Beyond the Taekwondo Dojang
by Rexon Ryu
It is often said that taekwondo holds for its students a prescription for life—that the tenets and principles underpinning this martial art have broad application across all aspects of one's life. In the context of my taekwondo training and my introspective search for these ties and bonds that link taekwondo to me and to my personal and professional endeavors, this paper seeks to examine the commonalities, contrasts and tensions between two seemingly disparate fields: taekwondo and public policy. This examination stems from a purely selfish desire. My professional life will develop primarily within the realm of the U.S. foreign policy apparatus, most likely as a civil servant; concomitantly, my training in taekwondo will be a life-long endeavor. With the expectation that the two have and will continue to intersect and interact, this paper explores the general commonalities and tensions of the two systems, and the rules and actions of individuals within these two systems.1, 2
In its purest form, taekwondo offers a path to be followed, not a goal to be achieved. Through a prescribed set of skills and techniques, and bounded by a system of beliefs and values based on respect and honor, taekwondo offers its students guideposts for leading a certain type of life. Of essence are the importance of respect and honor. Respect for higher ranks and their accomplishments as well as respect for oneself. Honor in one's actions, training and beliefs. The importance of these values leads naturally, and I believe logically, to the conclusion that taekwondo is highly individualistic. While it is true that initially instruction attempts to impart these beliefs and values onto a novice student of taekwondo, true understanding of their meaning can be achieved only through individual pursuit and self-realization. Taekwondo demands certain obligatory acts of respect and honor from every student. But taekwondo instructors and students earn the respect of others and find self-respect and honor only through one's own words and actions. The expectation is not that taekwondo teaches respect and honor but that taekwondo teaches a student how to practice respect and honor. Thus the argument that in taekwondo, the path is more important than any goal and that a path is chosen only as a decision made by each individual student of taekwondo. In practice, to develop and master the skills and techniques of taekwondo, discipline and training are required and, essentially, unavoidable. Many of the skills are complex and initially unfamiliar to the body; exacting repetition is needed for the motions to become habitual. To understand and to excel at taekwondo is inherently an exploratory process. One's focus turns inward as the student of taekwondo seeks to understand his/her physical abilities and limitations, to understand the conceptual origins and incorporation into taekwondo of the hand and foot techniques, to understand their mechanics, and to understand their implementation under combative circumstances. This final point raises the all important concept of combat. Nearly all aspects of taekwondo exhibit the marked influence of an opponent-based context. Movements are designed to ready oneself for attack or defense, to attack, or to defend. There are two implications worth noting. First, the presence of the opponent fuels the search for excellence and technical mastery. The assumption that one's weakness and shortcomings will be exploited by an opponent creates greater incentive to wholly understand the conceptual underpinnings, mechanics and practical implementation of taekwondo techniques. Second, though taekwondo is premised on combat and can arguably be seen as emphasizing a kill-or-be-killed mind-set, the rules which govern gyoroogi sparring, the aspect of taekwondo which most exhibits opponent-based combat, bound what is considered acceptable practice. By prohibiting, for example, attacks below the waist, to the head with hand-strikes and to the back, as well as grabbing, holding and throwing, gyoroogi sparring narrows the options with the intent of emphasizing skill, strategy, and technical mastery rather than a "win at any costs" mentality. A dedicated student of taekwondo strives to excel physically. Achieving a modicum of understanding of taekwondo demands nothing less. In doing so, one hopes that the required dedication, discipline and training impart upon the student a fuller, richer understanding of taekwondo itself, a greater understanding of one's own self and a set of beliefs and values applicable to life outside of the taekwondo dojang.
