Quotes of the Day:

"War should be carried on like a monsoon; one changeless determination of every particle towards the one unalterable aim." 

- Herman Melville

“For every prohibition you create you also create an underground.” 

- Eric Reed Boucher (known professionally as Jello Biafra, is an American singer, spoken word artist and political activist)

"Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains." 

- Jean-Jacques Rousseau

1. Yoon says unification ministry should no longer act like N.K. support agency

2. Is North Korea moving to reclassify South as foreign nation?

3. Unification Ministry does not support North Korea, Yoon says

4. What if Trump is reelected in 2024? by Michael Green (Korea and alliances)

5. Joining with India, Australia to build a G10 (Korea)

6. Veterans ministry to review decorations for independence fighters

7. Excessive, divisive remarks (South Korean Politics)

8. US ballistic missile submarine to visit S. Korea this month

9. Half million workers set for two-week nationwide strike against Yoon

10. Korea to launch new bureau in fight against human trafficking

1. Yoon says unification ministry should no longer act like N.K. support agency

​Good. Perhaps MOFA should engage north Korea and MOU should focus on unification policy, strategy, and planning.

President Yoon is definitely taking a human rights upfront approach with the north.

Excerpts:

"From now on, the unification ministry must carry out its proper responsibilities, in accordance with the constitutional principles that unification must be based on liberal democratic order," Yoon was also quoted as saying. "The unification that we pursue must be one in which all the people from the South and the North enjoy better lives and are treated better as human beings."

A high-ranking official from Yoon's office explained: "The unification ministry will mostly analyze and respond to the latest trends in North Korea and also handle North Korean human rights issues."

Yoon says unification ministry should no longer act like N.K. support agency | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by Yoo Jee-ho · July 2, 2023

SEOUL, July 2 (Yonhap) -- President Yoon Suk Yeol said Sunday the unification ministry should no longer act like a support agency for North Korea, days after he nominated a conservative scholar to head the ministry.

"So far, the unification ministry has operated as if it were a support department for North Korea, and that shouldn't be the case anymore," Yoon told his staff, according to senior presidential press secretary Kim Eun-hye. "Now, it's time for the unification ministry to change."

President Yoon Suk Yeol speaks at a national financial strategy meeting at Cheong Wa Dae in Seoul on June 28, 2023. (Pool photo) (Yonhap)

Kim said Yoon made his remarks in a meeting with his staff over the recent nomination of Kim Yung-ho, a professor known for a hard-line stance toward Pyongyang, as the new unification minister.

"From now on, the unification ministry must carry out its proper responsibilities, in accordance with the constitutional principles that unification must be based on liberal democratic order," Yoon was also quoted as saying. "The unification that we pursue must be one in which all the people from the South and the North enjoy better lives and are treated better as human beings."

A high-ranking official from Yoon's office explained: "The unification ministry will mostly analyze and respond to the latest trends in North Korea and also handle North Korean human rights issues."

Kim Yung-ho, professor at Sungshin Women's University and unification minister nominee, speaks with reporters outside the Office of the Inter-Korean Dialogue in Seoul on June 30, 2023. (Yonahp)

Kim Yung-ho, a conservative scholar nominated for the minister's position Friday, has spoken of the need to press North Korea by highlighting human rights violations in the secretive regime and has said North Korean human rights should be prioritized in Seoul's inter-Korean policy.

Critics believe Kim's appointment, once finalized in a parliamentary confirmation hearing, could weaken the role of the unification ministry, which puts a priority on seeking exchanges and reconciliation with the North.

jeeho@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by Yoo Jee-ho · July 2, 2023

2. Is North Korea moving to reclassify South as foreign nation?

Some different ways to interpret this. Recognition of the legitimacy of the South? (I doubt it). A sign that the regime has no intention of re-engaging the South in any of its "normal" ways any time soon (possibly). 

How should the ROK interpret this and exploit it?  

Is North Korea moving to reclassify South as foreign nation?

The Korea Times · July 2, 2023

This file photo, provided by Hyundai Group on Aug. 3, 2018, shows group chief Hyun Jeong-eun, company officials and North Korean officials attending a memorial service for former company Chairman Chung Mong-hun at Mount Kumgang in North Korea. Yonhap

Pyongyang rejects Hyundai Group chief's attempt to visit the North

By Nam Hyun-woo

North Korea's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has rejected Hyundai Group Chairwoman Hyun Jeong-eun's request to visit Mount Kumgang in August to hold a memorial service for her late husband and former chairman of the group, Chung Mong-hun.

This is a rare case of the regime using the foreign ministry, rather than agencies related to inter-Korean affairs, to make its position on an issue regarding South Korea.

The move is seen as North Korea's intent to handle South Korea as a foreign country, rather than acknowledging the two's nations' pre-war past, signaling a tougher environment for inter-Korean relations.

In a statement released through the North's Korean Central News Agency, Saturday, Kim Song-il, department director general of the North's foreign ministry said, "We make it clear that we have neither been informed about any South Korean personage's willingness to visit nor know about it and that we have no intention to examine it."

The comments came after the Ministry of Unification said Friday that Hyundai Group, which had run sightseeing programs at Mount Kumgang in North Korea, submitted documents to the ministry to visit the North in August to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the death of former chairman Chung.

