Unification Tax

edit: for clarity
 
August 15th is a good day to be in East Asia, unless well, you're in Japan, where it's a day of national humiliation; it's the day Japan surrendered. South Korean President Lee Myung Bak's proposed Unification Tax on August 15th was noteworthy in that it forward looking. It was announced on a day when usually there would be calls for Japan to apologize for deeds that occurred more than half a century ago.

I think the statement reflects better bilateral relations with Japan more so than it actually has anything to do with unification at all. By the way, I did find the statement pretty funny in the sense that it just completely ignores North Korea existing as an independent actor and speaks as if the country has already gone under -- which in a sense it has.

Link to KCNA statement via One Free Korea. There seems to be no link that posting...

An Update to the Cheonan Saga

It seems everything that I was advocating has happened and I'm delighted.

South Korean President Lee Myung Bak internationalized the issue to the point, where North Korea is now talking to the UN -- rather than South Korea -- about the Cheonan incident, a token UN resolution has been passed (more token it could not be), and it appears U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is again headed over to Seoul -- this time before heading to the ASEAN gathering.

This was almost exactly what I had been advocating since the beginning of the Cheonan incident. With a token slap of sanctions against North Korea, an opportunistic United States can take advantage of this situation -- I personally see a strong US-ROK alliance to be in the long term best interests of South Korea -- to strengthen US-ROK ties (again, here, there is the recent announcement by U.S. President Barak Obama in Toronto to look into the stalled KORUS FTA -- the only substantive policy change I had hoped this Cheonan incident would help foster -- and to agree to extend the deadline of wartime leadership of South Korean forces to South Korea to until 2015), use this incident by South Korean President Lee Myung Bak to marginalize Chinese regional leadership in front of at least the eyes of South Koreans, and, of course, to not really take any real punitive measures against North Korea -- which, hopefully, will crumble on her own accord shortly.

Pretty much, thanks to a foolish North Korean excursion and Chinese indecisiveness, the United States position has strengthened considerably in the region with no cost to the United States whatsoever. There is even continued talk of a U.S. aircraft carrier heading to the Yellow Sea, which while I have stated to be quite amusing, I find to be an amazing event in and of itself and shows exactly to what extent South Korea's internationalizing of the issue has brought about. China wants six party talks again...

This should put China on notice: it seems incredibly ironic that rather than China unleashing North Korea on South Korea/U.S., this incident has been more of the United States unleashing South Korea against North Korea. (Consider the rare nervous press release given by the North Korean military).

So, what now?

The narrative of the Cheonan is not quite yet over. Now, I think we wait until the U.S.S. George Washington arrives in the Yellow Sea/East Sea (of China) and read Chinese state run editorials stammering away helplessly -- while understanding that they must be privately fuming at North Korea. We watch to see what will come of the KORUS FTA and, of course, the joint press release that will be given when the U.S. Secretary of State pays a visit to one of the United States allies in the region.

And, of course, we should give credit where credit is due -- to South Korean President Lee Myung Bak and U.S. President Barak Obama for capitalizing perfectly on very poor decisions on the part of North Korea and the lack of any decision on the part of China. It seems China is quick to ask the rest of the world to recognize the changing economic balance of power in Asia, but China is even slower to to recognize the tectonic shift in not only the military and economic, but political balance of power on the Korean Peninsula.

Note: On a side note, is anybody else following how amazing the South Korean economy seems to performing? It appears the highly export dependent economy has grown over 7% in the first half of this year -- which makes it look as if South Korean President has fulfilled his election campaign promises (kind of).

Disclaimer: I write this posting comfortably thousands of miles away from the DMZ or the Korean Peninsula in California.

[A Rising South Korea] More on the handling of the Cheonan disaster/fiasco

When thinking of the Cheonan disaster/fiasco, probably a couple things that some people might think include whether the whole thing is a conspiracy -- as in why would North Korea do something so self-destructive and it seems to extremeley convenient for the Japanese  Prime Minister to renege on his campaign promises of moving U.S. bases off Okinawa-- and, also, whether South Korea unlike during previous administration has been doing the right thing by internationalizing the incident. But, of course, there is the evidence conducted by experts from South Korea, the United States, Japan, Australia -- and Sweden. (I wonder if they chose Sweden out of their expertise or because the name is not too different from Switzerland.)

Anyways, consider the recent announcement of combined U.S. - ROK naval exercises.

Peter Grier:

US-South Korean naval exercises tend to be smaller scale. Last week, the US cancelled a previously scheduled annual event called “Courageous Channel,” a naval exercise intended to practice the evacuation of noncombatants from the Korean peninsula. At the time, US military officials said that they did not want North Korea to think that the exercise, set to run from May 20-24, was a response to the Cheonan incident.

Now the US apparently wants to make the opposite impression, by announcing naval exercises billed as a direct response to the Cheonan’s sinking. According to a White House statement, President Obama has ordered his military commanders to coordinate closely with South Korea “to ensure readiness and to deter future aggression” by North Korea.

But, anyways, back to earlier posts, it's interesting to see the stark difference between what the U.S. is saying and what China is not saying.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton:

I will be discussing these issues with my counterparts in Beijing next week, and then I will travel to Seoul, to consult with our South Korean partners about the way forward. But let me be clear. This will not be and cannot be business as usual. There must be an international -- not just a regional, but an international -- response (US-Japan Joint Press Conference).

This suggests that the U.S. has not and will not simply be able to trade away a new round of UNSC sanctions on North Korea in exchange for China's announced support -- on the same day -- for a new round of sanctions against Iran. So, for a country such as South Korea that seeks so much prestige and respect as an independent and powerful country -- e.g. U.N. Security General, G-20 presidency, and the strange usage of trying to sound out Chinese names rather than use the Korean characters associated with each Chinese character. I simply cannot understand why some would like to go back to the Sunshine Policy.  

On a side note, with respect to Iran what is with upstart Brazil? Out of nowhere Brazil, which sits comfortably in South America, is naively complicating things that's in the best interest for the rest of the world.

Anyways, I believe what the U.S. Secretary of State was referring to when she used the term "not just a regional but an international response" is the trilateral meetings between China-Japan-South Korea in Gyeongju, South Korea (May 15th) -- home to the historical capital of Silla, which has symbolic imporance as Pyongyang was also the historical capital for a rival state on the Korean peninsula, Gogouryeo and those to be held at the end of the month in Jeju Island again at the foreign minister/secretary of state level. By the way, anybody take notice of how strange it is that while they take this to the United Nations, what nationality the U.N. Security Security General holds?

Anyways, consider U.S. remarks next to that of the Chinese...

But while expressing condolences for the South Korean sailors who died aboard the Cheonan, Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi merely reaffirmed Beijing's stance that "a scientific and objective investigation is important." Yang did not mention the possibility of a link between North Korea and the shipwreck (Chosun Ilbo).

This was before proof of North Korean involvement was put on display. A very big difference how this incident is being handled and, say, the kidnapping of South Korean fishermen and the shoooting of a civilian in Mount Geumgang.

With respect to arguing directly against the rather ridiculous positions -- blame the South Korean President?! -- taken by the South Korean left recently, I'll defer to the regular Korea bloggers.

South Korea -- Lee Myung Bak's Presidency Until Today...

I'm thoroughly impressed by the job South Korean President Lee Myung Bak has done. While he got off to a rocky start and began with a couple rather ridiculous campaign promises (e.g. 747 plan or 7% growth rate, improving the canal system in South Korea in the 21st century), he has guided the highly export dependent country through the "Great Recession" and the country after having chalked up positive economic growth last year is set to witness another 5% in real growth this year and slightly less next year.

But, what I find to be the most amazing is how effective he seems to be when steering South Korea through this Cheonan tragedy/fiasco (on the part of North Korea). I mean, just a couple years ago, it seemed to be the case that South Korea under the now defunct Sunshine Policy looked rather impotent. Not too long ago the country continued to give money to North Korea even as it became increasingly clear that North Korea really had no intent to reform the country. North Korea last year formally went from being a revolutionary communist kingdom to a military-first (probably fascist) revolutionary kingdom. Of course, at the same time the income gap between the South and North continued to and continues to widen.