In its purest form, pursuing a career in the U.S. government requires that one serve the people. This is a fundamental principle of government employment. The low salaries, relative to private sector employment, are one reflection of this belief that public service requires that the civil servant enter into government employment for reasons other than personal financial gain - ideally to serve the people and to work for the betterment of society. In considering the realm of U.S. foreign policy, one other observation is worth mentioning. Unlike domestic policy which is U.S.-centric, U.S. foreign policy is premised on our interaction, as a state, with the rest of the international system. Operating in a system which includes democratic, quasi-democratic, parliamentarian, socialist and autocratic states, the United States develops its foreign policy to reflect not simply its national interests abroad but also to reflect its beliefs and principles promoting peace, stability and democracy in the international arena. As such, U.S. foreign policy arguably represents an introspective evaluation of U.S. beliefs and principles, for better or for worse. For instance, any examination of our declared allies (most prominently, England, France, Japan, Israel) and our enemies (Iraq, Iran, Libya, North Korea) bears this assertion out. Within this paradigm of U.S. foreign policy, it is also worth examining the behavior and attitudes exhibited within this system. As in most professions, promotion and success hinge on excellence, on luck and on opportunism. Excellence is rewarded. But also is awareness and understanding of the system. If one's intent is to pursue an upward moving career in government, one must understand that government operates as much on persona and personal contact as it does on personal excellence. Success cannot be had if one fails to understand this. Additionally, within government service, a dedication to public policy reflects one's grounding in analysis and evaluation. Developing a policy on any given issue requires an understanding of the problem —of the context, of the interests involved, of the desired outcome and of the constraints, both external and self-imposed. This analytical framework is the backbone of my conceptual approach as an agent within the U.S. foreign policy apparatus. I view international events, decisions made by the executive branch and legislation passed by Congress through this analytical prism and my formulation of recommended actions on a given issue reflect consideration of the above-mentioned factors. Nonetheless, while efforts to develop policies that achieve U.S. policy objectives is analytical and results-oriented, the rigor of this approach is greatly tempered by the system within which one operates - one based on consensus, compromise and contrarian analysis. Policy is not an individualistic endeavor. The interested players are many, power and authority seldom centralized, the issues complex, the spotlight of the media intense and the desired outcome explicit at times, uncertain at times and, occasionally, confused and contradictory. Thus results can be indeterminate and amorphous, subject to varying perceptions, interpretations and "spin." Within the world of public policy, substance can easily be replaced by perception and theatrics. Finally, one cannot operate within this system without soon understanding the immense sway and lure of power. For senior decision-makers within the U.S. foreign policy apparatus retain power in its most naked form—the legitimate ability to conduct military action and send men and women to their deaths. If not anchored by a value system reflecting the beliefs of our society, this power can be corrupting and disastrous.
An obvious starting point to begin this examination of taekwondo and U.S. foreign policy is to note that one's dedication to taekwondo, like one's pursuit of a career in U.S. foreign policy, requires a commitment to ideals. While a career in government carries some unique benefits, the ability and talent manifested in top foreign policy makers would undoubtedly tender greater financial and other benefits in the private sector. Thus one must ask, "What drives these officials to pursue their public service careers?" Beliefs, ideals and values. An easy tie can be drawn to taekwondo. Why struggle with hours of practice, painful exercises and countless repetitions of techniques? What possibly motivates students of taekwondo to continue training for hours each week, year in and year out? Innumerable distractions exist. Rapid technological evolution is moving our society toward an ever faster pace—reducing attention span and increasing the demand for immediate gratification. Nevertheless, within this vortex, students of taekwondo continue to exhibit a commitment to the values which imbue taekwondo: respect, honor, discipline and training—arguably demonstrating a conviction that their long-term worth easily outdistances the short-term sacrifices necessary to develop these beliefs. It is in this vein of commitment—dedication to serving the people and bettering society, and dedication to the philosophical underpinnings of taekwondo—that one stark commonality is illuminated between taekwondo and U.S. foreign policy.
To the layman, the dizzying array of hand and foot techniques, both offensive and defensive, as well as the varying types of footwork and stances, may appear chaotic and overwhelming. A myriad of combinations can be created and, naturally, a student of taekwondo must train to recognize and react to this same dizzying number of possible attacks. To train in taekwondo is to develop an ability to analyze and categorize. Beyond understanding the mechanics of taekwondo motions, a student of taekwondo learns to think within what can be conceived of as a tree of possibilities. Picture this, within taekwondo there is gyoroogi sparring. Within gyoroogi sparring are attacks. Within attacks are attacks from open stance. This narrows to attacks from open stance using the rear leg. Used in training for gyoroogi sparring, poomse and arranged sparring, this type of systemic analysis of taekwondo affords its students the ability to create order and to develop their conceptual understanding the utility of taekwondo techniques and their application within practical circumstances. Categorization allows a student of taekwondo to, once he/she understands the fundamentals of taekwondo, piece together varying pieces into innovative, more efficient or more effective combinations, in order to further his/her understanding of taekwondo. This wider and deeper understanding of taekwondo is certainly evident in gyoroogi sparring during which time a competitor's ability to understand taekwondo techniques and recognize his opponent's movements creates a significant advantage in his ability to attack, anticipate or react with more effective and more efficient techniques. In U.S. foreign policy, one also finds a similar rigorous, analytic approach. To develop an aspect of U.S. foreign policy is to evaluate a host of different sub-issues, including, the consideration of the relevant international actors, the consideration of domestic interests, an evaluation of U.S. goals and priorities, a cost-benefit analysis of the varying options and an assessment of U.S. capabilities to achieve our goals and priorities. Without this analysis, the likelihood of a flawed policy or failure manifestly increases.