The submission of the plan is the first step in a two-stage process for South Koreans seeking to visit the North and meet people there. If all requirements are met, the process moves to the next stage, typically within seven days.

In the next stage, individuals can request an invitation from their North Korean counterparts to visit the North. If the invitation is issued from the North, it is then submitted to the unification ministry for government permission.

However, the North dismissed her visitation plan even before it was officially submitted, citing South Korean media reports. Hyun held a memorial service for the late Chung at the North Korean mountain in 2018 to mark the 15th anniversary of his death.

"It is the policy of the DPRK (North Korean) government that entry by any personage of South Korea into its territory cannot be allowed," the statement reads. "The Mt. Kumgang tourist area is a part of the DPRK's territory and, accordingly, the Korea Asia-Pacific Peace Committee cannot exercise any authority over the issue of entry into the DPRK. Such principle and policy are unchangeable and will be maintained in the future, too."

A North Korean official on the fourth floor from the top, is seen at the damaged support center building of the Gaesong Industrial Complex, in this May 30 photo. The building was damaged when the North blew up the nearby Inter-Korean Liaison Office on June 16, 2020. Yonhap

The South's unification ministry immediately expressed its regret over the North's decision.

Attention is focused on the fact that the visit was rejected by the North's foreign ministry, not by institutes related to inter-Korean matters.

So far, the North has been responding to matters related to South Korea through the United Front Department of the Workers' Party of North Korea, National Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the Fatherland or statements from Kim Jong-un's sister Kim Yo-jong, based on the notions that these are matters of the Korean nationals.

Experts said this signals a major shift in the North's perception of its relations with South Korea, which is heading away from any possibility of unification.

"So far, the South and North have been acknowledging inter-Korean relations as a special relation which pursues unification, so they viewed businesses running in the Gaesong Industrial Complex as trade between Koreans, thus not imposing tariffs," said Yang Moo-jin, president of the University of North Korean Studies.

"If inter-Korean relations become a country-to-country relation, there will be major conflicts in South Korea's Constitution regarding inter-Korean relations and more practical difficulties in pursuing unification will follow."

In 1991, the two Koreas adopted the Inter-Korean Basic Agreement, which stipulated that the relationship between the two sides is "a special interim relationship stemming from the process towards unification," not "a relationship between states."

This is because each Korea does not recognize the other as a separate country, with Seoul's Constitution stating that the country's territory consists of the Korean Peninsula and its adjacent islands. However, from the perspectives of the international community, the two Koreas are recognized as independent states.

Due to this, the two sides have seen their relationship as being specially formed in the process of pursuing reunification, not as a relationship between two separate countries.

"The foreign ministry's statement signals that the North is trying to see the South as a separate country, meaning that the basic agreement is losing its effect," Yang said.

"In that case, Seoul's Constitutional spirit of pursuing unification is also facing a greater dilemma. If the North is viewed as a separate country, the cause for seeking unification gets weaker. The legal grounds for the inter-Korean border village of Panmunjom may become an issue, and you even have to have a visa to visit the North, which is a violation of the South's Constitution."

"From an international perspective, the North's defining of the South as a separate country is feared to weaken global involvement in Seoul's calls for Pyongyang's denuclearization," Yang said.

Against this backdrop, Seoul's new Minister of Unification nominee dropped hints at a shift in the Yoon Suk Yeol administration's stance of respecting and executing all inter-Korean agreements.

"In the changed situation between the two Koreas, we need to have selective manners in considering agreements between South Korea and North Korea as we move forward," nominee Kim Yung-ho said on June 30.

The Korea Times · July 2, 2023

3. Unification Ministry does not support North Korea, Yoon says

I would parse it this way - MOU supports the Korean people in the north (who are Korean citizens) but not the Kim family regime - which is an illegitimate occupier of the northern territories of Korea.

Sunday

July 2, 2023

 dictionary + A - A 

Unification Ministry does not support North Korea, Yoon says

https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/2023/07/02/national/politics/Yoon-Suk-Yeol-Unification-Ministry-Kim-Yungho/20230702181908444.html

President Yoon Suk Yeol [YONHAP]

President Yoon Suk Yeol has stressed that the Unification Ministry is not a department that exists to support North Korea.  

According to the president’s office on Sunday, President Yoon said the Unification Ministry’s role must be changed to pursue a unification based on basic free democratic order. 

“In the past, the Unification Ministry acted as a department that supported North Korea,” Yoon said. “The unification that we should aim for is a unification where all citizens from both North and South could live better lives and a humane life.” 

The statement by the president’s office came after the Yoon administration announced its first reshuffling where Kim Yung-ho, a political science and diplomacy professor of Sungshin Women’s University known for his hardline stance against North Korea, was named as the Unification Minister nominee on Thursday. 

The opposition Democratic Party has criticized the appointment of Kim and likened him to a conservative YouTuber. 

DP called the Unification Minister nominee a person that is consumed by an outdated cold war era view that is hostile against North Korea. 

The minister nominee worked as a unification secretary and was Foreign Ministry’s human rights ambassador during the Lee Myung-bak administration.  

