Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

JumpinJesus · 10-03-2004, 01:04 PM

This is from today's Chicago Tribune. I've placed a link, but the Tribune requires you to register, so you can either register, or take my word for it that this article appeared in today's paper.

Link

Quote:

FIFTY YEARS ON THE KOREAN PENINSULA

Under three flags
WHEN THE ROMANCE IS GONE

How did the United States lose South Korea's heart?

By Won Joon Choe. Won Joon Choe has been working as a corporate attorney in New York and has written for the Korea Herald
Published October 3, 2004

America is hated in the squalid streets of Baghdad and Cairo, but the fires of anti-Americanism blaze no less fervidly in the posh cafes of the hyper-wealthy Kangnam district in Seoul. One bewildered American official recently grumbled to Park Jin, a visiting South Korean parliamentarian, that anti-Americanism in South Korea is more intense than anywhere outside the Middle East.

In the febrile imagination of the protest crowds chanting venomous anti-American slogans in Seoul, whether over the government's decision to dispatch troops to Iraq or over the grisly beheading of translator Kim Sun Il by Al Qaeda-linked terrorists, America, too, is an accursed land, and President Bush its Prince of Darkness.

The protest crowds no longer represent the lunatic fringe in South Korea. According to a much-publicized recent poll, a majority of young South Koreans picked America, not the totalitarian North Korea, as its greatest enemy.

Indeed, South Korea today views the North as something of a wayward brother, quirky rather than malevolent. Kim Jong Il, the North's "Teflon dictator," has been transmogrified into a lovable, avuncular figure. Though nonchalant about the gulags of the most horrific regime on Earth, more than 100,000 South Koreans a day flood the streets to condemn the accidental deaths of two teenage girls by an American military vehicle, culminating in an orgy of hate that one American expat called "scary."

The resulting puzzlement, then resentment, and ultimately indifference that America has displayed toward South Korea are not difficult to understand. Unlike many Arab nations, South Korea is not a failed state that must grope for Western scapegoats.

Due to American beneficence, South Korea went from being one of the poorest countries to the world's 11th-largest economy. This beneficence included, among others, the lives of over 30,000 American men in a faraway war that Americans did not need to fight.

But eschewing geopolitical calculations and moral obligation to benefactors, South Korea is threatening to turn its back on America in its hour of greatest need and abandon the alliance that has served it so well.

America, too, seems tired of giving but not receiving; or perhaps it has finally seized the meaning of Machiavelli's famous dictum that "whoever lets go of his own convenience for the convenience of others, only loses his own and gets no thanks from them." In a statement that reverberated throughout East Asia, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld declared: "We have no desire to be where we're not wanted."

So who lost Korea?

Some theories

The most common explanation for the recent mania of anti-Americanism in South Korea is the Bush administration's hawkish policy toward North Korea. Under this theory, South Koreans blame Bush for scuttling former President Kim Dae Jung's "sunshine policy" with his "axis of evil" rhetoric toward the North before engagement had time to take effect.

Others emphasize South Korea's domestic politics. Some claim that anti-Americanism in South Korea is an outgrowth of the nation's recent democratization and reflects its desire to chart an independent course. Others argue that anti-Americanism in South Korea typifies a small country's penchant to blame the big powers for its pain; and the pain of Korea in modern times has indeed been great.

But all these explanations are anachronistic. America had already begun to lose favor among South Koreans before Bush became president. While Bush may have exacerbated anti-Americanism in Korea, he certainly did not create it.

Whereas the Bush alibi does not go back far enough, the domestic politics explanation goes back too far. South Korea did not democratize in 2000; it did so in 1987. Likewise, the effort to find the fountain of anti-Americanism in the primordial Korean psyche ignores one salient fact: Anti-Americanism in South Korea was limited to radical leftist students and intellectuals before Kim became president in 1998.

The `democratic crusader'

The proximate cause of the current incarnation of anti-Americanism is none other than Kim Dae Jung, long revered in the West as a democratic crusader.

The West's romance with Kim, of course, ended with the expiration of his scandal-ridden presidency last year. As one Western journalist wrote, by then the halo had slipped; Kim was no longer likened to Gandhi or Mandela but had to suffer ignominious comparisons to Suharto or Marcos. The source of the disillusionment was that, while Kim made his name as a democratic activist, he governed like an archetypal Oriental despot. But what is less appreciated in the West is how Kim's anti-democratic transgressions decisively contributed to the rise of anti-Americanism in South Korea.

In antiquity, men often chose a heroic death over life because to be remembered through posthumous fame was the closest surrogate to immortality. While we live in a changed world, the longing to be remembered after death remains one of the most powerful motivations for East Asian political leaders.

