| |
New dynamics in US-Korean
relations
By Jeffrey Robertson
Foreign
Policy in Focus
The victory of Roh Moo-Hyun
in the December 19 South Korean presidential elections
has been presented in the Western media as a source of
future tension in South Korean-US relations. Roh, a
longtime liberal and human-rights advocate, when
compared with his more conservative opponent, Lee
Hoi-Chang, does represent a more challenging partner for
future South Korean-US relations. Roh's stated aims
include continuing the "Sunshine Policy" of engagement
with North Korea, renegotiating the Status of Forces
Agreement (SOFA) for the 37,000 US troops in South
Korea, and maintaining a more independent foreign policy
in international and regional affairs.
However,
it is difficult to argue that anything Roh does could
place more tension on the South Korea-US relationship
than the George W Bush administration's unilateral
foreign policy.
Indeed the current (and
immediate future) state of South Korean-US relations is
the result of much deeper currents. Anti-Americanism has
been on the rise since the end of the Cold War due in
part to a perception that the absence of a serious
global security threat vitiates the need to tolerate US
arrogance and unilateralism. In South Korea, the success
of the Sunshine Policy has further reduced the
perception of threat from across the last Cold War
frontier in Asia. The situation of reduced threat and US
unilateralism has combined in South Korea to create a
situation that does not augur well for future South
Korean-US relations. Anti-Americanism in South Korea, a
once close and passionate supporter of US policy, has
risen to alarming levels.
Anti-Americanism:
Then and now
An American soldier was detained by
an angry mob, forced to watch an anti-American
demonstration at which he was photographed, videotaped,
and forced to make a public statement demanding justice
from the United States. He was then taken to another
location to apologize to the co-chairman of an
anti-American organization ...
It is hard not to
conjure up images of a poor American GI being bound,
blindfolded, and dragged, then driven in a beat-up old
Peugeot along dusty narrow roads, all to the background
sound of evening prayer echoing along stucco
bullet-ridden walls. However, this particular event did
not occur in Lebanon, Iran, or the Middle East, but in
affluent uptown Seoul in September 2002.
Anti-Americanism was once viewed in South Korea
as unpatriotic and radical. The Cold War formed the
South Korean state. Its very existence was the result of
political and strategic decisions in Washington to
contain communism in North Asia. Its continued existence
was the result of a long, bitter war in which about
36,000 US soldiers died side by side more than a million
South Korean casualties. In Cold War rhetoric, to be
anti-American was to be radical and pro-Soviet, and
hence an enemy of the state.
In the early years
of the Republic of Korea, anti-Americanism was just that
- radical. It was limited to an extremely small number,
who risked both arrest and imprisonment under the
National Security Law (1948). The National Security Law
was used primarily by the administration of president
Syngman Rhee to ensure support for his conservative,
right-wing power base. Its use also ensured that
anti-Americanism remained the domain of only radicals
who were willing to risk arrest. In effect, it meant
anti-Americanism remained closely associated with
Marxism-Leninism, where it remained until the advent of
the democratization movement.
The
democratization movement changed South Korean
anti-Americanism. It removed anti-Americanism from the
confines of Marxism-Leninism and radicalism and placed
it in the realms of Korean nationalism and legitimate
mainstream political discourse. Further, the
post-democracy period has allowed a reinterpretation of
Korean history and a re-evaluation of the Korean
national identity. The reinterpretation and revaluation
changed the understanding of anti-Americanism in the
minds of both the elder and younger generation in
today's South Korea.
Revelations of US
complicity in the continued repression of the democracy
movement led to a growing cynicism about America's place
in Korean history. The permission granted by General
Carter Magruder to the Korean Army to dispatch troops in
the Masan Riots (1960) during early democratic struggles
and the more controversial decision to release troops
from Combined Forces Command to suppress the Kwangju
uprising (1980) highlighted US interference.
Other commentators have gone further to note the
earlier historical role of the United States in Korean
affairs, including US disregard for the United
States-Korea Treaty of 1882 that was understood to
protect Korea from imperialist designs, namely the
Taft-Katsura agreement of 1905, which exchanged Japan's
agreement to the US annexation of Hawaii for America's
agreement to Japan's annexation of Korea. A new
understanding of US involvement in Korea emerged.
Whereas the United States had previously been viewed as
a strong supporter of democracy guided by Wilsonian
values, it is now popularly considered hypocritical,
calculating, and self-driven. This is the same
reinterpretation of American values and revelation of
their hypocrisy that created greater anti-Americanism
throughout the Third World.
The legitimization
and widening of anti-Americanism have also justified its
expression in other areas that mirror complaints across
the globe. Anti-Americanism in South Korea now openly
reflects public responses to perceived threats to
economic, cultural, and national identity.
The US military presence
The greatest
source of tension contributing to anti-Americanism based
on national identity is of course the US military
presence. The US Forces Korea (USFK) are the subject of
an abundance of complaints. These include the
involvement in the deaths of two teenage girls during a
training exercise, the existence of the Yongsan military
base in downtown Seoul, environmental standards on US
bases, and the inadequate revision of the SOFA.
Last June 16, two teenage girls were killed in a
road accident in Yangju, north of Seoul, involving a
USFK armored vehicle on the way to training exercises in
the area. The tragic accident grew into a major issue
centering upon the presence of US forces in South Korea.
The extremely emotional nature of the accident
galvanized growing anti-American sentiment to such an
extent that both governments expressed fears. At the
center of the issue was the refusal of USFK to release
the two soldiers to be tried under South Korean
jurisdiction, after a request by the South Korean
Justice Ministry. Under the SOFA the USFK is not
required to hand over jurisdiction for incidents that
occur during training.
The event has sparked
what is considered to be the strongest anti-Americanism
in South Korea's history. The inability to buy Coca-Cola
due to shopkeepers' refusal to sell US goods is not even
recognized by expatriates turned away by signs on doors
brandishing statements such as "We do not serve girl
killers - Americans go home." The daily protests outside
the US Embassy in Seoul and the Yongsan military base
grew to demonstrations by more than 300,000 people in
Seoul and Busan, thousands more in rural and provincial
cities, as well as demonstrations by South Korean
communities in the United States, Australia, and
Germany.
The SOFA remains at the center of many
civic-group protests - in particular, the protection
afforded to USFK for crimes committed while on duty. The
last revision, which occurred in 2001, increased South
Korean jurisdiction for crimes committed off-duty, made
provisions for the protection of Koreans working on US
bases, and also set out environmental protection
provisions to be followed by USFK. Despite the changes,
there remains a large movement opposed to the current
agreement.
North Korea
The divergent
views on North Korea policy between the United States
and South Korea have been intensified by the fear that
America's preemptive-strike policy may extend to North
Korea, particularly in the wake of the North's nuclear
revelation. Inevitably the South Korean public views
Washington's recent policy in North Asia from national
missile defense (NMD) to hardline approaches with North
Korea as divergent from their interests.
The
division of the world into the two camps of good and
evil backed by a first-strike policy has placed South
Korean society in the difficult situation of choosing
between support for US President Bush's vision of the
world and outgoing South Korean President Kim Dae-jung's
vision of a united Korea. The continuing rise in
anti-Americanism is the result of this choice. With the
election of Roh Moo-hyun in the December presidential
elections, the big question now is not whether
anti-Americanism will continue, but to what extent will
it affect the policy of the new president.
Roh
has promised immediately to investigate options for the
renegotiation of the SOFA, continue reconciliation with
the North, and initiate a new independence in the
pursuit of foreign policy. As yet he has not announced
his international policy team. With the current nuclear
situation in North Korea and the rising levels of
anti-Americanism at home, the new international policy
team will have its work cut out when the new president
takes office next month.
Jeffrey
Robertson (e-mail jsrobertson13@optusnet.com.au) is a trade research specialist with the
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Group of the
Australian Parliamentary Information and Research
Service. This commentary is an abridged version of his
forthcoming special report that will be available
at www.fpif.org. This paper
was written in his individual capacity and does not
represent the official opinion of the Australian
government, and is used here with permission of
Foreign Policy in Focus.
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
