With the influence of South Korea’s increasingly popular culture in the global level, research on Korean soft power and public diplomacy has attracted great attention. Perhaps the best country example of how a nation’s image can change with policies and the influence of the media is South Korea. In this context, the question of how much the state’s public diplomacy and private sector activities affect the country’s image has risen questions.
To address this issue, Ankara Crisis and Politics Research Center (ANKASAM) brings to your attention the views it received from Daniele Carminati, a Visiting Lecturer at Mahidol University International College, to evaluate the public diplomacy implemented by South Korea to strengthen its national image.
1. Do you think that Hallyu could change foreign perspective on Korean image? If so, are there cases where famous Koreans negatively impact the country’s prestige?
If you mean from a broad perspective, detached of Korean matters, Hallyu is already changing foreign perspectives on South Korea. While South Korea was previously a lesser-known East Asian country (especially compared to Japan), it has transformed into a prominent country in a variety of domains / fields. Previously there were Samsung and LG, now popular music and TV series/fashion/food/cosmetics affect the country’s image. Thanks to this, Korean cars began to be much more appreciated and recognized. This attractive influence can hardly be seen negatively, and in most countries (beyond China perhaps and especially North Korea, for different reasons) the Korean wave is well received.
2. Could Korean public diplomacy influence foreign society’s thoughts about them? If yes, is Korean public diplomacy more influential in developing countries such as Southeast Asia than developed countries and why?
As mentioned above, although some surveys might show more specific nuances, Hallyu is widely appreciated in countries / regions as diverse as Southeast Asia, the Middle East (I was surprised about this), and the US, Europe is following and probably other places too. In this context, Maybe BrandFinance Soft Power Index offers specific data about regions and countries. In a nutshell, since for the time being Korea’s soft power is mainly cultural and not much political / ideological like the US, it is widely seen as harmless. Also, most countries welcome it, although some more authoritarian countries might oppose it because of the above reasons (not ‘ideal’ depiction of males or similar matters or affiliation with the West/ US).
3. Could Korea administration changes has any role in Korean image abroad?
I don’t think so for the time being, but perhaps the more attention the country receives, the more scrutiny on their leaders.
4. Do you think that Chinese and Korean public diplomacies have common features and/or similar policies abroad (such as Confucius Institute and Sejong Hakdang Institute)?
I do think that Chinese public diplomacy / soft power is almost exclusively state centric while Korea’s is a masterful public / private blend, although the more widespread it becomes the less the government can ‘control’ the narrative. I don’t see much similarities between the two, as China has broader geopolitical interests as a major growing power while South Korea is more pragmatic and mainly aimed at economic gains in line with reputational ones.
5. How will the future of Korean public diplomacy be shaped? With more state centred or private organizations?
As mentioned above, I see less and less control by the Korean government which may still be able to harness some ‘attractive’ potential from ‘inclusive / generic’ initiatives using ambassadors such a BTS and Blackpink. However, it will be more of a catching up while seeing how / when to take advantage of new ‘waves’ (creative ideas) than leading such waves. The government will still be there like for Japan and other countries but the ‘wave’ will shape its own path which for the most part will still benefit the government in economic and reputational ways. Nevertheless, but this is not always possible since not everything that foreign audiences like could reflect well on the leaders / government of a country, although a confident country can deal with that.
