Condolences to the friends and family of the British English teacher who was found deceased recently at her school in Gwangju:
A British woman in her 20s has been found dead at a middle school in the southwestern city of Gwangju, police said Thursday.
A janitor found the 25-year-old woman, who has been teaching English, in a research room of the school around 4:50 p.m. on Wednesday and reported the case to police.
The English instructor, whose name was withheld, was lying on her back, and there were no signs of fighting with any intruder at the scene, according to the police.
Her acquaintances have told police that she was supposed to undergo a surgery the same day for a disease that hurt her back and made it difficult for her to breathe.
I hope no one is surprised that the Moon administration is busy removing private sector hires from the government and replacing them with bureaucrat allies:
The Gwanfia is back, though it may never have left to begin with.
It seems that more senior bureaucrats than ever are parachuting into top posts at government-controlled institutions since the start of the Moon Jae-in administration.
Gwanfia is a portmanteau of the Korean word gwanryo, meaning “bureaucrat,” and Mafia.
The latest is the appointment of former Blue House economic chief Yoon Jong-won as the chief executive of the Industrial Bank of Korea (IBK).
Almost all positions filled during the Park Geun-hye administration by executives from the private sector are now held by bureaucrats.
The heads of three major state-run banks – Korea Development Bank (KDB), Export-Import Bank of Korea (Exim Bank), Industrial Bank of Korea (IBK) – and the leaders of the major financial associations – the General Insurance Association of Korea (GIAK), the Credit Finance Association and the Korea Credit Guarantee Fund (Kodit) – had been selected from the private sector.
Massive rallies against # MoonJae-in, Cho Kuk at Gwanghwamun & City Hall areas in Seoul, 2019.10.3. Unlike 100s of other protests against Moon, #SouthKorean major media are covering. So far, Chosun, SBS, Yonhap, Korea Times.https://t.co/7NQdbVoqz5
President Moon’s political opposition is going to play out the Cho Kuk saga as long as they can for maximum political benefit prior to next’s year’s national assembly elections:
Cho Kuk
“South Korea’s democracy is dead. We plan to use all available cards responding to President Moon’s nomination of Cho to the justice minister position including a plan to team up with minor opposition parties to submit requests to name a special investigator to look into Cho’s alleged corruption and nepotism allegations,” a spokesman at the main opposition Liberty Korea Party (LKP) said in a party commentary after the President’s confirmation of Cho, Monday afternoon.
The minor opposition Bareunmirae Party (BMP) said it will discuss action plans with the LKP. “Floor leaders of the country’s major political parties were discussing detailed plans for the next Assembly sessions, but I received a short phone call from senior presidential secretary for state affairs Kang Ki-jung in which he said President Moon appointed Cho as justice minister as planned. It’s simply unacceptable. We will do what we can do but other lawmakers oppose the President’s decision,” BMP floor leader Rep. Oh Shin-hwan said during a hurriedly arranged party meeting.
It is actually good politics to keep Cho Kuk in the headlines because this is what his current poll ratings are:
In a poll by local pollster Realmeter released last week, 56.2 percent of South Koreans respondents were opposed to Cho becoming justice minister, while 40.1 percent were in favor.
The ruling DPK are facing a key election next year, which would be critical for Moon to avoid “lame duck” status. The South Korean leader is facing challenges to diffuse an uncertain outlook for the country’s export-dependent economy, which this year is projected to expand at the weakest pace in more than a decade.
However, with Cho Kuk being appointed, I expect we will start seeing less of him in the headlines and this will just fade away down the memory hole like the Moon administration expects it too.
For example does anyone mention Foreign Affairs Minister Kang Kyung-hwa’s ethical lapses any more? It will be the same thing with Cho Kuk.
Wife of #ChoKuk, #MoonJaeIn's Justice Min. nominee, called Dongyang Univ Pres. (her boss), asked him not to release to prosecution files re: her alleged forging of her daughter's award, said at very end, "If you mistakenly release them, you will get hurt." https://t.co/14Rhr8HzNh
The ROK prosecutors tried to put some heat on Cho Kuk by indicting his wife for fraud:
Cho Kuk
The wife of justice minister nominee Cho Kuk was indicted on Friday over allegations that she fabricated a school certificate for her daughter.
The prosecution filed a formal charge against Cho’s wife, a professor surnamed Chung, without summoning her for its probe into a series of corruption allegations involving Cho’s family.
Chung, 57, a Dongyang University professor, was accused of forging a school president’s award certificate in 2012 to help her daughter enter a medical school in 2014.
The move is expected to deal a blow to Cho, who attended a parliamentary confirmation hearing Friday, nearly one month after he was nominated to lead the justice ministry.
