<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
I write as someone who studied this issue in some detail albeit some
time ago by writing a MA thesis on it (US and Korea in Vietnam and
the Japan-Korea Treaty: Search for Security, Prosperity and
Influence, Harvard, 1991 available at <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.dtic.mil">www.dtic.mil</a>
"ADA237979"), as a career US Army officer (28+ years) and PhD
candidate in History with focus on Korea of 1968-1972. <br>
<br>
Labeling the Korean soldiers in Vietnam as "mercenary" is overly
simplistic. It is my understanding that only volunteers were sent.
Although entire units were sent (9th White Horse Div, Capital Tiger
Div, Marine Blue Dragon Bde) they were filled with volunteers who
were carefully screened. The reason being that as the first overseas
deployment of South Korean forces and a major one at that Korea did
not want to force anyone to go over and only send the best
qualified. All soldiers destined for Vietnam went through intense
training and preparation.<br>
<br>
The motivations of the volunteers are complex. Economic was
undoubtedly a key factor in a period when Korea was one of the
poorest countries in the world. It is true that the USG paid a lot
of money and provided materiel, but most of those funds, routed
through the USG, were kept by the ROKG to fund modernizing programs.
But they were also motivated by ideological (anti-Communism in a
period that saw intense NK provocations 1966-1970), patriotic (the
enthusiasm for the nation building project under Park) and sense of
duty (repay the debt of the Korean War). The sense of national
mission and purpose among the general populace that VN generated in
the mid 60s was intense. It filled Koreans with intense pride.<br>
<br>
The atrocities of civilian massacres, of which there were many as
shown by a Friends Committee investigation in the early 70s and more
recently in the late 90s, is also a complex subject to explain. I
gather that the "type of warfare" that Brian mentions is
counterinsurgency (COIN) although I have no idea what "civilian
warfare" means as I have never encountered the term in my career and
study of history of warfare. COIN is messy and difficult as we have
found out again in Iraq and Afghanistan and military forces are
perhaps not the best means to conduct it. But I think there is a
greater factor, a cultural one. Although the Korean deployment was
officially depicted as a "crusade" to save another Asian nation from
Communism, the Korean soldiers in Vietnam almost immediately looked
down on the Vietnamese. The Koreans seemed to have had a sense of
cultural and physical (Vietnamese were generally smaller in stature)
superiority calling the Vietnamese <i>ttangk'ong</i> (peanuts). Of
course this is a generalization and many Koreans deeply respected
the Vietnamese. It was similar to the way many Americans looked down
on the Vietnamese that contributed in small part to the American
defeat because the PAVN/VC were underestimated (how often have we
done that in Asian wars). In a certain sense and in the passion of
the battlefield I don't think it was not difficult to see the
Vietnamese in less than human terms. There is also the general
emotions of the battlefield in any time and place where soldiers,
the ones with the instruments and powers to determine life and
death, feel empowered beyond reason. This is fortunately a
relatively rare occurrence due to military training discipline and
simple sense of human decency, but exceptions happen (Sergeant Bales
in Afghanistan).<br>
<br>
Don Kirk's recommendation to talk directly with Korean veterans
could help define this issue even if not definitely.<br>
<br>
In any event, I say these things only to state that issue complex.<br>
<br>
Jiyul Kim<br>
Oberlin, Ohio<br>
<br>
On 4/16/2012 1:56 AM, Eugene Y. Park wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4F8BB48A.4030707@sas.upenn.edu" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
Dear all,<br>
<br>
My contribution here is strictly anecdotal rather than
research-based. Two my of my relatives (i.e. my grandmother's
younger first-cousins) both volunteered (chawŏn, 자원) and both came
from families that were financially struggling. At the time, both
were active-duty soldiers in the ROK army. One did end up going to
Vietnam and died when the helicopter that he was on was shot down.
Another one, whom I got to chat with about all this last summer,
told me that he volunteered to go to Vietnam as promised
incentives were very attractive to him, but somehow he got
rejected when he applied. <br>
<br>
Best,<br>
Gene<br>
---<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Eugene Y. Park
Korea Foundation Associate Professor of History
Director, James Joo-Jin Kim Program in Korean Studies
University of Pennsylvania
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.history.upenn.edu/faculty/park.shtml">http://www.history.upenn.edu/faculty/park.shtml</a></pre>
<br>
On 4/15/2012 10:34 PM, don kirk wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:1334543678.54573.YahooMailClassic@web39402.mail.mud.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="font: inherit;" valign="top">
<div>By "forcefully mobiilized in combat units," you
mean they were draftees whose units were sent there,
right? That would make sense since two big divisions
were in Vietnam, the White Horse and the Tiger.
Wouldn't think all or most of them would have been
"volunteers" though special forces may have been
mostly volunteers, not sure. (Korean forces in Vietnam
totalled 50,000 or more troops much of the time. The
term "forcefully mobilized" would seem to be another
term for drafted. All young Korean men were subject to
the draft. Still are -- though some think of ways to
avoid it.)</div>
<div>Don Kirk<br>
<br>
--- On <b>Sun, 4/15/12, tae gyun park <i><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:tgpark3@gmail.com"><tgpark3@gmail.com></a></i></b>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid"><br>
From: tae gyun park <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:tgpark3@gmail.com"><tgpark3@gmail.com></a><br>
Subject: Re: [KS] Brian Hwang's Discussion Question
(Tae Gyun Park)<br>
To: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws">koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws</a><br>
Date: Sunday, April 15, 2012, 6:21 PM<br>
<br>
<div class="plainMail">Dear Brian,<br>
<br>
There is an interesting documentary, "Black Sergeant
Kim returning<br>
from Vietnam"(no.77, 2004) in "I can say now
(Ijeneun Malhalsu Itda)"<br>
series, produced by MBC in South Korea, for which I
was an adviser.<br>
According to interviews in the documentary, most of
the Korean<br>
soldiers in Vietnam were not volunteers, but were
forcefully mobilized<br>
in combat units. Of course, there were volunteers in
Korean combat<br>
divisions in Vietnam. I do not have any statistics,
unfortunately.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Tae Gyun Park.<br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>