PSPD in English Archive 2003-01-31   934

Editor’s Note

Let me first send my greetings to all the readers of Asia Solidarity Quarterly. It is a great honor as well as a challenge to serve as the new Editor-in-Chief of a journal that is a leader in the field. The journal will continue to cover the most compelling issues of the day and provide forum for the voice of NGOs and interests they represent. And that is what the current issue is all about, consisting of articles that explore the need for a more equal relationship between Korea and the U.S.; that discuss the ways to bring about a peaceful end to the North Korean nuclear crisis; and that provide reports of various NGO activities.

As implied above, it seems like the Korea-U.S. relationship has never been free of controversy. In the last few months, the deaths of two girls killed by a U.S. armored vehicle-and the Korean government’s passive response to it-touched off a wave of nation-wide candlelight rallies that attracted at times tens of thousands of participants in Seoul. The rallies became more intense as the soldiers were acquitted of any wrongdoing and as no one in the U.S. military assumed responsibility for the girls’ deaths. The rallies, often held near the U.S. embassy, were peaceful and were far from politically motivated: young couples and baby-carrying mothers were easily visible at these rallies. It was clear that the participants of the rallies saw the deaths of the two girls and the acquittal of the soldiers were symptomatic of the unequal relationship between Korea and the U.S. Accordingly, they made repeated demands for a revision of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), popularly perceived to be an unequal treaty that leaves Korean authorities powerless to exert jurisdiction over most crimes committed by U.S. soldiers. Many interpretations are possible about the rallies and their demands, but it is safe to say that they were calls for the U.S. to recognize Korea as more of an equal partner than as a subordinate and for more balanced relationship between the two countries. Despite its noble intentions, the reaction from the conservative newspapers in and outside of Korea was swift: within Korea, they argued that the new wave of anti-Americanism was threatening peace on the peninsula, while their counterparts in the U.S. argued for the complete withdrawal of U.S. troops from Korea, saying that Koreans are under-appreciative of the U.S. and capable of protecting themselves from potential North Korean attacks.

At present, the more explosive issue that could easily strain the relationship between the two countries is the North Korean nuclear crisis. Against the more hard-line approach of the U.S., which is known to have even entertained the possibility of bombing the nuclear sites in North Korea, South Korean government has insisted on dialogue and engagement with North Korea. One biggest change in all of this is that South Korea is emerging from the shadow of the U.S. and is attempting to take full charge of its foreign relations within the Northeast Asian region.

Both of these themes make up a significant part of the present issue. Kim Ji-en reviews the manifestation of Koreans?pride and independence in the candlelight rallies. The article rightly points out that the rallies were inspired by Koreans?realization that the tragic deaths and the dismissal of charges against the soldiers were caused by the unequal Korea-U.S. relationship in general and unequal provisions of SOFA in particular. It is also clear that the rallies voiced anger at the Korean government, which remained largely aloof until public pressure escalated (even when it did take actions, they were largely devoid of making independent demands towards the U.S. government).

Lee Jung-Hee discusses the controversy over SOFA. The central issue is whether the agreement is fair and whether it is comparable to the ones found elsewhere, including Japan and Germany. Those demanding a revision argue that SOFA is unequal: for example, the U.S. military has jurisdiction over crimes committed by American soldiers or by their families while on act of duty; and although the revised SOFA of 2001 stipulates that Korean prosecutors have jurisdiction over twelve serious crimes such as murder and rape, it also specifies that they should turn over the jurisdiction to the U.S. in the event of the latter’s request.

Lee Sohee shows how U.S. soldiers have committed crimes ever since they arrived on the peninsula, which is one of the reasons why Koreans have love/hate relationship with them. In addition to the seriousness and frequency of the crimes committed by U.S. soldiers, what is problematic is the popular perception of how U.S. military and Korean authorities handle these crimes. The former is perceived to be arrogant toward the latter and too lenient on the perpetrators, while the latter is perceived to be unable and not really willing to take legal actions against them.

Lee Yujin takes issue with environment pollution caused by the U.S. bases in Korea. Among others, oil leakages due to negligence or aging oil pipelines, soil contamination found in bombing ranges, and the pouring of formaldehyde by U.S. soldiers into the Han River have received much media attention. As Lee points out, a close monitoring of U.S. bases, revision of SOFA, and increased cooperation between Korean civic groups and their counterparts in other parts of the world are needed to effectively combat pollution caused by the U.S. bases.

Under the theme of peace on the Korean peninsula, the first article discusses possible solutions for the North Korean nuclear crisis, stressing the need for increased cooperation by neighboring countries such as Japan and continuous supply of heavy fuel oil to North Korea to ease tensions. The second article surveys new year’s statement by an alliance of civic groups in Korea. The alliance claimed 2003 as the Year of Self-Determination and Peace, pledging to help build a new Korea-U.S. relationship based on equality and emphasizing the importance of negotiation and dialogue as means for persuading North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons development program.

Then there is Hong Yun-Gi’s article which takes a retrospective look at the 2002 presidential election in which Roh Moo-Hyun won. Hong first traces the personal history and political career of Roh, portraying him as a man of principle who was willing to sacrifice his political career for combating such political ill as regionalism. Roh’s political career would have been over if it were not for the young supporters who had faith in him and joined forces to form a sort of fan club, the first of its kind for a politician, and helped launch a nation-wide support group through the Internet. The support group subsequently played a critical role in the Roh’s campaign.

The rest of the issue comprises an assortment of informative articles on NGO activities. One article introduces a database called Documentation for Action Groups in Asia (DAGA), which includes documentation and research on transnational corporations, migrant labor, rural to urban migrations and indigenous peoples, castes, and minorities. Park Yeara reports on the Conference of Non-Governmental Organizations in Consultative Status with the Untied Nations (CONGO), which was held for five days in December last year. The forum was held with the understanding that UN and NGOs, especially those in Asia, need to work more closely to solve social, economic, or environmental problems more effectively. Christian J. Park shares his experience of participating in the 2003 World Social Forum, which was held in Porte Alegre, Brazil, in January this year. He was part of 24-member South Korean delegation comprising participants from various NGOs and social movements. In addition to describing the activities of the delegation, the article discusses some of the problems with the forum, including its poor organization and lack of serious discussions. Lastly, Kim Minyoung provides an overview of activities by 400-plus civic groups during the 2002 presidential election. The so-called Voters?Coalition 2002 was formed to help root out old political practices such as money-centered campaigning, regionalism and corruption as well as to encourage a policy-based electoral debate.

The timing could not have been more apt for this issue to deal with the questions of the role of U.S. troops in South Korea and of South Korea’s role in the North Korean nuclear crisis. We can only hope that things turn out the way South Korean NGOs have recommended and that a lasting peace on the peninsula is secured through dialogue and negotiation.

Kim Eungi, Editor-in-Chief (aekim@korea.ac.kr)

정부지원금 0%, 회원의 회비로 운영됩니다

참여연대 후원/회원가입


참여연대 NOW

실시간 활동 SNS

텔레그램 채널에 가장 빠르게 게시되고,

더 많은 채널로 소통합니다. 지금 팔로우하세요!