Nonetheless, when the U.S. raised the ante by pretty much bending over backwards to see if North Korea would actually give up its nuclear weapons program, it was far from clear if the South Korean government had the courage, the political fortitude to withstand a very loud opposition those that had previously supported the Sunshine Policy as well as from within the party (Park Chung Hee's daughter) and the foresightedness to do more than just give into short-term North Korean demands for aid.  I mean the U.S. at that point gave North Korea money back it made from counterfeiting U.S. dollars among other ridiculous activities that "state" would actually engage in and even irked Japan to the point of notifying the country a good thirty minutes before taking North Korea off the list of states sponsoring terrorism... Japan, of course, was at that point being held hostage by its domestic outrage over having its citizens kidnapped.

But, it seems clear today that Lee Myung Bak is indeed coming through for his country. He flew into China mere days before Kim Jong Il's train arrived. There are reports (all seemingly quoting Joongang Ilbo) that China refused to give further aid or food to Kim Jong Il's kingdom, a visit from the Chinese foreign minister to Gyeongju of all places (the historical capital of Silla and where I believe the city is now currently so devoid of economic or actually any activity outside of its tourists that it lost its baseball team a few years back), and appears to be building an international consensus where it actually looks as if another round United Nations Security Council (UNSC) of sanctions might go through.

I'm impressed.

Kim Jong Il visits China

Shortly after the failed currency reforms, I last talked about how North Korea was in danger of collapse and wondered what would happen when Kim Jong Il shortly visits China. Well, Kim Jong Il is in China now and this time North Korea apparently blew up a South Korean ship.

There seems to be mounting evidence that North Korea recently blew up a South Korean ship (and no, I don't believe that North Korea blew up the BP oil rig from Cuba for a second). But, what is particularly interesting is what is going on in China and to see what, if anything, North Korean leader Kim Jong Il can extract from China this time.  In particular, it'd be interesting to see:

1)How China addresses the Cheonan incident, if at all. In particular, whether South Korea takes this incident to the UNSC for token sanctions, which would, again, require China to side against North Korea. The last time China did this it cost the Chinese $2.1 billion in aid, a visit by a high ranking Chinese communist official, and the prestige from hosting six-party talks.

And, in particular,

2)What type of additional aid North Korea receives from China, if any -- such as investment.

As it has become clear for a while now that North Korea will not give up its nuclear weapons program, what will China now do? As South Korea and the United States will not provide aid, it puts South Korea in particular at risk of pushing North Korea into China's camp. But, with North Korea allegedly blowing up the South Korean ship, Cheonan, it will be intereseting to see what happens from this point on. I mean it was interesting enough to see that the Chinese President Hu Jintao met with South Korea President Lee Myung Bak just a few days before Kim Jong Il's first visit to China since 2006. But, will China strain relations with South Korea and be seen as a supporter of yet another rogue (I'd itching to use the word "terrorist" here) nation for the sake of stability? A lot has changed for China since 1998 when they last bailed out North Korea -- the country has joined the WTO, hosted the Olympics, and is set to be the second largest economy in the world, if it isn't already. It seems that the trilateral alignment that Scott Snyder mentions in China's Rise and the Two Koreas: Politics, Economics, Security that is necessary to actually coordinate an effective policy might indeed already be underway and that the end of the DPRK might indeed not be that far off.

On a side note, I'd like to clarify so that everyone understands that North Korea was taken off the terrorist list not because the United States believed that North Korea wasn't a state sponsoring terrorism, but that the previous administration did so just to see if, well, let's give them everything they want and see if they'll give up their nukes -- which they didn't. And, the Obama administration is picking up right, where the last administration left off with an approrpiate definition of  the word "engagement."

As for North Korea being a terrorist state, let's see...
state sponsored manufacturing of illicit substances, counterfeit U.S. dollar bills, torture, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction technology (i.e. Syria), ballistic missiles (i.e. Yemen, Iran(Shahab-3)), kidnapping civilians from foreign soil or waters (Japan, South Korea), blowing up foreign airliners (Korean Airlines flight in 1987 to name one), shooting a South Korean civilian (Mount Geumgang), allowing terrorist organizations to take refuge in the country (Japan's Red Army faction back), etc...

