LOS ANGELES TIMES INTERVIEW : Kim Young Sam : South Korea’s President Reassesses Its World Role

President Kim Young Sam, 65, the first civilian leader of South Korea since 1961, will make his first trip overseas since taking office in February, and his first stop will be Los Angeles this week--primarily because last year’s riots so affected the city’s Korean population.

On Thursday, Kim flies to Seattle for a summit of the 15-member Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation organization, hosted by President Bill Clinton. Kim will then visit Washington for a summit with Clinton. How to deal with communist North Korea’s suspected development of nuclear weapons will be the major topic.

It’s the kind of role Kim pursued despite oppression and hardship as a leader of the opposition. When he broke with the opposition, in 1990, and joined forces with President Roh Tae Woo to give the government party a majority in the National Assembly, critics blasted him as a turncoat. Roh, an ex-general who had defeated Kim and a splintered opposition in 1987 by promising to democratize South Korea, rewarded him by supporting him as his successor. The boyish-faced leader won handily in December, 1992.

One of Kim’s first acts was to disclose his personal assets and declare he would receive no political donations during his five-year term. Then came laws that required all high-government officials and politicians to disclose their assets. Discoveries of inexplicable fortunes precipitated countless resignations.

Now Kim is embarking on economic reforms to transform South Korea into a nation where wealth, honestly earned, will be respected, and whose economy will, for the first time, be open to foreigners.

Kim, who speaks moderately good Japanese but little English, spoke in a deep voice through an interpreter for 75 minutes at the presidential Blue House. Though he suffers a reputation as a poor orator, the president fielded questions confidently, without notes.

Question: In the Los Angeles riots last year, Koreans were victims. What do you think of relations between Koreans and Americans of Korean ancestry and their neighbors in Los Angeles?

Answer: It is a most painful and tragic event that such a conflict occurred in the Korean community in Los Angeles. That is the main reason I decided to visit the city this time. I think the ethnic minorities living in the area should unite and create harmonious relationships.

. . . The Korean community should make friendly and productive relationships--not just with white people, but also with other ethnic groups. There shouldn’t be another incident like that again . . . .

Q: Last year, Park Jun Kyu, then National Assembly speaker, said Korean governments had long encouraged overseas Koreans to retain their loyalty to the mother country, and, as a result, they had not intermingled with other communities in the United States. What is your opinion?

A: If one has made the decision to emigrate to the United States, then one should try one’s best to become a good American citizen and take root in that society . . . fulfilling military duties and other obligations as a citizen of the American community . . . .

Q: What vision do you have for APEC and Korea’s role in that organization?

A: The APEC conference this time is significant in the sense that the participating countries are demonstrating a high rate of growth. In addition, the combined size of their GNP amounts to more than 55% of the total global GNP. One might say the conference actually symbolizes a very important gathering of dominant economic forces in the world.

. . . APEC should move toward openness and cooperation . . . . Last Monday, I made an announcement on new strategies for our economy in the direction of opening and internationalization . . . . During the last 32 years of military government, our regulation of the economy, including foreign investments, has been rigid. And, in fact, our own bureaucracy has become rigid so it was difficult for foreign business firms to invest and do business in Korea.

Bureaucrats are used to making regulations and like to exercise control. So this time, I’ll personally check to make sure progress is made for deregulation . . .

Q: What role are you prepared to play?

A: Korea is situated between advanced countries and developing countries in terms of its economic status. So we are in a position to be able to promote a smooth dialogue with both advanced countries and developing countries . . . .

The United States regards Korea as an important country. So does Japan. And China cannot ignore us. So all important countries of the world cannot continue treating our country as they did when we had illegitimate military governments.

After I took office as president, the international opinion toward Korea changed. Unlike the past 32 years, we are morally proud, and, therefore, the role we can play in APEC has expanded. . . . The countries participating in APEC share with us the goals of democracy, human rights and market economy.

Q. Including China?

A: (Laughs) I’m not in a position to answer your question.

Q: On the suspected North Korean development of nuclear weaponry, as an ultimate solution would you be satisfied if North Korea exchanged full inspection of its nuclear facilities for full diplomatic recognition with Washington?

A: . . . My position is this: North Korea should discharge its international obligations first--that is, accept International Atomic Energy Agency special inspections and also show its sincerity in conducting meaningful dialogue with South Korea. These conditions are what North Korea must meet before demanding any concessions from its partners. My position will not change. It is firm.

Q: We are now in the eighth year of this problem--North Korea signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1985. At the point it becomes clear that North Korea is going to develop nuclear weapons, would South Korea consider developing its own?

A: We do not have any intention to develop our own nuclear weapons. And, I am confident we can have North Korea stop developing nuclear weapons by maintaining close coordination with the United States and other friendly countries. It’s just a matter of time.

Q: Can you categorically rule out that under no circumstance will South Korea develop its own nuclear weapons?

A: Absolutely. That would disrupt peace in Northeast Asia and peace in the world at large. Peace is the most important issue. The very reason we are trying to stop North Korea from developing nuclear weapons is to maintain peace.

Q: If North Korea develops nuclear weapons, are you afraid Japan might develop nuclear weapons?

A: I think there is a possibility, yes. Because of the possibility that Japan might be stimulated to going nuclear, I think we should stop North Korea from developing its own nuclear weapons. The possible chain reaction would create an enormously tragic situation.

If North Korea insists on developing nuclear weapons, it will only mean its own self-destruction.

Q: Your predecessor, President Roh Tae Woo, declared that South Korea, even if reunified with North Korea, would like to retain a security treaty with the United States and keep U.S. troops in a unified Korea. Do you share that feeling?

A: Even after the unification of East and West Germany, American troops are still stationed there. American troops in Korea have contributed much as a deterrent force. I think it would be fine if the U.S. military presence continues even after the reunification of Korea, although not permanently.

Q: What do you mean, “it will be fine”?

A: No, that means it is desirable for the U.S. presence to continue even after reunification, although not permanently.

Q: What does “not permanently” mean?

A: The situation will dictate the decision. We will have to decide in accordance with the situation then.

Q: Relations between the United States and Korea have been good in recent years but there was one recent disagreement when you rejected President Clinton’s request to send additional troops to Somalia. Why did you reject Clinton’s request?

A: . . . When the request came, we had already dispatched an engineering corps in accordance with a U.N. request. The most important thing when I made the decision was to keep our government’s promise to our people. What happened is that when we asked the National Assembly to approve the (initial) dispatch of troops to Somalia, there was a concern that this would lead to sending combat troops in the end. And the government promised that wouldn’t happen.

So we decided to keep our promise. I think that’s very important in a democratic country.

The additional reason comes from the U.S. side. That is that President Clinton declared that American forces dispatched to Somalia will be withdrawn by the end of March, 1994 . . . . Even if we had decided to send additional forces, they would arrive, given the preparation time, sometime in January, 1994, and if the American forces are withdrawn two months later, the South Korean forces would have to withdraw at the same time, which means we would stay only two months. So, we decided not to send additional forces.

Q: During your many years in the opposition, you were ousted from your post as leader of the opposition; your seat in the National Assembly was taken away; you were purged from politics; you were put under house arrest, and, in 1987, were pushed into a police van in front of your office. Was there any point when you doubted you would achieve your dream of becoming president and that Korea would have democracy again?

A: It is true that I had a dream since my early days of becoming president, and despite the difficult experiences I had as leader of the opposition, hardship could not weaken my determination. Whenever the repression and the sufferings increased, my convictions became stronger that democracy would someday come to Korea and, if I became leader of the nation, I would change the injustice and introduce a new society with fresh hopes. That is the main reason why I did not fall ill and why I maintained my health. I always felt I could do it in the end.

Q: Is there anything that your suffering in those years helped you with after assuming the office of president?

A: . . . . Past sufferings . . . helped me become a better president in that I become more sympathetic toward those who suffer. My policy is, as much as possible, to restore the rights of those who suffered from the authoritarian governments--for example, the (fired members of) the National Teachers Union and persons on the wanted list for struggling for democracy--because of my own experience. I want to rehabilitate their rights to establish a better democracy.

Acting in accord with my conscience, I declared that, when I became president, I would not accept any political donation--not one coin--during the five years of my presidency, and I would create a clean government. It is with this spirit that I made public officials disclose their wealth by law. Those who had trouble in explaining how they accumulated big amounts of personal wealth had to resign . . . . Q: Although there is great support for your reforms, there is also criticism that they have distracted attention from the economy and caused instability in that businessmen are reluctant to invest because they cannot foresee what the future will be.

A: . . . Most Korean people share the opinion that though, in the short term, there may be some negative impact, in the long term, reform will be conducive to revitalizing the Korean economy.

Those who work hard will be rewarded. We are creating a society where wealth will be respected rather than despised as in the past . . . .