As you can see at the Chosun Ilbo, Yonhap and Korea Times, Korea’s National Security Council (NSC) has asked Combined Forces Command (CFC) to cancel the formulation of a contingency plan aimed at responding to sudden changes in North Korea, such as the collapse of the Northern regime or mass refugee floods:
Seoul demanded that Washington stop formulating a military contingency plan for possible instability in North Korea, including the collapse of the communist regime, the Defense Ministry confirmed Friday.
The National Security Council (NSC) asked the Korea-U.S. Combined Forces Command (CFC) in Seoul last January to scrap an operational plan, code-named 5029-05, that laid out military responses to various levels of internal trouble in the North, ministry spokesman Shin Hyun-don said in a briefing.
The request came due to South Korean concerns that the plan infringed on its sovereignty and ability to ensure peace on the Korean Peninsula.
Under the draft plan, the U.S. military would take wartime command in case of an emergency in North Korea resulting from internal turmoil such as mass defections or revolt. South Korea has control of its military in peacetime.
“The government found it difficult to accept the plan as it stipulates military actions under U.S. command in the event of internal crises in the North, not simply North Korean aggression against the country,” a NSC official said. He is worried that “hasty” U.S. military action could trigger a full-scale war on the Korean Peninsula.
The U.S. government, however, has resisted Seoul’s demand that the plan be scrapped, sources said. Washington stressed it is needed to prevent Pyongyang’s weapons of mass destruction from being smuggled out of the country while it was embroiled in a domestic crisis, he said.
Now, if I may, a couple of comments. Firstly, I have no problem with Seoul demanding that CFC cancel formulation of a plan that it does not want South Korean forces (or, for that matter, U.S. forces based on the Korean Peninsula) to get involved in. CFC’s mission statement, taken from Global Security.org, reads:
Deter hostile acts of external aggression against the Republic of Korea by a combined military effort of the United States of America and the ROK; and in the event deterrence fails, defeat an external armed attack against the ROK.
Dealing with other issues, such as a possible Somaliazation of North Korea, would seem to be out of CFC’s mandate. Like I said when Lt. Gen. Charles Campbell ran his mouth off last year about joint South Korean-U.S. missions in Northeast Asia, it’s one thing to make contingency plans with your own troops, but quite another to make them using another country’s troops. Now, OPLAN 5029 initially had the support of both governments, but Seoul apparently doesn’t want in anymore. Fine. That’s their right. CFC should have dropped work on the plan as soon as they were informed by NSC to drop it, which was apparently in January.
It should also be pointed out that while the powers that be in South Korea apparently doesn’t want CFC working on contingency plans based on sudden changes in North Korea, Seoul does have its own plan for just such contingencies, which were kindly leaked to the press by a Grand National Party lawmaker in October of last year. For those that may not recall Chungmu 9000:
Mr. Chung’s office said the details have been kept classified, but the Unification Ministry, seeking to assure the public, provided selective details. Under the plan, code-named “Chungmu 9000,” South Korea will establish an emergency administrative headquarters in the North, which will work to liberalize the economy and society. South Korea’s unification minister will head the agency with powers greater than a governor.
Unification Ministry staff will be deployed to operate the organization, and officials from other ministries will follow to take systemic authority in the North.
I don’t know what’s more disquieting — the prospect of North Korea going to pot, or the knowledge that if it does, Unification Minister Chung Dong-young might be charged with cleaning up the mess.
Anyway, there are more Korean contingency plans listed in that article, including plans to set up refugee camps along the DMZ.
Now, Seoul’s demand that OPLAN 5029 be put on ice IS problematic. First off, we known Seoul has contingency plans for something drastic happening up North. We can also safely guess that the Americans have contingency plans for everything ranging from a coup in Pyongyang to the revelation the Kim Jong-il is a transgender Martian. The question is, however, whether South Korea and the U.S. — two nations that are at least nominally allies — have concrete plans to work together. Assuming for a moment that if North Korea went to shit, both the South Koreans and Americans might eventually be involved, it would be nice if they were running their plays from the same play book. Moreover — and I’m not necessarily saying this is the case — if Seoul wants USFK to sit on its ass in the event of a major turn of events in North Korea, this is simply more evidence that the presence of U.S. troops on the Korean Peninsula is a geopolitical waste. Can’t use’em in Taiwan, can’t use them in an emergency in North Korea… in fact, the only thing they appear good for is pissing off the locals and taking casualties in the defense of an “ally” that is not only more than capable of defending itself against a North Korean invasion that’ll most likely never happen, but is also articulating a foreign policy that posits that while the U.S. is bound to come to Korea’s defense should it get into trouble, Seoul would determine whether it offered assistance to the U.S. should it (the U.S.) become embroiled in a conflict with another Northeast Asian power depending on the regional power balance.
96 Comments
Candu and Nora,
Rho and Kim DJ are tight, very tight. Kim hand-selected Rho to be the party’s presidential candidate from eight available candidates and Rho, I believe, follows DJ verbatim even these days.
DJ wanted to take Korea out of the U.S. control and place it under China. DJ is a Commie; he is from Jolla province of Korea which is famous for producing anti-government and anti-capitalism(=pro-communism) people. He brought pro-Communism disguised as nationalism into Korean politics and shifted Korea toward pro-NK and pro-China.
DJ radically shifted Korea’s national mood from anti-Communism to anti-Americanism. Rho is just following the direction laid out by DJ.
The OPLAN 5029 is an outdated document which tried to lay out the modus operandi for contingencies. Why does this type of doc is necessary in the first place? Nobody will follow this document once the emergency situation arises. I know that and you know that.
Korea has to have some room to manuever outside of what is written in the OPLAN and the same is true for the U.S. This type of documents just creates paperwork and bureaucracy. That is all. Both Rho and Bush will have overriding authority over this document.
So, why bother with this kind of nonsense? If you ask pres. Bush today, he would not have even vague idea about what is in OPLAN 5029.
Some officers(desk yesmen) have too much time on their hands.
baduk,
you have me very close to saying that people like you are what’s wrong with this country. and you don’t want me to say this, because it will mean i’m right.
ch??lla = pro-communist
ch??lla = anti-american
this kind of regionalistic division is one of the big problems here. non-ch??lla people (especially ky??ngsang people) don’t support ch??lla people because they’re perceived as communist, while ch??lla people fervently support ch??lla candidates because they feel they’re persecuted.
it’s got to end but it can’t when mindless people like you make mindless statements like this.
roh’s not even from ch??lla.
look, even if kim daejung handpicked roh, that doesn’t mean that roh=kim daejung. maybe kim daejung made a mistake. look at gore and lieberman. gore handpicked lieberman (for a variety of reasons), but then four years later he handpicked dean instead.
as for kim daejung, he tried to have a future-looking relationship with japan, and he clearly stated he thought usfk should remain in a unified korea for stability in northeast asia. hardly the ‘pro-china’ shift you suggest. looking to china as a potential market (as japan and the u.s.a. both do, without much criticism) is hardly the same as ditching the united states.
so baduk: less looniness, more logic.
When the US betrayed Taiwan by officially recognizing China and dropping Taiwan, that meant that if the US planned to station their troops in Taiwan, it would mean they would be same as wanting to put US troops in China. Because the US recognizes China’s one government policy, for the US to put troops in Taiwan, they’ll need a permission from Beijing.
Gee, the Unification Ministry actually plans for contingincies now? (see, e.g., former Unification Minister Jeong Se-hyun’s 2003 comment, “At this point, I don’t think we need to talk about policy issues based on the possibility of negative scenarios.”)
why don’t U.S just get the hell out of Korea and station their troops in Tiwan or something.
I think the CIA should get involved and overthrow the communist regime of Roh Mu Hyun’s Uri party, and save millions from death.
No US troops allowed to be stationed in Taiwan by US law (Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, the culmination of the process of restoring normal diplomatic relations between PRC and US from 1972 to 79).
I suppose I’ll have to find the text of the law if somebody wnats a quote. No US military aircraft stationed there, they don’t even stop at Taiwan airfields for refueling. Remember the US recon aircraft bumped by the Chinese MiG in 2001? It wasn’t allowed to stop at Taiwan, flew out of Okinawa or a mainland Japan US airbase on a round trip to do its mission in a “loop”, no plan for it to land anywhere as I recall.
No US naval vessels based in Taiwanese ports either, they don’t make even short “port calls”. Mainland watches all this like a hawk; they go diplomatically berserk when a high-ranking ROC government official merely makes an unofficial visit to US.
I do know that there isn’t one single US military advisor on the island, hasn’t been since 79. US military staffs and ROC staffs don’t even meet for coordination of war plans! (source, WSJ article, written in weeks after the 2001 “bumping” and forced landing and capture of US surveillance aircraft on Hainan. Incident happened in April 2001, so article was probably around May 2001 time period, don’t have it handy).
Undoubtedly this lack of coordination will cost US and Taiwanese lives, if it ever comes to the point of US deciding to assist Taiwan to repel a mainland invasion, but of course this is the elephant in the living room that US political leaders and diplomats don’t want to educate US public about.t. Who knows, once the 2008 Beijing games are over, maybe this will turn out to be President Hillary’s first big foreign policy test. She may find herself having to make some mighty momentous decisions in an awful hurry, not to worry though Bill will be at her side, he’s got “experience” in dealing with Asian totalitarians.
Even during the 50’s and 60’s US never had combat troops there, only an advisory presence. One thing the Nationalists have never lacked for is ground forces (just like ROK now).
US assistance to Taiwan was always seen as one of air and naval forces which could deploy from Japanese bases or out of US possessions (Guam, Hawaii).
Use of Japanese bases assumes the Japanese don’t get nervous about this. However, this seems unlikely, from Japan’s recent diplomatic/ military posture vs. a potential Taiwan-PRC conflict. Quite a contrast from the totality of “signals” from the ROK currently, wouldn’t you say? And as far as I can tell, the Taiwanese aren’t paranoid about this Japanese posture, in spite of the fact that they are also a former Japanese colony.
Of course if anyone knows otherwise post a link. Maybe there are young Taiwanese students brandishing hammers right now in the streets, over the prospect of imminent Japanese attack. Sorry, I can’t read Asian languages, dependent on the indulgence of others to translate ‘em.
You got to love this. Of course the NATIONALISTS like Noolji or Norapark think that this shit is great. But once the shit hits the fan, these assholes will be preaching to all that will hear that the USA once again stabbed korea in the back. Sick fucks.
‘can’t read asian languages…’
adds to your total lack of knowledge of asians in general, paul.
the deterioation of relations btween sk and the us can be placed at bush’s doorstep. the twit can’t see that the 10th largest economy in the world won’t be treated like some african basket case. bush still in 1950’s mode.
Oops, change “young Taiwanese students” in my last post to “former Taiwanese spies in PRC”. If I can’t be bothered to at least read the English language links so generously provided here, I can certainly be justifiably criticized for that.
I always try to be honest about my shortcomings Noolji. I like to think this enhances any modest credibility I might have, but of course each reader here must judge for him/herself.
My political views are a product of the cold war. Changing times do call for adjustments even by old fogies, but
I think the problem for ROK is that NorK is still in 1950’s mode as well. But maybe ROK will be able to ease them into the modern era, in fact I think their ability to do this would be enhanced if US were gone from the peninsula.
Marmot didn’t discuss above the prospect of “loose nukes” in a potential internal NorK crisis, undoubtedly a factor in the US planning he cites. US shouldn’t override ROK wishes in this matter ( ie “treat ROK as a basket case” as you put it, though this is unjustified hyperbole on your part). But neither should US remain on the peninsula and be exposed to NorK paranoia with its hands tied.
What if there’s an internal crisis up north, and there is a coincidental massive accidental (or deliberate) explosion of a NorK train or weapons depot? And a NorK leader mistakes this for a US move, and orders a retaliation? Not against ROK, but against an offshore US target (a US base in Japan, Okinawa, Guam?)
Best way to ease potential tensions is for US to leave the peninsula, let the Reunification Ministry get on with its job. Maybe ROK and PRC can even get together quietly and make some plans for a potential DPRK collapse. US can encourage this from the safety of the sidelines…
the deterioation of relations btween sk and the us can be placed at bush??s doorstep. the twit can??t see that the 10th largest economy in the world won??t be treated like some african basket case.
This is absurd, even for you, Noolji. Roh’s Korea is getting about the respect it deserves, if not more, and every downward tick in US-ROK relations (and South Korea’s strategic value) has followed some ill-conceived remark or action by Roh’s crew or Nosamo radicals and/or another success by North Korea in bamboozling otherwise smart South Koreans with nationalistic ploys. If it all comes totally a cropper, historians will write that South Korea’s most important alliance was pissed away by South Koreans themselves over a traffic ACCIDENT and foolish pride.
It’s also worth remembering that Bush was, if undiplomatic, entirely CORRECT back in March 2001 when, standing aside Kim Dae-jung, he wondered whether Kim Jong-il could be trusted. DJ Kim went on touting the June 15 summit (and accepted the Nobel Prize) fully KNOWING that the meeting with the evil Kim was purchased with a $500 million bribe. That Nobel Prize has all the merit of an East German Olympic Gold medal or a Mark McGuire home run record.
i really don’t like roh moohyun and i hope his administration is replaced by a pragmatic person from the conservative camp, but i do wonder if he’s not possibly on to something here.
cozying up to china, promising to be a lover not a fighter, and now this. this is what i think is going on: roh and company believe something up north really could go down, and they are very worried that china might be looking for some pretext to step in to the north korean situation (like china and japan did in 1895).
this may be why roh has been making nice with beijing: his intention is to show china that south korea is their friend and so it will be easier for seoul to influence beijing to just let seoul handle the situation up north.
if i’m right about this, then i fear it may backfire, however. beijing might go in to north korea with our without a warm seoul-beijing relationship. simply, it might just be too irresistible to them, their historic underling going to pot… of course they must step in.
add to that the fact that roh’s appeasement to beijing makes south korea look weak (at least until the conservatives take over), and that might make beijing more likely to try to occupy part/all of the north, and then force south korea to make major concessions in order gain control of the northern half of the peninsula. these concessions could be as small as a promise not to have u.s. bases close in former dprk territory, or it could be as major as a complete usfk withdrawal.
so how does that idea relate to this news? if this theory (and it’s just a theory) is correct, then more than anything else, this is meant as a sign to beijing that, if north korea collapses, korean troops will be right up next to your border, beijing, but don’t worry because there won’t be any american troops. you can rest easy.
so while some of roh’s actions are meant to appease the china and north korea, this one is more about setting their mind at ease. but of course, you can’t spell ‘appease’ without e-a-s-e.
anyway, even if all this is true (and it’s just an idea, a mere notion), i don’t think this means the u.s. military is a waste here, as marmot has suggested. while they do defend against a north korean invasion that will most likely never happen, it is their very presence that insures that it will never happen, plus their presence provides a damper on all the tensions that have swirled between the other countries around here, frequently leading to open conflict. every president of korea, at least including kim daejung, has expressed a desire and need to have u.s. military here even after reunification.
shazzam wrote:
You got to love this. Of course the NATIONALISTS like Noolji or Norapark think that this shit is great. But once the shit hits the fan, these assholes will be preaching to all that will hear that the USA once again stabbed korea in the back. Sick fucks.
leaving aside the fact that you have absolutely no clue what it is i think or what motivates my thoughts, and that you are mired in the belief that all koreans think this way or that way, calling me a ’sick fuck’ is very, very bad blogging behavior.
it’s one thing to make a criticism of my behavior (e.g., saying i might be going apeshit in response to an exchange between you and me), but it’s an entirely different matter to use profanity to gratuitously make a reference to me as an individual (e.g., calling me a sick fuck). even more so because you did so on a thread on which i hadn’t even participated at the time.
while it was mildly amusing and only slightly irritating before, you have either crossed the line or have come very close to it.
if you really are a jingoistic korean trying to make korea bashers look bad, now is the time to stop; you’ve simply gone overboard and it’s not funny. on the other hand, if you really are someone who believes what he/she is saying here, then you need to not just chill but consider pulling yourself away from the cyberworld and get back to learning how people in the real world should behave and act. perhaps marmot will help you in that endeavor.
paul h wrote:
But maybe ROK will be able to ease them into the modern era, in fact I think their ability to do this would be enhanced if US were gone from the peninsula.
people keep throwing this about, and i just don’t think it holds water. how has the rok shown any ability to influence the north in a positive direction? i cannot think of one way. the only thing the rok can do is to try to catch the north when it falls. that’s it. they can’t talk the north off the ledge.
why would this be any different if the usfk were to leave? if anything, this would embolden the north all the more, since it is one of their sincerest wishes and desires for the u.s. to leave south korea. it would embolden them that if they just stick to their guns, they will come out on top in the end.
and then this leads to another question: if usfk leaving south korea is such a positive step for south korean security, why is it that north korea wants that so badly? does north korea simply want what’s best for the south? or does north korea actually think it has some sort of leg-up if the u.s. military leaves?
i wrote:
i really don??t like roh moohyun and i hope his administration is replaced by a pragmatic person from the conservative camp, but i do wonder if he??s not possibly on to something here.
i just re-read the opening of my first post here, and i realized people might misinterpret what i wrote, especially if they don’t read the rest of the post.
by saying that roh might be ‘on to something here,’ i am not suggesting that this may be a good idea. even if my theory is in the right direction, i really don’t know if this is a good idea or a bad idea.
so when i suggested he might be ‘on to something here,’ i meant that he might actually be working from an actual paradigm or theory (which i later outlined), and not just making random, irrational comments and decisions, as he often seems to do.
then again, he could just be on something.
As Nora said, South Korea needs a pragmatic leader, not someone like Roh who says a lot and acts little.
It’s very easy for Americans, like me, to advocate the withdrawal of the USFK. With the anti-American contingent being so vocal and having access to microphones, South Korea can appear to be a satellite state of Kim Jong Il’s peninsular empire. However, we shouldn’t forget South Korea is a democracy, and that 2007 offers a much-needed opportunity to turn things around. Certainly, the conservatives at the Grand National Party, should they succeed in keeping their act together, have a clear shot at the presidency and the general elections, both of which will take place in 2007. A huge shake-up could happen, and it’s in the hands of the South Korean public.
And we shouldn’t forget that there’s still a large portion of America-friendly population in South Korea that would hug Rumsfeld before Kim Jong Il any day. For America to withdraw because of the uncooperative behavior of consecutive left-wing administrations and their supporters would be back-stabbing to the South Korean faithful, especially in the Grand National Party who have honestly worked their butts off to maintain the US-ROK alliance.
Withdrawal of the USFK would be tragic for South Korea. Foreign direct investments would be reduced drastically, the economy would go down hill, and the terrible socio-economic problems of recent years will only increase. And who knows what pudgy Jong Il would do then? As for America, our other democratic allies will take full notice that we’ve ditched an ally because of questionable behavior since 1998.
We need alliances and strong ones in Asia, especially with those that have strong economies and competent military capabilities. There are very few, aside from Japan. USFK’s total withdrawal would be a tremendous loss to South Korea, but definitely a loss of a notable degree to America as well. There’s no question about that.
For those ticked off about Roh’s behavior and his minions in the NSC, your anger is only reasonable, but wait until 2007 before you advocate a total pull out. There is no doubt that it is the Roh and Kim Dae Jung faithful who have placed the US-ROK alliance in a bucket of acid, not the Bush administration whose perceived faults stem simply from opposing the always-appalling “sunshine”/”peace and prosperity” policy.
However, on a positive note, we have seen positive signs from the South Korean right-wing, who have, in recent years, developed the ability to stand on their own without the remnants of past military regimes. Support for them is only growing stronger as Roh shows his dynamic ineptitude.
some good statements, mingi, but i only take issue with one thing: i don’t think it’s fair to lump kim daejung and roh moohyun together. kim daejung was on the left, but he was pragmatic and knew what he was doing for the most part. he did the right things in 1997 and 1998 to get the economy back on track, he made clear that the u.s.-rok alliance was very important (even stating that he hope the u.s. would remain even after reunification, for stability in the region).
and although he met with kim jong-il, i think that was an attempt at trying to really work on breaking a stalemate; it’s not at all like the kowtowing of roh to what beijing and kim jong-il want, like preventing refugees from coming south and what-not.
i don’t agree with everything kim daejung did, but he was a wise sage in comparison with roh moohyun.
Speaking of contingencies, what would happen if there were sudden political change in South Korea, similar to what happened in 1979? Koreans were certainly not prepared for the assassination of President Park.
If President Roh were to die, even from a sudden heart attack, would chaos rule once again in South Korea? Would the Nosamo crowd go on another Kwangju-like rampage through the streets of Korea’s cities, accusing the Korean military, the US military, the US CIA, or even the Japanese of somehow being responsible? Would the North take advantage of the situation and make their move, calculating that she now has enough support in the South to pull it off?
It may sound crazy, but I believe there is a greater chance of an internal uprising in South Korea than an attack from the North. Hopefully, the US has plans for such a scenario?
By the way, a fortuneteller I know has predicted that something will happen to President Roh before the end of his term. She does not know exactly what will happen, but has said it will not be good. And according to the fortuneteller’s daughter, her mother’s predictions have only been wrong once.
I do not really believe in fortunetelling, but if something does happen to President Roh, I do believe it will not be good for anyone, except maybe Kim Jong-il.
I wonder if I should now expect a visit from the Men in Black?
To me it is odd that South Korea wants to be the ‘balancer’ in the region using another country’s power. It is like stealing thank yous.
Sorry about the insults, I wish to disassociate myself from them, only mild sarcasm is acceptable here IMO.
1) Nora said: “…how has the rok shown any ability to influence the north in a positive direction?”
An aid and trade program, Marmot posted an article from WSJ a couple of weeks ago that detailed just how extensive this was. It’s a lot more than just food aid for starving peasants now, there are joint economic ventures. Scroll down into archives and review it for yourself if you haven’t already.
2) “…why would this be any different if the usfk were to leave? if anything, this would embolden the north all the more, since it is one of their sincerest wishes and desires for the u.s. to leave south korea..”
You’re assuming NorK political leadership knows what is best for itself, a dubious proposition IMO.
The NorK nuke and missile programs have been brilliant political achievements, rivaling the South’s achieving “world’s tenth biggest economy” as Noolji reminds us. But it has driven a vast wedge between US interests and ROK interests. Many ROK citizens are unconsciously blind to this IMO, many perhaps willfully so.
Does your imagination encompass all of the things that might conceivably happens, in a situation of internal chaos in the North? Say the Dear Leader has suddenly had a “heart attack”, and factions in Pyongyang are struggling for power. Such a struggle seems a rather probable scenario to me, at some time in the near future.
What if a NorK missile suddenly lifts off in the middle of all this, and strikes a US base located elsewhere in Asia (other than in ROK)?
North Korea news agency immediately comes on the air, announces that the perpetrators of the missile launch have been captured, shows a video of dozens of guys in blindfolds up against the wall, slumping over as the bullets hit them. (I bet this kind of NorK execution video would receive a wide rebroadcasting on all ROK channels).
The broadcast announces that the situation has been “handled”, and warns that any retaliation against NorK will provoke a general war.
Better hope the missile is a dud, or lands harmlessly in the sea, or that it isn’t a nuke at all. Or maybe that US anti-missile defenses are operational and shoot it down.
If the missile successfully hits a target though, and there are signicant numbers of civilian and/or US mlitary casualties, what is the US to think? Just accept NorK’s “word” for it that this is what happened?
“No retaliation” is exactly what an ROK administration would want of course. But this will definitely not be acceptable to any US administration IMO, be it Democratic or Republican. How can it know that the same thing will not happen again immediately or in the near future?
Does contemplating this make your hair stand on end, Nora? It does mine, though no doubt my scenario will be ridiculed as “unlikely” by others here. Maybe it’s only a 5% chance, but the potential downside is terrifying. And remember how many people would have ridiculed a description of a possible 9/11, prior to the actual event.
3) “…if usfk leaving south korea is such a positive step for south korean security, why is it that north korea wants that so badly?”
Because they are genuinely paranoid and believe their own propaganda up there, that a US attack is imminent at any moment. This is where some criticism of current US administration is justified, it was a mistake by Bush to mention NorK as part of “axis of evil”.
“Speak softly and carry a big stick” — Teddy Roosevelt. Best foreign policy advice ever given. Noolji should be given a suicide mission from the ROK to penetrate White House security and attempt to place a sign with that on Bush’s desk in the Oval office (right next to “The buck stops here”). If he survives, he can be awarded KDJ’s Nobel prize money (if any is left).
But, notice that particular bit of rhetoric has not been repeated. Doesn’t mean though that US officials such as Secy of State should make fawning visits to Nork.
US withdrawal would remove some of this paranoia, ease this consideration from minds of future NorK leaders. Since ROK is now determined not to allow US intervention up north under almost any circumstance, ROK will have to accept the added risk of having to repel any possible NorK attack by themselves, initially. Surely the world’s tenth biggest economy can handle this additional burden.
4) “..does north korea simply want what??s best for the south?”
Well, this non NE Asian isn’t qualified to say. Maybe many of them will in times to come, if US is gone and they begin to see things from a “total Korean” perspective.
5) “… or does north korea actually think it has some sort of leg-up if the u.s. military leaves?”
If ROK keeps the US alliance, and the US continues to give a nuclear guarantee to ROK from “offshore”, maybe the Reunification ministry can work on getting NorK to see things more reasonably.
I wouldn’t have taken this view about US withdrawal prior to DPRK obtaining nukes and the massive anti-American demonstrations in ROK. But nukes in the hands of unstable regimes change everything. And the situation will become even worse for the US when Iran gets their nukes operational, which I now believe is inevitable in the next year or two.
Too bad I can’t take back the hours of my life that I put into 5029.
gerry bevers asks:
Speaking of contingencies, what would happen if there were sudden political change in South Korea, similar to what happened in 1979? Koreans were certainly not prepared for the assassination of President Park.
If President Roh were to die, even from a sudden heart attack, would chaos rule once again in South Korea?
the prime minister would take over, and i believe new elections would be called.
Would the Nosamo crowd go on another Kwangju-like rampage through the streets of Korea??s cities, accusing the Korean military, the US military, the US CIA, or even the Japanese of somehow being responsible? Would the North take advantage of the situation and make their move, calculating that she now has enough support in the South to pull it off?
as much as you might want to paint koreans as all being like the pinky-chopping dad, mom, and son, most are far more rational than that.
there was an impeachment recently. maybe you heard. north korea didn’t attack, no one blamed the u.s., japan, china, russia, or the peruvians. things went about, business as usual, and stability reigned.
By the way, a fortuneteller I know has predicted that something will happen to President Roh before the end of his term. She does not know exactly what will happen, but has said it will not be good. And according to the fortuneteller??s daughter, her mother??s predictions have only been wrong once.
but to her own credit, she predicted she would be wrong once.
i wouldn’t trust any fortune teller who hasn’t won the lottery at least twice.
Kim Dae-jung is probably horrified at his successor’s handling of things - with the North, US, Japan, etc. He may have been a little to the left, but he understood the way the world works, unlike the president who seems to be listening exclusively to the unsophisticated and hardly cosmopolitan “386″ boys he surrounds himself with…
paul h wrote:
sorry about the insults, I wish to disassociate myself from them, only mild sarcasm is acceptable here IMO.
well, it’s not like you’re the one doing it. ah, i have thick skin; i’ll be okay.
1) Nora said: ?橫??how has the rok shown any ability to influence the north in a positive direction????
An aid and trade program, Marmot posted an article from WSJ a couple of weeks ago that detailed just how extensive this was. It??s a lot more than just food aid for starving peasants now, there are joint economic ventures. Scroll down into archives and review it for yourself if you haven??t already.
of course there are ventures and aid programs, but how does this translate into the r.o.k. being able to influence the north in a positive direction. okay, there probably is some fuzzy, intangible value in infusing the north with some positive economic energy which might lead to a shift in economic policies, but other than that very questionable ‘if,’ how has the r.o.k. been able to influence the north in a positive direction? have they reduced oppression, closed down labor/re-education camps, started being nicer to returned refugees, stopped using food as a weapon to insure loyalty, etc., etc.?
the south has very little, if any, practical effect on north korea. why would it have any more if usfk were to leave?
2) ?橫??why would this be any different if the usfk were to leave? if anything, this would embolden the north all the more, since it is one of their sincerest wishes and desires for the u.s. to leave south korea..???
You??re assuming NorK political leadership knows what is best for itself, a dubious proposition IMO.
The NorK nuke and missile programs have been brilliant political achievements, rivaling the South??s achieving ?橫world??s tenth biggest economy?? as Noolji reminds us. But it has driven a vast wedge between US interests and ROK interests. Many ROK citizens are unconsciously blind to this IMO, many perhaps willfully so.
so how would the usfk leaving be anything other than giving these leftists their just desserts (while simultaneously abandoning the tens of millions who see the importance of a continuing rok-us alliance)?
so the rok has the tenth-largest economy in the world? 10,000-won bills and supyo make lousy flak jackets.
Does your imagination encompass all of the things that might conceivably happens, in a situation of internal chaos in the North? Say the Dear Leader has suddenly had a ??heart attack??, and factions in Pyongyang are struggling for power. Such a struggle seems a rather probable scenario to me, at some time in the near future.
What if a NorK missile suddenly lifts off in the middle of all this, and strikes a US base located elsewhere in Asia (other than in ROK)?
North Korea news agency immediately comes on the air, announces that the perpetrators of the missile launch have been captured, shows a video of dozens of guys in blindfolds up against the wall, slumping over as the bullets hit them. (I bet this kind of NorK execution video would receive a wide rebroadcasting on all ROK channels).
The broadcast announces that the situation has been ?橫handled??, and warns that any retaliation against NorK will provoke a general war.
Better hope the missile is a dud, or lands harmlessly in the sea, or that it isn??t a nuke at all. Or maybe that US anti-missile defenses are operational and shoot it down.
If the missile successfully hits a target though, and there are signicant numbers of civilian and/or US mlitary casualties, what is the US to think? Just accept NorK??s ??word?? for it that this is what happened?
??No retaliation?? is exactly what an ROK administration would want of course. But this will definitely not be acceptable to any US administration IMO, be it Democratic or Republican. How can it know that the same thing will not happen again immediately or in the near future?
but now you’re talking about something different. you’re talking about a situation where the u.s. is not a spectating neighbor to an internal situation in another country, but a victim of military aggression.
Does contemplating this make your hair stand on end, Nora? It does mine, though no doubt my scenario will be ridiculed as ??unlikely?? by others here. Maybe it??s only a 5% chance, but the potential downside is terrifying. And remember how many people would have ridiculed a description of a possible 9/11, prior to the actual event.
hollywood had already predicted those types of events (’executive decision,’ using airplanes as missiles to attack the east coast).
is the rok request precluding the u.s. side from making plans regarding itself being attacked or even south korea being attacked? i don’t think so.
3) ????if usfk leaving south korea is such a positive step for south korean security, why is it that north korea wants that so badly????
Because they are genuinely paranoid and believe their own propaganda up there, that a US attack is imminent at any moment. This is where some criticism of current US administration is justified, it was a mistake by Bush to mention NorK as part of ?橫axis of evil??.
hmm… if that is true, where is the outcry against bush and rice about ‘axis of evil,’ or the new and improved version, ‘outpost of tyranny’? sure, someone should tell george not to poke the badger with a stick, but north korea was demanding usfk out for decades before bush ever arrived at the white house.
it’s what they want; their plans for domination of the korean peninsula are far more likely to succeed without u.s. presence than with. all they have to do is pick the right time (sunday mornings usually work) in the right circumstances and they push hard enough to seoul that r.o.k. winning back the capital will mean uncertain success but massive bloodshed, and with no one to help them, the rok government will have to agree to some sort of settlement on north korea’s terms.
??Speak softly and carry a big stick?? ?? Teddy Roosevelt. Best foreign policy advice ever given. Noolji should be given a suicide mission from the ROK to penetrate White House security and attempt to place a sign with that on Bush??s desk in the Oval office (right next to ?橫The buck stops here??). If he survives, he can be awarded KDJ??s Nobel prize money (if any is left).
you can expect a visit from some government agency.
But, notice that particular bit of rhetoric has not been repeated. Doesn??t mean though that US officials such as Secy of State should make fawning visits to Nork.
that particular bit of rhetoric has not been repeated? no, it has been reworked: now we have ‘outpost of tyranny.’ the north has english-korean dictionaries, you know.
US withdrawal would remove some of this paranoia, ease this consideration from minds of future NorK leaders.
just like the north koreans don’t believe that emasculated japanese military is not a threat to north korean sovereignty?
usfk exiting will not relieve their paranoia unless the u.s. military removes every boat, sub, and plane from a two thousand-mile radius around the peninsula. that is, if paranoia is what’s driving them.
north korea wants usfk out of south korea for an opportunity to invade, not to protect its own borders from being invaded. with or without usfk in south korea, north korea can be paranoid about us invasion, but without usfk in south korea, their plans of dominating the south are much more likely to work.
Since ROK is now determined not to allow US intervention up north under almost any circumstance,
that’s not the read i got at all.
ROK will have to accept the added risk of having to repel any possible NorK attack by themselves, initially.
this is policy by giving just desserts to a minority of rabblerousers. and it ignores what the majority of the people want. the people have had enough of the roh amateur hour.
Surely the world??s tenth biggest economy can handle this additional burden.
again: 10,000-won bills and supyo make lousy flak jackets.
4) ?橫..does north korea simply want what??s best for the south???
Well, this non NE Asian isn??t qualified to say. Maybe many of them will in times to come, if US is gone and they begin to see things from a ??total Korean?? perspective.
that was a rhetorical question. it does not. it wants what it wants as a way of achieving its goals, one of which is domination of the korea peninsula.
5) ???? or does north korea actually think it has some sort of leg-up if the u.s. military leaves????
If ROK keeps the US alliance, and the US continues to give a nuclear guarantee to ROK from ?橫offshore??, maybe the Reunification ministry can work on getting NorK to see things more reasonably.
because korea has been so good at getting north korea to see things reasonably? paul, the reason why we call roh’s failed appeasement policy an ‘appeasement policy’ is that he’s not getting anything in return.
usfk withdrawal would simply embolden korea’s enemies, not just in korea but around the world, that they can manipulate democracies by trying to be the loudest voice so that the thoughts and opinions of the majority are drowned out.
I wouldn??t have taken this view about US withdrawal prior to DPRK obtaining nukes and the massive anti-American demonstrations in ROK.
so the the tens of thousands-strong pro-american demonstrations and the surveys showing most koreans support a u.s. presence mean nothing because you saw how good the leftist loonies are at mobilizing 1/1000th of the population?
But nukes in the hands of unstable regimes change everything. And the situation will become even worse for the US when Iran gets their nukes operational, which I now believe is inevitable in the next year or two.
so the answer is to bury one’s head in the sand?
I was about to answer Gerry when I read Nora’s response which seems just about right on. I’m wondering where that post came from Gerry? Why in the world would you think there would be chaos if Roh suddenly died?
candu wrote:
Kim Dae-jung is probably horrified at his successor??s handling of things - with the North, US, Japan, etc. He may have been a little to the left, but he understood the way the world works, unlike the president who seems to be listening exclusively to the unsophisticated and hardly cosmopolitan ??386?? boys he surrounds himself with??
thank you, candu. that is what i was trying to say.
now apologize, mingi, for making me defend kim daejung!
mingi wrote:
Nora, I believe the only pragmatic initiative Kim Dae Jung undertook was to try and improve relations with Japan.
this is one of the great things he did that stand out in sharp contrast with roh. kim daejung, i thought, was really trying to set korea on what he thought was the right course for the future, especially on something like this, and roh is just shitting all over it.
i hope the hannara party keeps it together and puts forward a pragmatic candidate who can undo the damage roh has done.
5029 is not obsolete, and President Bush knows of every OPLAN, although I doubt he memorizes each by number.
It would be unwise and foolish for CFC to not have a plan for this contingency given the current state of affairs in North Korea. To demand that CFC scrap the plan and its refinement is a political statement made without the consultation of military wisdom.
Yet another product of the unguided, spin-stabilized Roh-dong missile.
“A mistake in initial dispositions can seldom be put right.” –Helmuth von Moltke
Baduk:
Contingency plans are valuable for forcing military and political leaders to think through the inevitable assumptions that have to be made, about how to deal with what might happen in a future scenario. Reviewing the thinking about what might happen, and then seeing what resources are at hand for dealing with them, often reveals surprising truths.
Even if such plans are relatively passive and non-military. For example, does ROK have immediate and current access to thousands of tents, heaters, food, clothing, sanitary facilities for setting up refugee camps along the DMZ? If not, when will the funds be allocated and the supplies purchased? Were such stockpiles of supplies depleted to help Indonesia as aid during the recent tsunami? If so, what is the time schedule for having the depleted supplies replaced? What help can be expected (or will any be requested) from US? What about from Japan? Will the DPRK refugees be severely displeased if they have to shelter in Japanese tents and under Japanese blankets? If so, make sure “made in Japan” labels are obscured ahead of time. Etc etc….
Political leaders need to know the details ahead of time (if they can be made to take an interest), so they can be prevented from making fools of themselves to their publics (by making last-minute promises that it turns out they can’t deliver on).
Famous example, the French Prime Minister in May-June 1940 (after the German invasion of France was succeeding) calling on the US publicly to provide France with “clouds of airplanes”. Of course delivery and training under battle conditions would have been impossible, but the US was short of planes itself at this time, didn’t have them to send. The prime minister (Daladier?) should have known this and avoided making false promises to his desperately hopeful public.
Also, plans based on assumptions about what is likely to happen give a starting point for leaders to “pivot” from as events unfold, as long as the plans are actively reviewed and made a part of periodic “war games” by such leaders. No sports team goes on the field without detailed “play-making”, US football is the best example, often compared to war planning.
Don’t you feel better if you make a plan for something ahead of time? I don’t mean one where you just follow one pre-set course of action rigidly, but one where you make some assumptions about how things will occur at certain decision points, and then plan for multiple contingencies after such points.
If plans are consigned to dusty shelves then of course you’re right, it’s too late to learn them when the trouble starts and leaders just make it up as they go along. But I find it hard to believe that one should just shrug their shoulders and accept this as inevitable, seems like a formula for failure.
With the recent withdrawl of the infantry brigade from ROK to Iraq, the US has only one infantry battalion left in Korea anyway, not very much for moving into the North and occupying any amount of territory during a period of massive NorK instability. Anyway, the PRC would undoubtedly object to such a potential US ground presence in the north (IMO PRC would probably send in massive military ground formations first anyway, as they would be as terrified of loose nukes as anyone).
