The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History

by Don Oberdorfer

Don Oberdorfer has written a gripping narrative history of Korea's travails and triumphs over the past three decades. The Two Koreas places the tensions between North and South within a historical context, with a special emphasis on the involvement of outside powers.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Asia, Politics, World History, International Relations, 20th Century

560 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1997

Reviews

[Jorge Matheos · Rating 4 out of 5]

How can one go about writing a review for a book like this? A book on the shelves of mainstream bookstores and competing with what seems to be an ever-growing "Korea" genre in the "Asia" section of most chain bookstores or on Amazon.com.

This might be the closest attempt at "non-biased" Western history of Modern Korea. It is a collection of facts and photos that details the evolution of Korean internal policy and foreign policy from the end of the Japanese Colonial Period until the beginnings of Modern Korean democracy at the end of the 80's and into the 90's. If you are interested in that, and all the good and band that it entails, you will find this book informative.

However, a book like this must compete with the likes of more narrative-based histories with firmer ideologies such as Bruce Cummings or B.R. Myers, both of whom have written more "hot" books about Korea. However, if you like to read history with as little written between the lines as possible, while still acknowledging the claims of both sides, this is a worthwhile starting point to Modern Korean Studies.

Remembering that it's difficult to rate the book. Judging from the reviews of Cummings and Myers and others on this website, it probably wouldn't hold many of your interest. However, if you are interested in the book's somewhat dry but indispensable history, it is definitely a compelling read.

[Grace Ye · Rating 3 out of 5]

was curious to learn more abt korean politics after all that presidential drama that happened in late 2024... saw this book at the thrift store so thought why not!

as all the other reviews suggest, this book is DRY and it actually gets progressively worse as you go! but it did give me an appreciation of how korea has evolved into its current geopolitical state.

other stuff:

i felt like wayyy too much time was spent on the nitty gritty details of the back-and-forth on north korea's nuclear crisis. WAYYYYYYYYYYY too much, especially considering how little actually happens... not to mention all the other events he could've chosen to cover.

there is also what feels like a disproportionate emphasis on the US's involvement in korea... couldnt tell if this is bc the US was really that important to korea at this time (like moreso than russia/china/japan or even the UN... which i doubt?) or if its just written this way bc the author is american. feel like this book couldve been more aptly titled "The American Take on the Two Koreas"

[Kberger · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book covers Korea from 1950 to 2000. It contains a lot of facts about events. If that is what you are looking for, this is a good book for you.

I found Korea's Place in the Sun to be a better read. That book has some opinion thrown in which made it more interesting for me.

One thing On China by Henry Kissinger and this book have in common is the focus on politicians, diplomts and soldiers. Fifty years ago, these things were important, but in the last fifteen years that type of stuff takes a back seat to business relationships. You might be reading this on your ipad, an Apple branded product that has components from LG, a Korean company, that is assembled in China. Economics are more important than statesman-type things.

[Ellis Hastings · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting and well-researched book, albeit pretty dry! With the material and rife historical juice that is available concerning the tensions and history between North and South Korea, the book should be way more gripping. Especially with a crazy assassination attempt that killed South Korean president Park Chung-Hee's wife during a speech, the assassination several years later of Chung-Hee, and multiple bombings of passenger airliners.

[Anuk Yingrotetarakul · Rating 4 out of 5]

There's a wealth of information on the history of the two Koreas. This book lays a good foundation of the cold war which is imperative to understanding the history and lays a foundation of both countries' histories too.

The style is somewhat dry though and it can get a bit boring if you start to lose focus. Nonetheless, I learned a lot.

[Greg · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book provides a journalist's account of the political history of the Korean peninsula from 1950-2000. Oberdorfer prevents facts in a well-ordered manner, reflecting the successes and failures in policy and personal actions. It is an excellent book, although his hopeful analysis at the end has now proven to be...overly hopeful.

Oberdorfer's exploration of the start of the Korean War and the personality of Kim Il Sung is quite interesting. Despite public claims to the contrary, Soviet archives show him from March of 1949 to January of 1950 seeking the support of Stalin for an invasion of the south to unify the country under his control. He stated, "Lately I do not sleep at night, thinking about how to resolve the question of the unification of the whole country. If the matter of the liberation of the people of the southern portion of Korea and the unification of the country is drawn out, then I can lose the trust of the people of Korea." After initially refusing Kim's request, Stalin eventually agreed due to developments in China.

