According to the Blue House, the S. Korean government and the Taliban has agreed on the release of the 19 remaining hostages. The condition for their release are;
1. Withdrawal of Korean troops
2. End to all Christian missionary activities in Afghanistan
However, the Blue House cautioned that because there has been an agreement that didn’t mean that the hostages will be freed right away.
I am glad to hear that the remaining 19 are to be freed. But in regards, to the above conditions, my first reaction was; they held on to those hostages for that??? Of course, now that I think about it, there were probably other conditions that both sides aren’t willing to disclose.
UPDATE 1 According to the Blue House spokesperson, the hostages will be released in groups of three to four in the next few days.
UPDATE 2 Here are the 5 points that both sides agreed as condition for the release(Korea Times).
1. South Korean troops in Afghanistan to be withdrawn
2. South Korea will stop sending Christian missionaries to Afghanistan
3. South Korean NGOs will leave Afghanistan(by the end of August)
4. The Taliban will guarantee safe passage for the withdrawing S. Korean troops.(WTF???)
5. The Taliban will not demand a prisoners-for-hostage swap.(They will probably get hard cash, so no need to demand a swap)
UPDATE 3 A MBC News report(Korean) explores the possibility of a back-room deal between S. Korea and the Taliban.
94 Comments
This is a great victory for the Taliban~!
Korea has shown its true character by demonstrating that it is more interested in the welfare of a handful of its citizens than in being a responsible member of the international community.
First it pays off North Korea for a summit. Now it is cutting deals with the Taliban.
Korea is a 얌채 나라 (Self-centered country). While it makes billions selling goods in an international market place made safe for foreign trade by the rule of international law and military power… Korea trades with theives and pirates.
Korea’s true character is now clear for all to see.
Not mentioned was the amount of money paid to the Taliban to purchase more weapons which will kill NATO forces in Afghanistan. And if you don’t think there was money involved you don’t know Korean culture very well.
This is outrageous!!!!! They made a deal to remove engineer and medical troops who are doing good deeds there at the request of terrorists.
All I can say is wow!! What a good day for the Taliban.
Cheers to the panzy Korean mindset.
Wonder how much the Taliban got. If SK negotiated the way it negotiates with North Korea, the Taliban probably got at least a million bucks for each one.
The only reason I like the ban on Christian missionary activity: it will make it harder for the church to claim that all this was God’s will.
But this is all just face-saving stuff for the Taliban. They got their money and know have to pose as Muslim heroes again.
Miserable. Disdainful. Shame. So much shame and disappointment. I lament the day that Roh took office. And the day that the Supreme Court dismissed the impeachment.
In the end, that coward of a “president” ends up rewarding those terrorists for attacking Korean citizens. I guess he never took PSY101. I’m not surprised though. One could expect only so much from this “president”.
Those Taliban killers sure do drive a hard bargain!
Well, at least they did not demand anything really important like free cell phones or plasma TVs. And notice that there wasn’t any mention of money.
Let that be a lesson for you Korean relief workers, military or civilian. The next time you want to help another country through humanitarian work, just forget it. Korea is for Koreans. Work with the foreigners already here.
To the remaining Korean Christians in Afghanistan, run and hide. The Korean government is hunting you. They’ve made an agreement with Islamic extremists and they have to keep up their part of the deal. We must save face, you know?
I’ll reserve judgment until I read more, although my first instinct is to vomit.
That being said, it’s good news that the hostages — dumbasses they may well be — will be coming home.
The alleged second condition for the release of the Korean is so incredible it just may be true. Yet is makes no sense. How could the Korean government legally or practically prevent private missions activities in any sovereign foreign country?
What about the two people who were murdered? Where’s the justice?
That a word?
no but “pansy” is. Orwell used it in describing the pansy left/liberals (one of his politer forms of address for them) of appeasement-minded Britain in the late 30s and to the same group for their subsequent Stalinist fellow-traveling and their subsequent peace-mongering. I think that’s the sort of tone the commenter wanted to evoke, not the flower.
How could the Korean government legally or practically prevent private missions activities in any sovereign foreign country?
This is Korea.
Now we can all look forward to more and more Taliban kidnappings. Next time someone is kidnapped I say it’s the responsibility of S. Korea to rescue them.
I remember a few years ago when some Japanese citizens were kidnapped and the government’s response was, “well, they shouldn’t have been there in the first place” and pretty much didn’t negotiate. Thus making the hostages worthless, the kidnappers had no choice but to turn them over rather then feed them. The kicker, is the Japanese government then billed those who were kidnapped for their plane fare! Now that’s the way to deal with kidnapping terrorists, just ignore them.
^ I think that was the Korean government’s response when some other dumb guy got kidnapped and killed a few years ago. This time, the difference is that there is an election coming up soon.
This is Korea.
I realize my reiteration of a sentence often said to foreigners in defense of this country’s ways may have been too apocryphal. I agree with you point
As a libertarian, I’m disgusted at the very idea of a government even believing it has the authority to interfere so blatantly in religious affairs.
But again, this is Korea.
“This is Korea.”
Nah, ya gotta say it RIGHT: “Here is Korea”
Wish I had a buck for every time I was told that.
