|
|
 |
 |
Nov 6, 2003
Hwang Kept Under Wraps in the US
I don't know why, but the commentary in the Joongang Ilbo about how the North Korean top defector was pretty much imprisoned in his US trip surprised me.
I was surprised at what seemed to me how little was made in the US press about the Hwang visit. I know he has been out of the loop for some years, but he still has a unique insight into how things go on at the top level of government/society, and with the nuclear situation making news each week, I thought there would be some interest in reporting what he had to say. I kept looking for some specific interviews and more coverage of his Congressional talk. I wondered why it wasn't coming. Then I read this:
(According to Nam, when Hwang went to meet Congressmen such as Christopher Cox and Henry Hyde, there was some physical wrangling between Cox's people and the Korean agents demanding to be present, and when Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly hurried to be first in the room they wouldn't budge. Nam was enraged at what he said was the way the Korean agents even used physical force to keep Defense Forum people from accompanying him or otherwise kept them away.
The South Korean government's explanation is that Hwang is being protected from what the North might want to do to him. But still, he was kept from having contact with people who have identities about which there can be no question.)
This is unbelievable. The South Korean government is so afraid of offending the North, they send agents with the mandate to get phycially confrontational with US Congressmen who want to talk to the guy.
It is obvious from this article the Roh government decide it didn't want to gain fresh complaints from the US government and media in Korea and the US by continuing to block Hwang's trip, but decided they could effectively "put a lid" on him by having their agents shut him up.
It's utterly amazing ------- that the South Korean government wouldn't let personal interviews with known reporters of the NY Times or Washington Post or other major media outlet or this guy from the Chosun Ilbo happen!
And I guess the SK government was successful. I had thought there were so few articles on his trip because the US press decided he wasn't news worthy.
It seemed odd, because they did a few articles in the run up to his visit --- like when he got permission to go, and then on the day he left, and then ------ ??? ---- not much.
Well, I guess I know now.....................This is really depressing. I can't believe how twisted around South Korea has become. Posted at 05:46 am by koreasojourner
Nov 2, 2003
The editorialists brought up some good ole ammunition today concerning the bastard Americans and their Embassy.
It just gets to the point of pitiful you almost want to cry or laugh at the same time.
I wrote up a brief and inadequate review of the Long Running Embassy Scandal for the first edition of the anti-USFK/US newsletter -- www.areastudies.org/usinkorea
Korea really should be ashamed of itself.
I used to tell my adult students Korea should cut the US Embassy staff down to one or two people and build them a shack on Tokdo and thus kill two birds with one stone. They could get rid of the US Embassy, humiliate the United States, and set up a firm foundation for ownership of that disputed island with Japan.
I really can't understand how the Koreans can do stuff like this and not realize how ludicrous it make them seem.
And this issue goes all the way back to 1986!!
It is obvious the area where the new embassy structures were planned to be built was a foreign legation area for a long time.
The Korean government, not the US Embassy, picked the spot, and the US Embassy paid for it.
The Korean government also told the Russians and Canadians to build their embassy buildings there.
And gee golly willikers, it seems the Russians were able to complete their project and the Canadians to get underway ---
without the Korean press expressing "grave concern" for Korea's "cultural heritage"...
but the American bastards start building there!!!!
Watch out!!!!
Pitiful pitiful pitiful. 17 years....
--big sigh--
And if you notice, there are several long term issues like this Korea uses to keep an acceptable level of pressure ongoing in Korean society.
Yongsan moving is another one. Environmental crimes another. Training range bases too.
Nothing ever gets done about it, by either side.
It sometimes makes me wonder if the top level of the US military actually believes it is going to relocate 2 ID and the Yongsan HQ below the Han?
It is too easy for the civic groups, press, and often politicians to drag these issues out --- drag them out until so much time has passed, old agreements look like parchments from a forgotten era ---- something that needs to be framed in glass and hung on a wall rather than trying to implement (again).
And if we can't get Embassy structures built in an area long designated for such things -- a place picked by the Korean government, and a place the US is paying for....
why in hell would you believe a mamoth move like Yongsan (which the Korean government doesn't want to pay for) and 2 ID (which the Korean government opposes) will ever come about???
I think Korea might be teaching us what they mean by the word "endure."
And I have yet to see any real sign the US government and military are actually willing to do anything more than that.
I see no real evidence the US government is willing to throw up its hands and pull troops out ending this 50 year alliance in the face of the continued North Korean threat.
And I don't think the Koreans will bend unless they face that possibility.
And we have done MORE THAN ENOUGH to give them strong reason to believe all they need to do is out wait the US military.
In short, different day, same ole shit...
Posted at 12:42 pm by koreasojourner
Oct 31, 2003
Putting pressure on North Korea
Posted at 06:25 am by koreasojourner
Oct 28, 2003
The Korea Herald ran a story on Hanyang U student council withdrawing from Hanchungnyon (sp?) - the radical student union. This could be a positive sign...
But, I wonder why the Korean press, when it is giving the background information about the group, fail to mention the beating death of a Korean civilian back in 1997 or 98???
Is my memory wrong?
When I arrived in Korea in the mid-90s, the radical students were being very active against the Korean government and universities and the US too.
And my students (all adults from 20-50 or so) generally sympathized with them even though they said their activities were too violent and they were alittle too carried away.
The common comment was, "Back when I was in college in the late 70s (80s), we had a reason to rant and rave, but now.....???"
Then, as I remember it, they fell out of favor in the public BIG TIME after one of their violent sit-ins at, I believe, Yonsei U.
They took an adult participating in the protest, I believe a car mechanic, who they thought might be a police "spy" and "interrogated" him ------- to death.
I thought the act was terrible, but I was still surprised at how quickly (overnight) my students went from general sympathy to very much angry at the whole group.
As I remember it, the next year, when the protest season came back around in the spring, the numbers of participants were WAY DOWN.
And it took them until about 2000 to rebuild their public credibilty.
Anyway, all through 2002, I read articles on the group with people giving "background" information.
This was especially true when the government was considering legalizing the group.
But NOBODY mentioned the beating death of that poor man.
Does his family not deserve the due respect of the Korean media?
Isn't that beating death a MAJOR event in this groups or the radical student movement's history???
Posted at 04:31 am by koreasojourner
Another source of the problem
For one of the future newsletters, I'm working on some review of messages coming out of the US from the the think tank and academia crowd as well as the US government.
A guy I know studying in one of the big Korean studies departments in the US asked a prof to write a paper about anti-Americanism in South Korea, and the response was, " Don't waste your time."
This is one of the reasons the culture and process of hate goes on year after year.
The academia and government people have a tendancy to " make things work out." I believe they can't see a way to change the habits of the Korean government, media, and edcuational system, and let's face it, the average Korean, because they have no influence over the institutions that promote the ideas in Korea.
And they avoid giving the American public an honest look at South Korea, because they are afraid of being squashed like bug between the slamming together of the "rock and a hard place" if Americans --- who haven't spent years learning to " understand" Korea, suddenly went postal in an anti-Korean committment backlash.
It's better to endure the evil you know than face one you don't......in short....
Anyway, below is a quote that perfectly shows my Mantra #1 and how so frequently its reality is missed ---
First the mantra ---
The vast majority of Korean society (made up of very friendly, nice, people) views USFK and to a slightly lesser extent the overall SK-US relationship as a cancer on their society - a cancer they just can't affort to cut out ---- yet!
Here is the quote:
http://www.aim.org/publications/briefings/2003/jan22.html
Anti-American Sentiment in South Korea
By Ji Yeon Lee (an intern for the fairness in reporting group)
January 22, 2003
The Washington Post reported on the anti-American sentiment as a deep gulf between the U.S. and S. Korea. It quoted a S. Korean poll, by the Korean Gallup company, on approval or disapproval of the U.S. The results were that more than 53% of S. Koreans surveyed said that they dislike the U.S., while those who answered that they like the U.S. declined from 64% to 37%. However, according to another recent poll, 76% of S. Koreans supported the presence of the U.S. military on the Korea peninsular. Didn’t the Washington Post know about such a pro-American poll, and the pro-American protest? What is the reason that papers such as the Washington Post and New York Times didn’t deal with those facts? Not enough space?
It is NOT a pro-American stance for a Korean to say they don't want USFK to leave!!!
Not not not not not not not!!!
(Picture a child stamping his feet and shaking his hands up-n-down)
I am so tired of hearing this message from the people in the media and academia and government in the US who want to bury reports of anti-American activity in Korea.....
Korea does not want to go through the MAJOR social changes it would take to replace USFK and despite what they want to believe, they still know deep in their heart North Korea is very dangerous.
This realization late in the 1990s after having taught Korean adults for several years led to Mantra #2 --
US soldiers in Korea are post-modern mercenaries. Mercenaries because the society they protect wants to hate them too, and post-modern because they don't make a profit.
Despite what even relatively non-anti-American Koreans also believe.....
If there was significant counter-activity in Korean society to debunk what is often false and easy to see misleading promotion of anti-Americanism from many Korean institutions by pro-American Koreans.....
and/or the US media, think tank people, and others in American society gave the American people the chance to understand the reality of our dangerous committment in Korea ----
I could stop feeling like a child ranting because nobody is listening......
Posted at 02:01 am by koreasojourner
Oct 27, 2003
JI Special Review of why America is Evil Index
Deep links between hawks and the Bush administration
Part 13 - Neocons and preemption
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200310/27/200310270038183709900090409041.html
Oil seen as essential element in U.S. power
Part 12 - Oil giants pave the way to empire
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200310/23/200310232325270179900090409041.html
English is major engine behind American power
Part 11- The world runs on English
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200310/21/200310212335088939900090409041.html
Power of U.S. movies is unmatched in the world
Part 10 - Hollywood propagates U.S. values
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200310/17/200310172232576139900090409041.html
2001 terror attacks in U.S. revived intelligence power
Part 9 - U.S. intelligence monitors the world
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200310/16/200310162349057639900090309031.html
Power of U.S. education gives country huge clout
Part 8 - Teaching the world’s leaders
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200310/12/200310122246082679900090409041.html
Finance, technology propel U.S. power
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200310/09/200310092306468909900090409041.html
Power of the pen - and persuasion
Part 6 - Think tanks run the U.S.
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200310/06/200310062318024639900090309031.html
The U.S. melting pot cools, and foreigners feel a chill
[Part 5 - No longer a land of immingrants]
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200310/01/200310012335576609900090409041.html
In today’s America, ‘liberal’ is equated with ‘unpatriotic’
[Part 4 - The eagle without a left wing]
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200309/30/200309300149071579900090409041.html
U.S. sees need for unusual alliances
[Part 3 - A la carte coalitions]
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200309/27/200309270047577709900090409041.html
Is U.S. aiming to rule the world?
Beginning today, the Joong-Ang Daily will reprint in condensed form a special series of articles on the how the world and Americans themselves view the United States and its place in the international community.
A team of reporters in Europe and the United States assembled by the JoongAng Ilbo, this newspaper’s parent organization, prepared the series.
The articles look at the United States as the chief global power and discuss the implications of a new era in unipolar geopolitics.
¯Ed.
[Part I - A Force in the World]
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200309/24/200309240214038009900090309031.html
(Note well --- the purpose of the series is to show "how Americans view themselves" and it deals almost totally with how post-9/11 America is becoming Patriotic and Conservative (read - "fascist")....
BUT...........for some reason, they fail to find many Americans who are saying "this is a good thing".....
Funny, isn't it.............the purpose of the article is to show how Americans feel about themselves, but the only clear theme is how Americans are hating themselves because of their growing fascism!!!
Posted at 07:07 pm by koreasojourner
The Joongang Daily Hatchet Job
I just started reading this series of articles uncovering how "America and the world sees itself" post 9/11. What a wonderful expression of Korean media objectivity!
Here parts of part 3 and my notes on it --
In today’s America, ‘liberal’ is equated with ‘unpatriotic’
[Part 4 - The eagle without a left wing]
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200309/30/200309300149071579900090409041.html
(Starts off with how Berkeley has been the traditional stronghold of anti-War, leftist, hippie culture.)
But students said things have changed.
Jason Nederveld, 22, said the Republican chapter at UC Berkeley, unlike its quiet activities in the past, began recruiting new members publicly this semester. “Berkeley is not an exception from the rising trend of conservatism that began after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks,” said Mr. Nederveld, a economics student.
(This is cute. Bemoaning the fact that the republican student org actually feels safe enough to recruit openly at Berkeley! The world must be coming to an end!!! But actually, without a doubt, liberalism, especially as typified by Berkeley, is less popular than it was in the heyday of the 60s and early 70s. But the point, which this article is full of shit to skip, is that this trend has been growing since the effect of the Reagan days in the 1980s.)
Revolution Books, located in a corner of a small underground arcade, is one of the remaining few. “In the past, there used to be Trotsky faction stores, Luxembourg-specialized stores and many others,” said Garry Miller, the owner of the bookstore. “But, it’s just us now.”
(Think the fall of the Soviet Union and the "revolution in thought" caused by understanding the nature of life in the "Communist Utopias" might have something to with this, besides 9/11??? Assholes.)
Waves of patriotism have covered America since Sept. 11, 2001. The conservative trend has been dominating politics, academia, the press and culture. Robert Jensen, a journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin, said, “Today, we are looking at an equation where liberal equals unpatriotic.” Mr. Jensen said he worried about the future of an American eagle with an injured left wing.
(Now this is very important to recognize when thinking about this series of hatchet jobs done by the "Special Reporting Team" assembled by the Joongang Ilbo ---
If patriotism is running rampant in the US post-9/11 --------- don't you think this "fact finding team" could have found a professor or a cultural critic or some "expert" who would say, "Gee, isn't this great! It's making the US a better place to live...."
Funny that you don't hear a peep about this.)
“Hollywood had leaned toward the left because of the experimental natures of filmmaking,” David Friedman, a movie critic, said, “but a typical American hero with a conservative message is what appeals to viewers today.” Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bruce Willis are getting hot, and Mel Gibson is making a retro film on Jesus because of such changes, Mr. Friedman said.
(Jesus! 9/11 made Schwarzenegger and Willis and Gibson hot!!)
The New York Times, Washington Post and ABC network have been traditionally considered liberal, but FAIR, a national media watchdog group, recently called them conservative.
Arie Kruglanski, a University of Maryland psychology professor, said the impact of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks was so strong that the conservative surge would continue for some time, but that American society would eventually regain its balance.
(This is the most "objective" assessment in the piece and comes as the last paragraph.) Posted at 07:00 pm by koreasojourner
Oct 26, 2003
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200310/26/200310262300191039900090109012.html
Because this kind of article tends to make me scratch my head wondering if I see things completely differently from other people.
This editorial cites the troop dispatch as a clear event resulting in a warming of ties with the US.
It specifically says that it has helped bury talk of (and the potential for) war with North Korea.
Specifically, he says the "axis of evil" has changed to "NK is different from Iraq".
And this opinion by the Korean editor of Joonang Daily is similar to things you can hear some of the press in the US and Korea specialists say.
But I don't get it......
Bush was criticized (correctly) at the start of the "Nuclear crisis" for taking the military option off the table. Even if you believe an attack is not productive, you don't take that issue off the table and ease the pressure on NK (who has few buttons to push).
But who really believes the military option was ever strongly considered?
Maybe I'm just pig-headed, but I still don't believe Clinton was going to attack North Korea in '93 or '94.
Did he put plans in motion and put the idea of an attack out there and build up tension? Sure. Was he going to pull the trigger? I just can't believe it. No way. The man who responded to the African Embassy Bombings by cruise missiles was not going to risk massive warfare in Korea and possibly greater East Asia including the potential for use of chemical and biological weapons and possibly nuclear --- by his firing the first shot.
Until I talk to God, I guess I'll always believe Clinton was using it as a pressure point, a big bluff, to get North Korea to negociate ---- and send Carter to get the deal they were willing to accept done.
So I was not surprised when Bush quickly said war was not an option and kept telling the press (despite press and democratic proding) that "the nuclear problem with North Korea is not a crisis". I was suprised he'd admit it publically, but it is not difficult to look at the situation and realize the US can't risk such a war on South Korea and Japan and on China's border.
And I'm not surprised he put the "threat" card back on the table as well as having others speak in public about the potential for such an attack.
I'm not even surprised there are some who think it might actually be really possible, but it isn't the mainstream idea.
So as I've written before, I think Korean society from top to bottom have a significant misunderstanding of how things work in the US.