For instance, some observers have noted that authoritarians such as Park Chung Hee and Lee Kuan Yew have been able to single-mindedly focus on modernizing their nations without becoming corrupt precisely because of this desire to preserve their good name for posterity.

Likewise, Kim sought apotheosis, and out of the thirst to be remembered was born his "sunshine policy," engagement designed to inch the sundered peninsula toward the Eldorado of Reunification. Of course, Kim's Eldorado turned out to be a desert with lots of sun and little else.

The North remains ever dangerous and truculent; even the unprecedented inter-Korean summit of 2000 took place only because Kim bribed the North to the tune of some $500 million (including $100 million from public funds) in the now infamous "cash for summit" scandal.

Tough pill to swallow

But before the "sunshine policy" could be implemented, Kim had to first sell it to his skeptical electorate, and therein lay the problem. South Korea had suffered a horrific fratricidal war through the Northern aggression. Pyongyang's provocations since the end of that war had also been unremitting, including large-scale terrorist acts and border incursions.

Kim found his solution in that old communist reliable: propaganda. He would try to transform the South Korean image of the North away from the reality of a totalitarian, potentially nuclear-armed menace to the chimera of a normal sibling country deserving empathy. In particular, he would target the impressionable young.

The propaganda had two essential components. First, Kim stifled all criticism of the North from the opposition press or non-governmental organizations; the mind-boggling $400 million fines levied against the conservative newspapers were the most egregious example.

Second, Kim unleashed hitherto-outlawed pro-North Korean voices throughout society. Foremost among these voices is the communist Korean Teachers and Educational Workers' Union, which has been recently excoriated by American media and diplomats for teaching blatant anti-American propaganda to Korean students and is even suspected by many to be under the direct control of the North.

The propaganda begot the anti-American eruption. The rehabilitation of North Korea meant that the blame for South Korea's postcolonial suffering had to be shifted from North Korea to America. And Kim would not cap the volcano; instead he may have fueled it. Many assert that Kim's government orchestrated anti-American demonstrations throughout his presidency, including the ugly demonstrations in 2002after two teenage girls died when they were accidentally struck by an American military vehicle.

"The black-haired beast [man] does not display gratitude," goes a Korean proverb.

The adage was made for Kim Dae Jung. He not only betrayed a country that twice saved him from certain execution at the hands of his own government, but he also has repeatedly turned against his benefactors and associates throughout his long political career whenever it became expedient.

Fear and loathing

It is heartbreaking and ironic that all the noble sacrifices Americans have made for a distant, unknown nation have redounded only in fear and loathing.

Nonetheless, American naivete ultimately hatched Kim and thereby anti-Americanism in South Korea. In its obsession with promoting democracy abroad, America forgot that genuine democrats are rare outside the West, but phony democrats who profess their belief in the Creed to obtain American support are a dime a dozen.

For Americans who still believe that dissidents in authoritarian regimes will govern as democrats and become reliable American allies when they seize power, the story of Kim Dae Jung is a cautionary tale.

This article basically gives a few possible reasons for this hatred.
1. Our policy toward North Korea scares the shit out of them.
2. South Koreans want to give freedom a try on their own, without the U.S. involved.
3. Our support of scandal-ridden former president Kim Dae Jung.

The author of the article makes it clear that whatever the reasons, South Koreans are ungrateful to the United States.

Either way, it appears we're losing another ally in a part of the world where we very much need one.

Also, near the end of the article, the author makes this statement.
<b>"...phony democrats who profess their belief in the Creed to obtain American support are a dime a dozen.

For Americans who still believe that dissidents in authoritarian regimes will govern as democrats and become reliable American allies when they seize power, the story of Kim Dae Jung is a cautionary tale."</b>

I can't help but think of the situation in Iraq right now when I read this statement. Will our long term plan for the Middle East backfire on us as usually happens when the U.S. backs and installs leaders in the world that didn't want our intervention in the first place? Are we creating a bigger, more long-term, problem in Iraq?

I make the connection because, regardless of our jingoistic arrogance, the world does not see the U.S. as we wish they would. Many in the world do not view us as a peace and freedom loving benevolent entity wanting everyone to enjoy the liberty we profess to possess. I believe that if we continue down this road, we are going to face more serious, more threatening, problems by many nations who decide to band together to fight the 800 lb gorilla that the U.S. is becoming in the eyes of the world. If we truly want the world to admire and respect us, we need to abandon our "fuck you, we're bigger and stronger than you" attitude that does not play well with the other 5.7 billion people in the world.