Two Korean human rights activists were apparently kidnapped and later released by Shia militia forces Monday as militiamen slugged it out with Italian forces for control of the southern Iraqi city of Nassariya. The militia leader in the city announced that he had taken the abducted, and would not release them until Italian forces had withdrawn from the city. The times and the details of what occurred are sketchy, but in the end, the two were eventually released after 14 hours of captivity, or so says a Ministry of Foreign Affairs official.
Besides seven embassy staff members and about 20~30 employees of the Omu Power Company, there are about 120 Korean civilians in Iraq.
Sticking with the Hankyoreh for the moment, the paper is blaming the U.S. for starting a civil war in Iraq and once again calling on the government to cancel plans to send troops to the country:
A year after the start of the illegal and unilateral US invasion and occupation of Iraq, that country is in a historically unprecedented state of division and confrontation. It’s bad enough that you have to say self-administered Kurdish regions are the only places with stable public security. The administration of George W. Bush needs to give up its ambitions about ruling the Middle East with strength, and then work with the international community on a plan for the earliest possible end to the occupation. Forget the lack of justification and practical benefit; the Korean government rightly needs to withdraw its decision to send troops, since it said yes out of habit, and the backlash will only be worse.
Leaving aside for the moment that the Hani’s cries concerning “stability” and “public security” sound a little too much like a desire to see a return to the good old days of Saddam Hussein — a bit of an odd argument coming from a paper with the Hankyoreh’s pedigree — I’m not sure if I follow the logic of pointing out how the country is on the verge of “civil war” and following it up by demanding the U.S. withdraw its troops and turn the problem over to the “international community,” and then following that up by saying that one member of that international community — namely, South Korea — won’t be sending troops. Perhaps I’m missing something, but it would seem that even those who opposed the war would view an American abandonment of Iraq at this point as a major act of irresponsibility. Doubly so if that abandonment is followed up by turning the situation over to an international community that should not — in the Hani’s estimation, apparently — contribute the force required to bring stability and order. I mean, what the Hani seems to be arguing is that Iraq was better off under the steady and stabilizing hand of Saddam Hussein — an argument that could rationally be made, although I’d expect to see it made in “law, order and harmony”- centric rightist publications like the Chosun or Dong A rather than the Hani — and the U.S. is causing civil disorder, so the way to solve that disorder is to pull out American forces and let the country go to pot.
Curious.
5 Comments
The talk of UN intervention in any troubled country is an attempt to avoid responsibility. To every country, peace is peace when domestic lives are not at stake.
Return to the lessons of Haiti and Serbia. Lots of UN intervention there, with truly minimal US troops involved. Nothing was ever done correctly.
In Haiti, there has been another coup. A bloody one. In Serbia/Bosnia, there are renewed attempts at ethnic cleansing. This time, the Muslims are cleansing the Serbians.
Have we forgotten the video footage of European UN peacekeepers helping Serbian troops rape and beat Bosnian women? In exchange for their lives?
I remember the grins on the faces of those European UN peacekeeprs. The Blue helmets.
There is no need for them to exist.
US is actually being responsible by staying in Iraq.
The last time I checked, UN peacekeepers kept very basic levels of firearms. Guns and bullets, basically. The forces of the Jihad will have feast on them.
Hankyoreh ain’t actually AGAINST the war, they’re just rooting for the other side. And why are South Korean “human rights activists” in Iraq while they are AWOL on North Korea?
A few reporters get detained by Americans for a couple of hours after the bomb-sniffing dog sits down next to them and the Korean media (or portions of it) go crazy and accuse America of being high-handed and arrogant. “Human rights” activists get kidnapped for 14 hours and hardly a peep is heard.
>US is actually being responsible by staying in Iraq.>
I love this kind of comment comment from Bu$hites. It does not even occur to them that the whole premise of invading the place was a lie and that the enitre operation has been, and will continue to be, a zealot-driven fuck-up. I also see that Bu$hites do not actually fight in Iraq themselves. Better to send some 18 year child who joined the army to qualify for the GI Bill so he can get some education.
It is anarchy in Iraq. The resistance forces left by Saadam (his REAL war plan, but Fox News will not let you know that) know that America does not have the intel, forces or training for the task it faces now. This will lead to further escalation as they know America cannot stop them. This is exactly why George I did not invade in 1991.
All Bu$hites: If you really believe in the Iraq war, it is your patriotic duty to enlist:
goarmy.com
Even though I’m probably a hopeless Bu$hite (not to mention a zealot-driven you-know-what), I managed to strike the dollar signs from my eyes long enough to do a little fanciful editing of the Hankyoreh quote above. My suggested changes are in brackets [].
“A year after …[54 years after]… the start of the illegal and unilateral US invasion and occupation of Iraq …[Korea]…, that country is in a historically unprecedented state of division and confrontation….
The administration of George W. Bush needs to give up its ambitions about ruling Iraq ….[Korea]… with strength, and then work with the international community on a plan for the earliest possible end to the occupation. Forget the lack of justification and practical benefit; the Korean…[US]… government rightly needs to withdraw its decision to send troops, since it said yes out of habit, and the backlash will only be worse.”
Remarkable how that comes out, isn’t it? Perhaps unconsciously the Hankyoreh is thinking about the home country. I think the psychologists call this “projection”.
My edited quote makes a remarkably good argument for the US getting out of Korea and turning the whole thing over to the UN, in which institution the Hankyoreh professes such confidence. Oh Lord, let it be… and soon.