The potential contingency mission I imagine the US would desire to carry out in the North, in the event of such massive instability, would be numerous small raid-type operations to disable NorK nuclear weapons and/or missiles. US Special Operations Command forces from elsewhere would probably be used for these, not the conventional forces of 2nd ID, but such raids would have to have extensive ROK support, in terms of much prior joint planning with supplementary ROK special operations personnel, and prior consent by the ROK to use US and ROK military support facilities for staging such raids (ie airbases).
Nora: Since even joint planning for this now appears to be out of the question, it again evidently falls to me to ask why the US is obligated to remain on the ground in ROK and submit itself to the risk of absorbing the first blow, maybe even the first strike, of a nuclear war with DPRK. If ROK isn’t worried about planning jointly and continuously with the US for this, exactly why should the US be concerned about it, Nora? It’s hard to be “more catholic than the Pope”.
All I know is that everything work great on paper, but when you really want to carry them out nothing works.
The case in point is the special forces attack. Who is going to do the attack? What planes? Who supplies the troops?
By now, the U.S. 2nd division headquarter is moving to somewhere outside of Korea and it will be staffed by officers who have no idea where Osan is. They will have no real troops to command and the whole document is just a pipe dream with no real troops to back it up.
Things like OPLAN is what Korean military and the Korean president hates most. It is basically a bureaucratic routine with no real support. Nothing will work as things are written in OPLAN.
Bush knows about these plans? Give me a break. President Bush, when hearing that there is a riot in NK, will order troops to move in and seize the nuke weapon. Depending upon the relationship between the U.S. and China, he may order the U.S. troops to move up.
Flexibility, man. Flexibility! These stupid pieces of paper prevents from doing the right thing.
As the U.S. troops start moving into NK, SK communists and Rho may try to stop the troops by waving OPLAN 5029. You know what any red-blooded Americans will do.
paul h wrote:
Don??t you feel better if you make a plan for something ahead of time?
the roh government isn’t saying ‘let’s not plan ahead.’ they’re saying that in the event of instability in the north, but no attack on the south, it should be the south that goes up in there (under chungmu-9000, whatever that entails).
the un-command structure is such that an attack on south korea puts the entire cfc under u.s. command, but “The government found it difficult to accept the plan as it stipulates military actions under U.S. command in the event of internal crises in the North, not simply North Korean aggression against the country.”
you keep referring to an attack on u.s. forces, which is outside the scenario they’re talking about.
Nora: Since even joint planning for this now appears to be out of the question,
joing planning for how to deal with internal unrest in the north or a north attack on the south and/or u.s. forces? only the first one, not the second one. and i don’t know if ‘out of the question’ is a fair description anyway.
it again evidently falls to me to ask why the US is obligated to remain on the ground in ROK and submit itself to the risk of absorbing the first blow, maybe even the first strike, of a nuclear war with DPRK. If ROK isn??t worried about planning jointly and continuously with the US for this, exactly why should the US be concerned about it, Nora?
it appears you don’t see the deterrence value of the usfk presence, so we would be just talking back and forth if i answered this again.
but i want to point out that the shelved contingency plans are about dealing with north korean internal crises, not attack on south or u.s. (or japanese) forces.
i would only be playing devil’s advocate here, since i don’t completely agree with the roh administration, but (a) the south does have a contingency plan for stabilizing the north; and (b) u.s. involvement, in particular u.s. leading south korean forces into north korea, in a north korean crisis could trigger some unwanted reaction from china a la the 1890s.
in other words, the u.s. role is to defend south korea and japan (and its own interests in this part of the world), not to send in troops to stabilize a north korea that’s not attacking either.
in my own opinion, i think that roh is going about this the wrong way. if he is worried about china’s reaction in the event the u.s. goes into a crisis-ridden north korea, then he should still be making contigency plans with the u.s., but with plans that keep the u.s. out of the dprk completely or as much as possible.
Baduk, I don’t believe the Roh and DJ see eye to eye on the present state of things, from the Korean-American alliance to revived animosity with Japan to the balancer role Roh and his crew seem to imagine Korea is going to assume. He was picked by DJ as his successor, but I think Roh and his 386 gang are deviating a fair bit from the old Donggyo-dong faction flight plan.
DJ attempted to improve relations with the Japanese and not focus so much on colonial history, he never spoke so blantantly of the possibility of maintaining neutrality in the event of a possible conflict with the north, and has argued just recently for a continued and strong alliance with the States, and to a lesser extent, the Japanese.
For a guy who really suffered under the military dictatorships here - kidnappings, stolen elections, exiles, beatings, attempted murder, and a death sentence - he didn’t seem as eager to start up a retaliatory, idealogical witch hunt, under the guise of national healing as the present guy is.
He certainly viewed increased Korean autonomy from US policy favorably - as I think ultimately most Koreans do - but as something to be done gradually - and as Nora has stressed - pragmatically.
Also, one might argue that DJ had - and still has - a sense of diplomacy, not to mention a clue about the big picture. There were some pretty harsh anti-US protests on DJ’s watch, but when you have an election to win it tends to take priority, regardless of what party you belong to.
Finally, while I’m not a huge fan of the sunshine policy - though perhaps would be more so if the principles of transparency and reciprocity were followed by the other guys - by no means do I think DJ or Roh are “commies” because they might have some left-leaning tendencies.
Baduk,
I agree wholeheartedly that no plan survives contact with the enemy; seldom has an operational campaign gone entirely according to plan. However, ruthless execution can make even the poorest plan succeed, but you must have a plan.
The battlefield calculus of logistics and intelligence preparation that goes into an OPLAN is like studying for an essay exam. You don’t know what questions will be asked, so you must prepare for each one. The science of war in the OPLAN will not change; the art of war lies in the execution and is up to the genius (or lack thereof) of our generals and field grades.
Listen to Paul H.
I was commenting on the inefficacy of such plans. Since this is just a pipe dream anyway, there is no reason to argue about it and waste time.
As you know, the Korean war happened because the infamous Atchison plan(another piece of useless document) was made public. This piece of paper, which basically declared that the U.S. will not defend SK, resulted in Korean war and killed many Koreans and Americans.
Therefore, all the military types, including moi, will agree that there is ABSOLUTELY NO need to make it public. It only helps NK and China to figure out possible attack scenarios. You have to keep the enemy in dark; don’t let them know what you are thinking.
Rho obviously is doing this to embarass the U.S. troops in Korea. He and DJ were for the “complete withdrawal of the U.S. troops from SK”. Yes, they are and I call them Commies.
Let me tell you about what kind of man DJ is. He was the leading opposition for the military dictatorship. DJ made many speeches and made himself out to be the champion of anti-military movement. Students were protesting against president Noh commiting public suicide by pouring gasoline and burning themselves to death. Meanwhile, our Sensei DJ flies to Beijing and takes the significant amount of bribe from president Noh. In other words, DJ played both sides.
DJ is behind the every move Rho makes. These two will take Korea from a friend of the U.S. to an enemy of the U.S. They will not stop until all U.S. troops leave Korea and Korea becomes a part of China. They are Commies and the enemy of true Korean patriots.
Rho and DJ are selling Korea to the Chinese.
And, why is Rho starting OPLAN debate now?
Because they want Koreans to hate Americans, not the Japanese. When Koreans hate the Japanese as it is going on right now, Koreans stop hating Americans. That is the problem for Rho administration; Koreans can hate only one country at a time.
Rho and his cronies want to bring Koreans back to “Hate-America” mode. Therefore, they leaked the OPLAN. To get Koreans back to summer rallies against Americans, not the Japanese.
And, about OPLAN leaking.. Isn’t that document a top secret item? The U.S. government should protest against Rho-nies about leaking a top secret document between two countries. The document basically is a top secret document for the U.S. as well. I am sure Bush can demand strong apology from pres. Rho.
Nora: I’ll try to explain my viewpoint froma another angle.
In the inevitable crisis that will come eventually in the North, besides the two or more sides in DPRK that might be struggling with each other up there, there will also be a “struggle” (as the Communist theory of history might put it) for the the body of public opinions of ROK and USA.
Climactic events have the potential to make these opinions shift in an instant, and not necessarily in the same direction; what the ROK public perceives as good for Korea (both parts of it!) will not not necessarily be the same as what US public does. ROK has opened up this potential divide, by its attempts to “triangulate” between the North and the US, in the mistaken hope of impressing the North toward moderation. (Not entirely ROK public’s fault, I think they had false hopes raised by the Clinton administration’s foolish-in-the-extreme policies toward the North, particularly in his second term).
This fact about public opinion holds true regardless of the twists and turns of domestic politics in both countries. For myself, I leave out any attempts at analyzing or opinionating on ROK domestic politics, though I try to follow it with interest here in order to be at least basically knowledgeable. In particular, I avoid criticism of ROK leaders since I am convinced they are properly and democratically elected, and therefore represent the wishes of the ROK electorate.
The one thing that will shift American public opinion dramatically is a threat against their soldiers; or perhaps I should say, a sudden renewed awareness of a threat that already exists but is suddenly accentuated.
In this hyper-inflated age of 24 hour media, such a renewesd awareness of the threat could change US public opinion overnite. Right now people like me in the US (non-Korean ethnicity, not married to a Korean, never been to Korea — but who actually take an interest in the affairs of the peninsula) are a tiny minority. I assure you though (IMO) that this will change in a hurry if there is a crisis up north, and I think such a crisis is inevitable.
And if the ROK public opinion does not change to mirror that of the US public, then the situation will become extremely dangerous, particularly if the struggle for power in the North is prolonged to the point of civil war and one of the factions in the north miscalculates.
The PRC public opinion matters as well, but it is subject to extreme manipulation by the Communist government (not total anymore in the age of the internet). Japan’s public opinion is also a democratic one, and it matters too, particularly as Japan begins to rearm itself with offensive precision conventional weapons that have the potential to attack nuclear weapons sites (known or suspected) in the North.
(So since ROK has got Dokto now, and Japan really isn’t likely to take it away, why not just keep quiet about it and avoid antagonizing them about something that isn’t likely to change? Never mind answering, just a rhetorical question, I don’t really expect anyone to listen to my advice on this).
I assure you (again, IMO) that if US ground forces are gone from ROK, there will be much less likelihood of a split between ROK and US public opinion in a crisis. The US will be more than happy to let ROK policymakers take the lead as to any potential intervention in DPRK, particularly if US and Japan have ballistic anti-missile defenses operational to protect their territory and bases. Everyone ought to pray every day for this to happen as fast as possible.
It seems clear to me that ROK is not really worried about a DPRK 1950-style invasion of the South; Korean public opinion just doesn’t think this will happen anymore. Thus, the potential for a split between US and ROK public opinion. If the US becomes alarmed about the safety of their troops there, and the ROK is saying “No, nothing can be done preemptively because the consequences would hurt Koreans north and south” — then the current fissure in the alliance will become an open split, and very quickly.
And it will break wide open if Americans die and ROK refuses to assist US in a retaliation.
This seems to me to be a highly possible outcome, if not probable. It could be avoided, and the alliance preserved, if US troops are “out of the middle”. I’m not saying that US should not help ROK in a war situation, but simply that such help should be rendered from offshore.
ROK should carry the entire burden of their own ground defense; if this becomes the case, then ROK can call all the shots as to alliance actions vs DPRK, in all potential situations.
This seems only fair. Americans will be happy to come under military control of ROK in the event of a conflict; just have ROK leaders tell us what targets to hit with air and naval power, and with what types of weapons. Aviators get extra pay to take those kind of risks.
US Army and Marines can deploy into the south from offshore to reinforce, if a war is prolonged (extremely unlikely in this day and age, worldwide pressure to stop a conflict quickly would be enormous).
Nora, are you saying I’m wrong in my reading of ROK public opinion (both current and potential), and that young Koreans everywhere are reawakening to the Communist threat and are now determined to allow no separation between the ROK and the US? That’s not the sense I’m getting from this blog - at all.
In particular, I avoid criticism of ROK leaders since I am convinced they are properly and democratically elected, and therefore represent the wishes of the ROK electorate.
well there’s your problem right there. rok presidents are not elected by majority. i don’t think any ‘democratically elected’ president has had much over 40%, which means opponents outnumber proponents by three to two.
it also means that appealing to regionalistic or sensationalist viewpoints can get someone elected. in short, roh’s actions most definitely do not represent the wishes of a majority of the rok electorate. public opinion surveys show that.
And it will break wide open if Americans die and ROK refuses to assist US in a retaliation.
again, i think you’re making leaps (like this) about what it is they are talking about. these are not decisions to not have a plan in case of attack. it’s about civil unrest. if americans or the south are attacked, the plans are on the table — regardless of oplan — to do something about it.
Paul,
“Americans will be happy to come under military control of ROK in the event of a conflict”? I am sure you are not a military man. This is a fiction.
You, like Rho-nies, want to see the U.S. troops out of Korea. Well, it is happening; “??8??? 17????????? ????? ??????(The U.S. eigth army 17th Airattack division moved out)” was in today’s Donga newspaper. It has been going on last five years.
Systematic troop withdrawal. However, neither Korean government nor the U.S. wants to let Korean public know. I believe the size of true withdrawal is much larger than what is leaked to the newspapers.
The reason that the U.S. does not make this public is that such announcement will surely bring changes in NK and China. NK may start a war. China will start ordering Korea around.
Once out, you are out. The U.S. will lose Korea to China.
Koreans so far have a great track record. Koreans fought side by side with the U.S. troops in stopping the spread of Communism during Korean War in 50’s.
Koreans again fought side by side with American soldiers in VietNam stopping whatever..in 70’s.
Koreans are again fighting side by side with the U.S. troops in Iraq in 2005. The Korea-U.S. relationship is a great success story for both countries. Korea should stay as “subcontractor” for the U.S.
Japan wants to take this title of “subcontractor for the U.S.” but Japan has problems. Its army is not big and strong enough to fill this role and more importantly it has bad relationship with China. Having Japan as the subcontractor will surely bring America to the fighting path with China. America does not want that. Therefore, Korea-U.S. relationship should stay strong as it has been and this will work out great for both countries.
Now, blinded by Commie propaganda, Rho-nies want to steer the country out of this position to be an independent company. However, Korea does not have resources to be an independent company. Surrounded by three big corporations in the area, Korea will soon go under or be overtaken by one of these corporations.
Korea has flourished under the U.S. and it has to stay in the same position. Going independent at this difficult business environment will surely ruin Korea and result in many lives lost.
Korea, stay where you are. Things could go bad really quick when you start working for the Chinese.
Is there anything in “Chungmu 9000″ that addresses Chinese troops massing along the North Korean border to create a “Koguryo Autonomous Zone?”
toolboy,
Don’t bother. “Chungmu 9000″, “OPLAN 5029″..They are not even worth the paper that is written to. These are just pastimes for officers who have desk job, to justify their salary.
Nothing will go as it is written on those stupid instructions.
When something worthwile happens, Bush will convine National security committee meeting in the White House and issue an order that is appropriate at the time. At that time! No OPLAN bul***.
The same thing happens in the Blue House.
Leaking these plans does nothing but embarrasses the U.S. government. That is what Rho-Commies want. And, that is what is happening.
Anonymous,
I agree KDJ had done somethings right.
However, you cannot deny that he put the country to the left, I mean, toward Communist side. You CANNOT deny that.
Even though he said “the U.S. is stablizing Korea…”, he and his people did everythign to encourage communists to speak out against the U.S. and helped spread NK propaganda against the U.S.
Can you deny that?
Rho, who is a loyal lietenant of KDJ, is just continuing this anti-American theme. And, I do call these people Commies; their final aim to sell out Korea to the Chinese. Nothing else!
Many Korean people, including church people and professional people like Cho GabJe, are worried about the direction Korea is heading. We see DANGER signs. We see Koreans dying in near future not for Korea but for Kim Jongil or for Chairman Hu.
This grassroot resistance will continue till Rho and DJ are placed under arrest for selling out the country!
Baduk, I think you are blowing DJ’s supposed anti-Americanism out of proportion. The US saved his ass - from being murdered by the KCIA in the 70s after his kidnapping in Japan and in convincing the Chun Doo-Hwan regime to spare his life and let him go into exile in the States in the early 80s - and he has spoken openly and often about his appreciation to the US.
Roh Moo-Hyun didn’t have such experience, nor much experience at all internationally. This is a big difference between the 386 crew and the Donggyo Dong crew. The former group’s world view is shaped by student politics of the 80s, while the latter experienced the war and actually had a clue about life outside the ROK.
I don’t think DJ spread communist propaganda against the US as you claim. Having differences with the US - especially the Bush Administration - doesn’t make one a communist. Seeking more national autonomy and development as a nation does not equal “Juche” philosophy or anything. If you listen to what DJ has said and is saying these days, it is clear he believes it is not in Korea’s interest to pursue Roh’s fantasy of a balancer role.
Roh Mu Hyun does it again and throws more cold water onto the rapidly freezing alliance between S.Korea and the US.
In Istanbul, he chastized some Koreans “who were more America friendly, than Americans themselves”. He basically said Koreans should act like Koreans, cause they’re not Americans. Well… why would the president say such things that will obviously alienate the US further?
One more thing, he looks ridiculous with this new eye job. Maybe he should act like a Korean, rather than wanting to look like a white person.
Sawhadong, what does the USA get out of this deal? I have educated you abuot a few things, now its your turn to contribute. Can you give me a list of things that the USA gets by defending koreas bacon? Noradong, you are free to submit your list too.
My list of what the USA gets from from Korea.
1) GIs get bar trash
2) Noradong types (watch your back)
Bye the way, this is not a request for a “thank you”, its a serous request for a list of the things that the usa gets by having troops in korea.
Shazzam - The US gets a forward position to check China’s influence.
jtb, why do you want the troops to stay until you can get them green cards?
Paul H., I’m sure enough soju may make you think like a Korean, and can be used as a defense in Korean court. On the other hand, I find that with soju it is very difficult to feel how much is too much, so I’ve had to quit altogether. Perhaps that is why my thinking is not up to par with these Korean political strategists.
Baduk…your comment #37 is a bit of an oversimplification. Too much of one, I think. You said:
“As you know, the Korean war happened because the infamous Atchison plan(another piece of useless document) was made public. This piece of paper, which basically declared that the U.S. will not defend SK, resulted in Korean war and killed many Koreans and Americans.”
There are many people that post on here that clearly know history (especially Korean history) better than I but since no one else seems to have challenged your assertion, I will. Most historians agree that 4 major things set things in motion for the Korean War….not just one.
They were (1) Mao Zedong’s Communist Revolution was victorious over Chiang Kai-Shek’s government. The People’s Republic of China was born. (October 1st, 1949) (2)The Soviet Union had successfully detonated their first A-Bomb, which would give Stalin a balance of power if America decided to get involved. (late 1949) and (3) America had withdrawn their combat forces from the penninsula (to Japan/June 29, 1949) and (4) Dean Acheson, the U.S. Secretary of State, made a famous speach to the National Press Club (in January 1950) about America’s “defensive perimeter”. It did not include Korea. He seemed to be saying America would not come to South Korea’s aid if there was a war.
So, yes, Dean Acheson’s speech to the National Press Club gave the wrong signal especially considering U.S. troops had already been withdrawn to Japan BUT those other factors are HUGE. And if both of those hadn’t occured it’s extremely unlikely the North would have been able to invade. “Soviet archives recently made available to historians clearly show that in March, August, and September 1949 and January 1950 Kim IL Sung implored Stalin repeatedly to authorize an invasion of the South. On at least two occasions in 1949, Stalin turned down Kim’s request, but the documents establish that in early 1950 he approved the war plan due to the ‘changed international situation’.” (The Two Koreas by Dan Oberdorfer)
Please don’t oversimplify the entire Korean War just to rationalize your argument that contingency plans shouldn’t be made. I think Paul H. made some really great example of why they do need to be made in advance (in post #32).
oops….”I think Paul H. gave some really great examples of why they do need to be made in advance (in post #32).”
Mingi is right about the time frame of the anti-American protests. They got into full swing in the Fall…October, even November. Just before the elections. I remember because that November was my worst time in Korea…I was ready to leave. Two times people tried started fights with me in bars…simply because they found out I was American. Thankfully, I had more sensible Korean friends that reminded me of all the reasons I had to stay…(them.)
Geronimo, I actually met a Canadian guy who was beaten up in Hong-dae. They mistook him for an American. Funny thing is, they’ll never kick my ass, because South Koreans refuse to recognize the fact that I’m American, based on the fact that I look more like Andre Kim than Brook Shields.
Geronimo,
Thank you for providing more insight into Korean history. I knew all other facts but item (4) enlightened me a great deal. I wrongly assumed that there was a document called Acheson doctrine. Good to learn new facts.
Of course, the history ,even that of a small country like Korea, cannot be seen from only one direction. Depending on the angle and the popularity of that angle, any one of the four factors you mentioned or the combination of all four as you suggested can be called the “cause” of Korean war.
Or, it just could be just one factor. Evil ambition of Kim Il Sung which caused so much destruction and bloodshed of Koreans, Americans, the Chinese and various other people who came as UN soldiers. Without Kim, there would have been no war.
Coming back to Acheson, I think his speech was unnecessary and premature. The precisely same errors are being committed by Pres. Rho. He is saying many things that are unnecesary and premature, ie he is jumping the gun.
For example, he is making it clear that Korea would not support the U.S. when she fights China to defend Taiwan. This is a way too premature. This bridge will be crossed by Korea when it comes to it. This is not the time to distance the U.S.
I do not agree with Rho-Commie but making that type of stupid remark is his prerogative and since many Koreans are quiet about it as if to agree(the same people later would say they never agreed with Rho), I as KA will take it as is. But, I cannot help but thinking Rho-Commie is stupid as Acheson was in 1950.
I think it is commical that the people in Washington have actually planned to car-jack the Armed forces of SOuth Korea in the even of significant change in NK. That is just bad form to car-jack the armed forces of another country. Isn’t that similar to planning to loot the local gun shop in case of social unrest-to keep the peace or at least keep the looters out of your house. More commical than that tough is the idea that the unification ministry and his his men would be in any sort of position to do anything-absolute nonesense. I think the US recognizes the fact that there would be a need for very quick reaction to keep the Chinese out and to catch any WMD that the Bush administration has, so far, been incapable of dealing with. Seoul would not be able to move in that way-as much as it would like the bragging rights of being able to claim sole victory over NK.
Hypothetically, of NK were to collapse, I do not supppose that realestate would automatically become property of SK? I think that is what we would all like but what is the majority policy that most countries have? to recognize 2 separate Koreas? Or only 1 Korea? The natural argument I would want to make is for the US to take the property in trust (perhaps in the name of the UN) until SK is ready to maintain order. The troops could come from Okinawa instead of SK…
In Istanbul, he chastized some Koreans ?橫who were more America friendly, than Americans themselves??. He basically said Koreans should act like Koreans, cause they??re not Americans. Well??? why would the president say such things that will obviously alienate the US further?
This is why many people familiar with Korea and Koreans have serious doubts about the loyalty of overseas Koreans that have been granted citizenship in their new countries. Even the president of Korea encourages loyalty based on ethnicity.
And for all those kyopos and Koreans who blast non-Koreans for noting that Koreans seem especially susceptible to groupthink and orthodoxy of belief, bite your tongue and reflect upon President Roh’s acknowledgement of just that: there is very definitely a set “Korean way” to think and act.
I hope President Roh’s comments above are picked up and spread widely in the U.S.
As I understand the situation.
U.S. Forces are on the Korean Peninsula under a U.N. mandate. Their mission