[KS] Brian Hwang's Discussion Question

Michael Pettid mjpettid2000 at yahoo.com
Mon Apr 16 19:57:01 EDT 2012


Mr. Kim,
>
>
>It is too easy to blame war and violence on some predisposed human condition (and that is very convenient for militaristic governments and individuals who hope to profit from such violence).  And preparing for war is surely the best way to prevent it and make the world safe.  We are certainly doing a fine job of that as I write.
>
>
>
>I am a premodernist and I teach my students about the futility and uselessness of war and how that damaged the lives of individuals and society.  It is not a human condition as you state, but rather resultant from greed and the desire to take from others what one might not have.  I find it rather amazing that this is something I need to state in academia, but clearly we have a ways to go.
> 
>Michael J. Pettid
>Professor of Premodern Korean Studies
>Department of Asian and Asian American Studies
>Director, Translation, Research and Instruction Program
>Binghamton University
>607.777.3862


________________________________
 From: Sheila Miyoshi Jager <sheila.jager at oberlin.edu>
To: koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws 
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2012 8:22 AM
Subject: Re: [KS] Brian Hwang's Discussion Question
 

Unfortunately war is a necessary evil in the human condition. The better you are prepared for it the better the chance of preventing it. No one is more anti-war then the people who have to fight it if it occurs. You can condemn war, and rightfully so, but you can't eliminate it. 

Jiyul Kim.

On 4/15/2012 7:50 PM, Michael Pettid wrote: 
Mr. Kim
>
>
>I am happy that you were able to find a silver lining in a war that killed tens of thousands of combatants and many, many more non-combatants.  The war experience that was able to "bolster the competence and confidence" of the SK troops was surely worth such a cost, right?  Wars are the plague of humankind and nothing more than the actions of various governments to achieve their goals.  War must be condemned in whatever fashion necessary.
>
>
>Michael J. Pettid
>Professor of Premodern Korean Studies
>Department of Asian and Asian American Studies 
>Director, Translation, Research and Instruction Program
>Binghamton University
>607.777.3862
> 
>________________________________
>From: Jiyul Kim <jiyulkim at gmail.com>
>To: koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws 
>Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2012 12:58 PM
>Subject: Re: [KS] Brian Hwang's Discussion Question
>
>
>This is all good and fine from a macro view and I see nothing to disagree with, but numbers and quantification and metrics do not make history. What is left out is the psychology and emotions that Vietnam generated in Park, the military, and the populace. No doubt there were tremendous materiel benefits for SK and other Asian countries from the war, but the war also had unmeasurable "benefits" that were recognized then as well for example consolidating national pride and confidence and providing the military with combat experience. Since 1953 the only Korean forces, North and South, who have experienced real combat were the Koreans in Vietnam including a handful of North Korean fighter pilots. That experience did much to bolster the competence and confidence of the South Korean Army. This is not to justify their deployment or to somehow legitimate the Vietnam War. I for one believe it was a tragic unjust war for the U.S. and its allies to have gotten
 involved in, but we should not always paint everything about the war in broad and condemning strokes.
>
>Jiyul Kim
>
>
>On 4/15/2012 10:15 AM, Katsiaficas, George wrote: 
>The larger context has bearing on your question. The government of South Korea received tremendous economic benefits from the Vietnam War. Park Chung-hee's grandiose scheme to build heavy industry required enormous amounts of money, but he had only limited domestic sources. As much as hesqueezed workers and devalued the currency to stimulate exports, he still needed farmore capital. Between 1953 and 1962, US aid funded 70% of Korea’s imports and 80% of its fixed capital investments—about 8% of its GNP.Once the US needed its monies to fight the war in Vietnam, however, it began to cut back. In order to find new international sources of money, Park endorsed a key US proposal: closer ROK ties with Japan. Staunch domestic opposition to normalization prevented a treaty from simply being finalized. On June 3, 1964, Park declared martial law in Seoul and dismissed dozens of professors and students. The US Combined Forces Commander approved the release
 of two combat divisions to suppress the protests. Despite thousands of students threatening to storm the Blue House (the presidentialresidence), Park rammed the treaty through the rubber stamp legislature of the Third Republic. When the opposition went on a hunger strike to protest the treaty, the ruling party took one minute to ratify it, and at the same time, it also approved sending 20,000 troops to Vietnam to fight on the side of the US. In exchange for normalization of relations, Japan paid $300 million in grants (for which Park indemnified Japan for all its previous actions) and made available another half-a-billion dollars in loans.
