Left Flank

I'm reluctant right now to launch into another series of posts about the recent Japan-ROK fracas over Dokdo/Takeshima (or, again, Liancourt Rocks). My first reaction was disbelief, when the ROK ambassador was recalled, because I associate such a step as the penultimate decision before declaring war. The barren rocks are not worth this diplomatic tension.

But then, I cynically quipped that the Dokdo issue in ROK is exactly what the beleaguered Lee administration needs to crawl out of the dog house. As a matter of fact, the Asahi Daily blames politically impotent leaders in both countries for the tensions. Yet, even the simplest tactics don't work for the Lee administration, considering this masterpiece of convoluted writing:

However, the spokesman admitted that Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda may have informed the president of Japan's position on the disputed islets, asking for Korea's understanding about the educational guidebooks. This seems to indicate that the presidential office denies the Yomiuri Shimbun report, but acknowledges the Kyodo News report that said Fukuda had informed President Lee of the plan in advance, even though the Blue House had denied it on July 13

Now, as James Larson talks about the mighty South Korean netizen cyber-guerrillas are baaack (come bitch, you little freaks!), I just want to smash my computer.

I would advocate a two-pronged strategy to solve this canker sore of a pseudo-dilemma: firstly, pump up the UN Law of the Sea; secondly, renegotiate the Treaty of San Francisco. Discovering an alternative fuel source to replace hydrocarbons would also be nice. In the meantime, the sanest, most generous argument I can make is, read the mega-series, Lies, Half-truths, & Dokdo Video.

Christopher Pellegrini contributes #2 in a series of excellent pieces on the anti-Lee protests in Seoul . Here's the important part.

The people want change. True, this president was sworn in only a little over a hundred days ago, but they want change again. Serves them right for not voting in the first place.

But the protests of 2008 aren't the protests of yesterday. These protests are being maintained by the well-connected community of regular people that surf the Internet every day (also known as netizens).

Again, how can South Koreans protest the guy they didn't really vote for? It's a convenient excuse, right? But, police just wouldn't stand at the fringes and ask for proof of voting, could they? How many of these younger acolytes of disorder actually thought about their choice 100 days ago?  What reality do the netizens inhabit to justify listening to their grievances?