To expand on the WC’s pithy response, Korean law contains the concept of personal as well as territorial jurisdiction, i.e., its laws apply to Korean citizens even outside of the country’s borders by virtue of their citizenship. If they can prosecute a guy for smoking the wacky tabacky in Amsterdam (and being dumb enough to blog about it), they can ban Koreans from going over there to proselytize.
Enquiring minds want to know: did Roh cancel his summit with Bush before or after confirmation of the hostage deal?
We don’t know for sure if the hostages will go free as planned. We don’t know what additional/secret terms there might be. We don’t know if this means the Taliban involved in these kidnappings will not be dealt with later. Some of the speculation may be correct, but it is premature.
And, as much as I personally dislike the present administration here, please don’t try telling me that imposing travel bans on one’s citizens or dealing covertly with terrorist groups or states is the unique domain of South Korea.
American citizens are not allowed to travel to Cuba - seemingly contrary to the 5th Amendment of the United States Constitution and a Supreme Court ruling - and the United States did covertly sell the Iranians TOW missiles (not just cash, but the actual weapons!) in the 80s in order to try getting some hostages released in Lebanon.
Not saying two wrongs make a right - and I’m certainly not claiming the Koreans don’t have a self-centered world view - but most countries (leaders, at least) act in ways that they perceive represent their own interests, even if it means junking principles they claim to value above all else.
We don’t know for sure that it was Roh who cancelled the Bush summit or that there was even going to be one.
Of course, that assumes that there is such a law to enforce (and that it passes constitutional muster)… Any ideas on how long any such bill is going to take to get through a National Assembly heavily peppered with Christians? So even despite the threat of worldwide personal jurisdiction (which many countries have on a somewhat more limited basis than Korea — such as the United States), any ‘ban’ on missionary activities to Afghanistan might indeed have no teeth. And notice that there’s still no apparent promise to stop (ahem) ‘aid workers’ from going to Afghanistan…
Of course, the SK government could just ask the Afghani government to deny entry to any South Korean citizen, which could be an easy workaround (assuming that missionaries would be flying into Kabul rather than sneaking across a border somewhere…)
Ah, finally I can comment on this thread.
Let me be the FIRST one on this blog to have a completely positive thing to say about the hostages’ upcoming release:
Great!! Praise God!!!!
#20
Too bad God dropped the ball on those two hostages who got killed, eh? Oh well, I guess you really can’t win them all.
To cydevil.
I feel the same as you.
But, one correction is needed. Impeachment ruling is done by the Constitutional Court not the supreme Court.
Korea has Constitutional Court unlike USA.
Zonath,
I think you were addressing it to #20, not 21.
God didn’t drop the ball on anything. He does what He does.
Well, gotta get ready for my long run today….on these perfectly good knees, thanks to acupuncture.
Did y’all see what the most popular major is for the fake doctoral degrees that Koreans get from fake U.S. universities? Christian studies! Why is that not surprising?
But let’s stay positive here. 19 people are going to escape getting murdered. Praise be to all people’s imaginary friends!
I detect a future irony… one of those kidnapped missionaries being re-captured as he attempts to quote the Book of Exodus upon being freed… hahaha.
“Did y’all see what the most popular major is for the fake doctoral degrees that Koreans get from fake U.S. universities? Christian studies! Why is that not surprising?”
#1, where is your support behind this. And #2, what is your actual number when you say “most popular major…for fake doctoral degrees that Koreans get”? Let’s say that there are 20,000 doctoral students in the US from Korea, and two are getting fake degrees…..in Christian studies and no one else is getting a fake degree. TECHNICALLY, one could say, as you have, that the most popular major for a fake degree in the US among Koreans is for Christian studies….but to just state it as such would be misleading. It would be kind of like saying the US military polluted the Han River with toxic chemicals (which is TECHNICALLY true but hides the fact that it was not some US military conspiracy where the top brass gleefully ordered chemicals to be dumped into the river in order to f*ck up Korea but was instead a lowly soldier who ignorantly, and with likely no ill-intention, dumped some chemicals down a sink drain….which would eventually make it to the Han River). In other words, Herod, be careful how you choose your words and how you choose to state “the truth” because it would make you no better than a Korean newspaper trying to fan anti-American sentiment. Some might even call this tactic of yours “spin.”
But anyways, what is your source for this little tidbit?
And as for this comment: “But let’s stay positive here. 19 people are going to escape getting murdered. Praise be to all people’s imaginary friends!”
We SHOULD be grateful that 19 people are going to make it out. Why would we not be? And apparently you are an atheist, but don’t disparage other’s faith in the Supreme Being. He is not an imaginary friend.
korea did what it had to do and that’s that. don’t like it? tough.
and it’s just like i said, some of these folks on this board WANT to see the hostages die. why? well, because they’re koreans. and can you imagine? most of these guys portray themselves as saviors for the lil korean lady.
you wanna vomit? so do i.
pawikirogi,
“and it’s just like i said, some of these folks on this board WANT to see the hostages die. why? well, because they’re koreans. and can you imagine? most of these guys portray themselves as saviors for the lil korean lady.”
Dude, that’s bullsh!t. How do you get the idea that these people want to see these people die (because they are Korean?!?!?!??!?!?) all because they are sick of the way the Korean government handled the situation? (Yes, I’ve read the previous threads and the previous comments too.)
