Dear friends
The article below is WW's analysis of the current crisis
caused by the U.S. military occupation of the Korean
peninsula and its refusal to end the war with the DPRK.
Solidarity,
John Catalinotto


------------------------- Via Workers World News Service
Reprinted from the Jan. 9, 2003 issue of Workers World
newspaper -------------------------

BUSH'S REAL CRISIS IN KOREA: NORTH AND SOUTH, KOREANS WANT
U.S. TROOPS OUT

By Deirdre Griswold

More than at any other time in the last half-century, the
people of Korea, north and south, are today united in
their resistance to the United States occupation of their
country.

They are appalled at the Bush administration's threats of
war against the north, they want greater cooperation and
contact between the two halves of the divided peninsula,
and they want Washington to sign a peace treaty and remove
its troops from the south.

In South Korea, this sentiment is being expressed in
constant demonstrations of tens and even hundreds of
thousands of people against the U.S. military presence
there. It was reflected in the recent presidential
election, where the candidate who promised to continue a
"sunshine policy" toward the north, Roh Moo-hyun, won a
decisive majority over Lee Hoi-chang, the candidate
favored by Washington.

Roh's victory was made even more remarkable given the
predictions of his defeat in all of South Korea's major
media the day before the election. Chung Mong-joon, heir
to the Hyundai fortune and head of the National Alliance
21 party, had pulled out his support for Roh just two days
before the election. The reason he gave was a speech by
Roh implying that South Korea would be neutral in any war
between the north and the U.S.

Chung's support had been considered crucial by the big
business media. But Roh won anyway, with a decisive
majority. The whole incident just heightened anti-U.S.
popular sentiment, which has been growing in South Korea.

While the struggle against U.S. occupation comes primarily
from the masses of people, it also reflects contradictions
within the South Korean ruling class, exacerbated by
Washington's arrogant demands and the desire of many
Korean capitalists to do business with the north. Several
large north-south construction and commercial projects
have been underway, but they are now jeopardized by
Washington's threatening stance toward the north, which
was escalated last January when Bush included North Korea
in a presumed "Axis of Evil" in his State of the Union
speech.

BUSH'S REAL CRISIS IS NOT NUCLEAR

For the Bush administration, this growing rejection of its
Cold War policies constitutes a crisis of the first order.
The further the two Korean states proceed in knocking down
the barriers erected between them, the more threatening is
the stance taken by Washington.

The focus of media attention right now is the
determination expressed by the Democratic People's
Republic of Korea (DPRK)--socialist North Korea-- to
resume construction of two nuclear power plants. The Bush
administration presents this as a terrible threat to the
whole area.

Interestingly, "danger from the north" is not the view of
the South Koreans, whose capital, Seoul, is just a few
miles from the demilitarized zone dividing Korea. They are
calling on the U.S. not to make threats but instead to
move toward normalizing the situation on the Korean
peninsula.

President-elect Roh is expected to maintain the approach
to averting a nuclear crisis on the Korean peninsula that
was articulated by the Kim Dae-Jung government in December
1998. It involved four steps: (1) the United States
lifting economic sanctions against North Korea, (2) the
United States normalizing relations with North Korea,
including opening diplomatic missions, (3) North and South
Korea reaching an agreement on arms control, and (4) North
and South Korea converting the current cease- fire accord
into a permanent peace system. (Korea Times [Seoul], Dec.
8, 1998)

This stance paved the way for the historic north-south
summit meeting between DPRK leader Kim Jong Il and Kim
Dae-jung in June 2000. While the U.S. government appeared
favorable to the summit, its subsequent actions show that
it is doing everything it can to torpedo rapprochement
between the two states.

The North Korean socialist state was born out of the
Korean people's long struggle against Japanese
colonialism. The U.S. capitalist establishment, however,
has presented the DPRK as a dangerous threat to the world
ever since its founding in 1948. This is how it has
justified its more than 50-year military occupation of the
south.

CASHING IN ON FEAR

Promoting fear of the DPRK has been a lucrative business
for U.S. companies. South Korea for years was one of the
largest purchasers of U.S. weapons in the world. For
example, in November 1993 the Pentagon announced the U.S.
intended to sell South Korea 317 air-to-air missiles,
produced by Raytheon and Hughes Aircraft, for $169
million.

The Japanese newspaper Daily Yomiuri on Sept. 17, 1997,
reported that South Korea had imported $1.7 billion worth
of weapons in 1996, almost as much as China, which has
more than 20 times the population. Most of those weapons
came from the United States.

But when the Asian economic crisis hit South Korea in
1997, this enormous burden could no longer be sustained.
The Far Eastern Economic Review of Feb. 5, 1998, reported
that, due to the crisis, South Korea was postponing 220
military projects, including airborne early warning
systems and submarine purchases.