BY LEE HO-JEONG [lee.hojeong@joongang.co.kr]

4. What if Trump is reelected in 2024? by Michael Green (Korea and alliances)

Not sent with any partition message. But I get this question from my Korean counterparts: What will happen to the ROK/US alliance after the 2024 election?

Excerpts:

Korea will have friends in Australia, Japan, Canada, and NATO — and in the Congress, media, think tanks and the American public. Korea also has a good story to tell on investment in the U.S., shared democratic values, and (thanks to President Yoon) more proactive participation in regional diplomacy. These attributes may not matter much to Trump personally, but they will matter a lot to most senior officials who would follow him into government and want to make America more secure and prosperous.

We will see what happens. But if it looks like Trump is heading for the Republican nomination, I will swallow my bitter disappointment and devote some more columns to thinking through how Korea and other U.S. allies should get ready … something everyone failed to do last time.

Sunday

July 2, 2023

 dictionary + A - A 

What if Trump is reelected in 2024?

https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/2023/07/02/opinion/columns/Trump-reelected-2024/20230702202800296.html

중앙일보-CSIS 연례포럼이 '한국과 미국:세기적 도전에 어떻게 대응할 것인가?'란 주제로 29일 서울 하얏트호텔 리렌시룸에서 열렸다 .마이클 그린 CSIS 일본실장,2011.04.29 김상선

Michael Green

The author is CEO of the U.S. Studies Centre at the University of Sydney and Henry A. Kissinger Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).

When Joe Biden won the 2020 Presidential election and Donald Trump was subsequently impeached by Congress for his role in the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capital, it seemed that the Trump era in American politics was finally closing. However, early polls in the Republican primary race for President now suggest that Trump could make a comeback. While the former President has been impeached twice, faces multiple federal and state legal charges, and has negative ratings from a significant majority of American voters, he remains deeply popular within the Republican Party itself. His path back to the Presidency is narrow, rugged, and strewn with legal landmines. But there is a path. If the half dozen Republicans running against him all stay in the race through the early primaries next spring in Iowa and New Hampshire, then he will start collecting a strong lead in primary votes before a single opponent can amass enough votes to stop him as happened in 2016. Despite the cascade of legal rulings likely to hit him in the months ahead, the odds of Trump winning the Republican nomination have to be about 50/50 right now.

Winning the general election would be much tougher for Trump given the strong wall of negative views towards him. But if the economy worsens (looking ok for now) or Joe Biden starts to appear too old for the job (a more dangerous drag for the Democrats), then Trump could manage to lose the popular vote but still win just enough of the Electoral College votes to slide into the Presidency again (for those not familiar, the U.S. President is chosen by a majority of the electors from the states they win and large states with small populations that lean Republican like Montana tend to have more electors per capita than largely populated states like New York or California that lean Democratic). Personally, I would give Trump a 20% chance of winning in the general election if he gets that far, but in 2016 his own polling expert reportedly only gave him a 30% chance the night before the election ... and he won.

So, while a second Trump term still seems unlikely, it is nevertheless time to ask what it would mean for Korea.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump makes his way inside the Manhattan Criminal Courthouse in New York on April 4 to answer criminal charges that threaten to throw the 2024 White House race into turmoil. [AFP/YONHAP]

If re-elected, Donald Trump would again come into office with a belligerent and nationalistic but largely incoherent worldview. His stump speeches today are rambling attacks on his legal and political enemies, replete with racism, misogyny, childish name-calling, and pro-wrestling-like entertainment value that his supporters love. He has expressed mountains of anger and resentment but almost no vision for what the United States or the world should look like.

One exception could be his lingering animosity towards U.S. bases in Japan, Korea, and NATO. Since the 1980s he has argued that these allies are “ripping-off” the United States. In his simplistic imagining, Korea should be “paying” the United States more for deploying U.S. forces on the peninsula by “buying” more goods and giving the United States a trade surplus. Trump is not bothered by the national security arguments since 1941 that dictate forward presence keeps the peace and the enemy far from the United States or by international economic theory in which foreign direct investment and intermediate trade matter far more than narrow bilateral trade deficits. But Trump began making his arguments in the mid-1980s and those Americans resentful of globalization responded.

Trump’s negative view of U.S. forces in Korea is further compounded by his self-proclaimed “love affair” with North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un. In fact, one of Trump’s current legal troubles stems in part from his decision to hide letters from Kim as personal souvenirs, despite the well-established fact that they are classified and U.S. government property. Trump’s approach to the Korean peninsula is therefore both inappropriately transactional and deeply narcissistic as he fancies himself a transformational historical figure who can sign a peace treaty ending the Korean War and saving America money by pulling troops home.

In his one term as president, Trump frequently challenged his national security advisors and Republican allies in Congress to explain why he shouldn’t just pull U.S. troops off the Korean peninsula. One advisor told me this was a weekly occurrence throughout his presidency. Trump even acknowledged that Vladimir Putin advised him to do so before the first summit with Kim in Singapore in 2018. Trump’s most senior former advisors have warned in private and public that he will try to pull troops out of Korea if re-elected.

