Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Keeping Perspective on North Korea
When the current Korean crisis emerged, I immediately contacted the wisest person I know on the subject. His name is Gene Matthews, and he spent decades in South Korea as a missionary who was active in the pro-democracy movement there.
He's a contributor to a great new book called "More Than Witnesses: How a Small Group of Missionaries Aided Korea's Democratic Revolution."
Here's what he has to say about the current standoff.
"North Korea has always felt threatened by joint military exercises of the U.S. and South Korea, and has always protested against them," he says. "This time, North Korea stated that the exercises were taking place in North Korean territory and that if shots were fired during the exercise they would retaliate. Shots were fired (not at the North, it should be pointed out but out toward the ocean) and the North retaliated."
What's saddest about this standoff, he says, is that it shows how far relations have slid in the last fifteen years.
"Let's go back to 1994 when it was discovered that North Korea might be developing nuclear weapon capability. The right wing in America had a field day. Republicans in Congress began calling for massive bombing raids to wipe out the North Korean nuclear facilities.
"Enter Jimmy Carter. Please check out Jimmy's article in the Washington Post. A strong case could be made for saying that Carter's visit to the north prevented war from breaking out. As a result of his visit The United States and North Korea finally began talking to each other and reached some remarkable agreements. The North agreed to destroy its small nuclear generator in return for enough oil supplied the United States and Japan to replace the generating capacity. Plans were even under way to open a U.S. Embassy in North Korea. I remember receiving a phone call from a friend in the U.S. Embassy in Seoul asking if I could recommend somebody sufficiently fluent in Korean to work in the Pyongyang Embassy as an interpreter. President Clinton even began to speak of a possible visit to the north.
"The situation continued to improve dramatically with the inauguration of Kim Dae Jung as president of South Korea in 1998. He developed his famous "Sunshine" policy with the north. A brief, useful description of the Sunshine Policy can be found at fact-index.com."
George W. Bush destroyed all this progress, Matthews says.
"Without being totally naive about the situation I cannot help but feel that North and South Korea could be thrashing out the final clauses of some kind of positive détente had George W. Bush not been appointed U.S. president by the Supreme Court. You will recall that shortly after his own inauguration Bush declared North Korea part of the Axis of Evil, the terrible triumvirate of nations including Iraq and Iran which Bush declared were intent on destroying out freedom. When Bush subsequently attacked Iraq for no reasons that made any sense, North Korea would have been foolish not to assume that they were also on the list of nations to be targeted.
"In a later public statement Bush labeled North Korean President Kim Jong Il a "moral pigmy." Very few Americans can understand how insulting and devastating such talk is to a Korean leader. Americans tend to judge the rest of the world by their own cultural thought patterns. For a Korean leader to ignore such slurs would be a sign of grave weakness. I feel this goes a long way toward explaining some of the recent hostility displayed by the north.
"Bush was not through, however. Kim Dae Jung in two short years had already begun implementation of his Sunshine Policy. In 2000 he had made a historical visit to North Korea where he was warmly received. He would later receive the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts at bringing peace to the Korean peninsula. Following Bush's inauguration, Kim flew to Washington to try to persuade the new American president to continue support of his efforts to engage the north. Instead, Bush used the occasion to lecture Kim about how foolish he was to trust the north. Again, very few Americans realized how harmful this was. Here was the cocky, shallow thinking, fraternity boy lecturing an elderly man whose entire life had been dedicated to achieving democracy in his own land, who was carrying on delicate negotiations with one of the most unstable regimes in the world, fully cognizant of all the pitfalls inherent in such negotiations, willing to risk his entire political future in spite of those pitfalls. The scene defies description.
"Kim returned to Korea realizing that not only could he not count on support from Bush but that he now had to expand political energy to overcome Bush's insulting behavior. Both Kim and his predecessor, Roh Moo-Hyun, moved ahead with the Sunshine Policy not only lacking support from Bush but now faced with Bush's seeming determination to counter any Korean policies developed under President Clinton.
"When I last visited Korea in 2003 I was amazed to find a railroad connection already completed between north and south. A South Korean Industrial complex had been built in Kaesong where North Korean workers were producing goods for sale in South Korea. Family visits were common and South Korean tourists were making regular visits to the beautiful Diamond Mountains of North Korea."
