Search

Begin New Search Topic Education Political Geography Asia Publication Year within 10 Years Publication Year within 5 Years

1. Korea's Official Development Assistance to the Philippine Education Sector: Observations and Inputs

Author:
Inero Ancho
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
Advocating inclusive and equitable quality education (SGD 4: Quality Education) is central to sustainable development efforts anchored on collaboration and partnership that enable the policy-to-impact synergy. Agencies and institutions in various levels need to align motivations as they work towards realizing education for sustainable development (ESD). As education fuels sustainable development, school access and completion need to be prioritized, as wealth inequality and gender gap are eliminated. Human capital investment involves the provision of relevant and responsive education systems and training. These mechanisms enable an individual to be productive and contribute to positive outcomes, improved standard of living, and potential gains. As a core element to growth and poverty reduction, human capital suggests implementing significant and concrete progress in core education indices. Further, sustained economic growth, increased productivity value, and favorable social returns are manifested outcomes at the macro level. This paper looks at the ODA from Korea to the Philippines in the context of education. The discussion will be anchored on the Philippine Development Plan and AmBisyon Natin 2040 as roadmaps reflecting the aspirations of every Filipino of having a strongly rooted, comfortable, and secured life.1 Observations and inputs will be offered to ensure effective ODA and provide focus and ways forward towards access to and quality of education, along with programs and projects that contribute into any meaningful development of the Philippine economy.
Topic:
Development, Education, Economy, Human Capital, and Sustainability
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, and Philippines

2. Korea Matters for America/America Matters for Korea (2023)

Author:
East-West Center
Publication Date:
04-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
The 4th edition of Korea Matters for America/America Matters for Korea, part of the Asia Matters for America initiative, maps the trade, investment, employment, business, diplomacy, security, education, tourism, and people-to-people connections between the United States and South Korea at the national, state, and local levels. This publication and the AsiaMattersforAmerica.org website are resources for understanding the robust and dynamic US-Indo-Pacific relationship.
Topic:
International Relations, Climate Change, Economics, Education, Environment, Politics, Science and Technology, Governance, Population, Public Health, and Travel
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, North Korea, North America, and United States of America

3. United Kingdom Engagement with North Korea

Author:
Alastair Morgan
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
As one of the Allied Powers, The United Kingdom was involved in Post-World War II planning for the Korean peninsula, including the November 1943 Cairo Conference declaration that “… in due course, Korea shall become free and independent.” However, US President Roosevelt’s proposal at the February 1945 Yalta Conference did not establish a formal role for the UK in the trusteeship of Korea. Subsequently, the United States and the Soviet Union agreed to divide the peninsula at the 38th parallel in August 1945, and direct British involvement in the peninsula was limited prior to the Korean War. The United Kingdom’s Korean War contribution to the United Nations Command was second only to the United States, with significant deployments of maritime and air assets in addition to the provision of ground troops. Almost 60,000 British troops saw action, with nearly 5,000 killed, wounded, missing in action, or taken prisoner. Following the armistice, the United Kingdom has continued to send representation to the United Nations Command. The armistice agreement includes an obligation on so-called “Sending States” to respond to renewed hostility. Although there is no automatic UK commitment to send forces, the armistice agreement remains a consideration in engagement with North Korea.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Economics, Education, Politics, and Strategic Engagement
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Europe, Asia, and North Korea

4. North Korea-Germany Relations: An Ambassador's Perspective of Diplomacy with Pyongyang

Author:
Armin Schäfer
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Germany established diplomatic relations with North Korea, also known as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), in 2001 at the request of the South Korean government, which hoped that Germany and the European Union (EU) would play a more active role in supporting the “Sunshine Policy.” Since then, Germany, together with the other EU states, has sought to moderate North Korea through a “Policy of Critical Engagement” to convince it of the benefits of international cooperation, respect for the rule of law, and improving the political and economic situation of its people. In doing so, Germany could build on the long relationship between North Korea and the former East Germany. “Critical engagement” means being willing to talk and get involved, but without holding back on criticism—and, if need be, imposing sanctions. It also implies that comprehensive engagement is not (yet) possible because of the circumstances. There is ample cause for a constrained approach from North Korea’s aggressive foreign policy and systematic human rights violations to the absence of suitable economic and fiscal conditions for business and development cooperation. Moreover, the lack of will on the part of considerable segments of the North Korean regime to engage with other countries also hampers broader engagement.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Economics, Education, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, North Korea, and Germany

