In an interview with the Chosun Ilbo, former US Ambassador to Korea Thomas Hubbard discussed the death of middle school girls Hyo-sun and Mi-seon 10 years ago.
To sum up, he said he regrets not pushing then-US President Bush to apologize directly instead of sending an apology letter, but at the same time, nobody on the Korean side stood up and explained to the Korean people the importance of the Korea—US alliance. He said he understood an election was coming up, but it was regretful that no Korean officials or politicians did any explaining, and everyone just stood back and tried not to get entangled in the mess.
The Chosun used Hubbard’s interview to pen an editorial, too, that questioned whether Korean politicians have since gotten the courage to tell people why the alliance is needed.
GI Korea has a post on the 10-year anniversary of the girls’ deaths. The Hankyoreh has a (very worth-reading) piece, too, although I was saddened that I couldn’t find any editorials on it.
The only thing I’ll say is that I think for a lot of Americans connected either personally or professionally to Korea, the 2002 protests were a major turning point—few of us ever looked at the Korea—US alliance—an “alliance forged in blood”—in the same way again.
UPDATE: Be sure to check out Matt’s excellent post on the anniversary here.
{ 80 comments… read them below or add one }
Let us also not forget the tenth anniversary of the West Sea (Yellow Sea) Naval Battle which is in 2 weeks. http://dok.do/H9PKfG
The blog post you linked to had an earlier post beneath it (flashback within a flashback), from 2003. I love reading Robert’s old posts from back then. He was quick to take a side, and dropped f-bombs like a mofo!
Yeah, they’re fun to read, but frankly, if there’s anything I’ve learned from nine years of blogging, it’s that I really shouldn’t be so quick to take a side.
Amb Hubbard is letting the hosts off light here. Nobody stepped up to explain the SOFA revisions that the ROK had just agreed to, or to combat the rumors spread by mainstream media that the drivers deliberately hit the girls and then laughed at their deaths. That was an orgy of media malpractice that makes MBC ‘s recent travesties look like Pulitzer material. (Of course MBC was involved in the 2002 fun).
Profiles in “progressive” courage … not!
#4 we all know the “progressives”, their ranks filled with radicals, are the biggest disturbers of shit, and this was no exception. I think a lot of Koreans are coming to realization now a days, how they were hood winked. This, plus the Mad Cow. Just read that story from Hankyoreh article that Robert posted.
The year 2002 was an election year, and the conservative politicans didn’t speak up because they were scared they would lose the votes. Instead, they pandered to the progressive camps, including the lead candidate of GNP Lee Hoi Chang, shrinking down and meekly asking the US to apologize, being afraid that he would lose his presidency.
2002 was also the world club year. not many americans or foreigners in general paid much attention to Korea before this. Korean films were beginning to make an impression worldwide, but its probably the beginning time of the age of english teachers.
marmots blog was in its infancy and sunshine was at its height…
ten years later, korean journalism still has long way to go in journalistic integrity.
But the question remains. who was really responsible for this? the left or the right? the rise of 386 and their extremely radical political agenda has very much to do with the corruption and extremism of Korea’s right. America was unfortunately, guilty by association.
the issue really wasnt about SOFA. It was about the kids beng angry with their parents and america was on the parent’s side.
Viewed from afar, the election to parliament of bonafide Pyongyang stooges (not just Sunshine softies) and the behavior of these folks in the few months since that vote suggests few lessons were learned over the decade and there is more trouble in store. I hope I’m wrong.
America wasn’t on the parents’ side; America was the parent.
#7 – there maybe more trouble ahead, but the conservatives are much more ready now, and with the aging of Korea’s population, the politics of the voters themselves are becoming more in tune with the conservatives.
#8. that probably explains everything.
MH commentariat to old women in their 80s, who were raped and tortured for years and may not have any chance at redress before they die: “GET OVER IT!! GET OVER IIIITTTTT!!!!!!!”
MH commentariat to a large, peaceful demonstration in which absolutely no one was hurt: “HOW DARE DEY?! WE WILL NEVER FORGET!! FUCK KOREANS!!”
^ this is the baseball ball being thrown in from the deep left field.
On a more serious note:
The 2002 demonstrations were chickens coming to roost. As much as I believe that having U.S. (rather than U.S.S.R.) as a patron state helped the democratization of South Korea, one cannot forget that for decades, U.S. betrayed its own ideals and supported a series of South Korean dictators. America turned a blind eye to the oppression by Rhee, Park and finally Chun. To win the Cold War, U.S. was willing to tolerate mass murderers leading a country, as long as that mass murderer was not a communist. And this is before we even get into the many crimes committed by GIs, property destruction caused by USFK that was rarely compensated adequately for, the prime real estate that USFK occupies without paying a penny and the horrendous environmental defilement of those said real estate.
