Journalist

Lee Jung-woo, Kim Yeon-jae
  • Day 7 Middle East War: Trumps Iran war exposes fractured alliances and global ripples
    Day 7 Middle East War: Trump's Iran war exposes fractured alliances and global ripples SEOUL, March 06 (AJP) - The U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran under Operation Epic Fury have done more than cripple Tehran’s leadership and military infrastructure. They have also exposed deep fractures in the Western alliance system and revived questions about the future of the post–World War II international order. The campaign began with the assassination of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Feb. 28 — a dramatic opening move that President Donald Trump framed as a decisive effort to dismantle Iran’s military and nuclear capabilities. Yet the manner in which the operation unfolded — executed without meaningful consultation with traditional allies — has underscored a striking shift in Washington’s approach to global security: rapid unilateral action first, alliance management later. As Iranian missiles and drones struck Gulf targets, including near Dubai’s airport, the war quickly illustrated the unpredictable consequences of that approach. Italy’s defense minister Guido Crosetto, who happened to be vacationing in Dubai when retaliation hit the United Arab Emirates, later acknowledged that even analysts had not expected Iranian strikes on Gulf commercial hubs. Allies left in the dark Europe’s major powers — long pillars of the transatlantic alliance — were largely excluded from pre-strike deliberations, forcing governments into awkward post-facto positioning. French President Emmanuel Macron publicly acknowledged Paris had been “neither informed nor involved,” a rare and pointed rebuke that echoed across Europe. The European Union eventually convened an emergency security meeting more than two days after the strikes began, highlighting the continent’s discomfort with a war initiated outside its consultation structures. Even Britain, traditionally Washington’s closest military partner, found itself politically divided. Prime Minister Keir Starmer had earlier denied U.S. access to the British-controlled Diego Garcia base in the Indian Ocean. His subsequent cautious endorsement of the strikes drew criticism from both Labour’s anti-war wing and Conservative hawks demanding stronger support for Washington. The diplomatic confusion extended across the Middle East as well. Gulf states condemned violations of their airspace while simultaneously bracing for Iranian retaliation across the region. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and other Gulf monarchies have since faced waves of drone and missile attacks on civilian and energy infrastructure. Russia, meanwhile, has limited its response largely to rhetoric. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov condemned the strikes as aggression following talks with Iranian officials, but Moscow has offered little tangible assistance. The muted response reflects Russia’s weakened position after years of geopolitical setbacks, including heavy losses in Ukraine and the collapse of allied governments in parts of the Middle East. No coalition for ground war Security experts say the structure of the operation itself suggests Washington is not seeking a multinational ground campaign similar to those in Iraq or Afghanistan. Andrew Gordon of Harvard University said Trump’s decision to launch the war without building an international coalition will likely deter allied participation in any potential invasion. “No one expects multiple countries to join a U.S. intervention sending troops into Iran,” he said. Instead, analysts say the operation appears designed as an air- and cyber-heavy campaign aimed at weakening the Iranian state without occupying the country. Chiara Redaelli of the University of Geneva described the strategy as a shift toward coercive regime pressure conducted largely from the air. “The operation signals a move from limited strikes toward sustained military pressure without the political burden of occupation,” she said. Several analysts also expect the conflict to remain relatively short. Muhamed H. Almaliky of Harvard argues Iran’s missile and drone stockpiles could be depleted within several weeks if the country receives no outside assistance. He added regarding Iran: "Iran does not have partners or allies of the type willing to endure the risk and consequences of joining it. Apart from the proxies in Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen who are not expected to have a substantial impact on the course of the war." European participation is likely to remain limited to defensive naval deployments protecting shipping lanes, according to historian Jeremy Friedman of Harvard. A short war — but lasting disruption Even if the fighting ends quickly, analysts warn the geopolitical and economic disruptions could persist far longer. Christian Bueger of the University of Copenhagen notes that insurance premiums, shipping routes and global energy markets often remain unstable well after military operations subside. “The conflict itself may last weeks, but disruptions to trade and maritime security can last much longer,” he said. Bueger added, "U.S. leadership continues to be unpredictable. For Korea, stable regional and international partnerships become ever more important. That includes the relationship to Japan, but also ASEAN and the EU." Kenneth Rogoff, the Harvard economist, adds that the war’s strategic lessons will be closely watched by other states. He said regarding the possibility of other countries joining the war: "the US will almost certainly get some other countries to join in, though probably it will require exerting considerable leverage to do so." North Korea, already armed with nuclear weapons, may draw the conclusion that nuclear deterrence remains the ultimate protection against external intervention. Strains on the rules-based order Operation Epic Fury also raises broader questions about the future of the international system built around U.S. alliances and multilateral institutions. Jeffrey Frankel of Harvard Kennedy School said the unilateral nature of the intervention represents another blow to the post-war global framework Washington helped build. “It’s another blow to the 80-year structure of alliances and multilateral rules that the United States itself created,” he said. Redaelli similarly warned that the growing gap between Western rhetoric about a “rules-based order” and the willingness to use unilateral force risks weakening the credibility of international law. For South Korea, the war’s most immediate impact is economic rather than military. The country relies heavily on Middle Eastern energy supplies, with much of its oil passing through the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic chokepoint now under heightened risk. South Korean lawmakers have warned that even a short disruption could ripple through domestic industries ranging from petrochemicals and shipping to aviation and semiconductors. “If the Strait of Hormuz issue is not resolved promptly, Korea will inevitably be affected across all industries,” said Democratic Party lawmaker Maeng Seong-gyu, chairman of the National Assembly’s transport committee. Others see a deeper shift in the global security environment. People Power Party lawmaker Kim Ki-woong, a former vice minister of unification, argued the conflict reflects a broader transformation in international politics. “The era of norms, order and morality has ended,” he said. “We have entered an era where power is openly displayed.” As Operation Epic Fury enters its second week, its military trajectory remains uncertain. But the geopolitical implications are already clear. Trump’s strategy of decisive, alliance-light military action may weaken adversaries quickly. Yet it also risks reshaping alliances, challenging global norms and deepening geopolitical fault lines far beyond the Middle East. For countries like South Korea — deeply tied to global energy flows and U.S. security guarantees — the conflict is a stark reminder that wars fought thousands of miles away can still reshape the strategic landscape at home. 2026-03-06 17:03:18
  • AI meets Realpolitik: How the U.S.–Anthropic rift turned a drone strike into a tech crisis
    AI meets Realpolitik: How the U.S.–Anthropic rift turned a drone strike into a tech crisis SEOUL, March 05 (AJP) - In the latest contradiction from Washington, President Donald Trump last Friday ordered federal agencies to “immediately” stop using what he called the “radical-left” artificial intelligence systems developed by Anthropic, while the U.S. defense secretary labeled the company a risk to “national security.” Only hours later, the president authorized Operation Epic Fury. Within days, the very system Washington had just denounced proved instrumental in the operation — and in Operation Roaring Lion, the parallel Israeli campaign. The same AI platform that helped track and capture the Venezuelan president in February was again deployed to process intelligence and coordinate battlefield decisions. The paradox reveals how deeply generative AI has become embedded in modern warfare — and how dependent even the world’s most powerful military has grown on privately developed algorithms. The U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), which oversees military operations across the Middle East, relied extensively on Anthropic’s Claude AI to process vast volumes of imaging and signal intelligence, identify potential targets, and simulate strike scenarios. The tool remained in active use even after Trump publicly ordered a government-wide phaseout of Anthropic software. The administration cited the company’s refusal to allow its models to be deployed in “all lawful scenarios,” including intelligence operations that could involve U.S. citizens or autonomous weapons. The Iran strike therefore ignited not only a new debate over AI ethics and civilian oversight but also an unexpected reshuffling of the global AI market. A clash of ethics and wartime pragmatism At the heart of the dispute lies a philosophical and contractual standoff between Anthropic — one of the United States’ leading AI research firms — and the Trump administration. Founded by former OpenAI engineers with a reputation for cautious, human-centered design, Anthropic has placed explicit limits on how its systems may be used. Its internal policies prohibit deployment in large-scale domestic surveillance, autonomous weapons, or operations lacking human oversight. Those guardrails collided directly with the Pentagon’s wartime requirements. In late January, defense officials argued that generative AI operating within classified networks must be unrestricted — usable for “all lawful purposes.” Anthropic’s refusal effectively froze the renewal of its defense contract. The White House responded by designating the company a “supply chain risk entity” and began shifting intelligence infrastructure toward competing models developed by OpenAI and Elon Musk’s xAI. Yet disentangling Claude from U.S. military systems is far from simple. For more than a year, the model had been integrated across critical elements of CENTCOM’s operational environment, from communications filtering to satellite imagery analysis. Its ability to transform raw surveillance data into actionable intelligence made it indispensable to analysts and commanders. Defense experts say replacing the system will take months — an eternity in conflicts defined by real-time decision-making and algorithmic speed. The battlefield paradox The February strike against Iran illustrated the contradiction with unusual clarity. Even as Trump publicly branded Anthropic a national security threat, CENTCOM units continued using Claude-enabled analytics to coordinate drone and mortar operations, identify high-value targets, and estimate potential civilian casualties before strikes. According to intelligence officials, no commercially available AI currently matches the system’s ability to adapt rapidly to dynamic battlefield data without creating internal network vulnerabilities. The episode exposes a deeper strategic dilemma. As militaries integrate generative AI into operational planning, the line between ethical constraint and strategic disadvantage becomes increasingly blurred. Anthropic’s position — that democratic societies should restrict AI use in surveillance and autonomous warfare — resonates with digital rights advocates. For defense planners, however, such restrictions risk slowing decision cycles in conflicts where milliseconds matter. The result is a distinctly twenty-first century paradox: moral restraint may now carry logistical costs. Silicon Valley solidarity The political fallout spread quickly through Silicon Valley. In the days following the Iran strikes, traffic to Anthropic’s Claude platform surged to record levels, briefly causing service outages, according to Bloomberg. The spike reflected growing demand among developers and businesses seeking what many describe as “ethically aligned AI.” OpenAI, whose models underpin several major U.S. government systems, found itself in the opposite position. Recent defense contracts — combined with reports that company executives donated to a pro-Trump political action committee — sparked a social media backlash dubbed the “QuitGPT” movement, as critics warned that AI leadership was becoming politically