[KORUS Free Trade Pact] A Pony to an Equus...

A couple days ago, I was driving -- and while waiting for the lights to turn green, of course, no idea why the light there is green...-- there was this dated Toyota truck right in front of me. Interestingly enough, all the letters from the word Toyota fell off except for, well, "YO." And, well, it sure enough perked my interest to the point where I took a picture of the car. The picture is symbolic of Toyota's fading presence recently; Toyota has apparently recalled over 11 million vehicles in the past ten months.

Now, flip back a couple decades and many car American buyers thought that, well, Japan makes affordable, quality passenger cars so what's different with South Korean cars. Of course, they gap in quality was at that time a gulf. Shoddy brakes on Hyundai cars left a perceived gap in the quality of Korean cars that for some even continues to the present. It also took Hyundai almost two decades to recover its U.S. sales back to that of its heyday in the late 1980s. It's well past that now as Hyundai looks to introduce the Equus.

When I first heard of Hyundai's Equus I thought the name to be pretty funny. The first passenger car that Hyundai ever built was called, well, the Hyundai Pony. In Korea, for some time now, the largest and most expensive car that Hyundai sold has been, well, the Hyundai Equus. The Equus is, well, in latin, horse. So, I thought it a bit funny and somewhat representative of how Hyundai together with its subsidiary Kia Motors has come to be I believe the fifth or sixth largest car manufacturer in the world. They have gone from building ponys to well horses. Hyundai has also opened a factory in Alabama where American workers now assemble many of the cars that are now sold to, well, Americans.

The threat that cheap Asian imports from Korea would displace American jobs seems to be overblown.The cars that South Korea produces compete directly with Japanese car manufacturers more so than it does with American manufacturers. Hyundai -- along with Kia -- seems to be poised to displace Nissan this year as the third largest Asian auto seller in the U.S. after, well, Toyota's slip up in quality. In this sense, the idea that passage of the KORUS free trade pact would displace American jobs seems to be overblown. 

Moreover, much of GM's success in China -- probably the only place in the world where GM's sales have been competitive and consistently profitable in the past decade is due to in large part to the expertise gained from GM taking a stake in what used to be an insolvent South Korean car manufacturer, Daewoo Motors. (By the way, perhaps America's labor unions could see how their South Korean counterparts have come to see the introduction of a large American presence in South Korea's domestic market. Whereas the Chinese takeover of Ssangyong Motors has resulted in, well, disaster, GM's investment in GM Daewoo has come to be seen as a successful merger, if it could be called that, in an industry where successful takeovers are, well, excluding Nissan, for the most part non-existent.)

Moreover, South Korea really likes American beef and they like to buy a lot of it.

So, perhaps, it's time to pass that KORUS.

Time to amend presidential term limits in South Korea

Apparently, South Korea has grown over 7% on a per annum basis for two consecutive quarters now. I can't believe this presidential pledge is coming through.

Paul Eckert:

The IMF -- which again revised the growth forecast of Asia's fourth-biggest economy upward, to 6.1 percent from 5.75 percent in a July report -- said expansion was increasingly led by private sector demand and was at or near full growth potential.

I think it's about time South Korea amends her constitution to make way for two term presidencies. Currently, South Korean Presidents are restricted to one five year term.

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...

[Apple conquers Korea] iPhone 4 Pre-Orders Halts Korean Mobile Service Carrier...

Kushibo notes: 

KT's online ordering site for the iPhone 4 ground to a halt today. Apple and KT representatives assumed it was due to 70,000 people ordering the beloved smartphone, but it turns out it was a roving band of bored netizens randomly taking down a website in protest over Apolo Ohno existing on the planet.

Earlier, I commented on how years of South Korean government protection for the mobile phone market did not lead to the emergence of a  widely adopted mobile platform. I'm guessing South Korean telecom providers' reluctance to accept a phone that made use of WiFi, which had been a solid money making stream also comes to play here. 

But, to note how South Korean government protection -- by adopting a CDMA standard -- led to the emergence of globally competitive cellphone manufacturers, one needs to look no further than how well Motorola has done up until I believer very, very recently. They hold probably a fifth of the cellphone market in South Korea and I believe it's sales have for some time been larger than Samsung or recently dipped slightly below Samsung in, well, Samsung's "home" market. However, what is more interesting is a quick search on market share for cellular phones or mobile phones does not lead to a number of sites about hardware sales any more; all news now seems to focus on the market share of mobile operating systems...

Military Exercises in the East Sea (Sea of Japan) and the Cheonan Incident in Review

edit:  Aug. 1st, 2010, for grammar.

Contrary to what many may be thinking, including Christine Ahn in a New York Times editorial:

In a move intended to punish North Korea for its alleged sinking of a South Korean warship, the Cheonan, the United States and South Korea are flexing their military might by mobilizing American and South Korean ships, over 200 aircraft, including the F-22 Raptor fighters, and 8,000 troops.

I highly doubt the United States would go to that extent to "punish" or show North Korea.anything. The United States doesn't need to send warships to intimidate North Korea; all the United States has to do is -- as Josh Stanton advocates -- enforce financial sanctions on North Korea for which the United States (and South Korea) lacks the will to do.

Considering the highly visible show of force and also within context of the United States taking a position on the Spratly Islands and the Obama Administration's very tough stance against Japan's push for a more independent Japan or equivalently a diminished U.S. role, it seems that the audience for all this is definitely not for North Korea or even China, but for all actors in East Asia. Additionally, with respect to China, it seems that unlike my earlier postings about how this is being used to push China to control North Korea, I have come to believe that the ultimate objective of the United States' military exercises is that while the U.S. may be caught up in a couple overseas entanglements and, also, the aftermath of the worst recession since, well, the Great Depression, the United States is using the Cheonan incident to re-assert the United States in East Asia.

There's more than a couple things that led me to this view. 

For starters, unlike Joshua Stanton, I do not believe that the United States is levying any type of real financial sanctions against North Korea. "One hundred" bank accounts is extremely vague and this indicates that this is primarily for domestic (North and South) Korean consumption purposes. Moreover, when considering that the United States has finally decided to take a position on the Spratly Islands -- it seems to be more than mere chance that for the first time in history both U.S. Secretaries of State and Defense -- while en route to an ASEAN Security Dialogue -- visited the DMZ together. All this seems that the U.S. has finally in place  a coherent policy in East Asia that encompasses more than a "quick fix." Furthermore,  consider that the current administration did not take lightly to Japan's proposals for base relocation. Finally, the sheer scale, size, and scope of the recent military exercises off the East Sea (Sea of Japan) seems to be the icing on the cake. 

Problematically, and this is where I might suggest that previous analyses of the naval exercises has overlooked is how relatively unimportant North Korea -- and, unfortunately, South Korea is to the United States. It seems support of South Korea's global initiative is there just to send Japan a message and the naval exercises are there just to show China -- and the rest of East Asia -- that the United States is committed to engaging the region. Also, I might add that the "financial sanctions" the United States is adding is there just for Korean (North & South) consumption. I do not believe that freezing one hundred "bank accounts" is anything beyond mere symbolism. 

I say this not with any elation at all and actually wish South Korea was more important to the United States for its own sake, but as in the past -- most notably, the Cold War -- South Korea is  and will be benefiting. The  United States is supporting the current South Korean administration's global initiative (e.g. G-20 summit), a stronger US.- South Korea military alliance, and, hopefully passage of the KORUS, which would  really  reinvigorate the US-ROK notwithstanding the economic aspect.  If current U.S. domestic political trends continue, then I would be that passage of KORUS is not that far off.

Initially I had intended to originally post on the scale of the United States deployment to the East Sea (Sea of Japan). However, while I was thinking about the deployment it led me to this posting. Just check out these pictures over at ROKdrop. The picture in the back is of the ROKN Dokdo or a South Korean "mini-carrier" that transports troops and helicopters -- I believe. The two hundred planes -- and the USAF's F-22  stealth fighter -- is a lot when considering that South Korea initially procured just forty planes when the country decided to purchase F-15K from Boeing. (I believe there was an extension in this contract or that South Korea will attempt to purchase the upcoming F-35's...) 

But, anyways, consider that there are seventy planes on the 97,000 ton U.S. aircraft carrier and that two hundred planes are involved. Also, there seems to be a recently built new, Virgina class U.S. attack submarine that seems to be on its way to be deployed over at Pearl Harbor -- that would make it the third deployed in Pearl Harbor and sends a direct signal to China's massive military buildup. Furthermore, the South Korean navy has been very busy recently as well. Involved in the exercises were most likely KDX I/II/III destroyers. I believe the KDX III destroyers are equipped with the anti-air AEGIS missile system. The KDX III destroyers are actually larger in tonnage than their USN counterparts that are largely armed with US technology. Of course, there was also probably a nuclear submarine and a U.S. AEGIS ship that went along with the U.S. carrier. So, yes, it definitely does look like a show of force, but reading up or checking out how large -- or expensive -- these U.S. and South Korean ships may be to get a sense of why the U.S. is doing this is not necessary. The pictures linked at ROKdrop is probably a good analogy of the situation.

[A Paradox or Mere Contradiction?] Korean Economic Dependence with China, but Security Reliance with the United States

Joshua Stanton:

I certainly do not suggest that Peter Lee speaks for Beijing, but I do suppose his writing probably reflects the way Beijing hopes to use this incident to advance its hegemonic ambitions and divert its suppressed domestic rage toward foreign demons.

But, in Peter Lee's lenghty article's, he goes on to write that the U.S. decision to support South Korea in the Cheonan incident was in part a response to Japanese efforts to move the U.S. base off of Okinawa. He goes on further to write that "it encouraged Lee's ambitions to boost South Korea's global profile, arranging for the Group of 20 Summit and 2011 Nuclear Security Summit to be held in Seoul." U.S. President Barak Obama also pledged to support the KORUS free trade pact that was signed during the last administration and which has yet to be ratified by the Senate -- both President Barak Obama and Secretary Hillary Clinton had reservations against KORUS in the last presidential campaign race. 

Nonetheless, there's also another aspect of this article that I find to be interesting at least with respect to a certain state owned Chinese publication. 

I previously wrote about how the People's Daily Online -- a Chinese state owned newspaper -- fabricated claims about a fictitious South Korean Professor's research and a South Korean agenda to register Chinese script as a Korean cultural treasure. Well, interestingly enough, Peter Lee documents the several "other" times this publication has lapsed into questionable journalistic practices.

In an indication of the convoluted path of content across the Chinese Internet, the People's Daily English-language post was an uncredited cut-and-paste of an EastSouthWestNorth (ESWN) post.

Apparently, the publication also published pictures of a bombed U.S. aircraft carrier before it retracted it. 

However, with respect to the main aspect of Peter Lee's article, he suggests that increasing South Korean economic dependence on China makes it difficult for South Korea to remain dependent on the United States for security. And, I believe this is what Joshua Stanton was addressing when he writes that he "suppose[s] his writing probably reflects the way Beijing hopes to use this incident [...]" 

However, it hasn't really yet been shown whether China can effectively transfer economic ties into political leverage-- I'd say consider Scott Snyder's book, China's Rise and the Two Koreas: Politics, Economics, Security. This seems to be true for both halves of the peninsula, but it remains to be seen if this will continue to hold, even as South Korean trade with China now is greater than combined trade figures with the United States and Japan and North Korea is kept on life support by China. 

Still, even as China keeps North Korea afloat, China doesn't really have that much leverage with North Korea. 

Andrei Lankov writes:

A senior South Korean diplomat described this problem in a private conversation by a good allegory: "China does not have leverage when it comes to dealing with the North. What China has is a hammer."

[A Rising South Korea] The Cheonan Saga Continues...

I've been following this Cheonan story for quite some time now and I wrote about how funny I thought it would be that a U.S. aircraft carrier would be going to the Yellow Sea. Well, the story seems to be quite true and just keeps getting more and more interesting.

Christopher Bodeen of the AP:

"The U.S. is directly threatening China by sailing an aircraft carrier into the Yellow Sea," wrote defense blogger Brother Guangdong on the Western Military Affairs site. "China must respond firmly and show the American imperialists we won't be pushed around."

I think this Chinese Blogger is a bit confused. China should respond firmly and show the Americans by taming North Korea rather than attempting to slug it out with a giant nuclear powered U.S. aircraft carrier, a nuclear submarine, and destroyer off the Chinese coast. But, there's more...

China's Foreign Ministry this week registered its concerns that the drills could prompt further rash behavior from North Korea's isolated and erratic communist regime.

North Korea will -- as a direct result -- of the U.S. naval deployment be essentially tamed by Communist China for the forseeable future. This is not because North Korea is scared of a U.S. military attack, but because North Koreans do not want to further upset the -- already furious -- Chinese by attracting another aircraft carrier to the coast of China. Beijing is a lot closer from North Korean than Taiwan -- just consider the Korean War. So, this essentially negates the arguments of blind Chinese nationalists as well as the South Korean left.