If America is “the parent” — a ludicrous metaphor, by the way, but I am willing to indulge in it — it was a parent that permanently plopped down in the middle of the child’s room and took a dump in it. Sure, she fed the child and gave him shelter. But beyond that, she abandoned any reasonable standard of parental guidance.
The 2002 demonstrations were the first real chance for Korean people to vent their frustrations with U.S., something which they were not able to do under Korea’s military governments who had their mouths super-glued to their patron’s groin. In that context, it was remarkable that the protests were so peaceful, especially considering the number of people involved.
As an American, this is beyond disappointing. By all rights, U.S. should be able to not piss off Koreans, one of its most significant allies in Asia. U.S. interacted with Korea more closely than nearly every ally it has. And STILL U.S. cannot get its shit together long enough to quickly respond to a burgeoning P.R. disaster. If America cannot even manage to not piss off Koreans, how could it possibly hope to not piss off Afghanistan, Iraq, or any other global area in which U.S. needs to secure its national interest?
Why doesn’t America do something about Lee Myung Bak, isn’t he a dictator too?
You are being serious, I was afraid of that.
The Republic of Korea reached the age of majority in 1987. It doesn’t need a parent. It needs allies. Even if we sent our very best troops and treated every inch of soil like a national park, the US-ROK relationship would still be strained by the visible presence of foreign troops in Korean soil, an ever present reminder that Korea did not liberate itself in 1945 and remains unable or unwilling to demonstrate full responsibility for its defense. A drawdown of US troops is in both our countries’ interests.
and japan was defeated and did not liberate itself. crock of shit, sonagi. its all got to do w respect. read the koreans post again.
That screed is enough to make me wonder why any Koreans chose to emigrate to the U.S. Revenge?
Discussions like this are “above your pay grade,” pawi. Get back under the dingo.
Besides liberating you from Japanese colonial rule, sacrificing 37,000 of its own men to stop North Korean aggression, and providing the basic security and open markets necessary to engineer one of the greatest socio-economic success stories in the history of man, what has America ever done for you?
As opposed to certain segments of the then-ruling party, progressive press and netizenry who proved quite adept at generating a P.R. diaster aimed at the country’s most important ally? Hey, fine with me—ultimately, between the distrust it generated and the fact that it got Roh elected, it turned out to be a bigger disaster for Korea than for the United States.
Japan does not have US military bases in the middle of its capital or any other major city, and the Okinawans have long resented playing host while the rest of Japan prospered under the US military umbrella,.
Sonagi,
One of the biggest reasons why the Okinawans resent the U.S. military presence is that many marines there act like jack asses.
I had Korean bbq recently with a ex-marine who was stationed in both Okinawa and South Korea (somewhere in the shigol, forgot to ask him where) sometime in the 90′s and he said that he didn’t blame the Okinawans for hating them. A lot of them treated the place like the personal playground with little regard for the local population. He had a fine time in South Korea… then again, there weren’t 20k marines stationed there.
When looking at the U.S. military in Korea, I like to focus on the fine contributions to Korea studies that many of these former service men had contributed to…
* James Palais- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Palais
* Mark Byington- http://korea.fas.harvard.edu/programs/early-korea-project
* Daniel Kane- http://www2.hawaii.edu/~dkane/
* Gari Ledyard- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gari_Ledyard
Oh, also. Okinawa is kind of like the Sicily of Japan. Yeah, it’s a part of Japan, but mainland Japanese do have a latent form or racism towards them. Thus, they deem is appropriate if there is going to be any significant land station for U.S. troops, it might as well be in their Sicily.
Try to remember your college days, Wangkon. If a large group of young people congregate together, odds are that at least a few of them are going act like jackasses, especially if the male:female ratio is high. When I lived in a college town as a working adult, I made a point of living as far away from campus as possible.
Well, for better or for worse… it makes the natives restless.
I thought we agreed on a wombat??
A tad condescending, wouldn’t you say?
America’s main aim throughout the last 60 years in Korea has been the ROK’s security (and by extension, its own). Of course they made mistakes, but it’s now 2012 and South Korea is free, secure and prosperous. You seem to think (naively, I might add) that in the decades after the Korean War the ROK had the luxury (and America the ability) of tossing out ROK leaders and running peaceful elections of the sort we see today, at the drop of a hat. It seems to be the most common mistake of progressive revisionists: the simple-minded idea that Korea was a hapless (and helpless) victim of foreign stewards and predators throughout its modern history, with little or no power to enact change on its own, and that the US was an omnipotent force that had the ability to make things right, and fix things up, but chose not to.
This idea reaches back as far as Taft-Katsura, when the US (not even a great power yet) is blamed for not saving Korea from Japan. America and Korea weren’t even allies in those days, and the US barely had a functioning navy, yet somehow, in the eyes of so many young Koreans, the US’s agreement not to attack Japan is viewed as a betrayal, and ultimately a cause for the colonial period. Why on earth was the US obligated to save Korea from Japan (and itself?)