In this period, the South Korean government had its hands
full dealing with a militant labor movement that was
resisting draconian measures forced on the country by the
International Monetary Fund and the U.S. The workers were
demanding jobs and a living wage, not missiles.

The U.S. had been putting intense pressure on the South
Korean government to continue buying weapons. On June 11,
1997, the New York Times reported that the Pentagon was
telling Congress that South Korea planned to buy 1,065
FIM-92 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles and 213 launchers
from the United States. However, South Korea's Defense
Ministry denied that any decision had been made on the
purchase, and said it had not decided between the French
Mistral, British Starburst, or U.S. Stinger.

Some Korean officials reportedly believed that the U.S.
made the announcement prematurely to give an advantage to
the Stingers. The deal would have been worth $307 million.

Of particular importance to the U.S. military-industrial
complex in this period was the projected theater missile
defense program. The Korea Herald of May 4, 1999, reported
that Seoul had no plans to join the U.S.- led program. A
high-ranking official said that "at this stage, [South
Korea has] neither an intention nor ability to take part
in the TMD plan, which requires a huge sum of investment
and up-to-date technology."

Meanwhile, the U.S., which claimed it was in South Korea
to protect it, was preventing South Korea from producing
its own medium-range missiles.

During the 1990s, in response to this furious arming of
the south, the DPRK was able to develop and manufacture
missiles on its own at a much lower cost.

WHY U.S. UNDERMINED AGREED FRAMEWORK

What seemed to be the beginning of a relaxation of
tensions between the DPRK and the U.S. had begun on Oct.
21, 1994, with the signing of the Agreed Framework. At
that time, it was the view in Washington that socialist
North Korea would not survive long because the Soviet
Union and its allies had collapsed. Korea's legendary
leader, Kim Il Sung, who led the anti-colonial forces
during World War II and then established the DPRK, had
died on July 8 of that year. The way the U.S. imperialists
looked at it, it was just a matter of time before the
socialist north would be absorbed by the capitalist south,
similar to what had happened to the German Democratic
Republic in Europe.

The year had begun with an announcement by the U.S. that
it would deploy Patriot missiles in South Korea and would
continue its annual nuclear war games known as "Team
Spirit." It sent 48 launching ramps and 192 warheads to
South Korea. With this club firmly in its belt, the U.S.
then entered into the agreement with the DPRK. It seemed
to open up a process that would end the official state of
war between the two countries, which has existed since
1950.

With the signing of the Agreed Framework, the DPRK stopped
construction of its graphite nuclear reactors, which the
U.S. claimed could be used to produce plutonium for
nuclear weapons, and agreed to allow in UN inspectors. In
return, Washington was to help the DPRK build two
light-water reactors (LWRs). The Korean Peninsula Energy
Development Organization (KEDO) was set up by the U.S.,
Japan, South Korea and the European Union to implement the
agreement. In the meantime, the U.S. was to keep North
Korea supplied with fuel oil until the reactors were
ready.

It is now eight cold winters later. The DPRK has not
collapsed. It has weathered extremely difficult material
shortages but has consolidated its political structure and
defense under the leadership of Kim Jong Il. It has also
successfully reached out to South Korea in this period.

In these eight years, no construction has been done on the
LWRs. By 2000, the ground for the sites had still not been
prepared. The South Koreans in charge of the project cited
"financing problems"--a euphemism for U.S. foot-dragging.

Nor has the U.S. lived up to the other part of the
agreement. The DPRK has complained that promised oil
deliveries from the U.S. and Japan were frequently held
back until the worst of the winter weather was over.

This November, just at the onset of cold weather, the Bush
administration and the Japanese government both announced
they were stopping oil shipments altogether.

This brutal move precipitated the current crisis. Without
the promised light-water reactors or fuel oil, what was
the DPRK to do? Lie down and freeze to death?

The Bush administration may act startled and alarmed by
North Korea's announcement that it would resume work on
its original nuclear power plants, and its order to the UN
inspectors to leave, but it is obvious to any thinking
person that Washington knew all along it was forcing the
DPRK into a corner.

So the Bush administration is using the threat of war,
famine and freezing temperatures, telling the DPRK that it
can't build the reactors and tightening an economic
blockade of the country.

ENERGY AND DEFENSE

The DPRK, a far northern country that suffers severe
winters, has decided it needs nuclear power. South Korea,
with a somewhat milder climate, has 16 operating nuclear
power plants and four more under construction.

The DPRK also needs to defend itself against the most
destructive military machine the world has ever known. For
over half a century, the U.S. has brandished its nuclear
weapons to terrorize smaller nations into submission. The
crisis Bush faces now is not that the DPRK will be a
nuclear danger to the world, but that it may be able to
develop enough of a retaliatory capacity that U.S. nuclear
blackmail will cease to be effective.

Some in the U.S. ruling establishment are now advising
Bush to resume a policy of "engagement" and tone down his
rhetoric against the DPRK, at least until the war with
Iraq has been resolved. In general, this administration
has shown little patience with diplomacy and much desire
to wield its big stick. However, despite all its insulting
caricatures of the north as a "hermit kingdom" ready to
implode, it is forced to reckon with the DPRK leaders'
skill at defending the socialist base of their society
even while opening political and commercial relations with
the south.

Furthermore, the threats are not working. In fact, they
seem to be having the opposite effect. After Bush's hints
of a "preemptive military strike" on the reactors brought
a strong rebuke from the DPRK and led to turmoil in South
Korea, including a drop in the stock market there, the
U.S. president on Dec. 31 tried to soften his rhetoric.
Responding to a reporter's question on possible military
action against North Korea, he said, "We can resolve this
peacefully."

The aggressive grouping now running the White House has
long trumpeted the ability of the Pentagon to fight two
wars at the same time. However, they may have to put Korea
on the back burner right now, while they focus on
preparing a criminal assault on Iraq.

WHY KOREANS DON'T TRUST U.S.

Korea was the first battleground of the Cold War. An
estimated 3 million Koreans and over 50,000 U.S. troops
were killed there during the 1950-53 war. Terrible
atrocities were committed by U.S. troops in both the north
and south, as the recent exposures of the massacre at
Nogun-ri confirm.

The Cold War strategists of both the Truman and Eisenhower
administrations saw this bloody conflict, in which the
Pentagon came close to using nuclear weapons on China's
border, as essential to rolling back the anti-colonial,
anti-capitalist revolutions that transformed China, Korea
and Vietnam after World War II.

The intense frustration of the U.S. ruling class with its
inability to establish domination over all of Asia after
the military defeat of Japanese imperialism led to a
vicious debate within the political establishment over
"Who lost China?" Even as the Korean War raged, Sen.
Joseph McCarthy was unleashed to purge thousands of
progressives from the unions, schools and government
bureaucracy. In this witch-hunt atmosphere--some feared
incipient fascism in the U.S.--there was little expression
of the kind of anti-war sentiment that later emerged
during the Vietnam War.

Now, however, progressives in the U.S. need to understand
and sympathize with Korea's long struggle against
colonialism and imperialism. It closely parallels that of
Vietnam, another country divided after World War II that
only achieved reunification after a bitter liberation
struggle.

At least 37,000 U.S. troops have been stationed in the
south ever since the Korean War ended in a cease-fire.
During both the Carter and Clinton administrations,
attempts to reduce the size of this military occupation
and move toward normalizing relations with the socialist
north were scuttled under pressure of the militarist far
right in the U.S.

U.S. propaganda depicts the DPRK--with 25 million
people--as a grave threat to world peace. It never
mentions that this country has been ringed by U.S. nuclear
weapons for more than half a century. Not only do
nuclear-armed submarines cruise its coastal waters, not
only have U.S. planes with nuclear bombs been constantly
within striking distance, not only are long-range missiles
focused on its cities, but for years the U.S. stationed
nuclear weapons right in South Korea itself.

And they may still be there.

According to the Washington Times--a newspaper with strong
ties to South Korea's right wing--President George Bush
Sr. announced on July 2, 1992, that all 2,400 U.S.
battlefield nuclear weapons in South Korea, made up of 500
tactical weapons from naval aircraft, 1,000 nuclear
artillery shells, 700 Lance missile warheads, and 200 B-57
nuclear depth-charge bombs, had been removed to the United
States for storage or destruction. (See www.nti.org, a
very large database on nuclear issues set up by Ted Turner
and Sam Nunn, for abstracts of this and other articles
from the world press on Korea and nuclear weapons.)

Who can verify that everything in this huge arsenal was
truly removed? Two years ago, U.S. forces in South Korea
denied having depleted uranium weapons there, but had to
retract that after being confronted with the truth by
activists.

Have there ever been the kinds of obtrusive weapons
inspections of U.S. military facilities in South Korea
that Washington demands of Iraq?

More and more, the demonstrators in the south are asking
these questions.

- END -

(Copyright Workers World Service: Everyone is permitted to
copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but
changing it is not allowed. For more information contact
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail:
ww@wwpublish.com. Subscribe wwnews- on@wwpublish.com.
Unsubscribe wwnews-off@wwpublish.com. Support the voice of
resistance http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php)