Things took a further turn for the worse with the election due to political changes in the South, Matthews says.
"It all began to grind to a halt with the election of Lee Myung Bak as South Korean president in 2007. This highly successful business man and former mayor of Seoul saw himself as a pragmatic, no-nonsense leader who seemed determined to rule with a firm hand, almost reminiscent of the past military dictators. He too, flew off to Washington to sit at the feet of George Bush and came back singing Bush's praises. Almost overnight the progress made under the two previous presidents was wiped out. The railroads and highways were virtually closed down, tours and family visits ceased and production at the industrial complex in Kaesong declined dramatically. This was all combined with a vigorous renewal of the "defensive" exercises some of which were now taking place in the disputed boundary waters between North and South."
Nor does Matthews spare President Obama.
"One final ingredient for the stew pot is President Obama's abysmal approach to the Korean situation. Whereas in his campaign he promised to deal with situations like Korea through negotiation, as president he has almost wholeheartedly embraced Bush's policies and has pledged full support to South Korean president Lee Myung Bak's hard-line stance.
Matthews has no illusions about North Korea, but he urges us to move beyond simplistic portrayals.
"The point of this overly long backgrounder is not to paint North Korea as blameless. By almost any measure the North is a basket case. Its leadership is terribly paranoid, and its internal human rights record is abominable. But Americans seem unable to see beyond the hasty conclusions and Hollywood-type approach to any incident such as the shelling of the island and sinking of the ship. America good. South Korea good. North Korea bad. The end."
It's just not that simple, he says.
"American still has 28,000 troops stationed in South Korea 57 years after the cessation of hostilities. North Korea perceives their presence, rightly or wrongly, as a threat. This perception is only reinforced when American and South Korean forces carry out aggressive military exercises within gunshot of North Korea."
Above all, says Matthews, we need to return to the path that was showing so much progress.
"The ways of Jimmy Carter, Kim Tae Jun and No Moo Hyun were working. The current ways are not."


69 Comments so far
Show AllNorth Korea hasn't been able to fully feed its population since the end of the cold war. Made worse but the fact that the military gets first priority.
Shhhh! Communism good. Capitalism bad. Sure, the communists need capitalists to provide food, but...
Actually I consider the Sunshine Policy to be a failure. It was a one way street. The North even had naval confrontations with the South during the period. The only difference was that the South tried to ignore it as best possbile at the time. Kim Dae Jung even refused to go to the funerals for the dead sailors because he might offend the North.
Yes, let's let a dictatorship slaughter a democracy. Great plan.
OMG! Even the Koreans have to take some blame? What a concept.
The involvement of the USG goes back to the early 1900's when the USG and Japan agreed to let the Japanese have a free hand in Korea and the Japanese would not interfere with the USG in the Philippines.Japan's intention for the Koreans was to turn them into slave labor and the USG murdered some 300,000 Filipino's. The North Koreans have been under threat of nuclear attack from the USG for 60 years. Under Bush the strategy was/is to keep the Northwest Pacific in turmoil by using Korea as the scapegoat. The reason being that the USA want to dominate the N.W. Pacific and it is where China, Russia, Japan, Korea, and USG interests collide. Under Bush North Korea was concocted to be a threat to prevent Korean unification because the USG doesn't want another nuclear power in that region. Also, it might encourage Japan to go nuclear which it could do in a short amount of time.
bogi -
President Teddy Roosevelt won the Nobel Peace Prize in the early 1900's for brokering an end to a nasty naval war between Russia and Japan. The sleazy tradeoff you describe - the US turned its head while Japan occupied Korea and made it its colony, while Japan turned its head to the US colonization of the Phillippines and the US naval presence there - was the realpolik deal struck in the back room. That deal essentially held together until December 7, 1941.
The 38th parallel on the Korean penninsula was agreed upon as a line for the Japanese troops to effectuate surrender. The Japanese could surrender to the Red Army north of that line (the Soviet Union did not declare war on Japan until after the war against Germany ended), or the Japanese could surrender to the Americans south of the 38th parallel. There was no "deal" to divide Korea geographically into Cold War zones of interest, certainly no consent by the Korean people to any such division, regardless of their ideological persuasion.
What emerged in the late 40's was a regime in south Korea riddled with elites who were, in varying degrees, former collaborators with the Japanese colonial oppressors, and who were viewed (with some justification) by Koreans in the north as still being a puppet of outside foreign interests (now, postwar American interests, rather than Japanese interests). Once the killing started, the Korean War took on a chaotic life all its own with the locals caught up in a major power crossfire between the US/UN and the Chinese/Russians that very nearly went nuclear.
George W. Bush's idiotic Axis of Evil speech, lumping North Korea alongside Iraq and Iran on the neocons' post 9/11 hit list for regime change, was indeed a tragic watershed moment - the gift that keeps on giving, so to speak, if you are into mindless knee jerk militarism on a global scale. All of the painstaking progress that had been made towards Korean reunification and nuclear nonproliferation over the previous fifty years vanished, causing North Korea to dramatically jump start its nuclear weapons acquisition program.
Those chickens are still coming home to roost from Bush's assinine Axis of Evil speech. We have gunboat posturing with a nuclear aircraft carrier task force rushing to the area on Obama's watch, artillery barrages from the North in protest of the US/ROK war games, and the most rabidly militaristic elements within South Korea become ascendant, to the point that a running tally of the number of artillery rounds fired by each side is kept to determine testosterone level bragging rights.
Very stupid. Very scary if you live in the immediate neighborhood. And very dangerous in the context of the threat of nuclear war by accident or by rogue actor design.
Time to take the toys away from the boys.
Bill from Saginaw
After giving the Nobel Peace prize to Obomber and Roosevelt hopefully the selection process will exclude USG Presidents in the future.It hasn't worked out for the world.Thanks for the info. I can't say the same for South Korea but there was no such country as south Vietnam, which may have been a haven for those whom collaborated with the Japanese. South Vietnam was concocted and only existed in the minds of those in D.C. which means all of those killed in S.E.Asia were the victims of the USG protecting a non existent imaginary, country.
Bush messed up in countless ways, but you can't lay all the blame at his feet. NK has been preparing for war for a long, long time, well before Bush Sr.
You may not belong there, but it's a handy place to dump all the crap (military) the MIC produces so you can make / sell more of it.
You may not belong there, but it's a handy place to dump all the crap (military) the MIC produces so you can make / sell more of it.
I actually had the opportunity to discuss the Korean war with a Chinese citizen a while back . Basically his perception of the war was that of many Americans, the war was a very long time ago and it doesn't effect anything now. Plenty of younger Americans( 25 or younger) as well as Chinese aren't too nationalistic...
But as a nice bonus he was able to clarify why China invaded Vietnam in 1979. " We were at war with (the) Soviet Union "...
"China invaded Viet Nam"
That war is over but the Korean war is not. That War lasted 3 weeks, a border war and was punishment for Viet Nam's invasion of China supported Cambodia right after Cambodia was raiding Vietnam.
Actually millions were saved from the Khmer Rouge because of that.
All this was the aftermath Of USA's trying to control SE Asia and we continue Superpower Imperialism.
We will see if China does not care about North Vietnam and if the Korean war gets heavy the nukes could impact the whole world.
Now Russia and China are gettiin along and It is not about being "Nationalistic", that I care.
"...as well as Chinese aren't too nationalistic"
You're nuts. I lived in China, might move back. The people there are extremely nationalistic. Go out karaoke singing with people in China and count the times you see people, pretty young people too, singing Mao's poems or nationalistic songs. Talk to young people, born decades after Nanking, about what they think of the Japanese. Ask young people about Taiwan, if they think it is a part of China or not. Some might disagree on the issues, but you'd get a pretty clear picture quickly.
Regarding "central planning". Market countries' economies dominated by oligopolies (most of the modern capitalist economy, including finance), with thousands of employees world wide, in multiple countries, are centrally planned. There is no modern, developed country that didn't develop without massive state intervention into the economy, and state planning. Ha Joon Chang has written a lot about this, he says that two countries, the Netherlands and Switzerland can say that they developed using the "free market". Every other economy has developed using massive state intervention, the US more than most.