Chun and Park are America’s fault, even though there is no evidence to suggest the US had any hand in their siezing power, and even though both of them drew power from massive support bases in Korea. Rhee is a puppet of the US, even though there was no alternative, and the US wrestled with him every step of his time in office.
Anyway, I’m with Sonagi: the US’ legacy is a great one in the ROK, but the boots on the ground are way past due leaving.
Well, I think I’ve said this before, but I like American Empire. One of the few things that keeps the dollar steady….
Well said, hoju.
And, yes, as you would guess, I seized on dingos because they were in the headlines this week, so wombats it is.
america’s support for dictators was the right choice. koreans are fractious; without an iron fist, i am not sure korea would be where it is now. thank god for 박정희!
ps the korean does not know hunger.
I think Pawi just upped his pay grade. Imagine left-leaning political parties sending people like to Lim Soo-kyung, Lee Seok-ki, and Kim Jae-yeon to the National Assembly in the 60s, when South Korea was much weaker and North Korea much stronger compared to now.
It’s people like TK that pisses me off the most. I’m not talking about the Jongbuk forces who’s divide and conquer strategy are so obvious. It’s the spoiled brat know nothings who think they can stand up to North Korea by holding up candle lights and singing kumbaya, screaming democracy. Your enemy is not America or South Korea. Your enemy is up north, who’s enslaving 23 million people. Why aren’t you guys ever standing up and speaking up for them?
^ I must say, it is telling that the older generation of Koreans – you know, the ones who actually lived through the Korean war and the dictators – are the most pro-US.
“I think Pawi just upped his pay grade. Imagine left-leaning political parties sending people like to Lim Soo-kyung, Lee Seok-ki, and Kim Jae-yeon to the National Assembly in the 60s, when South Korea was much weaker and North Korea much stronger compared to now.”
The result would have been all too predictable. Look at South Vietnam 1975.
@32,
That’s true. And, with younger Koreans, among those who served as KATUSA – you know, the ones who actually work day in and day out with American servicemen and -women – you’ll find that same condition exists.
Like I said, food and shelter. Don’t think I am discounting the importance of those things. In fact, compared to providing food and shelter, crapping in the middle of the room is more of a nuisance, an attack on dignity rather than on physical well being. The point is — you are not supposed to attack the dignity either, no matter what else you are doing.
First, U.S. would not leave Korea even if Korea begged her to do so. (Just look at your latest couple of posts!)
Second, The imperative to learn diplomatic self-awareness is stronger for the U.S. Korea does not have a global ambition like U.S. does. Korea only needs to do a half-assed job at keeping one country happy, and it has done so just fine under the progressive administrations. America, on the other hand, must continue ruling a huge portion of the world, or accept its status being dramatically reduced.
This is a scoff-worthy mischaracterization of the progressive historical theory. The point always has been that throughout Korean history, despite external forces working against them, Korean people always rose up to achieve freedom, and eventually democracy. “with little or no power”? Like hell.
Being that I am an American also, I am more generous about U.S.’s role in Korea’s democratization than other progressives. But the fact remains — U.S. was always in a position to vindicate its stated ideals of freedom and democracy in Korea, and they sat on their hands, if not actively encouraging the oppression under the mistaken impression (informed by their paranoia against communism) that democratization activists are no more than communists.
Ah, pathetic little man. You don’t even know what freedom means. You would sell out your freedom to speak, move, think, sing, write, dance, love, grow out hair, all for a pitiful loaf of bread. You owe your freedom to yap on the Internet to the blood of the activists, but instead of being grateful, you shake your fist at them.
I hate all enemies of freedom. But North Korea can’t touch me, whereas South Korean government can.
Funny, I found it to be completely opposite with KATUSA grads — they would go in with neutral/favorable impression of U.S., and would get out utterly disgusted with U.S., or at least USFK.
Not really. I lived in Gwangju for 5 years, I know the score.
Again with the “external forces”. Yes, South Koreans are the chief engineers of their own democratic achievements, but their main opposition to achieving a liberal democratic society has always been other Koreans – most notably the Kim family, but also the dictators and their supporters. America has never been the enemy of South Korean democracy. Blaming them is a cop-out.
Which is my point. Koreans have always had the power and the ability to do it on their own, but the externalization of blame for their failures is where I have a problem.
What were they to do with Chun and Park? Try to oust them by force? Abandon the alliance? Apply sanctions? Deny the ROK military arms, while the DPRK waited in the wings? IMO they prety much made the right calls – as history has shown us. They let Koreans muddle through the process of democracy more or less on their own.
It may be largely paranoia today, but it sure as hell wasn’t in Syman Rhee’s day, or even in the years of Chun and Park.
