CONFIDENTIAL
over the classification of the talks (and some of the sources of our information) but in general it seems to me that the talks could cover much of the same ground and could be useful to both sides. In rather general terms I tried out these thoughts on the Director of the Second West European Division in the Gaimusho, Mr Arafume and the Gaimusho man seconded to the JDF, Mr Otsuka. Both seemed to think there was something in the idea, but stressed that it would be important to ensure that on each side the talks were led by diplomatic service personnel rather than members of the services.
The
5. The second, very different, point which struck me arose from the contrast between the pace and method of development in Korea and China. In Korea the provision of basic communications - roads, railways, telephones - is enabling rural areas very rapidly to join the market economy and advance from a rural self-sufficiency to producing for the urban areas with an immediate increase in wealth (a doubling of income in the village I visited). In Korea too, the absence of Government provision of adequate social services, including secondary education as well as pensions and health care, has led to a strong propensity to save and to small families; whereas in China, as in Eastern Europe, state provision of many community needs free, or almost so, means that in prosperous communities people have very little to spend their money on the commune I visited near Shanghai seemed quite unable to prevent its accumulated surplus from rising. young Korean economists to whom I spoke were, however, much concerned about the social costs of their pace of development - as well they might be: in Pohang we were told that the 10,000 construction workers who would have been employed for a good many years would simply have to fend for themselves once the job was completed in 1981. The batchelor migrant workers, whether in Korea or in the Middle East, is a well established habit cannot surely last for ever alone on the present scale, especially as alternatives become available. The purpose of noting these points is to suggest (a) that the Koreans would welcome exchanges with British experts and academics, and (b) that our own people concerned with development in the broadest sense of the word might find every bit as much to interest them in Korea as they seem to find in China. In particular I think that the time is overdue for a Ministerial visit at a relatively junior level by someone who would like to see for himself what is going on. Equally, I am sure that senior officials travelling in the area would find a brief visit to Korea well worthwhile.
28 March 1978
J. I was feled.
小
JT Masefield
Far Eastern Department
CONFIDENTIAL
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.