South Korea, for example was the "capitalist" alternative to the North. I challenge you to point out how it wasn't more similar to the USSR during its developmental stage than the US (since they copied Japan's state lead economic development). Strong capital controls (making it a capital offense, death, at one point if someone exported capital), one party state, massive state ownership and strong regulation (especially finance), massive state protection of "infant industries", extensive welfare state, increasingly militant trade unions, etc. Here's Chang talking about South Korea:
http://www.rjkoehler.com/2010/11/11/its-time-to-reject-the-washington-consensus-chang-ha-joon/
"South Korea of course did things that most people agree are important for economic development, such as investment in infrastructure, health and education. But on top of that, it also practiced many policies that are now supposed to be bad for economic development: extensive use of selective industrial policy, combining protectionism with export subsidies; tough regulations on foreign direct investment; active, if not particularly extensive, use of state-owned enterprises; lax protection of patents and other intellectual property rights; heavy regulation of both domestic and international finance."
"The G7 was always remarkably reluctant to recommend these “heterodox” policies and insisted that the “Washington consensus” package of opening up, deregulation and privatization was the right recipe for everyone. When confronted with the Korean case, Washington consensus supporters tried to brush it off as an exception. However, the history of take-offs in most of the G7 countries – especially Britain, the US, Germany, France and Japan – is far closer to the Korean model than is commonly thought. The “unorthodox” policies used by Korea and almost all of today’s rich countries need to be seriously considered in any discussion on development options."
Love the fact too that Obama is moving forward with another disastrous "free trade" deal, this time with South Korea. The elites could give a crap about working people.
Great post all around, Wilber1, but one minor correction, though. During the 35-odd years of military dictatorship -- up until the early-mid 90's really -- when the ROK had a dirigiste political economy, it NEVER had a classical welfare state. Most if not all benefits and services we associate with the classical welfare state (with the exception of health coverage, possibly) came courtesy of one's employment status, namely working for one of the big family-owned conglomerates (the chaebol). And that is precisely why the somewhat neo-liberalized, post IMF-crisis ROK political economy of today features even less stable provision of benefits and services (again, save health coverage) than before. Incidentally, one reason why 2MB won the last presidential election, and was thus in the position to disastrous overturn the Sunshine Policy, is because Kim Dae-Jung and Roh Moo-Hyun more or less went along with the neo-liberal reform program, thus weakening their political support...
North Koreans are allowed to go ANYWHERE! North Korean refugees had to escape.
Well, its not "impossible" but its extremely difficult . The point is North Korea is in no way a open society, the situation there is similar to that of Eastern Germany. In a perfect world China would at least have the decency to not send refugees back who happen to escape North Korea ...
N.Korea is way worse than E.Germany ever was. It would be better if the trade embargoes and various blockages were dropped, as in Cuba, Iran, Iraq. The locals would be better off if they had unimpeded access to all the world's goods and services. The US doesn't really give a damn about human rights in other countries...or at home, it seems.
i guess you shut keithsoulasa up good, LOL.
My goodness. Are you sure you're on the right forum? You're arguing for nuclear power! Would you support a new nuclear power plant in the US?
bug off you zionist neo-nazi.
Geeeze, if NK's actions are good faith, what does that make Israeli's actions towards Palestinians? Messianic sacrifices? I sense a wee double-standard.
NK is a scary, scary place run by scary, scary people with a brain-washed populace armed to the teeth. You can't have reasonable conversations with a psychopath holding a loaded gun to your head.
another zionist shill. it was obvious the moment you uttered the first word, though. everything is always about Israel to you, isn't it? pop some more pills.
Exactly. The "basket case," the powerful country controlled by ruthless, insane bullies and fanatics that everyone needs to be wary of, is the USA, not North Korea.
Too bad there are so many here who cannot mentally remove themselves and view the scene from afar.
you're not worthy. you asked for more insult, LOL.
Looking at your other posts that's about the only thing you can do. Loser...
So you hate the Chinese?
Did the Communists here in America ever hurt you?
Your hate comes through and it is ugly and maybe your Hate is your Hell.