Well, this would certainly teach Mr. Vershbow:
North Korea’s state news agency recently proposed a novel punishment for the new United States ambassador here, Alexander Vershbow: South Koreans should force him to stand in the midst of Seoul’s notorious downtown traffic, and then "punish him in the name of the nation and immediately expel him from their land."
From the NYT.
UPDATE: Vershbow managed to piss off both Koreas–from the Korea Times:
U.S. Ambassador Alexander Vershbow??s recent labeling of North Korea as a "criminal regime" went beyond the bounds, National Assembly Speaker Kim Won-ki said on Thursday.
It is the second remark to come from parliament in a week, criticizing the American envoy to Seoul for his "provocative" definition of the Pyongyang regime.
On Tuesday, Rep. Kim Won-wung of the ruling Uri Party warned that he would introduce a resolution, demanding Washington recall Vershbow.
"It is regrettable that Ambassador Vershbow??s statements went too far," the speaker said during an interview with a KBS radio program. "His remarks were not appropriate for an ambassador to South Korea, which is endeavoring to stabilize peace on the Korean Peninsula."
I guess it would be out of place of me to point out that regardless of whether you agree with what Vershbow said or not, his job is to represent U.S. policy regarding North Korea, not Seoul’s. I didn’t pay much attention to Kim Won-wung’s statement, because he’s certifiable and everyone knows it (he’s the one who spearheaded a parliamentary resolution calling for an annulment of the Kando Convention of 1909, a move that would have virtually lodged a territorial claim on parts of Manchuria). Kim Won-ki is a different story, however. Not that I think the National Assembly will pass a resolution calling for him to be withdrawn, but if it does, Washington had better retaliate.
Oh, and more DPRK rhetoric, the likes of which we’ll miss once they’re gone:
In Seoul on Dec. 7, Vershbow said that North Korea is a "criminal regime" and the U.S. cannot remove sanctions as a political gesture when the regime is engaging in dangerous activities such as weapons exports to other rogue states.
North Korea reacted angrily, calling Vershbow a "governor general" of South Korea and "the most bitchy and malignant ambassador in history."
Lovely.
18 Comments
South Koreans should force him to stand in the midst of Seoul’s notorious downtown traffic, and then “punish him in the name of the nation and immediately expel him from their land.”
Pyongyang’s not being very original. Haven’t many international residents already experienced this punishment?
Yes, welcome to Korea. What a country.
Dr.Hwang has now admitted that there are no stem cells. How he has been able to fool so many people is incredible. He’s probably finished as a scientist and probably should fry. The hospital should keep a suicide watch.
As reported by KBS
Hwang’s research results were a fraud.
http://news.kbs.co.kr/article/.....11725.html
An Ambassador’s role is to be diplomatic and build a good relationship with the host nation. Vershbow is doing none of that. He has turned into an Ambassador of Bad Will instead of Good Will. He is also stirring up trouble with North Korea, which does not help the situation. South Korea has every right to complain about that, because it causes serious complications for the nation.
The former Ambassador Chris Hill was a great example of how an Ambassador should act. He was diplomatic and still firm. Compared to Chris Hill, Vershbow is a jerk.
While I’m not for Vershbow, I have to disagree with you Mi-Hwa. Diplomat’s role is not only to be diplomatic and build good relationships, but also to represent his nation and its interest and this sometimes may clash your definition of a diplomat. You must be used to look pretty, talk pretty, do nothing diplomat crowd. I rather prefer a jerk to be my diplomat than an airhead.
Vershbow will only provide more fuel for the anti-American crowd in South Korea.
If South Koreans vote more towards the left, Americans like Vershbow deserve some of the blame.
My favorite KCNA jibe toward Vershbow was that his words were “nothing but tongue rolling.”
Mi-hwa you sound a bit like the KCNA at times. If South Koreans move more to what you seem to define as the left, it will be out of ignorance more than spite over Vershbow. Actual leftists like myself would agree that N..K. is a criminal regime–in the West leftists mistook first the Soviets and then the Maoists as the anti-capitalist ideal, but almost everybody has wised up since then.
Everybody calls North Korea a criminal regime.
Michael, Hear hear.
This entire discussion would be improved by the realization that opposition to tyranny is a leftist ideal. Many of the folks who are calling for a hard line on NK are hypocrites but that doesn’t make them wrong.
See this interesting “defense” of Versbow, in of all places the Korea Herald, under the title “In Defense of the American Envoy”:
http://www.koreaherald.co.kr/S.....160006.asp
After applauding Vershbow for his energy (but in a way that is also rather condescending of his extra-curricular activities, he KH credits Versbow for reminding Koreans waht the NORK regime is really like. But it them goes on in the strange mixture of arrogance and whimpering that one runs across in Korea so often to remonstrate with him that he needs to learn and reflect more on Koreans’ point of view and Korean “realities” rather than “what he learned from his tutors in DC”.
A pretty back-handed “defense”. Can you imagine the howls that would rise up if anyone, especially American, purported to preach to Korea’s US representative in such a fashion? What pious hyprocisy.
Like it or not, there is a certain tradition for diplomats to be polite, and not rock the boat with rude or controversial remarks. That’s why polite and indirect talk is referred to as ‘diplomatic’.
I can see an argument against this tradition, but you can’t deny the existence of a norm amongst diplomats for extreme circumspection. This tradition developed partly in response to the ease with which an international incident could arise just from the errant behavior of individual diplomats.