When Trump began musing about withdrawing troops as President the first time, a coalition of Republican Senators and Trump’s own national security team aligned to block him through quiet delaying actions and legislative maneuvers. A large majority of Republicans in Congress disagree with Trump on foreign policy and polls show that more Americans than ever support the U.S.-Korea alliance, so Trump faced considerable headwinds within his own party and administration. Abe Shinzo also played a key role in convincing Trump to keep U.S. troops in Korea over multiple dinners and games of golf (Abe may have been unpopular in Korea but was perhaps the best friend Korea had at the time).

Many of these same national security advisors will not return to a second Trump administration since they broke with the former President publicly or resigned in the immediate aftermath of January 6. Moreover, Trump’s most loyal henchmen have formed a shadow government in new think tanks such as the America First Institute to be better prepared to seize the reins of power than they were last time. My guess is that there are not enough of them to overwhelm the Congress or the mainstream officials or Trump appointees who would run the Pentagon, State Department, and NSC. Moreover, Trump himself remains a dilettante when it comes to foreign policy — more interested in showy announcements and angry speeches than following through on his grandiose gestures. Nevertheless, the fight to protect U.S. alliances will be much more severe than last time and much more in the open. And it will be a fight between the President and his own administration and political party.

Korea will have friends in Australia, Japan, Canada, and NATO — and in the Congress, media, think tanks and the American public. Korea also has a good story to tell on investment in the U.S., shared democratic values, and (thanks to President Yoon) more proactive participation in regional diplomacy. These attributes may not matter much to Trump personally, but they will matter a lot to most senior officials who would follow him into government and want to make America more secure and prosperous.

We will see what happens. But if it looks like Trump is heading for the Republican nomination, I will swallow my bitter disappointment and devote some more columns to thinking through how Korea and other U.S. allies should get ready … something everyone failed to do last time.

5. Joining with India, Australia to build a G10 (Korea)

Excerpt:

Korea must unite with other convincing candidates for an expanded G7. What countries can meet the cause and practical interests? For an effective derisking strategy, Australia — an advanced democracy with rich mineral resources — could be an answer. To bolster the diversity of the advanced group, a leading representative of the Global South needs to be invited. That is India — the only country that can replace China in terms of population and market size. Coincidently, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi had a summit with Biden at the White House on June 22 in his first state visit to the U.S. since his election nine years ago. Korea’s joining of the G8 can come only after the G10 — or G7 plus Korea, Australia and India — is established. The memories of the country exponentially expanding its strategic space of diplomacy to the socialist bloc through its northern diplomacy three decades ago are becoming faint. I hope the foreign ministry demonstrates diplomatic imagination and ability to make the dream come true at the inflection point of the 21st century.

Sunday

July 2, 2023

 dictionary + A - A 

Joining with India, Australia to build a G10

https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/2023/07/02/opinion/columns/G7-G8-G20/20230702203530170.html

Choi Byung-il

The author, a professor of economics at the Ewha Womans University Graduate School of International Studies, is president of the Korea Foundation for Advanced Studies.

On the threshold of the new Cold War, the United States and China are reluctant to worsen their bilateral relations further as they recognize the significance of managing conflict to prevent an accidental clash from evolving into a larger one. That’s a lesson they learned from the two world wars in the 20th century. U.S. Secretary of State Tony Blinken’s two-day visit to Beijing last month reflects such will of the two superrpowers. He met with China’s top diplomatic officials and President Xi Jinping. Since the direction of Xi and U.S. President Joe Biden has been affirmed, the two countries will soon be headed to the Group of Twenty (G20) summit in New Delhi, India in September and a Biden-Xi summit in November on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in San Francisco.

Managing Sino-U.S. conflict

The need to manage conflict signifies a serious level of conflict between the U.S. and China. The two countries don’t deny it. The U.S.-China confrontation that reached a climax during Donald Trump’s presidency continues in the Biden administration — in a more elaborate and systematic way. The first measure Biden took against China as U.S. president was a rebuilding of supply chains that overly relied on China, starting with the chip sector, to keep China’s dramatic rise at bay. The U.S. strategy to create a new semiconductor ecosystem on its home turf where the U.S. can control the entire process of chipmaking — including design, materials, parts, equipment and assembly — has been called “decoupling.” To achieve the goal, the U.S. has methodically lured its allies into investing in America with hefty subsidies and put a limit on supplying key equipment and parts to foreign chipmakers which invested in China.

The U.S.’s push for “decoupling” — armed with the new narrative of strategic stability after abandoning short-term efficiency — irritates China. The more the complaints from global chipmakers about higher production cost in the U.S. than in China, the stronger the determination of U.S. strategists to press ahead with the decoupling. They strive to find out strategic means that can lift China’s production cost — and put them into action, since they found a fatal danger of China’s emergence as a leader in semiconductors, an indispensable material for industries across the board — particularly the military and security fields. The best time for the U.S. to take action against China is now, when it wields its military supremacy over China.

Leaders of free democracies — or members of the Group of Seven (G7) — in competition with the autocracy led by China and Russia show a delicate sign of fissure. Last November, Germany’s new Prime Minister Olaf Scholz, accompanied by CEOs of companies like Volkswagen, BASF and Adidas met with Xi Jinping in Beijing. In April, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and French President Emmanuel Macron flew over to China to meet with Xi. They are traditional allies of the U.S., but are increasingly stifled under the weight of the U.S-led alliance based on the shared values amid the deepening new Cold War.

The dilemma basically stems from the harsh reality that they are leaders of free democracies where immediate economic gains help ensure the survival of their governments. The German prime minister did not want to divorce with China, but did not want overreliance on China, either. The French president didn’t want France to get entangled in a crisis far away from Europe. They are disgruntled about the double standards of Uncle Sam who put the brakes on allies’ investments in China while turning a blind eye to Apple and Tesla’s investments in China.

From ‘decoupling’ from China to ‘derisking’

As if to mitigate their complaints, the term “derisking” has stealthily replaced “decoupling” from China. After the European Commission president officially used the word for the first time, Germany and France quickly joined her with the reasoning that decoupling from China is not possible nor meets Europe’s interests. Later, U.S. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan joined the chorus. The developments eventually led to the adoption of the phrase “derisking, not decoupling” in the joint statement from the Hiroshima G7 Summit in May.

The principle of “derisking” is asset management 101. In semiconductors, decoupling from China is part of “derisking.” Expanding investments in consumption goods not related to economic security also constitutes “derisking.” So, basically, nothing changes in substance. The so-called “small yard, high fence” strategy of choosing certain areas to weaken China’s global influence and maintaining existing relations on other fields is the core of the Biden administration’s China policy.

Leaders of the Group of Seven (G7) and heads of guest countries pose for a group shot at the G7 Summit in Hiroshima, Japan, May 20. [NEWS1] 

Economy and security can’t be separated

The essence of the new Cold War is a clash between the free democratic system and the autocratic system. During the Cold War, no economic exchange was made between the two blocs, but in the new Cold War, companies in a free democratic world are deeply connected with authoritarian states for trade and investment. You cannot remove overnight the complicated system of economic exchanges built over the past 30 years of globalization since the end of the Cold War. And yet, if you just maintain existing networks, it is same as allowing the despotic states to have the upper hand in the contest. Herein lies the dilemma of the new Cold War in which economy and security cannot be separated.

The triumph of the West in the Cold War owed much to the United States’ huge assistance to Europe to help restore its devastated economy — and to the largest U.S. market being wide open to the rest of the word. It led to economic growth and prosperity for its allies, but resulted in frustration, jealousy and breakaway for enemies. At the onset of the new Cold War, the U.S. has again championed the values of free democracy, market economy, rule by law and human rights. But the U.S. can hardly win the hearts of its other allies still cherishing authoritarian values. The challenge has now reached a point where the G7 alone cannot weather the turbulence from the new Cold War, since the power of the Global South — a group of countries not affiliated with the U.S. or China — has grown noticeably.

The problem with U.S.-led global economic organizations

The U.S.-driven rules for global economy are not working well. First of all, the World Trade Organization led by the U.S. is in a vegetative state. Second, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) started from the U.S.-led Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), but since the U.S. left the TPP in 2017 during the Trump administration, the U.S. can hardly return to the CPTPP due to divided politics at home. The G20 emerged as the commander of the global economy after playing a decisive role in helping prevent the 2008 global financial crisis from spreading to the rest of the world, but the G20 has turned into a venue for discord, not the ground for solving problems. What should we do now? The answer can be found in expanding the G7. Korea also can find strategic room for survival and prosperity in the new Cold War era.

Korea has emerged as a global player on many issues — such as providing aids to developing countries, tackling climate change, building sustainable energy ecosystem, setting global digital rules, and seeking space development — after expanding its diplomatic space beyond the boundaries of the country. If Korea cannot be excluded from a global picture on the chip, battery and defense sectors, the country must be given its due role in global affairs. Korea must participate in the debates on expanding the G7.

Looking beyond the G8

Korea’s top diplomats fuel a discussion on expanding the G8. But they need a different strategic approach. If the country can join the prestigious group, it will certainly be happy and proud. But the question is whether other members really want it. For instance, Korea must overcome opposition from Japan — the only Asian member in the G7. Despite the activation of future-oriented Seoul-Tokyo relations and the agreed reinforcement of trilateral cooperation among Korea, the U.S. and Japan, Tokyo wants to remain as the only Asian representative in the G7.

U.S. President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden welcome Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the White House for a private dinner, Jun. 21, in Washington. [AP/YONHAP] 

Korea must unite with other convincing candidates for an expanded G7. What countries can meet the cause and practical interests? For an effective derisking strategy, Australia — an advanced democracy with rich mineral resources — could be an answer. To bolster the diversity of the advanced group, a leading representative of the Global South needs to be invited. That is India — the only country that can replace China in terms of population and market size. Coincidently, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi had a summit with Biden at the White House on June 22 in his first state visit to the U.S. since his election nine years ago. Korea’s joining of the G8 can come only after the G10 — or G7 plus Korea, Australia and India — is established. The memories of the country exponentially expanding its strategic space of diplomacy to the socialist bloc through its northern diplomacy three decades ago are becoming faint. I hope the foreign ministry demonstrates diplomatic imagination and ability to make the dream come true at the inflection point of the 21st century.

Translation by the Korea JoongAng Daily staff.

6. Veterans ministry to review decorations for independence fighters

Transparency.