Easy to say from the wealthy comfort of the US in 2012. Try starving on the wrong side of the Worker’s Party lines like your grandparents for a few months and then let us know how you feel. My bet is you’d be more pragmatic, and less idealistic.
“I hate all enemies of freedom. But North Korea can’t touch me, whereas South Korean government can.”
North Korea numerously have threatened to turn South Korea into a sea of fire. What about North Korean people? They don’t mean anything to you because you’re safe and free in your lawyer’s chair? Are they outsiders, or are they Koreans too? Ignore their problems away, pretend their suffering don’t exist? You left progressives should change your name, you guys are not fit to be called progressives.
That’s a lot of food and shelter, dude.
I’m still not seeing how we attacked anybody’s dignity in 2002.
Watch what happens if another Roh-like figure wins the next election.
I might—operative word is MIGHT—put aside the obvious fact that Korea needs the United States much more than the United States needs Korea and buy that argument. Still, you’ve yet to demonstrate what, exactly, the United States did so grievously wrong in 2002. And not to put too fine a point on this, but in the end, the US got an FTA, base realignment and 3,000 Korean troops to Iraq. And Korea got… Roh Moo-hyun.
thekorean,
You do realize you likely wouldn’t be enjoying the freedoms you have without the US being a world jackass?
I really urge TK to watch this video and get a clue why the 2002 was bogus issue fanned on by the hidden North Korean forces.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8azQNYSBNM
CactusMcHarris: Who could forget?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcAaertdaQk
This was what I found too, but a large part of that was rooted in the KATUSA soldiers’ idea that they were the social betters of the American NCOs posted over them in the chain of command. KATUSAs are drawn mainly from Korea’s elite families, and during their enrollment at elite colleges; having to answer to uneducated, black(!) and hillbilly NCOs was pretty hard for them to take.
While I agree that frequently the Army is kind of a clown show (especially at the retired-major level), my observation was that the KATUSAs kind of had a stick up their asses, which made the whole conflict situation inevitable.
Progressives with Lim Soo Kyung debating freedom against North Korean defectors
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzqyQo3oijI&feature=related
There is no real basis to the alliance aside from America’s geopolitical interests vis a vis China and Russia. Even if it managed to completely assume its own defensive responsibilities, Korea would have an incentive to make nice with China and Russia if the US left.
As for the US role in Korean democratization:
The US leaned heavily on Park in 63 to hold elections, and kept the pressure on until we weakened our security commitment under Nixon’s Guam Doctrine. Park and Marcos promptly turned authoritarian. So, US pressure helped to keep elections going for 10 years. In 1980, though, the US winked at Chun in Kwangju. The US could have done more.
As for comments about the US delivering Korean independence from the Japanese, engineering economic recovery, opening its market, delivery security (and you could have added all the economic and military aid to Korea, too) – sure, but these were acts taken to advance the US interest. The US was not acting out of altruism. Korea happens to be in a pretty geostratically important location.
As for cm’s comments about leftist hypocricy concerning human rights in N and S Korea – I agree – but the S Korean right is equally hypocritical – most of them opposed human rights in S Korea prior to 87. It’s hard to find any political force on the peninsula genuinely committed to the principle of human rights for all. Most of the time it’s used as a way to beat up on the enemy.
As for what the US did wrong in 2002 – they made a mistake and they should have sucked up and taken responsibility from the top, from the start. There is a tendency in the US, I don’t know if it’s something recent or not, to dodge responsibility. Doctors won’t admit a mistake, for instance, for liability reasons. And, they aren’t the only ones – it’s pretty prevalent in the US, in my opinion. They screwed up and should have taken responsibility directly, from the outset.
@36 and 43,
What can I say, except that ‘your mileage may vary? Just as I’m still pro-Korea after all these years, despite having sometimes met and/or worked with Koreans whom I haven’t held in high regard, the former KATUSA I’ve met seem to be able to separate their opinions about America from their opinions about some Americans.
Poor U.S. – a victim of external circumstances! A hapless, helpless nation that only happened to be the world’s greatest superpower that had tens of thousands of soldiers stationed in Korea!
When my family had a choice between bread and freedom, we chose freedom, even if it meant surveillance, random nighttime raids, prisons time and torture. Based on what you’re saying, however, you would have sold out on a dime. That’s ok, most people did. We never begrudged anyone for being lonely in our fight.
1. Just how many times did North Korea carry out its numerous threats? Since the end of the war, did North Korea ever turn South Korea into a sea of fire? Which government killed more South Koreans between 1953 and 2012 – North Korea’s or South’s?
2. Yeah, what about North Korean people? All I ever did was to play an instrumental role in getting North Korean defectors get a Congressional hearing in the U.S., donate enough money to rescue several North Korean defector children out of China and into South Korea, connect those said children with free English lessons and other social services in Korea, etc. I totally pretend they do not exist.
Again, don’t think I am not grateful for it.
