Poland’s Ambassador to Korea, Tadeusz Chomicki, had some interesting things to say to the Korea Times concerning Korea’s planned dispatch of troops to Iraq:
Poland’s top envoy in South Korea on Wednesday said there is no safe place for troops dispatched to Iraq, based on his country’s nine-month-long experience in the war-torn country.
“It is unrealistic that you can go to places like Iraq and find safe locations,” Polish Ambassador to Seoul Tadeusz Chomicki said in an interview with The Korea Times on Tuesday.
With mounting concerns over the security of South Korean troops to be dispatched to Iraq, many Koreans are wondering about the real situation in the country, especially in a southern region where Seoul is likely to send its soldiers as part of an international coalition to help out in reconstruction efforts.
“Somebody (here) believes that by sending troops to one place rather than another, casualties can be avoided. However, that’s unrealistic,” Chomicki said.
I should point out, however, that at least one Korean politician has said it’s the U.S. that told Korea to find a new spot other than Kirkuk, but this has not been seconded by anyone as far as I know.
The ambassador also had words for those protesting the decision to send troops:
He also touched on a current rift in Korean society over the troop dispatch by saying that his country suffered the same situation when sending troops to the southern part of Iraq.
“Though there was some opposition to the troop dispatch to Iraq, a majority of Polish people supported the troop dispatch,” he said.
The ambassador pointed out that his country has good reason to send troops to Iraq because Poland has a long history of suffering from foreign or internal totalitarian power.
“The students who demonstrate against the Korean troop dispatch must remember and understand they only can demonstrate freely against the war in Iraq because many international soldiers died for freedom and for what Korea is today.”
I’ll let people fight this out in my comments section.
One Comment
what’s to fight? the ambassador’s “reasoning” summarily denies even the theoretical possibility for protest and in doing so, completely undermines the whole point of being “liberated.” ah, the joy of living on the wrong side of modernity’s pardox, roughly summed up as: “You’re free! . . . .Now rejoice, say thanks, do as you’re told and shut the fuck up!” (albeit, with much finer p.r. skills thank i can conjure)