Excerpts:

In January 2021, the veterans ministry offered to open a probe into the two people's status before doing an about-face and concluding that there was no issue with their decorations.

This time, the ministry said it will allow the public to participate in its review.

​

Veterans ministry to review decorations for independence fighters | Yonhap News Agency

en.yna.co.kr · by Yoo Jee-ho · July 2, 2023

SEOUL, July 2 (Yonhap) -- The veterans ministry said Sunday it will review the records of decorated independence fighters and filter out those with dubious accomplishments, picking up a process that had been halted during the previous administration due to questions of fairness.

In a press release, the ministry said, "We will address the social conflict caused by honoring people as patriots despite their pro-North Korean leanings, and will establish clear standards in this regard."

The list of patriots to come under review is believed to include Sohn Yong-woo, the late father of former lawmaker Sohn Hye-won.

Veterans Minister Park Min-shik speaks at the start of a peace forum hosted by Yonhap News Agency and the unification ministry in Seoul on June 29, 2023. (Yonhap)

Sohn Yong-woo was decorated for his contribution to Korea's independence in 2018 under modified criteria, after being rejected for the honor on six previous occasions because of his time spent with the Communist Party of Korea following the country's liberation.

"With each new administration, the criteria for socialist activities either changed or became blurred," a government official said. "We have to identify whether people's activities contributed to the founding of modern Korea or helped establish a communist nation."

The ministry said it will also look to identify those who shouldn't have qualified for decorations because of potentially falsified records.

The ministry is said to be looking into Kim Geun-soo and Jeon Wol-soon, the respective late father and mother of Kim Won-wung, former head of the Heritage of Korean Independence, the state-funded association of independence fighters.

Kim Geun-soo received a presidential citation in 1963, the National Foundation Medal in 1977 and the Order of Merit for National Foundation in 1990. His wife was also conferred the Order of Merit for National Foundation that same year.

This composite of file photos shows former lawmaker Sohn Hye-won (L) and former Heritage of Korean Independence chief Kim Won-wung. (Yonhap)

However, media reports have claimed both might have forged their records of contributions to Korea's independence, citing inconsistencies in their personal information.

In January 2021, the veterans ministry offered to open a probe into the two people's status before doing an about-face and concluding that there was no issue with their decorations.

This time, the ministry said it will allow the public to participate in its review.

"We will accelerate the process of stripping people of decorations if they're found to have doctored their records, and end all controversies once and for all," the ministry said.

jeeho@yna.co.kr

(END)

en.yna.co.kr · by Yoo Jee-ho · July 2, 2023

7. Excessive, divisive remarks (South Korean Politics)

Yes, but...

Criticize the remarks and the challenge target of the remarks.

But Koreans in the South should never forget that the regime in the north is conducting active subversion to undermine the legitimacy of the ROK government and destabilize ROK society. Koreans in the South must recognize the regime's strategy, understand it, expose it, and attack it with superior information and political warfare strategy.

Excerpts:

Everyone could see those words were directed at Yoon's center-left predecessor, Moon Jae-in, and his engagement policy with North Korea. However, faced with intense backlash from DPK and the criticism of many neutral commentators, the presidential office said the remark did not take aim at a specific political force. It also asked critics to consider the time, place and occasion of the remark.

Even considering the time, place and occasion, it was apparent that the president crossed a line.

...

Far-right populism has swept major countries, from America to Europe. Korea, the only country still mired in the old Cold War regime, can ill afford to follow their footsteps and test extreme ideological waters.

Koreans want their leaders to remain democratic, listen to opinions from those with differing views, integrate the nation instead of splitting it, and pursue economic equality.

Excessive, divisive remarks

The Korea Times · July 2, 2023

A leader's language should be refined and unifying

The ideological gap between South Korea's major political parties is not wide by Western standards.

Since the Republic of Korea was born 75 years ago, political power has changed between two centrist parties. After numerous name changes, the ruling People Power Party (PPP) represents the right-of-center forces now, and the main opposition Democratic Party of Korea (DPK), the left-of-center group.

That might change soon.

"Anti-state forces significantly undermined South Korea's security by begging for the lifting of U.N. sanctions on North Korea and pushing for an end-of-war declaration with Pyongyang."

Those remarks did not come from one of the far-right YouTubers. The speaker was none other than President Yoon Suk Yeol, and the occasion was a ceremony to celebrate the founding anniversary of the Korea Freedom Federation, a prominent conservative civic group, last Wednesday.

Everyone could see those words were directed at Yoon's center-left predecessor, Moon Jae-in, and his engagement policy with North Korea. However, faced with intense backlash from DPK and the criticism of many neutral commentators, the presidential office said the remark did not take aim at a specific political force. It also asked critics to consider the time, place and occasion of the remark.

Even considering the time, place and occasion, it was apparent that the president crossed a line.

Policies, including the inter-Korean policy, can change when political power shifts. However, no presidents had called their predecessors, let alone a former boss in the incumbent's case, "anti-state." The comment, coming from a leader who won the election by a 0.73 percent margin, could split the country into two. Former U.S. President Donald Trump and his vitriol of political rivals as "anti-America" comes to mind.