I’m afraid you missed the entire point that I was making, Robert. The point was not about what U.S. did in 2002; it was about what U.S. has done between 1953 and 2002.
And just what grievous wrong was committed to U.S. by the candlelight vigils, enough to warrant this 10-year memorial? Did anyone die? (Only the two girls did.) Did anyone get injured? (Again, only the two girls.) Did U.S. not get the strategic objectives that it wanted to get out of Korea? (They did – like you said, FTA, base realignment and Korean troops to Iraq.) The most one can say is that Americans were made uncomfortable for a few months. OMG, how terrible.
Of course I do. Don’t you remember that I thank all American service members who served in Korea?
Sure, individual experiences may differ. At any rate, those KATUSA grads that I know who ended up being disgusted at America did not derive their opinion from “some Americans” — they did so from the institutional culture of USFK itself.
One of my friends, for example, talked about the time when his troop was moving, and a truck rammed into a person’s house, destroying half of it. The driver of the truck was actually my friend’s roommate, and he was high on marijuana. My friend got out of the truck to check for any injured person in the house, and he was later sanctioned for slowing down the movement. Who gives a shit about some dead gook? Getting the troops moving was way more important.
By the way, did the owner of the house get compensated from the USFK? Of course not. SOFA gives USFK immunity from any property damage in the course of conducting official duties.
I’m not disparaging what your family went through. But I doubt you were the one that chose freedom over bread, so I’m not sure you should be personally casting aspersions of cowardice on others. As for most people choosing bread, I don’t begrudge them it, not those that had children, wives, grandparents to protect. The fact is that the vast majority of Koreans that lived through the Korean War – my father-in-law included – are pro-US, sometimes fervently so. I value their opinions more than anguished 20-and-30-year-olds.
I never claimed the US was a victim, I just find the anti-US vitriol a little bit much, as a neutral observer.
I suppose you also consider the Korean war a proxy war between the USSR and the US, with Koreans helpless pawns caught between them? From memory that was the common mantra of students down in Gwangju.
Funny how Park Chung-hee, with his “mouth[] super-glued to [his] patron’s groin,” said that Yushin was necessary because of Korea being tainted by American ideas like ‘democracy,’ and that the marijuana crackdown in 1975 (which was really the simplest way for him to crush youth culture) was justified because these young people were tainted by the ‘decadent culture’ of America. Such cultural anti-Americanism began under right-wing tutelage long before the left decided to adopt it.
As for 2002 being “the first real chance for Korean people to vent their frustrations with U.S,” that’s sheer nonsense. Just for fun, let’s look at this quotation from a Nov. 23, 1988 Stars and Stripes article:
Not mentioned there is that on October 14, a US cultural center in Gwangju was attacked, and on October 16 a brawl in iItaewon involving 40 US soldiers and 200 Koreans took place, which led to Korean authorities taking jurisdiction over the case for the first time ever in an assault case, due to, as Seoul Prosecutor Yoo Sang-su, put it, “a change in the national consciousness toward American troops.” It’s basically at this point that demands to revise the SOFA begin, in order to, as the the Party for Peace and Democracy put it, gain “[f]ull restoration of sovereignty and national pride.” On October 23 the USO in Seoul was firebombed, and five days later the US cultural center in Daegu was attacked. And that was just the first three weeks after the Olympics, which is when anti-Americanism went from a student sport to a national one (when Korean crowds cheered for the Soviets when they competed against the US (Korean Air flight 007 what?)). According to a KBS poll of 2000 people, 16% “disliked the United States” in August 1988, but that number had grown to 38% by October. This was mostly because a New Zealand boxing coach penalized a Korean boxer so that he lost his match with a Bulgarian. But that’s another story.
Needless to say, 2002 was not the ‘first chance’ – the first chance occurred under Roh Tae-woo, oddly enough, and from what I’ve read about 1989, it seems it would give 2002 a run for its money.
That said, the ‘you don’t care about North Koreans’ would be obvious for the canard it is to anyone who reads The Korean’s blog.
Joshua Stanton has testified before Congress, and his entire blog is a testimonial to his tireless efforts to obtain human rights protections for North Koreans. Can he vouch for you? He doesn’t have to name you, but he’d surely know who you are if you did indeed “play an instrumental role.”
I would agree, considering TK’s work translating the words of NK defector and SK journalist Ha Seong-joo to amplify his voice out to the global community.
And thanks for that detailed correction of TK’s assertion, Bulgasari.
Likewise, since you are enjoying the fruits of that freedom, the least you could do is to be grateful to those who chose the hard way, rather than insulting them by saying that democracy was too much for Korea to handle.
I never claimed Korea was a victim either. Not fun when your point is mischaracterized, is it?
No.
Consider the number of those involved in 1989 versus 2002. In 1989, voicing the anti-U.S. sentiment was for the foolhardy few. 2002 was the first chance which a very large segment of Korean population felt safe and secure to voice their political opinions.