No Breaks for South Korean President Lee Myung Bak

Incredibly, former President and Nobel laureate President Kim Dae Jung had a lot to say about current President Lee Myung Bak (left photo, source: Agence France-Presse).

"On Thursday, former President Kim Dae-jung likened some actions by current President Lee Myung-bak to those of a dictator and said Mr. Lee threatened South Korea's progress as a democracy. Mr. Kim made the remarks at an event commemorating the June 2000 inter-Korean summit and stood in front of a picture of himself and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il at that summit" (Wall Street Journal)."

While former President Kim Dae Jung's words about democracy are backed up by a lifetime of suffering that he endured at the hands of South Korean military dictators, he should understand that just because a right exists it doesn't mean it should be exercised recklessly. And, while I'm not a lawyer here, I believe citizens, even past presidents, have a duty to exercise their rights in a responsible manner (for example, pulling the fire alarm only when there's a fire). And, I feel sorry for President Lee Myung Bak. Especially as I feel he is probably not the most astute politician the world has ever seen and compounding to terrible economic circumstances and geopolical realities he inherited, a past president has now come out to give this president a tough time. More on this soon. It is worth noting that the Sunshine Policy is effectively dead.

"After a decade of false optimism, harsh realities permeated the aura of good-will engendered by North-South agreements. The Bush administration, having demanded 'complete, verifiable, irreversible dismantlement' [CVID] of North Korea's nuclear program, gave up using that term but was not willing to abandon the goal. It became clear that the next U.S. president eventually would have to face the North's refusal to come clean on its uranium program, highly enriched or not" (Wall Street Journal's Far Eastern Economic Review).

As the article notes, two U.S. administrations over four terms (that's sixteen years) have tried to engage North Korea, but to no avail. It really is not President Lee Myung Bak's fault that engagement in the true sense of the word is no longer an option for the United States. I have great respect for President Kim Dae Jung (More so for how he handled the IMF crisis that was forced on him rather than for his unbridled optimism towards a unified Korea). But now, it seems to be a rather petty (and very unpresidential) act for former President Kim Dae Jung to attack the current President as the former president's Sunshine Policy has become discredited.

One aspect of the Sunshine Policy that many people don't mention is that since the Sunshine Policy was first instituted as President Kim Dae Jung took office in 1998 (and, no, it's not the United States' fault that President Kim Dae Jung became president at such a late age) is the divergence in economic performance. One of the key tenets of the Sunshine Policy is that the gap in living standards between North and South is so much that if the economic burden of unification were to fall on Seoul, then the country could not simply afford it. But, supporters of the failed and discredited Sunshine Policy and detractors of South Korea's current president should note that the gap in wealth between North and South Korea has only grown since the Sunshine Policy was first instituted.

Moreover, in defense of South Korea's current president, who once again, I'd like to say doesn't really ooze charisma, but is nonetheless really a victim of circumstances and situations. Consider this with South Korea's limited flexibility and power as a half nation (and here Korean nationlists should take heed that unification should be goal number one). I believe that the Economist put it best:

"That is probably wishful thinking [desirable policies]. For no matter what efforts South Korea makes on the global stage, it is still a shrimp among whales in its own region, and even there the power of its American godfather may decline in relative terms. Only the unification of a divided peninsula might bring South Korea the standing it craves. And given the fearsome problems North Korea would carry with it, even that is far from guaranteed" (Economist).

While this posting may put my blog to the far right for some, my hope is that you the reader can examine my reasoning in its own light and not that of some far right "blogger." My aim isn't to write words to an audience that already might agree with everything I might have to say (as most blogs and news networks are these days).

Other stuff:

1. Check out how South Korea's High School Uniforms have changed on rokdrop.

2. After much thought, I've also decided to make a major life changing decision -- I am going to buy a book to read for fun for the first time in like five years. And, it looks like the book will be:

*drum roll*

3. Also, added a link to both the National Intelligence Committee's 2025 vision which predicts Korea will most likely be united in some form (more on this one day as well) and the special report: "Koreas: The Odd Couple" (Economist).