entangled. Meanwhile, Google’s Gemini platform seized the moment to close the competitive gap. Internal teams reportedly accelerated security certification processes for defense-related deployments, hoping to capture government contracts displaced by the Trump–Anthropic dispute. Industry analysts now describe an emerging “tripolar” race for AI dominance, where corporate ethics, geopolitical alignment, and national security priorities are increasingly intertwined. The confrontation also triggered an unusual display of solidarity across Silicon Valley. Hundreds of employees from Google, Anthropic, and even OpenAI signed an open letter titled “We Will Not Be Divided.” The statement condemned the Trump administration’s designation of Anthropic as a security risk and warned against “state interference in scientific research ecosystems.” Academics and civil society leaders echoed the concern, arguing that the dispute reflects a broader struggle over political control of technological innovation. The rhetoric recalled earlier moments in American tech history — the encryption wars of the 1990s, the Snowden revelations, and the pandemic-era battles over online speech. But the stakes are now significantly higher. Never before has a militarized AI system become a central geopolitical controversy while an active conflict was unfolding. Global ripple effects The repercussions are already spreading beyond the United States. European policymakers, wary of unregulated military AI, have cited the dispute as evidence supporting stricter oversight under the forthcoming EU AI Act. In Israel — a key participant in the Iran operation — defense officials have privately expressed concern about the reliability of U.S. technology partnerships. Chinese state media, meanwhile, portrayed the episode as proof of what it called “chaotic dependence” within American digital infrastructure. Financial markets have reflected the uncertainty. Venture capital has begun flowing toward smaller “responsible AI” startups in Canada and the United Kingdom, as investors bet that ethical compliance could become a competitive advantage. At the same time, U.S. defense technology firms such as Palantir and Anduril rallied on expectations that the Pentagon will accelerate investment in AI-driven battlefield systems. The end of the civilian–military divide The deeper shift, analysts say, is structural. Military strategy, software governance, and domestic politics are rapidly converging into a single ecosystem. AI systems that once belonged in academic laboratories now sit at the center of global power projection. Every algorithm carries geopolitical consequences. The Trump administration’s confrontation with Anthropic has forced the technology sector to confront a fundamental question: whether “civilian AI” can still exist separately from military applications. For decades, defense-funded research produced technologies that later became civilian infrastructure — the internet, GPS, and the neural networks underpinning today’s AI models. Generative AI, however, is different. Its adaptability and general-purpose nature make strict boundaries almost impossible to enforce. For companies like Anthropic, ethical safeguards are core to their identity. For governments operating in crisis, those limits increasingly appear impractical. The Iran operation exposed that divide in stark terms: a president eager to project power, a company defending its principles, and a military choosing performance over politics. That tension may define the next stage of the AI revolution. 2026-03-05 08:35:13
  • Middle East crisis: Korea pulled into war axis with 70% oil exposure
    Middle East crisis: Korea pulled into war axis with 70% oil exposure SEOUL, March 03 (AJP) - South Korea sources roughly 70 percent of its crude oil from the Middle East — and about 95 percent of that volume passes through the narrow Strait of Hormuz off Iran’s coast. Tankers bound for Korea and other Asian destinations must transit the strategic waterway, navigating under the shadow of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which has threatened to “set fire” to vessels and “not let a single drop of oil leave the region.” The warning sent immediate tremors through Seoul’s financial markets, contributing to a 6.6 percent plunge in the benchmark KOSPI on Tuesday. According to the Korea Petroleum Association, 69.1 percent of the 1.028 billion barrels of crude oil South Korea imported last year came from the Middle East. Separately, 20.4 percent of liquefied natural gas imports were sourced from the region. The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most critical energy chokepoints. About 15 million barrels per day — roughly 27 percent of global seaborne crude oil trade — transit the strait. The world’s largest tankers shuttle oil and gas from the Middle East to Asia through the 21-mile-wide, 100-mile-long passage, bordered by Iran to the north and Oman and the United Arab Emirates to the south. Given that 65.65 percent of South Korea’s imported crude passed through Hormuz last year, a prolonged disruption would severely complicate the country’s energy procurement. Seoul is preparing contingency measures should the oil shock intensify. First Vice Minister of Economy and Finance Lee Hyoung-il said Tuesday that if “any signs of abnormality” emerge from the U.S.–Iran conflict, authorities would swiftly deploy the government’s 100 trillion won-plus market stabilization program in coordination with relevant agencies. The government has held daily emergency meetings since the Feb. 28 strikes. Officials stress that South Korea currently faces no immediate supply disruption, although traffic through the strait has slowed to a crawl since hostilities flared up over the weekend. The last Korean-flagged vessel to transit the passage was an HMM container ship that exited the Strait of Hormuz safely on Sunday without incident. Authorities say strategic reserves provide a significant buffer. The International Energy Agency (IEA) recommends member states maintain emergency oil stocks equivalent to at least 90 days of net imports. South Korea’s government-held crude reserves stand at about 100 million barrels — enough for 117 days of consumption. Including private-sector inventories, officials estimate the country has secured more than 200 days’ worth of supply. Still, Lee said Seoul is exploring alternative sourcing outside the Middle East should the conflict drag on. Jane Boulden, professor at the Royal Military College of Canada, said the immediate impact on countries such as South Korea would likely be economic. “The first effect would be sustained increases in oil prices and disruptions to global supply chains if shipping restrictions persist,” she said. Christian Lequesne, professor at Sciences Po, predicted short-term oil price spikes but noted that if Iran were to attack multiple Gulf states, stronger regional coordination could help contain price pressures. “It would take time for the United States to reopen the Strait of Hormuz if Iran actively obstructs it,” Lequesne said, adding that such an operation would be difficult but “not impossible for the U.S. Navy.” The New York Times reported Monday that South Korea and Japan are among the Asian economies most vulnerable to a Hormuz blockade due to their heavy reliance on Middle Eastern energy and limited domestic production. Japan imports about 90 percent of its crude oil from the Middle East and has stockpiled reserves equivalent to 254 days of supply as of the end of last year. Japan’s three major shipping companies — Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Nippon Yusen and Kawasaki Kisen — have suspended navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, ordering vessels to remain in safer waters, according to the Nikkei newspaper. Like South Korea, Japan sources crude oil and LNG from the Middle East via Hormuz, underscoring the broader Asian exposure to any sustained blockade. South Korea’s National Intelligence Service (NIS) announced Wednesday that it has formed a “Middle East Situation Response Task Force” and is holding daily emergency review meetings chaired by its director. Established on Feb. 28, the task force is monitoring supply-chain risks and providing real-time intelligence to relevant agencies. The NIS is conducting on-site inspections across the energy, logistics, defense and shipbuilding sectors in preparation for a potential Hormuz disruption. The agency also warned that terrorist groups could exploit regional instability to stage attacks and said it is intensifying domestic and international terrorism risk assessments and preventive measures. For now, South Korea remains shielded by its reserves and stable tanker operations. But with roughly two-thirds of its crude flowing through a single narrow corridor flanked by Iranian waters, the country remains tightly tethered to the trajectory of a widening Gulf conflict. 2026-03-03 16:43:28
  • Asian Culture Calendar
    Asian Culture Calendar SEOUL, February 27 (AJP) - Dec. 5 - Mar. 15 Garden of Morning Calm Winter Lights Festival 2026 Mar. 15 Seoul Marathon 2026 Mar. 14 - 16 Jeju Fire Festival Mar. 29 - Apr. 6 Jinhae Gunhangje Festival Japan Mar. 1 Konomiya Naked Festival Mar. 6 Umekoji Handicrafts Market Feb.1 - May 24 Kyoto Nippon Festival 2026 Mar. 9 - 22 Grand Sumo Tournament 2026 Hong Kong Mar. 21 Complex Live! Mar. 27 - 29 Art Basel Hong Kong Feb. 27 - Mar. 30 The 54th Hong Kong Arts Festival Mar. 25 - 29 Art Central 2026 Singapore Mar. 21 Hari Raya Puasa 2026-02-27 16:11:37
  • Coupang keeps up sales, but Q4 data shock exposes cash and trust risks
    Coupang keeps up sales, but Q4 data shock exposes cash and trust risks SEOUL, February 27 (AJP) - Coupang Inc.’s fourth-quarter numbers told a stark story: revenue rose 11 percent year-on-year to $8.84 billion, yet operating income collapsed 97 percent to just $8 million, and net income swung from a $156 million profit a year earlier to a $26 million loss. The sharp deterioration, driven largely by a massive data breach disclosed in November, undercut profitability, disrupted cash conversion and triggered regulatory scrutiny on both sides of the Pacific — even as the company posted record annual revenue for 2025. According to its filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the South Korean e-commerce giant, headquartered in the United States, generated $34.53 billion in net revenue in 2025, up 14 percent year-on-year and 18 percent on a constant-currency basis. Net income attributable to shareholders reached $208 million, while adjusted EBITDA increased to $1.49 billion from $1.38 billion a year earlier. Gross profit climbed 15 percent to $10.14 billion, with margin improving modestly to 29.4 percent. On the surface, scale and operating leverage appear intact. But free cash flow tells a different story. Free cash flow fell to $527 million in 2025 from $1.02 billion in 2024 — a 48 percent decline, representing $489 million less in cash generation. Management explicitly attributed the drop primarily to “the impact the data incident had on working capital in Q4 2025,” alongside elevated capital expenditures. Operating cash flow slipped to $1.773 billion from $1.886 billion a year earlier. Meanwhile, equipment-related capital expenditures surged to $1.015 billion from $634 million. The working capital shock is particularly revealing. Coupang’s business model depends on rapid cash cycles — collecting from customers quickly while managing payables efficiently. In the fourth quarter, however, cash lingered in refunds, credits, remediation costs and legal provisions rather than converting cleanly into free cash flow. Demand did not collapse. Cash efficiency did. Fourth-quarter profitability cratered The October–December quarter marked a sharp inflection. Revenue rose 11 percent year-on-year to $8.84 billion. However, operating income plunged to $8 million — a 97 percent decline — while net income swung to a $26 million loss. Adjusted EBITDA fell to $267 million from $421 million, with margin compressing from 5.3 percent to 3.0 percent. Sequentially, revenue declined from $9.27 billion in the third quarter to $8.84 billion in the fourth, marking a rare quarter-on-quarter contraction since Coupang’s 2021 New York listing. Gross margin deteriorated by 248 basis points in Q4, underscoring the cost of remediation, security upgrades and customer-related expenses following the breach. The episode illustrates a classic platform dynamic: transaction volumes can remain resilient, but profitability can deteriorate quickly when trust is impaired. Bom Kim: Trust remains central On the earnings conference call, founder and board chairman Bom Kim acknowledged the setback. “Everything Coupang has achieved has been driven by our single goal of delivering a Wow experience to our customers,” he said. “We are doing our utmost to earn customers' trust, as nothing is more serious for us than failing to meet their expectations.” He added, “While we faced challenges this quarter, particularly with the data incident, we remain committed to strengthening our operations and expanding our offerings. Our strong cash position allows us to invest in long-term growth opportunities.” The remarks reflect management’s effort to frame the incident as a temporary disruption rather than a structural impairment. The key question for investors, however, is whether the working capital shock was truly one-off — or whether heightened