over the next five years and has also outlined plans for larger 10,000-ton destroyers. The North describes some of its cruise missiles as "strategic," a term it often uses for weapons designed to carry nuclear warheads. Experts say deploying such weapons on surface ships could give North Korea more launch options and complicate missile-defense planning by South Korea, the U.S. and Japan. KCNA said senior defense, navy and shipbuilding officials attended Friday's tests, including Jo Chun-ryong, a secretary of the Workers' Party Central Committee; Kim Jong-sik, first deputy department director of the party Central Committee; Pak Jong-chon, an adviser to the Ministry of National Defence; Pak Kwang-sop, commander of the navy; Kim Yong-hwan, president of the Academy of Defence Sciences; and Kim Kwang-il, minister of shipbuilding industry. It also said Kim convened "an important consultative meeting for the development of the warship building industry" but gave no details. 2026-07-06 10:51:03
  • North Korea, DPRK, or Joseon? Seouls naming dilemma
    North Korea, DPRK, or Joseon? Seoul's naming dilemma SEOUL, July 03 (AJP) - Defined by its neighbor "hostile state," South Korea is rethinking how to address North Korea. The Unification Ministry said Friday that growing calls to refer to North Korea by its official name are part of a broader process of building public consensus, as a linguistic debate over inter-Korean relations moves from academic and religious circles into the center of national politics. At issue is whether South Korea should continue using the term "North Korea" — Bukhan in Korean — or begin referring to the country in official and public settings as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, or by its shorter Korean name, "Joseon." The proposal, promoted by some religious leaders, scholars, and officials, is framed as a gesture of mutual respect that could help ease tensions. Critics counter that it risks echoing Pyongyang's claim that the two Koreas are separate, hostile states, and could undermine Seoul's constitutional commitment to peaceful unification. Jang Yun-jeong, deputy spokesperson for the Unification Ministry, said at a regular briefing in Seoul that the ministry was watching a declaration issued a day earlier by senior leaders of South Korea's major religious communities, which urged the two Koreas to respect each other's official names as a starting point for peaceful coexistence. "We see these developments as part of a process in which public consensus is being formed over the question of how to refer to North Korea's national name," Jang said, adding that the ministry would follow the debate closely and listen broadly to views across society. Her remarks stopped short of announcing a formal shift in government terminology, but signaled that the Lee Jae Myung administration is willing to keep the discussion alive at a time when inter-Korean relations remain frozen and North Korea has hardened its stance toward the South. The Korean Council of Senior Religious Leaders issued the "Declaration for Peaceful Coexistence and Mutual Respect on the Korean Peninsula" on Thursday, arguing that peace begins with respecting the other side's name. Signed by senior figures from Catholicism, Buddhism, Protestant Christianity, Won Buddhism, Cheondoism, Confucianism, and Korea's native religions, the declaration noted that the international community already recognizes the two Koreas by their official UN names — the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Approaching the other side's chosen name with respect, the group said, could be a symbolic first step toward reducing hostility. Kang Chang-il, executive vice chairperson of the National Unification Advisory Council — a constitutional body on unification policy chaired by the president — endorsed the proposal Thursday in a personal statement: "If North Korea calls us the Republic of Korea, it is only reasonable that we call North Korea the Democratic People's Republic of Korea." Kang argued that the first step toward converting the armistice into a peace regime would be for both Koreas to use each other's official names, noting that such names appeared in the 1991 inter-Korean Basic Agreement, the same year both countries joined the UN separately. Continued hostility amid a dialogue freeze, he said, would lead only to mutual destruction. The main opposition People Power Party denounced Kang's comments Friday. Spokesperson Cho Yong-sul said North Korea's use of "Republic of Korea" is not a gesture of respect but part of Pyongyang's effort to formalize its "hostile two-state" doctrine, and warned that a terminology debate should not be allowed to weaken South Korea's security posture given the North's continued weapons development. A Larger Question About National Identity The dispute reflects a broader question facing Seoul: how to respond to North Korea's