Execution in Iraq stirs up hornets'
nest By David Scofield
Will
the kidnapping and execution of a Korean contractor
prompt South Korea to rethink its dispatch plans?
Like the tragic execution of American Paul
Johnson in Saudi Arabia, Kim Son-il, a 33-year-old South
Korean man working for a Korean US military contractor
in Iraq, has become the latest victim in a campaign
targeting independent contractors supporting the United
States military in the region.
Initially it
seemed Kim, a student of Arabic, may have been granted a
reprieve as the time of his execution lapsed and Arab
television later reported his execution had been
postponed. The tale became even more confused as the
government seemed to be relying on vague contacts
between private Korean security company New Korea Total
Service (NKTS), which has been operating in Iraq since
last fall, and the al-Qaeda-linked kidnappers Jamaat
al-Tawhid and Jihad to determine Kim's condition.
Choi Seung-kap, the head of NKTS, announced that
his Iraqi business partner was in contact with the
terrorists negotiating Kim's release. Kim's family was
hopeful, and South Koreans around the world inundated
the website of alJazeera with messages demanding Kim's
release. But while the nation remained hopeful, analysts
within South Korea and beyond considered the potential
for still greater bloodshed should Seoul succumb to
the terrorists' demands.
It seemed inexcusably
heartless to suggest that the South Korean government
should not attempt to appease the terrorists, rescuing
Kim from certain death. But in saving one, South Korea
would surely endanger many more as word of South Korea's
willingness to negotiate with terrorists, even if
through private channels, spread throughout the region.
Despite the tragic death of Kim Sun-il, the
South Korean government still stands behind its decision
to send troops to Iraq beginning this August. But this
heinous murder will make following through on the
dispatch as planned politically very difficult. Or will
South Korea's young people, appalled by the senseless
attack, demand retribution?
Since President Roh
Moo-hyun first promised to dispatch combat troops to
Iraq to aid in security and reconstruction last October,
the government has been none too swift in following
through on its pledge. An initial deployment of 600
medics and engineers went off without a hitch, but the
subsequent promise of 3,000 troops, 50% of whom would
be combat soldiers, has been far slower to materialize.
First there were location issues. Then the
composition of the forces had to be considered, and
reconsidered. Survey team after survey team were sent to
Iraq to find the best - most securely isolated - area
for a dispatch, and they seem to have found one, the
remote Arbil region in Iraq's northeast.
Some analysts have suggested that Roh's strategy seems
to be to comply with US requests in the hopes of gaining
leverage in on-going negotiations concerning the timing
of the withdrawal of 12,500 US troops - South Korea is
anxious to delay the withdrawal and the budgetary
ramifications the United States Forces Korea's (USFK's)
departure will have on the nation's coffers.
Roh
tried to sell the dispatch to a Korean public who,
according to previous polls, viewed the planned dispatch
not as an opportunity for South Korea to help bring
peace and stability to a corner of the world that, as
the world's fourth largest net importer of oil, South
Korea has a strong vested interest in helping to secure,
but rather as another instance of forced compliance to
US demands - though US officials have been quick to
counter that South Korea is under no obligation to send
troops. Indeed, long-time US ally Canada has refused to
send combat troops to Iraq, though it maintains over
2,000 combat soldiers in Afghanistan.
But the
image of the young, aspiring PhD student, tragically
pleading for his life, has stirred Koreans, prompting
many to demand revenge.
The troop dispatch plan,
the result of what appeared to be an off the cuff remark
by Roh last fall, has never been popular. Soon after the
announcement, polls showed South Koreans were evenly
split on the idea, but support has been dropping
steadily ever since. Immediately following the graphic
video of Kim Sun-il pleading for his life, online polls
by Korea's top three Internet portals (Yahoo, Naver and
Daum) indicated that less than 30% of respondents
supported the dispatch. Roh, seemingly unaware at the
time of his promise that a dispatch of combat troops to
Iraq would make South Korea a target for reprisals by
Iraqi insurgents, has tried to launch a counter
offensive. He gave an interview to alJazeera TV in
February in the hopes of demonstrating to the terrorist
elements in Iraq that South Korea is not a combat ally
of the US, more a reluctant accomplice concerned only
with reconstruction and peace.
Roh's soft-spin fell on deaf ears, both in South Korea
and Iraq as the insurgents have demonstrated that
South Korea is a target no matter how
they portray their involvement. Domestically, opposition
to further military involvement in Iraq was growing, even those
within Roh's party were lining up in opposition to the deployment
- over 60 OOP (Our Open Party) lawmakers
signed a document opposing additional troops for Iraq.
The left-leaning Democratic Labor Party vowed to table a resolution
in the assembly canceling the troop plan and calling
for the immediate return of the 600 medical
and engineering troops presently there - at least 40 OOP
members were expected to support it. Government
opposition parties, smelling blood, lined up against Roh's troop plan.
The graphic dispatch of Kim Sun-il has caused a
sea-change, however, and the same group that staunchly
opposed the dispatch hours earlier are now demanding a
military response. The home pages of the Ministry of
Defense and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade
went down this morning, overwhelmed by the postings of
outraged citizens.
On June 16, just one day
before the abduction, Roh was quoted as saying "the
environment has become favorable to South Korea in
contributing troops". Two days ago, the Blue House
advised the nation's media to avoid emotional interviews
with Kim's family, and asked all to avoid referring to
the terrorists as, well ... terrorists. A naive attempt
not to offend those bent on instability and death.
The Blue House has doggedly maintained that the
dispatch will go ahead, but the conviction began to
drain from their rhetoric after the abduction. The
terrorists demanded that the troop dispatch be cancelled
and far from countering with steely resolve, the South
Korean Defense Minister was quoted as saying "let's wait
and see". The execution has galvanized the
people, pushing many into the deployment camp.
Preliminary surveys indicate a 20+% jump in the number
of respondents who now support the government's plans.
If the government is committing itself to operations
in Iraq only to satisfy a tacit obligation to support
the US in the misguided hope of creating leverage
in negotiations concerning the timing of the
USFK withdrawal, then support or not, the dispatch should
be scrapped. Iraq is not a place for half measures or
token forces. But if the government is committed to the
long-term agenda of stability and reconstruction, built on
street-level security, then the execution of Kim may
have given them the support they need.
(Copyright 2004 Asia Times Online Ltd. All
rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com for
information on our sales and syndication
policies.)