Sorry – the reference to persons was a response to Brendon’s comment, but I thought it might also be a response to yours as well. I also think my opinion about Korea is formed from more than just whatever personal disagreement /dissatisfaction I might have at times with some government office or its employees. I’ve also had good experiences and seen good things done as well. I guess the former KATUSA I’ve met were generally more similar to me in that regard, because they surely weren’t filled with utter disgust for America.
Probably not — I saw him, but he doesn’t know who I am.
TK, I understand your hatred of SK’s past dictatorships and sympathize with your family history… but can you be so sure that the true democrats of the 50′s-80′s had the fortitude and wisdom to keep NK-supported/subversive groups from joining their ranks? As we can see from the recent UPP fiasco, do you think the idealism of the true democrats could have stood against the ruthlessness of NK-apologists, whose idea of democracy was/is of the kind that’s practiced in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea? The UPP has shown its true colors, that it is an illiberal, undemocratic, and violent organization.
If today’s young, affluent, supposedly sophisticated “progressives” can be hoodwinked into supporting such a marriage, what makes anyone believe a much poorer, more chaotic, desperate Korea of yesterday could have repudiated such a dangerous link? Recall that there was support for the recent electoral coalition despite the UPP leadership’s known links to the North, and despite the UPP’s dangerous influence on the DPP. As Hoju (#37) mentioned what could the US have done in such a situation?
“What were they to do with Chun and Park? Try to oust them by force? Abandon the alliance? Apply sanctions? Deny the ROK military arms, while the DPRK waited in the wings? IMO they prety much made the right calls – as history has shown us. They let Koreans muddle through the process of democracy more or less on their own…”
Sorry, I meant marriage as in the recent ill-fated DPP-UPP coalition.
“If today’s young, affluent, supposedly sophisticated “progressives” can be hoodwinked into supporting such a marriage, …”
Bullshit. I’m disappointed.
^ all I am seeing from the link is that the compensation petition is to be made either to the Korean government, or the individual USFK personnel responsible for the damage. At any rate, I never studied SOFA very carefully, and I am happy to be corrected.
Let me make this clear — I am so fucking done with those UPP 당권파 빨갱이 새끼들. At the same time, this is bordering on irrational paranoia. I am willing to concede that until early 1960s, there was some measure of danger that South Korea could be absorbed into the North. Past that, it is an irrational worry that democracy shouldn’t have been allowed because of some communists. 구더기 무서워서 장 못 담급니까.
Quite a few foolhardy souls in this 1987 photo and this one, too. I wonder why the New York Times and Time Magazine bothered to cover the historical footnote known as 6월 민주항쟁 in Korean.
Likewise, since you are enjoying the fruits of that freedom, the least you could do is to be grateful to those who chose the hard way, rather than insulting them by saying that democracy was too much for Korea to handle.
I never said that at all – on the contrary, I said the US left democracy largely up to Koreans to figure out on their own – which they did, to their great credit.
But you never really addressed my question: what was the US supposed to do about Chun and Park and their supporters (military and civilian)? Most importantly of all, what should they have done in 1948? And afterwards, when Rhee grew more despotic in the face of a growing communist threat? What would you have done?
“I am so fucking done with those UPP 당권파 빨갱이 새끼들”
Include the DUP party as well TK, it’s not just the UPP. What’s DUP’s thinking on Lim? Explain that one. And joining up forces with 빨갱이 새끼들 is just as bad. Paranoia, I don’t think so.
“I am willing to concede that until early 1960s, there was some measure of danger”
Some danger? Let’s look at this realistically OK?
What could the US done for South Korean human rights violations during the Park and Chun years? Not much. For the US, it’s damned if you do, and damned if you don’t. The US had two choices, overthrow the South Korean government and replace it with their man of choice. Or wait it out, let South Koreans figure it out for themselves, goad them, and use threats of reducing of economic aid. They wisely chose the latter. If the US had overthrown the South Korean government, what would the Korean leftwingers of today say? They will surely blame the US for meddling in Korean affairs, and putting an American puppet government. The accusations of US blame by the pro-North Korean forces within South Korea, would have been far worse.
Of course, the US had the third choice. Completely move out of Korea and stay away from Korea and let Koreans fix everything by themselves. But if they had done that, would TK and I be here today arguing over this? Then the accusation by some would be, why the US didn’t get involved.
You see? This argument over the US blame is just endless and no matter what the US had done, there will TK’s of this world who will point the finger at the omnipotent.
Which is what, exactly? Support dictators? I’d be more convinced if the cornerstone of the angry generation’s foreign policy wasn’t bankrolling a dictatorship infinitely worse.
#61 – “…Past that, it is an irrational worry that democracy shouldn’t have been allowed because of some communists. 구더기 무서워서 장 못 담급니까.”