5. Japan Matters for America/America Matters for Japan (2023)

Author:
East-West Center
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
The 4th edition of Japan Matters for America/America Matters for Japan, part of the Asia Matters for America initiative, maps the trade, investment, employment, business, diplomacy, security, education, tourism, and people-to-people connections between the United States and Japan at the national, state, and local levels. This publication and the AsiaMattersforAmerica.org website are resources for understanding the robust and dynamic US-Indo-Pacific relationship.
Topic:
International Relations, Climate Change, Economics, Education, Politics, Science and Technology, Governance, Population, Public Health, and Travel
Political Geography:
Japan, Asia, North America, and United States of America

6. Chinese Military-Civil Fusion: Sino-Italian Research Cooperation

Author:
N. Lill
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
The Chinese government exploits foreign academic infrastructure and talent to build a world-class military. Although cooperation with China offers alluring investments, it risks research objectives being mandated by or from China and may result in unintended knowledge transfer in critical areas. Considering the extent of Chinese military-civil fusion, any collaboration—with military and non-military institutions alike—is likely to boost Chinese military capabilities. Utilising academic exchanges to further military ambitions is a coordinated and broad long-term strategy that has benefited from the West’s limited knowledge of Chinese institutions and their links to the military. To repurpose a quote by Nelson Mandela, “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” And for now, that weapon is handed out without deep consideration or proper regulation.
Topic:
Education, International Cooperation, Research, and Civil-Military Relations
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Asia, and Italy

7. The Chinese Communist Party’s Campaign on University Campuses

Author:
Ellen Bork
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
The People’s Republic of China (PRC)’s influence activities at American universities have received considerable scrutiny from the US government, Congress, and media over the past several years. Many of them operate under the auspices of its united front, a loose network of entities for which there is no American equivalent.1 The united front is a Leninist concept the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) adopted from the Soviet Union in the earliest phase of the party’s development. United front activities “control, mobilize, and otherwise make use of individuals outside the party to achieve its objectives . . . domestically and internationally.”2 In recent years, General Secretary Xi Jinping has reinvigorated the united front, drawn it more tightly under his control, and directed it to serve an ambitious agenda to project Chinese power globally and undermine liberal democratic norms. China’s influence activities are part of the country’s subnational united front agenda, which targets not only universities but also state and local governments, private businesses, and civic organizations, in line with Mao Zedong’s directive to “target local entities in order to weaken the national core.” Some of China’s united front efforts, including Confucius Institutes and Chinese Student and Scholar Associations, have experienced declines and exposure. This is not as significant as it might seem. The CCP has a record of responding to united front failures by regrouping and doubling down. US intelligence agencies have warned that China is intensifying influence efforts at the subnational level. Several factors complicate America’s ability to respond effectively to China’s united front activities at American universities. Under America’s federal system, states, cities, and educational and civic institutions have no responsibility for and little experience in defending against national security threats. For much of its relationship with the PRC, the US minimized the fundamental differences between the US democratic and Chinese communist political systems. American leaders encouraged not only trade and investment but also participation in activities that served the PRC’s political, ideological, and other agendas. Furthermore, Washington largely accepted the CCP’s conflation of itself with China and the Chinese people, enabling it to cast its critics—including those in the US and elsewhere in the West—as “anti-China,” xenophobic, or racist. The Trump administration began countering united front activities, including by educating the American public, state and local officials, and university administrators about the threat they pose. Despite the bipartisan consensus on China that has emerged in recent years, the Biden administration has not maintained the same priority on countering united front efforts.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Education, National Security, and Chinese Communist Party (CCP)
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

8. CCP Ideological Indoctrination, Part 1: The PRC’s New “Patriotic Education Law”

Author:
John Dotson
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
China Brief
Institution:
The Jamestown Foundation
Abstract:
On October 24, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) National People’s Congress (NPC) Standing Committee (全国人民代表大会常务委) officially codified the country’s existing initiatives for “patriotic education (PE; 爱国主义教育)” by promulgating the People’s Republic of China Patriotic Education Law (中华人民共和国爱国主义教育法). This mandates indoctrination in state-directed ideological content throughout all sectors of society (PRC Government, October 25). While CCP policy documents are always more important than formal PRC law, the Party-state does use formal laws passed by the National People’s Congress (全国人民代表大会) to codify and emphasize Party policies. This law appears to be no exception. [1] The unveiling of the new Patriotic Education Law has been accompanied by a campaign of predictably laudatory coverage in PRC state media. For example, the CCP mouthpiece People’s Daily ran a flowery editorial that quoted a professor from the China University of Political Science and Law as stating that “implementing the patriotic education law will enhance the daily practice of patriotic spirit” among the Chinese people. The editorial itself opined that the NPC had, “on the basis of the rule of law, promoted and guaranteed New Era patriotic education, inspiring the nation’s spirit, concentrating the people’s strength, advancing the building of a strong country [and] national revival with extremely significant and profound meaning” (People’s Daily, November 23). Such coverage has appeared alongside other official messaging emphasizing the need for enhanced focus on ideological instruction. For example, the mid-October issue of the CCP’s official journal Qiushi (求实) was a themed issue focused on ideology. It featured a lead article under Xi’s name titled “Open New Frontiers for the Sinicization and Modernization of Marxism.” It also included a list of articles on supporting themes, such as a Central Party School article titled “In the New Era and New Journey, Unceasingly Advance the Party’s Innovations in Theory” (Qiushi, October 16).
Topic:
Education, Law, Ideology, Political Parties, Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and Indoctrination
Political Geography:
China and Asia

9. Organized Shinto’s Efforts to Restore the Imperial Rescript on Education in Postwar Japan

Author:
Hirokazu Yoshie and Paul Kreitman
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Weatherhead East Asian Institute, Columbia University
Abstract:
In the 1960s, the Association for Shinto Shrines—comprising 98% of the shrines nationwide—began running a decade-old campaign to reinstate a prewar symbol of emperor-centered nationalism, i.e., the Imperial Rescript on Education (kyōiku chokugo). Member priests petitioned prime ministers and other LDP politicians, published manuals for adults and picture books for children, and held summer camps for young students. These efforts were based on a modern translation into which the organization had rendered from the originally archaic rescript. Puzzlingly, this modern paraphrase completely concealed the authorship and centrality of the Meiji emperor, leaving only generic words of patriotism, which apparently defeats the purpose of the restorationism. His presentation makes sense of the campaign by analyzing organized Shinto’s discourse with it and considering its broader historical context. The narrative starts from the US occupation era (1945-1952), when the official invalidation of the rescript by Americans left conservative Japanese aggrieved. After failed attempts to revise the new constitution (1952-1964), the restoration movement gathered momentum amid left-leaning campus activism in around 1970. Convinced that it was a result of America’s ideological colonization, the Shinto organization argued that the restoration would serve to overcome that negative influence. But they tried to do so without disrupting popular sovereignty of postwar Japan, which required dilution of the text’s politically incorrect elements. The talk ends by suggesting the significance of looking at prewar legacies in our understanding of the role of the monarchy in postwar Japan.
Topic:
Education, Religion, History, and Shintoism
Political Geography:
Japan and Asia

10. Finding Firmer Ground: The Role of Higher Education in U.S.-China Relations

Author:
Yawei Liu and Michael Cerny
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Carter Center
Abstract:
This annual report is the third issue of the Carter Center’s Finding Firmer Ground series on U.S.-China Relations. This series is published by the Carter Center’s China Focus with generous support from the Ford Foundation and other organizations.
Topic:
Education, Bilateral Relations, Higher Education, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America