“korea did what it had to do and that’s that. don’t like it? tough.”
It had better options ( http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/200.....ostages_dc ). But, yep they did what they did. And people of other countries will pay for the Roh administration’s cowardly actions with blood…..tough, you got that right.
globalvillageidiot,
“And, as much as I personally dislike the present administration here, please don’t try telling me that imposing travel bans on one’s citizens or dealing covertly with terrorist groups or states is the unique domain of South Korea.”
You may be right, but as you said: two wrongs don’t make a right.
pawikirogi, I posted a response for you, but for some reason it’s pending moderation…….I hope you can read it later. (could one of the moderators check it out, please? Thx!
)
#20 et al.-
From the JoongAng Daily:
http://joongangdaily.joins.com.....id=2879851
Well, here is my absolutely candid take on this, and I apologize in advance if I offend.
Even if I were Christian, I’d think it would be much better if the missionaries were to die. If all of them died. What a great and courageous way to leave the planet, noble in sacrifice for one’s religious beliefs. As a Christian (which I’m not), I’d much rather see such on display than the quivering “we don’t want to die” line the missionaries have given, which puts me off to no end. One doesn’t need to be an atheist or non-Korean to feel antipathy toward this group.
And of course there are many practical, political reasons to disapprove here. But that’s the obvious thing and those points have been brought up already.
That said - Korean Christians have been going to Afghanistan for years. This was certainly not some random outing. Many of them foot real work for the people they try to help, be it in the name of Jesus or the plain ol sake of being a good human being. I don’t feel that the rebuke these Christians have been getting matches up with the work of Korean missionaries in general. And, to my knowledge, Korea isn’t the only country that has ever stooped to the demands of terrorists to save the lives of their citizens. Ultimately, I’m glad the hostages are being freed, and am glad the Korean government have stepped in to save them. Call that self-centered or whatever if you will but try to show some perspective when you do it.
Then again, I really tire of the “Praise Jesus.. hostages are freed” worship quick. That Jew has nothing to do with their rescue. I hope the Christians in Korea and the missionaries - as well as some people here - get around to figuring this out.
Vomit away, but even by the “standards” you’ve maintained over the years, pawi, it is intellectually sloppy if not outright dishonest to claim that anyone HERE wanted the hostages to die. There was, I recall reading, plenty of such commentary among local netizens back when those missonaries were kidnapped.
#30-
Says you.
Stop trying to impose your beliefs on others. Isn’t that what you people are always screaming at believers? Practice what you preach.
Stop trying to impose your beliefs on others. Isn’t that what you people are always screaming at believers? Practice what you preach.
- Unlike the gradeschool atheists that often rear their heads when topics like this come up, I don’t subscribe to the don’t preach what you believe ideology. By all means, Christians ought to be preaching and prosslyting. If you believe the eschaton is near, then by all means grab the worldy unbeliever sitting next to you and try to save him. That is an ought in life, I subscribe to, this thing about fighting for one’s beliefs about world and reality and universalizing them. Everyone ought to be following this as a rule of thumb. Fortunately, truth and rationality aren’t so arbitrary that the set of things people believe can’t be judged true or false from objective grounds. (ie Beliefs are commensurable - proselytize but don’t be shocked if I correct you!)
correction: prosslyting -> proselytizing.
This tragically misguided foray by Korean Christians into the valley of the shadow of death has revealed many things.
One of them is that there are those who value political abstractions of an empire whose policies are motivated by the sword over real human lives whose intentions were motivated by charity.
A real eye-opener. Koreans should take a closer examination of the expats around them.
I don’t know, Slim, I kind of agree to an extent with Pawi. We hear news that the Korean hostages will be released….and the reaction by many of the expats in Korea on this thread seemed….bitter and disappointed, as if they wanted to hostages to REMAIN hostages. Excuse me if I am wrong about this, but just take a look at many of the comments!
We hear about the two men who were kiled by the Taliban, or executed by the Taliban. Could we and various news organisations get it right please. They were MURDERED by the Taliban.
Execution, is lawful killing (some dispute this)
Kill, is accidental, or self defense (combatants)
The killing was not lawful, not accidental, or in self defense.
It was murder!
When we use lesser words we are absolving these cowards and scum of their crimes.
This is good yet bad. Contrary to what certain people want to believe, most people did not want to see the hostages harmed.
However, it did increase the Taliban’s political power. It may have also been the start of a new ‘open season’ on all innocents - Korean or not.
“pawikirogi” may be right: “some of these folks on this board WANT to see the hostages die.”
The first condition, that the troops be withdrawn by the end of the year, was decided before the hostages were even taken.
The second condition, the end of Korean missionary activity, is precisely what the usual suspects on this board wanted, yet none of them are praising Roh’s government for this. Why is that?
The Goat has it about right.
The tone of many reactions here was churlish but most people simply pointed out (accurately IMO) the boon to the Taliban and the risks to others that this arrangement appears to entail. Admittedly, it could have been worse had the Roh administration not been effectively prevented from caving earlier.
Korean bureaucrats, North and South, are infamously tough, shrewd and obnoxious negotiators, notwithstanding the fecklessness of current political masters (in the South). Absent solid proof that money changed hands to free the 21, one might even be able to say that Korea got the hostages back merely by repackaging its existing policies on the troops and missionaries in Afghanistan. That approach has worked with maddening regularity on Uncle Sam over nuclear, USFK base and trade issues — but I had thought the Taliban would have none of it.
From what I can see, there is indeed an unusual level of venomous attitude towards what has become of the hostages in this forum. Granted, I myself subscribe to the idea that there were foolish amount of risks taken by the hostages and that better security measures should be taken by the missionaries… but nevertheless, my first and only reaction at this time is “yay!” with a silent nod to God (I am a Christian, after all ;-)).
The attitude the Korean gov’t seemed to have taken in this situation was “Save the hostages first and foremost.”, or to put it more adequately, “우선 살려내고 보자.” Quite different from, say, “We don’t negotiate with terrorists.” Suffice to say, different worlds, different values, and consequently different policies.
“Suffice to say, different worlds, different values, and consequently different policies.”
Precisely. I highly recommend The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Westerners Think Differently…and Why.
Whereas we Westerners tend to find an abstract principle (“We don’t negotiate with terrorists”) and stick to it come hell or high water, Easterners tend to examine the situational context to a much greater degree. It may come as a shock to many Westerners that many Easterners find our approach immature.
Ummmm… Pawi, JK, and Western Confucian, the hostages are the victims, not you three. Your self-indulgence is embarrassing.
#16 Ut Videam:
“To expand on the WC’s pithy response, Korean law contains the concept of personal as well as territorial jurisdiction, i.e., its laws apply to Korean citizens even outside of the country’s borders by virtue of their citizenship”
This is not unique to Korea. Doesn’t the US use the concept of personal jurisdiction to effectively keep US citizens out of Cuba and don’t Western countries use the concept to prosecute citizens who rape children overseas?
There is nothing terribly abstract about the danger of releasing 23 Taliban prisoners, as many would have had Karzai do, nor really about the idea of setting a dangerous precedent.
@36 JK:
Commenters are not upset that the hostages have been released. They are upset at the possibility that a large sum of money and questioning the enforceability of the second stated condition of release - the ban on proselytizing.
@28 Pawi:
It’s ironic that you accuse expats of wishing death upon the hostages. Rather, your words reflect your frustrated and fruitless hatred of “the Expat.”
“…Easterners tend to examine the situational context to a much greater degree. It may come as a shock to many Westerners that many Easterners find our approach immature.”
How about if the “situation” involved an attack on the ROK? Would ROK citizens expect the US to stick to it’s principles come hell or high water, or would they prove to be understanding of the US’s greater “maturity” if it opened negotiations for some sort of political settlement at their expense — one aimed at saving the lives of its own forces?
Oh, I see — that’s “different”. Excuse me, I’m probably being immature.
Before I’m accused of wanting the hostages to die for “my” principles, I’ll make the mandatory specification that I’m glad they’re alive and being released (assuming the entire transaction is ultimately successful and the Taliban don’t go back on their word).
I will be interested to see if any large sums were paid for their release, assuming that if this is what happened the story of such a payment will come out in the ROK press.
BTW, w/o being able to readily link to a source, I’m sure I’ve seen allusions to similar situations in Iraq where the Germans and Italians have been alleged to pay large ransoms to get their nationals back.
So I won’t hold the Korean government to any higher standard than these Euro ones. The idea of a “blowback”, involving tens of thousands of Korean troops being committed to offensive operations in Afghanistan as a result of this blatant attack on their nationals, is surely an “immature” dysfunctional fantasy on my part, just as it would be for our continental NATO allies.
its = possessive
it’s = contraction of “it is”
Missed my chance to use “its” correctly just above, in spite of the outstanding preview feature provided by mine host. I request forgiveness — in the next world, if it’s not possible in this one.
#41 Bum from Korea:
“The attitude the Korean gov’t seemed to have taken in this situation was “Save the hostages first and foremost.”, or to put it more adequately, “우선 살려내고 보자.” Quite different from, say, “We don’t negotiate with terrorists.” Suffice to say, different worlds, different values, and consequently different policies.”
The Korean government’s attitude can be more precisely worded as follows:
“Save the KOREAN hostages first and foremost.”
or to put it more adequately, “우선 한국인 살려내고 보자.”
“different worlds, different values, and consequently different policies”? Nope. Just the Korean government putting the welfare of 19 of its citizens above the security of Afghanistan.
I see that some commenters here are showing approval of this shameful decision by the Roh administration(I’m reluctant to call these miserable mo*ons the “Korean government”), that Korean lives should be of utmost importance. In this regard, I would like to point out that this case will serve as a very dangerous precedent to the future safety of other Korean citizens abroad. The Roh administration pretty much sent out a global messege to terrorists and priates around the world that “kidnap and kill Korean citizens and we will reward you!” This is a simple psychological principle - reinforcing(rewarding) bad behavior will cause its reoccurence.
JK? A little something for you to suck on: (Source: last week’s Joongang Ilbo)
According to the Korea Research Foundation’s data, 276 or 6.6 percent of 4,199 people who registered their U.S. doctoral degrees with the foundation since 2003 acquired the degrees from diploma mills, unaccredited institutions that issue questionable academic degrees.
At least two of the fake doctoral degree holders are currently working as professors at local universities, according to Yoo.
Among the fake degree holders, 140 majored in Christian religious studies and the rest earned degrees in business, education, art or other fields. The degrees were issued by 23 diploma mills, with 39 each from American World University and Midwest University.
I think we need to keep in mind that 19 hostages pose a different problem for a country than 1 or 2 hostages. We negotiated with Iran when all those hostages were taken in 79, no?
And if Seoul doesn’t help the hostages, who will? Not their imaginary friend in the sky, that’s for darn sure.
didn’t become a believer, yet?
Herod, here’s something for YOU to suck on:
First of all, show the link. Secondly, you wrote: “of 4,199 people who registered their U.S. doctoral degrees with the foundation since 2003…”
Um, since when has it been a requirement that a Korean getting his/her doctoral degree in the US register their degrees with with “Korea Research Foundations”? I’ve never even HEARD of such a “foundation.” And I know many native Koreans who are PROFESSORS (tenured at that, too) at US universities where background checks were conducted where fake doctoral degrees would have been sniffed out. I doubt any of these tens of thousands of Korean people who are now PROFESSORS IN THE US registered with any “Korea Research Foundation.” Sounds like a more accurate number to go by (let’s stop spinning, shall we, Herod?) would be 276 people who supposedly got fake doctorals in the US (and I’d like to see the actual source for this) out of a MUCH larger number than 4,199 since most Korean recipients of doctorals in the US likely do NOT register with any “Korea Research Foundation.”
And while you’re at it, tell me how many illegals from Canada or the US with fake college degrees (or real degrees with useless majors which provided no work opportunities in Canada or the US) are teaching in Korea without a work permit.
Goat,
“Contrary to what certain people want to believe, most people did not want to see the hostages harmed.”
Whether they wanted to see the hostages harmed or not….there were some pretty angry, bitter responses from the Western expat crowd once news got out that they were to be released. There would NOT have been the same angry, bitter responses if it had NOT been announced that the hostages were to be released. Take what you will from it.
It is a requirement to register with the KRF, my dear JK. Check your facts.
You know the Kabul Theological Center for Accidental Islamic Studies is accepting applicants. It’s no diploma mill and I don’t believe it has a PHD program. I think most people going in have misconceptions about the curriculum. Hopefully they come out wiser from lessons learned.
Let’s just say congratulations to this years graduating class. God speed.
I tend to believe the Taliban didn’t get much of what they wanted, and pretty much released these hostages because
a) while they don’t give a damn what we infidels think, they do care somewhat what the rest of the Ummah (islamic family) thinks, and it was becoming clear that, this time, directly butchering young girls wasn’t going to play well on Al-Jazeera. In this regard, South Korean visits to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan were a very good idea, as it caused these countries to re-iterate their disapproval and increase the ‘oh, just let them go’ pressure from the rest of the Islamic world.
b) it seems these particular Taliban actually had qualms about butchering women. Who did they kill? Two older guys. Then they let two sick women go. It points to qualms, as I said. These guys aren’t all from the pits of hell, remember, most of them are afghan village boys recruited in because their uncle’s cousin is a taliban bigwig.
and c) they were probably real sick of the wails and sobs of “Oppa!”
If they didn’t have the stomach to kill them, and they knew money and the release of Taliban prisoners weren’t happening, they probably figured they might as well let them go. The two public conditions of Korea troops out and no more missionaries strike me as a sop to them, a way for them to release the girls and still save face as big bad Taliban.
Honestly, it looks to me like the Korean approach of patient negotiation worked, and those calling for military strikes that probably would have killed some hostages too were wrong. And I was one of the latter, to some extent. It’s called admitting you were wrong, guys. (Bush voters take note.)
Talk about ransom is expat conspiracy theory at this point, however much you might say “Oh, I know Koreans…there must have been money paid.” We all heap scorn on Koreans for logic like that (”America must have done this, although there is no evidence to support it…”), so until there is mention of a ransom keep in your pants.
Of course they are not home yet. Godspeed them, hope they will be soon.
Herod,
I have members of my own family who were professors at universities for 25 years here in the US (tenured and full professorship status at that) once they got their Ph.Ds in this country . And no, they didn’t register with any “foundation” in Korea. Did your figure of those Koreans who got their doctorals in the US include them? Nope.
So much for your “facts”, Herod.
Hugh, well-said in #58, particularly your last three paragraphs.
JK:
“Korean doctorate degree holders are required to register their degrees with the Korea Research Foundation.”
http://joongangdaily.joins.com.....id=2879625
You can believe the paper, or you can call it shoddy journalism. I’m going with the paper on this one.
Perhaps your relatives who were professors in the U.S., not Korea, were not required to register because they were not living and teaching in Korea. Or perhaps they are U.S. citizens and exempt from whatever this requirement is.
Maybe it is a requirement that exists, but is widely unknown or flouted, in which case its data are suspect. Whatever, there is no doubt that these bogus degrees are the current hot issue in Korea at the moment, which means it is likely to die down very soon.
Other published reports have stated that the most prominent of these U.S. degree mills are operated by Korean-Americans.
FWIW, I’m one “expat” who will be glad if the Korean hostages leave Afghanistan safely with no further loss of life.
http://joongangdaily.joins.com.....id=2878419
“Perhaps your relatives who were professors in the U.S., not Korea, were not required to register because they were not living and teaching in Korea.”
Dogbert, THAT WAS MY POINT to Herod. According to Herod, 4,199 Koreans who got their degrees registed with the “Korea Research Foundation.” But doesn’t this number exclude the (I would imagine) much larger number of Koreans who, once they get their Ph.Ds in the US, found job opportunities in the US? And for what reason would they register at any freakin’ “foundation”? If the 4,199 number is the number in since 2003 of people who actually DID register with the foundation, then exactly how large is the TOTAL number of Korean people since 2003 who received doctoral degrees….and either stayed in the US or moved back to Korea? I would daresay it’s a lot more than 4,199, in which case, the 276 figure is a pretty (but still worrisome) miniscule percentage. At least in the US, the fakes would not have been allowed to teach at an accredited university. Then again, those same ones teaching at an accredited university in the US likely didn’t registed for any “Korea Research Foundation.”
Hugh’s analysis is spot-on. Prominet Muslims and Muslim governments around the world called for the hostages to be released. And the Taliban, despite their fanaticism, are still Pashtuns, renowned for their hospitality.
And after all, if the Taliban were Evil incarnate, how could they have been the good guys in Rambo 3 and for the Reagan Administration? Ever wonder why the nonsense term jihadi (for “one who wages jihad”) was created to replace the correct term mujahadin, which were told meant “freedom fighter” in the ’80s?
Even after 9/11, the Taliban agreed to hand over Osama bin Laden to a third country provided evidence. Osama bin Laden had denied involvement in the attacks, and the video in which he (or a much fatter actor playing him depending, on your interpretation) admitted involvement was not found until after the invasion.
Hey, terrorists! Short of cash? Have bad credit? Don’t worry about! There is a solution!
Kidnap some Koreans and watch your cash grow! Call “1-800-555-Kimchi” today and we’ll help you get that hard-to-find funding for your next attack.
That’s “1-800-555-Kimchi.” Call now and you’ll receive absolutely free as our complimentary bonus a “George Bush is Satan” limited edition print suitable for framing.
Your first consultation and the limited edition print are yours free when you call “1-800-555-Kimchi.” Call today. Operators are standing by.
# 60,
I have to agree with a lot of what Hugh said. The Koreans get all the remaining hostages free without really giving up anything (as far as we know). They were going to withdraw by the end of the year anyways.
Also, Hugh says things that I knew would be in issue all long, for example the danger of a rescue operation:
http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/.....ment-99687
And the fact that even the Taliban was reluctant to kill defenseless women: http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/.....ment-98345
People here keep talking about how the Taliban got money for the hostages. Do we have any evidence for this? If not, then why do people keep talking about it as if it is?
@ Sonagi
Fair enough. Korean government was looking out for Korean people. How is that wrong? Or are you asking governments of the world to not prioritize their citizens’ lives? Rather have them sacrifice the people in the supposed cause of War on Terror?
Jon Stewart’s America: The Book had an interesting viewpoint on this matter; 5000 drowning Indonesian = 300 bombed Iraqis = 60 hijacked Turks = 12 kidnapped Europeans = 1 missing American. Don’t want to use tu quoque, but christ, sometimes, I guess I have to. Until we form an actual world government (of course UN doesn’t count), a government’s first and foremost duty is to its own citizens.
Security of Afghanistan? Surely you don’t imply that just because South Korean government decided not to bunker-buster bomb the #$^% out of where the Talibans (and the hostages) were or send in commandos Chuck Norris style, somehow that worsens the situation in Southern Afghanistan? I’m sorry to say this, but I wonder what the political impact of having 200 non-combatant soldiers (who were already on their way out) removed from a country where not even the main combatant nation isn’t investing most of their efforts into is.
You also comment previously that what everyone here is upset about is the ‘possible’ occurrence of ransom for the hostages. What’s very interesting is that while this is a baseless speculation (near-approaching a conspiracy theory, if not that in the first place), a lot of people here (including, apparently, yourself) seems to have just accepted it as a fact (like Warren up there). Quite a display of hypocrisy, considering the usual criticism of ‘Korean assumption’.
@ Hugh
Your point about Islamic sphere diplomacy was a very welcomed reminder. I think Saudi pressure definitely played a hand in the outcome, and I’m also glad to see this situation ended by the power of diplomacy.
#46 - Sonagi,
Yes and yes. I’m not sure where I claimed that the Korean employment of personal jurisdiction is unique, though. I just pointed out that it’s the operant principle that allows Korea to ban certain activities in other countries by its own citizens.
And as the article I cited @ #31 points out, the Korean government is accomplishing its end of the bargain by banning travel to Afghanistan and requiring Korean NGOs to leave there by the end of the month.
JK
You might want to check real current sources, and not just assume that your friends and relatives would have informed you that they registered their degrees!
But I’m curious as to the point you’re trying to make, since you raise the complete non sequitur of foreigners teaching here without qualifications, and the non sequitur of your friends and relatives with real degrees.
My original point, made in view of the Joongang Ilbo article, was that Christian studies is the most popular major among Koreans’ FAKE doctoral degrees registered (by law) with the KRF.
Is your point that Christian studies is not the most popular major among Koreans with fake doctoral degrees? What do you think is, then?
On what basis do you assume that the proportion of Christian studies majors(over 50%) among fake degrees registered with the KRF is not representative of fake degrees in general?
“4. The Taliban will guarantee safe passage for the withdrawing S. Korean troops.(WTF???)”
WTF indeed. I mean, could they take it up any deeper?
With Korean troops leaving Afghanistan there will be one less liability for the rest of the world.
By they way, why doesn’t the USFK have a scheduled withdrawal date that needs to be renewed every year or so? Sounds like a good idea to me…
“By they way, why doesn’t the USFK have a scheduled withdrawal date that needs to be renewed every year or so? Sounds like a good idea to me…”
To me, too, and to the other president named George who warned us that “It is our true policy to steer clear of entangling alliances with any portion of the foreign world.”
The authors of these pieces would agree also: A Republic, Not an Empire and The Original American Foreign Policy.
‘It’s ironic that you accuse expats of wishing death upon the hostages. Rather, your words reflect your frustrated and fruitless hatred of “the Expat.”’ sonagi
well, are you saying i want them to die? you better read this board again, lady.
moreover, i’ve seen enough of your writings to know you’re just one of them. you got ‘my-country-right-or-wrong’ written all over you.
*****
i stand by what i said. there are people on this board who want to see the koreans die. i think most the the fair minded who pass by here can see that.
as for koreans funding ieds, well, it’s a bit like arms for hotages, wouldn’t you say?
btw, it’s interesting we don’t see much relief or joy that the hostages will be released, what we see instaed are some very pissed off people talking about how this is going to hurt us policy.
yes, it is ironic.
I do not think there are any posters at all on this board who want to see the Korean hostages die. That’s a ridiculous and hateful charge and I defy you to point to any post that says this, pawikirogi. The expats who protest this deal here have quite other concerns, which they have clearly stated.
> “4. The Taliban will guarantee safe passage for the
> withdrawing S. Korean troops.(WTF???)”
That makes perfect sense as a provision in this situation; withdrawal of established foreign troops from a war-torn country is logistically tricky, and it’s easy for insurgents to ambush or otherwise attack them on their way out, while they are in vulnerable convoys (the US military forces in Iraq are reported to be extremely concerned about this). As part of this agreement, the Taliban is promising no attacks on the Koreans as they leave. This not only reassures the Koreans and their government, but also gains the Taliban a lot of “face” since they are making a commitment of the sort that de-facto governments make, as if they are truly in control of at least part of Afghanistan (disorganized gangs of rebels cannot make, or at least cannot keep, such promises).
And on that note, showing that the concerns of some of the above commentators are indeed justified:
“Maybe they (the Taliban) did not achieve all that they demanded, but they achieved a lot in terms of political credibility,” said Mustafa Alani, director of security and terrorism studies at the Dubai-based Gulf Research Center. “The fact that the Koreans negotiated with them directly and more or less in their territory … is in itself an achievement.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200.....fghanistan
#77,
“it’s a bit like arms for hotages, wouldn’t you say?”
Whatever, I’m not American.
This is nothing like ‘arms for hostages’, by the way. There’s a huge difference between paying a ransom as an equal and signing a document that puts you in a submissive position.
I dunno, I’m kind of with Pawi on this. I’m as anti-missionary as anyone, but if your first reaction to the news of the hostages’ release is anger, then something’s wrong.
#79 Sanshinseon, quote:
4. The Taliban will guarantee safe passage for the withdrawing S. Korean troops.(WTF???)”
That makes perfect sense as a provision in this situation; withdrawal of established foreign troops from a war-torn country is logistically tricky…”
My comment:
this is a meaningless concession for the Korean government to make; by signing it they are only giving away a “no-cost” propaganda victory to the Taliban and undercutting their coalition partners, though I reckon the official US position towards this “concession” will be one of resigned understanding.
I suppose you would have to search thoroughly on the web to confirm it (if possible from newspaper stories), but —
surely the 200 Korean engineer troops arrived “in-country” by air, at a secured air base such as the major US facility at Bagram. And they will leave the same way.
Both the Korean and the Taliban negotiators understand this perfectly well. When the Koreans move to leave from their individual compound(s) (I once found their specific location (s?) listed on the coalition web site) it will certainly be under Afghan govt troop escort, more likely NATO or even US armed protection.
If they have their own vehicles/heavy equipment, the Koreans will either arrange for these to be transported out in cargo planes (perhaps US military ones, or in civilian charters) or maybe they will just leave such equipment behind as a donation to the Afghan government.
If I’m not mistaken there are no operational railroads from other countries into Afghanistan and I can’t believe any foreign troops would do an evacuation convoy motor march through the dangerous areas of Aghanistan into Pakistan, no matter what the Taliban “promise” (ie in order to reach a Pakistani ocean port and embark for sea movement back to Korea).
It would be interesting to know what percentage/type of US military logistics are being moved by sea to ports in Pakistan and then by motor transport to Afghanistan. I doubt if it consists of anything other than relatively non-military heavy bulk cargo such as construction material, etc. If so this type of thing is surely moved by local hire shipping contractors who are responsible for their own security and who are assured of Pakistani govt protection for economic reasons.
Anything else such as US military equipment being moved by ground from Pakistan into Afghanistan would be a political liability for Pakistan; also an invitation for hostile natives to grab their AK’s and RPG’s and open up on the passing parade.
Logistics is undoubtedly a major reason for the US fighting its portion of the war in Afghanistan with a relatively “light” footprint.
You are undoubtedly correct on all that, Paul H, it’s a meaningless concession for the Korean government to make, and a face-gaining propaganda-victory for the Taliban at no cost to the Koreans.
@#70 bumfromkorea:
“Fair enough. Korean government was looking out for Korean people. How is that wrong? Or are you asking governments of the world to not prioritize their citizens’ lives?”
Nope. Nothing wrong with a government putting the lives of its citizens first. I was objecting to you and others painting the opposing stances of the Korean government and US government as reflecting different cultural values.
“Security of Afghanistan? Surely you don’t imply that just because South Korean government decided not to bunker-buster bomb the #$^% out of where the Talibans (and the hostages) were or send in commandos Chuck Norris style, somehow that worsens the situation in Southern Afghanistan? I’m sorry to say this, but I wonder what the political impact of having 200 non-combatant soldiers (who were already on their way out) removed from a country where not even the main combatant nation isn’t investing most of their efforts into is.
You also comment previously that what everyone here is upset about is the ‘possible’ occurrence of ransom for the hostages. What’s very interesting is that while this is a baseless speculation (near-approaching a conspiracy theory, if not that in the first place), a lot of people here (including, apparently, yourself) seems to have just accepted it as a fact (like Warren up there). Quite a display of hypocrisy, considering the usual criticism of ‘Korean assumption’.”
There were earlier reports of an attempted Korean ransom payoff that failed and resulted in one of the hostages being shot. Moreover, there was Korean government and media pressure on the US to negotiate with the Taliban on its demand for the release of Taliban prisoners. Since there was no prisoner release and if there was no ransom payoff, then no, there is no threat to Afghanistan’s security. We do not know if there was in fact some payment, but it would be naive to take the Korean government’s word for it. As I recall, neither the Italian or Afghan governments has officially acknowledged the terms of the release of the Italian reporter.
The US did painstakingly negotiate for the release of the embassy hostages over a period of more than a year with the government of Iran.
There is no assumption of a ransom payment on my part, bum. Just a suspicion, not because the Korean government is involved but because of circumstances surrounding other hostage releases. No hypocrisy. Just reasonable skepticism.
#66 Western Confucian:
“….if the Taliban were Evil incarnate, how could they have been the good guys in Rambo 3 and for the Reagan Administration? Ever wonder why the nonsense term jihadi (for “one who wages jihad”) was created to replace the correct term mujahadin, which [we?] were told meant “freedom fighter” in the ’80s?”
The Taliban as a formal organization did not exist during the 80’s (Reagan administration ended in 1989, Rambo III 1988; BTW I recommend you not cite “Rambo” movies as a source of your historical knowledge if you are interested in having any credibility as to assertions of what knowledgeable Americans consider that their US military can and cannot do).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.....since_1992
The replacement of the “positive” term “mujahideen” by the “negative” one “jihadi” seems to me an accurate reflection of reality on the ground, rather than some sort of sinister manipulation of “us” plebians by the dark forces of the Reagan-Bush administration (that is what you are implying right?)
Nice, so because of a handful of irresponsible missionaries, the people who might actually be doing some real humanitarian work have to get out of dodge. Can I get a praise Jesus?
Oh, and just to clarify for those who would impute some sort of wish to see the hostages die to my above statement… I’m glad that the hostages (most of them) are coming back alive. I don’t really disapprove of the deal the SK government made. I still think the hostages were a bunch of idiots for going to Afghanistan in the first place.
Eh, I don’t think they are idiots for GOING to Afghanistan… They were idiots for traveling AROUND Afghanistan in a bright, shiny, unguarded bus in a particularly BAD part of the neighborhood.
Korean evangelical Protestant Christianity has quite rightly taken on a great deal of censure within S Korea as a result of this episode. But I think it is fairer to say that the recklessness of these hostages’ initial undertaking is generally representative of an over-competitive S Korea in general. The obsession for social status – the climbing of the social pecking order – within the world’s most Confucian society that today lacks universal standards of social status only promotes this kind of nonsense.
While we may seem some serious soul searching following the safe return of the last of the hostages, I doubt mass self-reflection will be deep or wide enough to consider the ultimate causes for modern Koreans to launch themselves into risky, prestigious activities.
In other words, we may expect less risky, prestige-based evangelism, but we can still expect to find Koreans getting themselves caught in often dangerous schemes as they seek to prove they are better – or at least, not inferior – to the bulk of the pack
Mgr Lazarus You Heung-sik, Catholic Bishop of Taejŏn, suggests it may have been the Presbyterians, not the goverment, who paid ransom:
“[T]he release of Protestant missionaries has set a dangerous precedent. Our government humiliated itself by dealing with fundamentalists. Now they can think they can do the same with other hostages. At the same time, the agreement humiliated Protestant Churches who have been much criticised at home for their action abroad and for the ransom many think they paid.”
The link to the above: