On March 30-31, 2009, the Institute of the Far East of the Russian Academy of Sciences hosted the XIII scientific conference of Russian and CIS Korean studies "Korean Peninsula: a time of new challenges", which annually discusses a range of problems related to the Korean Peninsula, and scientists from Russia and CIS countries have the opportunity to exchange experience and opinions on issues of interest to them. The conference was also attended by representatives of government agencies and private organizations, specialists in related fields. The 37 reports presented are divided into three sections: "Politics", "Economics", and "History and Culture".

Opening the conference, M. L. Titarenko, Director of the Institute of International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences, noted that in the new, difficult historical conditions, the goals of the scientific forum are changing, which should not only cover, but also promptly respond to acute problems arising in the Korean direction. Among such problems, he attributed: the curtailment of the national dialogue in relations between South Korea and the DPRK caused by the policy of the new President of the Republic of Korea Lee Myung-bak, the global financial crisis, the prospects for a new US course towards the DPRK with the arrival of Barack Obama in the White House, etc.

Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Republic of Korea to the Russian Federation Lee Gyu-hyun noted that the Conference of Korean studies in the IDA was first held in 1996 and now rightfully occupies an important place not only in Russian Korean studies, but also among the world forums of this level. The ambassador further noted that since the establishment of diplomatic relations between Russia and South Korea in 1998, they are constantly improving, and under the current president, Lee Myung-bak, they have acquired the status of strategic ones. Speaking about the importance of this forum, Lee Gyu Hyun said that its materials will undoubtedly be used in the future by Korean diplomats to build the policy of the Republic of Korea towards Russia.

Oleg Davydov (Russian Foreign Ministry) stressed that the current situation in the republic differs from the previous one in its dynamism, it requires constant analysis and rapid response. Oleg Davydov rightly noted that Russian Korean scholars have done a lot to study politics in the DPRK and the ROK, but there are still a number of problems that have not yet been studied enough. This is the policy of the United States, China and Japan in North Korea, the lack of interest in the problems of modern and contemporary history (the Korean War, the activities of the military administration in 1945, the national liberation movement in Korea, etc.).

The "Politics" section (12 reports) focused on the settlement of the DPRK nuclear issue, the new course of the US administration, and the DPRK's relations with China.-

page 158
it, the policy of President Lee Myung-bak, the dialogue between the ROK and the DPRK, etc. Presentations were made by: A. Z. Zhebin (IDV Central Research Institute) "On the situation around the Six-party talks on the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue"; A. V. Vorontsov (IB RAS) "The second stage of denuclearization of North Korea in the framework of the Six-party talks in Beijing"; V. V. Khrustalev (Nevelsky Moscow State University Central Research Institute, Vladivostok) "The North Korean model of Nuclear Deterrence: from virtual to minimal?"; G. D. Toloraya (IE RAS)" The multilateral system of Security and Cooperation in Northeast Asia: a Premature Idea or a Chance for Russia?"; V. P. Tkachenko (Moscow)" Korea and its great neighbor"; L. V. Zabrovskaya (IIAANDV, Vladivostok) "Cooperation between China and the DPRK in solving regional security problems"; R. V. Savelyev (IDV) " The Korean Peninsula and the United States: established traditions or a new stage in relations under President Barack Obama?"; V. A. Grinyuk (IDV) "Japan's position in the dispute with the ROK and the DPRK over the Dokdo Islands" Kim Yong-un (IDV) "The politics of Sansen gonyong: goals and prospects"; LV Zakharova (RSUH) "The Policy of" Coexistence and Co-flourishing "by Lee Myung-bak and inter-Korean economic relations in the first Year of his Presidency"; I. Y. Pankina (Institute of History of the Russian Academy of Sciences) "The current socio-political situation in the DPRK in the assessments of North Korean scientists"; A. I. Efimova (Moscow State Institute of Economics of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation) " K the question of the stability of the political regime in the DPRK".

The reports of A. Z. Zhebin, A. V. Vorontsov, V. V. Khrustalev and G. D. Tolorai were devoted to the problems of nuclear security and the balance of political forces in North Korea, in which they described the six-party talks on the nuclear security of the Korean peninsula.

A. Z. Zhebin believes that the negotiations were prolonged and did not bring a real result due to the fault of the United States, Japan and Kazakhstan. In his opinion, the American political elite has not recognized the DPRK's right to independent existence. South Korea's position also complicates matters, as the new administration of Lee Myung-bak has decided to "distance itself" as much as possible from the previous course of Presidents Kim Tae-joon and Roh Moo-hyun on constructive dialogue with the North. This has led to a deterioration of the political situation and absolutely does not meet the interests of Russia on the Korean peninsula, its integration into the Asia-Pacific region. A.V. Vorontsov, on the contrary, believes that, despite the failure of the six-party talks in Beijing, nothing terrible has happened yet, and therefore Russia has hope that in the future all difficulties will be successfully overcome. His position is also shared by G. D. Toloraya, who believes that the main task of the negotiations was fulfilled, and the parties refrained from extreme actions. He believes that Russia should not ignore the negotiation process, because if it is disrupted (no matter whose fault), it will lose the opportunity to influence the situation in Korea.

