Flying Yangban

Is everyone at the NSC on the crack?

(A holler to One Free Korea for bringing this up.)

I guess it was inevitable that something like this would come out of the Korean National Security Council once Anti-Unification Minister Chong Dong-young got put in charge:

A top official from the National Security Council on Wednesday threw his weight behind a change in Korea's geopolitical strategy away from what he called the "Cold War camp diplomacy" in East Asia, pitting a northern alliance of North Korea, China and Russia against the southern alliance of South Korea, the U.S. and Japan.

"In future, Korea will break from the framework of confrontation and switch to open security cooperation," the official said. "As a dynamic actor, Korea will play a balancing role in Northeast Asia." He was echoing remarks by President Roh Moo-hyun on March 22 that Korea would play a balancing or stabilizing role in the region - a role Roh said arose "from earnest reflection on the loss of Korea's national sovereignty 100 years ago."

If memory serves, didn't Korea try its hand at balancing during the end of the Joseon era?

This is the money shot:

"Korea will anchor its balancing role in the Korea-U.S. alliance," he said, this time echoing comments from Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon.

Now just wrap your mind around that for a minute. 

Did Ban really say something like that, or was it just a case of him putting the best spin on something stupid that had come out of the Cheong Wa Dae?  The Foreign Ministry usually sounds like it is run by adults.

Here is some context:

On Wednesday, Roh also repeated the new doctrine, saying "Korea must play the role of balancer so that tensions do not revive within Northeast Asia." The president reportedly said recently hegemonic competition between China and Japan was a major insecurity factor in Northeast Asia, adding Korea needed to help avert a situation where a U.S.-Japan alliance faces off against China.

So let me see if I get this strait.  Roh plans to use the Korean alliance with the USA as a means of balancing between China and the USA.  I've heard of having your cake and eating it too but this takes the.... err, cake. 

Note to the Blue House:  You can't play Switzerland while being part of an alliance.  Sooner or later you are going to have to decide if it is in Korea's best interest to be a part of an American-led alliance (whether in the hub-and-spoke system in use now or in a NATO-style collective security arrangement) or to become an independent player.

So far this is just idle talk, the kind which shouldn't be leaking out of the NSC.  But too much idle talk might make other governments believe that this is really Korean policy.  If it is, fine, Korea's neighbors can adjust their own policies accordingly.  If it isn't Korea policy, then somebody at the NSC needs to learn how to shut up.

Liberation in North Korea (LiNK) meeting tomorrow

Liberation in North Korea (LiNK) will have its next meeting tomorrow:

Hello All,
Hope everyone's week is going well.
This week's meeting we'll be discussing plans for LiNK's next event:

North Korean Human Rights Awareness Day @ Ewha University
Sponsored by Ehwa Dream (Student Council) and LiNK
April 18, 2005
Featuring:
- Photo Exhibition (one of the world's largest collections)
- LiNK Informational
- Seoul Train (Documentary on refugees in China)
and more..

We'll be finalizing the schedule, have volunteer signup, and discuss
additional details for the days events.

Please invite anyone you know who is interested and would like to
contribute their efforts in any way they can.

Meeting Date/Time: Thursday, March 31, 7pm
Location: Ehwa Student Union Building (이화여대 학생문화관) Room number: Room 220

Contact Diana at 010-6361-2284 if you have trouble finding the place.

Hope to see you all then,
LiNK Seoul

So everyone mark April 18 on your calender.  I can't make the meeting tomorrow (evening class) but I plan to make it to that event on the 18th.

Korea trying out the jury system

The Korean Constitutional Law blog has the goods and points out that juries might not be constitutional:

But for now, a question: Is there a constitutional issue here? Article 27 of the Constitution provides, "All citizens shall have the right to be tried in conformity with the Act by judges qualified under the Constitution and the Act."

Check out the rest.

'MiG tipping' near the Iranian-Afghan border

How boring can it get at a USA air force base?  Check out the action at the Shindand air base in western Afghanistan:

The sprawling air base lies close to the border with Iran and life there is so slow that U.S. troops at times resort to "MiG tipping" -- a game that involves standing on the tail of one of the many wrecked Soviet-era planes and tipping its nose up.

"It's a pretty pointless and silly thing to do," said one serviceman. "But there really isn't that much to do around here."

Some 'tipped'  MiGs at Shindand air base (Reuters photo)

For non-Americans, the 'tipping'  part of MiG tipping may be derived from the urban legend of 'cow tipping.'

