Among the policy differences dividing the US and South Korea, one that stands out is divergence over the issue of North Korea's abuses of the human rights of its citizens.
In the US, President George W. Bush, both houses of Congress and private, bipartisan committees have condemned the North Korean abuses and have urged South Koreans to do likewise. In Seoul, US Ambassador Alexander Vershbow has been particularly outspoken.
Just this week, Vershbow chided the South Koreans for not standing up to the North Koreans.
"I think all South Koreans," he said, "should be worried about [a] regime that threatens its own people so badly, that wastes its scarce resources on nuclear weapons and that engages in counterfeiting, drug trafficking, money laundering and the export of dangerous military technologies."
Instead, South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun, who was a human rights lawyer before entering elective politics, has been strangely subdued on this question. Senior officials of his government have argued that it is better to be "prudent" than to provoke the North Koreans with criticism. Some have demanded that the US ambassador be recalled.
In a press conference with Bush during his visit to South Korea in November, Roh asserted in a convoluted argument that his approach on the North Korean human rights issue was similar to that of US president Abraham Lincoln in freeing the slaves during the American Civil War.
"President Lincoln's first priority was unity among the states of America," Roh said in reference to the reunification of Korea. "I think that this is quite similar to the position we are taking when it comes to North Korean human rights issues."
The dispute over how to handle this issue comes against a backdrop of rising anti-Americanism in Korea and a nascent anti-Korean backlash in the US. In particular, Washington and Seoul disagree over how to negotiate with Pyongyang on North Korea's nuclear ambitions, with the Americans taking a hard line and the South Koreans advocating "flexibility."
The US and South Korea disagree on military matters. The South Koreans have said they will cut their troop deployments in Iraq by one-third this year, while the Americans will move forces from positions close to the demilitarized zone dividing the peninsula to camps further south despite South Korean objections.
Command of Korean forces in wartime is in dispute. Indeed, relations between the US and South Korea have deteriorated so much that some Korea specialists have begun to privately speculate that the alliance will be diluted or possibly dissolved in five to eight years, even though Bush and Roh have proclaimed them to be in good shape.
A particular point of contention has been two reports issued by the non-profit US Committee for Human Rights in North Korea.
The first, Hunger and Human Rights: The Politics of Famine in North Korea, said that 1 million North Koreans, or about 5 percent of the population, had died of famine over the last two decades because "the government was culpably slow to take the necessary steps to guarantee adequate food supplies."
Written by Stephan Haggard of the University of California, San Diego, and Marcus Noland of the Institute of International Economics in Washington, the report concluded: "It is difficult to imagine a famine of this magnitude, or chronic food shortages of this duration, occurring in a regime that protected basic political and civil liberties."
Roh's government objected, contending that, contrary to the report, South Korea had monitored its food aid to North Korea to ensure that it was being distributed equitably to reach the people who needed it. Haggard and Noland disagreed in a rebuttal.
Earlier, the committee issued a report entitled The Hidden Gulag: Exposing North Korea's Prison Camps. Based largely on information from North Korean prisoners who had defected to South Korea, the report assessed two different systems of prisons. One set comprised forced labor camps, the other punishing North Koreans who had fled to China but who had been returned.
Written by David Hawk, a human rights researcher who has produced reports on abuses in Cambodia and Rwanda, the study pointed to citizens arrested because of guilt by association and lifetime sentences for three generations of political prisoners.
Hawk portrayed forced abortions for pregnant women who had fled to China and who were forcibly sent back, or the "murder of their new born infants." Further, he said: "The practice of torture permeates the North Korean prison and detention system."
Richard Halloran is a writer based in Hawaii.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the