Differences between taekwondo and policy do exist. In particular, in taekwondo, the key question to ask when evaluating techniques and one's ability is, "Does it work?" That is, does a block actually defend successfully against an oncoming attack? Or, does this attack actually overwhelm/deceive/defeat an opponent to score a point or land a strike? The criteria for evaluation are tangible and logical. For example, both an upper block and an in-to-out block are seldom used in defense of a round house kick simply because neither block works effectively to deflect the oncoming kick. Though it is true that more advanced, strategic attacks and defenses demand more complex movements and techniques, there remains an inherent logic throughout taekwondo which can arguably be traced back to the simple question, "Does it work?" No such easy questions or standard logic exists in the policy world. The stark realm of logic often blurs to shades of gray when dealing with U.S. foreign policy. For ultimately, it is the people, and not those who fashion U.S. foreign policy, who hold final judgment on whether foreign policy-makers devised and implemented the best possible policy. Success in policy is often defined not merely as the accomplishment of one's goals and priorities but rather the perception or judgment that one's goals and priorities were achieved. These perceptions and judgments can be influenced by an entire spectrum of factors, including incomplete information, varied goals and priorities amongst the people and biased portrayal in the media. Finally, it is important to note that beyond these external factors which contribute to the obfuscation of success or failure, policymakers themselves will also seek to blur the truth or distort the facts to hide policy shortcomings or failures. The result is that a failure may be thought to be a success, a success thought to be a failure and, of course, a success thought to be a success.
The normative belief which underpins my perception of taekwondo is that taekwondo offers its students a superior way of life. The respect, honor and discipline gleaned from years of taekwondo training can provide for its students a lifestyle replete with growth, reward, and satisfaction. Taken as anecdotal evidence, this examination of taekwondo and the world of U.S. foreign policy demonstrates that indeed, the values inherent within taekwondo stretch beyond the bounds of the taekwondo dojang. With awareness of these ties, these commonalities strengthen one's conviction of the values inherent in taekwondo. Nevertheless, as the discussion of success and the perception of success sought to illuminate, tensions do exist. This, I believe is inevitable; everyone faces pressure that test one's beliefs and difficult decisions must be made. In this examination, the pressure for success of a policy, and implicitly the pressure on the policymaker to succeed in the creation and implementation of a certain policy, can at times lead to choices which test one's beliefs. If faced with such ethical or moral choices, one must often decide if there exists a threshold under which values and beliefs can be compromised without great loss and if so, at what point is that threshold crossed? This, I believe illuminates the importance of introspective examination for the answers to these very difficult questions ultimately lie with the individual faced with the decision. And the decisions made will reflect the path on which one has chosen to travel. Taekwondo offers its students a path which can yield great understanding and appreciation of the laudable values of respect, honor and discipline. Yet we should be under no illusion that instruction of taekwondo can teach these values or instill them into one's character over night; rote repetition of kicks, punches and blocks will not yield understanding and I do not intend to provide a prescription to alter taekwondo instruction in an effort to further promote introspection amongst students of taekwondo. What I believe taekwondo offers its students is a blueprint, a roadmap if you will, that if chosen to be followed, will hopefully provide its travelers a fruitful, rewarding experience. This manner of cross-sectional examination can provide students of taekwondo a unique opportunity to evaluate the intrinsic worth of taekwondo for themselves as well as a greater understanding of its power to enrich other facets of one's life. Dedication to taekwondo provides strength and integrity to one's character in that introspection and individualistic exploration of one's motivations, beliefs and priorities yields understanding. In understanding comes strength. For to understand both the value systems of the paradigms with which one operates and how disparate parts of one's life interact, either to reinforce or to create tension, allows one to act and to make decisions reflecting deeper understanding and more thoughtful consideration than otherwise would have been possible. Though there should be no expectation that values of taekwondo should dictate the decisions to be made in areas outside of the dojang, what taekwondo offers is a normative prism through which choices can be evaluated prior to a decision being made. Understanding the existence and the meaning of this prism as well as the prisms offered by other paradigms influencing one's life creates awareness and knowledge. Similar to its emphasis in the physical training of taekwondo, awareness and knowledge are vitally important in all aspects of life. 1While an argument can be made that between taekwondo and public policy, there will exist a mutual exertion of influence, this paper is limited to examining only how my taekwondo training influences my perceptions of and actions within the U.S. foreign policy apparatus. 2 I must also make what amounts to be a self-evident disclaimer. This examination is premised on my interpretation, at this point in time, of taekwondo and is meant to reflect what I view to be the most important aspects of taekwondo. My discussion of public policy and the U.S. foreign policy apparatus reflects my academic training and professional experience to date, having studied international relations at U.C. Berkeley and Princeton University and having worked in Congress and at both the CIA and the National Security Council.
All content copyright © D.C. Taekwondo, 1999—2000. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Reproduction of any material in whole or in part in any form or medium is prohibited without express written permission from D.C. Taekwondo. The D.C. Taekwondo web site is designed & maintained by Charles A. Buhs |