>>Sensing an opportunity to channel public sentiment against the communist enemy as well as a second avenue to raise capital, Park immediately offered thousands more troops for deployment to Vietnam. Despite scattered student protests, war with Vietnam proved less controversial than his settling of accounts with Japan. Park’s movement of troops was so fast, that according to figures released by the US State Department, there were more South Korean soldiers fighting in southern Vietnam in 1965 than North Vietnamese.[1] South Koreans soldiers were widely reported to be even more brutal than their US counterparts. At the end of 1969, some 48,000 ROK military personnel were stationed in Vietnam, and by the time they completed their withdrawal in 1973, some 300,000 veterans had fought there. ROK casualties included 4,960 dead and 10,962 wounded. Wars provide experiences for military officers who go on to inflict future casualties. Lieutenant No
 Ri-Bang served in Jeju in 1948 and went to Vietnam. Future dictators Chun Doo Hwan and Roh Tae-woo served together in Vietnam, before brutally ruling South Korea after Park’s assassination in 1979.
>> 
>>The economic benefits of military intervention in Vietnam were extraordinary. >From 1965-1970, the South Korean government received $1.1 billion in payments—about 7% of GDP and 19% of foreign earnings.[3] More than 80 Korean companies did lucrative business in Vietnam—from transportation to supply, construction to entertainment—from which the country accrued another $1 billion for exports to and services in Vietnam. Secret US bonuses paid to Park’s government for Korean soldiers who fought in Vietnam totaled $185 million from 1965-1973. When we add all these funds to the $1.1 billion in direct payments, the total US allocations to Park’s regime amounted to about 30% of the ROK’s foreign exchange earnings from 1966-1969.[4] Altogether US aid to South Korea totaled $11 billion by 1973—more than to any other country except South Vietnam—some 8% of worldwide US military and foreign monies.[5] Regimes friendly to the US in Japan, Taiwan,
 the Philippines, and Thailand also benefited greatly from the tidal wave of dollars that flooded the region during the Vietnam War.
>>
>>
>>Excerpted from my book, Asia's Unknown Uprisings: Vol. 1 South Korean Social Movements in the 20th Century
>>
>>
>>George Katsiaficas
>>
>>>>________________________________
>> 
>>[1] See the discussion in the volume I edited, Vietnam Documents: American and Vietnamese Views of the War (Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 1992) p. 63.
>>[2] Chae-Jin Lee, pp. 55, 70.
>>[3] Cumings, Korea’s Place in the Sun, p. 321.
>>[4] Martin Hart-Landsberg 1993, 147-8.
>>[5] Han Sung-joo, “Korean Politics in an International Context,” in Korean National Commission for UNESCO (editor) Korean Politics: Striving for Democracy and Unification (Elizabeth, NJ: Hollym, 2002) p. 620. 
>>
>>From: don kirk <kirkdon at yahoo.com>
>>Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List <koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws>
>>Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 15:04:41 -0700
>>To: Kevin Shepard <kevin_shepard at yahoo.com>, Korean Studies Discussion List <koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws>
>>Subject: Re: [KS] Brian Hwang's Discussion Question
>>
>>
>>
>>The question is whether or not they got bonuses in order to "volunteer" for Vietnam. If they got no bonuses, then obviously they wouldn't be "mercenaries." Even if they got bonuses, it would be difficult to pin the mercenary label since soldiers in any army generally get combat pay when fighting overseas. Also, I'm not sure ordinary draftees had any say in where they were sent.
>> All told, 300,000 Koreans served in
                              Vietnam over nearly a ten-year period.
                              Five thousand of them were KIA, many more
                              WIA. The White Horse and Tiger divisions
                              were the principal units. Korean special
                              forces were also in Vietnam. Those whom I
                              have met are proud to have served there.
                              Many of them, grizzled old veterans, turn
                              up at demonstrations in Seoul protesting
                              leftist demos, NKorean human rights
                              violations, North Korean dynastic rule
                              etc. They love to wear their old uniforms
                              with ribbons awarded for Vietnam service,
                              including acts of individual heroism. 
>>Some of them also talk quite openly about
                              what they did in Vietnam -- and could
                              provide material supporting your thesis re
                              "the type of warfare that they had to
                              fight in Vietnam,
>>including guerrilla warfare and civilian
                              warfare." Strongly suggest you come here
                              and interview some while they're still
                              around. They'd tell you a lot, good and
                              bad. Sorry to say, one of them once
                              boasted to me of a personal "body count"
                              of 300 victims -- would doubt if all of
                              them were "enemy." On the other hand, they
                              were also known for high levels of
                              efficiency and success in their AO's.
>>Good luck on the project.
>>Don Kirk
>>
>>--- On Sat, 4/14/12, Kevin Shepard <kevin_shepard at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>From: Kevin Shepard <kevin_shepard at yahoo.com>
>>>Subject: Re: [KS] Brian Hwang's
                                Discussion Question
>>>To: "koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws" <koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws>
>>>Date: Saturday, April 14, 2012, 1:40 PM
>>>
>>>
>>>I think you will be hard-pressed to justify calling individual soldiers mercenaries - the Korean government may have received funds from the US, but ROK soldiers were drafted into mandatory service. If you come across documentation that individuals volunteered for Vietnam in order to receive funds from the US, please send such documents to me.
>>>
>>>
>>>Kevin Shepard, Ph.D.
>>>Strategist
>>>UNC/CFC/USFK
>>>UCJ 5 Strategy Div.
>>>
>>>
>>>________________________________
>>>From: "koreanstudies-request at koreaweb.ws" <koreanstudies-request at koreaweb.ws>
>>>To: koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws 
>>>Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2012 1:00 AM
>>>Subject: Koreanstudies Digest, Vol 106, Issue 9
>>>
>>>
>>>Today's Topics:
>>>
>>>  1. Discussion Question (brianhwang at berkeley.edu)
>>>  2. March 2012 Issue of
                                        "Cross-Currents: East Asian
                                        History and
>>>      Culture Review" Available
                                        Online (Center for Korean
                                        Studies)
>>>
>>>
>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>Message: 1
>>>Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 10:15:24
                                        -0700
>>>From: brianhwang at berkeley.edu
>>>To: koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws
>>>Subject: [KS] Discussion
                                        Question
>>>Message-ID:
>>>    <7cb59ce69b486f3c15e6bba3e396a6d4.squirrel at calmail.berkeley.edu>
>>>Content-Type:
                                        text/plain;charset=utf-8
>>>
>>>Hello all:
>>>
>>>I am a history student at
                                        University of California,
                                        Berkeley. Currently I
>>>am working on a paper regarding
                                        Korean involvement in the
                                        Vietnam War. My
>>>argument is that although Korean
                                        soldiers were 1) mercenaries
                                        (because
>>>they were paid predominantly by
                                        US dollars to go) and 2) anti
                                        communists
>>>(because of past history), the
                                        atrocities that they are accused
                                        of
>>>committing are not primarily due
                                        to the aforementioned reasons,
                                        but
>>>because of the type of warfare
                                        that they had to fight in
                                        Vietnam,
>>>including guerrilla warfare and
                                        civilian warfare.
>>>
>>>Do you all think this is a valid
                                        argument? Are there any primary
                                        sources
>>>that would help me in my
                                        argument, including ones that
                                        attribute Korean
>>>atrocities to their mercenary
                                        and anticommunist nature?
>>>
>>>Thank you!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>------------------------------
>>>
>>>Message: 2
>>>Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 11:00:21
                                        -0700
>>>From: "Center for Korean
                                        Studies" <cks at berkeley.edu>
>>>To: <koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws>
>>>Subject: [KS] March 2012 Issue
                                        of "Cross-Currents: East Asian
                                        History
>>>    and    Culture Review"
                                        Available Online
>>>Message-ID: <037401cd199f$4b410820$e1c31860$@berkeley.edu>
>>>Content-Type: text/plain;
                                        charset="utf-8"
>>>
>>>March 2012 Issue of
                                        "Cross-Currents: East Asian
                                        History and Culture Review" now
                                        online 
>>>  
>>>The second issue of IEAS's new,
                                        interactive e-journal
                                        "Cross-Currents: East Asian
                                        History and Culture Review" is
                                        now online. The theme of the
                                        March 2012 issue is "Japanese
                                        Imperial Maps as Sources for
                                        East Asian History: The Past and
                                        Future of the Gaih?zu" (guest
                                        edited by K?ren Wigen, professor
                                        of History at Stanford). Visit http://cross-currents.berkeley.edu/e-journal/issue-2 to read the articles, a review essay written by Timothy Cheek (University of British Columbia) about Ezra Vogel's new book on Deng Xiaoping, and abstracts of important new scholarship in Chinese. The March issue of the e-journal also features a photo essay by Jianhua Gong documenting Shanghai's longtang alleyways. 
>>>
>>>A joint enterprise of the
                                        Research Institute of Korean
                                        Studies at Korea University
                                        (RIKS) and the Institute of East
                                        Asian Studies at the University
                                        of California at Berkeley
                                        (IEAS), "Cross-Currents" offers
                                        its readers up-to-date research
                                        findings, emerging trends, and
                                        cutting-edge perspectives
                                        concerning East Asian history
                                        and culture from scholars in
                                        both English-speaking and Asian
                                        language-speaking academic
                                        communities. 
>>>
>>>
>>>* * ** ** 
>>>
>>>
>>>March 2012 issue of
                                        "Cross-Currents" e-journal
>>>(See http://cross-currents.berkeley.edu/e-journal/issue-2)
>>>
>>>*Co-Editors' Note*
>>>
>>>Building an Online Community of
                                        East Asia Scholars
>>>Sungtaek Cho, Research Institute
                                        of Korean Studies (RIKS), Korea
                                        University
>>>Wen-hsin Yeh, Institute of East
                                        Asian Studies (IEAS), University
                                        of California, Berkeley
>>>
>>>*Japanese Imperial Maps as
                                        Sources for East Asian History:
                                        The Past and Future of the
                                        Gaihozu*
>>>
>>>Introduction to "Japanese
                                        Imperial Maps as Sources for
                                        East Asian History: The Past and
                                        Future of the Gaihozu"
>>>Guest editor K?ren Wigen,
                                        Stanford University
>>>
>>>Japanese Mapping of Asia-Pacific
                                        Areas, 1873-1945: An Overview
>>>Shigeru Kobayashi, Osaka
                                        University
>>>
>>>Imagining Manmo: Mapping the
                                        Russo-Japanese Boundary
                                        Agreements in Manchuria and
                                        Inner Mongolia, 1907-1915
>>>Yoshihisa T. Matsusaka,
                                        Wellesley College
>>>
>>>Triangulating Chosen: Maps,
                                        Mapmaking, and the Land Survey
                                        in Colonial Korea
>>>David Fedman, Stanford
                                        University
>>>
>>>Mapping Economic Development:
                                        The South Seas Government and
                                        Sugar Production in Japan's
                                        South Pacific Mandate,
                                        1919--1941
>>>Ti Ngo, University of
                                        California, Berkeley
>>>
>>>*Forum*
>>>
>>>Asian Studies/Global Studies:
                                        Transcending Area Studies and
                                        Social Sciences
>>>John Lie, University of
                                        California, Berkeley/
>>>
>>>Defenders and Conquerors: The
                                        Rhetoric of Royal Power in
                                        Korean Inscriptions from the
                                        Fifth to Seventh Centuries
>>>Hung-gyu Kim, Korea University
>>>
>>>*Review Essays and Notes*
>>>
>>>Of Leaders and Governance: How
                                        the Chinese Dragon Got Its
                                        Scales
>>>Timothy Cheek, University of
                                        British Columbia
>>>
>>>A Note on the 40th Anniversary
                                        of Nixon's Visit to China
>>>William C. Kirby, Harvard
                                        University
>>>
>>>*Photo Essay*
>>>
>>>"Shanghai Alleyways" by
                                        photographer Jianhua Gong
>>>Essay by Xiaoneng Yang, Stanford
                                        University
>>>
>>>*Readings from Asia*
>>>
>>>Ge Zhaoguang , Dwelling in the
                                        Middle of the Country:
                                        Reestablishing Histories of
                                        "China" [????:????"??"???]
>>>Abstract by Wennan Liu, Chinese
                                        Academy of Social Sciences
>>>
>>>Wang Qisheng, Revolution and
                                        Counter-Revolution: Republican
                                        Politics in Social-Cultural
                                        Scope [???????????????????]
>>>Abstract by Bin Ye, Shanghai
                                        Academy of Social Sciences
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>-------------- next part
                                        --------------
>>>An HTML attachment was
                                        scrubbed...
>>>URL: <http://koreaweb.ws/pipermail/koreanstudies_koreaweb.ws/attachments/20120413/a3ff12bf/attachment-0001.html>
>>>
>>>End of Koreanstudies Digest, Vol
                                        106, Issue 9
>>>*********************************************
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://koreanstudies.com/pipermail/koreanstudies_koreanstudies.com/attachments/20120416/dca7cc74/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the Koreanstudies mailing list