cybersecurity spending, compliance costs and customer incentives will structurally weigh on margins. Core resilient, expansions magnify volatility Coupang’s Product Commerce segment — including Rocket Delivery and Fresh — generated $29.59 billion in annual revenue, up 11 percent. Adjusted EBITDA improved to $2.5 billion, with margin expanding to 8.4 percent. Active customers rose 8 percent year-on-year to 24.6 million in Q4, suggesting the core ecosystem remains broadly intact despite the breach. By contrast, Developing Offerings — including Coupang Eats, Taiwan operations and newer initiatives — posted revenue growth of 38 percent to $4.94 billion, but adjusted EBITDA losses widened to $995 million. This imbalance amplifies consolidated volatility: while the core produces steady cash flow, expansion businesses increase sensitivity to shocks. The fourth-quarter incident exposed how quickly margin compression in emerging segments can compound pressure from unexpected events. "While its convenience once defined its brand, the recent data breach has shifted consumer perception from a local champion to a detached U.S. corporation, a sentiment now mirrored by similar challenges in Taiwan. Rebuilding this fractured consumer trust will be the defining hurdle for Coupang’s long-term sustainability in 2026," said Lee Hong-joo, professor of Business Administration at Catholic University. Regulatory scrutiny intensifies The breach involved unauthorized access to roughly 34 million customer accounts, exposing names, phone numbers and shipping addresses, though not payment details or login credentials. South Korea’s Personal Information Protection Commission has launched an investigation into whether Coupang’s internal access controls met legal standards. In the United States, members of Congress have sought briefings on the scope of the breach, reflecting the company’s status as a New York–listed firm subject to global governance scrutiny. While management says no secondary misuse has been detected, the scale of the breach presents a significant reputational risk in a subscription-driven model built on loyalty and trust. Coupang shares closed Thursday at $18.71 on the Nasdaq, up 1.91 percent in regular trading. Following the earnings release, the stock fell roughly 3.6–3.7 percent in after-hours trading. 2026-02-27 11:59:46
  • How 60-second micro-dramas are redefining screen culture
    How 60-second micro-dramas are redefining screen culture SEOUL, February 26 (AJP) - Over the past two decades, researchers have found that the average time people remain focused on a single task has fallen from roughly 2.5 minutes to about 40 seconds. For a generation raised on scrolling rather than scheduled programming, sitting through a two-hour film can feel like a commitment. A drama told in one or two minutes, however, fits neatly into the rhythm of daily life. Micro-dramas — serialized stories delivered in 60 to 120 seconds — are rapidly becoming one of the most consumed forms of visual entertainment worldwide. In South Korea, the surge has been particularly pronounced. According to Seoul-based short drama platform Beegloo, four of the five most-watched series this month are micro-dramas. While many titles initially targeted women in their 20s to 40s, the audience is broadening. Data show the core demographic is older than expected: women aged 35 and above now account for more than half of Beegloo’s global users. The rise of micro-dramas signals a structural shift within the already booming short-form content market. For years, web dramas with 10- to 15-minute episodes dominated digital storytelling. Now the attention economy favors speed, compression and emotional intensity. Micro-dramas are not confined to South Korea. Data from British research firm Omdia show the global market was valued at $11 billion last year and is projected to reach $14 billion this year. Nearly half of the $3 billion generated outside China comes from the United States alone. Regional breakdowns underscore the genre’s breadth. Latin America accounted for 27 percent of all short-form drama app downloads in the first quarter of last year — nearly 100 million downloads, up 69 percent year-on-year. Southeast Asia followed with 24 percent, a 61 percent annual increase. India, Europe and the U.S. each now hold between 7 and 11 percent of the global share. China remains a major growth engine, powered by domestic apps such as ReelShort and DramaBox. Both reported in-app purchase revenue growth exceeding 30 percent over the past year. According to Omdia’s analysis based on SensorTower data, ReelShort users in the U.S. average 35.7 minutes of daily viewing time — surpassing Netflix (24.8 minutes), Amazon Prime Video (26.9 minutes) and Disney+ (23 minutes). “I’m looking at Korean ones now through Vigloo and can compare them to shorts I often see on TikTok, YouTube and Instagram. The sheer volume of short sequences is striking,” said Patrick Parra Pennefather, a professor at the University of British Columbia. “Chinese and Korean micro-dramas are more developed,” he added. “With tools like Seedance 2, we may see new micro formats emerge — perhaps even original content built around generative AI. I’ve seen good, bad and a lot of slop.” A Battle for Attention Despite high daily viewing times, micro-drama platforms still trail major streaming services in monthly active users. Netflix counts roughly 12 million active users in the United States — about ten times more than ReelShort. Yet the disparity reveals something more nuanced: even with fewer users, micro-drama apps generate longer engagement per viewer. Their addictive brevity and algorithmic targeting reward repetition. “Micro-dramas aren’t just replacing television — they’re reprogramming how we consume stories,” said David Oh, professor of global media at Syracuse University. “Their power lies in how seamlessly they fit our digital habits.” Micro-dramas first gained traction in China’s mobile video ecosystem before spreading across Asia and onto global platforms such as TikTok, YouTube Shorts and Instagram Reels. Their narrative DNA blends soap opera melodrama with mobile-first design. Episodes often open mid-crisis — an affair exposed, a slap delivered, a betrayal revealed — pulling viewers instantly into the next clip. Earlier theories linked the popularity of webtoons and web dramas to commuting culture — watching or reading while riding the subway. But that explanation no longer suffices. “This isn’t just about mobility,” Oh said. “It’s about how deeply the mobile phone has become the center of everyday life.” Shortened attention spans, constant multitasking and algorithm-driven “instant payoff” loops form the psychological foundation of this viewing culture. Even pop songs are getting shorter. Time compression has seeped into storytelling, music and cognition itself. Micro-dramas embrace melodrama unapologetically. Betrayal, revenge and infidelity are recycled at high speed, echoing the “makjang” dramas once dominant in Korean prime time — but now compressed to 10x tempo. Emotional clarity replaces narrative complexity. In Southeast Asia and Latin America in particular, micro-dramas have become accessible entertainment for lower-income smartphone users with limited data plans or time. Light bandwidth, brief runtimes and emotional directness make them globally adaptable in ways prestige streaming often is not. As micro-dramas reshape storytelling grammar, traditional television faces recalibration. High-concept series such as Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones are likely to retain loyal audiences. But mid-tier shows may increasingly borrow from micro-drama logic. “We’re seeing split attention — people scrolling while watching TV,” Oh noted. “That means hour-long shows will pack in more frequent payoffs: twists, fights, shocks. It’s not a revolution, but an intensification of television’s existing strategies.” Long-form storytelling may begin to mirror short-form rhythms — faster cuts, sharper escalation and denser emotional triggers. Film faces a more uncertain path. On streaming platforms, the social discipline of the theater — no phones, no distractions — has weakened. To hold attention, films may simplify narratives and amplify spectacle. But the opposite scenario is plausible. As everything else shrinks, cinema could double down on scale: immersive sound, collective viewing and emotional grandeur. “Survival for film,” Oh suggested, “may depend on reminding audiences what ‘big’ really feels like.” In Seoul, telecom companies are already exploring micro-dramas as a subscription driver. Bundling short-drama platforms into mobile plans mirrors earlier streaming strategies: the more users watch, the longer they remain within an ecosystem. Production houses are investing heavily. Some operate industrial-scale studios churning out serialized one-minute episodes. Others experiment with generative AI tools to script dialogue and edit footage to algorithmic pacing. 2026-02-26 17:38:32
  • Chinas Seedance unleashes dispute on how far AI can go in fiction
    China's Seedance unleashes dispute on how far AI can go in fiction SEOUL, February 25 (AJP) - The release of Seedance 2.0, an AI-powered video generator developed by ByteDance, has triggered a fresh wave of copyright disputes between technology firms and the global entertainment industry amid blurry border in the fictional realm. After users began circulating AI-generated clips featuring characters resembling Spider-Man and Deadpool, major studios including Disney and Paramount Pictures issued cease-and-desist letters, accusing the platform of enabling large-scale copyright infringement. To assess the legal and regulatory implications, AJP spoke with leading legal scholars in Asia, Europe, Australia, and the United States. Their views suggest that the controversy sits at the intersection of unsettled law, rapid technological change, and growing pressure for industry self-regulation. Training Data vs. Copyrighted Expression Park Kyung Sin, a professor of law at Korea University, draws a crucial distinction between learning from copyrighted material and reproducing it. “Whether AI can claim authorship is a separate question from whether it should be allowed to train on copyrighted works,” Park said. “Copyright protects expressions, not ideas.” In his view, most AI training resembles human learning. “AI does not retain books, films, or images as such. It retains statistical relationships between tokens. Just as a human can read a book and absorb its ideas without infringing copyright, a machine should be able to do the same.” However, Park cautions that the technical process itself may pose legal problems. “The tokenization process involves copying copyrighted works. Technically, that can constitute infringement. Courts are now debating whether this copying qualifies as fair use.” U.S. courts have reached mixed conclusions, while some European rulings have taken a more restrictive stance. More troubling, Park argues, is Seedance’s apparent ability to reproduce recognizable characters. “If Seedance retains and reproduces complete images of Spider-Man on demand, that is clearly infringement,” he said. “ByteDance can and should install filters to block outputs that replicate training material.” He added that while parody and satire can sometimes justify reuse, mass automated reproduction does not. Who Owns AI-Created Works? Ilanah Fhima, professor of intellectual property law at University College London, points to deep international uncertainty over authorship. “There is no global consensus on whether copyright should exist in AI-generated works,” she said. “Most copyright laws were written before this technology existed.” Copyright traditionally rests on human originality. That assumption is now under strain. “The U.S. has refused to recognize AI as an author,” Fhima noted. “The UK, however, has long recognized ‘computer-generated works,’ although this has not yet been tested in modern AI cases.” China has issued rulings suggesting limited protection for AI-generated content, while other jurisdictions remain undecided. Another unresolved question concerns users. “There is an ongoing debate about whether the person who designs the prompt should receive copyright, based on their creative input,” Fhima said. These differences mean that cases against platforms like ByteDance could set precedents far beyond any single country. Fair Use and Platform Responsibility David Super, a professor at Georgetown University, sees multiple legal vulnerabilities in AI video tools. “First, training often involves physical copying,” he said. “That likely counts as copying under copyright law.” Whether such copying qualifies as fair use remains unclear. “Fair use usually requires that the copying not undermine the market for the original work,” Super explained. “If AI-generated videos substitute for movies or licensed clips, that argument weakens.” Beyond training data, Super highlighted the issue of secondary liability. “Selling technology that enables illegal copying can itself create liability,” he said, citing landmark U.S. cases involving video recorders and file-sharing software. While earlier rulings protected technologies with legitimate uses, later decisions imposed liability when companies encouraged infringement. “Many AI tools advertise themselves as ‘uncensored,’” Super said. “Courts may see that as encouraging copyright violations.” If