rejection of the long-standing idea that the two Koreas remain one nation temporarily divided by history. Since late 2023, Kim Jong-un has described inter-Korean relations as those between two hostile states rather than members of a shared nation, and Pyongyang has increasingly used "Republic of Korea" or "South Korea" instead of terms implying ethnic or national kinship. For some in Seoul, that shift opens the door to a more pragmatic relationship built on mutual recognition. For others, it's a trap that could normalize North Korea's abandonment of unification and erode South Korea's legal and moral standing. The Lee administration's unification policy has emphasized peaceful coexistence, respect for the North's system, and reduced military tensions. Unification Minister Chung Dong-young has repeatedly used North Korea's formal name in public remarks — speaking of "Korea-Joseon relations" and, at a ministry event earlier this year, referring to the North as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. In January, he said the government respects the North's system and rejects any German-style absorption unification. In March, at a joint conference with the Korea Institute for National Unification, he again used the North's official name, urging South Korea to turn Pyongyang's hostile two-state line into an opportunity to rethink the inter-Korean paradigm. At the Ulaanbaatar Dialogue on Northeast Asian Security in Mongolia on June 4, Chung used "DPRK" and proposed four-way talks among South Korea, North Korea, the United States, and China to build a peace regime — one that could later expand to include Mongolia, Japan, and Russia. "We can begin four-party talks among the Republic of Korea, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the United States and China," he said. The use of "DPRK" at an international forum drew attention because, while South Korean officials have long used the term at international bodies, they've been more cautious about it domestically. Ministry officials say no fixed policy exists yet and that any change would require public discussion, expert review, and government-wide coordination. The issue entered formal public discussion on April 29, when the Korean Political Science Association — backed by the Unification Ministry — held a conference titled "Naming for Peaceful Coexistence: North Korea or Joseon?" examining whether a change in terminology could reshape perceptions, law, and policy. Sogang University professor Kim Sung-kyung argued that "North Korea" is not a neutral term in South Korean society, shaped as it is by decades of anti-communist ideology, the National Security Act, and threat narratives. Using the North's official name, she said, would signal respect and a willingness to reset relations. She noted that South Koreans bristled when Pyongyang used "South Joseon" for the South, and asked whether continuing to use a name the North rejects for itself really serves the relationship Seoul says it wants. Kangwon National University professor Lee Dong-ki pointed to West Germany's Cold War-era shift away from West-centered labels for East Germany as part of a broader reconciliation process, suggesting South Korea consider similar language to defuse mutual hostility. Supporters say adopting "Joseon" would not signal acceptance of Pyongyang's ideology or nuclear program, but would be a limited gesture acknowledging the reality of two governments on the peninsula. They point out that past agreements have used formal titles before: the 1972 July 4 Joint Communique avoided official names amid extreme Cold War caution, while the more formal 1991 Basic Agreement — signed as both Koreas entered the UN as separate members — described inter-Korean relations as a "special relationship" formed temporarily in the pursuit of unification, rather than ordinary relations between foreign states. That formula has let Seoul treat North Korea as a negotiating counterpart while still upholding its constitutional goal of peaceful unification. Critics say the proposed shift could upset that balance. South Korea's Constitution defines the Republic of Korea's territory as the entire Korean Peninsula and requires the state to pursue peaceful unification; some conservative politicians and legal scholars warn that officially calling the North "Joseon" could imply acceptance of it as a separate sovereign state, undermining the constitutional basis for unification policy. Others question whether Pyongyang would reciprocate at all, arguing that North Korea's own terminology shift was never conciliatory — but rather a strategy to sever ethnic and political ties with the South, brand the Republic of Korea a hostile foreign state, and justify a more aggressive military posture. The Unification Ministry has tried to frame the issue as one for public deliberation rather than swift decision. Vice Unification Minister Kim Nam-joong told the April conference that language can either deepen distrust or ease tension, and that institutions and language recognizing the other side's existence are needed to break the cycle of confrontation. But he acknowledged the issue is far from simple, requiring South Korea to weigh its constitutional order, the special nature of inter-Korean relations, domestic law, international practice, and public consensus. A Politically Fraught Symbol North Korea policy in South Korea has long swung between engagement and pressure depending on the administration, and even symbolic steps can become partisan flashpoints — especially when they touch on the North's statehood, nuclear program, or claims over the South. The Lee administration is seeking room for engagement at a time when Pyongyang shows little interest in dialogue: North Korea has expanded its nuclear and missile programs, deepened ties with Russia, rejected Seoul's offers for talks, and left inter-Korean communication channels severed. Supporters of the terminology shift argue that in this climate, small symbolic gestures may be among the few tools available to reduce animosity, since language shapes how the public understands the other side and how policymakers imagine future agreements. Opponents counter that symbols cut both ways — that changing terminology without any reciprocal move from Pyongyang could signal weakness and blur South Korea's goals, and that Seoul should instead focus on deterrence, sanctions enforcement, and alliance coordination. The debate has been sharpened by North Korea's own conduct: its use of "Republic of Korea" has often appeared in hostile contexts rejecting reunification and casting the South as a permanent enemy, even as Pyongyang revises its domestic political language to strip out references to peaceful unification. For many South Koreans, "Joseon" carries layered meaning — it's the short name North Korea uses for itself, but also evokes the premodern Joseon Dynasty and a shared national history. "North Korea," by contrast, reflects division while implying the peninsula remains connected by history, language, and identity. The practical implications of any change remain unclear. The government could keep using "North Korea" domestically while continuing to use "DPRK" at international conferences, as it often already does; it could encourage academic, civic, and religious groups to adopt the official name without making it government policy; or it could eventually use "Democratic People's Republic of Korea" in certain official documents or inter-Korean proposals while keeping "North Korea" as the standard public term. Whether the proposal can win broader public support remains uncertain. Polling has not yet established a clear national consensus, and the issue is likely to stay vulnerable to partisan framing. 2026-07-03 17:50:32
  • Koreas Lee to head to NATO summit as Seoul courts defense partners
    Korea's Lee to head to NATO summit as Seoul courts defense partners SEOUL, July 3 (AJP) -South Korean President Lee Jae Myung will travel to Türkiye and Mongolia next week for a five-day diplomatic swing aimed at expanding Seoul's security, defense industry and supply chain partnerships, the presidential office said Friday. Lee will attend the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit in Ankara from July 7 to 8 before making a state visit to Mongolia from July 9 to 11, National Security Adviser Wi Sung-lac said at a briefing at Cheong Wa Dae, South Korea's presidential office. The trip will be Lee's second major multilateral diplomatic outing in less than a month, following his participation in the Group of Seven (G7) summit in Evian-les-Bains, France, in June. The presidential office said the visit is intended to broaden South Korea's diplomatic reach and accelerate cooperation with NATO member countries, which Wi described as the world’s largest defense market. Lee is scheduled to arrive in Ankara on the afternoon of July 7 and attend a small-group meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and leaders from the alliance's Indo-Pacific partners — South Korea, Japan, Australia and New Zealand — a grouping often referred to as the IP4. NATO has stepped up engagement with the four Indo-Pacific partners in recent years, saying developments in the Indo-Pacific can directly affect Euro-Atlantic security. The four countries first joined NATO leaders at the 2022 Madrid summit and later attended summits in Vilnius in 2023 and Washington in 2024. NATO says its cooperation with South Korea includes cyber defense, emerging technologies, nonproliferation and interoperability. The Ankara summit, scheduled for July 7 and 8, will be chaired by Rutte and held at the Beştepe Presidential Compound, according to NATO. The alliance's Defense Industry Forum, a high-level event on defense production, investment and innovation, will also