This is just wrong.

Japan and Korea's compeating claims to Dokdo/Takeshima Part One: Japan's claim

Once again, the Marmot has the Dokdo post of the day, so check it out for the latest information.

In an earlier post, a commenter asked me to give some proof of ownership of Dokdo, so I will lay out the competing claims (laced with generous heapings of my own opinion, of course).  I will use official documents as much as possible and then play 'Judge Yangban.' 

I will start with Japan's claim.  If I think it can be refuted out of hand, then I'll call it case closed, turn off my computer and call it a day.  If not, I will do another post on Korea's claim.

(NOTE: If anyone doesn't know this already, I have lived in Korea for several years.  My wife is Korean.  I do not claim to be strictly neutral on this.  However, it is possible that I might change my mind by the end of this post.  Being an American, I don't have a dog in this fight.  So I can keep appeals to emotion to a minimum.)

OK, you've been warned, so let's get to it.

Shimane Prefecture's 'Takeshima Day' a case of fish blowback?

While I was flipping through the 'all Dokdo, all the time' coverage of the latest brouhaha over the islands, I came across a piece in the Yomiuri Shimbun. 

It is pretty standard stuff.  But one part jumped out at me:

According to the two countries' agreement concerning fisheries that went into effect in 1999, neither country is to establish an exclusive economic zone around the island, and they are to jointly administer the area surrounding the island by designating it as a provisional area.

But Japanese fishing vessels have been all but excluded from the area, leading frustrated fishermen in the prefecture to back the ordinance.

There is a reason that this was passed at Shimane Prefecture's legislature and not in the Diet.  The Japanese national government, while not giving up its claim to Takeshima (the Japanese name for Dokdo), doesn't want to upset relations with South Korea.  On the other hand, the exclusion of Japanese fishermen from the waters off Dokdo has cost the people of Shimane Prefecture money and few things will motivate people to action faster than hitting them in their wallets.

Naturally Japundit has the goods on this:

I’ve seen two specific complaints by the Shimane fisherman. The first is that the South Korean Coast Guard prevents them from fishing. The second is that the agreement calls for the South Koreans to stop using fishing nets anchored in the seabed and use trawling nets instead. Use of the anchored nets effectively prevents Japanese fishermen from operating. The nets also catch a lot more fish, and the Japanese are concerned that the South Koreans are depleting nearby fish stocks. (The International Whaling Federation will be surprised to hear about Japanese interest in maritime conservation.) Another aspect of the agreement is that the Koreans are supposed to use ships with a smaller capacity to store fish; a compromise was specifically worked out on the tonnage. The South Koreans do not seem to upholding that part of the agreement, either.

Folks, I think we have the makings of a face-saving compromise here.  If Korea would just live up to its part of the fisheries agreement, the Japanese government should be able to get the Shimane Prefecture to drop Takeshima Day.  Off course, it would take a lot of work behind closed doors (and away from TV cameras) but I don't see why this can not be worked out.

Tora! Tora! Tora! Brave Korean air force turns back Japanese recon plane one day after 'Takeshima Day' declared

As expected, the Shimane Prefecture (Note: not the Japanese National legislature) passed a bill proclaiming Takeshima Day, which caused a predictable response in Korea.  Somebody should point out to Koreans that it is the bereaved party which does all the shouting, making faces and finger chopping.  Since Korea has Dokdo, all they have to do is yawn and smile whenever the Japanese mention Takeshima.

As one would expect, the Marmot has the Dokdo post, so be sure to read it to get all the latest information.

Korea turns back Japanese air force

In the latest twist, the Korean government claim to have turned back a Japanese air force plane:

A Japanese reconnaissance plane approached South Korea's de-facto airspace over the East Sea Wednesday but turned back after warnings from the South's air force, officials said Thursday.

The RF-4C plane from Japan's Self Defense Force came as close as 10 miles to the South's Korea Air Defense Identification Zone, a military buffer zone surrounding the country's airspace, around 12:20 p.m., officials at the Joint Chiefs of Staff said.

The area was near Dokdo, a group of rocky islets that Japan claims sovereignty over.

The Japanese plane turned back at 12:25 p.m. after receiving radio warnings from the South's air force three times, officials said.

At that time, two South Korean F-4 fighter jets were patrolling a nearby region and were ordered to move to the Dokdo area, but there was no confrontation, officials said.