so, manufacturers could be held responsible for how users deploy their products. Cultural Change and Platform Regulation Akshaya Kamalnath, professor at the Australian National University College of Law, argues that the debate extends beyond courtroom doctrine. “This is also a cultural shift,” she said. “AI clips often function more like memes than traditional films.” That distinction, she suggests, may push regulators toward platform-based solutions rather than relying solely on copyright lawsuits. Actors and performers, meanwhile, face separate risks. “Individuals can object to the unauthorized use of their likeness,” Kamalnath noted. “This overlaps with deepfake regulation.” In India, platforms must remove deepfakes within hours of receiving notices. Similar rules are emerging elsewhere. She also points to competitive pressures. “Companies are racing to release products first and fix problems later. This reflects competition not only between firms, but between countries.” The Rise of Industry Guardrails James Grimmelmann, professor of digital and information law at Cornell University, observes that many AI firms are now moving toward self-regulation. “There are still no definitive court rulings,” he said. “But most companies are building copyright guardrails into their systems.” These systems aim to block outputs involving identifiable characters, celebrities, or copyrighted scenes. “Seedance launched without strong safeguards,” Grimmelmann said. “ByteDance quickly realized that was risky and began adding them.” He believes such measures are now becoming standard. “Companies understand that without guardrails, they face serious legal exposure.” A Test Case for AI and Entertainment Taken together, experts agree that the most immediate legal danger for platforms like Seedance lies not in training data, but in output. Reproducing recognizable characters, enabling large-scale imitation, and marketing tools in ways that encourage infringement all carry significant risk. ByteDance has promised new safeguards, but has not paused the rollout of Seedance 2.0. At the same time, lawsuits against other AI firms signal that the conflict is far from isolated. The coming years are likely to determine whether courts accept the idea that AI “learns like humans,” or conclude that mass automated generation fundamentally alters creative markets. For now, the Seedance controversy stands as an early test of how law, culture, and technology will negotiate the boundaries of creativity in the age of machines. 2026-02-25 17:25:35
  • Defiant Trump vows to stand firm on tariffs despite Supreme Court ruling
    Defiant Trump vows to stand firm on tariffs despite Supreme Court ruling SEOUL, February 25 (AJP) - U.S. President Donald Trump on Tuesday signaled he would not back down on tariffs, despite a Supreme Court ruling against his tariff policy last week. "A very unfortunate ruling, but the good news is that almost all countries and corporations want to keep the deal that they already made..... knowing that the legal power that I as president have to make a new deal could be far worse for them, and therefore they will continue to work along the same successful path that we had negotiated before the Supreme Court's unfortunate involvement," he said during his first State of the Union address in his non-consecutive second term. The remarks came just several days after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down his sweeping global tariffs policy, ruling that Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose broad import duties was unlawful. The decision dealt a significant blow to one of the administration's signature economic initiatives. Undeterred, Trump wasted no time resorting to alternative measures such as Section 122 and Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 and Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, threatening to reimpose global tariffs of up to 15 percent. He then doubled down further, declaring that import duties could one day replace income taxes even as his administration faces major legal and political obstacles to that vision. "As time goes by, I believe the tariffs paid by foreign countries will, as in the past, substantially replace the modern-day system of income tax," Trump said to applause from Republican lawmakers, claiming that such a shift would "take a great financial burden off the people that I love." "So despite the disappointing ruling, these powerful country saving - it's saving our country the kind of money we're taking in - peace protecting - many of the wars I settled was because of the threat of tariffs I wouldn’t have been able to settle them without - will remain in place under fully approved and tested alternative legal statutes," Trump said, adding that "congressional action will not be necessary." "And therefore, they will continue to work along the same successful path that we had negotiated before the Supreme Court's unfortunate involvement," he said. Trump's unwavering stance leaves uncertainty looming and complicates calculations, as tariff deals are not merely economic matters but are closely linked to national security and defense concerns. Earlier in the day, South Korean Ambassador to the U.S. Kang Kyung-wha said at a press briefing with South Korean correspondents in Washington, D.C., that Seoul has been "closely monitoring" the Trump administration's follow-up moves while supporting upcoming discussions with Washington, aiming to ensure they proceed "in a favorable atmosphere." Washington's trade community has also turned its attention to newly opened investigations under Section 301, with speculation mounting that the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) could examine potential "discriminatory practices" against U.S. tech and digital platforms, including e-commerce giant Coupang, which claims it suffered unfair treatment during a probe related to its massive data leak late last year. Tuesday's address came after over a year of rapid deregulation, a record number of executive actions, and a turbulent political climate marked by mass layoffs, aggressive immigration enforcement, and a partial shutdown at the Department of Homeland Security. While Trump used the address to project confidence in his economic stewardship ahead of November's U.S. midterm elections, recent polls suggest public opinion remains divided. A PBS News/NPR/Marist survey found that 60 percent of Americans believe the country is worse off than a year ago, compared with 40 percent who say it has improved. 2026-02-25 15:49:54
  • Vice FM Kim pledges inter-Korean dialogue on humanitarian issues at UN rights council