It’s easy to speculate now, in 2012, that “some” communists could have been dealt with easily by a poor, weak, chaotic, imaginary democracy of yesterday. But the reality for the vast majority of South Koreans who had recently suffered through the trauma of war and who just wanted to escape famine (much less joining the ranks of wealthy nations), their immediate priority was not exactly getting the vote. That South Korean dictatorships took advantage of this situation and committed numerous crimes is in no doubt. But it’s highly doubtful that democracy, not backed by security and food, could have taken root or survived the constant threat from the North, or communist agitation from within. It’s also wishful thinking to say the democrats could have purged NK influence/sympathizers back then… The DPP couldn’t or wouldn’t do it even in 2012! Even someone as educated, worldly and well-spoken as you believed the recent electoral coalition was a splendid idea, despite the warning signs.
NOW you can safely say you’re “so fucking done with those UPP 당권파 빨갱이 새끼들” but if recent election results had turned out differently, I can bet you the DPP would keep its mouth shut and look the other way, all in order to keep its parliamentary majority. So what would have happened, say back in the 60′s – 70′s if a naive prececessor of the DPP had helped the UPP gain power and allowed it (and therefore NK) to dominate policy?
Sorry, I meant DUP, not DPP.
That’s a valid point, Robert.
6월 항쟁 was not specifically an anti-U.S. movement. And even 6월 항쟁 was a foolhardy one, risking the prospect of death against the dictatorship that amply showed its callousness to mass murder mere seven years prior.
Oh? “You seem to think (naively, I might add) that in the decades after the Korean War the ROK had the luxury . . . of tossing out ROK leaders and running peaceful elections of the sort we see today . . .” How does that statement mean anything else than “Democracy was too good a luxury for Koreans”?
I don’t know why 1948 is more important than any other time — I don’t think I ever said anything about that. But then again, apparently you are not talking to me; you are talking to every progressive-leaning Korean you have ever encountered in the past. I have to wonder why I bother writing anything, in that case.
Out of courtesy, I will give you three decision points that U.S. faced, and what they could have done out of consideration for democracy and freedom. There are many more I can give, but I neither have the willingness or the time. The same goes for addressing any counterpoints you may have.
(1) In 1954 or shortly thereafter, after Syngman Rhee fraudulently amended the constitution to become the president for the third term, U.S. could have implemented the Operation Ever Ready, a startlingly detailed plan formulated by the State Department to remove Rhee from power, to be replaced by Yoon Bo-Seon and Jang Myeon. Instead, the exact same thing took 6 more years to happen — in 1960, only after Korean people forced the situation with the 4.19 Revolution.
(2) For three years (from 1961 to 1963,) Korea was totally devoid of a government that could even nominally be called “democratic,” as Park Chung-Hee’s military junta (국가재건최고위원회) was the de facto government. There were a number of ways in which U.S. could have leaned on PCH to hold transparent democratic elections, including by insisting on U.N. monitors at the polls.
(3) In December 1979, when Chun Doo-Hwan took over, U.S. specifically protested the establishment of the new military government. The protest, however, waned after 15 days. The protest at any rate was only concerned with the possibility of North Korean aggression, and had zero consideration for freedom and democracy in Korea.
Sounds like the US made the right choice. I’d rather see citizens organize and overthrow their own leader than see the US impose regime change. Democracy is stronger when established from within rather than imposed from without.
Now maybe you could address the contradiction between Korean progressives blaming the US for supporting dictators decades ago while simultaneously supporting regime maintenance up north.
“Ewww, you touched a communist! You’re now a communist too!”
Let’s put it this way. If the opponents of the Sunshine Policy held a series of very large but peaceful protests voicing their opinion in 2002, I wouldn’t think about specifically commemorating the 10 year anniversary of those protests.
It is just as easy to falsely imagine now, in 2012, that Korean society — who knew enough about democracy to undergo the 4.19 Revolution as early as 1960 — was “poor, weak, chaotic,” etc.
What of it? Even in the most optimistic scenario pre-election, UPP was gaining no more than 20 seats in the 300-seat National Assembly. Do you seriously think DUP (its equivalent in the 1960s and 70s) was stupid enough to take in everything UPP (same condition) wanted to do? And even if they did, you don’t think GNP would have stood pat, instead of throwing a shitfit, blockading the National Assembly, etc.?
The advantage of democracy — indeed, the whole point of it — is to synthesize various points of dispute into a gradual change of direction. In a democracy, revolution does not happen; only evolution does. By the 1960s and 70s, a very large portion of South Koreans harbored fierce antagonism for North Korea and communism. They were politically organized, influential and active, thanks to the decade-plus rule of RSM. By then, as a polity, South Korea was never in danger of surrendering to North Korea. And of course at this point, no matter what happens in the elections, South Korea faces absolutely no such danger.