I found particularly interesting the analysis of South Korean's various leaders. Oberdorfer is unsparing in his criticism of the KCIA and its various directors, one of which, Lee Hu Rak, organized the kidnapping of future leader Kim Dae Jung (and perhaps only because of pressure from the US did not execute him). Similarly, his analysis of the often disjointed US policy I found interesting. Actions such as those of Deputy Chief of Mission Richard Ericson, who disregarded official policy and placed his career in jeopardy to reach an accommodation during a crisis between Japan and North Korean elements after the resignation of Nixon is a good example. Oberdorfer is unsparing in his criticism of Carter, who went against his advisors multiple times in order to seek with withdrawal of US troops and also blundered into a number of mistakes with Kim Il Sung and the south, so much so that he went against his previous statements of verifying assurances from the Soviet Union before any withdrawals or concessions.

Oberdorfer's analysis of the Kwangju massacre, as well as various incursions and kidnappings, and ultimately terrorist events, were chilling. The picture painted of the North is quite disturbing, and reflects those carrying out orders, or interpretations of orders, from a highly centralized but often disconnected single leader. Later events such as the embracing of Soviet athletes competing against the US at the 1988 Seoul Olympics, paint a complicated picture of how US policy has been interpreted by leaders and the people of South Korea over the years.

Oberdorfer discusses the transition from corruption and essentially military rule in the South to liberal democracy...nearly all of which was new to me, I'm ashamed to say. Much of the end of the book is focused on the nuclear question, as well as the transition from Kim Il Sung to Kim Jong Il. Unfortunately the opportunities provided by the transition in leadership have now evaporated, as the situation is largely unchanged now in 2018. We can only hope for cooler heads and positives steps at de-escalation in the future.

See my other reviews here!

[Lesley Parker · Rating 5 out of 5]

A 'primer' and a must-read if you want to know how we got to where we are today (though even the revised version is now out of date with the election of Trump). And it's not as simple as the media stereotypes. This has been an utter failure of diplomacy, a litany of errors. Recommend this thorough and readable history.

[Alex Helling · Rating 4 out of 5]

Amid the devastation the Korean War ended pretty much where it started; with two roughly evenly sized Koreas’ staring aggressively at each other across a border across the middle of the peninsular. It was an armistice not a full peace treaty. And therefore not a recipe for long term stability. However the superpowers were now fully committed and wanted to keep the peace, the USSR supporting the North, and the United States the South. But managing partners is never easy and Korea has had an eventful history since the end of the War. Don Oberdorfer in The Two Koreas traces the history of the two halves of Korea through the lens of the United States relations with Korea.

Pros
Well written engaging history
Excellent on the key figures

Cons
Odd start and end point

The Two Koreas is “a contemporary history” so running right up to the point the book was published (which was in 1997 so now not quite so contemporary!) This history is dealt with in straightforward chronological order. Oberdorfer’s intention is that this history should both provide context for the regular crises in Korea and that it have special attention to the outside powers as this is where the interests of so many powerful countries; USA, USSR/Russia, China, and Japan, intersect. The Two Koreas is therefore a history of Korea but with a focus on the international relations aspects rather than say the economic. That is not to say that other issues are completely ignored; beyond security the US had clear interests in human rights and democratisation among other issues.

As a journalistic first take on history Oberdorfer has an eye for the stories and for telling a good tale that will be engaging. The writing is excellent and easy to read. That focus on how the outside powers interacted with Korea means that the boring bits between the key events can be minimised. It matters to Koreans, but a quiet Korea is not something the outsiders need to engage with. This helps produce a fast paced narrative.

Don Oberdorfer was there. And from this flows many of both the positives and negatives of The Two Koreas. To get the negative out of the way first Oberdorfer essentially uses his time there to set the period the book covers. This means the timing is somewhat odd. While there is a bit of filling in on what has happened earlier the real start is in 1972 when Oberdorfer is first a correspondent covering the region. Being almost 20 years after the end of the Korean war this is an odd starting point. At the other end the end point was set by when the book was published, with the nuclear crisis still ongoing so also an odd ending. That said the saga that was in full swing in the 1990s on North Korea’s attempts to get the nuclear bomb is still underway so it could be said there is no real good ending point (yet) for the book.

The other downside is that The Two Koreas is one sided. There is lots of access to the South, but not to the North. That said, given how reclusive the North is this can’t really be a criticism and Oberdorfer has clearly had a lot more contact with the North and their leaders than almost anyone else.

The plus side is perhaps more important; Oberdorfer has met almost all the participants. Working as a senior correspondent in the region for 20 years has given him the opportunity to interview pretty much everyone of relevance on the Southern and American sides, and particularly in the 1990s he has also been able to interview many senior North Koreans. This both means that there is added authenticity to the book and its take on the participants, and that Oberdorfer can write very convincing pen portraits of the participants and give an idea of their characters.

Although as a ‘contemporary history’ this is getting a bit dated and has an odd end point The Two Koreas is still an excellent narrative of twenty years of Korean history. Worth reading if you want to understand the background to the nuclear crisis or more about the relatively recent political history of South Korea.

[Dave Reads · Rating 4 out of 5]

There is so much to know about the Korean peninsula and this book sheds an expert’s light into the history and politics of both North and South Korea. Former Washington Post reporter Don Oberdorfer goes into great detail in “The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History”.” We learn about the complicated relationships between those two nations and other world powers such as the United States, Russia, and China.

Among the interesting things I learned:

* During the Korean War, 1,500,000 Americans served, and 36,000 were killed.

* The proposal to split Korea into two, along the 38th parallel, was drawn with the help of a National Geographic map and done under great pressure to complete the task. No Korean experts were involved in the planning.

* The Korean conflict was considered a prototype of a limited war in that none of the superpowers used the nuclear weapons they had at their disposal, and the US didn’t attack the Soviet or Chinese territory as some had feared.

* It is estimated that 900,000 Chinese and 520,000 North Koreans were killed or wounded.
* Kim Il Sung, demanded no dissent. Inhuman treatment, torture, and public execution were common for those who did not conform. Twelve prison camps were established in remote areas for more than 150,000 people. They were never released.

* In 1988, following the Seoul Olympics, the Soviet Union sought closer ties with South Korea.

* In 1991, Beijing followed Moscow’s lead to a closer relationship with Seoul. Chinese trade with South Korea was seven times larger than its trade with the North.

* In the 1990s North Korea’s nuclear weapon program was underway. It later became a bargaining chip for the government.

* In 1994 war nearly broke out on the peninsula. The US responded to North Korea’s nuclear challenge with a combination of force, and diplomacy.

The author concludes, “Korea sits at the vital center of Northeast Asia, one of the world's most strategically important and dynamic regions, it is surrounded by three great powers China Japan and Russia. No longer a passive factor in regional and world affairs, Koreans North and South will have an important impact on their neighbors and on the international scene in the years ahead. “Whatever the future holds will likely develop with high drama, intense emotion, and powerful consequences. Hold onto your hat. Korea is a land of surprises."

While it reads like a history text, it remains a fascinating read.

[Bookaholic Confessions · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Hold on to your hats, Korea is a land of surprises"… if that's not an amazing closure, what would it be?. This phrase that you would find at the very end of the book, clearly summarize what you will find over and over again while reading this book. The history of Korea after WW2 is a juxtaposition of casualties and causalities, mixed together in order to provide a series of amazing, although at the same time very sad, events.

I have to say I am totally neophyte about Korea's history (I little bit less after reading this book) and I would say this book guided me through all the above mentioned historical events in the smoothest possible way. Although the majority of the book centers in all the things that happened after WW2 and the imposed division of Korean land into North Korea (patronized by Russia) and South Korea (sponsored by U.S), the author provides a deep insight into the events that shaped modern history of East Asia, from Japanese invasion and control of Korea at the beginning of 20th century, passing by Russo-Japanese War, to the beginnings of world domination between Capitalisms (represented mainly by U.S, West Europe and Japan) and Communisms (Russia, China and East Europe).

As I said before, Korea's conflict is a case in itself, and for a case like that, it would be almost impossible to have a good understanding of all the aspects of it without participate in some way or another. Don Oberdorfer job as a Washington Post correspondent in Korea provides the reader with fresh and detailed information about the conflict, a first hand of political aspects, description of military confrontations and a myriad of interviews to important characters that were undertaken as part of the correspondent work as well as a preparation for this book.

I really enjoyed this book because it's organized in an way that gave me the appropriate approach to learn more about one of the most appealing political and military conflict of world history.

[Katherine]

Ughhh. It took me quite a few years and three separate attempts to get through this book, and I guess I'm grimly satisfied that I finished it? This is a useful chronicle if you're interested in the chronological minutiae of political decisions, but it's not an engaging piece of writing at all. "This event happened. Then this country issued this response. This other country issued this response. A meeting was held between delegates from these three countries. These delegates attended the meeting. This delegate had also attended the following previous meetings... At the end, a communique was issued. It was received this way in this country. It was received a different way in this other country. Six months later, another meeting was held between delegates from these three countries..." And on and on and on.

I think the decision to continually update and rerelease the same book, rather than to write new ones as new circumstances developed, was a mistake. You get the feeling that the authors are feeling a certain way at certain points in history--"ah, look, light at the end of the tunnel! Things are surely looking up!"--and that that's where previous editions ended. Then the new edition is written and they continue, saying, "As it turned out, there was NOT light at the end of the tunnel. This event happened on this date, with the following results. This meeting was then held..."

Basic takeaways:
1) All US political dealings with both Koreas have been hampered by racism. Most US administrations talk about North Korea as if it were a group of misbehaving children and not a sovereign country.
2) Any political progress achieved by a given administration will be undone by the following administration.

Frustrating stuff.

[A · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ok book on modern Korean history. Written by a reporter and therefore not scholarly - enough so that I wonder sometimes at the author's version of an event. Often told from a "i spoke to this lesser state dept official and here is the real story..." .... just sort of got in the way of the story. Still- structurally easy to follow, i did learn some about the transition from military to civilian leadership in the south and heard accounts of the transition from one Kim to another in the obscure North.

[Stefanie Robinson · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book discusses the history of North and South Korea, and all of the stark differences between the two nations and the people residing in them. This book was a dollar at my local used book store, and I bought it simply to learn some generalized information about Korea. I bought this as well as a few other books from people who had left North Korea. I found this book to be very informative. It gave some really good historical facts, as well as good political information outlining the relationships between the two countries.

[Erica · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fascinating Dive into Contemporary North and South Korean History and Relations

Expertly delves through North and South Korea’s evolution and strained relationship since the founding of each modern state in the 1950s, beginning really with the aftermath of the Korean War, as well as America’s complicated and often ill-informed policy and negotiations with the two Koreas.

[Earl · Rating 4 out of 5]

More than just K-Pop, the world ought to turn to the history of the conflict between the North and the South. This book provides us a good background and story of a conflict that goes beyond ideology and toward the nitty-gritty of politics. And the most important question that this leaves us: Is there a possibility for a re-unification to happen?

[TS Allen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Comprehensive. The best introduction to US policy about Korea. Since Northeast Asia is a strategic cul-de-sac, it's helpful to review the debates in this book. They all seem to repeat every few years.

[Ryan King · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pretty good political history of Korea since the end of the Cold War. The author talks about his personal experiences at certain points in the book which help explain situations and provide a better insight to important events. Hopefully an updated version will be released in a few more years.

[Stevie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting read, a good history of the divide between North & South Korea from the Korean war until the late 90's. It's sadly not the most up to date but it was interesting & a good overview of things.

[Phil Eaton · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interesting but omits so much detail about North Korean human rights violation while mentioning South Korea's various protests that you're left wondering about what else is missing. Written by a journalist, the book is full of pointless and irritating cliches.

[Bill · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great modern overview of the conflict in the pennisula.
Strategic mistakes by world powers and the Koreas cannot be easily forgiven and show the complications in the standoff.

[Kat Dixon · Rating 5 out of 5]

compelling (if in - desperate! - need of continuation)

[Amy Mason · Rating 5 out of 5]

Must read for anyone traveling to or working with Korea

[Nathan Smith · Rating 5 out of 5]

An awesome history on how and why Korea was split. Living, in Korea, it's really interesting understanding the history behind the modern situation.

[Phillip · Rating 4 out of 5]

WELL WRITTEN. WEAVES A LOT OF UNFAMILIAR INFORMATION INTO A TRAGICALLY BALANCED HISTORY. COMPLETELY AND CONVINCINGLY SHATTERS GOD /BAD DICHOTOMY OF KOREAN RELATIONS

[Strick · Rating 4 out of 5]

A history of missed opportunities and poor reading of the other.

[Robert · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book focuses almost exclusively on relations between North and South Korea, with disappointingly little on domestic issues.

[Don Rosso · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great book, well-researched and well-sourced. A little too U.S.-focused for my taste, and almost completely focused on the North for the latter third.

[Alec · Rating 2 out of 5]

How to take one of the most riveting and tragic stories in 20th century history and make it dull as hell.

[Jeff Learned · Rating 5 out of 5]

An interesting and very readable history.

[Elizabeth Jorgensen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Too dense for me.