 |
| President Moon Jae-in toasts with Hassanal Bolkiah, Sultan of Brunei, during a recent trip there. The Islam country doesn't encourage toasts even with nonalcoholic drinks. Korea Times |
By Oh Young-jin
"Even with 10 mouths, there can be nothing to say," an old Korean saying meaning an inexcusable mistake, may apply to a series of gaffes made during the recent presidential visit to Brunei, Malaysia and Cambodia.
Prime Minister Lee Nak-yeon admitted that it showed a lack of professionalism and promised to ameliorate it, while Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-hwa apologized. The Foreign Ministry helps prepare protocols involving presidential overseas trips.
But the presidential faux pas cannot be apologized away and forgotten by a promise of improvement. Rather, the situation reveals a fundamental flaw with the nation's diplomacy and its diplomats.
President Moon spoke greetings in Indonesian rather than Malaysian during his joint press conference with Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Bin Mohamad. Moon is said to have gotten mixed up with greetings for afternoon and night.
Cheong Wa Dae admitted the language mix-up, but insisted that the President had used correct greetings fit for the timing of day when the functions took place.
Moon also had proposed a toast to Hassanal Bolkiah, Sultan of Brunei, even though the country's strict Islam code of conduct forbids alcohol, during a banquet hosted by the Sultan. The toast was made with non-alcoholic drinks, but reportedly some Brunei citizens at the banquet did not raise their glasses.
Then there was a mistaken flag incident in which Cheong Wa Dae used Taiwan's flag on its official Twitter account where that of Cambodia should have been.
Obviously, these bone-headed blunders may be attributed to lax discipline, lack of coordination among working-level officials or "show producers" who replace protocol officials, as pointed out by some conservative media outlets.
Rather, there are more than meets the eye.
All three countries on Moon's itinerary belong to Korea's lesser priority list, irrespective of relative geographic proximity.
That can aptly explain why there was no Malaysian language specialist available to prevent Moon from greeting Malaysians in Indonesian. That the two languages are obviously similar can hardly be an excuse.
I bet there are very few knowledgeable enough to know about oil-rich Brunei and its sultanate protocols. The same is most likely true with Cambodia.
Besides the three, other middle and small countries have been off Korea's diplomatic radar because Korea is always preoccupied with big powers such as the United States, China and Japan. Adding to it is North Korea, a perennial challenge to South Korea.
Depending on how the influences of those big powers wax and wane, Korea has to make adjustments and cannot afford to be distracted with other countries.
This traditional architecture of Korea's diplomacy has caused a bias in scope, myopia in perspective and stunted development in growth.
Top talent seeks to and gets posted to deal with matters related to the U.S., Korea's longtime military ally and economic partner. To a lesser degree, China comes next and then Japan. Diplomats who work on those three countries get plum jobs, while those who get other assignments are passed for promotions.
A check on the list of the past foreign ministers shows the connections. Even the current Foreign Minister Kang, not a career diplomat, owes her job to her expertise in U.S. affairs, even though she has worked at the United Nations.
But the Moon government is worthy of praise because it is trying to expand its diplomatic horizon.
As a matter of fact, Moon's recent visit was organized as part of promoting his "New Southern Policy" to reach out more seriously to the subcontinent and Southeast Asian countries.
Moon's diplomatic diversification effort comes against the background of a stronger role assumed by his administration in mediating between North Korea and the U.S. for the North's denuclearization.
Moon's bold approach drew a lot of skepticism at first, but has contributed greatly to bringing the two adversaries to the negotiating table, pulling them away from the brink of war. Thanks to him, we have a luxury to see the standstill in the denuclearization talks as part of a cycle that can be overcome and lead to a real deal.
The real test, however, starts with whether the mindset of the diplomats can change ― enabling them to develop their expertise away from the big powers and still get recognition by getting equal chances for promotion or other benefits.
It may be comparable to the question of which comes first, the chicken or the egg? In a sense, it does not matter as long as the two exist in a virtuous cycle. In other words, as the nation gets powerful, its diplomatic horizon expands, the diplomats develop more expertise and the nation gets stronger.
Nobody would stop the diplomats from being the first to get this cycle going. In the meantime, I suggest we stop being too harsh on the President for getting mixed up with foreign greetings. It is part of growing pains for our diplomacy. No pain, no gain. Besides, it takes time to learn a foreign tongue.