I really like the 'de-facto airspace' bit.  If I am correct in my interpretation of what the article says, the Japanese plane was not in Korean airspace or even near Korea airspace.  It was near the airspace that is near Korean airspace (the military buffer zone.').  Even if the Japanese plan were to enter the buffer zone, it still would have been in international airspace. 

I plan to be severely beaten when I try to explain this to my Korean wife tonight.

WP on Park Geun-hye's rising star

Grand National Party Chairwoman, Park Geun-hye (Lee Jin-man/AP pic)

The Washington Post has a piece on GNP Chairwoman Park Geun-hye in conjunction with her visit to Washington this week.  POTP says that her star is on the rise:

From the beginning, Park Geun Hye's political path was paved by tragedy. She lost her mother, then South Korea's first lady, to a North Korean assassin in 1974. Five years later, Park bowed before the coffin of her father, Park Chung Hee, the nation's longtime military ruler, who had been gunned down by his intelligence chief.

But as her political star has begun to rise in South Korea, now a democracy, Park, 53, has transformed herself from a subject of national sympathy into a stateswoman. Over the past 12 months, she has taken the helm of the Grand National Party, shaking up the nation's largest opposition force, which had lost public support during corruption scandals and an unpopular attempt to impeach President Roh Moo Hyun.

Park is now considered an early contender for the 2007 presidential race and has hinted at a bid to become South Korea's first female leader. She travels to Washington on Tuesday on her first official visit to the United States as head of the GNP.

One thing to like about Park is her moderate realism regarding relations with North Korea, which lies somewhere between the all carrots approach of the Roh administration and the all sticks approach of... (OK, let's be honest here, I don't know of anyone who is 'all sticks.)  Mostly sticks approach of some members of the Bush administration:

"If North Korea cooperates, we need to send the message that we are ready to help them economically," Park said. "But if they do not, then they need to realize that such a situation would make economic cooperation impossible."

That North Korean policy certainly puts Park ahead in my book of say, 'Vlad' Chong Dong-Young, the Uri party's likely candidate for the presidency in the next election.  Chong wants to give Pyeongyang anything it wants while actively fighting against North Koreans who want to escape to freedom.

But I am not convinced that Park is the woman to lead the GNP to the Blue House and back to a majority in the Kuk Hoi.  Her leadership during the recent capital semi-relocation fight left a lot to be desired.  Also, the folks at the Uri party are sure to keep up a campaign of innuendo against her late father as Japanese collaborator during their selectively comprehensive investigation into Korea's colonial past, which may prove fatal.  I certainly hope that the GNP has plan B ready.

UPDATE: Oranckay has another reason why Park might not be the woman to lead Korea.

How Chinese domination of the Choseon dynasty changed the course of the Korean war

A complaint

Last week I did a post on an attempt by a group called VANK to change a description of Korea in a British museum.  Their complaint was that, while the Choseon dynasty was a vassal of Korea, the description could lead people to believe that Korea was always a vassal of china, including during the Three Kingdoms, Unified Shilla and Koryo periods.  I said that they had a point and thought that the description should be changed to reflect the fact that Korea was not always a vassal of China.

While a couple of guys commented that the VANKers were being wankers about this, the most interest comment went the other way.  It read in part:

The relationship between China and Korea is drastically damaged when we boil it down to whether Korea was "independant" or a "vassal" state. Korea - the government and society - benefited much from its relationship with China even though it eventually led in part to the weakness Korea found itself in during the 19th century when the industrial world's geopolitical ideas took over the weaker East Asia idea of the Middle Kingdom....

It hurts more than it helps to look at geopolitical situations by trying to make a definitive statement about whether country X was "truly independent" or a "vassal state" or similar argument.

My reply

When I said that the Choseon dynasty was a vassal of China, I wasn't making anything up.  I said that Choseon was a vassal of China because Choseon was a vassal of China.

Tribute to Beijing?  Check.

King of Korea prostrating himself before the emperor's messenger?  Check.  (BTW, the writer of this piece states that China's relationship with its Korean vassal was usually one of benign neglect until the 19th century.)

So, why didn't I just handle this in the comment section?  Because I came across an item recently which demonstrated a direct relationship between Chinese domination of the Choseon dynasty and the course of the Korean war.  In fact North Korean fear of Chinese domination may have cost them victory in the summer of 1950.

As Paul Harvey used to say, now for the rest of the story.