Axis of Evil?

"Non-proliferation expert Joe Cirincione of the Carnegie Endowment for International peace said the shipment was unsurprising given Pyongyang's history of missile exports.

However, "it's not clear there is anything illegal about this yet (as there is) no treaty or any restrictions that stops (North Korea) from selling to other countries nor is there a prohibition for any country receiving them," he told CNN.

The only restraints on missile exports are contained in the Missile Technology Control Regime, a voluntary arrangement that does not include North Korea, he said. "

"By Jon Leyne
BBC Washington correspondent

Spot the difference. The United States is threatening war against one of the "axis of evil" because of its weapons of mass destruction.
For another of the "axis" countries, Washington is still agonising over whether to stop multi-million dollar aid payments.

The two countries, of course, are Iraq and North Korea.

The difference between them? North Korea is much further advanced in its programme to produce nuclear weapons.

The accusations of a double standard refuse to go away. "

Like Iraq their country is covered by overlapping circles that represent the blast radi of nuclear warheads sitting in the middle of an ocean on trident D3 missles. China as well as Russia also has the ability to launch a retaliatory or first strike against N. korea. N. Korea will fall apart in due time. I believe they are currently eating each other over there, well unless your a party official. Some are more equal than others you know..They are a clear threat to stability in asia.

What god(s) they pray to is irrelevent.

" I believe they are currently eating each other over there"

Some people think Americans eat babies, too.

" China as well as Russia also has the ability to launch a retaliatory or first strike against N. korea."

I really don't see that happening, except maybe in Radian's Alternate Earth.

wasn't the embargo of cuba an act of war? Your point?

The spanish stopped the ship.

Time to bankrupt them, they have no more friends. Communisim is a faltering social virus..

Both Russia and China posess the technology to respond to a nuclear attack from N. Korea. Didn't say it was probable, only possible.

BBC as well as S. Korean press have documented cases of cannibalisim in N. Korea. I didn't hust make it up.

Pakistan has also exchanged physics componets for ballistic missle componets with N. Korea. (ding dong missle). The world is becoming a more dangerous place...

"South Korean protesters hold candles during a rally for two school girls killed by a U.S. military vehicle near the U.S. embassy in Seoul December 7, 2002"

And everyone in the US is against the coming war with Irag. I saw the protest pictures on the TV. That makes it reality right?

The S. Koreans hate us so much that they spend billions on our weapons..

U.S.-South Korean Relations

Since the end of the Korean War, the United States has committed itself to the security of South Korea. In the 1954 U.S.-R.O.K. Mutual Defense Treaty, the United States commits to help the Republic of Korea defend itself from external aggression. In support of this commitment, the United States currently maintains about 37,000 service personnel in Korea, including the Army's Second Infantry Division and several Air Force tactical squadrons. In the 1990s, the U.S. has begun the transition from a leading to a supporting role in maintaining South Korean security and the South Korean government has agreed to pay a larger portion of the costs for stationing U.S. forces in Korea. On 1 December, 1994, peacetime operational control authority over all South Korean military units still under U.S. operational control was transferred to the South Korean armed forces.

Historically, the United States has been the top arms supplier to South Korea, due to the importance of having compatible weaponry. However, the South Koreans have begun an indigenous arms industry (see below) and also begun to shop other countries, causing a decline in U.S. sales to South Korea during the 1990's.

...

High military expenditures led Seoul during the 1970s to establish indigenous military industries. In 1973, arms imports were 4.9% of all ROK imports; by 1990, this figure dropped to 0.8%, according to the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (World Military Expenditures and Arms Transfers, various years). Domestic arms production, while driving up overall costs, keeps more money in the country, employs more citizens, results in the acquisition of technological and production know-how for foreign partners and provides export opportunities.

Nearly all of South Korea's arms purchases appear to have objectives in addition to national defense. A December 1993 Wall Street Journal article said that, since the late 1980's, arms purchases have been designed for the "transfer of high technology to local industry" rather than military preparedness. Incorporation of Korean components, for example, is a high priority.

As a result, South Korea is emerging as an important second-tier arms exporter. During 1994-1998, according to the Stockholm Peace Research Institute, the ROK exported more than $100 million worth of arms. This figure may include illegal exports of as many as 300,000 M-16s built under license in Korea. Korea is also offering its version of the U.S.-designed Armored Infantry Fighting Vehicle (AIFV), dubbed the Korean Infantry Fighting Vehicle. Malaysia has bought 64 and is expected to co-produce several hundred more under license. [Primary competition came from Turkey, which was offering its own version of the same vehicle built under license in Turkey.]

