The "Image of Peace"
A recent article from McClatchy Newspapers in regards to the upcoming Inter-Korean summit offered little of any real new analysis of the meeting, but it did have a few good quotes in it worth sharing:
"That was his campaign promise. He’s a one-term president. Why should he transfer (the summit) to the next president? If he can have a summit, why not do it?" said Moon Chung -in, a political scientist at Yonsei University who advises Roh and will be attending the summit with him.
Judging by this statement it appears this summit is more about what good it will do for Roh than what good it will do for the country. I can’t say I’m surprised by that.
"A peace treaty for Roh Moo-hyun is very important," said Park Syung Je , a military analyst with the Asia Strategy Institute in Seoul . He added that the 61-year-old president wants to return from Pyongyang telling his countrymen: "We don’t need such a large army anymore, and we can spend that money on social issues."
That money will not be spent on social issues, it will spent on giving it right back to Kim Jong-il as well as raising taxes to give him yet even more money:
In a memo, the ministry detailed several possible ways to raise funds, saying that the government may need to come up with more financial resources if the summit brings about a number of large-scale economic cooperation projects between the two Koreas.
It also said the government may consider diverting part of the defense budget to finance inter-Korean projects.
About 26.7 trillion won was allocated for the defense budget next year, up 9 percent from this year, despite eased geopolitical risks associated with North Korea. […]Also, the memo indicated that the government may contemplate creating new taxes, which could be dubbed as either a “peace tax” or “unification tax,” as well as issuing lotteries and bonds to raise funds for inter-Korean economic cooperation.
What is so unbelievable about this is that South Korea has to increase their defense spending to buy the new technology that USFK once provided for them when they take over operational control on the peninsula and US forces continue to withdraw from Korea.
Anyway here is the final quote from the McClatchy article I found of interest:
"The summit is going to turn out to be a stage where they can create a false image of peace that they can take to younger voters," said Lee Dong -bok, a Korea specialist in Seoul with the Center for Strategic and International Studies and a veteran negotiator with North Korea . "They may not prevail."
I cannot see the South Korean public being duped yet again with the "image of peace" tactic by the Korean left. What has the "image of peace" gained the average Korean? Absolutely nothing. Kim Jong-il has more forces deployed on the DMZ than ever, shootings on the DMZ still occur, six South Korean sailors were murdered in 2002 by the North Koreans, ballistic missile testing has increased, and they even have a nuclear bomb. Than to top it off Kim Jong-il may have been caught proliferating nuclear technology to Syria, human rights violations in North Korea are as bad as ever, and he has not returned the thousands of kidnapped South Koreans and Korean War POWs to South Korea.
What exactly has the Korean taxpayer’s won actually gained South Korea? A few reunions, an overpriced tour trip to Kumgangsan, and a tax payer funded slave labor operation at Kaesong. But hey it is all in the "image of peace".
To any objective outside observer, President Roh behaves as if he is actually acting on behalf of Kim Jong-il. It's pretty clear he's a puppet of Pyongyang, plain and simple. His legacy will be one of allying his country with a heinous regime and years of shame, corruption and weakness.
Koreans should pray that this mindset is only as deep as pond scum floating on the top of a lake, because if it has any depth to it at all, it spells trouble for their future.
This kind of stuff, cutting back on military spending, is the best shot at seeing USFK leave since Rumsfeld left.
I've had some hope in it for awhile, since I heard that we were planning on closing down many bases, and especially heard years later we were going to give up operational control and missions…..
….because any of these changes would require heavier tax payer money being spent on the SK military, and doing that kind of budget shifting is hard for any democracy to do (in peace time)………so you could have guessed stuff like this might happen….
if it does…..if the voters and politicians end up resisting the change in spending, or even cut spending, it will be felt in DC………
[…] Like I said before how does President Roh Moo-hyun plan on diverting the South Korean defense budget to North Korea when he hasn’t even paid for the necessary equipment and man power necessary to take over operation control in 2012?: […]