South Korea as an ‘Ordinary’ Country: A Comparative Inquiry into the Prospects for ‘Permanent’ Immigration to Korea

Politics of multiculturalism in East Asia: Reinterpreting multiculturalism

“…In the same manner as Nagayoshi, Lim (2012: 507–508) stresses Korea’s longstanding ethno-cultural-based post-WWII identity, ‘tending to believe that Korea has a unique (cultural) dynamic that sets the country apart from others.’ DeWind et al. (2012: 376–377) argue that this concept of ethno-cultural homogeneity was rooted in Korea’s pre-colonial isolationist past which was turned on its head with Japanese colonialization resulting in the influx of non-Koreans and the movement of ethnic Koreans throughout Japan and Manchuria.…”

“…South Korea’s approach to multiculturalism has been interpreted as both similar to Japan, and pro-active, compared to Japan. On the first point, South Korea remains highly restrictive in terms of immigration rules, employing a similar argument to Japan that its ethnic and cultural homogeneity (Lim, 2012: 510–511) and requiring a migration approach that places an emphasis protecting the delicate ethnic balance that exists. This approach to immigration has remained in place for much of South Korea’s post-WWII history.…”

“…The states of South Korea, Japan and Taiwan have deliberately constructed their multiculturalism policies based on ethnic–cultural preconceptions of homogeneity and along political–ideological lines. Lim (2012), Chapman (2008) and Oishi (2012) highlighted that South Korea’s and Japan's propensity to build multicultural and migrant policies that consolidate the perceived ethnic and cultural homogeneity of the host population are deeply linked to their historical experiences in the post-WWII period. Oishi’s policy approaches to migration policies in Japan bring attention to the structural and organizational barriers that act as hurdles to inculcating permanency for the most highly skilled and able migrants under highly skilled migrant acts.…”

“…Their ethnic and cultural reality and their high degree of group-oriented behavior and their predilection for group identity continue to be barriers to inclusion of diversity of which migrants represent the most extreme form. These articles continue to stress how the inclusion of migrants is still hampered by attachments to the idea of being ethnically and culturally homogeneous societies (DeWind et al., 2012; Lim, 2012; Nagayoshi, 2011; Oishi, 2012). Hsia’s (2009) article shifts the focus of conceptualizing multiculturalism and migration policy from the loci of ethnic and cultural homogeneity to how the state, in this case Taiwan, carefully manages and implements policy that inculcates the political considerations found in their cross-strait relations with China.…”

Multicultural Education Policy in South Korea: Current Struggles and Hopeful Vision

“…With our focus specifically on South Korea's immigration policy, Lim's (2012) observation is significant. Lim claims that although South Korea is highly restrictive and assimilative to new comers, the growing discourse on multiculturalism, as well as the gradual evolution of the immigration policy makes Korea an "ordinary" immigrant country (p. 513).…”