    Vice FM Kim pledges inter-Korean dialogue on humanitarian issues at UN rights council SEOUL, February 24 (AJP) - Seoul will pursue inter-Korean dialogue to address humanitarian issues such as family reunions and the return of detainees, Vice Foreign Minister Kim Jin-a said Monday at the United Nations Human Rights Council. In a keynote address to the council’s 61st session in Geneva, Kim said the government would work closely with the international community to achieve “practical” improvements in the human rights of North Korean residents. “It will pursue inter-Korean dialogue to resolve humanitarian issues such as separated families, abductees, detainees and prisoners of war,” the Foreign Ministry said in a statement, quoting Kim. She also reaffirmed South Korea’s commitment to its role as a council member for the 2025–2027 term, pledging to help promote global norms for stronger protection and advancement of human rights. Kim highlighted Seoul’s efforts to narrow social and development gaps arising from new technologies, including artificial intelligence, as well as challenges related to youth, climate change, digital innovation, welfare and healthcare. She voiced support for international action to eliminate conflict-related sexual violence, noting that South Korea remains committed to restoring the honor and dignity of victims of Japan’s wartime sexual slavery. Kim also introduced a recent amendment to the Comfort Women Victims Protection Act, which aims to strengthen protections against the spread of false information about survivors. During her visit to Geneva from Feb. 23 to 25, Kim met with UN Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights Nada Al-Nashif to discuss cooperation on North Korean human rights and South Korea-led priorities on technology, local governance and human rights. She also held talks with International Committee of the Red Cross Secretary General Pierre Krähenbühl, with both sides agreeing to strengthen cooperation amid growing humanitarian crises linked to global armed conflicts. 2026-02-24 16:41:14
  • AI reckoning: when Chinese algorithms start making movies
    AI reckoning: when Chinese algorithms start making movies SEOUL, February 23 (AJP) - When clips of Spider-Man crouching on a rain-soaked Shanghai skyline and Deadpool delivering punchlines in fluent Mandarin began circulating on Chinese social media last month, Hollywood C-suite were impressed. Then they panicked. The videos were generated by Seedance 2.0, an artificial intelligence tool developed by ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok. With a short line of text, users could summon short films complete with soundtracks, camera movement and dialogue — often featuring copyrighted characters. Within days, major studios were drafting cease-and-desist letters. It was not the first time generative video technology had unsettled the film industry. Tools such as Sora, Runway’s Gen-3 Alpha and Pika had already previewed a future in which movies could be produced from prose. But Seedance struck a deeper nerve — not only for its technical quality, but for how easily it collapsed the boundary between fandom, piracy and production. When Seedance-generated clips featuring Marvel and Pixar characters went viral, Disney and Paramount accused ByteDance of facilitating copyright infringement. Japan’s Agency for Cultural Affairs soon opened an inquiry after anime-style shorts appeared online without authorization. ByteDance said it was strengthening safeguards. The dispute echoes earlier battles in the West. In 2023, The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft over training data. A year later, Reddit filed suit against Perplexity over unauthorized scraping. Together, the cases expose a growing contradiction: media companies condemn unlicensed data use, even as they quietly integrate AI into their own production pipelines. Disney, according to industry sources, has since signed a licensing agreement with OpenAI’s Sora worth roughly $1 billion. Protest and participation now coexist. Beneath the legal disputes lies a more unsettling question: Is artificial intelligence creating anything at all? “If a user is required to initiate the process, then the AI has not really created the film,” said Gwen Grewal, a philosopher at The New School for Social Research. “It has compiled it. Like a production manager or editor.” Without consciousness, she argues, there is no intention — and without intention, no true authorship. Grewal traces the issue to existential philosophy, from Heidegger to Sartre, which links creativity to human awareness of limits. “People are born into systems they did not choose,” she said. “But they know they can become something more. Does AI have that impulse? Can it reject its own work? Can it care if it fails?” Seedance can generate surprises, even for its engineers. But it cannot “mean” what it produces. That distinction, she suggests, may define the boundary between creation and computation. Not everyone in the film world sees AI as an existential threat. “I don’t think directors have much to fear,” said Shin Haerin, a professor at Korea University’s College of Media and Communication. “What AI cannot replicate is intention,” she said. “That will become more valuable, not less.” She compares the shift to fashion. “As we distinguish between ready-to-wear and haute couture, cinema will divide between automated content and intentional filmmaking.” In this view, AI will dominate fast, disposable entertainment — short clips, personalized stories, viral visuals — while human filmmakers retreat into slower, more deliberate work. Polish will matter less than purpose. That Seedance emerged from Beijing is no accident. Over the past year, China has placed generative AI and robotics at the center of national strategy, investing heavily in chips, automation and algorithms. The rise of Seedance follows the breakthrough of DeepSeek, which became the most-downloaded free app in the U.S. Apple Store in 2025, briefly overtaking ChatGPT. Together, they signal China’s ambition to compete not just in manufacturing, but in cultural technology. For Beijing, AI is also a soft-power tool. By enabling users to generate cinematic content in Mandarin, Cantonese and minority languages, platforms like Seedance could reduce reliance on Hollywood imports and strengthen domestic entertainment ecosystems. What begins as hobbyist creativity may evolve into a parallel film industry. Seedance 2.0 has not ended cinema. Nor has it solved creativity. But it has exposed how fragile the old boundaries have become — between studio and fan, artist and algorithm, inspiration and imitation. In the coming years, the central question may no longer be whether AI can make films. It will be whether audiences still care who made them. 2026-02-23 18:08:18