Recruiting friendlies: Korea's RASCALS

What motivates people to work for a foreign government?

Espionage, often depicted as a world of intrigue and danger, is actually boring and emotionally draining. It’s about waiting and human weakness. 

The model scenario involves two individuals: a recruiter and a target. The recruiter must learn about the target, discover what motivates them to act, and set in motion a train of events that facilitate this. Motivations to act are often complex and multifaceted, ranging from ideological convictions to financial desperation. They’re also strongly influenced by culture. For a publication entitled Diplomatic Seoul, this raises a relevant question: Are there “Korean” cultural factors to be considered?

There are several models and frameworks commonly used to understand and facilitate the recruitment of agents. The two most common are the MICE and RASCALS models. The MICE (Money, Ideology, Coercion, and Ego) model is the most commonly used. It is a broad, universal approach to explain how individuals can be motivated to act. The RASCALS (Reciprocation, Authority, Scarcity, Commitment, Affinity, Liking, Social Proof) model goes further. It is more detailed and expands on the MICE model to provide a more nuanced approach to influencing and manipulating potential recruits, and importantly takes a more modern, broader cultural framework. 

However, neither can fully take into account the nuanced cultural specifics of recruiting in Korea (or recruiting those with a Korean background). Between both Korea and its partner states, these factors have to be taken into consideration. The RASCALS model serves as an example.

The Korean RASCALS model 

• Reciprocation: The recruiter helps the target resolve a personal issue, such as securing a prestigious opportunity for their child. This creates an obligation to reciprocate. Later, the recruiter asks the target for a seemingly small favor in return, such as providing non-sensitive information. This back and forth continues until the target receives and signs a receipt for monetary payment. 

• Authority: The recruiter uses an influential figure respected by the recruit, such as a senior government official, a military leader, or even a religious figure, to endorse or subtly pressure the recruit into cooperation. In South Korea, where respect for hierarchy and authority is deeply ingrained, the recruit may feel compelled to comply with the request to maintain their standing and avoid disappointing the superior or elder. In the same way, a recruiter may seek the target’s assistance in a project and offer to pay, so that they do not disappoint their superior. Recognizing the need to not disappoint a superior, the target’s resistance to the request for assistance diminishes.

• Scarcity: The recruiter frames the opportunity as a unique and limited-time offer. They might stress that the information they seek is time-sensitive and that sharing it now could lead to significant benefits or prevent a major catastrophe. Accustomed to the time pressures of a competitive society, where missing out on opportunities is a significant concern, this sense of urgency and scarcity can prompt the target to act quickly, fearing they might miss a rare chance to make a difference or gain an advantage. 

• Commitment: The recruiter begins by asking the target for small, seemingly inconsequential pieces of information, perhaps under the guise of helping with a broader, non-threatening project. Over time, as the recruit provides more, they become increasingly committed to the relationship and the cause. Given a cultural emphasis on loyalty and maintaining smooth working relationships, the target may find it difficult to back out after making initial commitments, leading them deeper into cooperation.

• Affinity: The recruiter invests time in building a strong personal relationship with the target, perhaps bonding over shared cultural experiences, similar backgrounds, or mutual connections within the community (and often much drinking and golfing). With personal relationships and deep emotional connections being highly valued, the rapport creates a sense of loyalty and trust. The target becomes more inclined to cooperate out of a sense of personal connection and responsibility to the recruiter.

• Liking: The recruiter makes a deliberate effort to be personable and likable, understanding and respecting South Korean customs, such as bowing, using formal language, and showing appropriate deference to the target’s age or position. The recruiter might also share common interests or engage in social activities like golf or whisky tasting together. With harmonious relationships and social compatibility being important, the target may develop a genuine liking for the recruiter, making them more willing to assist.

• Social Proof: The recruiter subtly indicates that others, particularly those respected by the target, such as peers or superiors, are also involved in similar activities. This could involve hinting that other influential figures or even friends within the target’s social or professional circle are cooperating. Reflecting group dynamics and social conformity, the recruit may feel compelled to join in to align with what they perceive as the norm within their group.

