| Submit your comments on this article |
| China-Japan-Koreas |
| US demands the closure of 'cash cow' projects for Kim; SKors get hinky |
| 2006-10-19 |
| THE United States and South Korea are on a collision course over sanctions against North Korea because Seoul refuses to close projects that are channelling money to Kim Jong Il. Condoleezza Rice will press South Korea to halt operations at two symbols of cross-border co-operation today. The Kaesong industrial complex and the Mount Kumgang tourist resort are a few miles north of the border dividing the neighbours. Both are funded by the South Korean Government and the huge Hyundai conglomerate, and are intended to build co- operation and trust between North and South. But the US, backed by Japan, believes that the projects — Mount Kumgang in particular — are cash cows for Mr Kim. The hiking resort “seems to be designed to give money to the North Korean authorities”, Christopher Hill, the chief US diplomat on the North Korean crisis, said. The controversy has caused deep divisions within South Korea between conservatives who hate the idea of rewarding a country that is building nuclear weapons and liberals who believe engagement is the only way to bring North Korea out of its xenophobic isolation. Kim Hyung O, leader of the South Korean Opposition, said yesterday: “The Government’s position that it will maintain the projects is tantamount to letting the North take the South Korean people hostage.” But President Roh Moo Hyun shows no sign of abandoning the schemes, which have cost South Korea almost a billion dollars and are central to his policy of constructive engagement with the North. “For the US, money being sent via the Mount Kumgang project and the Kaesong complex is important,” the head of Mr Roh’s ruling party, Kim Geun Tae, said. “But for us, what is important is that the two Koreas meet and make exchanges.” There was a temporary surge in cancellations after the nuclear test, but 40,000 South Koreans have spent a million dollars every month travelling to Mount Kumgang. Dr Rice, the US Secretary of State, flies into Seoul today for talks with her opposite number, Ban Ki Moon, soon to be installed as the new UN Secretary-General. They will discuss the Security Council sanctions designed to punish Pyongyang for its first nuclear test. But the Americans are being accused of hypocrisy for complaining about cash going to Mr Kim. A South Korean official drew attention to $23 million (£12.3 million) that the US paid to the North Korean military between 1996 and 2005 as “expenses” for repatriating the remains of 225 US servicemen. Dr Rice, in Tokyo yesterday, underlined Washington’s commitment to defend Japan, which was spelt out in their mutual defence treaty of 1960. Her words were designed to emphasise the solidity of the Japan-US alliance and scotch calls for Japan to start its own nuclear programme. Last night President Bush also warned North Korea against exporting nuclear weapons. “If we get intelligence that they are about to transfer a nuclear weapon, we would stop the transfer,” Mr Bush said. |
| Posted by:.com |
| #10 LOTP, there won't be any change in the Euro mentality until tens of thousands are dead. They have to undertake a total change in their approach to government. Their socialist model is unsustainable, but they will keep at it until/unless they are forced to change. Their militaries will suffer until that time. The only thing that will force the change is a devastating attack on one or more of the nations. Perhaps the change will only occur individually, as each nation is hit in turn. Depending on the nature of the attack, by that time it may be too late. |
| Posted by: remoteman 2006-10-19 14:20 |
| #9 #1 Why Captain, do you think she's up Shit Creek ? |
| Posted by: SpecOp35 2006-10-19 12:31 |
| #8 Can Kobe beef be raised in Korea? Just asking. |
| Posted by: Perfesser 2006-10-19 09:27 |
| #7 South Korea has a long and deep history of bribes, influence money and similar practices in their own politics. Why should we be surprised if they use those favored techniques with the north? We should be binding their militaries more closely to ours in equipment, training and procurement That assumes they are willing to do that. I don't see it happening in Europe and probably not in Korea either. Both groups will consider it a matter of pride either to produce their own systems in competition with ours or to refuse to collaborate in joint security efforts. And if we just give them the technologies, they will proliferate to 3rd parties faster than you can sneeze. I would love to get the Brits back in the tent. Do they want to be there, tho? I think they're torn, the French and Germans don't want to play at all, the Italians change governments every year or two or three. Spain is embracing Eurabia with public glee. And some key technologies of the 90s were sold to China under Clinton. The Chinese both have fielded them and are proliferating them selectively. Which means we must continue to press ahead on newer technologies, which widens the gap with putative allies other than those such as Australia whom we trust and those such as Japan, who may not prove to be allies in the future but who have great indigenous capabilities to draw on. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-10-19 07:15 |
| #6 SKors get Hinky? They have been for quite some time. We should reduce our presence to a fig leaf, but we should not leave Korea. It is still a daggar pointed at Japan. If we aren't there, Korea will become a Chinese puppet and Japan won't sit for that long. Having us as a buffer is a key to keeping Northwest Asia peaceful. Unfortunately dealing with the Koreans is a headache. But at least they shoulder their military responsibility, unlike the Eurobabies we have to suckle. I am beginning to think this is the disadvantage of having such overwhelming military preponderance. Everybody else thinks, the Americans are so powerful, we don't make a difference and they quit trying, confident that we will show up to save the day. I anticipate the qualitative gap in power to continue to widen for the forseeable future with more abandonment of responsibility by supposed allies and increasingly adolescent behaviour from dependents. We should be binding their militaries more closely to ours in equipment, training and procurement. The Euroforces are a sterling example of how wrong things can go. They are killing NATO. We are at the point where it is no longeer safe for even the Brits to be on the battlespace near us. We need to get them back in the tent or completely outside. And the completely outside option is worse. It's just that we don't know how much worse, so the grass is greener effect makes it appear preferable. But it's not. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-10-19 07:02 |
| #5 Japan can get a nuke like [*snaps fingers*] that, and they've already got the missile to put it on. |
| Posted by: Mike 2006-10-19 06:40 |
| #4 Remember Eisenhower's paranoia... strength in Vietnam, Korea, Japan and the Phillipines to contain China's naval expansion. I think we have surrendered the strategy. If you believe the news, the tactics of capitalism have converted them. SPOD may be right in recommending withdrawal. |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2006-10-19 02:43 |
| #3 DEMOLEFT > criticize Dubya-GOP for either being too rough wid North Korea or now failing to prevent North Korea from getting a nuke(s). How many times during the Cold War agz the USSR-Commie Bloc, and even post-Cold War/USSR, has the DemoLeft argued that NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION, i.e. MANY OR ALL NATIONS HAVING NUKES, makes the USA + World SAFER. DARE SAINT BILL + AL GORE REMEMBER THEIR ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION!? |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2006-10-19 02:42 |
| #2 The Koreans seem to be of 2 minds about us when they really need to be of one mind. Time for us to leave the south as well. Let them be hostage to the North I don't really care. |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom 2006-10-19 02:08 |
| #1 Did Condi bring her paddle? |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-10-19 01:16 |