Like Taiwan, South Korea also hopes to use co-production projects to decrease its dependence on foreign suppliers and to enter new markets. South Korea is the leading recipient of offset agreements with American defense manufacturers in the Pacific Rim, and among the top ten recipients worldwide. For example, as part of an offset connected to the 1991 sale of F-16 fighter-bombers, Lockheed Martin will help South Korea build an indigenous trainer/light attack aircraft. According to the U.S. Commerce Department, during 1993-96, South Korea entered in to twelve new offsets, half of which were direct investments in the Korean defense industry.

http://www.fas.org/asmp/profiles/south_korea.htm

South Korea-US Alliance at Critical Moment

By Oh Young-jin

Staff Reporter
The South Korea-U.S. alliance is at a new juncture after more than half a century, with no signs of anti-American sentiment, triggered by the acquittal of two U.S. soldiers charged with running over two Korean schoolgirls, abating.

On the surface, at issue is the revision of the two countries¡¯ Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), under which the two U.S. defendants were tried by a U.S. military court and found not guilty.

However, there are more fundamental issues at stake.

First, contrary to past GI crimes whose Korean victims did not belong to the mainstream of society, the latest incident involved the death of two schoolgirls.

The different nature of the victims is serving as the emotional glue holding together not only activists but also an increasing number of the general public, for their common call for the SOFA revision.

Plus, election politics is stoking the sentiment as key candidates compete with each other to raise the ante so they can win in the Dec. 19 presidential election, which is expected to be a very close match.

Whoever wins the election, however, the new president is bound to be burdened with any strong anti-U.S. rhetoric he has used during the campaign, making it difficult to restore the bilateral relationship to the previous level.

More importantly, the incident came on the top of a diplomatic row between the two countries kept at bay only thanks to the strength of their decades-old alliance.

The Kim Dae-jung administration has given up its pacifist approach toward North Korea in the face of a hard-line approach favored by U.S. President George W. Bush. Bush appears to be prevailing, with Seoul and Tokyo supporting a U.S.-led effort to force Pyongyang to give up its nuclear program.

This reversal of roles has apparently added to the frustration felt by Koreans about the half-century-old relationship between protector and protected.

``There is no question about the supreme importance of United States in Korea¡¯s international relationships,¡¯¡¯ a senior South Korean diplomat said. `` But what bothers me is that U.S. sometimes doesn¡¯t recognize how Seoul has grown from a poor underdeveloped country to an economic power.¡¯¡¯

Scott Snyder of the Asia Foundation noted the expanded diplomatic latitude Seoul is now enjoying, saying that Seoul can afford to focus on U.S. less than before the end of the Cold War. ``Seoul¡¯s priority is how it will simultaneously manage constructive relationships with all four major powers.¡¯¡¯

On the other side of growing anti-American protests, Americans feel frustrated about the current situation.

``We shed blood to defend this country,¡¯¡¯ an American official said on condition of anonymity. ``What have we got in return?¡¯¡¯

The more typical sentiment among Americans is that they feel sympathy for the death of the girls but that the tragedy is something that can¡¯t be rectified by a revision of the SOFA.

``I have two daughters myself but the death of the two schoolgirls cannot be reversed,¡¯¡¯ an official of U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) said. ``Revising the SOFA in a way that Koreans want is not only unprecedented but also impossible, as long as U.S. soldiers are here.¡¯¡¯

Complicating matters is the lack of solutions to defuse the current situation, with efforts by the two governments proving to be unsuccessful.

President Kim has repeatedly stressed the U.S. role in Korea¡¯s national interest, warning against the current sentiment hurting the alliance. Bush offered apologies through his top envoy here, while his Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld went to the extent of expressing ``deep sorrow¡¯¡¯ in Korean.

``Are we ready to tell Americans to leave?¡¯¡¯ a South Korean diplomat asked. ``We have to find an answer to this question before tackling the current South Korea-U.S. relationship

http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nation/200212/kt2002120817480211960.htm

Opposition to U.S. Military Operations in South Korea

Under the National Security Law, it is officially illegal for Koreans to publicly oppose U.S. military policy in South Korea. They risk being labeled communist or unpatriotic, a serious charge in this context where many social activists have served jail sentences for opposing the government. Unlike in Okinawa, land belonging to private landowners was simply confiscated for use as U.S. bases, so there are no Korean anti-war landowners as there are in Okinawa.

Opposition to the U.S. military has been part of the agenda and analysis of 1980s democracy movement activists, mainly concerned with sovereignty and self-determination. Another inflammatory issue is crime committed against Korean civilians by U.S. military personnel. The National Coalition for the Eradication of Crime by U.S. Troops in Korea, which comprises human rights activists, religious groups, feminists, and labor activists, was galvanized into action by a particularly brutal rape and murder of a bar woman, Yoon Kum E, in 1992. Such crimes are usually denied and covered up, but in the past few years there have been several protests on this issue.

In the spring of 1997 university students and human rights activists organized national fundraising efforts in support of famine-stricken North Korea, and many South Koreans are concerned for long-lost family members in the North. Many people support reunification, and the reunification of Germany despite economic inequalities and differences of political ideology, has given added impetus to these hopes. The presence of U.S. military bases in South Korea is a serious barrier to this happening.

Current Campaigns

Peace activists, women's rights advocates and environmentalists in South Korea are campaigning on a number of issues, and redefining the meaning of security:

• Changes in the Status of Forces Agreement so that U.S. troops have more sensitivity towards local people and can be prosecuted under local laws if they commit crimes against Korean people; getting the U.S. military to take responsibility for environmental clean-up.

• Support for women who sexually service U.S. troops, and opposition to all violence against women and girls committed by U.S. troops. Development of alternative forms of livelihood for bar women.

• Seeking information on the degree of environmental contamination of land and water as a result of U.S. military operations, and possible effects on people's health.

• Support for Amerasian children in terms of education and job training, and being allowed entry into the United States. Activists argue that every Amerasian should have U.S. citizenship and educational opportunities, with visas for their mothers. The Korean government should also provide education, job training, basic livelihood, and medical care.

• Increased democratization, and the repeal of the National Security Law.

• Reunification.

Negative Effects of U.S. Military Operations on Korean People

Violence against Women and Children

Many thousands of Koreans were forcibly drafted into the Japanese war effort in World War II--men in factories and mines, women to sexually service the Japanese Imperial Army as "comfort women." Military prostitution has been continued under the U.S. at the end of World War II. Prostituted women in GI Towns (kijichon) outside the bases work in deplorable conditions and earn roughly $170 per month. They are allowed one rest day per month; if they take an additional rest day they are fined half a month's wages. Among the older women who draw in customers to bars and clubs are comfort women who survived the Japanese.

A key concern of women's organizations is violence against bar women. The government of South Korea has an explicit agreement with the U.S. military concerning "R&R," including arrangements for regular health check-ups for women who service the men, assuming that they are the cause of sexually transmitted diseases. Pimps and U.S. personnel try to intimidate the women against speaking out about acts of violence against them. Also they are afraid of public humiliation.

Another concern is for Amerasian children who are despised and discriminated against due to their physical appearance and the stigma of their mothers' work. They are thought of as "half persons" who can only half-belong to Korean or to U.S. society. Those with African-American fathers face worse treatment than those with White fathers. Most Amerasians grow up poor with no regular income in their families. They are discriminated against in employment due to stigma, a lack of training and education, the absence of credit and other supports for poor families. Most older Korean-Amerasian people have menial jobs. Some are stateless persons who have never been officially registered and, as a result, could not attend Korean schools. There is no government support for Amerasian children from either the Korean or U.S. governments. The U.S. 1982 Amerasian Immigration Act is of little help to Amerasians in Korea due to its stringent conditions. It only applies to people born between 1951 and 1982. An applicant needs a financial sponsor and documentation that the father is a U.S. citizen. Two NGOs, Du Rae Bang and Sae Woom Tuh, work with bar women and women who date U.S. military personnel. They focus on counseling, education, providing shelter and alternative employment. A bakery at Du Rae Bang has been running for 10 years and has led the way for some bar women to learn new skills and become self-reliant. Similarly, Sae Woom Tuh women have started a herb-growing project. Both these organizations seek to empower bar women to make demands of the Korean and U.S. governments concerning their situation, and to educate the wider society on these issues. Du Rae Bang and Sae Woom Tuh have educational programs for Amerasian children, and seek to educate Korean society about their situation.

In the past few years GI Towns have undergone changes, becoming international prostitution zones for foreign men, with foreign women workers coming from the Philippines, China, Taiwan, and Russia, some of them illegally. The problems of GI Towns are not local and show links between militarized prostitution and sex tourism.

Distorted Local Economy and Land Use

As in the Philippines and Okinawa, U.S. goods from PX stores, military surplus, or U.S. military families are in high demand by local people. There is an outflow of PX goods from U.S. bases and a black market in U.S. goods. Under the Status of Forces Act, U.S. military personnel in Korea do not pay customs duty for imports and can sell U.S. goods to local people at a big margin. This reinforces the view that the best goods and services come from the United States.

As the Korean economy has expanded the U.S. government has pressed for "burden sharing," and Korean taxpayers now contribute a considerable sum to maintain U.S. bases in Korea. The post-war Korean economy was partly built with U.S. economic aid, amounting to nearly $6 billion between 1945 and 1978. Successive authoritarian governments have been staunch allies of the U.S. and harsh in repressing political opposition and labor organizing, thus providing a stable, anti-worker business environment for transnational corporations, many of which are based in the U.S.

As in Okinawa, U.S. military bases take up a great deal of land in South Korea, a densely populated country. For example, Yongsan Army Base, a very large U.S. base is located in the middle of Seoul, the national capital, in the Itaewon district. Discussions concerning this location have gone on for years. The U.S. military has said that it is willing to relocate the base, but only if the Korean government will pay for the aquisition of an alternative site and all relocation costs. Meanwhile traffic has to be routed around the base. In towns near U.S. bases in Korea there are strict zoning laws as a result of U.S. military opposition to new development. For example, Tongduchon, the location of Camp Casey, has changed very little since the 1960s, though there has been major redevelopment in Korea as a whole over the past 30 years.

Environmental Contamination

Under the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), the U.S. is not responsible for environmental clean-up of bases. Local people do not have adequate information concerning military contamination. Under the Status of Forces Act, the Korean government cannot release information about environmental contamination without agreement of the U.S. military. The Korean government denies reports of environmental contamination caused by U.S. military activities because it fears this will fuel anti-bases sentiment in the country. The U.S. military will not confirm or deny (NCND) whether there are nuclear or chemical weapons in South Korea. Environmental organizations like Green Korea, Greenpeace, and the WorldWatch Institute have some documentation of contamination. Local people's observations are another source. Because of the confrontational situation that still exists between north and south Korea, there are drills and maneuvers year-round, including Team Spirit which damages farmland and destroys crops.

Small islands off the coast of Korea have been used as bombing ranges since the Korean War. Villages nearby suffer from noise. This has affected animals and pregnant women who suffered spontaneous abortion. There are unexploded shells in places used for live ammunition drills. In 1987, with the rise of the democracy movement in Korea, local people tried to protest it. The Korean government arrested them, and it stills go on. Children have been hurt from unexploded ammunition rounds. In Korea, as in Okinawa, U.S. Marines have fired depleted uranium shells.

There is a need for specific research on the health of people who live near military bases.

Treaties and Agreements

The Mutual Defense Treaty of 1953, updated by the Status of Forces Act, 1967, provides for U.S. bases in South Korea for an indefinite period, rent free. U.S. troops are immune from criminal prosecution if they commit crimes against local people. The U.S. military is not responsible for clean-up of contamination caused by their operations (Article 4) .

The National Campaign for the Eradication of Crime by U.S. Troops in Korea cites a Korean Congress report that estimates 39,542 crimes committed against Korean civilians by U.S. military personnel between 1967 and 1987. These include murders, brutal rapes and sexual abuse, arson, theft, smuggling, fraud, traffic offenses, and an outflow of PX merchandise and a black market in U.S. goods. In many cases, U.S. troops are disciplined, if at all, by U.S. military authorities. Often they are simply moved to another posting, perhaps back to the United States. Military personnel who have injured or, in some cases, killed local people through negligent driving are usually not brought to trial in local courts. This situation incenses local people who see it as a daily manifestation of U.S. insensitivity and high-handedness. In both Korea and Japan there is pressure for changes in the Status of Forces Acts to give more protection to local people.

The U.S. military is not solely responsible for this situation. The U.S.-Japan Security Treaty and the SOFA are agreements, implying the complicity of the host government, even though it is not an agreement between equals.

http://www.apcjp.org/womens_network/skorea.htm

The Koreans bought new aircraft, I believe f15e. That was a billion dollar contract. They also buy warships , aegis I believe. They also purchase communications gear, and air defense systems. Why, because the us makes the best high tech weapon systems in the world.

Oh yeah they sure bought a shitload of landmines over the years..

To your knowledge - the US of A doesn't necessarily build the best weapons. It just has the power to shut down other countries' development and marketing of more advanced weapons by threatening the countries' governments to cut down their $$$ support.

That doesn't make the US products any better...

Why the US should cut all foreign aid. That money is quite often used to bite the US in the ass. The US has its own problems, it’s time to let the world start taking responsibility for their own countries problems.

Why can't South Korea and Japan contian North Korea on their own?They(South Korea and Japan) are both rich nations with capable militarys.Do they need us thier?

The only real source for advanced weapon systems is western europe, Russia, and china. And of course the US.

everybody else is basically a consumer. I'm not talking about rifles, trucks, and bombs.

Aegis systems (linked assets for naval warfare), submarine and surface warships are clearly the realm of the United States. The ohio class and seawolf class are years ahead of their counterparts. Guided missle technology that ties in with GPS is american owned and operated. The euro''s are just now planning a gps system.
We make the best air defense systems as well as the best long range bombers, fighters, and support aircaft, like the a-10 and awacs jets.

To complement this the US has one of the best trained armed forces. A tank commander in the gulf war stated that his units could have defeated the Iraqi tank units using t-72 tanks. Why, because the Iraqi's were well equipped but poorly trained.

don't take my oppinion check with Janes defense. If the other guys can't compete who cares. You don't hear kia bitching because honda spends more on R&D and makes a better car.