It apparently worked because President Moon went ahead and appointed him to ROK Justice Minister as expected:
President Moon Jae-in (R) shakes hands with Justice Minister Cho Kuk before giving him a letter of appointment at Cheong Wa Dae on Sept. 9, 2019. (Yonhap)
President Moon Jae-in appointed Cho Kuk as justice minister Monday, emphasizing the need to continue the government’s reform drive.
He appealed for “public understanding and support” for his decision to appoint Cho despite controversies over alleged ethical lapses and wrongdoing by his family. Cho’s wife has even been indicted on charges of forging a university president’s citation for her daughter.
Moon said he’s aware of the fierce debate over whether Cho is suitable for the post.
“But I thought what’s more important is to maintain the principle and consistency,” Moon said in a televised statement issued after giving Cho a letter of appointment at Cheong Wa Dae.
It would be a “bad precedent” to not appoint Cho solely on the basis of suspicions of illicit acts that have not been confirmed, Moon said.
Over the coming weeks expect to hear the term “reform” quite a bit because President Moon wanted Cho Kuk as the Justice Minister to take power away from prosecutors for corruption investigations. President Moon wants to move indictment powers from prosecutors to a special unit. If this special unit is staffed with political allies like Cho, this would allow the Blue House to control who gets indicted.
Cho Kuk, when asked if he has turned away from Sanomaeng (Socialist Workers League of Korea), which called for armed revolt to overthrow #SouthKorea's liberal democracy, said socialism is necessary in South Korea. Moon sill wants to appoint him.https://t.co/Wo039glAEO
Here is what Chung Jae-jeong, professor emeritus at the University of Seoul has to say about the current trade dispute between Korea and Japan.
Q: Since the Supreme Court ruling, has Seoul given the impression that it may be disregarding the 1965 pact?
A: There is a high possibility that Japan takes this view. Seoul says that it is addressing the insufficiencies of the 1965 pact, but from Japan’s point of view, all issues regarding compensation were completely resolved with the deal. The Korean government has only said it respects the ruling, and has not given clear explanations about the discrepancy between the 1965 pact and the Supreme Court ruling. There has not been any statement from the foreign minister or the President declaring once and for all that Seoul does not deny the pact. If this position was declared through an official channel, it could help to assuage the considerable level of concern Japan has. This will facilitate negotiations on how to resolve the current disputes. Abe and the Japanese foreign minister have continued to demand Korea “keep state-to-state promises and treaties.”
Q: If the President were to make such a declaration, the Korean public may see it as a humiliation and get the impression that we are succumbing to Japan’s demands.
A: I think we as a country have passed a stage where we approach state-to-state conflicts emotionally. They should be handled with professional judgment and knowledge.
Professor Chung recommends that a third party arbitrator be used to resolve this issue, but this is whole is issue is about driving anti-Japanese sentiment for future elections not resolving it, so the Moon administration will continue to down play the 1965 Treaty.
I am not used to news commentators asking good and informative questions. Kang made the point that the current trade dispute is about the South Korean court ruling on compensating forced laborers, not North Korea export controls as Japan claims. I think everyone agrees on this point and the Japanese are using the North Korean export issue as its legal cover to put pressure on the ROK government on the forced labor issue.
In my opinion Kang did not explain very well how the 1965 Treaty is no longer relevant in regards to settling compensation claims. She kept saying it was the South Korean Supreme Court that came up with the ruling, not the ROK government. However, it is the ROK government that can settle the compensation issue by paying the compensation claims with the money given to the ROK in 1965 by Japan. If they did that to begin with this current trade dispute would not happen. Instead they want to confiscate Japanese property in South Korea.
I believe the Japanese are responding hard on this issue because they want to prevent compensation claims coming from other countries that they have already had settlement agreements with if they paid the South Korean claims. The ROK government knows that Japan is not going to pay the compensation, but are using the dispute for domestic political purposes to obscure their bad economic policies, corruption, and other issues.
I would have liked to have had Foreign Minister Kang asked if she thinks Chinese property should be confiscated if victims of Chinese aggression during the Korean War demand it.
The interview then goes on to talk about the US-ROK alliance and North Korea. Hardtalk asks Kang if South Korea has been sidelined in the negotiations with North Korea as well as the upcoming US-ROK cost sharing talks. Kang says that is not the case, but does not make a very convincing argument. For the cost sharing issue she says that a reasonable amount needs to negotiated for the upkeep of US troops that can pass through the National Assembly. The reported amount that the US is looking for would not make it through the National Assembly.
The interview is pretty long, but I recommend watching the whole thing. I would be surprised if Foreign Minister Kang appears on the show again considering the grilling that she received.
