Gianluca Spezza
I am currently Chair of the Social Sciences department, and Assistant Professor of International Studies at the American University of Iraq-Sulaimani (AUIS), where I design and teach courses on International Relations, East Asian Studies, Global Governance, International Political Economy, Modern and Medieval Civilizations. As a researcher I also hold external affiliations as Associated Research Fellow of ISDP’s Stockholm Korea Center, and Invited Professor at the Faculty of Economics & International Affairs, Kasetsart University, in Bangkok, Thailand. During the summer of 2022, I was a Visiting Research Fellow at ERINA (Economic Research Institute for Northeast Asia) in Niigata, Japan. I previously served as Assistant professor of International Relations at KIMEP University in Almaty, Kazakhstan and as Senior Researcher at KIMEP’s DPRK Strategic Research Center. I am the founder and director of the Institute for Korean Studies in the Middle East (중동의대표적한국학연구소) at AUIS (IKSME). The Institute, funded through a generous grant from the Academy of Korean Studies (AKS-2023-INC-2230005), works on developing research about the Korean peninsula, Human and Economic Development, Education, and Korea’s relations with the Middle East, particularly the Gulf states.
Supervisors: Hazel Smith
Supervisors: Hazel Smith
less
InterestsView All (19)
Uploads
The article examines the European Union (EU)'s policy toward and interactions with North Korea (DPRK) in order to answer the question, "To what extent, despite prima facie ruptures in the relationship, has the EU been engaged with the DPRK, which is conventionally understood as an unreliable state." Although the EU is seemingly inactive in North Korean affairs, yet it is a powerful institution that can play a significant role in the peacemaking process in Asia including on the Korean peninsula. This article explores, firstly, how the EU's policy toward Asia has evolved historically; secondly, how far such an agenda and principles have been implemented in the North Korean context; and finally, the extent to which previous practices pave the way for the two parties to be included in the process of forming a kind of extended regional governance in future. A common view is that the EU's strategical/political motivation for getting involved in North Korean affairs is negligible due to a lack of economic interests to counterbalance high political risks. This article highlights that, contrary to the common understanding of its soft issue-focused approach to Asia, the EU has been persistently engaged in DPRK affairs, notwithstanding the significant structural barriers. This role underpins the EU's growing intention and potential to enhance interactions under the aegis of comprehensive security (third generation cooperation) covering the economic, social, cultural, and human security-focused aspects of the relationship.
This paper reviews and examines the main drivers and events in U.S. foreign policy towards the People’s Republic of China (China) and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) since the inception of the Trump administration. The article makes a direct comparison between the D. Trump administration and its immediate predecessor, the B. Obama Administration. We look at how U.S Foreign policy towards these two Asian countries is, under Trump, framed by a reliance on personalism and power politics on part of the current U.S administration. The paper makes an assessment of how practical issues with both China (trade, geopolitics in Asia-Pacific), and North Korea (nuclear weapons, sanctions,human rights) have evolved over the last three years, presenting hypothesis for future scenarios in either the case of a Trump re-election, or a change of leadership in the White House.
Korea, each carrying a different weight for future developments: International Cooperation, Elite Training, and information technology (IT). The paper contends that without an adequate improvement of the education system, the current lack of well-trained public officials, administrators, and managers will pass onto the next generation. Since 1995, a number of International Organizations (IOs), Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and a number of international universities have been allowed to develop projects for educational support to North Korea. A good part of these is related to primary education and is not contemplated here. At the level of higher education, most projects are limited to training a few, government-selected North Koreans, either at home, or abroad. The first part of the paper will briefly address the history and evolution of education in North Korea, and the main features of International cooperation in this field. Subsequently, the paper will consider whether the current situation can be improved. Finally, the paper will consider the role of IT in the development of education in the DPRK and summarize the challenges that lie ahead.
이 논문은 북한의 교육 진화를 다루고 있는데 최근 북한의 교육 환경을 세 가지 요소로 - 국제사회와 협조 , 엘리트 교육 , 정보통신기술 (IT)- 다룬다 . 이 논문의 앞부분은 북한에서 교육의 역사와 진화를 짧게 다루고 이 분야에서 국제사회의 협조가 갖는 주요 특징을 다룰 것이다 . 이어서 현재 북한 상황이 향상될 수 있는지를 생각해 보고 마지막으로 북한의 교육 발전에서 정보통신기술 (IT) 이 갖는 역할을 고려한 후 그로 인한 저항을 요약할 것이다 .