Yoon must also know even Trump once agreed with North Korea's Kim Jong-un to turn the shaky armistice into a peace treaty to end the state of war here. It's an open secret that the political novice had to switch his stance later at the behest of the Republican hardliners. Moon was simply no match for the U.S. neocons.

Yoon criticizes inter-Korean rapprochement under center-left leaders as "fake peace" counting on Pyongyang's goodwill. However, if "genuine peace" risks real war, most, if not all, Koreans will prefer fake peace.

Politics based on bipartisan cooperation is impossible when top leaders regard their counterparts ― North Korea or center-leftists ― as anti-state forces threatening national security. These leaders think the other side is subject to removal, not reconciliation.

Yoon's latest Cabinet reshuffle also showed he is not a politician who doesn't just talk but acts. He named an extreme hardliner ― who called for "reunification by absorption" ― as unification minister. The chief executive also appointed a person who calls Moon a "North Korean spy" to reform the police and the one who said Moon "used soldiers for biotest tools" to the post to educate government employees.

"These appointments gave hope to far-right YouTubers that they could be vice ministers through extreme remarks," said Jin Jung-kwon, a well-known commentator.

While retaining most ministerial portfolios, Yoon also replaced five vice ministers with his close aides. Critics say it established a direct-ordering system bypassing ministers while skipping confirmation hearings in the opposition-dominated National Assembly. A democratic administration is supposed to make significant policies through free and democratic discussion between Cabinet members with different views.

Being shipshape may be an efficient and convenient form of governance, but it risks falling into dogmatism. Nowhere else is this clearer than the prosecution, where all prosecutors move with the order from the top. However, the government is not the prosecution, and the chief executive is not the prosecutor general.

Far-right populism has swept major countries, from America to Europe. Korea, the only country still mired in the old Cold War regime, can ill afford to follow their footsteps and test extreme ideological waters.

Koreans want their leaders to remain democratic, listen to opinions from those with differing views, integrate the nation instead of splitting it, and pursue economic equality.

President Yoon pledged so a year ago. He must keep it.

The Korea Times · July 2, 2023

8.  US ballistic missile submarine to visit S. Korea this month

Excerpts:

Local defense analysts view that around July 27 would be the most likely date for the submarine's arrival. July 27 is celebrated as "Victory Day" in the North, as it claims that it defeated a U.S. invasion of its territory in the Korean War.

Pyongyang is expected to hold a large-scale military parade on the upcoming holiday, featuring the display of its latest nuclear weapons.

The envisioned visit of an SSBN to South Korea would be a clear demonstration of the enhanced security guarantee promised by the U.S. in the Washington Declaration signed by President Yoon Suk Yeol and U.S. President Joe Biden in April. In the agreement, the U.S. pledged regular deployment of its strategic assets to the Korean Peninsula.

US ballistic missile submarine to visit S. Korea this month

The Korea Times · July 2, 2023

USS West Virginia (SSBN 736), a U.S. Navy Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine / Korea Times file

By Lee Hyo-jin

A U.S. nuclear-capable ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) might arrive in South Korea later this month, which would be the first dispatch of an SSBN to the Asian country in 42 years, in a major show of force against North Korea's rising nuclear threats.

An Ohio-class submarine, an 8,000-ton vessel equipped with 20 submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), is expected to be dispatched around July 27 to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the Korean War Armistice Agreement, which suspended combat in the 1950-53 war.

It would be the first port call of an SSBN to South Korea since 1981. SSBNs are one of the most secretive U.S. nuclear assets and their public visits to foreign ports are highly rare.

During a press briefing last week, U.S. Department of Defense spokesperson Brig. Gen Pat Ryder said a nuclear-capable Ohio-class submarine will visit South Korea, without giving a specific timeline.

Local defense analysts view that around July 27 would be the most likely date for the submarine's arrival. July 27 is celebrated as "Victory Day" in the North, as it claims that it defeated a U.S. invasion of its territory in the Korean War.

Pyongyang is expected to hold a large-scale military parade on the upcoming holiday, featuring the display of its latest nuclear weapons.

The envisioned visit of an SSBN to South Korea would be a clear demonstration of the enhanced security guarantee promised by the U.S. in the Washington Declaration signed by President Yoon Suk Yeol and U.S. President Joe Biden in April. In the agreement, the U.S. pledged regular deployment of its strategic assets to the Korean Peninsula.

On June 16, USS Michigan SSGN, an Ohio-class nuclear-powered guided missile submarine (SSGN), docked at a naval base in Busan to participate in joint drills with the South Korean navy. It was the first visit of a US SSGN to the peninsula since October 2017.

The Korea Times · July 2, 2023

9. Half million workers set for two-week nationwide strike against Yoon

Think subversion. Who is organizing and supporting these strikes?

Remember the missions of the United Front Department and the Cultural Engagement Bureau from the north.

Half million workers set for two-week nationwide strike against Yoon

koreaherald.com · by Lee Jaeeun · July 2, 2023

The Korean Confederation of Trade Unions, the more militant of the nation's two largest umbrella labor organizations, has announced two weeks of strikes starting Monday to call for the resignation of President Yoon Suk Yeol.

