<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Foreign Minister resigns &#8212; big changes in store for US-ROK ties?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rjkoehler.com/2004/01/16/foreign-minister-resigns-big-changes-in-store-for-us-rok-ties/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2004/01/16/foreign-minister-resigns-big-changes-in-store-for-us-rok-ties/</link>
	<description>Korea... in Blog Format</description>
	<pubDate>Fri,  5 Sep 2008 17:33:55 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2004/01/16/foreign-minister-resigns-big-changes-in-store-for-us-rok-ties/#comment-1514</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Jan 2004 00:53:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjkoehler.com/?p=462#comment-1514</guid>
		<description>^-^


PING:
TITLE: When Diplomats go native: Roh ready to fire "United States worshiping" diplomats
BLOG NAME: Flying Yangban
In my last post, I talked about how Tom Cruise's character in The Last Samurai "went native," that is he rejected his own culture and adapted that of the locals. It just so happened that a major controversy has developed
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>^-^</p>
<p>PING:<br />
TITLE: When Diplomats go native: Roh ready to fire &#8220;United States worshiping&#8221; diplomats<br />
BLOG NAME: Flying Yangban<br />
In my last post, I talked about how Tom Cruise&#8217;s character in The Last Samurai &#8220;went native,&#8221; that is he rejected his own culture and adapted that of the locals. It just so happened that a major controversy has developed</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Operation Freedom</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2004/01/16/foreign-minister-resigns-big-changes-in-store-for-us-rok-ties/#comment-1513</link>
		<dc:creator>Operation Freedom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Jan 2004 21:09:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjkoehler.com/?p=462#comment-1513</guid>
		<description>I give you the comments of Richard Perle from PBS Frontline (a bit dated but still relevant).  For those of you who don't know Perle is part of the Wolfowitz circle of close advisors to Bush and the former head of the Defense Policy Board &lt;a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/kim/interviews/perle.html:" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/kim/interviews/perle.html:&lt;/a&gt;

I think Kim Dae Jung's interests, and the interests of the South Koreans, are not at all identical to ours. They have an interest in doing everything possible to avoid military conflict, and it's understandable. Seoul is within artillery range of thousands of North Korean artillery tubes. They would much prefer to take a risk that North Korea will become not only a nuclear power, but the nuclear bread basket of the world, building and selling nuclear weapons, as they are now building and selling missile technology, and anything else they can lay their hands on.

From the South Korean point of view, that is a lesser immediate threat than artillery landing on Seoul. So it's hardly surprising that the South Koreans are going to see this differently from the way we see it. But our president has, first and foremost, a commitment to the security of the United States.

We're talking nice now because the bulk of our forces are tied downed in Iraq but eventually N. Korea has to be dealt with ...preferably through airstrikes on Yongbyon and other suspected nuclear facilities.  Our ground troops in Korea are basically hostages to a possible North Korean retaliation.  

The cause of the friction in U.S.-Korea relations goes beyond Communist college kids and left leaning politicians.  Fundamentally, as Perle says, the U.S. and S. Korea have different interests.  The Koreans realize this on a gut level (since they are not capable of a logical analysis) and it's the cause of the rising anti-Americanism.  South Korea can take care of itself, it's time to move on as far the U.S. is concerned.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I give you the comments of Richard Perle from PBS Frontline (a bit dated but still relevant).  For those of you who don&#8217;t know Perle is part of the Wolfowitz circle of close advisors to Bush and the former head of the Defense Policy Board <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/kim/interviews/perle.html:" rel="nofollow"></a><a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/kim/interviews/perle.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/.....perle.html</a>:</p>
<p>I think Kim Dae Jung&#8217;s interests, and the interests of the South Koreans, are not at all identical to ours. They have an interest in doing everything possible to avoid military conflict, and it&#8217;s understandable. Seoul is within artillery range of thousands of North Korean artillery tubes. They would much prefer to take a risk that North Korea will become not only a nuclear power, but the nuclear bread basket of the world, building and selling nuclear weapons, as they are now building and selling missile technology, and anything else they can lay their hands on.</p>
<p>From the South Korean point of view, that is a lesser immediate threat than artillery landing on Seoul. So it&#8217;s hardly surprising that the South Koreans are going to see this differently from the way we see it. But our president has, first and foremost, a commitment to the security of the United States.</p>
<p>We&#8217;re talking nice now because the bulk of our forces are tied downed in Iraq but eventually N. Korea has to be dealt with &#8230;preferably through airstrikes on Yongbyon and other suspected nuclear facilities.  Our ground troops in Korea are basically hostages to a possible North Korean retaliation.  </p>
<p>The cause of the friction in U.S.-Korea relations goes beyond Communist college kids and left leaning politicians.  Fundamentally, as Perle says, the U.S. and S. Korea have different interests.  The Koreans realize this on a gut level (since they are not capable of a logical analysis) and it&#8217;s the cause of the rising anti-Americanism.  South Korea can take care of itself, it&#8217;s time to move on as far the U.S. is concerned.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Tustison</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2004/01/16/foreign-minister-resigns-big-changes-in-store-for-us-rok-ties/#comment-1512</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Tustison</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:58:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjkoehler.com/?p=462#comment-1512</guid>
		<description>Kim Dae Jung made an extensive purge of the National Intelligence Service and the Unification Ministry because of opposition to the Sunshine Policy in those organizations. This looks like the same kind of purge. However given that the US has yeilded on SOFA and Land Use far beyond what they ever had in the past, I can't imagine what logical policy direction they want to take in opposition to the US. Are they next going to be  releasing a Comemoration of the Sinking of the USS General Sherman stamp set. ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kim Dae Jung made an extensive purge of the National Intelligence Service and the Unification Ministry because of opposition to the Sunshine Policy in those organizations. This looks like the same kind of purge. However given that the US has yeilded on SOFA and Land Use far beyond what they ever had in the past, I can&#8217;t imagine what logical policy direction they want to take in opposition to the US. Are they next going to be  releasing a Comemoration of the Sinking of the USS General Sherman stamp set. <img src='http://www.rjkoehler.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: oranckay</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2004/01/16/foreign-minister-resigns-big-changes-in-store-for-us-rok-ties/#comment-1511</link>
		<dc:creator>oranckay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:11:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjkoehler.com/?p=462#comment-1511</guid>
		<description>Having been the one who hastily translated that Chosun editorial let me suggest that it is 10 percent of a point and 90 percent very dizzying, yet skillful, spin. After reading Chosun editorials for well over a decade, I've learned how to do discourse analysys on them things. 

Of course, 10 percent counts for a lot in this situation.

The problems within the foreign ministry, which Yoon [sic] did not fix, should not be underestimated. I'm still trying to figure this out but the story I hear is that some foreign service people were going around commenting on how Roh is only a high school graduate and how Yi Jongseok at the NSC didn't go to SNU and the country suffers as a result...

I think the verdict on what Yoon's departure means should wait until we see who replaces him. 

In the meantime, Korea's ambassador in Washington is still someone who was (1) Kim Young-sam's first foreign minister and (2) was named ambassador by Roh even though he advised Roh's opponent in the presidential campaign, Lee Hoi-chang. Months ago, during his last quick visit to Seoul, the ambassador said Korea should "unconditionally" send troops to Iraq, and so I imagine he is not on the best of terms with the "independents" supposedly at the NSC, but, given his position, it wouldn't be too much to assume he might be advising Roh on who to choose as Yoon's replacement.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Having been the one who hastily translated that Chosun editorial let me suggest that it is 10 percent of a point and 90 percent very dizzying, yet skillful, spin. After reading Chosun editorials for well over a decade, I&#8217;ve learned how to do discourse analysys on them things. </p>
<p>Of course, 10 percent counts for a lot in this situation.</p>
<p>The problems within the foreign ministry, which Yoon [sic] did not fix, should not be underestimated. I&#8217;m still trying to figure this out but the story I hear is that some foreign service people were going around commenting on how Roh is only a high school graduate and how Yi Jongseok at the NSC didn&#8217;t go to SNU and the country suffers as a result&#8230;</p>
<p>I think the verdict on what Yoon&#8217;s departure means should wait until we see who replaces him. </p>
<p>In the meantime, Korea&#8217;s ambassador in Washington is still someone who was (1) Kim Young-sam&#8217;s first foreign minister and (2) was named ambassador by Roh even though he advised Roh&#8217;s opponent in the presidential campaign, Lee Hoi-chang. Months ago, during his last quick visit to Seoul, the ambassador said Korea should &#8220;unconditionally&#8221; send troops to Iraq, and so I imagine he is not on the best of terms with the &#8220;independents&#8221; supposedly at the NSC, but, given his position, it wouldn&#8217;t be too much to assume he might be advising Roh on who to choose as Yoon&#8217;s replacement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Roberts</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2004/01/16/foreign-minister-resigns-big-changes-in-store-for-us-rok-ties/#comment-1510</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Roberts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2004 23:27:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjkoehler.com/?p=462#comment-1510</guid>
		<description>new independent foreign policy&#62;&#62; Seems that in the parlance of Comrade Roh and the racist mob that elected him this means actively opposing ny position Washington may make.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>new independent foreign policy&gt;&gt; Seems that in the parlance of Comrade Roh and the racist mob that elected him this means actively opposing ny position Washington may make.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
