Koreans on US: Can't live with 'em, or
without 'em By David
Isenberg
WASHINGTON - Americans: can't live with
them, can't live without them. Crudely stated, but not
by much. That is the conclusion of many South Koreans
and foreign analysts, and this anti-US sentiment - with
major implications for US security policy - goes beyond
the actions of the administration of President George W
Bush.
"Many South Koreans appear to share the
generalized belief that their nation is not treated with
respect by the US, substantial minorities have expressed
the view that US-South Korean differences are
attributable to differences in values (which typically
cannot be negotiated), and large majorities indicated
that their unfavorable attitudes are not specific to the
current [US] administration," said a recent study by the
RAND Corp, a federally funded US contractor.
That the United States is no longer welcomed
with open arms by its South Korean ally has major
implications for US strategic and military policy in
North Asia. Impeached President Roh Moo-hyun has been
emphasizing the importance of South Korea developing an
independent foreign policy and not taking instructions
from Washington. For some time, the US has been
committed to moving its troops out of Seoul, the South
Korean capital, because of popular resentment, and
transferring them elsewhere in Korea. Some of the 37,000
military personnel - and their 37,000 dependents,
contractors and others - may leave the peninsula
entirely.
The RAND study released last month, Ambivalent Allies: A Study of South
Korean Attitudes Toward the US, found strong
evidence of a recent downturn in favorable attitudes
toward the US among South Koreans - but also evidence of
a more recent recovery. Attitudes in general, however,
are hardly enthusiastically pro-American, and some are
hostile.
In the past couple of years Korean
attitudes toward the US have dipped and risen like a
yo-yo. Sentiment plummeted in February 2002 after a
South Korean speed skater lost the Olympic gold medal to
an American. It rose that summer but plunged again in
December 2002, after the acquittal of two US soldiers
whose armored vehicle accidentally killed two South
Korean schoolgirls.
'A certain amount of
disquiet in DC' Some experts agree. "There is a
certain amount of disquiet in DC over the situation in
Korea. I perceive a greater hostility toward the US,"
said Doug Bandow, who was a special adviser to former US
president Ronald Reagan and is a senior fellow at the
Cato Institute, a libertarian Washington, DC,
think-tank.
But to attribute changing
unfavorable South Korean views to such incidents as the
death of the schoolgirls would be to underestimate the
causes, according to the RAND report. It found multiple
factors just for the past decade alone: "Historical
residue, US and Republic of Korea leadership, actions
taken and not taken, the ROK's security and economic
situation, the state of North-South relations, social
and generational change, and the media".
The
demographics of the Korean population is particularly
important, according to Bandow. "The problem for the US
is that the attitudes of South Koreans will change due
to generational attitudes. The younger generation will
not have the fond memories of the United States that the
older people do. They will look more positively towards
North Korea. Their attitudes will generally worsen
unless there is a crisis with North Korea."
The
RAND report said this is no time for complacency about
the US-South Korean relationship. Despite efforts in
both countries to put bilateral relations back on track,
there has been only a partial recovery in favorable
sentiment toward the US.
The report found that
anti-Americanism in South Korea is complex, comprising
several different strains. One is panmijuui, a
deeply rooted conviction held primarily by radical
student organizations and leftist scholars and
journalists, which actively excludes and aggressively
opposes the US and its policies.
Another is
panmijongso, a passive, more generally held view
that results in dissatisfaction about, or criticism of,
some aspects of the US or its policies.
Moderates reject US policies, not US per
se In the middle is a pragmatic anti-Americanism,
represented by moderate non-governmental organizations
that do not reject the US per se, but instead focus on
specific issues, such as the Status of Forces Agreement
(SOFA), concerning the presence of US troops, or wartime
operational control of South Korean forces.
The
historical basis for South Korean ambivalence toward the
US is not recognized in the US, given most Americans'
general ignorance of and obliviousness toward the rest
of the world - but it is well remembered by Koreans.
First was president Theodore Roosevelt's rejection
of Korea's request to help protect its independence, as
Japan extended its control in Korea after its victory in
the Russo-Japanese war, 1904-05. Roosevelt even
authorized his secretary of state to sign a secret
agreement with Tokyo in July 1905 (the Taft-Katsura
Agreement) that recognized Japan's prerogatives in Korea
in exchange for unfettered US freedom of action in the
Philippines. The US also sponsored the Treaty of
Portsmouth that acknowledged Japan as the dominant power
in Korea.
Second was the Cairo Conference of 1943 when the
United States publicly pledged that "in due course Korea
shall become free and independent", While many South
Koreans took that to mean soon, no US or other leader
had any idea how Korean self-rule could be accomplished.
Thus, for the remainder of World War II, the US
leadership neglected any detailed planning for Korea's
postwar future, assuming Korea would be placed under
some form of international trusteeship. When the Yalta
Conference (in February 1945 involving the US, the
United Kingdom and Soviet Union) did not even mention
Korea, many Korean leaders suspected that Korea had been
sacrificed in order to secure Soviet involvement in the
war against Japan.
Third was the subsequent post-World War II decision
to divide the peninsula along the 38th Parallel, to
govern the southern part of the country through direct
military rule, to terminate the occupation because of
other needs elsewhere, and to create the South Korean
state - all highly controversial moves.
Fourth was the perceived US support for subsequent
decades of authoritarian rule by South Korean
governments. US actions during the Kwangju crackdown in
May 1980, when popular unrest after the assassination of
president Park Chung-hee led to a brutal military
crackdown, infuriated South Koreans on both the left and
right; the former because they thought the US supported
the crackdown and the latter because they thought the US
was insensitive to the realities of Korea's situation.
Unease over tough US stand on North
Korea All of this, plus periodic unease over US
policy toward North Korea, especially concerning its
nuclear-weapons program, have left many Koreans with an
unfavorable view of the United States.
RAND
found the results of its polling somewhat worrisome. Its
report made the following recommendations to US
policymakers:
Explore opportunities for more robust intelligence
sharing.
Do more to persuade South Koreans that their
interests in the region go well beyond the North Korean
threat and that they have a long-term interest in a
peaceful, stable, and economically vital Northeast Asia.
Develop a public diplomacy strategy for South Korea
that focuses on the legitimate grievances of those who
criticize the United States - and does not attempt to
change the views of those whose anti-Americanism is
ideological and more deeply rooted.
Better understand the extent to which, if at all,
South Korea's educational system constitutes a
structural source of anti-American sentiment.
Improve US understanding of the role of the South
Korean media in shaping attitudes toward the US.
David Isenberg, a senior analyst with
the Washington-based British American Security
Information Council (BASIC), has a wide background in
arms control and national-security issues. The views
expressed are his own.
(Copyright 2004 Asia
Times Online Co, Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact content@atimes.com for
information on our sales and syndication policies.)
