I tend to agree that it is both. Strange how both the KCTU and the DLP tend to involve themselves in all things anti-American. I find it cheapens what may be some reasonable concerns that farmers and other workers may have about their job prospects, or that ordinary citizens - ie. the ones who actually live near the Hump - might have with base relocation. Just a personal take.

Funny how the same high profile protesters can be found downtown protesting the FTA and in Pyeongtaek protesting the base relocation. This includes the deceased, who was active in the latter protest too, not to mention the fact that he included a reference to the death of the middle school girls in Uijeongbu in June, 2002 in his suicide note (though he incorrectly gives the year as 2003).

Anyway, if you go to the KCTU website you can see a photo of Brother Heo (Huh) posing with his picket, apparently taken the night before his self-immoliation. I like to think that nobody knew of his plans, but the photo reminds me of these farewell videos that members of Hamas and other organization make before they go out in a blaze of glory. I get the distinct impression that the KCTU doesn’t feel all that bad about people sacrificing themselves for the cause.

thanks for your comments. actually, i was reacting to the statement that this was not an anti-fta but an anti-us issue which i still disagree with, however, in light what i’m reading i think it is safe to say that this is both an anti-fta and anti-US thing…

to claim it as being only an anti-us thing as i had (mis?) understood goat’s comment to mean seemed unfair/inaccurate considering the strong protecionist sentiments also involved in this issue.

That probably has something to do with the fact that Roh, despite his perceived anti-Americanism, supported the FTA.

If it were GNP that was pursuing the FTA, the whole “we’re submitting ourselves to evil US empire” argument would sound suddenly much more plausible to many Koreans.

I’ve been very impressed with the fact no one I know opposed to the FTA with USA is suggesting the US is forcing this on the Korean Colony.

I’m sure there are exceptions, but I just don’t hear it as much as I would’ve expected even just a few years back.

That is, those who are opposed and express anti-American sentiment right now seem to focus that on what unprotected sex with the US might do to Korea. They don’t seem to be suggesting Korea couldn’t say “no,” and that however dangerous it might be that it wouldn’t be consensual. It seems to me that everyone is recognizing that Korea has a choice. IMHO this in itself is a very significant development - progress as far as healthy debate in Korea is concerned, if you ask me.

Dogbertt and goat, so do you think such reactions are all done SOLELY out of anti-US sentiments vs protectionist feelings???

Solely out of anti-US sentiments, no.

I do believe that protectionism was a big driving force, one that would not be unique to Korea, of course.

However, looking at photos of anti-FTA demonstrations, marches, etc. I notice the same “usual suspects” (the wacky priest, the hanbok guy, etc.) who are always at the front of any anti-U.S. demonstration.

I doubt they were leading any anti-Chile FTA demonstrations, however.

Like you, I was also present here when the Chile FTA was being negotiated and I do not recall protests (much less news coverage) that approached the level seen recently.

I am saying that the basis for the protests and concern were there (and could be justified pending your particular leaning) but the driving force that increased their scale and publicity could care less about the farmers (the main focus of the protests) 95% of the time.

In regards to China, there (finally) appears to be some concern

http://times.hankooki.com/lpag.....511870.htm

Will be interesting to see how the public reacts to the much bigger (agricultural) threat that is China - where Korea has been notoriously submissive in the past.

There was some “neo-colonialism,” “imperialist hegemony” rhetoric in the FTA protests that just kind of blur into the general anti-American sentiment here.

. . . Secondly, I am in the camp that the protests are not anti-FTA - just that they are anti-USA. Most people don’t even know (nor care) that Korea has been engaged in FTA talks with other countries and wishes to initiate more.

I would have to agree somewhat with this statement, even if it did come from a talking goat

The reported complete absence of vitriol and “save-our-country” bile regarding a FTA with China is telling, even though China now could really put Korean farmers in a serious bind, not to mention China’s claims on the natural resources of Korea’s (North Korea) and their disingenuous claims to Korean territory and history.
The very groups in South Korea that have protested a Korean/American FTA are now silent. This, in effect, demonstrates that the nationalism displayed by the KTCU and DLP is more Chinese than Korean.