Category Archives: Interview

「エ マ ニ ュ エ ル ・ パ ス ト リ ッ チ さ ん   民 間 シ ン ク タ ン ク 所 長   米 国 と 東 ア ジ ア を つ な げ る 」Daily NNA (共同通信グループ)

Daily NNA (共同通信グループ)

アジアで会う

2019年 7月 22日

エ マ ニ ュ エ ル パ ス ト リ ッ チ さ ん   民 間 シ ン ク タ ン ク 所 長   米 と 東 ア ジ ア を つ な げ る

2 6 1

えまにゅえる・ぱすとりっち 1964 年米国テネシー 州生まれ。民間シンクタンク、アジアインスティテュ ート所長。東京大学で修士号、ハーバード大学で博士 号をそれぞれ取得。専門は東アジアの古典文学など。 韓国在住 12 年。著書に「韓国人だけが知らない別の大 韓民国:ハーバード大学の博士が見た韓国の可能性)」 (21 世紀ブックス)などがある。このほど、初の日本語 書籍となる 「武器よさらば:地球温暖化の危機と憲法 九条」(東方出版社)を上梓した。

日本語と韓国語、中国語に堪能なパストリッチさん。南部ナ ッシュビルで生まれ、中部ミズーリ州セントルイスで幼少を過 ごした。中学卒業後、サンフランシスコにある高校に通った。 そこでのアジア系学生との出会いがパストリッチさんの人生を 方向付けた。 中国文学を専攻したイエール時代  83年に入学したイエール大学では中国文学を専攻。明・清時 代に書かれた「水滸伝」「三国志演義」などの白話小説の勉強 に打ち込んだ。  

日本語は4年生になって本格的に学習始めたという。「アジ アの2言語をマスターすれば、将来活躍できる場が一層広がる と思った」と同時を振り返る。ところが「本業」の中国語より も相性が良かったのか、卒業後、日本留学を決意。東京大学の 修士課程に進み、江戸時代後期の南画家として知られる田能村 竹田などが書いた漢詩や漢文を研究した。  

修士取得後は東大博士課程に進むも、「母国で活躍したい」 と米ハーバード大学の博士課程に方向転換。98年に博士号取得。 イリノイ大学で日本文学の助教授として教鞭を執り始めた。

大使館で  

パストリッチさんは05年、ジョージワシントン大学で教授の 職を得る。大学で教鞭を執る傍ら、近くにある在米韓国大使館 で韓国の外交官や学者、記者を相手に米国政治に関してブリー フィングする仕事も始めた。当時、韓国は盧武鉉(ノ・ムヒョン)政権で、ブッシュ政権との関係は決して良好とは言えない 状況だった。ワシントンにはアジアの専門家と呼べる人材が少 ない。ハーバード時代に1年間、ソウル大学に留学した経験が 買われた。  

韓国大使館では、政治経済や社会などを学ぶゼミ「Koru s House」も月2~3回のペースで主催した。大学での 仕事よりも魅力を感じたのか、パストリッチさんは、水を得た 魚のように活動した。しかし、活動場所は韓国大使館内だった ため、次第に限界を感じるようになる。  そこでパストリッチさんの人生に転機が訪れる。知人を通じ て出会った李完九(イ・ワング)忠清南道知事(当時)から補 佐官として招請を受けたのだ。パストリッチさんは悩んだ末、 「大使館での仕事より面白そう」と韓国行きを決意。ジョージ タウン大学を辞し、07年から南部大田市で生活を始めた。

アジアインスティテュート設立  大田市は韓国を代表する科学技術都市。パストリッチさんは、 名門韓国科学技術院(KAIST)などさまざまな研究機関で 行われる共同研究といった各種プロジェクトに参加。筑波大学 の研究機関にも訪問したという。環境問題に目覚めたのもその 頃だ。知事を補佐する傍ら、「Korus House」を発 展させる形で、民間シンクタンク、アジアインスティテュート を設立。自ら所長に就任した。自由な発言の空間を得たパスト リッチさんはこれまで、米政治学者フランシス・フクヤマ氏や ジョセフ・ナイ氏など世界の碩学たちと対話を重ねてきた。  

2011年からソウル市に活動の拠点を移し、慶熙大学で教鞭を執 り始める。執筆活動にも力が入った。これまで韓国語で5冊の 本を上梓。うち3冊がベストセラー。中でも、「韓国人だけが 知らない別の大韓民国」は朴槿恵(パク・クネ)元大統領が高 く評価し、講演やテレビ出演も多くこなした。  今年7月には、待望の日本語書籍「武器よさらば:地球温暖 化の危機と憲法九条」を上梓した。

ニュースサイト「ハフィン トンポスト」に寄稿した文章などをまとめた上で加筆したもの で、これまでの執筆活動の集大成という位置付けだ。パストリ ッチさんは本の中で、今後の日本の安全保障について「環境問 題の解決なしにあり得ない」と指摘。大田市時代に日本の科学 技術力を知った経験を基に、「日本は『新安全保障』でイニシ アチブを取る能力と資格が十分にある」と訴える。

東アジアと米国をつなげる  パストリッチさんは来月、12年間の韓国生活を整理し、母国 に戻る予定だ。拠点は政治の中心ワシントン。「韓国と米国だ けでなく、東アジア全体と米国をつなげる役割を果たしたかっ た」と話す。その基盤となるのがアジアインスティテュートだ。 ワシントンとソウルの他に、日本にも法人を設立。ベトナム・ ハノイにはオフィスを開設した。  

「米国では海外生活を通じて大きく成長した姿を見せたい」 と話すパストリッチさん。活動の舞台は整った。アジアインス ティテュートを世界的なシンクタンクとして育成すべく、一歩 を大きく踏み出そうとしている。

(韓国版編集部・坂部哲生)

Emanuel on Xi’s speech at CPC

Interview with Emanuel Pastreich

Director of the Asia Institute

October 18, 2017

CGNT (China Global Network Television)

Asia Today

 

On the 19th Communist Party Congress and President Xi Jinping’s Speech

13:30

 

Mang Mang:

“Of course, Xi Jinping elaborated on Chinese foreign policy towards Asian neighbors. Which issues stood out most to you and do you have any fresh insights?”

Emanuel Pastreich:

“I can tell you what was most striking. President Xi did not criticize any other nations. He did not speak about wars, or even competition. He gave hope and an opportunity for cooperation. He suggested a new vision for the world, for Asia, starting from the One Belt; One Belt Initiative. His proposal was that the ultimate focus was on each nation’s potential

He said that China offered potential models in its past and in its present, but that each country had its unique qualities that also should be respected.

 

And I was most impressed when he said, “the political advancement of mankind,” which suggested an idealism that in many countries has been lost over the last few decades and it is very, very far from “America first.”

Finally I was impressed by his emphasis on science and on scientific inquiry, on addressing poverty and addressing climate change, and on global collaboration which was the original purpose of the World Bank and the United Nations, but we have sometimes lost our way.

 

Host Mang Mang:

“So in order to enhance collaboration there needs to be a decent level of integration. What more can you tell us about Chinese efforts to facilitate greater regional integration in Asia?

 

Emanuel Pastreich:

“Well, of course, China is active all over the place, and increasingly playing a vital role. But we have to see this in context. As an American, myself, originally, the Trump administration’s decision to withdraw from UNESCO, to reduce its participation in the United Nations, in diplomacy and in global governance, in poverty reduction, makes China now the major donor. We are going to see major shifts around the world. And it is inspiring to me, of course I am not a fortune teller and I do not know how things will play out, but this potential for a cooperative world not based on the threat of force or economic domination, in which the needs of poor people and developing countries are properly addressed, that this offers a real potential to us that can be inspiring and I think many people were hoping that he would make some statement like this to give us some sense that there is some potential in what is a very critical and critical and dangerous moment in human history.

Interview with 938 Live on Korean Election

Interview with Chew Wui Lynn of 938LIVE, Mediacorp Radio in Singapore about the Korean elections today.

 

Can the next Korean president address the issues? 

 

“The Greatest asset of Korea is our people” Speaker Chung Sye-kyun (January 3, 2017 Huffington Post)

Huffington Post

“ ‘The Greatest asset of Korea is our people’ Speaker Chung Sye-kyun on Impeachment and Korea’s future”

January 3, 2017

speaker-chung-sye-kyun

Emanuel Pastreich

Chung Sye-kyun became speaker of the National Assembly when his Democratic Party of Korea swept to victory in the June elections last year. The conservative Saenuri Party had taken a tremendous fall because of the fading appeal of its neo-liberal policies.

A senior figure in Korean politics with a balanced personality, Chung is not quick to make emotional judgments, but rather focused on creating harmonious relations within the political sphere. He has a passion for institution building. He has emerged as a central political figure in Korea during the impeachment proceedings of President Park Geun-hye.

I had a chance to talk to him briefly about Korea’s current political crisis and his perspective on the challenges, and possibilities, that lie ahead. As a man in the eye of the storm, he is perhaps best positioned to give an accurate assessment.

Read more of this post

“Interview with Harvard’s Legendary Dean Henry Rosovsky” (Huffington Post, January 9, 2016)

Huffington Post

 

“Interview with Harvard’s Legendary Dean Henry Rosovsky:

The Secret of excellence and the prospects for Asian Higher Learning”

rosovsky 

January 9, 2016

 

Emanuel Pastreich

 

 

Pastreich: 
Harvard University had obtained a remarkable global role since the end of the Second World War. Of course it has been a strong institution for a long time, but if we think back, in 1900, or even in 1930, it was not considered to be on the same level as some universities in England, Germany or France. What exactly was it that allowed Harvard to reach the status that it enjoys today?

Rosovsky: 
The task of building a great university is never simple.

Let me stress one point because it’s so often misunderstood, and we see this in Asia today: To become a world-class university takes a lot of time. There are simply no shortcuts. People tend to assume, and I have encountered this sort of thinking all over the world, that if they just sink enough money into a university, it will emerge in a few years as a first-class institution. But such rapid growth never happens. It takes time; it takes generations.

That said, there are a few clear factors that determine the potential of a university to reach the highest levels of excellence. In the case of Harvard University, it was true that by the time of its tercentenary (300th anniversary of its founding) in 1936, Harvard had already achieved a reputation as a world-class institution. Harvard did not have the stature that it does today.

So what specifically happened between the nineteen-thirties and now? Well the United States became more economically powerful and attracted more resources and faculty from around the world after the Second World War. But one very important development were the innovations introduced by President James Bryant Conant who served as president from 1933 to1953.

Pastreich:
What were the specific steps that President Conant took as president to transform Harvard? Read more of this post

Interview with Dr. Bark Taoho, former minister of finance (ROK) Arirang G-Lounge

January 4, 2016

Emanuel Pastreich
Director
The Asia Institute
Arirang TV
G-Lounge

TP151203092249_A1

 

 

Interview with Dr. Bark Taeho (former minister of finance)
Professor
Seoul National University
Graduate School of International Studies
Review of the global economy in 2015 and prospects for 2016.

 

arirang bark tae ho

Part 1


Part 2

 

Part 3

 

Part 4

“Chinese meritocracy and the limits of democracy” (Interview: Daniel Bell in The Diplomat)

The Diplomat

Interview: Daniel Bell

“Chinese meritocracy and the limits of democracy”

December 17, 2015

 

Emanuel Pastreich

 

 

 

China as a society, a government, an economy and a culture is quite difficult for us to comprehend today. The changes are so rapid in cities like Beijing and Shanghai and the culture remarkably fluid. What do you see as the defining characteristics of China’s culture today and what do you anticipate in terms of China’s future role in the international community?

The most striking cultural shifts in China over the last two decades or so has been the revival, both orchestrated and spontaneous, of tradition. The main trope for culture in the twentieth century, especially since 1949, has been anti-traditionalism. As far back as the May 4th movement in 1919, and before, whether it was the financial elite, the liberals, the Marxists, or anarchists they all agreed that China was poor and that one of the causes of that state of affairs was the backward traditional culture.

We have witnessed a dramatic reevaluation of tradition in China, and also in other East Asian countries with a Confucian heritage such as Korea. This part of the world has witnessed rapid growth over the last three decades that has sharply reduced poverty and the region has remained at peace. So when people look around and ask what do all these countries have in common, one answer is their Confucian heritage. So whereas the previous narrative was that Confucianism undermined modernization and economic growth, now many argue that it actually helps.

We are witnessing the return of a more historical and humanistic perspective on the world, an emphasis on education, a concern for family across several generations, and a new assessment of the value of China’s tradition of political meritocracy. Chinese have long held that the key to a political system is the selection and promotion of leaders with superior abilities, ethical qualities and social and cultural skills who can best lead the nation forward. The perspective has Confucian roots, but it has been modernized and has been the core of the strategy for economic development in China and other East Asian countries such as Korea and Japan. Although Confucian ideology was denounced during the Cultural Revolution, it is taking on a new centrality today. And the promotion of core Confucian values is not limited to the government. We see similar efforts in business and in the non-profit sector. Read more of this post

Interview: Benjamin Elman The Diplomat, December 10, 2015

 

The Diplomat

Interview: Benjamin Elman

“The ‘rise of China’ narrative can be read in different ways, and for Japan it is a challenge.”

December 10, 2015

Emanuel Pastreich

 

 

When people talk about the future of East Asia, and the potential for integration, they say,“Well, Europe has been integrated from Roman times but East Asia has no such precedent. In fact Japan has never really been part of a unified architecture in Asia.” Is there something in the way East Asia has evolved in the 2,000 years that limits future integration, or is that not an assumption we should make?