take place in Ankara on July 7. Lee will deliver a keynote speech during the forum and later attend an official welcome dinner hosted by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and First Lady Emine Erdogan. Wi said Seoul is arranging bilateral meetings on July 8 with countries that have strong demand for practical cooperation, including in defense. He said the trip would help lay the groundwork for South Korean defense companies to enter NATO markets and build more resilient defense supply chains. South Korea has emerged as a major arms exporter, particularly after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine triggered a surge in European defense spending. Seoul has promoted its weapons systems as cost-effective, NATO-compatible and quickly deliverable, a combination that helped Korean firms win large contracts in Europe, including in Poland. The NATO summit comes as the alliance seeks to expand defense production and reinforce deterrence amid concerns over Russia, Ukraine and burden-sharing within the transatlantic alliance. Turkish Defense Minister Yasar Guler told Reuters ahead of the summit that NATO’s priorities include increased defense spending, a stronger transatlantic defense industry, alliance unity and support for Ukraine. Lee's visit also comes against the backdrop of deepening South Korea-Türkiye defense ties. Türkiye, a NATO member with the alliance's second-largest military, has worked with South Korea on major defense projects, including the Altay main battle tank. Erdogan said last year that the Altay project was one of the most successful examples of defense cooperation between the two "strategic partner" countries. South Korea and Türkiye established diplomatic ties in 1957 and often describe their relationship as one rooted in the Korean War, when Turkish troops fought under the United Nations (UN) Command. In recent years, the two countries have expanded cooperation in defense, infrastructure, energy and trade, while Ankara's role inside NATO gives Seoul an additional channel into the Euro-Atlantic security architecture. After the NATO summit, Lee will travel to Ulaanbaatar at the invitation of Mongolian President Ukhnaa Khurelsukh. Wi said it will be the first state visit to Mongolia by a South Korean president in 15 years. Lee will hold a summit with Khurelsukh on July 9, followed by an exchange of agreements and memorandums of understanding and a joint press announcement. The two leaders are also expected to issue a joint declaration setting out what the presidential office called a new "golden era" in South Korea-Mongolia relations. Lee will later deliver a keynote speech at a South Korea-Mongolia business forum attended by government officials and business leaders from both countries. South Korea and Mongolia established diplomatic relations in 1990 and upgraded their ties to a strategic partnership in 2021. Mongolia's "third neighbor" policy, which seeks to diversify its foreign relations beyond China and Russia, has helped Seoul and Ulaanbaatar expand cooperation in diplomacy, development, culture, infrastructure and resources. Critical minerals are expected to be a major focus of the visit. Mongolia is rich in natural resources, including rare metals and other minerals needed for batteries, electronics and advanced manufacturing. South Korea, whose major industries depend heavily on imported raw materials, has been trying to diversify supply chains for critical minerals. Last month, senior officials from South Korea and Mongolia launched a vice-ministerial strategic dialogue in Ulaanbaatar, where they discussed cooperation in rare metals, critical minerals, supply chains, health care and international issues. On July 10, Lee will visit a memorial hall honoring Lee Tae-joon, a Korean independence activist and doctor who practiced medicine in Mongolia and supported Korea's independence movement during Japan's colonial rule. He will also meet members of the Korean community in Mongolia over lunch. On July 11, Lee and Khurelsukh will attend the opening ceremony of Naadam, Mongolia's largest national festival. Wi said Lee will be the first South Korean president invited as guest of honor to the festival, which celebrates Mongolia's independence and national identity through traditional sports including wrestling, archery and horse racing. Wi said Mongolia is also significant because it maintains traditional ties with North Korea. He said Lee and Khurelsukh are expected to discuss peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula, regional confidence-building and possible ways to resume dialogue with Pyongyang. "The visit to Mongolia is connected to our government's push to expand cooperation with the New Northern region and diversify diplomacy," Wi said. "It will also be an opportunity to strengthen trade and supply chain cooperation with a resource-rich partner." 2026-07-03 15:17:32