The troop dispatch isn't going to "solve the ills of the SK-US alliance."
It did not "change" the prospects of war on the Korean penisular started by a US first strike.
It will not make the US more willing to "give an inch" to NK it was not already willing to offer. The US isn't suddenly going to start agreeing with the President Roh view of what needs to be done.
And more importantly, I highly doubt the troop dispatch is going to kill talk of moving 2 ID away from the DMZ or convince the US to pay the lion's share of the costs to remove Yongsan or stop the US from pushing for the move....
In other words, the problems in the near future that had the potential to cause more resentment in Korea remain unchanged to any significant extent.
In fact, all the talk of how the troop dispatch will or has eased the tension with Washington will probably heighten the resentment, because it will only make the future moves seem like a "slap in the face" in view of the unrealistic expectations and misreading of the US government.
Posted at 12:24 pm by koreasojourner
Quality of life gets low rank in military budget
http://www.koreaherald.co.kr/SITE/data/html_dir/2003/10/27/200310270009.asp
Moreover, the Korean government has committed an astronomical amount of money to the purchase of a wide range of next-generation airplanes, projectiles and vessels over the next five years.
However, the military establishment appears tight-fisted in the allocation of its substantial means to enhance quality of life for its rank-and-file soldiers.
According to recent Defense Ministry statistics, the government's daily expenditure for the basic necessities of one soldier - including food and lodging in the barracks - is tallied at a meager 6,000 won, less than the price of a movie ticket.
The data highlighted the lack of spending on the nation's 690,000 soldiers, most of whom are in their early 20s and fulfilling mandatory military service.
The monthly salary for enlisted soldiers ranges from 20,300 won for a second-class private up to 26,950 won for a sergeant, with 50 percent of the salary paid every three months as a bonus.
This is one of the primary signs South Korea will never ask the US to leave as long as North Korea is a threat.
I was very surprised the "Cold War" worries of my Korean studens (aged 20-50) about the threat from North Korea were so COMPLETELY different from what I had experienced in the US during the Cold War. My generation took it for granted one day the US or USSR would make a mistake and lead us into a chain-reaction nuclear war. The vast, vast majority of the Koreans had just about zero fear of war ----- why?
"Because America would blow North Korea off the face of the earth......It would be suicide for Pyongyang to invade."
What does this have to do with an article about the quality of life for Korean soldiers?
Korean society has become totally accustomed to taking the US protection for granted.
If they were to change this mentality, they would have to face MAJOR changes they are not willing to look at ----
like moving from a conscript military into a professional one made up of mostly career military people.
That would take a revolutionary change of living standards for Korean soldiers which would make the cost of replacing USFK even higher compared to if they just needed to replace the equipment (which this article criticizes).
So why even think about such difficult changes when you have the American blanket?
Posted at 11:58 am by koreasojourner
Roh Should Resign or Shut Up, But
http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/opinion/200310/kt2003102617424411340.htm
Does he not know that the Korean constitution, which underwent nine tortuous amendments, provided for a single five-year term for the president? Does Roh's frustration in the eighth month of his presidency justify a new constitutional crisis, wasting the money and political energies of the nation, while all manners of economic and other problems accumulate?
I agree with most of this editorial. If Roh believes he can't handle the job, or he believes the contreversies around his administration won't allow him to do his job, he should resign --- or shut up.
But it is too late to shut up. He can either step down or go along the process he has thrown the fragile Korean democracy into.
I personally think Roh should stick it out. He sucks as a president so far, but I think it would do Korean democracy good to see that they can survive a bad president.
I remember a conservative student who defended Park Chung Hee by saying, "Our country was in trouble! Who was going to save it?" meaning only Park could have done it or only his style would have worked.
Roh is the first president with pretty much a clear distinction from the past authoritarian days. If he can muddle through, Korea can learn much about democracy ---- as long as the progressive and other more extreme elemetns of the Korean "democracy" don't rip it apart ------ like the Puan county magistrate getting severly beaten over the nuclear waste facility or the parents taking their kids out of school to protest them same.
I think if Roh can make it without the nation falling apart, Korea can learn a lot for the better for their future. Posted at 01:31 am by koreasojourner
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
