these empires were divided into countries consisting of either an ethnic group or another kind of group. These countries are similar in size and this is why European nations can easily share the same view of the international system. In Northeastern Asia, on the other hand, there is a predominant inequality among the countries. I would like to mention that this situation distorts the view toward intentional relations from both sides: super powers and small countries. Super powers have a strong sense of their own greatness and small nations depend too much on nationalistic ideas to protect their identity. This pattern remains a structural problem and an influence on the future of Northeastern Asia.
As a result, in Asia, especially in the two countries in the Korean Peninsula, so-called regionalism including a framework of a regional order does not always have positive connotation. Even though words such as "regional cooperation", or ,"regional order" are used in the media, in Asia, especially in Northeastern Asia, the regional orders people experienced were vertical or hegemonic. For example, Sinocentric order, colonial rule by Western European countries and the Great East Asia Commonwealth that was never materialized were by no means vertical of hegemonic, Another typical model is the successive Korean governments and their foreign policies after the World War II. The concept of regionalism has occasionally been used as a lip service, however, Korean rulers have been apprehensive of the idea behind it. This is the reason why the relatively nationalistic South Korea has been seeking relationships with areas outside its own region in order to deflect regionalism of its own.
One of their targets is the United Stales. South Korea is positively involved in international organizations, partially because they are afraid that their nationalism might decline if the country is confined to a small region. Fortunately, in Asia, especially in South Korea, people have enjoyed economic growth and democratization since the late 1970s.
Questions one should ask are, "How have these two movements, economic growth and democratization, influenced intentional relations and the foreign policy of Asian countries?" and "How have these changes affected the regional order in Asia?" The big question is, as Dr. Reid has presented in his paper, "Is it possible to establish so-called democratic peace in Asia?" Each country in Asia has improved their economic strength and has gradually been democratized at their own pace. It is important to know how these factors have affected their nationalism and changed their own regional and intentional policy.
According to the classic Western modernization theory, as democratization advances, international relations become more peaceful. And the more democratic procedures progress, the more a political system becomes pluralistic and the more mutual dependency is promoted. And then the number of conflicts might decrease. Economic development is essential to this process. As Dr. Reid mentioned, it is doubtful that democratic peace or democratic regional peace will be established in Asia. The movement might be hindered by strong nationalism. In Asia, it will fake a long time to establish democratic peace or regional democratic peace because nationalism remains firmly rooted in Asian society. As I mentioned it before, it is structural as well as historical.
Typical effects of economic growth and democratization can be seen in South Korea. Their foreign policy has been ambivalent. To a certain extent, the Korean government has been trying to soften nationalistic movements, to change situations and to make systems plural and healthier. In contrast, serious issues were found in Seoul's tightened foreign policies toward Japan and the United Sates started under the administration of Kim Yon sam, the first civilian President in Korea. South Korea s policy toward North Korea has become more nationalistic, It has been difficult for South Korea to survive since it is surrounded by the super powers.
Supported by the increased economic power of South Kore4 Kim Yon sam has raised Korea's political status in intentional society. He used China and Russia in order to maintain political independence from Japan and the United States. In addition to that, Kim Yon sam has tried to annex North Korea to establish a unified Korea.
Kim Dae jung's new government has reconsidered the foreign policies of his predecessor and is trying to establish multilateral relations based on civilian oriented politics. Kim Dae jung has declared that he would transfer the authority of the central government to local civil societies. He would like to employ foreign and domestic policies linked to Korean civilian society and is movements, I expect that Kim Dae jung will keep his promises and promote peace of Northeastern Asia. Democratization does not guarantee regional peace right now. However, in the long run, Korean society seems like it is changing for the better even though there are obstacles ahead.
Finally, I would like to comment briefly on the Korean economy. In November and December of 1997, Koreans reacted more calmly than expected to the ongoing IMF crisis.