The article examines the European Union (EU)'s policy toward and interactions with North Korea (DPRK) in order to answer the question, "To what extent, despite prima facie ruptures in the relationship, has the EU been engaged with the DPRK, which is conventionally understood as an unreliable state." Although the EU is seemingly inactive in North Korean affairs, yet it is a powerful institution that can play a significant role in the peacemaking process in Asia including on the Korean peninsula. This article explores, firstly, how the EU's policy toward Asia has evolved historically; secondly, how far such an agenda and principles have been implemented in the North Korean context; and finally, the extent to which previous practices pave the way for the two parties to be included in the process of forming a kind of extended regional governance in future. A common view is that the EU's strategical/political motivation for getting involved in North Korean affairs is negligible due to a lack of economic interests to counterbalance high political risks. This article highlights that, contrary to the common understanding of its soft issue-focused approach to Asia, the EU has been persistently engaged in DPRK affairs, notwithstanding the significant structural barriers. This role underpins the EU's growing intention and potential to enhance interactions under the aegis of comprehensive security (third generation cooperation) covering the economic, social, cultural, and human security-focused aspects of the relationship.
This paper reviews and examines the main drivers and events in U.S. foreign policy towards the People’s Republic of China (China) and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) since the inception of the Trump administration. The article makes a direct comparison between the D. Trump administration and its immediate predecessor, the B. Obama Administration. We look at how U.S Foreign policy towards these two Asian countries is, under Trump, framed by a reliance on personalism and power politics on part of the current U.S administration. The paper makes an assessment of how practical issues with both China (trade, geopolitics in Asia-Pacific), and North Korea (nuclear weapons, sanctions,human rights) have evolved over the last three years, presenting hypothesis for future scenarios in either the case of a Trump re-election, or a change of leadership in the White House.
Korea, each carrying a different weight for future developments: International Cooperation, Elite Training, and information technology (IT). The paper contends that without an adequate improvement of the education system, the current lack of well-trained public officials, administrators, and managers will pass onto the next generation. Since 1995, a number of International Organizations (IOs), Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and a number of international universities have been allowed to develop projects for educational support to North Korea. A good part of these is related to primary education and is not contemplated here. At the level of higher education, most projects are limited to training a few, government-selected North Koreans, either at home, or abroad. The first part of the paper will briefly address the history and evolution of education in North Korea, and the main features of International cooperation in this field. Subsequently, the paper will consider whether the current situation can be improved. Finally, the paper will consider the role of IT in the development of education in the DPRK and summarize the challenges that lie ahead.
이 논문은 북한의 교육 진화를 다루고 있는데 최근 북한의 교육 환경을 세 가지 요소로 - 국제사회와 협조 , 엘리트 교육 , 정보통신기술 (IT)- 다룬다 . 이 논문의 앞부분은 북한에서 교육의 역사와 진화를 짧게 다루고 이 분야에서 국제사회의 협조가 갖는 주요 특징을 다룰 것이다 . 이어서 현재 북한 상황이 향상될 수 있는지를 생각해 보고 마지막으로 북한의 교육 발전에서 정보통신기술 (IT) 이 갖는 역할을 고려한 후 그로 인한 저항을 요약할 것이다 .
North Korea is frequently portrayed as an unknowable, impenetrable land. However, a substantial amount of data on health indicators is readily available. While it must be treated with caution – malnutrition figures, for example, don’t include political prisoners languishing in camps – the data can be useful for showing longer-term trends. Health indicators have improved in the two decades since the country’s 1990s famine – during which hundreds of thousands of people starved to death. But there are still major problems. Levels of malnutrition, maternal health, and tuberculosis are worrying enough, but a lack of accurate data on HIV/AIDS and hepatitis B presents new cause for alarm.
What comes after a peace declaration with North Korea, and can it salvage the country’s economy? There is debate on whether North Korea has slowly grown inured to aid since the 1990s, or it deliberately stalled economic development to concentrate resources on its military, but there is consensus on its enduring long-term need for aid.
Needing a bike to deliver medicines but having a TV in most households exemplifies the development paradox of the DPRK. Some have argued by looking at the signals of apparent modernisation over the last five to six years that the North Korean economy is growing. However, modernisation and development are not necessarily synonyms, and a look at North Korean socioeconomic contrasts can clarify the situation inside the country. Is North Korea richer than it was 20 years ago? The answer might be both yes and no, depending on the measurement used.
to the notion of accountability and collective responsibility for all North Koreans regarding human rights abuses, while also exploring the issue of Korean nationalism; and Sandra Fahy analyzes the history and meaning of North Korea’s famine in the 1990s through the testimony of defectors in South Korea and Japan, illustrating how North Korean society changed in the process of survival.