By the way, why is it that those on the South Korean left label themselves as "progressive." It is a ridiculously Korean English term, not unlike, say, "Netizens" which really hasn't caught on in the rest of the world. It would be best to label South Korean liberals as well liberals -- though the term Socialists is a good fit for those on the left in the South Korean political spectrum. Progressive in a way implies that, well, those that are not progressive thinkers haven't learned something yet.  It seems so condescending to those that might disagree with these "progressive" thinkers. To me though, the word, progressive reminds me of an insurance company or Teddy Roosevelt a century ago.  

Anyways, back to how the Chinese are directy anger at U.S. "imperialists..."

People's Daily Online (yes, this is the newspaper -- 人民日報社 that reported that a non-existant South Korean professor was going to register Chinese script as a Korean cultural treasure):

No one would allow its competitor with guns in hand to wander in front of their home or keep a close watch staring through their windows, and the American would not too.

[...]

The United States should make people feel that the U.S. military presence in this region is peaceful and necessary, not vice versa.

I'm pretty sure that it was Chinese inaction that led to this military exercise and I'm quite sure the South Korean and Japanese governments feel a lot more comfortable that there is a friend that can stand up to China.

Furthermore, the United States needs to take into account these countries' moods if it wants to become a peacemaker, not a troublemaker. Otherwise, the United States will have difficulties in staying in the region for a long time and its interests here will be difficult to effectively protect.

China never considers the United States an enemy, but the United States should show necessary respect to China. The provocative military drill will only lead to the accumulation of resentment against the United States in the hearts of Chinese people and the United States will inevitably be regarded as a threat.

Again, China seems to only respect force or strength. If South Korea had nuclear weapons and a dozen aircraft carriers, then I'm sure the Chinese would've respected the lives of the South Korean sailors.

Anyways, not too long ago, the rest of the world believed China had some leverage over North Korea and could control the "isolated" and "erratic" regime. Specially appointed diplomats from the United States, South Korea, and Japan among other nations would even go to Beijing and play along in this facade by paying tribute -- attending the Six Party Talks. In exchange, it was believed that China would and could control North Korea -- or if the United States was upsetting the Chinese -- unleash North Korea on South Korea. But, this is no longer the case...

The Cheonan incident -- along with a very nicely played hand by both South Korean President Lee Myung Bak and U.S. President Barak Obama, has single-handledly demonstrated how incapable the Chinese were of controlling North Korea. The incident as mentioned in earlier postings has strengthened the U.S-South Korea alliance, US-Japan alliance, and encouraged better bilateral ties between Japan and South Korea. Furthermore and perhaps most importantly, it has shown the world how little leverage Communist China has over a country that she is basically keeping on life support -- not to mention how much resentment this must breed amongst North Koreans.

Moreover, the United States has also -- finally -- agreed to extend the handover of wartime control to South Korea from 2012 to 2015. (This was first negotiated out of a misguided belief on the part of the late South Korean President Roh Moo Hyun, who believed South Korea might be able to become a regional power or -- the more nonsensical idea of a playing a "balancing" role in Northeast Asia --  before unification had even taken place.) Of course, what Roh Moo Hyun did not understand is that the "balancing" role is precisely what the United States is doing right now by sending none other than a U.S.S. George Washington to waters off the coast of China. The United States is sending China a crystal clear message to China that this is what exactly could occur if the Chinese are incapable of controlling North Korea. And, thanks to North Korea, there seems there will once again be fireworks on July 4th -- no longer North Korean missiles as twice before -- but a nice exercise by the Chinese navy.

(Plus, of course, it's also a nice way to send back a reply to the Chinese military snubbing Secretary of Defense Robert Gates when about a two hundred strong U.S. delegation visited China.)

Nonetheless, I find the ongoing Cheonan saga quite comical as it's gone from an incident that wasn't first highly publicized to one that has led to a U.S. aircraft carrier that will soon kiss the coasts of China in an exercise that is -- of course -- aimed at North Korea, and, which if you really think about, it really is.

[Apple Conquers South Korea] Also, it's time to sell your 3GS -- by Sunday

After several years of trying to protect the Korean market from the iPhone, the phone seems to have taken off. How do I know this? You know something has become huge if my aunt, who is the head Buddhist Monk at a temple in Seoul, Korea has purchased an iPhone. I also convinced my mother that it's time that she catches up with her friends and colleagues, who all have either an iPhone and Blackberry. I showed her the voice control features off the iPhone. For example, if you change the phone's voice command options to Korean, then you can literally say, "Call Mom" in Korean and then in Korean the iPhone says "Calling Mother" in Korean. Also, she liked the idea of being able to send and receive text messages in Korean and to other iPhone owners regardless of whether they are in South Korea or the United States as well as other features more commonly associated with smartphones.

Apparently, Apple has made it easy for me to show her how cool the iPhone is, but it was my job to show that she needed it. She agreed. She thinks it will be a good idea to bring both my younger brother and her  into an AT&T family plan. As a reward, I will be upgrading to the iPhone 4G.

Anyways, it seems to be the repeat of an innovative American company -- namely Microsoft -- turning the products of hi-tech Japanese companies into commodities (memory chips). By the way, I finally saw an iPad today at the Glendale Galleria  and, well, it looks pretty unbelievable. And, its sales also seem unbelievable considering that it seems like a very expensive toy.

But, the new iPhone is a different story. When I first got the iPhone it was nice in that I didn't have to carry around an iPod and a phone. It also functioned as my camera and a mini-computer in that I could browse the web and send e-mails without having to purchase a laptop, while having all the features of a traditional phone with the slick, cool Apple interface -- I can't stand the OS X when it comes to a using a computer though. So, the iPhone is something I've grown quite attached to and with a more powerful camera -- that has a flash and zoom feature -- and a better resolution, the iPhone 4G makes it a new must have for me. 

Used iPhone 3GSs seems to be going for $350-$400 on Craigslist at the moment, but I'd suggest selling it before Monday if you plan on upgrading to the iPhone 4G.

[A Rising South Korea] Apparently Mainstream Media Outlets Have Picked Up on The Story...*edit*

Note: It seems that recent articles on The Economist almost exactly corroborates what I have been writing about this entire time and takes the exact same position I have been taking up until now when I first discussed the possibility of a DPRK regime collpase and the major powers waiting out Kim Jong Il on March 25th, 2010.

Edit: 5/31

It seems many others are picking up on what is going on in North Korea, including mainstream publications such as The Economist now. I mentioned earlier that China is "looking rather feeble" these days, but The Economist goes one step further:

They [the Chinese] presumably fear jeopardising the stability of their renegade ally. But that is not just feeble, it is silly.

The Chinese are indeed continuing to look rather feeble:

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao has steered clear of public discussion of North Korea’s role in the sinking since he arrived in South Korea yesterday. In contrast, Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama today paid his respects at a cemetery where the 46 sailors who died in the sinking are buried, before flying to the resort island of Jeju for the two-day summit. There he said he would back any South Korean move to take the case to the United Nations Security Council.

[...]

The U.S. is joining South Korea in blaming North Korea for the sinking to “put China into an awkward position and keep hold on Japan and South Korea as its servants,” KCNA [North Korea] said.

I've been arguing the whole time South Korea has been in the driver's seat by internationalizing the issue, hence the reason why I preface these posts with "A Rising South Korea." Moreover, the rare press conference from the North Korea army seems that China must be furious at North Korea right now. This is happening not because South Korea is being held as a U.S. servant, but because of South Korean President Lee Myung Bak's handling of the issue.  

Moreover, I have been arguing against the Sunshine Policy for quite some time now as one of its supposed premises -- to bridge the income gap with North Korea for eventual unification -- has been flat wrong as the gap has only widened and continues to widen since the Sunshine Policy has taken hold -- in both absolute and relative terms. Well, it seems The Economist has a nice graph on that as well. 

And, it seems I should put a retraction here -- apparently China committed a pretty serious faux pas on their own by not notifying South Korean President Lee Myung Bak while he was in China...

Nonetheless, apparently there's a new study out by Bonnie S. Glaser and Scott Snyder that The Economist mentions. The link to the pdf file is here. I plan on giving it a full read through shortly, but as it details the potential consequences of what a North Korean collapse might lead to I'd suggest the Chinese government should give it a thorough read and perhaps reconsider what they are doing.

[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.

So, what should be done about North Korea?

Among other things that are going on, there seems to be a lot of speculation in major U.S. publications, among the South Korean Press, and, well, pretty much all over the place about what to do about North Korea. Though domestic U.S. media is currently preoccupied with the BP spill ($30+ billion dollar loss in market cap), there seem to be almost a daily number of articles & incredible number of editorials on the topic in the past couple weeks... Well, here's my position South Korea should do nothing in full FDR fashion by switching from blaming U.S. and Japan for hampering Korean reunification to Chinese selfishness ("stability" so it can get "rich") and support for North Korea (the hapless North Koreans, who are being taken advantage of by the Chinese). I meant in full FDR fashion as a way of slowly building or manufacturing consent (whichever term you prefer) for possible unification. In material terms, South Korea should do nothing as NGOs don't seem to be particularly effective and, just let North Korea be -- without subsidies. Nothing else though.  

Similarly, I believe North Korea's opportunity to receive U.S. aid (or the U.S. just buying out North Korea's WMD program) has come and gone. So, I'd suggest that it is high time to prepare the South Korean public for unification -- FDR style. I mean there is the planning over the what ifs -- I spoke earlier about OPLAN-5029, which details U.S. and South Korean (ROK) armed forces crossing over into North Korea primarily to secure North Korea's weapons of mass destruction (they have stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons that get less media attention, though I'm not as sure of the latter). But, this is just one small aspect.  On a side note, unlike Iraq or Afghanistan there is also a rich country with the right people to occupy the country, if necessary. Though, of course, unlike invading Iraq or Afghanistan, the war might turn out to be much more like World War I, but against a much more suicidal enemy (kind of like Imperial Japan).

With the current Cheonan sinking incident it's time for the South Korean government to slowly manufacture consent not unlike the Sunshine Policy, which did the same against unification for the past deacde. For example, anti-North Korean sentiment should naturally be diverted to anti-Chinese sentiment since South Korea really can't (and shouldn't) do anything (For example, long term DPRK concessions to the Chinese, such as, the port of Rajin -- which looks like a reality, should be as well known as Dokdo). 

The U.S. should continue to give symbolic assurances (aside from ratifying KORUS, which goes beyond the symbolic and which should have been ratified much, much earlier) of U.S. support for South Korea and. For starters, avoid (skip) the six-party talks until the Cheonan incident get's resolved and Kim Jong Il dies. This should serve to build pro-U.S. support for any unified Korea or for whichever type of regime comes next. Given South Korea's national psyche and inclination to blame outside forces, this shouldn't take too long. If this is indeed what happens, we'll be less likely to hear from Korean press about Dokdo (Liancourt Rocks) and more about Goguryeo (Goguryeo) for a long while.  

I don't put much weight on the thought of the Chinese ever deciding to actually add North Korea to China proper (I mean North Korea is not a Xinjiang or Tibet. And, I think there's probably a reason why nobody aside from the Tang Dynasty in the 7th century and Japan in modern times really tried to annex Korea (though I believe it was discussed in China during the latter days of the 19th century to ward off Japanese influence and it's not just because of the historical, tributary system in Asia).  Imagine trying to govern the most xenophobic, nationalistic, and ethnocentric (perhaps, racist) people in the world.  

Moreover, I'm not fully convinced that China is fully backing the North Korea regime. If anything, China would love to be in the position of the United States -- hence, the reason why the South Korean President was met days before Kim Jong Il. Moreover, these concessions in the form of long term leases of ports (Rajin) or mines, etc, seem more like short term hedges against a North Korean collapse and just create North Korean resentment toward China. And, if anything, while we always consider how South Koreans might lean in the event of unification, I'd bet that current Chinese policies in North Korea would cement Anti-Chinese sentiment among North Koreans in a future, unified Korean peninsula for generations.

After a couple of decades as being the lone ranger in Northeast Asia (Japan and Australia really don't count here), it seems the U.S. is finally in a rather nice position.

China? Decidedly, less so.

Anti-Americanism in South Korea -- "Fucking USA" Song w/English translation

Edit：During the song when the singer asks, "Is America still a beautiful country?" this references the (Sino-Korean) word for the United States (미국 - 美國, literally "beautiful country"). I wrote about this last year and how the Sino-Japanese word for the United States is rice country (美國  vs 米國) -- the Korean and Japanese pronounciations for beautiful and rice are homonyms in both languages.

As I was re-reading my earlier post, I was thinking, "what on earth is a bicycle and spoke system?" Anyways, in the DeCal yesterday, I spoke about Anti-Americanism and the recent North Korean currency reform, which in hindsight, achieved what looks to be an economic atmosphere in North Korea that has a eerie resemblance to the situation policymakers in the U.S. (and the rest of the world) were trying to get us out of just a couple years ago.

But, with respect to Anti-Americansm, I guess I should've included this video in yesterday's class as it really puts things in perspective. Basically, what I went over in class is the understanding I came to have of the Anti-Americanism that was pervasive at around the time of the 2002 World Cup and immediately preceeding  following it. Well, here's the video. There's a translation in English (and Japanese) as well -- gotta love those Japanese Anti-Korean Youtube posts (I'm just joking, by the way. Nationalism in East Asia is not confined to Japan... ). But, anyways, you might find this video shocking when considering that South Korea is a U.S. ally, how much more beneficial the US-ROK alliance is for South Korea, and how South Korea owes a great deal, including it's very existence (on a side note, this directly brings up whether Korea would have been better off in 2010 had Korea been a unified Communist country back in 1950) and except in the direct development of its democratic institutions (a source of Anti-Americanism as disccused yesterday) to the United States up until very recently. Hopefully, the discussion in class yesterday will put a video like this in perspective.

And, during the U.S. - SKorea game, it wasn't just drunken guys singing this song -- it was very, very popular with almost all young adults and adults. The very same college and high school students, who after a gathering of 300,000 or so to watch a soccer game in mass and who would afterwards individually pickup the trash, were the very same people that sang this song. It wasn't just an extreme segment of SKorean society, but it was part of popular culture.

If you click on the Anti-Americanism label, you'll come up with a list of posts that in a nutshell is what was discussed yesterday minus the in detail description of the main issues and events that dominated the formative years of those those that voted to put Roh Moo Hyun in power.

Of North Korea, Internet Addiction, & Unification Church. Also, What's been going on in South Korea?

Note: I guess the only thing to do about typos is... to keep writing(or posting)...

I wrote about what I thought was going on in North Korea these days (possible regime collapse soon). This article summarizes the sentiment of "longtime observors."

The rising prospect of collapse is chiefly expressed by a range of professors, military experts and think-tank analysts who scrutinize Pyongyang's power elite. Those observers have pointed to weaknesses in the regime in the past, particularly after the death of Mr. Kim's father, Kim Il Sung, in 1994, but they seemed to have settled into a belief in the regime's stability. Last month, however, the chatter began to change.

"It's like a taboo that's been broken," said Daniel Pinkston, an analyst at the Seoul office of International Crisis Group, a Brussels-based group that reports on conflict areas (North Korean Regime Seen as Weakening | Wall Street Journal).

The reason that it was taboo to talk about a North Korean collapse is that a lot of really smart people got embarassed when they mistakenly predicted the collapse of North Korea after the death of Kim Il Sung -- I think the CIA put the regime's lifespan at five years at that time -- and again when the famine was playing out. But, nonetheless, unless the United States comes forth with a sweeping security guarantee with large amounts of financial aid in exchange for North Korea's complete, verifiable and irreversible dismantlement (CVID) of its nuclear weapons program, in an internal environment for North Korea that seems to reward those that are the most conservative and confrontational (as the sucession issue looms and not unlike how the Republican Party in the U.S. is today) and an external environment that has never been more hostile (seems South Korea was the key variable all along (along with a consistent US foreign policy) that makes the DPRK's days look numbered...

So much for those in Korea that have purposely and wrongly blamed outside countries, particularly the United States for blocking Korean reunification) -- If there's any country to be blamed, it's China back during the days of the famine and, perhaps, China again... though a massive, unilateral Chinese intervention / aid looks unlikely even with the upcoming visit to China by Kim Jong Il....China again with an intervention in North Korea that will come shortly...

But anyways, you know what this means? Well, as I was walking by campus a couple days ago, I saw posters from the Unification Church (통일교회) of Rev. Sun Myung Moon. Among its many beliefs and businesses (the Church single-handedly brought the Fox News Version of the Washington Post -- The Washington Times to, well, Washington, D.C.) is that Jesus Christ will return when the Korean Peninsula is unified. So, get ready: the end is near.

Meanwhile in South Korea with the fastest Internet connections in the world:

 

A couple of professed video-game addicts, while playing marathon sessions of a game where they ironically raise a virtual baby, were found guilty of killing their real life baby out of criminal neglect.

 

At the same time, of course, Lee Kun-Hee, son of the late Samsung founder was pardoned as he returned to be head of Samsung Electronics, the largest high tech company in the world (in revenue... larger than HP now). By the way, check the chart in that article (it shows how far Samsung has come in various industries, all commoditized industries, but nonetheless).  He has to save the company and country from Apple and Research In Motion).

 

Of course, not to be outdone, Hyundai Motors (though I think Samsung Electronics comprises a quarter of the total market value of the main South Korean stock exchange - KOSPI) reported record sales on continued growth in the U.S. and Chinese markets. Along with its subsidiary, Kia Motors, the carmaker reported grabbing 8.1% of the U.S. market, which means goodbye to KORUS for the time being as 8.1% of the U.S. market is probably the size of the entire South Korean market.

 

By the way, there is an interesting provision in the KORUS FTA agreement that isn't in the Korea-EU Free Trade Treaty about products made in the Gaeseong Industrial Complex -- which allows for the U.S. to decide if products made in Gaeseong will be tariff free. The treaty with the EU completely ignores the issue as and classifies those products as North Korean products, which could be used as leverage against North Korea -- I believe there's an article that argued precisely that, but considering that the agreement isn't in the one with the EU and the Gaeseong issue, I believe rather than showing a point of potential leverage, it goes to show how much more important or attractive the U.S. market is than the E.U. one. As during the KORUS negotiations, the Gaesong phrase was put in there to placate SKorean negotiators -- I'm guessing it goes to show how much more profitable the U.S. market is... (regardless of gross volume of sales...)
 

Anyways, this article best illustrates the success that Hyundai has been seeing in the U.S. (though GM -- which has a 40% stake in GM Daewoo -- should probably come out as KORUS' biggest advocate. GM has sold more cars in China than in the U.S. as of late. Much of this is due to GM Daewoo -- one of their successful acquisitions). 

 

There's also a freak accident that destroyed a South Korean naval ship that's being covered in more detail over on all the main Korea blogs, where they investigate some of the causes.

 

Thought I'd share some of the articles I kept open in my tabs as I catch up on what's been happening around the world... (Spring Break ended)...

Of Textbooks and Computer Games

Oh, and by the way this brings me to a post about the ridiculous system of English education in Korea. Again, I don't think I'll ever be able to get over how English is taught before Sino-Korean Characters(한자, 漢字)!. You see, I don’t understand why there aren’t specific books made for the Korean market. (maybe there were or are now, but I haven’t come across them…).

I remember one thing that I hated and I guess this is a double edged sword in that I hated how large the Korean computer gaming market was. You see when I lived in Korea I loved playing computer games (now, I just like to buy the game and see how good the graphics look on my computer, show it off to a couple people who could care less, and then end up selling it in a couple months) … But, I swear just as certain Korean grandparents can play Go (바둑) at that age; I’m going to playing Civilization X or at least show off to my grandchildren how nice the graphics are...

Well, anyways, the problem with the Korean computer gaming market being so big (and I believe the online gaming market was the largest in the world before World of Warcraft and broadband Internet – by the way, should this word still be capitalized really took off in the rest of the world?

Anyways, the Korean computer gaming market being “big” is all nice if you’re a Korean-Korean or a native Korean since this means companies such as Electronic Arts will invest the time and money to localize the game (as in at the very least translate the game into Korean). But, for people like me, well, …

You see, I always loved the game Civilization. When I was in Korea, Civilization 3 came out and that’s when I learned what the word 문명 (*civilization*) meant. It was nice; all the menus were in Korean and all, and while I could understand what “Install” was or “Options” was in Korean, when it came to actually playing the game and moving these "historical units," I was quite frustrated … (Of course, for Korea it was a boon, I mean this was the beginning of Korean cultural or media exports that were no longer about building gigantic ships that no other country asides from either a China or Japan has desire to build, but finally songs, computer games, television dramas, movies, etc…)

But anyways, for me, it wasn’t that great. At least, for playing “문명” (Civilization, if you don’t have a Korean font installed). But, you see, as an English teacher there I saw a parallel. The funny thing is that you would think that Korea would have the largest market for books teaching Koreans English from a Korean perspective. But, I cannot tell you how many times I came across expensive, no, very expensive textbooks published by large American or British companies that were published to teach the domestic market (Americans or the British) English. In America, the last time I studied grammar – and I’m not sure if this is true for rest of America, but the last time I studied grammar was I believe in fifth or sixth grade.

I remember the teacher correcting us if we wrote I would of rather than I would’ve

You see, that’s a problem that native English speakers of Americans have when learning how to write in English and not one that Koreans would have.

If these game companies can localize games for the large domestic market in Korea, then these gigantic publishing houses should do the same for these ESL books (Of course, they might exist already, but textbooks not localized for the domestic Korean market should not be allowed into the market as they do a great disservice to those trying to learn and teach English).

Please excuse my generalizations, but please do understand that I’m speaking about a wide and I mean a wide range of topics in this blog).

A Schizophrenic Han

(Probably Part I of II) Part II can be found here.

From previous posts, such as this one, you can tell I am somewhat sympathetic towards Lee Myung Bak. He just seems to be the wrong president at the wrong time, but anyways I just read this article and every single time I read something like this, the political situation in Korea boggles the mind (But on a side note, I'd also argue that South Korea is one of just two East Asian countries with democratic institutions - Taiwan being the other one. And Japan, well, we'll see). That is, how on earth can people care so vehemently (and violently) about civil rights on the margin when there's North Korea just a fiften minute drive away (of course, it's not really about civil rights. It seems to be more about getting even in my opinion).

But anyways, how can those in Korea (those few that care about politics that is, which in and of itself is amazing -- Considering that half the country still remains divided, the country is still just yet another middle income country, the country is at WAR and has been for half a century) care so little about politics.

How Can This Go On In Korea?

"Now the former president’s supporters are blockading the halls of parliament 24 hours a day, preventing deputies from getting into the chamber and any laws from being passed (see picture). Progressives are demanding the president apologise for Mr Roh’s suicide, claiming that prosecutors who were investigating him were operating at Mr Lee’s behest—a charge the president furiously denies" ("Political confrontation in South Korea: Long, hot summer" Economist)

To take a look at how ridiculous this is, we need to briefly examine Korean history (When Koreans often proudly claim a 5,000 year history, they are referring back to 2333 BCE as the beginning of the Korean People. Koreans not unlike that of Israelis do not distinguish ethnicity from nationality -- although recent trends in South Korea seem to be breaking from tradition among many others, including teaching English before Sino-Korean Characters).

It doesn't make sense to me that there's a country that has pretty much had the same borders and unified borders since the 7th century can care so much about the freedom of the press at the margin when half of the country will -- I honestly believe -- go down in history as the worst example of a totalitarian government that systematically implements human rights violations (perputating ignorance is just as big a human rights violation in my honest opinion as physical torture -- think fascism -- and here North Korea has no parallels).

By the way, on a tangent here, for those Koreans, who believe in this newly created North-South States Period Theory or 남북국시대 (신라+발해 = Korea), let me tell you -- it's pure rubbish, which I would like to address in detail one day(The main question behind that issue comes down to who were the Mohe (말갈, 靺鞨) people. What is uncontested is that the people that lived under Balhae were not the same as that lived under Silla).

But anyways, what is important here is how it is undisputedable that there has been a Korean state since the 7th century. Yet, after about 1300 years as one united (한 나라), half the country comes to be moderately wealthy after a relatively, short period of immense humiliation (36 years out of 5000?) and destitution (is there a precedent in Korean history, where Korea was like an island before? Because, South Korea right now surely resembles an island state like a large Singapore).

To get to the heart of the matter, it's hard to take complaints against the current Lee Myung Bak president seriously when these same people can condone what's going on in the northern half of the peninsula, yet be so vehemently be against alleged human rights violations against the Lee Myung Bak administration that if true would lay on the margins.

Freedom of press violations? (This is where I would say perpetuating ignorance is also a crime against humanity" c'mon Americans only eat Australian beef? Anyways, yes, it looks like Lee Myung Bak is trying to limit some of the gains made by the (State run) news organizations, but still... it pales in comparison to the North.