Models always seem a tad dry and don’t capture the nuances behind recruitment. Let’s put it into a narrative setting. Imagine an experienced South Korean NIS officer, Mr. Lee, who is deeply familiar with both Korean and Korean-American cultures. His target is Mr. Kim, a Korean-American engineer working at a defense contractor in the United States, with ties to his Korean heritage and community. The recruitment occurs over several months, during Mr. Kim’s frequent trips to South Korea to visit family and attend cultural events.

• Reciprocation. Mr. Kim, during one of his visits to Seoul, finds himself in a difficult situation when his elderly parents are caught in a legal dispute over property rights in Korea. Mr. Lee, who has been subtly cultivating a relationship with Mr. Kim, steps in and uses his connections to resolve the issue quickly and favorably. Mr. Kim, recognizes the favor, and feels indebted to Mr. Lee. Later, when Mr. Lee asks for a small favor in return— just some general insights into the American defense industry—Mr. Kim feels a strong obligation to help.

• Authority. Mr. Lee introduces Mr. Kim to a retired South Korean general, who is highly respected within the Korean community. This general subtly endorses Mr. Lee’s requests, implying that Mr. Kim’s cooperation would be seen as a service to his motherland. Mr. Kim feels an internal pressure to comply with what he perceives as a directive from a respected and authoritative figure.

• Scarcity. Mr. Lee emphasizes the urgency of the situation, framing the request as a one-time opportunity to contribute to something that will significantly strengthen South Korea’s security. He explains that the information Mr. Kim can provide, will only be valuable for a short period and that acting now could make a substantial difference. The change of presidential administration in Seoul will make the opportunity impossible. Mr. Kim feels the pressure to act quickly, not wanting to miss the chance to help his homeland.

• Commitment. The relationship between Mr. Lee and Mr. Kim begins with small, non-intrusive requests, such as sharing general industry trends or attending meetings with South Korean defense officials as a guest. Over time, Mr. Lee gradually increases the stakes, asking for more detailed and sensitive information. Mr. Kim, having already committed to the relationship in these smaller ways, finds it increasingly difficult to refuse the escalating requests, especially within the context of maintaining an important relationship, which is a core value in Korean culture.

• Affinity. Mr. Lee invests significant time in building a personal bond with Mr. Kim. He attends Korean-American community events in the U.S., where he shows deep respect for Mr. Kim’s family and background, often discussing shared experiences of growing up not far away. Mr. Lee also expresses genuine interest in Mr. Kim’s children’s education, knowing the importance of family. He even offers to write reference letters and could perhaps arrange a scholarship. This fosters a sense of deep emotional connection. This personal connection makes Mr. Kim feel a sense of loyalty and trust toward Mr. Lee, making it harder to refuse his requests.

• Liking. Mr. Lee goes out of his way to be personable and likable, understanding the nuances of both American and Korean cultural norms. He always greets Mr. Kim with a respectful bow, uses formal language when addressing Mr. Kim’s parents, and participates in cultural rituals like dining together with traditional Korean dishes. On top of that, he also takes mr. Kim golfing at the best courses and drinking at the best bars -0 things he could not afford by himself. Mr. Kim finds himself genuinely liking Mr. Lee. This personal likability increases Mr. Kim’s willingness to help Mr. Lee.

• Social Proof. Mr. Lee subtly implies that other Korean-Americans in similar positions have also contributed to this cause, portraying it as a common and accepted practice within their community. He might mention that certain well-respected figures in the Korean-American community have also provided assistance to South Korea, creating a sense of “social proof.” In the culture of both South Korea and the Korean-American community, Mr. Kim does not want to be seen as the one who does not contribute, especially when others he respects are involved.

Through the RASCALS model, Mr. Lee successfully recruits Mr. Kim, who starts providing valuable information under the belief that he is helping both his homeland and living up to the expectations of his community and cultural values. The process is carefully tailored to align with Korean cultural dynamics, emphasizing reciprocity, respect for authority, social harmony, and the importance of maintaining face and relationships. But above all, he’s also making some decent money.