Focus On: Witold Henisz

Troubled Times Ahead for North Korea?

The death this weekend of North Korea’s Kim Jong-il, who ruled the country with an iron fist since his father’s death in 1994, had immediate repercussions throughout Asia and beyond.

The New York Times reports that South Korea — which has been at war with North Korea since the early 1950s — immediately put its military on alert, “boosting surveillance along the 155-mile border between the two countries, one of the world’s most heavily armed frontiers.” The tension between the two countries escalated during the past several years after North Korea demonstrated nuclear capability.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Asian stock markets took a dive in response to the news, “with South Korea’s stock market and the won tumbling to multiweek lows…. With markets already reeling from the European debt crisis and global growth concerns, Kim’s death has added a dangerous layer of instability to the Korean peninsula,” the Journal noted, adding that “many Asian neighbors [are] uneasy about the leadership transition phase in one of the world’s most reclusive regimes.”

That unease was further heightened by the announcement that Kim’s son, Kim Jong-un, has been named the country’s new leader, despite his youth (he is in his twenties), lack of experience and isolation from other governments.

Wharton faculty echoed the anxiety expressed in news reports. “Missiles have already been fired in the Sea of Japan” by North Korea, says Wharton management professor Witold Henisz. “This gesture demonstrates the internal uncertainty over succession, with Kim Jong-un or others trying to demonstrate their loyalty to the military or, perhaps, the military trying to demonstrate its independence. No one knows very much about the new potential ‘great successor.’ He will have to consolidate his power internally after having been raised in a two-generation cocoon [removed] from reality.”

The next days and weeks “are fraught with hazards such as Asia has not seen in years,” Henisz added. “Is China ready to step up and assume a position of international political authority? How will Japan, South Korea and others respond to provocations? Making the situation even worse, Europe is focused internally on the need to avoid the break-up of the euro, and the U.S. is increasingly turning inward as its election campaign heats up. In these circumstances, North Korea will have to act out even more to gain the international attention that it so craves. These are dangerous days.”

Wharton management professor Mauro Guillen points out that “leadership transitions in North Korea are a big deal because this is only the second one in half a century. The key issue is whether the youngest son has the support of the army or not, or whether the generals will use him as a puppet. His father alienated everyone, including China and the U.S., with his nuclear policy.”

Along with the country’s isolation is the fact that the North Korean people “are starving and are politically repressed,” Guillen adds. “Korean unification is still far away, and one can only hope that when it comes, it does not destabilize South Korea. Just think about how hard it was for West Germany to absorb East Germany. North Korea is much poorer and larger, and South Korea is not as resourceful as West Germany was. I think [U.S. President] Obama should go to the Demilitarized Zone separating the two Koreas and deliver a Reagan-style speech to [Chinese] President Hu, demanding that he ‘ cut off this barbed wire.’ China must seize the opportunity to put an end to this disaster.”

According to Howard Pack, Wharton professor of business and public policy, the death of Kim Jong-Il has been widely anticipated following rumors that he suffered from pancreatic cancer. Meanwhile, the succession issue “is very unclear – he favored his third son, but it is not [apparent] that [this son] is acceptable to the military. North Korea’s economy is very weak. While precise estimates of income per capita cannot be calculated, stories from emigrants both in China and in South Korea suggest a very low per capita income. [Yet] the country’s military capacity, especially in rocketry and atomic knowledge, is more than capable and has also been the only major source of foreign exchange.”

Pack adds that the “South Korean government has intensively explored the possibilities of an implosion of the North Korean economy and alternative policies to deal with it. South Korea is much larger, and its per capita income is probably 15 times greater. However, the government is well aware of the enormous costs to West Germany of absorbing East Germany. Except for the unlikely scenario that the new government would launch a war against the South, the death of Kim Jong-il has no obvious short-term implications for financial markets given its absence of exports, imports and financial interaction with the rest of the world.”

Featured Professors: , ,
Posted in Knowledge@Wharton Today | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Where Does the Occupy Movement Go from Here?