The recent souring of relations between South Korea and the US over remarks made by Vershbow and Lefkowitz demonstrate this, although I have no doubt these diplomats were instructed to make such statements by the US government.
This is a case where Americans are happily following the North Korean model. Diplomats spout controversial and threating remarks regularly and unapologetically. Nowadays, people are getting quite used to threats from the US against North Korea, Syria, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, etc. So much so that the US’s statements are seen like we see North Korea’s statements: generally empty posturing, that is nonetheless disturbing.
Whatever happened to the good, old-fashioned speak softly and carry a big stick.
The line between diplospeak and lying may be fine, but it’s bright - notwithstanding the propensity with which diplomats cross it. Counterfeiting currency is a crime and those who do it are criminals. If you want to take action to stop them, you have to say what it is your after and why. Saying the perpetrator is waht it is, is simply speaking the truth, and there just ain’t no way - honestly - to get around it. Same with running concentration camps = tyranny. And both are a long long way from the vitriol spewed by the NORKS. Let’s not pretend there’s any equivalence.
Surely, the criminal activities of North Korea haven’t suddenly become a high-priority issue. After decades of North Korean shenanigans, suddenly in winter 2005, on the brink of a potential breakthrough in the 6 party talks, the US must once and for all confront the grave threat from North Korean countefeiters.
Vershbow defied credulity when he said:
“And we can’t somehow remove our sanctions as a political gesture when this regime is engaging in dangerous activities such as weapons exports to rogue states…”
from BBC News
How can one refuse to see the sheer hypocrisy in such words? All nations bend their laws when it is convenient. I remind you that the US lifted sanctions on Pakistan and is now selling fighter jets to the same “non-criminal” military dictatorship. Pakistan supported al Qaeda and the Taliban, developed nuclear weapons, exported nuclear weapons technology to rogue nations, and is still promoting Islamist terrorism. I also point out the case of the Lybian terrorist madman Qaddafi, who recently bought his way clear of sanctions.
The reality is that all nations make exceptions to laws, policies and morality when it suits their purpose. Pretending otherwise is just hypocrisy. Let’s drop the boy scout act and face the realities of world politics. There is a good debate to be had on the proper approach to North Korea without these distractions.
I think the Bush Administration is trying to sabotage the 6-nations talk, so that it will fail. That way they can say that negotiations failed and it’s time for a hard-line approach.
“Mi-wha”: “I think Bushie is bad man blah blah…” The English in these comments is a bit too well-written, the sentiments too pat. I’m going to say Canadian ESL teacher in Seoul.
“Mi-wha”: “I think Bushie is bad man blah blah…” The English in these comments is a bit too well-written, the sentiments too pat. I’m going to say Canadian ESL teacher in Seoul.
Michael
Such impolite slurs are shameful. Mi-hwa is expressing a position that is quite reasonable. These distasteful ad-hominem attacks made by critics of the sunshine policy are all too common.
There is a deafening silence when miscreants on these boards resort to vile mud-slinging. Where are all the noble defenders of truth and morality?
But I thank Michael for so clearly identifying himself as somebody not to be taken seriously.
Impolite slur? Man, you need to read a bit more carefully. I was pointing out that Mi-wha’s comments are a little too “pat” (Function: adjective
1 a : exactly suited to the purpose or occasion : APT b : suspiciously appropriate : CONTRIVED)
to be from an actual Korean person.
You’re kind of a sock yourself…maybe you’re Mi-wha–come on, fess up.
By the way, this is:
sarcasm
Main Entry: sarทcasm
Pronunciation: ’s?r-”ka-z&m
Function: noun
Etymology: French or Late Latin; French sarcasme, from Late Latin sarcasmos, from Greek sarkasmos, from sarkazein to tear flesh, bite the lips in rage, sneer, from sark-, sarx flesh; probably akin to Avestan thwar&s- to cut
1 : a sharp and often satirical or ironic utterance designed to cut or give pain
2 a : a mode of satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language that is usually directed against an individual b : the use or language of sarcasm
Michael, thank you for the definitions. I had learnt these words sometime in my childhood, but thanks anyways. Your display also shows your adeptness at consulting dictionaries, quite an impressive skill indeed.
“probably akin to Avestan thwar&s- to cut”
In the unlikely circumstance that Michael has not learnt of ‘Avestan’, I shall attempt a short description, in the same generous spirit with which Michael so kindly defined ‘pat’ and ’sarcasm’.
Avestan is an ancient Iranian language. The ‘Avesta’ is the holy book of Zoroastrianism, and the language of this holy book is referred to as Avestan. Avestan was a purely oral language for millennia due to a Zoroastrian suspicion of the written word. It was not written down until about 1600 years ago.
‘Avesta’ is linguistically related to ‘Veda’, the ancient Hindu holy writings. The Avesta and the Vedas are close in language and content. They represent some of the earliest Indo-European languages, and the only ones to have survived in some form until the present day. The Avesta and Vedas are still revered today in India by the Parsis and Hindus, respectively.
That is why ‘Avesta’ is mentioned in the definition of “sarcasm”, as Latin, Greek, English, French and German are Indo-European languages, like Avestan and Sanskrit (the language of the Vedas). For the curious, there is a short Wikipedia article on Avestan.
I hope my post is at least as educational as Michael’s deeply erudite writings.