The Death of an Alliance, Part 56

At the end of this post, there is big news, but  if I told you now, I couldn’t wring the last full measure of absurdity out of  it.  So please stick with me here.  I have  accused the South Korean government of promoting anti-Americanism.  When I do, I speak of things like  this:

The chief presidential secretary for security Song Min-soon on Wednesday said South Korea would be the greatest victim in a war on the peninsula due to the “absurdity” of the security structure. The U.S., on the other hand, “has fought more wars than any other nation in the history of its establishment and survival,” Song said.

This, in response to American objections to South Korean support for the North Korean regime, is one of those  expressions of national maturity  we’ve heard about; not anti-Americanism, just another reaction against Bush’s unilateralism (a theme we will soon revisit).  Well, in one important way — the absurdity of the security structure — Song is right, of course.  It’s absurd to think that if Kim Jong Il opts  for “use it or lose it,” 600,000 Americans  would fly in to defend Song’s sorry ass. 

So we can conclude that the predicted conflict over Kaesong and Kumgang has begun?  That would be safe to say.

Uri Party Chairman Kim Geun-tae intends to visit the Kaesong Industrial Complex in North Korea tomorrow, despite strong opposition from his own party amid growing concern here that the North used income from the inter-Korean economic project to fund its nuclear weapons program.

At a party leadership meeting yesterday, Mr. Kim was asked to reconsider the visit. The Uri Party’s secretary general, Won Hye-young, and two senior lawmakers, Kim Boo-kyum and Chong Jang-sun, told Mr. Kim it was inappropriate for the leader of South Korea’s governing party to go to the North at this time, considering public sentiment. They also said the North may conduct a second nuclear test.

Mr. Kim did not relent. “It is an action to symbolically show that the inter-Korean economic cooperation projects must continue,” Mr. Kim was quoted as saying by attendees at the meeting. “It is hard to postpone the schedule at this point.”

So Kim is running for president after all.

Now, the same report tries to distance Kim Geun Tae from a Korean government that, but for the odd legal fiction of partisan neutrality, is really an Uri government.  It does seem that both the government and Uri are somewhat  split on the implications of 1718 for Kaesong, but in each case,  someone is theoretically empowered to speak the views of the organization.  We know where Uri officially stands, then.  Roh could disavow those views, or he could disavow the party itself, but  by the end of the day,  he manages to simultaneously piss off absolutely everyone — the Security Council, the Americans, and even Kim Jong Il.  What’s saddest is that you could call this  an improvement.

At this point, we need to differentiate between the Kaesong Industrial Park and the Kumgang tourist project.  When American diplomats call Kumgang  a “cash cow” that seems designed for the specific purpose of funneling cash to North Korea, they are referring to the “$451 million in admission fees have been paid to North Korea since the tourism program began late 1998.” If you count associated development projects, the total comes closer to a cool billion.  So unless the South Koreans can account for where all that money is going, we have an issue with Resolution 1718’s requirement that governments ensure that neither they nor their companies are supporting sanctioned programs.  Just hours ago,  one  Roh’s main national security spokesmen was denying that it was so, and so was his most influential cabinet advisor:

Mr. Hill, who visited South Korea on October 17, expressed a negative view on the project, saying, “The project seems to have designed to give money to the North Korean regime.

In response to this, Minister Lee, who claimed to be the protector of engagement policy toward North Korea even after the North’s nuclear test, expressed his difference with Assistant Secretary Hill’s perception of the project. During the meeting with Mr. Hill, which was held at the central government complex in Seoul on the morning of October 18, Lee reportedly refuted, “The Mt. Geumgang project is normal commercial trade and has nothing to do with the UN Security Council’s resolution to impose sanctions against North Korea.

Here, we reveal the  truth  behind that  old saw, “unilateralism“:  to some,  only Republican American presidents are capable of it.  They can justify it, even in defiance of a unanimous resolution of the  United Nations, when it’s done in the service of appeasing evil.

Asked about Mr. Hill’s comments on the Mount Kumgang tourism project, he replied, “It is difficult to leave one’s own issue to a multilateral decision, although there is a need to respect that decision. It’s not an policy to be changed following somebody’s order to do this or that.”

Reporters continued to press him about whether Seoul was out of step with the international community, and he snapped, “We are not deviating from the UN Security Council. We are not deviating from the international community only because we differ with a certain country.” He added, “I’m not going to name that country.”

In fact, one could argue that China is  actually showing more signs of cooperating with Resolution 1718. So, what did all of this acrimony accomplish?  Bupkes.  After all that bile, the Korean government folded like  a pleated skirt.

The South Korean government has decided to suspend its financial assistance for a troubled tourism project to North Korea’s Mount Geumgang, a South Korean official said Thursday, apparently due to U.S. criticism of the inter-Korean economic project.

But the measure was believed to fall far short of what Washington had expected to see from Seoul since it would only lead to a cutback of several million dollars in the nearly US$1 billion project, which critics claim is a “cash cow” for the communist state.

So can we now conclude that the conflict over Kumgang ended almost as soon as it began?  No.  The text of Resolution 1718, Para. 8(d),  requires member states to “ensure that any funds, financial assets or economic resources are prevented from being made available by their nationals or by any persons or entities within their territories, to or for the benefit of such persons or entities.” 

What’s really odd about South Korea’s blind dedication to these projects is that they’ve been given a higher priority than food aid.