The reports of V. P. Tkachenko and L. V. Zabrovskaya were devoted to North Korea's relations with China, in which they concluded that, despite its complex historical heritage, China was and remains one of its significant strategic partners.

Interest was aroused by Kim Yong Un's report on the essence of Lee Myung-bak's policy towards the DPRK. In his opinion, the policy of "seonsen gonen" ("coexistence and co-prosperity") is more suitable for business than for dialogue between representatives of the unified Korean nation. Seonsen Gonyong was based on the Denuclearization, Openness, transparency program launched by Lee Myung-bak back in 1997, when he was running for president from the Hannar Party. The program provides, in accordance with the denuclearization process, for gradual implementation of reforms and openness to assist North Korea in achieving a per capita GDP of up to $ 3,000. within 10 years. The goal is not only the complete elimination of all North Korea's nuclear programs, but also to change its socio-economic system. Such conditions are absolutely unacceptable for the DPRK, as they actually mean the renunciation of sovereignty. They caused the cessation of government contacts and increased tensions between the two Korean states. The author comes to the conclusion that the new tough policy of the "southerners" towards the North pushed the inter-Korean dialogue back to the rule of Kim Yong-sam (early 90's). XX century) and that the situation is unlikely to change in the near future.

Kim Yong-un's conclusions largely echo the opinion of L. V. Zakharova, who believes that Lee Myung-bak's tougher approach to North Korea negated a significant part of the efforts of his two predecessors. The inter-Korean dialogue was curtailed, the implementation of new economic plans was frozen, and existing projects began to bring losses.

During the discussion of the reports, various points of view were expressed, controversial points of the speeches were identified, but, according to the unanimous opinion of the audience, the work was productive and useful.

Eight reports were read at the Economics section: S. S. Suslin (MGIMO University) Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation) " The Republic of Korea in the context of the Global Financial crisis: causes, trends and consequences-

page 159
A. N. Fedorovsky (IMEMO) "Economic Policy in the Republic of Korea in the context of the global crisis"; P. S. Leshakov (ISAA MSU) "South Korean economy in the context of the global financial Crisis"; A. F. Sinyakova (MGIMO) "Main trends in the economy of the Republic of Korea in the context of the economic crisis"; J. O. Ballod (Soken University, Seoul) "Russian-Korean cooperation in oil and gas projects on Sakhalin: challenges and prospects"; D. N. Verkhoturov (Regions of Russia, Moscow)" Tumangan: foggy prospects"; V. G. Pak (IDV) "The problem of brain drain as a new challenge for the economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan"; V. A. Ten (Moscow State University)" On some aspects of migration processes in the Republic of Korea".

The reports of S. S. Suslina, A. N. Fedorovsky, P. S. Leshakov, and A. F. Sinyakova were devoted to the situation of the Republic of Kazakhstan during the crisis. In particular, Suslina noted that South Korea's GDP showed negative growth for the first time since the 1997-1998 crisis, and Leshakov focused on the collapse of its stock market.

Another problem of modern South Korea is the lack of specialists in the leading sectors of the economy. Thus, V. G. Pak believes that it is now compared to the 60 - 80 years. The problem of "brain drain" is most acute in the Republic of Korea, when with the growing prosperity of Korean families and the increasing integration of South Korean society into the world system, young people are increasingly leaving the country. due to her low labor qualifications, replace the South Korean youth who left for permanent residence (mainly in the United States and Canada).

The section "History and Culture" is the most numerous (17 reports) and, in the author's opinion, the most interesting. It was presented by the following participants: O. V. Dyakova (IIAEN DV) "Problems of Bohai through the eyes of South Korean scientists"; A. Yu. Ivanov (DVSU, Khabarovsk) "The Peking Treaty of 1860 and the problem of settling border issues between Russia and Korea (1860-1885)"; B. B. Pak (IB RAS) "The Struggle of the South Korean People's Republic of China". in Russia around the Russo-Korean Treaty of 1884 (to the 125th anniversary of its signing)"; A.V. Efimov (Russian Foreign Ministry) "On the periodization of Modern History in the DPRK"; N. N. Kim (Russian Foreign Ministry) " Political discussions around the guardianship regime in South Korea (1945-1948)"; K. V. Asmolov (IDV) " Myths about the Korean War. On the priority of internal factors and the role of Pak Hong Yong"; A. A. Kurmyzov (IDV) " Juche Ideas and Jucheson ideology: an attempt at comparative analysis"; S. O. Kurbanov (Spb.GU) "The Korean Peninsula in the first half of the year after the Pyongyang Summit in 2000: facts and trends of historical development"; V. N. Dmitrieva (MGI (U) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation) "The Republic of Korea: on the way to creating a multicultural society"; Ye. Pokholkova (MSLU) "Lexical and semantic features of the inaugural speeches of South Korean Presidents Kim Dae-jun, Roh Moo-hyun, and Lee Myung-bak"; M. A. Baklanov (Novosibirsk) "Moral education in South Korea in the framework of school education: stages of formation (1945-2008)"; D. A. Samsonov (Kunstkamera, St. Petersburg) " On the Korean etiquette of ceremonies of worship of the ancestors of Chere (on the example of ceremonies held in the famous ancestral estates of the Republic of Kazakhstan)"; A.V. Pak (Institute of History of the Russian Academy of Sciences)"Protestant Church in Modern South Korea"; L. B. Hwang (Karakalpak State University, Nukus) "Russia at the Turning Point of Epochs through the prism of Korean Literature"; N. I. Ni (Institute of History of the Russian Academy of Sciences) " Working man in the era of developing Economy. Park Nohae "Dawn of Labor"; I. V. Choi (St. Petersburg State University) " New and traditional in the stories of Kim Tonin (1900-1951)"; Lee Sang-yoon (RSPU, St. Petersburg) "Traditional and modern motifs in the work of the writer Shin Kyung-suk".

O. V. Dyakova's presentation on the Bohai problem aroused great interest. The author noted that Bokhai studies in the Republic of Kazakhstan began to develop rapidly in the 80s of the XX century. The impetus for such rapid development was the processes of renewal and perestroika in the then USSR, when foreign citizens were granted access to previously "closed" territories, including the Far East. Since 1993, South Korea has been entering into agreements with scientific organizations of the Far East to conduct joint archaeological work. O. V. Dyakova concludes that the main direction of Bohai studies in the Republic of Kazakhstan is to justify its "native Korean roots" in order to please the political situation.

A peculiar sensation of the conference was the report of K. V. Asmolov on the causes of the Korean War. The author casts doubt on the popular myth of the 1950-1953 war as "Stalin's war", unleashed by him in order to push the PRC and the United States together. In his opinion, the approval of Kim Il Sung's plans by the leadership of the then Soviet Union to invade the South was a misconception about the existence of a revolutionary situation in South Korea. K. V. Asmolov believes that North Korean politician Park Hong-yong played a significant role in this disinformation and that it was largely due to his political intrigues that the Korean War broke out in 1950.

page 160
Yu.V. Vanin, an employee of the Institute of Information Technology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, spoke in response to the discussion, who rightly noted that historians should follow a more balanced approach to the Korean War. He believes that the culprit of the war was not just Park Hong-young, so you should not "demonize" his identity. Objectively, both parts of Korea at that time sought to solve the problem of national division by force, which eventually led to a fratricidal conflict.

A. A. Kurmyzov's speech was devoted to a comparative analysis of ideology in the DPRK and the ROK. In his opinion, the ideological concepts of the dictatorial regimes of Kim Il Sung in the DPRK and Park Jung Hee in the ROK had many common features. Both leaders declared the idea of an independent economy, self-defense and an independent foreign policy. Even the names of the two ideologies - Juche in North Korea and Jucheson in South Korea-were similar. These ideas included a number of elements of Korean nationalism. However, there were also differences. If the leadership of the DPRK considered its state with a socialist economy, then Park Jung-hee was a supporter of a state-regulated capitalist economy.

The report of the Patriarch of Russian Korean Studies V. N. Dmitrieva was devoted to new trends in the cultural development of South Korea. In her opinion, a new concept is currently being implemented in Kazakhstan-the creation of a multicultural society. It is characterized by greater tolerance for Western culture, women's rights, children from mixed marriages, etc. Its ultimate goal is the globalization of Korean culture. However, V. N. Dmitrieva believes that the " complex of Asian values "(respect for elders, strict implementation of traditional Confucian rituals by Korean youth, etc.) continues to be a basic element of modern Korean culture. At the same time, in the course of the discussion that unfolded, the participants of the section rightly noted the growing and far from unambiguous role of Westernization of South Korean society (literature, cinema, American mass culture, etc.).

Four reports of the section were devoted to Korean literature: L. B. Hwang-portraying the image of Russia in the works of Korean writers, N. I. Ni - proletarian themes in the works of Park Nohae, I. V. Choi - Kim Tonin, and Lee Sang-yoon - the South Korean writer Shin Kyung-suk.

A distinctive feature of the current conference is the active participation of young people in it. So, in the section "Politics" were: L. V. Zakharova, I. Yu.Pankina, A. I. Efimova. In the section "Economics" - J. O. Ballod, D. N. Verkhoturov, V. G. Pak. In the section" History and Culture " - A. Y. Ivanov, N. N. Kim, A. A. Kurmyzov, E. A. Pokholkova, M. A. Baklanova, K. V. Asmolov, A.V. Pak, D. A. Samsonov. This gratifying fact indicates the gradual restoration of the scientific potential of Russian Korean studies, which was largely lost in the 1990s. Young scientists, postgraduates and students of various universities not only actively participated in the conference, but also demonstrated a broad outlook, ability and desire to discuss pressing problems of the Korean Peninsula together with their senior colleagues.

In conclusion, I would like to point out that the conference brought undoubted benefits to its participants, giving them the opportunity to communicate directly, discuss current issues, and share their experience.

Permanent link to this publication: