And just to show that concern about South Korean public opinion is a bipartisan thing:
Former U.S. First Lady Hillary Clinton said “historical amnesia” among South Koreans about the important role the United States has played in supporting the country’s development is putting strain on their longstanding military alliance.
Clinton, a Democratic senator for New York, made the comment on Tuesday during a Senate Armed Services Committee confirmation hearing for new appointees, including Gen. Burwell B. Bell, who is nominated to take over as commander of the U.S. Forces Korea (USFK).
Addressing recent signs of divergence between the wartime allies, Clinton said the relationship between the United States and South Korea is at a “critical juncture.”
She argued that the strain in their relationship is due partly to a shift in South Koreans’ “understanding of the importance of our position there and what we have done over so many decades to provide them the freedom that they have enjoyed to develop the economy that is now providing so many benefits for South Koreans.”
“I think there is a lack of understanding and a sense of historical amnesia,” Clinton told the hearing. She said both countries should seek to understand each other and recognize the importance of their alliance.
Personally, I don’t think the “historical amnesia” is quite as important as the refusal on the part of some in the United States to realize that as South Korea grows and becomes less dependent on its Cold War patron, it may begin defining its national interests in ways than don’t necessarily coincide with Washington’s.
24 Comments
Korea’s national interests always coincide with Washington’s.
Cold War is over but Korea is again in the middle of the power struggle between Japan and China. NK, an underling of China, has been spending a lot of money in the SK to grow “China-backers”, a.k.a pro-North politicians.
Korea, if left alone, will slowly drift toward joining this barbaric Chinese empire, with total loss of its present freedom and advantages. It will be under NK-like Communist dictatorship. That is what China wants.
America is the only friend that has consistently helped Korea, but now these pro-North sympathizers are coming out of woodworks to destroy all advancements made by this war-torn country through the help of the US.
It is time for patriotic Koreans like me to turn the country toward the right direction. Korea must wake up from this amnesia. Or, it would regress back into the poor and uneducated country it once was. Under China, it will time travel back to 1940’s. Just look at NK.
The Uri party has consistently weakened the Korea-US frienship to the point that even Hillary wants to use this as the excuse to sever the tie.
Korea is in dangerous situation as she aptly described. If Korea does not radically change its present course of joining the Chinese camp, Korea will soon plunge into poverty and slavery, which she historically is so familiar with.
The point of no return is quickly approaching. The Uri politicians are getting bold everyday. Their pro-North(pro-China)actions are undermining the very fabric of Korean democracy. Korean rightwingers must retake the power soon.
Luckily (through God’s providence) Korea is turning toward the right direction. This morning, all four election results showed Hannara’s complete victory! Four out of four.
If the presidential election were held today, the Uri party will be lucky to get 10% of votes. The Uri party that has been blatantly pro-North has lost touch with the common people of Korea.
Their 1960’s ideology, pro-Communism, just doesn’t have legs to stand on in 2005. These stupid college dropouts must go!
The well-educated and productive Koreans are taking back the government from these f***ing student radicals.
Personally, I don?t think the ?historical amnesia?? is quite as important as the refusal on the part of some in the United States to realize that as South Korea grows and becomes less dependent on its Cold War patron, it may begin defining its national interests in ways than don?t necessarily coincide with Washington?s.
The problem, from Washington’s perspective, is not that South Korea “defin[es] its national interests in ways than don?t necessarily coincide with Washington?s,” but that it wishes to pursue these changed interests while simultaneously receiving U.S. military protection and an annual defense subsidy of $15 billion`. It is the duty of America’s leaders to allocate limited military and economic resources so that they support U.S. interests. The more the interests of another nation differ from those of the United States, the less justification exists to allocate U.S. resources to support that other nation’s differing interests, particularly when the other nation is relatively wealthy.
It’s also charitable in the extreme to characterize South Korea’s anti-Americanism, most of which is visceral, emotional, and fundamentally illogical, as a redefinition of its national interests (thus imputing logic to it).
True alliances are voluntary and mutual contracts. I have yet to hear a serious American suggestion that South Korea lacks the right to set its own independent policy. South Korea has the freedom–one exercised all too often–to publicly differ from U.S. policy, or even to renegotiate or end the alliance. The converse is true for the United States. Public differences and renegotiation of the contractual terms are not exclusive South Korean rights.
Alliances are based on agreed interests, not unilateral delusions of entitlement.
(my full response with hyperlinks)
“Personally, I don?t think the ?historical amnesia?? is quite as important as the refusal on the part of some in the United States to realize that as South Korea grows and becomes less dependent on its Cold War patron, it may begin defining its national interests in ways than don?t necessarily coincide with Washington?s.”
I see your point marmot. To a degree some of the problems in the relationship between the US and SK are due to SK’s growth and different interests, and the U.S. not recognizing it as fast as it should.
But one cannot discount this historical amnesia and its strain on the relationship. It might be nice for Korean pride to blame many of Korea’s ills on the U.S. It might be nice for Korean pride to not recognize the U.S. contribution to SK and claim they would have reached the same level of development and freedom without the US. But it affects SK’s view of the U.S. and thus relations with the U.S. If SK honestly believes the US goal was to divide Korea and is the continued goal to keep it divided, it will affect the relationship. Or that certain US generals with statues in SK wanted to pillage Seoul. Not to mention this amnesia seems ungrateful to the US for its large contribution to SK freedom and prosperity, thus hurting US pride and straining the relationship.
I for one am happy that some politicians in the US are realizing this strain. On America’s part, it will help America adapt to the Korea of today and not the Korea of 30 years ago. It will also help to let Korea know that if they continue this amnesia and to bad mouth America at will, there will be consequences and that will indeed affect the relationship for the worse.
I think the U.S. is slowly taking steps to recognize Korea’s divergent interests and is working to focus on what the two have in common to keep the relationship. I can’t say I see Korea taking any steps to refute some revisionist history and are actually perpetuating it. This is straining the relationship.
1) ?…as South Korea grows and becomes less dependent on its Cold War patron, it may begin defining its national interests in ways than don?t necessarily coincide with Washington?s.??
Great news — as long as the “redefinition” includes the ROK assuming the entire burden of its own ground defense (insofar as ROK voters believe such a defense remains necessary).
2) From 1st post above by Baduk:
“It is time for patriotic Koreans like me to turn the country toward the right direction.”
Baduk, I’m rubbing my eyes in disbelief. Don’t I remember you telling us you are a US citizen? And waxing rhapsodic in an earlier thread about the achievements of the previous Clinton administration?
“No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other.” Luke 16:13
Ok, I admit that I love both Korea and America. And, when the push comes to shove, I will take arms against Koreans. So, don’t worry.
It is not logical to assume that I am an automatic trator because I love Korea as well as America. Many ItalianAmericans, ChechAmericans, RussianAmericans, Japanese Americans, IrishAmericans, let alone Jews…get the picture? If I am allowed, I like to hold dual citizenships, both Korean and American.
However, we KoreanAmericans rather want to move Korea toward the right direction before the accidents happen. You see, a very few(1%?) Koreans are truly anti-Ameican. Most Koreans do not want to see Korea going against the US. When Americans like yourself realize where Korea is politically, it will help our cause tremendously. Hilary obviously made her assessment based on wrong information.
Do not throw away the baby with the bath water! Remember that it is easy to say “Goodbye” but very difficult to say “Hello” to someone who you have just left.
So, stop insisting on the US pulling out of Korea. If it happens, the US may save some money but it just added a new and powerful enemy to its list of enemies, because Korea will jump right into the arms of China. Koreans may become China’s front troop. NK and SK together may threaten the US.
Don’t be penny-wise and pound-foolish.
Other countries have suffered amnesia as well…sometimes it just takes a good solid bump on the head to make people remember.
It seems Korea is overdue for another bump on the head.
Both the Marmot and Hillary are off the mark on this one.
Hillary’s mistake - “historical amnesia” is neither historical (even current events are burried to suit national/racial consciousness), nor amnesia (grudges are never forgotten and new revisionist theories are long remembered). A more proper term might be “revisionist reactionary ethnocentrism”.
Marmot’s mistake - “Korea defending its ‘national interests’ is neither “national” (it’s race-consciousness) nor self “interest” (its self-destructive). A more proper term would be “Native wanna-be kissing Korean ass.”
Seriously, what has it got to do with Korea’s national interests when the nation that liberates, defends, bankrolls, educates and even raises its orphans is defamed and provoked to the extent that it begins to withdraw its support and economic progress begins to stall?
What you call “defending Korea’s “national interests” is simply competing groups in society seeking their own vested interests at the expense of one another and of national interests. Even kimhchi is inetible because of the perpetration of corruption that prevents inspection, while imports of the best beef in the world from the U.S. is banned for “safety reasons.”
Yes, historical amnesia applies when it comes to America, along with a good dose of historical revisionism. And no, it’s not driven by national interests but bigotry and racial insecurity.
Glad to have straightened this out.
baduk, I am going to have to argue about your statement:
“However, we KoreanAmericans rather want to move Korea toward the right direction before the accidents happen. You see, a very few(1%?) Koreans are truly anti-Ameican. Most Koreans do not want to see Korea going against the US.”
I have been teaching at a foreign language public high school in Jeollanam-do (South Cholla) now for 4 years, and I can tell you, 90% of the teachers as well as the students (therefore their parents) think that Prof. Kang is heroic for standing up against the US. I know this because I have asked them! They firmly believe that the US is responsible for the Korean War, the history books that my students use in their history class states that the US started the war, my students have shown this to me!
Kim Il-sung did his job well. His infiltrators in the 1970’s and 80’s came down, enroled in the universities, became teachers, and then they became the teachers’ teachers. North Korea has a very, very firm grasp on the educators in South Korea. The ideological change in South Korea has been a slow one, carefully planned, and insidious. And it has worked.
South Korea has now become a no-win situation for the Yanks, and they need to take their bat and ball (troops and money) and go home. The game has been rained out.
Gillian,
Just wait two years. When new administration comes in, you will be surprised at the speed of change. Korean people change very fast. When they see that it is not fashionable to be pro-North, they will sing a totally different tune, right away. I am even afraid that they become too pro-America to the extent of taking some bad cultures(gang violence, drug usage, sexism, disrespect for the old) into Korea.
In any case, you will see the overnight change. It is already taking place: See today’s election results.
baduk,
I would like to think you are correct, but I suspect I will win this one. The infiltration has been much too successful. As for your fear of Korea importing American bad habits, hum.
1) Gangs are rife in Korea, down through even the elementary schools. However, this was not an American import, more to the point, Asia exported their unique gang culture to America.
2) There has always been a drug culture in Korea, remember “hemp”?? And opium? It has only been in recent years that these have been illegal. The lovely tree-covered mountains are filled with meth labs, as well as marajuana farms. Not to mention the stuff that is smuggled in from N Korea via China. The USFK GIs get their pot from the locals, for pity sake. And alcoholism is a problem beyond imagination here.
3) Sexism?? You must be joking. Korea is one of the most sexist countries I have ever seen! Gads.
4) Disrespect for the old. Yes, this one is tragic. My area of Korea, Naju, is filled with the elderly, and they command about as much respect as a slug. I am usually the ONLY person who offers my seat on the bus to them. I am the ONLY person who has physically gone down the steps of the bus to assist a eollmone lift her bundle onto the bus, and I am the ONLY person I have seen yell back at the bus driver when HE would start to yell at the poor little peanut-sized woman for being slow.
Marmot: “Personally, I don?t think the ?historical amnesia?? is quite as important as the refusal on the part of some in the United States to realize that as South Korea grows and becomes less dependent on its Cold War patron, it may begin defining its national interests in ways than don?t necessarily coincide with Washington?s.”
Who in the US is refusing what, Marmot? And does redefining one’s national interests mean that one must also redefine history, including changing one’s position on who started the Korean War?
The problem in Korea is not that the US is refusing anything; the problem is that Koreans are confused about which direction they want to go. If you ask me, the US has been too patient with Korea and too accommodating because it has led to a “give-em-an-inch-and-they’ll-take-a-mile” situation. Diplomacy is supposed to be a 2-way street, but the US has allowed Korea to occupy seven lanes while she takes only one.
The US could learn a few things from China, who puts her foot down when Korea start trying to take over more than her fair share of the road. For example, it did not take China long to respond to Korea’s tactic of correcting trade imbalances by scaring Koreans away from Chinese fish and kimchi.
If you ask me, Hillary seems to have a better grasp of the situation in Korea than you do, Marmot.
I think Baduk makes a good point in Post #10. Koreans seem to change direction very quickly. If the Chinese are marching through their streets, they wave Chinese flags, but if Americans are marching through their streets, they wave American.
The main reason Koreans have been waving Chinese and North Korean flags over the past few years is that they have seen China and North Korea as bigger threats than the US. However, now that the US is starting to show impatience with Korea, it will not be long before Koreans once again start waving American flags.
Personally, I don?t think the ?historical amnesia?? is quite as important as the refusal on the part of some in the United States to realize that as South Korea grows and becomes less dependent on its Cold War patron, it may begin defining its national interests in ways than don?t necessarily coincide with Washington?s.
True enough. But then South Korea ought not to cavil about the United States taking a cold look at the United States’ national interests. Which, I might add, don’t include Korea except for the reason “just because Korea has always been a national interest of the United States.” There’s no there, there.
The Marmot knows who pays the bills.
Baduk, in #6: “…And, when the push comes to shove, I will take arms against Koreans. So, don?t worry….It is not logical to assume that I am an automatic trator because I love Korea as well as America.”
That’s the last thing I would ever assume, Baduk. I’m just trying to point out that it’s the ROK that has a problem, not the US (IMHO of course). For myself I’m not at all anxious for the US to take up arms against any Koreans north or south (I find it interesting that you didn’t distinguish in the quote above between North and South, or between “commies” and “anti-communists”).
Since your mention of Providence has got me in a Biblical mood, perhaps this quote is more to the point:
“Forsake not an old friend; for the new is not comparable to him: a new friend is as new wine; when it is old, thou shalt drink it with pleasure.”
Ecclesiasticus 9:10
The question today for the voters of the ROK:
between the US and the DPRK, who is the old friend who is the new? Quite a dilemma all right.
“Korea?s tactic of correcting trade imbalances by scaring Koreans away from Chinese fish and kimchi.”
This part is wrong I believe. There really is a crisis with food labeling, food safety and food inspection in S. Korea where the entire system is about to collapse due to woefully underfunded and undermanned government department. That’s why one day they come up with a study that says one thing, but then next day they say the completely different thing - a sign of disarray and confusion that spreads and exasperates consumer doubt and fear. There was even a sudden death of one overworked civil worker handling the food crisis - he litterally dropped dead from exhaustion.
China itself is well known to extremely dangerous levels of poor food safety beyond just problems with food hygene . Babies have died because of fake milk formulas. People have died drinking fake alcohol. People have died from eating poisoned dumplings. SARS and bird flu (all directly related to livestock and meat hygene) came from China but the Chinese government kept them hushed up until it spread beyond control. And It’s not some cheap tactic to trade barrier.
I’m just repeating what the Korean media is saying with the following.
The only reason why countries like Japan and the US don’t have these kinds of problems with Chinese food imports is that these countries have very stringent food inspection, handling, quality, and safety requirements. Korea, on the other hand, do not. Not only that, Korean greed makes Korean food importers to do business only with Chinese suppliers who only look for cheapest of the cheapest Chinese products - damned the quality and damned the safety. Plus, Japanese and Americans have strict guidelines that Chinese firms must abide by. There are no such guidelines that Korea has given to Chinese firms. The outcome is the predictable and the inevitable.
.
And all this isn’t helped by the fact that about 60% of all vegetables consumed by Korea comes from China. There is no such thing as a “Korean kimchi”. If the cabbage didn’t come from China, the garlic, the chillie powder, or the some of the other 20 ingredients that’s needed to form the batch of kimchi would have come from China.
Gillian, I respect your authentic Korean experiences while teaching in a provincial high school, but I beg to differ that Korean high school textbooks teach that the US started the Korean War. I have right in front of me a 2005 high school Korean history textbook. On page 351, it describes very clearly how Kim Il-Sung set up a government in the north and then made provisions for war before launching an attack on June 25, 1950 to bring the south under the authority of the north’s Communist party. In this section, there is very little information about American participation; rather, the text focuses on the role of former president Rhee Syngman.
I’m not characterizing the nonsense spouted by some on the radical South Korean left as a “redefinition of Korea’s national interests.” And if anyone thinks I am encouraging the United States to continue to offer its protective services to South Korea while Seoul undermines U.S. foreign policy initiatives in the region, let me state categorically that I believe U.S. ground forces should be withdrawn and the alliance redefined to reflect the changes in the interests/capabilities of the parties involved.
That having been said, the decision whether to stick a fork in the alliance, so to speak, needs to be made with a cool-headed realism, not because so-and-so said a statue of such-and-such should be pulled down or because Korean college kids say stupid things about the United States. Yes, Sen. Clinton is right when she says many South Koreans suffer from “historical amnesia,” but that’s neither here nor there. You don’t make foreign policy decisions based on your partner’s interpretation of the history of the bilateral relationship. You make them based on what’s in your national interests. Yes, anti-Americanism in Korea annoys me. But frankly, Koreans could be in the street waving American flags and whistling “God Bless America” out their assholes and I’d still be calling for U.S. troops to come home. What gets me about Sen. Clinton’s statement is she says the alliance is in trouble, but then she goes and cites “historical amnesia” on the part of Koreans. I’m sorry, but rather than talk about all the great things the U.S. has done for Korea in the past (great arguments for why the alliance WAS necessary, emphasis on the past tense), she needs to explain — both to Koreans and the U.S. public — why the U.S. alliance is so crucial to both parties in the here and NOW. Telling the Korean public it should play along with U.S. policy initiatives vis-a-vis China, for instance, because Washington saved South Korea during the Korean War and played an instrumental role in its socio-economic development is just not going to fly anymore. And to be honest, I have no idea how the U.S. public accepts Washington subsidizing South Korea’s defense when Seoul is more than capable of defending itself and the nation’s geopolitical importance is not what it was during the Cold War.
WHAT YOU ARE ABOUT TO READ IS NOT A SCIENTIFIC SURVEY:
However, in have met a quite a few internationals who wish Koreans would remember all the wonderful things the US has done for them in the past but wish they wouldn’t dwell on all the bad things done to them by the Japanese and the dictatorships.
It’s about time that American politicians draw the line and speak their mind. In my 10 years of experience in Korea, I have found that many times the Koreans are looking to Americans(or whoever it is they are dealing with)for what is appropiate behavior. If left to their own device, Koreans will go for the juggler, as they do with eachother in traffic, or in lines at the bank or at bus terminals(or any other point of onslaught). Because of the hierarchical nature of Korean history, the general population of Koreans are so used to being told what to do that when given the freedom of choice, their sense of protocol is under developed and will go at whatever it is they desire like a catholic virgin in heat. If you are on the receiving end of this phenomenon, then a little guidance is neccesary. For example, in my classes because I give the students latitude to make many of their own choices(pretty normal from where I come), students will pull anything and everything all the time. When I calm them down and point out that it’s not appropriate behavior and that if they tried this kind of behavior with their Korean teachers, what do you think would happen? they usually feel terrible and start apologizing and realigning their approach. In a democracy as young as this and for a people so used to all or nothing, a little schooling from their brothers and sisters is useful. Thank you Hillary.
“Personally, I don?t think the ?historical amnesia?? is quite as important as the refusal on the part of some in the United States to realize that as South Korea grows and becomes less dependent on its Cold War patron, it may begin defining its national interests in ways than don?t necessarily coincide with Washington?s.”
Well, if you…………….ahhhh…….what’s the point?…..
For the past couple of weeks, I’ve been half-way out the door with Korea-related items and voicing opinion on the internet altogether, and this might finally get me to shut it.
There is no hope in turning the tide in Korea’s thinking. It is too deep and too supported by pillars of the community