CM- The US decided, for its own interest, to keep troops on the Korean peninsula to support an ally in the South. S Korean sovereignty has unavoidably suffered as a result. When the US has exercised defacto control over the S Korean military, it’s just not plausible for the US to claim that it has little influence or has chosen not to intervene out of respect for Korean sovereignty. So, the real argument is: now that the US has compromised S Korean sovereignty, who is it going to support- the democrats or the dictators? Kennedy pretty much forced elections on Park in 63. Reagan coddled Chun in 80. The US basically created the Rhee regime in the early 50s.
I agree that domestic conditions need to be ripe for democracy to flourish, but US pressure got Park to hold elections in 63, 67 and 71. Check the polity index and you will see that Korea was considered pretty democratic in the 60s. Park and Kim Jong Pil had initially planned to create the DRP as an authoritarian top-down party.
For those who think that US pressure doesn’t matter – just compare the results of popular uprisings in US allied states (Egypt) with those in US adversaries (Syria). There are plenty of tools available if the US chooses to act in support of democracy. For those who claim that the US had no choice but to back Chun – I’d counter that backing Chun was actually more damaging to US long run interests. US intelligence reported no N Korean activity during Kwangju. The US was already in S Korea – it can’t pretend it wasn’t. And if it’s going to be here, it might as well do the right thing.
^ I can vouch what dokdoforever said. For instance, I was a little boy, but it was a big deal enough at that time for me to remember that in the 1970′s, South Korea and Park Chung Hee was under heavy Jimmy Carter pressure to reform his government and hold free elections. The US, also under Nixon and Carter often tied the American aid to Korea on Park Chung Hee’s government’s improvements of human rights. It’s untrue that the US did nothing but coddle the authoritarian South Korean regimes. It’s easy to sit in one’s lawyer’s chair in 2012, and point out in hindsight what the US should have done. But in the end, what the US did, was right. If they had done what TK suggested, putting their own man in the Blue House, the charges we see today would have been that Korea is a puppet state, governed by a American puppet government. Even with fair elections, the suspicions would be there that the Americans had something to do with it.
Only a delusional mind like you would sign onto a post that says the opposite of what you argue.
Just to add to what Brendon said in #59, I don’t buy TK’s story about what the KATUSA told him. It sounds like the KATUSA exaggerated the situation to him. At least in the years I have served in 2ID, maneuver damage was taken very seriously. Each unit has a maneuver damage officer trained to respond to claims. Most Koreans living near military maneuver areas know how to file claims for compensation. After major exercises the maneuver damage officers are usually very busy investigating and closing out claims.
I remember when I was in my Bradley during an exercise and had to pull off the road into the parking lot of a small restaurant off of Highway 37 near the Imjim River due to a maintenance issue. The tracks from my Bradley damaged the parking lot’s pavement. A nice old lady from the restaurant came out and brought out all us ice cream bars and then proceeded to collect names and unit information for her maneuver damage claim.
As far as KATUSA’s most of them that I interacted with did a very good job and were definitely a force multiplier for our unit. However, there was definitely some that were quite bitter about having to do their mandatory service. Some of these bitter KATUSA would then make little effort to adapt to the American Army. Often times the KATUSA’s were older and had better academic credentials then the NCO’s and even sometimes the officers they found themselves subordinate to. Then you throw in the race and female factor that some KATUSA had an issue with and occasionally you have problems.
I once had a KATUSA that would blow off what a black, female E-5 he worked under told him to do. Our senior KATUSA tried to counsel him but he continued to have a bad attitude about working underneath the NCO. Our senior KATUSA believed it may be a race thing or that the guy was just lazy. So I spoke with the ROK Army Sergeant Major assigned to our battalion and after being threatened to be sent to the regular ROK Army his performance improved significantly.
Like I said before it is a minority that had bad attitudes and most KATUSA soldiers were a valuable member of the unit.
I also wonder about the implied strong racism attached to USFK’s purported method of operation (“Who gives a shit about some dead gook?”). Is that part of policy, an enduring attitude, or simply a fabrication?
TK’s argument is very similar to fraudulently elected UPP official named Lee Seok Ki. He says that because the Aegukka which is the national anthem of South Korea was first adopted by the military dictatorship at that time, it doesn’t deserve to be called the national anthem. He has decided that the Arirang is the national anthem of South Korea.
http://news.hankooki.com/lpage/politics/201206/h2012061602414321000.htm
This comment is going to cause another storm shortly, but let me try to understand this.
So anything that existed in Korea during the period of 1945 to 1998, which I presume, according to the some people like Lee Seok Ki and TK, is invalidated due to its ties with the “dictatorship”. How far do we need to go on this? Can we even say South Korea should be South Korea?
@#78:
Maybe TK’s KATUSA friend was the same fellow posting stories on Agora about seeing US soldiers laughing after the girls were run over.
You must log in to post a comment.
{ 1 trackback }