The strikes, expected to involve a total 400,000 to 500,000 workers, comes in protest of Yoon’s proposed labor reform measures and as a broader pushback against perceived anti-union policies.

On Monday, approximately 3,000 workers, predominantly courier and home appliance repair personnel, will begin the strike, ceasing work to hold a rally at Gwanghwamun Square in the heart of Seoul. Following this gathering, additional members of the KCTU will join.

On Wednesday, large-scale rallies are planned across the country, including in the metropolitan cities of Seoul, Daegu, Busan, Gwangju and the southern island of Jeju. The following day, some service workers will hold a rally in front of Sungnyemun in Seoul. On July 8, public officials will hold a rally in Yeouido, Seoul.

On July 12, metal workers will go on a general strike. On July 13, health and medical workers and office workers will gather in Seoul to stage a rally. On July 15, a rally will be held calling for Yoon’s resignation.

Candlelight rallies will be held throughout the country on the evenings of July 4, 7, 11, and 14 to urge the president’s resignation.

The KCTU estimates that the rallies from July 3 to 15 will draw a total of 400,000 to 500,000 workers.

The nationwide protests come on the back of growing opposition to Yoon's proposed labor reform measures. Yoon and the KCTU have been at loggerheads over various reform plans put forward by the government.

The Yoon administration had proposed a plan to permit a working week of up to 69 hours, while maintaining an average maximum week below 52 hours. However, after strong opposition from not only labor unions but also the country’s young people, the government backed away from the plan.

Yoon has taken a tough stance on illegal acts committed by labor unions as a wider part of his labor union reforms. Yoon has demanded trade unions boost their financial transparency while denouncing some construction unions' practices of receiving kickbacks and some labor unions' political campaigns.

The Yoon administration is now pursuing a plan to restrict rallies at night or during commuting hours, as well as those by organizations which have a record of illegal demonstrations.

“We are going on a general strike because we need to stop regressive labor reforms. The KCTU declares an all-out struggle against the Yoon government, and this 2-week strike is the first step,” KCTU Chairman Yang Kyung-soo said at a press conference.

The government plans to take strict measures against illegal acts during protests. Yoon Hee-keun, the National Police Agency Commissioner General, said, "We will guarantee the right to stage pre-reported rallies, but we will manage those outside the scope of the report as illegal acts.”

The National Police Agency plans to mobilize up to 9,300 police a day to respond to those rallies.

By Lee Jaeeun (jenn@heraldcorp.com)

koreaherald.com · by Lee Jaeeun · July 2, 2023

10. Korea to launch new bureau in fight against human trafficking

Korea to launch new bureau in fight against human trafficking

koreaherald.com · by Lee Jung-youn · July 2, 2023

South Korea is set to establish a dedicated anti-human trafficking bureau in a bid to address international criticism over its handling of the issue, according to sources and news reports on Sunday.

According to reports, the anti-human trafficking bureau, which will be known as the Department of Rights and Rescue, will operate with a total of seven temporary employees within the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family. The new bureau will be in charge of supporting human trafficking victims and female North Korean defectors, as well as establishing a comprehensive plan to prevent human trafficking.

The bureau plans to provide educational support for victims of human trafficking, including underage children. It also aims to assist victims with reintegration into society through vocational training, legal counseling and coverage of medical expenses. Additionally, it will aid foreign victims in returning to their home countries.

The bureau will be established on a temporary basis for six months until the end of the year, but its operations may be extended until June 2024 if necessary.

The South Korean government has faced consistent criticism over its management of human trafficking crimes. The United Nations has advised the Korean government to come up with more practical human trafficking prevention systems, pointing out that sexual and labor exploitation of foreign workers is a serious issue.

In response, the Korean government in January implemented the Human Trafficking Prevention Act, which defines and prohibits both sexual exploitation and labor exploitation as human trafficking, and requires the Gender Ministry to establish a comprehensive plan to prevent human trafficking every five years.

Despite these measures, South Korea was downgraded for the first time in 20 years to a Tier 2 country in July 2022 in the annual human trafficking report published by the US State Department -- a document that divides human trafficking surveillance and crackdown levels in three tiers. This year's report released on June 15 also ranked Korea in the Tier 2.

"Despite reports of rampant human trafficking targeting foreign workers, the South Korean government has not made any reports identifying foreign victims of forced labor. Officials continue to confuse human trafficking with other crimes, and the court has sentenced related criminals to less than a year in prison, fines or probation,” the US State Department said.

Following the release of the report, the Foreign Ministry pledged to enhance its response in alignment with the Human Trafficking Prevention Act.

Since 2001, the US State Department has published these reports in compliance with its own laws, categorizing countries based on their human trafficking surveillance and enforcement efforts.

In this year's report, the US, Britain, France, Taiwan and the Philippines were classified as Tier 1 countries. Japan, Switzerland and New Zealand, along with South Korea, were classified as Tier 2, while North Korea, China and Russia were placed in Tier 3.

By Lee Jung-youn (jy@heraldcorp.com)

koreaherald.com · by Lee Jung-youn · July 2, 2023

De Oppresso Liber,

David Maxwell

Vice President, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy

Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation

Editor, Small Wars Journal

Twitter: @davidmaxwell161

Phone: 202-573-8647

email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com