Are Koreans Schizophrenic? How on Earth can you look at a country when there's a shared history -- imagine, let's say, a thousand years of a country with no minorities. No sense of other. I mean, in the United States, there were Indians, and then the Irish and Germans and then the Latins, etc etc... But, in Korea, there was the Kim clan and Lee clan (of course, gets more detailed) than that and, yes, the Chang clan...

While, half their fellow bretheren -- half of the clan members are just having the time of their lives under Kim Jong Il, freedom of the press is so important or an apology that important or necessary? Does it serve any function other than to ask for the current South Korean president to belittle himself?

Effects of an Economic Downturn : Feeling Pain, the Korean Way

As to what is going on in the southern half of the Korean Peninsula, Koreans seem to be going through some very turbulent times (but, hey, this is the downside of having such an overly educated workforce without a strong emphasis on innovation)? Nonetheless, this being Korea, as the WSJ usually loves to say (and I guess from this article, what the New York Times also sees in Korea:)

"Just as distinctly Korean may be the lengths to which some go to hide their newly humble status."

And, perhaps, to point again, at the sense of duty and responsibility that Koreans toward family, the pains of an economic downturn, in thisConfucian society are felt communally. As one native Korean puts it:

"If my parents knew what I was doing now, they would pity me," he said. "Now, I look at the ocean and think, I should have worked harder at the cellphone store, and be a better man for my family" ("With Wounded Pride, Unemployed Koreans Quietly Turn to Manual Labor | New York Times)

I would like to thank a certain Ms. S.J. Kim for pointing this article out on Facebook.

Interestingly, a comment like the one above cited in the New York Times article sounds no different than something a Korean-American or a Korean living in the northern half of the peninsula might say. Aspects such as why this is so will be discussed extensively in the coming semester.

Breaking Down Borders: Korea, Fall 2009 Semester

I have just received word that both Professor Elaine Kim and the departmental chair of the Ethnic Studies department at UC Berkeley, have both signed off on there being another "Breaking Down Borders: Korea" class next semester. Now with just the approval of the Academic Senate, "Breaking Down Borders: Korea" will now be available this coming fall semester.

Provided there is enough room, although last semester, we actually had a waiting list for upper classmen, I welcome people to audit the course. In that, you just come in to participate and contribute to the discussion. The syllabus can be found here (I do realize there are quite a few typos).

Articles, such as, the one above is a good example of what will be discussed over the course of the fall semester.

North Korea, Koreas Update

On the North Korean front:

Nothing exciting to speak of as North Korea really is running out of things to do, firing missiles on July 4th has been done before and no missile came close to Hawaii. Kangnam I safely returned back to North Korea. But, what has recently begun appearing on the news is if the North Korean succession story is for real or just to grab Hillary Clinton’s (United States) attention. More on this later.

South Korea – Japan held a summit. Of course, nothing came of it since still the dominant relationships in East Asia are still the bilateral relationships with the United States. Of course, what should be interesting for Korean nationalists, whose national psyche or “han” has not fully healed yet, is how they react to the trilateral meeting between the United States-China-Japan that will be held shortly. Previous overtures by China on such a meeting were declined on the part of the United States to assuage South Korean insecurities. However, with the financial crisis the United States consented this time.

With this in mind, South Korea’s foreign policy priority number one should still solely be on unification and nothing else. Ideas such as being a neutral or balancing party (former South Korean President Roh Moo Hyun) or of building closer ties with ASEAN (South Korean President Lee Myung Bak’s New Asia Initiative) might seem great, but it’s just fanciful(wishful) thinking on the part of a confused half nation. This has been a repeated theme in this blog. Zhiqun Zhu writes:

“Korea's dream to become a leading player in international affairs will also likely be wishful thinking if the nation remains divided. Nevertheless, Lee, just like Roh, is commendable for his attempts to enhance South Korea's international profile and to contribute to peace and development in Asia” (South Korea in a new Asia initiative Asia Times).

China is NOT the key to North Korea

I'm actually in the middle of studying for a make up test later today, so I have a flight in a few hours, but this editorial caught my eye. To be honest, it’s flimsy editorials like this one that make me want to write this blog. I can’t find exactly who the author is, but somehow it made to the Los Angeles Times.

"North Korean leader Kim Jong Il decided long ago that nuclear weapons were his best protection against an external threat of regime change" ("China is the key to North Korea" Los Angeles Times).

A couple posts down, I describe why South Korea’s foreign policy is held hostage at least with respect to North Korea due primarily to the location of Seoul. But, what I didn’t mention in that post was how while the United States could attack North Korea without much risk to being attacked at home, U.S. foreign policy too is held hostage to the fact that there are still about 28,500 U.S. soldiers in South Korea. An invasion by North Korea with or without nuclear weapons would not only destroy Seoul, but kill most of those U.S. soldiers overnight. Former President George W. Bush was told this exact same thing by former Saudi Ambassador and Crown Prince Bandar (Check out Bob Woodward’s State of Denial: Bush at War, Part III ). If twenty thousand U.S. soldiers died overnight from a North Korean invasion, then there would be no need for a congressional or public debate about the need for a U.S. invasion of North Korea. It would be done (Another reason why as I wrote earlier that Extended Deterrence was solely for propaganda purposes).

If North Korea has artillerly that can flatten Seoul and kill 28,000 thousand American soldiers and about twenty million living Koreans overnight, then this should be enough to protect against a "regime change." Then which country would have the most to lose if North Korea actually developed a full-fledged nuclear program? So, it’s not the U.S. and it’s definitely not South Korea. Japan, maybe? Recall the United States decision to notify Japan only twenty minutes before taking North Korea off the list of states sponsoring terrorism. The only terrorists North Korea actually harbored were those of the Red Army (Communist Japanese Terrorists). And, moreover, if Japan feels it “necessary” that to protect against North Korea that Japan too needs nuclear weapons, when of course, the country doesn’t (remember, Extended Deterrence covers Japan as well), then who loses?

China.

So, if China would lose out the most if North Korea developed nuclear weapons and China is not doing too well as the more North Korea backtracks the more China’s lack of power shows (i.e. failure of six party talks, continual and unending foreign aid from Beijing), then does China really have the power to do anything in North Korea?

Perhaps. But, what if North Korea had let’s say dozens of nukes that couldn’t go thousands of miles, but could fit on its Rodong missiles that could hit Beijing?

So, no. It is to protect the North Korean regime from a China rather than a United States and China does not have the power to change North Korean policy and will see the country’s ability to do anything at all get smaller and smaller as North Korea’s nuclear program matures.

Anyways, I will be taking a break for a few days – unless I see articles like this again, and I will actually be flying on July 4th with more than a slight bit of irony to London to attend summer school there for the next 6 weeks.

America the Dangerous?

On a more serious note, I noticed a couple articles in the news that makes me want to explain the other side … the view of the United States as a “normal” nation where the behavior of the nation isn’t explained by how America wants to expand “democracy” or rid “tyranny.”

This is a view I picked up living in Korea and I also hinted before at how shocked I was at the level of Anti-Americanism seen in Korea. How could it be that so many people of the same shared heritage (and, of course, of the same 족(族)) could hate America ? The country gives so many opportunities to so many different countries and is so goddamn beautiful (미국, 美國). On a side note here: One of my favorite lines in Korean, “아름다운 미국을 어떻게 싫어 할 수 있어 ” or “How could you hate Beautiful America?”

There’s a double meaning here and another opportunity to poke fun at Japanese. The Chinese characters used to represent the United States in Chinese and Korean literally mean “Beautiful Country/Nation (美國).” In Japanese, it isn’t (米國). In both, Korean and Japanese (not sure in Chinese), but anyways, the characters for “beautiful(美)” and “rice(米)” are homonyms. So if the Chinese characters that the Japanese language uses were to be pronounced in Korean, it would still be the same (미국 whether it’s美國 or米國). And, if the Japanese language were to call America “Beautiful Country” rather than “Rice Country” as Chinese and Korean do, then everybody in Japan would still be able to understand. Those island savages…

Anyways, to the meat of the post: America is also basically a giant island nation bordered by two much smaller countries to the north and south and an ocean to the east and a “vast ocean (太平洋)” to the west. So, basically the United States has no natural competitors (well, minus a Brazil one day) and dominates an entire hemisphere (half a planet) to herself. And as the Pat Buchanan wing of the Republican Party advocates and has advocated since the birth of this nation, the United States can always hide behind the two oceans with the most powerful navy in the world (Unfortunately, I believe this is why Japan fought a war with the U.S., for the control of the ocean. Consider that Japan has gotten everything the island nation wanted during World War II except for that).

Since the United States controls the oceans and has the most powerful navy in the world and has a string of allies in East Asia, it gives the country one huge advantage: very far-flung borders.
So, the effective border between the United States, and say, North Korea, is the DMZ and the East Sea (Sea of Japan) (For China, it’s even worse. The effective border between the U.S. and China is Japan down to South Korea down to Taiwan – So, that’s why Taiwan is so important to China/U.S.). The United States can attack North Korea from South Korea or Japan or even off the waters near North Korea in the East Sea or (Sea of Japan) without fear of reprisal. North Korea has to launch unreliable missiles over thousands of miles just to hit a Hawaii or Alaska.

But, now, let’s take a look at it from the South Korean perspective:

If you are living in Seoul, particularly Sinchon (신촌), then there’s a good chance a war between the U.S. and North Korea (for a second imagine, that it’s only between the U.S. and North Korea and while the U.S. and South Korea may be allies in name or nominal allies, it’s not in the South Korean or for that matter in any nation’s interest to see her capital destroyed) would not be seen as such a good thing. The reason I mention Sinchon in particular is that there was a study that said a North Korean attack on South Korea would lead to 99% of the people in Sinchon dying in the first fifteen minutes (Of course, I can’t cite the exact study, but hey this is a blog). So, actually, if you’re studying at Yonsei or Ehwa Universities, then there’s a good chance you might be done for. The point is that while a North Korean missile must travel thousands of miles before it can actually hit U.S. territory, the economic and political capital of South Korea is just fifteen minutes away from North Korea.

This can lead to some serious misunderstanding between the United States and South Korea. While the U.S. may think it to be perfectly rational to simply consider an airstrike on a North Korean nuclear facility, South Korea would think it to be utterly crazy. I mean from South Korea’s perspective, how on earth could somebody consider launching a war that would immediately destroy Seoul (half of all Koreans in South Korea live in Seoul and neighboring Gyeonggi province). So, before certain Korean-Americans and other commentators in America are quick to judge South Korea as a disloyal and ungrateful nation, it would also be natural and quite fair to expect that the United States understand and consider South Korea's concerns or else the United States would be the disloyal and arrogrant nation. Anyways, while North Korea has been in the news a lot recently (well up until Iran stole the limelight and the Obama Administration is tackling a real concern -- health care), the United States definitely did respond to North Korean threats by:

1. Upgrading Missile Defenses in Hawaii, which while it may sound ludicrous, it also serves a domestic propaganda function -- President Obama is “taking action” (Ahh, I miss President George W. Bush; well not really, but at least some of his phrases. I am a registered Republican by the way).
2. And, while none of the major newspapers in the United States seems to have covered it, the United States conducted a missile test too. Well, China, South Korea, and, of course, North Korea’s state run news agencies did (American newspapers aren’t state run right?) Basically, while the U.S. president wants Americans to know things are being taken care of (Hawaii), the U.S. wants North Korea to know that "Hey we got hundreds of these missiles that work and isthey are very, very accurate -- to within 6 m? -- and can carry three nuclear weapons at once."

“The Minuteman 3 was fired from Vandenberg Air Force Base during a six-hour
window that started at 3:01 a.m., carrying three unarmed re-entry vehicles that
hit their targets near the Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands, some 4,200
miles (6,720 kilometers) away, the Air Force said” (Xinhua).

Anyways, it's not the type of thing I believed a "good" country like the United States would ever do and maybe it's just coincidental. After all, the United States loves to bomb things. Before the United States gave up possession of Dokdo/Takeshima(독도(獨島)/たけしま(竹島)) and Senkaku/Diaoyu islands, the United States used both as bombing ranges (A link for this will be provided one day). Anyways, America at the same time actually does believe she is a force for good.

South Korean President Lee Myung Bak is "taking action" as well as South Korea is building up a missile defense system of her own. South Korea is buying a lot of weapons from the United States:

"South Korea plans to acquire 40 new surface-to-air missiles within the
month for its Aegis destroyer, a military source said Sunday" (Yonhap).

Anyways, that's South Korea's view.that is how the United States can be seen as a "normal" nation that takes behavior not based upon what is right or wrong, but what on her interests. Interestingly, and what I believe will and has been a recurring theme in American (and World) History is that the United States and, moreover, Americans genuinely believe that what is in America's best interest is also good for the world. They call it naivete in Europe. I call it optimism and a product of the Enlightenment.