In order to understand global issues, one needs to understand the regional issues that undergird them. China, Japan, Korea, and to some degree Vietnam and other portions of South Asia have become a very viable regional group. China is increasingly influenced by the nations around it in economics and politics. To understand the region’s potential, we need to consider the historical development of the Chinese empire, the economic impact of the Tokugawa government (17th-19th centuries), and, ultimately, how Korea was a part of economic and scientific change influencing both sides.

Korea often served as a conduit for medical knowledge, for Buddhist and Confucian metaphysics, and for technological innovations. Korea has been caught in the middle historically as China continued to surpass Korea in terms of its military and economic power and influence in East Asia during the Ming and Qing dynasties. I think that when Japan’s Toyotomi Hideyoshi led invasions (1592 and 1597) of Korea that fundamentally altered the geopolitical landscape and reduced Korea’s role in the economic and political order of the region.

We tend to underestimate just how big Japan was in the global economy in the 16th and 17th centuries. The Tokugawa reunification of Japan after the battle of Sekigahara (1600) brought together a population of 25-27 million under a highly disciplined military. That meant that Japan was not just an island, but a powerful state capable not only of invading Korea and marching all the way to the Yalu River, but also capable of challenging the Ming Dynasty. Innovations in naval warfare and the decision of the Ming to throw their full weight into the campaign against Japan meant that Hideyoshi was forced to give up the campaign against the Ming, but the consequences of that campaign were that Korea was devastated and is only now starting to recover its self-confidence. The Gyeongbok Palace remained in ruins until the middle of the 19th century. Japan took advantage of Korea’s decline. Read more of this post

Interview with Ambassador Thomas Lehmann of Denmark @ G Lounge (Arirang TV)

G Lounge
Arirang TV

November 30, 2015
Interview with Ambassador Thomas Lehmann
Danish Embassy in Seoul

interview with thomas lehmann

Hosted by Emanuel Pastreich

Green Growth in Korea and Denmark

 

A wide-ranging discussion of the “Green Alliance” between Denmark and Korea and prospects for new approaches to growth post Paris 2015 COP 21.

 

Part 1

 

 

Part 2

 

 

Part 3

 

 

Interview: Lawrence Wilkerson @ The Diplomat

The Diplomat

Interview: Lawrence Wilkerson

A discussion of tensions in East Asia, and some possible solutions

By Emanuel Pastreich

December 03, 2015

 

 

What do you see as the underlying sources for the tensions between China and the United States today? 

The tensions between the United States and other ASEAN nations with China over the South China Sea today are extremely serious. The South China Sea and the tensions with Russia over Ukraine are the two greatest sources of possible conflict today and I believe that either problem could lead to war if not properly handled.

The problem is in part one resulting from an American drive to confront China, but it is exacerbated, almost daily, because the Chinese leadership has discovered that nationalism serves as a great replacement for the void in ideology that the death of communism has produced. I fear that as growth slows below 7 percent, the Chinese government will increasingly feel a need to throw nationalist red meat to the Chinese people. I fear that the speculation about a possible military conflict could become a self-fulfilling prophecy and I suggest that America and China, and other nations, take concrete steps to reduce the tension and create a broad dialogue. The United States or China could end up in a situation in which both parties, to avoid a loss of face, are forced to do what they said they would do. In the South China Sea – and in particular around the Spratly Islands – we see the greatest risk of a major confrontation.

All sides should recognize that we have a dangerous situation. Such confrontation is not in the interest of the United States, China or the region.

I am not interested in defending China regarding the South China Sea, but there are those who have argued that although some see Chinese activities in the South China Sea as excessive, or arrogant, China’s actions are certainly not worse than American interference in South America in the 1960s and 1970s and that there is no justification for the United States to get involved in what is essentially a regional problem. What are your thoughts?

The argument regarding the United States’ meddling is a fair one to make. I would rather want to focus on the need to start a broader and more level-headed discussion about territory in the South China Sea that moves beyond an emotional and nationalist fight between the claimants such as Vietnam and the Philippines, and China. Let us also bring in countries like Indonesia who have a stake in the region. I think the best way to address what I personally think is a mistake on the Chinese part is to have other voices say, “Listen China, these claims are causing an unnecessary problem. You are making claims that are far beyond what any international law would codify and approve.”

There are laws and processes that can be invoked to deal with these claims without escalating military tensions. The United States should pull back and not try to make itself the center of attention.

The United States could say, but currently is not saying, “Let’s resolve this dispute in a way that benefits everyone and sets a positive precedent for the future.” Read more of this post