Quotes of the Day:
"So this is the rationality paradox. Here is how it works: rationality is the opposite of certainty. Certainty is the opposite of wisdom. Why? Because wisdom is not the sum total of what you know, wisdom is the sum total of what you don't know. In other words, the capacity to reflect critically on your own assumptions. This is also why politicians want to sell you certainty and want to avoid rationality. Certainty is comforting, rationality is discomforting. Which means that to be rational is to question the basis of peoples' certainties."
- Julian De Medeiros
"Be sure you put your feet in the right place, then stand firm."
- Abraham Lincoln
“And on the subject of burning books: I want to congratulate librarians, not famous for their physical strength or their powerful political connections or their great wealth, who, all over this country, have staunchly resisted anti-democratic bullies who have tried to remove certain books from their shelves, and have refused to reveal to thought police the names of persons who have checked out those titles. So the America I loved still exists, if not in the White House or the Supreme Court or the Senate or the House of Representatives or the media. The America I love still exists at the front desks of our public libraries.”
-Kurt Vonnegut, A Man Without a Country
1. N. Korea raps U.N. human rights council over 'arbitrary' standard
2. U.S. alliances with S. Korea and others cause China heartburn: Campbell
3. Vice FM says S. Korea, Japan will continue dialogue amid renewed Dokdo spat
4. Russian, Chinese warplanes enter South Korean air buffer zone: Seoul
5. Top U.S. trade official stresses will for 'mutually beneficial' ties with S. Korea
6. Sinpho Secure Boat Basin: A Reassessment of Recent Developments
7. US, South Korea and Japan warn North Korea to invoke sanctions for launching missiles
8. Former US military, diplomatic reps are cautious about formal end to Korean War
9. Diplomatic discourtesy: Japan under fire for undermining trilateral cooperation
10. Lack of diplomatic acumen (Korean presidential candidates)
11. Old-world Seoul going, going, gone
1. N. Korea raps U.N. human rights council over 'arbitrary' standard
Admit nothing, deny everything, make counter accusations.
We should understand that the focus on human rights is a threat to the regime. It is not only a moral imperative but it is a national security issue as Kim Jong-un must deny the human rights of the Korean people living in the north in order to remain in power. Human rights issues undermine the legitimacy of the regime. However, when we focus on the regime's nuclear program it enhances Kim's legitimacy. We need to consider this for our information and influence activities campaign plan.
N. Korea raps U.N. human rights council over 'arbitrary' standard | Yonhap News Agency
SEOUL, Nov. 20 (Yonhap) -- North Korea's foreign ministry on Saturday criticized the U.N. Human Rights Council for adopting "arbitrary" Western standards to attack its human rights conditions.
The ministry said the U.N. council's adoption of human rights resolutions "targets particular countries," which is against its purpose of treating human rights issues in a "fair, equal" manner.
"The U.N. Human Rights Council has become a stage for pinpointing independent, developing nations under the arbitrary Western standard," the ministry said in a statement posted on its website.
The remark came after the U.N. General Assembly's Third Committee on Wednesday passed a resolution condemning North Korea's human rights violations for the 17th consecutive year.
The ministry claimed the special rapporteurs on North Korean human rights situations are from countries that do not comply with Western values and human rights standards, and are selected without discussions among member states.
Tomas Ojea Quintana, a lawyer from Argentina, has been serving in the position since 2016.
It also said the U.S. and other Western powers should stop "coercion" and "tyranny" to improve human rights "in the true sense."
The U.N. has adopted such a resolution on North Korea's human rights problem every year since 2005. This year's resolution will be forwarded to a plenary meeting of the U.N. General Assembly next month.
South Korea didn't participate in the resolution for the third consecutive year, which was seen as an apparent bid not to antagonize the reclusive neighbor and revive a dialogue mood.
ejkim@yna.co.kr
(END)
2. U.S. alliances with S. Korea and others cause China heartburn: Campbell
Why does China fear alliances? And what makes China think it deserves a vote in the sovereign decision of countries that chose to enter into alliances.
Excerpts:
"I think it would be fair to say at the virtual meeting, President Xi made very clear that a number of things that the United States is doing cause China some heartburn," Campbell said in a virtual forum hosted by the U.S. Institute of Peace, a state-run think tank based in Washington.
"And I think at the top of that list is our bilateral, reinforcing and revitalizing our bilateral security alliances with Japan, with South Korea, with Australia, the Philippines and Thailand," he added.
U.S. alliances with S. Korea and others cause China heartburn: Campbell | Yonhap News Agency
By Byun Duk-kun
WASHINGTON, Nov. 19 (Yonhap) -- The United States strengthening its alliances with South Korea and other countries is causing China "heartburn," National Security Council Coordinator for the Indo-Pacific Kurt Campbell said Friday.
His remarks come after U.S. President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping held their first summit on Monday.
"I think it would be fair to say at the virtual meeting, President Xi made very clear that a number of things that the United States is doing cause China some heartburn," Campbell said in a virtual forum hosted by the U.S. Institute of Peace, a state-run think tank based in Washington.
"And I think at the top of that list is our bilateral, reinforcing and revitalizing our bilateral security alliances with Japan, with South Korea, with Australia, the Philippines and Thailand," he added.
The U.S. has emphasized the importance of working with its allies and partners in tackling regional and global challenges that it says include maintaining a rules-based order in the Indo-Pacific.
While Washington insists its efforts to maintain stability in the Indo-Pacific does not target any one specific country, many believe such efforts clearly point to China, putting pressure on U.S. allies in the region.
National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan earlier said U.S. alliances with the countries, including South Korea, had allowed the U.S. president to engage with his Chinese counterpart from a position of strength.
"He (Biden) has strengthened our alliances with the Republic of Korea and Japan, so that they are as strong as they have been in the history of those two alliances. That's the context for the meeting last night that is the strategic environment into which President Biden walked," Sullivan said.
South Korea's First Vice Foreign Minister Choi Jong-kun has said the ongoing rivalry between the U.S. and China places South Korea in a difficult situation, noting South Korea's trade volume with China is "larger than our trade volume with the United States and Japan put together."
bdk@yna.co.kr
(END)
3. Vice FM says S. Korea, Japan will continue dialogue amid renewed Dokdo spat
Some good news (or good words). Can it be followed by action? Our adversaries are already exploiting this division in our trilateral relationship.
Excerpts:
Tensions over Dokdo flared when Mori boycotted a joint press availability set to involve all three diplomats, in protest over the recent visit to Dokdo by a top South Korean police officer.
"There is no discontinuity in dialogue or consultations between the diplomatic authorities (of the two countries) and they will continue," Choi told reporters at Incheon International Airport, west of Seoul.
"We will have consultations over issues that need to be discussed, but we will strictly stick to principles," he said.
Vice FM says S. Korea, Japan will continue dialogue amid renewed Dokdo spat | Yonhap News Agency
INCHEON, Nov. 20 (Yonhap) -- South Korea and Japan will continue diplomatic talks, a senior Seoul diplomat said Saturday, amid a renewed spat between the two countries over the East Sea islets of Dokdo.
First Vice Foreign Minister Choi Jong-kun made the remarks upon arriving home from Washington where he held talks with his U.S. and Japanese counterparts -- Wendy Sherman and Takeo Mori.
Tensions over Dokdo flared when Mori boycotted a joint press availability set to involve all three diplomats, in protest over the recent visit to Dokdo by a top South Korean police officer.
"There is no discontinuity in dialogue or consultations between the diplomatic authorities (of the two countries) and they will continue," Choi told reporters at Incheon International Airport, west of Seoul.
"We will have consultations over issues that need to be discussed, but we will strictly stick to principles," he said.
The vice minister also said that there isn't any territorial dispute between South Korea and Japan -- in a reiteration of Seoul's position that Dokdo is its inherent territory historically, geographically and by international law.
Dokdo has long been a recurring source of tension between the two neighbors, as Tokyo continues to make sovereignty claims in its policy papers, public statements and school textbooks.
South Korea has been in effective control of Dokdo, with a small police detachment, since its liberation from Japan's 1910-45 colonial rule.
sshluck@yna.co.kr
(END)
4. Russian, Chinese warplanes enter South Korean air buffer zone: Seoul
As I wrote yesterday:
It is all about the rocks for the ROK and Japan (among many other issues).
The US calls these Liancourt Rocks while the Koreans call it Dokdo and the Japanese call it Takeshima.
I wonder if we will see another flyby by Chinese and Russian air forces which is only designed to drive a wedge between the ROK and Japan and undermine US credibility in its two bilateral alliances.
Recall the spat it caused between Korea and Japan when they overflew Dokdo previously. The Russians and Chinese were pretty quick in responding to te fallout from the Deputy Ministers trilateral meeting this week.
If they were anticipating this and were ready to execute it shows their foresight and intent. But if they did this immediately with no prior planning it does illustrate interesting capabilities and closer ties than we may think. Either way this does not bode well for us- whether they are conducting effective deliberate planning and operations based on anticipation or they are conducting crisis action planning and operations based on emerging opportunities. In both cases it shows they have an effective relationship with each other to pull this off.
Russian, Chinese warplanes enter South Korean air buffer zone: Seoul
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — South Korea said Friday it scrambled fighter jets to respond to a group of Russian and Chinese warplanes that entered its air buffer zone unannounced.
South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said it detected seven Russian and two Chinese military aircraft in the country’s air defense identification zone off its eastern coast.
Anticipating the moves, South Korea had already sent fighter jets and other aircraft to the area to prevent accidental clashes, but the Russian and Chinese planes left without breaching South Korea’s territorial airspace, the Joint Chiefs of Staff said.
RELATED
On its current trajectory, U.S. planners should expect greater military cooperation on a global level between Beijing and Moscow.
China later told South Korea through a military communication channel that the flights were part of its routine military exercises with Russia.
“(We) assess the current situation as a joint exercise between China and Russia and additional analysis is needed,” the Joint Chiefs of Staff said in a statement.
Air defense identification zones usually expand beyond the country’s territory to allow more time to respond to potentially hostile aircraft. Military planes entering another country’s air defense identification zone are required to notify it in advance.
RELATED
A host of scenarios could push China and the United States into some kind of conflict.
Chinese and Russian warplanes have often entered South Korea’s air defense identification zones in recent years as they increasingly flex their muscle amid an intensifying competition with the United States.
In 2019, South Korea said its fighter jets fired hundreds of warning shots toward a Russian military plane that it said twice violated its national airspace off its eastern coast. Russia then denied that its aircraft entered South Korea’s territory.
5. Top U.S. trade official stresses will for 'mutually beneficial' ties with S. Korea
Will we commit to coming to the aid of our ally if China again conducts economic warfare against it as it did during the THAAD deployment.
(LEAD) Top U.S. trade official stresses will for 'mutually beneficial' ties with S. Korea | Yonhap News Agency
(ATTN: CHANGES photo)
SEOUL, Nov 20 (Yonhap) -- A top U.S. trade official emphasized the United States' will Saturday to strengthen a "mutually beneficial" relationship with South Korea during a meeting with local entrepreneurs, a local business lobby said.
The Federation of Korean Industries (FKI) said that U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) Katherine Tai met with Korean business leaders in Seoul, as Seoul and Washington have sought to beef up cooperation on global supply chains, technologies and other issues amid an intensifying Sino-U.S. rivalry.
The meeting was co-hosted by the FKI, the U.S. Embassy in Seoul and the American Chamber of Commerce in Korea.
During the session, Tai highlighted the Joe Biden administration's will for stronger cooperation with South Korea and its vision for an Indo-Pacific economic framework related to cooperation on supply chain resiliency, digital economy, clean energy and other areas.
FKI chairman Huh Chang-soo said that the South Korea and the U.S. have demonstrated their "steely" alliance through cooperation over the last two years in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic.
"At a time of great economic uncertainties caused by COVID-19, cooperation among the countries sharing values is more important," he was quoted as saying.
"The two countries should work together to foster a fair global business environment and create a synergic effect for world prosperity through cooperation in the cutting-edge industrial sector," he added.
Participants included executives from Samsung Electronics Co., Hyundai Mortor Co., LG Energy Solution Ltd. and Hanwha Solution Corp.
It is the first time in 11 years that the sitting USTR has visited South Korea. She arrived in Seoul on Thursday for a four-day visit.
sshluck@yna.co.kr
(END)
6. Sinpho Secure Boat Basin: A Reassessment of Recent Developments
All warfare is based on deception.
Sinpho Secure Boat Basin: A Reassessment of Recent Developments
Commercial satellite imagery from November 12 and 13 show little activity at North Korea’s Sinpho South Shipyard around the SINPO-class ballistic missile submarine other than the repositioning of the submersible test barge to be partially covered by the awning at the secure boat basin. The purpose of the repositioning is unclear, although the awning does obscure a portion of the barge and prevents complete monitoring.
On October 19, North Korea conducted a submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) test from the SINPO-class submarine. Ten days later, 38 North concluded that activity spotted after that test at the barge was “consistent with preparations” for another test launch of an SLBM. The movement of a mobile crane from the submarine to the submersible test barge—reportedly not used in the October 19 launch—and the removal of the cover over the barge’s missile canister ring mount, seen on October 28, were activities associated with inserting a missile canister into the ring mount.
As no subsequent SLBM test has been detected since then, other explanations for activity at the submersible test barge now seem more likely, such as improvements, maintenance or perhaps even deception.
Figure 1. Overview of the secure boat basin.
Image © 2021 Planet Labs, Inc. cc-by-nc-sa 4.0. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.
7. US, South Korea and Japan warn North Korea to invoke sanctions for launching missiles
Invoke AND ENFORCE.
US, South Korea and Japan warn North Korea to invoke sanctions for launching missiles
Last Updated: 18th November, 2021 14:24 IST
The United States, South Korea, and Japan stand firm in maintaining compliance with UN Security Council sanctions on North Korea for missile launches
Written By
IMAGE: AP/ANI
Maintaining their stand on compliance with the UN Security Council over the issue of North Korea's back to back missile launches, the trio - the United States, South Korea, and Japan - set to impose sanctions on Pyongyang if it fails to review its policies, reported news agency Sputnik. According to the media reports, US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman during a press conference in Washington said that the trio agreed to impose sanctions on North Korea for launching missiles.
"There is no question that Japan, South Korea and the United States all agree that we need to stay compliant with UN Security Council resolutions that impose sanctions on North Korea for launching missiles that it should not," the US diplomat said in a press briefing on Wednesday.
Further, the US diplomat added the trio would do nothing except impose sanctions on Pyongyang. It stressed that the North Korean Supreme Leader has to change the policies regarding the nuclearisation of its weapon and asked to adhere to the UN Security Council measures. Notably, the statement from the US diplomat came after holding a trilateral meeting with South Korean First Vice Foreign Minister Choi Jong-Kun and Japanese Vice Foreign Minister Mori Takeo.
The officials explained their countries' commitment to maintaining a free, peaceful, and open Indo-Pacific and emphasised their backing for the central role of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in the regional architecture, Sherman added. She pointed that diplomacy and dialogue are crucial to delivering the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and establishing durable peace.
Japan, South Korea hesitate at sharing stage after US talks
During the briefing, Sherman noted that Tokyo and Seoul continue to work on resolving "bilateral differences," which led to their no-show at the joint presser following the meeting that lasted for over three hours. However, in a report published in the Associated Press, American diplomats couldn’t convince their Asian allies to share a news conference stage. It said Sherman sat at a table alone, taking a question from reporters from those countries. While explaining the differences, she said "some bilateral differences between those two Asian allies of the US "that are continuing to be resolved, unrelated to today's meeting."
8. Former US military, diplomatic reps are cautious about formal end to Korean War
Wise counsel from both and also a good question from General Abrams.
Harris expressed skepticism over a formal end-of-war declaration and suggested the results may fall short. He urged listeners to ask themselves “what will change the day after that declaration is signed?”
“It’s not a peace treaty – the armistice will still be extant,” Harris told the panel. “Our treaty obligations to defend South Korea will still be extant. And North Korea’s missile, nuclear and conventional capabilities will still be extant.”
Harris echoed warnings from foreign policy watchers and added “the quest for dialogue” with North Korea must not come at the expense of the ability to respond to its threats.
“We must not relax sanctions or reduce joint military exercises just to get North Korea to come to the negotiating table,” he said. “This is a tried and true road to failure.”
...
Abrams warned that an end-of-war declaration would be followed by calls to abolish the U.N. Command, the U.S.-led international body that defends South Korea. Such a move, he said, would prompt the dissolution of “the only internationally recognized legal instrument that has prevented the resumption of hostilities.”
Supporters of an end-of-war declaration have said it would rekindle the peace process between the two Koreas. It could lead toward reunification or entice North Korea to join the international community, they say.
The U.S. has not yet clearly defined what the ultimate policy goal for North Korea would be, according to Abrams.
“Is it a peace treaty or is it denuclearization?” he asked. “We haven’t answered that question yet.”
Former US military, diplomatic reps are cautious about formal end to Korean War
Then-U.S. Forces Korea commander Gen. Robert Abrams, left, greets then-U.S. Ambassador to South Korea Harry Harris aboard the USS Blue Ridge in 2019. (U.S. Embassy in South Korea)
The former U.S. ambassador to South Korea and the retired top commander for U.S. forces in the region said they are cautious about a formal declaration to end the Korean War, a plan championed by the South Korean president as his tenure nears its end.
Former ambassador Harry Harris, a retired admiral who once led U.S. Indo-Pacific Command and the Pacific Fleet, and retired Army Gen. Robert Abrams, the former commander of U.S. Forces Korea, delivered their remarks Wednesday at a panel discussion hosted by The Korea Society in New York.
Harris expressed skepticism over a formal end-of-war declaration and suggested the results may fall short. He urged listeners to ask themselves “what will change the day after that declaration is signed?”
“It’s not a peace treaty – the armistice will still be extant,” Harris told the panel. “Our treaty obligations to defend South Korea will still be extant. And North Korea’s missile, nuclear and conventional capabilities will still be extant.”
Harris echoed warnings from foreign policy watchers and added “the quest for dialogue” with North Korea must not come at the expense of the ability to respond to its threats.
“We must not relax sanctions or reduce joint military exercises just to get North Korea to come to the negotiating table,” he said. “This is a tried and true road to failure.”
Rather than ending with a peace treaty, fighting from the 1950-53 Korean War ended with an armistice agreement.
South Korean President Moon Jae-in recently renewed his call for the agreement’s signatories to formally end the war. During a speech to the U.N. General Assembly in September, he urged the signatories to “come together and declare that the war on the Korean Peninsula is over.”
Diplomats from Seoul and Washington, D.C., have since discussed the possibility of ending the conflict. Moon’s presidency ends in February and his renewed drive to end the war is viewed as one of the last major policy decisions of his tenure.
Abrams, who led the roughly 28,500 American troops stationed on the Korean Peninsula from 2018 to July 2021, spoke publicly about the U.S. and South Korean alliance for the first time as a private citizen. He reiterated that the concept of an end-of-war declaration has been discussed for many years, and that “we ought to be really careful and proceed deliberately.”
“This is my issue,” he said. “That declaration … is not an end-state or an objective unto itself, but rather a way to achieve that end-state.”
Abrams warned that an end-of-war declaration would be followed by calls to abolish the U.N. Command, the U.S.-led international body that defends South Korea. Such a move, he said, would prompt the dissolution of “the only internationally recognized legal instrument that has prevented the resumption of hostilities.”
Supporters of an end-of-war declaration have said it would rekindle the peace process between the two Koreas. It could lead toward reunification or entice North Korea to join the international community, they say.
The U.S. has not yet clearly defined what the ultimate policy goal for North Korea would be, according to Abrams.
“Is it a peace treaty or is it denuclearization?” he asked. “We haven’t answered that question yet.”
David Choi
9. Diplomatic discourtesy: Japan under fire for undermining trilateral cooperation
A Korean view.
Diplomatic discourtesy
Japan under fire for undermining trilateral cooperation
Japan cannot avoid criticism for its serious diplomatic discourtesy in boycotting a planned joint press conference of vice-ministerial officials from South Korea, the United States and Japan in Washington, Wednesday. U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman held the conference alone after her Korean and Japanese counterparts pulled out, due to their bilateral conflict over Korea's southernmost Dokdo Islets.
First Vice Foreign Minister Choi Jong-kun quoted Japanese Vice Foreign Minister Takeo Mori as having said that Japan would not take part in the joint briefing, just before the start of the trilateral talks. Japan took issue with a visit to Dokdo by Korean National Police Agency Commissioner General Kim Chang-yong Tuesday. The vice-ministerial talks took place as scheduled to discuss diverse pending issues. Yet, the parties failed to narrow the differences in their stances.
It is deplorable that Japan upset the diplomatic protocol involving the three countries. It is natural for Korea's police chief to visit the country's Dokdo Islets, where its police are stationed. Japan has taken flak for raising this issue despite the need to solidify trilateral cooperation on more significant issues, such as North Korea's nuclear program and so forth.
The Japanese government had already lodged a protest to Korea over Kim's Dokdo visit, later on Tuesday. It is a serious and callous diplomatic discourtesy for Japan to raise the matter again on the multilateral diplomatic stage involving the three allies. The trilateral meeting was significant due to the need to cement the alliance in the wake of the crucial summit between U.S. President Joe Biden and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping.
Japan's inappropriate behavior could potentially shake the trilateral alliance, undermining the Biden administration's efforts toward cementing it. Cheong Wa Dae also expressed displeasure over Japan's action, describing it as unprecedented. The trilateral talks, resumed under the Biden administration, have partly the goal of containing China. They have also served as a useful diplomatic channel among the three countries.
The three officials were supposed to discuss grave issues such as an official declaration to end the Korean War, sought by the Moon Jae-in administration, as well as regional security issues in the Indo-Pacific. Yet, due to Japan's seemingly "uncooperative" move, the participants did not have the chance for in-depth discussions. Sherman said, "As has been the case for some time, there are some bilateral differences between Japan and the Republic of Korea that are continuing to be resolved."
This recent case shows that the bilateral conflict between Seoul and Tokyo has worsened to the extent of threatening trilateral cooperation. It also indicates that Japan will continue to bring up the issue of Dokdo with the international community. It is time for the nation to deal resolutely with the matter through specific and concrete policies, so that it can maintain the upper hand over Japan internationally.
10. Lack of diplomatic acumen (Korean presidential candidates)
Critique of both ROK presidential candidates.
Lack of diplomatic acumen
Leading candidates hit for narrow-minded views
Diplomatic acumen is one of the qualifications required by presidential contenders. Yet it is questionable if the leading candidates of the ruling and opposition parties have any diplomatic sense or proper foreign policy proposals.
Lee Jae-myung, the candidate of the governing Democratic Party of Korea (DPK), is under attack for a diplomatic discourtesy. During a meeting with U.S. Senator Jon Ossoff last Friday, Lee said that America played a part in helping Japan colonize Korea in 1910 through a secret deal.
He mentioned the Taft-Katsura Agreement to remind Sen. Ossoff that the U.S. was responsible ― one way or another ― for the loss of Korea's sovereignty to Japan. The secret deal was made in 1905 between former U.S. Secretary of War William Howard Taft and then Japanese Prime Minister Katsura Taro.
It is an established historical fact that under the agreement, America condoned Japanese rule over the Korean Peninsula in return for U.S. control over the Philippines. But Lee's remarks were abrupt and out of context. It was improper to refer to the agreement when he met with the Democratic U.S. senator who was visiting Korea to advocate for the Seoul-Washington alliance.
Later Lee explained that he mentioned the agreement because Ossoff showed interest in Korean history. This, however, sounded like a lame excuse. He has only invited criticism for committing a diplomatic discourtesy. He should have realized that such remarks could be seen as an expression of his anti-U.S. sentiment.
As some critics argued, the progressive candidate might have been trying to rally his supporters around anti-American sentiment in the lead-up to the March 9 presidential election. If that is the case, Lee cannot avoid criticism that he is hell-bent on winning the poll even at the cost of the South Korea-U.S. alliance.
It is not the first time that Lee has triggered controversy over Seoul-Washington ties. In July, he said that U.S. troops who entered the peninsula following Korea's August 1945 liberation from Japan were "occupation forces."
He cannot lead the country in the right direction with such anachronistic views, if he is elected president. He should immediately discard his narrow-minded viewpoint about history and the alliance with the U.S.
Yoon Seok-youl, the candidate of the main opposition People Power Party (PPP), has also touched off controversy. During a press conference hosted by the Seoul Foreign Correspondents' Club last Friday, he said that Korea can allow additional deployments of the U.S. anti-missile system, known as THAAD, on its soil as it is a matter of sovereignty.
Yoon should have taken a more cautious approach to such a sensitive security issue, considering a feared backlash from China, which imposed economic retaliation on Korea for the 2017 deployment of a single THAAD battery here.
He also promised to change the "master-servant" approach in inter-Korean relations, criticizing President Moon Jae-in for playing into the hands of North Korea to promote his active engagement with Pyongyang. However it is wrong to describe the North as a master and the South as a servant.
We urge both Lee and Yoon to have a better understanding of key diplomatic and security issues. They should present better foreign policy visions designed to protect our national interests and enhance our international status and reputation.
11. Old-world Seoul going, going, gone
Korean history and culture.
Old-world Seoul going, going, gone
Royal and religious legacies are over-preserved while bulldozers crush last bits of the common man's architectural heritage
SEOUL – Friday was a fine, late Autumn day, and I was walking back to the office from a long lunch. With time in hand, I took a detour to stroll through one of the megalopolis’s last few remaining neighborhoods of ambient, higgledy-piggledy alleys.
These alleys – some barely wide enough to walk through – front exclusively low-rise buildings: dusty antique shops, cozy family-run restaurants and tiny residences, usually inhabited by oldsters. Not a beautiful district, perhaps, but pedestrian-friendly, dense with life and bristling with character – especially compared with the high rises that tower over it.
So, I looked forward to the stroll.
Approaching it via an alley in Insadong – a specially zoned, modern tourism district of souvenir shops, handicraft sellers and upmarket traditional restaurants – I was momentarily befuddled. The alley was blocked off at the end by a gray hoarding.
Had I taken a wrong turn? I took the next alley. Same thing.
Realization began to simmer. A brief circuit and my fears became concrete. The entire neighborhood – a full city block – had been razed to the ground.
“What happened?” I asked a middle-aged man sitting on the ground repairing a motorcycle. “Jaekebal,” he said without looking up – “redevelopment.”
I ducked into a tiny restaurant on the periphery of the wasteland. “What is going to happen here?” I asked a young man who was clearing tables.
He looked surprised at the inquiry, then raised his hands in the global gesture of helplessness. “All these little alleys? They are going,” he said with a sad smile.
My feelings veered from shock to fury – but not surprise. These, after all, are the near-final throes of a trend underway for decades.
A low-rise neighborhood in Seoul awaits the wrecking ball. Photo: Andrew Salmon / Asia Times
Out with the old
Seoul, like other Asia metropolises, is future-focused. But the focus here is particularly relentless. Modern history may explain why.
A hyper-speed industrialization program that kicked off in the 1960s sped Koreans from agrarian poverty to urban prosperity within the span of a generation. As the country surged up the metrics, its old-school character was sacrificed on the smoking altar of modernity.
The lure of the capital was particularly magnetic. Seoul expanded as millions swarmed into the capital to man the new industries in what became a colossal case of urban drift.
Traditional neighborhoods of single-story family dwellings were submerged. A vast tonnage of high-rise office buildings hosted the salarymen, while endless clusters of identical apartments rose to house their families.
Still, while the optics of a city established in the 14th century were being changed forever, top-down efforts were made to rejuvenate a culture that had been suppressed by three and a half decades of Japanese colonialism.
In the architectural heritage field, Seoul’s medieval royal palaces – emptied of their former residents – were restored. (That process is still ongoing.) Ditto the temples of the Buddhist priesthood, and the city’s old fortress walls and gates.
One could say “over-restored.”
Seoul’s palaces are superbly restored – some might say, over-restored. Photo: Tom Coyner
Signs in palaces and temples refer to the timescales of centuries – even though the visitor is looking at a structure that, as is patently clear even to the untutored eye, has been restored (or plain rebuilt from scratch) within the last few years. This is particularly visible in the city walls, where the aged stones at the bottom are an entirely different color and texture from the new stones and battlements piled higher up.
But that restoration process was hardly all-encompassing. Oddly, for a country and a city that is relentlessly middle class, there was no drive to preserve the residences or neighborhoods of the average man and woman of pre-modern Seoul.
A generation obsessed with all things new aspired to live in apartments – cleaner, more convenient and more secure than the hanok (traditional cottages) they had been raised in.
These curved-roofed residences were pleasing to the eye. But the vast majority lacked running water, flush toilets or safe electrical wiring. Their creaky walls and leaky roofs were the source of endless travails.
Psychology, as well as science, was at work. With modernity to the fore, apartments were more prestigious than the wooden-bodied, thatch- and tiled-roof cottages of yore.
Result? The hanoks’ curved, tiled roofs and ornate, wooden doors disappeared in clouds of dust as bulldozers and wrecking balls did their work. It went on years; for decades.
Meanwhile, a nation achieving prosperity sought to increase it.
For Koreans, the investment destination of choice was not capital markets – seen as risky if not downright crooked. The tangible brick and mortar of real estate markets was a sounder choice; property ownership became a path to riches.
For the lucky – the landlords – the more tenants you could pack into a space, the more won could be earned. That meant functional buildings, not attractive buildings. The emphasis was on verticality.
Amid this convergence of trends, it was not just architectural heritage that was hurled into the trash can of modernity.
Aesthetics, too, were ditched.
De-prioritizing prettiness, crushing character
If you visit a Seoul real estate agency you will see prices and floor spaces written up, but no photographs displayed. This, one might assume, is because people are interested in the economics and dimensions of a home, rather than its outer appearance or interior design.
And – perhaps because Seoul’s cityscape lacks architectural attraction – real-time views are not a thing.
Although the city is graced with a broad river and a sprawl of forested mountains, it is striking how few restaurants, bars and cafes offer views of them.
Equally striking is how many Seoulites use their apartment balconies as storage spaces to pile up household junk, rather than as platforms on which to sit and sip cocktails while watching the sun sink behind the horizon.
Forlorn hope: An old-school pub advertises its wares on the hoardings of a chunk of city that has been obliterated in the name of redevelopment. Photo: Andrew Salmon/Asia Times
It was not just the old hanok that went virtually extinct. In ongoing waves of urban rejuvenation, buildings and neighborhoods dating from the 1960s and ‘70s also disappeared as the bulldozers continued their onslaught.
Granted, few of these offered much in the way of design. Still, these old-school, mid-rise districts offered some character – which is more than can be said of the samey-samey, cookie-cutter ‘hoods that replaced them.
There is a long and depressing list of properties and neighborhoods that suffered the wrecking ball. Even in the limited space of Seoul’s central business district of Gwanghwamun, that list is long.
A block of hanok was destroyed, providing space for a giant police station and a corporate law firm. An ambient, old alley was cleared to permit the construction of an international, 5-star hotel. A nationally famed alley of restaurants – Pimatgol – was obliterated to make way for a multi-use office block.
Granted, there have been a handful of efforts at urban preservation. One village of hanok, Bukchon, which sits on a hill between two of Seoul’s palaces, has been preserved. Well – sort of.
With City Hall offering grants for hanok “renovation” in this last redoubt of old-style housing, many owners have, over the last 20 years, taken the money. But instead of using it to upgrade their properties, they have flattened their authentic old hanok, and built new, ersatz hanok in their place.
The result is a “Disneyland Castle” effect: Busloads of Chinese tourists have asked, “Where are the old houses?”
A rare, rare view in millennial Seoul: a district of hanok, or traditional cottages. Photo: Andrew Salmon / Asia Times
The last line of defense: Millennial hipsters?
Are there any grounds for hope? There may be.
Seoul is not the poor location it was in the 1960s and ‘70s. Generations of Koreans have grown up in middle-class prosperity, with good educations and overseas travels. They do not have bad memories of creaky, windy old hanok.
Moreover, they are – it is unkind but fair to say – more aesthetically sophisticated than their parents and grandparents.
And they are winning a global reputation. The personnel who man the city’s creative industries have generated a wave of content – BTS, “Parasite,” “Squid Game” – that has enthused the world.
At home, cutting-edge designers, baristas and craft brewers cater to the tastes of a rising population of, well, hipsters. The good news is that these younger Koreans are not attached to now old-fashioned concepts of “modernity.”
As a result, there are organic developments underway that offer some hope for the future. There is a renewed love affair among the young with hanok – although few want to live in them. But converted to restaurants, cafes, pubs, wine bars, galleries and photos studios, a handful of hanok dotted around the city have won a new life.
Few Seoulites live in hanok; those that survive are more likely to be restaurants, galleries or cafes than homes. Photo: Asia Times / Andrew Salmon
And this lure of nostalgia extends to neighborhoods.
Youth flock to Iksan Dong, a 15-minute walk east of the central business district. Formerly a district of shabby, semi-derelict old cottages, Iksan Dong has been converted into a dense network of alleys and neo-hanok hosting upscale eateries, cafes and pubs.
This is hanok cool.
And it is not just hanok that beckons youth. The distinctly unlovely and often crumbling concrete precincts and niches of Euljiro (aka “Hip”-jiro), another 15-minute walk southeast of the CBD, are now one of the city’s hottest districts for partying.
This is retro cool.
The two districts showcase possibilities and present models.
The district that used to exist adjacent to Insadong could have become, with the right zoning and regulations, a combination of Iksan-Dong and Eulijiro. Of course, now it will not – it has been obliterated, victim to the mighty (and corruptive) power of the property developer.
Can that force be halted? Perhaps. But if Seoul’s hipsters are going to colonize and gentrify other, older areas, they had better get a move on.
Other sub-districts in the broad area of Jongno, north and east of the central business district, are also slated for jaekebal – the grim “compulsory purchase” order, or “redevelopment.”
These are some of the very last remaining chunks of pre-modern Seoul. When they are gone, they will be gone forever and the city will lose a core component of its character of yesteryear.
Low rise falls, high rise rises: A condemned area of Seoul. Photo: Andrew Salmon / Asia Times
That damned foreign voice
Of course, there is an element in this column of the outsider complaining.
For much of the 19th and early 20th centuries, Koreans were beholden to powerful foreign powers. During the period of economic development, there was almost a national fetish of benchmarking “advanced nations.”
Those days have passed. Seoulites must choose their own destinies. Those destinies include what kind of city they wish to inhabit.
After all, they inhabit a lively, vibrant democracy. They can – and do – demonstrate at the drop of a hat. Some demonstrations are one-person affairs; others, such as the “candlelit protests” that overthrew President Park Geun-hye in 2017, lure millions.
However, there is no protest movement to preserve old buildings or neighborhoods.
Moreover, Korea is a vibrant capitalist economy. Seoul property owners have the right to develop and upgrade their assets. These go-getters will not be trammeled by foreign voices arguing for cultural heritage preservation, or urban aesthetics.
Yet as the bulldozers mass on the perimeters of the last, few, tiny holdouts of old architecture left in Seoul, there may, just may, be foreign benchmarks that could feasibly be consulted.
Multiple capitalist cities – in Western Europe and North America – have strict regulations on the development of old properties and old districts. Some have extremely strict regulations which make it downright onerous to make even minor changes to buildings of a certain vintage.
These regulations are accepted by their populaces as part and parcel of living in cities where the elected municipal governments see the pluses of preserving distinct urban heritages.
Where is the character? Seoul boasts splendid geography but suffers from ‘every-city’ architecture. Photo: Andrew Salmon / Asia Times
Minutes to midnight
Seoul in the 1960s was the capital of one of the world’s poorest nations. It did not have the luxury of prioritizing aesthetics or inner-city heritage. Nor, did it have the kind of architectural and design manpower available to create beautiful spaces, or to renovate and preserve old ones.
Seoul today is the capital of the 10th richest nation on earth. It is also home to a population whose younger members have sound and advanced ideas about technologies, trends and designs.
Moreover, a city that was formerly known as a base of stern-faced industrial warriors is today a bona fide welcoming destination for regional and global tourists. Many of these tourists will be drawn to millennial, high-tech, bright and sparkly Korea: The neon! The technologies! The high rises!
But many will also want to see Seoul’s unique character – i.e. what differentiates it from other regional cities such as Shanghai, Tokyo, Singapore and Hong Kong. Granted, much of this differentiation exists in fields such as cuisine and popular culture.
But cities are physical spaces. Visitors will not ignore what they see and experience around them. What is a city’s look – its feel? What is its character – its spirit?
This is not just a question for Seoul, but for other Asian capitals and cities. Perhaps due to the traditional preference for building in wood rather than stone, perhaps due to the modern trend for ultra-fast development, urban heritage across the region is being crushed to dust.
But to return to Seoul, specifically. The risk is increasing that the very last few remnants of Seoul’s distinct character – barring its palaces and temples – will disappear forever.
Surely, there must come a time when the city government stands up and says to the real property developers who are poised to bulldoze yet another of the city’s last, few remaining oases of pre-modernity, “Enough is enough!”
Given that there is so very, very little left to preserve, that time could be nigh.
V/R
David Maxwell
Senior Fellow
Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Phone: 202-573-8647
Twitter: @davidmaxwell161
FDD is a Washington-based nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.
