Left Flank

An Chul-jin, a «North Korean member of the 'North Korean elite class' » living in PRC, vents his indignation at South Korean protesters in Seoul. Amid the rants, there's confirmation of the parlous diet most North Koreans scramble to put together and a strong rebuke.

I had never in my life eaten beef until recently. I have had it several times in China. In North Korea I only ate chicken, duck, pork and dog meat. In North Korea, cows are treated like humans. Cows are a means of production on the farm. If you don't have a cow, you cannot farm the land.

So people don't use cows for food. Cows that die of old age are loaded into trucks and no one knows where they're taken. Individuals aren't allowed to raise cows; when a calf is born it is registered as national property. There is never an instance of raising one in order to eat it as one chooses. How could we eat our national means of production?»

An (a pseudonym) also calls South Korea «...a country in a transitional stage of development...not a completely realized democratic society.» OUCH! That stings!

I think the protesters are a minority that don't representative the South Korean population. I would urge them to stop. If someone feels threatened by U.S. beef, they don't have to buy and eat it. They should think of the nation and their neighbor North Korea rather than themselves. For North Koreans who only get to eat meat a few times a year, this is very sad to see.

Well, I'm glad the yardstick for democratization is not North Korean elites' opinions, no matter how condescending their paternalistic concern is.

Don Oberdorfer, the author of one of the best books on the Korean peninsula, The Two Koreas, is a straight arrow on Korean issues. When he argues that «Seoul's 'Beef' Not About Beef», it carries weight.

We've been reading in the U.S. press almost every day about big street demonstrations by thousands of South Koreans protesting the import of U.S. beef for safety reasons. Recently, the United States modified the trade agreement saying that only beef younger than thirty months would be exported. Koreans eat a lot of beef— but are they really that worried about the safety of American beef?

I don't think you can make a generalized statement about what all Koreans believe or are worried about. But, in my view, there are a lot of other elements here in addition to beef. In some ways beef is the least of it. Really, a lot of it has to do with Korean nationalism, with protests between various groups in Korea. There were these huge candlelight protests with literally hundreds of thousands and even millions of people out in the streets at one time. These had to do with the fact that after ten years of progressive governments, the Koreans have elected a conservative as their president. A lot of this has to do with the current politics opposition to the conservatives on the part of many of the progressive groups.

This is an excellent interview, including opinions on DPRK policy and FTA. A must read!

The Liberty Forward Party (LFP)'s spokesperson's colorful title quote speaks for itself. The progressive United Democratic Party added, 'pours cold water on the people's expectation'. The Hankyoreh mocks, «This is what they call yong do sa mi, a big beginning that leads to a weak conclusion» and warns, «Insufficient reshuffle could lead to bigger crisis».

President Lee needs to give some deep thought as to what personnel reform means in this unprecedented political crisis. The people were more interested in the political choices Lee would make through a Cabinet shuffle than in the change of a couple of ministers. Through the political act of a Cabinet shuffle they wanted to see a changed president. The changes he has made to his Cabinet, however, make his intentions clear. He is going to abandon the approach of making it appear like he was suddenly going to accept their demands, and from now on push ahead with the style of running government he has had from the start. He will not be able to quiet public anger that way. It is worrisome, rather, because it looks like it will only accelerate the government's political crisis.

In short, the current political impasse starting with American beef and broadening into a diffuse condemnation of the government could deepen into legislative trench warfare.

President Lee Myung-bak's statements from the G-8 summit confirm the Hankyoreh's skepticism.» 'I think we should revise the goals. But I'd like to cultivate our country's potential so that we can attain the original goals.'

Who knew there were so many ways to flip the bird in Korean?

The policy positions of the three conservative groups converge on most issues. Their intense battle over power and influence is unlikely to have much effect on foreign policy. Pro-Park lawmakers and the LFP are hesitant to offer blanket support for free trade agreements, since liberalisation of the agricultural and livestock sectors would significantly affect their constituencies,which include many rural districts. But the president controls foreign policy and the inter-Korea policy agenda, and his conservative rivals tend to agree with his views in these areas, so he can expect support unless he completely alienates the National Assembly and the public.

This is as ICG interprets the 2007 election results. We might as well consider President Lee as impeached already.

International Crisis Group has always impressed me with its sober analyses. Although I've only skimmed the full report, the one paragraph on the anti-US beef protests impressed me for a pithiness that manifests the limited salience of the events better even better than any photograph.

The government, however, has been paralysed by street protests and the opposition boycott of the new assembly, which officially convened on 30 May 2008. Street demonstrations began shortly after President Lee's decision to reopen the domestic market to U.S. beef during a summit with President George W. Bush only days after the April elections. U.S. beef imports were the catalyst for the protests, but they grew as citizens opposed to numerous other policies joined, with the result that Lee increasingly became their target.

The missing element involves comparing the legitimate protest, and its collateral grievances, with global movements opposed to food shortages and hydrocarbon prices.

Also, I would point out a more compelling «debate» between Gord Sellar («Catholics 1, Riot Cops 0») and Scott Burgeson («A Funny Thing Happened to Me on the Way to City Hall Tonight») than I've read elsewhere. I only wish I had encountered it earlier.

Finding the South Korean heart amid the eddies of public opinion is as always frustrating. But, two examples define the range where my hopes lie.

Firstly, despite how Hanky and the Chosun Daily see it differently, I found this quote from the conservative Chosun significantly cheering and illuminating:

Internet users are becoming more vocal in criticizing violent protests, and argue it is time to recognize the government's efforts and stop candlelight vigils. Over 110,000 people clicked on a post titled, «Who are the people still holding the candles?» posted on Friday on the Agora board. «Didn't they watch the press conference and hear the president say that the beef from cattle aged 30 months and older will not be imported?» the writer says. «How come they just jump to the conclusion that the government will not keep its promise without giving it a chance?» It drew more than 3,300 responses. Some said the writer hit the bull's-eye and lamented that some people are distorting the issue. Others said this was not an issue where Koreans can sit back and trust the government. «Those who call for nonviolence have disappeared from the rally scenes, and the original intention of those remaining is to bring the country down no matter what the president says,» one user wrote.

Those expat conservatives who insist upon overreacting to radical provocations, by creating straw villians and with reactionary pique of their own, can only persist in their hurt feelings because they do not understand what ordinary South Koreans want.

To each the benefit, Ranting Englishman and Korea Beat disagree about the ROK Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries suing MBC for its egregiously unfair April 29 PD Notebook broadcast that ignited fear and spread misinformation.

These journalists have abused their position, and neglected their duty to tell the truth. Sometimes, the truth is open to interpretation, and had they interpreted information in a way that I disagreed with, I would defend their right to do so. PD Notebook have not done that. They have not made a mistake. They have deliberately lied and misrepresented «facts» in order to cause a public panic. They have used the personal tragedy of a mother and manipulated it by representing it as something else, hiding behind a language barrier in order to avoid immediate scrutiny.

vs.:

This does make me a little uncomfortable — as much as MBC is clearly at fault here, I don't think it's ok for the government to go after the press like this.

I have to take Korea Beat's side, and I did argue so on his site against punishing MBC (#21).

And, as if I needed another example, Hanky illustrates why managed bilateral trade deals suck.

Powered by ScribeFire.

FB Friend and fellow Busan-crawler, Jason Hugh McDermott, posted this photo album a few hours ago. The photos were snapped at Children's Park, a popular urban spot for families. I was visiting my sister-in-law and niece in the hospital and also ran into some riot police still guarding the ruling party's headquarters near Bukgyung National University.

Powered by ScribeFire.