Occupy Wall Street is moving beyond the park — literally and figuratively. The protest that started an international movement was kicked out of Zuccotti Park by New York City police earlier this week, after camping there for two months to demonstrate against growing economic inequality in the United States. On Thursday, as part of a “day of action,” activists attempted to stop the opening of the New York Stock Exchange and marched throughout the city. Other demonstrations by Occupy offshoots took place across the country, including St. Louis, Portland, Ore., Miami and Detroit.

But where should the movement go next, in terms of setting its agenda? “We have views that range from the most liberal to the most conservative,” activist and Occupy Wall Street spokesperson William Buster said Tuesday as part of a panel discussion on the movement held at Wharton. “It’s not any easier for us to have conversations than it is for Congress…. The only difference is that we continue to listen and continue talking to each other. This is going to be a long process. This is the start of a dialogue.”

The movement has spent much of its time being reactive, Buster said, including trying to aid activists arrested by police. And within the camps, there has been an evolution where “we weed out the real workers from the hangers-on.” At the panel discussion, Buster, University of Pennsylvania urban studies professor Andrew Lamas, finance professors Franklin Allen and Gregory Nini, and management professor Witold Henisz, talked about the movement’s origins and impact — and where it goes from here.

Nini said there are several areas where Occupy Wall Street could push for reforms or work to gain support. “The legal system has a role in helping to curb corruption, and right now there is an important debate going on about the legal liability of banks prior to and during the crisis,” he noted. “Shareholders of banks also play a role; corporations are run by the people and, ultimately, they have a responsibility to shareholders.”

The financial services industry has spent an “enormous amount of money” to gain influence with politicians and regulators, Allen said, which contributed to the fact that the sector has faced few consequences for practices contributing to the recession. “Occupy Wall Street is not happy that this group got an unfair advantage. It’s supposed to be a competitive industry, but it isn’t because you can’t make such great amounts of money in a competitive industry.”

Although corruption is a problem, Lamas said the larger issue is that the richest Americans have been able to build wealth in terms of net worth, while most people in the lower and middle classes have not. According to the Pew Research Center, median net worth of white households declined 16% from 2005 to 2009. The decline was much steeper in black (53%) and Hispanic (66%) households, which already had a significantly smaller median net worth in the first place ($6,325 for Hispanic households in 2009 and $5,677 for black households, versus $113,149 for white households)

“The American dream, to an extent, is based upon ownership and the only ownership offered to society at large is home ownership,” Lamas noted. “But this is not how you build wealth. Nobody in finance builds a wealth strategy around the home. If you can’t build wealth through being a homeowner and they’re not letting you build it at work, how are we going to change this data? We’re not.”

Henisz said he was surprised that more leaders in the business and government sector haven’t spoken in support of the Occupy movement’s efforts to address growing inequality. In American history, there have been “enormous gains in addressing inequality because movements have also developed in terms of education…. We’re not even getting conversations going about what could be done and how to move the movement forward. Walls have been built, and there’s the sense that the [Occupy activists] are seen as radicals. That’s a lost opportunity.”

The negative reaction comes because the movement is tough to label, Buster suggested. Outsiders are “not sure what we are and what we stand for because we’re not brandable in the way they’re used to. I’ve never seen so much fear inspired by people talking in the park.”

Posted in Finance and Investment, Law and Public Policy | Tagged | 2 Comments

Seven Years in Jail and a $190 Million Fine

When a Ukrainian court earlier this week sentenced former Ukrainian prime minster Yulia V. Tymoshenko to seven years in jail, fined her $190 million and excluded her from politics for 10 years — all because of a natural gas deal she negotiated with Russia two years ago — some government officials and legal experts in the West cried foul.

According to an account in The New York Times, European leaders “have condemned the case as politically motivated, and hinted that they are unlikely to ratify a free trade and association agreement with Ukraine” that has been in the works for four years. The court based its ruling on a natural gas deal that Tymoshenko — now an opposition politician after losing her bid for reelection in 2010 — negotiated with Russian prime minister Vladimir Putin in 2009 for what the court said was an excessively high price.

The Times also noted that Ukraine’s current president, Viktor Yanukovich, is likely to “soften Ms. Tymoshenko’s conviction swiftly.”

What is behind all the politicking, and who is really at fault? According to Wharton management professor Witold Henisz, “what is billed as a purely political attack is not without justification. Yulia is no saint. There were suspicious gas deals under her watch which she likely benefited from. Her allies certainly did.” The punishment, however, “does go beyond what you would expect and has a punitive political element [because it] takes her off the political stage. It also demonstrates the weakness of the court system.”

The “sad thing,” he adds, is “that all of the post-independence leaders, including Yulia, have themselves [harmed] Ukraine’s political and legal institutions by focusing personal attacks on each other and [amassing] power for themselves instead of finding ways to … build institutions and processes that could provide a better future for their country. Now one of them is paying a steep personal price for her misgovernance in the past. Is it too severe a punishment or too light for her role in Ukraine’s recent political history? The unfairness of Yanukovich sitting in the Presidency unscathed makes it seem so, but in absolute terms, Yulia, Yanukovich and [former Ukrainian president Viktor] Yushchenko all deserve some time behind bars. Even that unrealistic aim wouldn’t help the country, however, because they have left” behind them little capability or capacity for others “to rule in their absence or in a different manner.”

Wharton legal studies and business ethics professor Philip M. Nichols, who has done research on corruption in Europe as well as Asia, describes Yulia Tymoshenko as “a complicated person” who may “believe in democracy or in government that actually is accountable to the governed. Her past, however, lends some credibility to those who question her sincerity.”

According to Nichols, Tymoshenko made millions of dollars through her association with Pavlo Lazarenko, who eventually became the prime minister of Ukraine. During the Soviet era “Lazarenko held several high positions, and after the independence of Ukraine, he served as energy minister. During that time, he developed close relationships with leaders of various energy industries, including Yulia Tymoshenko, the president of United Energy Systems of Ukraine. All of these allies profited from their relationships with Lazarenko, who awarded Tymoshenko’s United Energy Systems a contract to supply one third of Ukraine’s natural gas needs.”

United Energy Systems benefited further from Lazarenko’s patronage when, “after he was appointed prime minister by [Leonid Danylovych] Kuchma, [president of Ukraine from 1994 to 2005], he partitioned Ukraine’s energy market into separate sectors, awarding single energy firms monopoly rights in specific regions,” Nichols says. ”Lazarenko facilitated the award to United Energy Systems of the most profitable contract rights, those of the industrial oblasts [territorial divisions]. The businesses associated with these monopolies accrued revenues equal to one fifth of the Ukrainian gross domestic product for that year. Lazarenko allegedly received payments from various energy companies in exchange for the award of monopolies. In the case of United Energy Systems, he also owned shares.”

International criticism rose to a level “that distracted even the venal Kuchma, who forced Lazarenko out of office,” Nichols says. “Lazarenko set out to destroy Kuchma politically, and recruited Tymoshenko as an ally. The campaigns on all sides were vicious and employed illegal tactics.”

Lazarenko’s story ends with him fleeing Ukraine, being denied asylum in Switzerland and facing trial in the United States, where he was convicted and is serving a seven-year sentence, according to Nichols. “It is almost impossible to calculate the damage that Lazarenko and his cronies have done to Ukraine. The damage is so extensive and goes so far beyond just money that it seems impossible. Lazarenko was listed by Transparency International as one of the eight most corrupt leaders in the world.”

Tymoshenko’s story did not end with Lazarenko’s flight, Nichols says. “She continued to fight Kuchma politically, and eventually found, and then left, a much better ally than Lazarenko: She became a star of Ukrainian and Eastern European media. But she got her start in an extensive scheme that bilked Ukraine of billions of dollars and gutted its nascent government. Her initial foray into politics was instigated by a fight to protect that scheme.  The fact that it took so long to convict her illustrates the fragility of Ukraine: That she has been convicted could be a sign of a much-needed change in how Ukraine deals with corruption.”

 

Featured Professors: ,
Posted in Knowledge@Wharton Today | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments