Normally, I don’t read Korea Times editorials, but this one made me chuckle — concerning US pressure on Korea to dispatch troops to Afghanistan (and pressure to increase Korea’s burned in relocating US bases), the KT said:
In this situation, President Lee Myung-bak should not let his self-declared pragmatic diplomacy be taken hostage for the alliance with the U.S. What is important is that the Lee administration should not sacrifice South Korea’s national interests under the name of alliance. We have to think over what is a true alliance between the two countries.
A true alliance, apparently, is one in which Korea can get away with dispatching a small number of engineers and medics to Afghanistan (and promising the Taliban — the Taliban! — to pull them out when Korean nationals get caught doing something so mind-bogglingly stupid it almost qualifies as “suicide by jihadi” ), while the US is obligated to place hundreds of thousands in harms way to defend Korea in the event of an emergency. Even our much-maligned NATO partners — several of which with large and potentially problematic Muslim populations — are more generous. I can assure the editorial staff of the KT, Seoul isn’t the only side that needs to think over what is a true alliance between the two countries.
53 Comments
Oh get over yourself. LMB hasnt decided yet what he will do, but he will most likely send troops. What happened before was under Roh and his clique and I dont think LMB will continue their policies. If you havent seen a marked change in how things are being handled you may as well close down this blog. Its obvious that the new administration is much closer to Washington on crucial issues related to NK for example and Im sure it will be so on other issues, including Afghanistan. if there is a final breakthrough on the nuke declaration you should thank LMB for closing down NK’s main source of aid and funding and putting them in a corner. if it was business as usual NK could rely on Seoul to bail them out. Now, well, its not gonna happen unless NK plays ball and they look like they may finally do that. Not all of this is thanks to LMB but a large part of it is.
Also, lets not kid ourselves. The US doesnt maintain a large presence in Korea/Japan out of the goodness of their hearts. This is a very important region for the US. NK isnt even the main reason the US maintains a presence in this region, though it is an important one. Throughout histories empires have maintained military presence in far away lands for selfish reasons. The US is an empire no different from Rome or Britain. It does things for selfish reasons and for the sake of the Empire. Not to say thats bad because but thats how it is.
Finally, the Korea Times is a rag on par with toilet paper. Its a joke compared even to the Herald.
Should Korea deploy troops? Probably so. Let’s give them time to make a decision before we attack them, eh?
Does this blog receive funding from the US State Dept.?
Heaven forbid if most South Koreans are over Bush’s bogus “war on terror.”
Who cares what a majority of South Koreans think, right?
Bush just isn’t the sort of man that any thinking nation should follow into war. And I say that even as a citizen of a nation (Canada) so far under the American security umbrella that we haven’t seen the sky in generations. As for our help in Afghanistan, you’re welcome. You’re quite right about this assistance being pure generosity. I attribute no such altruistic motive to the continuing US military presence here.
I wonder how many posts until the words “Looney left” get used?
Linkd, stop yer complainin’ and just give us the rest of yer oil, eh?
Think we’re hard to live with now, just give us a couple more years at $100 a barrel. We’ll buy Texas, if Chavez doesn’t snap it up first.
#4: Seems to me the neo-cons are the real loons.
Anyone going to see Gen. Colin “The Patsy” Powell speak at Kodae today at 3pm?
Hopefully someone there will ask about his whitewashing of My Lai!
Why do people cry and whine about America being an Empire? Yes, it is an Empire. And I’m glad it is. Which other nation would you rather have as the world’s superpower? I bet you wish it was China or Russia. Because we all know their history of treating their citizens and critics.
If the Korean government sends troops to Afghanistan, they’ll do it like they did in Iraq; find a relatively quiet corner, build a nice fort, sit inside, and pay to defend the outer perimiter.
Any one who disagrees this post has been weened from the ‘tit’ for far too long. When it comes to matters of globaly security, you’re either in or you’re out. Period. Fence sitters need not apply. I’m sorry, but anyone who thinks otherwise is downright foolish.
As for KT’s editorial dream team, well, don’t get me started on that one. The recent jaunt to Afghanistan in the name of ‘good faith’ was an absolute fiasco and I don’t remember reading one objective piece from KT at the time but rather a string of subjective drivel that used the mishap as a means to empower their already swelling hatred for the US.
#8: “Why do people cry and whine about America being an Empire?”
Well, I know Ahmadinejad for one sure ain’t complainin’, ever since we handed him Iraq on a silver platter.
That’s fine if Koreans are over the “war on terror,” but when randsom payments from the Korean government fund the killing of so called, “allied” soldiers, perhaps the ally status is not quite accurate. Let’s not forget the ROK government has been subsidizing another enemy, the North Korean Army, for several years as well.
Time to pack up USFK and leave.
So ummm… Why are there still troops in Afghanistan again? It’s been 6 years — hasn’t the Afghani government had enough time to raise its own damn army?
Whoops, typo… In the post above, “Afghanistan” should read “South Korea”, “6″ should read “50+”, and “Afghani Government” should read “South Korean government”. Sorry…
As far as I’m concerned anything that happened during Roh’s presidency didn’t happen.
i have a question for obama supporters and those who generally feel that US should pull out of iraq. i hope my question is not viewed as a commentary. i’m really curious. the question is, wouldn’t a pull out in iraq result in more instability and chaos?
i mean, let’s say attacking iraq was a collosall mistake and all the blame goes to bush for the sake of argument. but now that we are there, wouldn’t the pull out be even worse, in terms of more lives being lost? the only reason i ask is that in the past two days, i saw a british reporter on cnn talking about how the surge in essence has been a success and a pull out would be a mistake. i also heard on npr an iraqi female translator who worked with the US military saying the same thing, that the US should not pull out until there is more stability.
so, wouldn’t a pullout be worse? granted, it’s only two people’s opinion, but they were there to see the situation for themselves and i would think they have a better grasp of things than me. i would really like to know the justification for a pullout other than the war should never have happened.
robert, my apologies for asking this question under this post.
Unconditional pullout does seem irresponsible. A more interesting question, I think, is: What does “stay” mean? i.e., For how long? Under what rules, governed by whose laws? With what power? Who pays for your presence? What governs the decision to leave? Is there even any intention of leaving? What becomes the reason for an extended stay, assuming the ‘fight the terrorists’ excuse wears thin?
I don’t see anyone’s made the point yet that Korea has zero interest in Afghanistan. The Korea-US alliance does not require Korea to get involved in US military operations overseas. The Times editorial may be awkwardly expressed, but it makes the right point.
“Why do people cry and whine about America being an Empire?”
Because we shouldn’t have to police other peoples’ problems and we shouldn’t use the military to protect commercial interests.
“Yes, it is an Empire. And I’m glad it is. Which other nation would you rather have as the world’s superpower?”
I’m not glad anymore that it is. When there was the threat from the Soviet Union, then perhaps, but even then our Domino theory didn’t pan out. I would rather we were a bit more humble in our policies and not enforce our way of life on others.
“I bet you wish it was China or Russia. Because we all know their history of treating their citizens and critics.”
They couldn’t be superpowers as long as the US due to their economic policies. Hell, during the cold war we were subsidizing Russia with food and money because their farming policies failed. China may be one in the future, but for now, only their immediate neighbors should worry about human waves. As far as treatment of their citizens and critics, well, that’s their society’s problem to work out. Trade with China has improved their society and I predict that their political system will change. No trade with Cuba has not toppled their leaders even with sanctions for 50+ years.
the new LMB admin will lean a lot farther to the right however the interesting aspect of this is the democrats win the US election and now we have an opposite scenario with a “looney left” adminsitration from obama or HRC and a conservative here in south korea
the troops SK sent to iraq were symblolic at best but now LMB may want to take that a step further and send some combat troops to afghanistan i doubt it but it could happen
Let’s assume Korea decided to get involved in a conflict in Burkina Faso. Would the US as a good ally have to send troops there too?
Perhaps, but then again, is Afghanistan a matter of crucial national interest to, say, the Netherlands and Canada? And if it is, why so for them and not for Korea? Don’t get me wrong — if Korea has zero interest in Afghanistan, or zero interest in helping its ally in Afghanistan, it shouldn’t send troops. But that works both ways.
If the Burkina Faso government had, let’s say, provided shelter to a terrorist group that hijacked an airliner and flew it into the 63 Building, I might be inclined to say yes.
@21 Should we assume that when Korea invaded Burkina Faso that they sent some of their ten of thousands of troops who’ve been stationed in and protecting Washington D.C. for the last half century?
Netherlands has the highest number of soldiers deployed per 1,000 people as well.
Roh was anti-US and LMB has already stated that he wants Korea playing a role with American military operations.
@25 perhaps some of the dutch parliament members realized that it is a great opportunity for them to kill them some of them despised muslims.
“If the Burkina Faso government had, let’s say, provided shelter to a terrorist group that hijacked an airliner and flew it into the 63 Building, I might be inclined to say yes.”
So… Korea doesn’t have to send troops to Iraq but only to Afghanistan?
BTW, for the record, I’m starting to question why even the US is in Afghanistan now. Six years of wasting mountains of money and valuable military resources trying to build viable democracies in two Muslim countries has, oddly enough, soured me on the experience. It’s just that I think times like this are instructive. If the international community thinks it has a crucial interest in turning Afghanistan into, if not a model democracy, then at least a functioning state — and it certainly appears the international community, or at least NATO, does believe this — then why is it that Korea might feel that this interest does not apply to them? Then, I might ask, if Korea and the United States do not share such interests, what interests do they share that warrant a military alliance — backed up with very real US security guarantees — between the two states?
@#16
I am one of those people who’s torn between Obama and McCain. Being a flaming social liberal on most issues (baby-killing, baby-eating, and “two men making God cry”), I have trouble supporting McCain despite agreeing most of what he says about Iraq. I have trouble supporting Obama even though I like quite a bit of his domestic policies (despite florid speeches, his policy proposals (handed out during campaigns) are quite detailed) because I think he would pull troops out too quickly (his position isn’t Ron Paul immediate pullout, but definitely prioritizes “Out” rather than “Fix”).
So… I dunno… coin flip? Anyone got a quarter?
Vote Obama and I’ll give you a dollar.
If anyone ever found 100 million barrels of oil underneath the big pile of rocks they call Afghanistan, everyone and his uncle will be trying to create a “viable” state there.
Alas, Afghanistan has really nothing of interest other then opium poppy fields and Muslim extremists…
The U.S. may just need to say there to keep it from ever being a Al Qaeda safe haven, that is unless they turn Northern Pakistan into one, then we may need to send troops there…
Because we shouldn’t have to police other peoples’ problems and we shouldn’t use the military to protect commercial interests.
tell that to europeans in I and II
tell it to the soviets under communist oppression and the block nations who have since been awarded “our way of life”
first hand you can see what the policing did here in SK which was a very unpopular choice at the time so soon after WWII
i guess in a perfect world we wouldnt have dictators, opression, world poverty, economic disparity and we would all be so peachy keen!
I’m not glad anymore that it is. When there was the threat from the Soviet Union, then perhaps, but even then our Domino theory didn’t pan out. I would rather we were a bit more humble in our policies and not enforce our way of life on others.
translation “i am voting for obama”
the level of denial from the looney left on the surge is astounding and its based on their pure hatred of bush
yes they would rather see many more die to prove their point rather than stability and light at the end of the tunnel of a military mission that should have been completed in 91.
It’s Iraq that makes absolutely no sense. We had a guy there that was essentially neutered. There was plenty of evidence for that, but Dubya just didn’t wanna believe it. Kept seeing some kind of Saddam Hussein/Al Qaeda/WMD cabal that just didn’t exist.
Saddam hated Al Qaeda (as well as Islamic extremism) and never had the resources after Gulf War I to seriously pursue WMDs. We’d be at least $3 trillion richer and have 4k more citizens if we had just left that looney coot alone.
# 14
This may fall into the “should never have happened” category:
The US should have pulled out when the original goal of the war, the elimination of WMD under UN Resolution was accomplished/verified, even if the UN inspectors were right even before the war.
Another justification, aside from simply not belonging there, is additional blowback. The US is going to get it again, it’s just a matter of when. We’re growing a generation of Iraqis that hate our intervention into their self-determination. At lease if we pull out we can begin to repair relations by establishing trade with what ever government they determine. Look at Vietnam. It will get worse before it will get better, but at least they will decide and we won’t have our soldiers in the middle either as a crutch or a scapegoat.
You want another one? Remember the line that the war would be paid for by Iraqi oil? Nope, we’re still paying and paying more at the pump.
Another reason? Futility. It will never end. The same way that no red-blooded American would stand by for a foreign army on our soil, so too will Iraqi’s and other Muslims stand by with non-believers on their soil.
How about the hypocrisy of the invasion. Let’s bring freedom and democracy to the oppressed Iraqis…at the end of a gun. Doesn’t that very notion go against liberty? A foreign power tells the locals that they WILL have democracy.
How about Constitutionality? NO declaration of war was given by Congress. The executive branch can play cowboy-shoot’em-up for 90 days, but then the congress needs to OK the war otherwise they have to come home. BTW, Korean War, also unconstitutional. Sadly, our congress has endorsed the invasion every year for fear of “not supporting the troops.” In fact they could end it this very day by stopping the money that would, in any way, support this invasion.
There are so many reasons to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, but if you really want a reason that hit’s home, try money. John Q Public can’t pay for gas or a mortgage, but wants the government (wrongly in my opinion) to step in and save him from a bad financial decision. We can, if we must (grrrr), but we need to stop spending it overseas and bring it home.
This war is being paid for, not by us, but by our grandchildren who be paying the interest while we lie in the ground. Just look at China and how happy they are sitting on their mountain of US debt, raking in the interest.
@32 “yes [the looney left] would rather see many more die to prove their point rather than stability…” -McNutty
I love when my conservative friends try to play this card in an argument, because it’s usually where they start to lose. It’s a ridiculous statement, and that some rightwingers like to believe it is even more ridiculous.
@33 well said.
#32 McNut,
Not looney left, constitutional conservative or perhaps you’d like the term, Libertarian who have more in common with Republicans than Democrats, you, you neo-con police-stater.
Your translation is poor. I’d vote for Ron Paul, even if I have to write it in.
“tell that to europeans in I and II”
We were attacked first, we were not the initiators. We also declared war.
“tell it to the soviets under communist oppression and the block nations who have since been awarded “our way of life””
Those governments fell on their own mismanagement and their people chose their own way. We didn’t have to invade them and dictate terms.
“first hand you can see what the policing did here in SK which was a very unpopular choice at the time so soon after WWII.”
Your point is that our military presence created a stable environment for economic development. And we’re still paying for it 50 years later. The Korean war was not our problem. We did some policing in Vietnam. After we stopped policing, we eventually traded and they are getting better through soft power, not through force.
You would see our soldiers die and let them intervene is what history has taught us as the bloodiest of wars — civil war. We created the situation in Iraq, we messed up, let’s get out, learn from our mistakes and not repeat them. Also, my friend, I’m not a Yellow Republican/Libertarian. This boy’s been in the sand from 05-06 and that surge has everything to do with our presence and nothing or little to do with the cock-up they call the Iraqi army. If that is so, then we will never leave and we’ll always be the guy in the middle.
“the level of denial from the looney left on the surge is astounding and its based on their pure hatred of bush
yes they would rather see many more die to prove their point rather than stability and light at the end of the tunnel of a military mission that should have been completed in 91.”
Translation: “I like my civil liberties taken away and putting my countryman’s lives at risk because those darn Muslims can’t make their own choices about how they want to live. Oh, and that’s MY oil they’re living on. Heil Bush!”
@31, Afghanistan has natural gas, petroleum, coal, copper, chromite, talc, barites, sulfur, lead, zinc, iron ore, salt, gold, and precious/semiprecious stones.
So, there actually is more to Afghanistan than poppy fields and pesky fundamentalists.
Last I checked, Korea is interested in aquiring raw materials from new areas. It’d be as good a reason as any to send troops there…dontya think?
Let’s just pull US troops out of Korea and send some of them to Afganistan. Believe me, if I had the power to do so, it would have been done looooong ago. Bet ya the Koreans would whining over that like they did in 04.
Korea can defend itself on it’s own. If there’s a war in Korea, America should simply look the other way.
And no more awarding Korean companies contracts in places where the US military goes either.
Enough is enough
that is would be whining…
“Alas, Afghanistan has really nothing of interest other then opium poppy fields and Muslim extremists…”
as #38 said, there IS more. Also, think pipelines
#30: Linkd, I voted for Obama in the California primary. Can I have a dollar, too?
#16: “i have a question for obama supporters and those who generally feel that US should pull out of iraq. i hope my question is not viewed as a commentary. i’m really curious. the question is, wouldn’t a pull out in iraq result in more instability and chaos?”
Well, here’s what Obama said in his speech “The World Beyond Iraq” delivered on 19 March 2008:
“In order to end this war responsibly, I will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. We can responsibly remove 1 to 2 combat brigades each month. If we start with the number of brigades we have in Iraq today, we can remove all of them 16 months. After this redeployment, we will leave enough troops in Iraq to guard our embassy and diplomats, and a counter-terrorism force to strike al Qaeda if it forms a base that the Iraqis cannot destroy. What I propose is not – and never has been – a precipitous drawdown. It is instead a detailed and prudent plan that will end a war nearly seven years after it started.
My plan to end this war will finally put pressure on Iraq’s leaders to take responsibility for their future. Because we’ve learned that when we tell Iraq’s leaders that we’ll stay as long as it takes, they take as long as they want. We need to send a different message. We will help Iraq reach a meaningful accord on national reconciliation. We will engage with every country in the region – and the UN – to support the stability and territorial integrity of Iraq. And we will launch a major humanitarian initiative to support Iraq’s refugees and people. But Iraqis must take responsibility for their country. It is precisely this kind of approach – an approach that puts the onus on the Iraqis, and that relies on more than just military power – that is needed to stabilize Iraq.”
The fact of the matter is that Iraq was always an artificial state and Saddam was the only thing holding it together. This is the reality that a lot of people seem to forget. I say give the Kurds their own nation and let the Sunnis and Shiites hash things out amongst themselves. We broke the pot but we’ll never be able to fix it because the pot itself doesn’t want to be fixed. Indeed, the pot was never real.
By the way, I saw Colin Powell speak at Kodae today and he said the US could have troops here in Korea for another 50 years.
Guess he doesn’t read The Marmot’s Hole, does he?
Hmmm… it took McNutball 20 comments for us to see “looney left” get used.
Must be getting slow in his old age.
Let me recommend “Conflict and Culture” by Salzman. Its a very good primer on Islam and the west and Arab tribal culture.
NATO, exept for the Canadiens, Brits and Danes, have proven themselves to be reluctant to commit COMBAT units to the fight in Afghanistan.
Robert Kaplan defends this but I disagree and think more should be expected of our allies. By the way, I did read that there are some some small elite counter terror ARAB soldiers fighting the Taliban under NATO auspices.
1. let’s remember koreans have already died as a result of the us in afghanistan.
2. what marmot is really saying is, koreans need to die for the benefit of us policy even though said policy has no benefit to koreans. that’s very differnt than the us intervening in korea where the us fought an ideology on behalf of it’s own thus resulting in the by-product of dictatorship in korea.
3. if the expat can figure out korea can fight the north on it’s own, do you think the folks who run the pentagon can too? it seems obvious to me the us is in korea for more than nk. that’s why the troops are there. anyone who thinks it’s because of concern needs to come out of his drunken stupor. the us doesn’t do anything that doesn’t benefit the us.
4. korean benefits the us.
5. koreans need to think long and hard before they adopt a policy that entangles them in a fight that isn’t theirs. the west created radical islam. why should korea involve itself in such?
6. unlike japan, thousands of korean troops have already died on behalf of the us with not a word of thanks from the american people. keep that in mind, korea. keep that in mind.
4.
Pawi,
Some of those points are true. However, I think that the U.S. applied a lot of diplomatic pressure to the Afgani government that enabled that deal to get those 23 hostages out alive also.
hey pawi correct me if i am wrong (which rarely happens) but i think the only memorial to that ROK soldier killed in afghanistan is right here on Yongsan base
i know the roh government didnt give a rats ass about it
and now this really shows your inept ability to be logical or rational
the west created radical islam.
I think the complaints on American attempts to establish democracy in foreign countries with no history of democracy, and by military force are particularly ironic on a SOUTH KOREAN BLOG–that is, a country that would not exist were it not for Americans doing just that.
I wonder if, in another 50 years, Afghani and Iraqi bloggers will be whining about American involvement in Africa or Mars or god knows where. No good deed goes unpunished, after all.
As for people calling America an “empire”…
Normally I’d beat you over the head with my IR diploma, but in this case I can simply point you to the dictionary…
EMPIRE: an extensive group of states or countries under a single supreme authority, formerly esp. an emperor or empress
empire (adj.)
: [in names ] the Roman Empire.
Is America powerful and influential? Absolutely. but there’s another word for it:
HEGEMONY: leadership or dominance, esp. by one country or social group over others : Germany was united under Prussian hegemony after 1871.
Janus, are you familiar with the Hardt & Negri Empire thesis?
If anyone is interested, I was able to ask Colin Powell about reunification yesterday and he gave a ringing endorsement of the alliance:
http://www.kingbaeksu.com/bbs/.....amp;no=902
Apart from the fact that he didn’t actually answer my question, a fundamental flaw in his reasoning is that the South Korean people actually want reunification. In any case, he seems to be pretty happy with the status quo for now.
#46 Pawi, don’t forget that the hostages had no fucking business in Afghanistan. You should also come to terms with the fact that Korea handled the situation like a pack of cowards. Your country bought IUD’s and AK-47’s with the money you paid the terrorists. Long live George Bush. Take the fight to the proper region.
Make that IED.
One Trackback
[...] appears I’m not the only one ambivalent about the dispatch of these South Korean policemen as [...]