| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:43 pm Post subject: Korea should break contract with Taliban |
 |
|
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/09/17/news/edkim.php
| Quote: |
When the last of South Korea's Christian aid workers held hostage by Taliban militants for 43 days returned home to Seoul, they were greeted by a public that was equally relieved and angered.
It was hardly a hero's welcome. There were no ticker tape parades or a public audience with the president. Quite the contrary. President Roh Moo-Hyun went so far as to state the government's plans to exercise its right to indemnity and hold the ex-hostages liable for expenses such as airfare and even the cost of transporting the corpses of two hostages slain by the Taliban during the crisis.
By contrast, consider the jubilant welcome given American ex-hostages such as Private Jessica Lynch or the Christian Science Monitor's Jill Carroll.
The distinctly cold ending to South Korea's hostage crisis betrayed something far more significant than cultural disparities.
South Korea was profoundly powerless in every sense throughout the six-week ordeal. There were no rescue attempts, no strong words from the leadership in Seoul that threatened the Taliban with swift justice if hostages were harmed, no retribution when two hostages were murdered.
Instead, Seoul immediately reacted to the hostage-taking with appeasement. First, South Korean leadership made a frantic, unsuccessful attempt to sway U.S. and Afghan officials to display "flexibility" and grant the kidnappers' demands of a hostage-for-prisoner exchange. Then, three weeks into the crisis, Korean officials sat down and entered into direct negotiations with the militants. The fact that a coalition partner was brought to its knees without so much as a hint of a fight wasn't lost on anyone, least of all to the people of South Korea.
There were no good choices to make during the ordeal, but Seoul consistently chose the worst. By openly negotiating with the Taliban, they gave the militant group and its methods of intimidation and extortion legitimacy.
Further, Seoul demonstrated a feeble commitment to the coalition that disintegrated in the earliest days of the crisis. And ransom or no ransom, direct negotiations undoubtedly opened the door to more hostage-taking worldwide.
Finally, by holding its own people financially liable for the ordeal, the government in Seoul sent a message that the Taliban was not entirely to blame for the brutal murder of two South Korean citizens.
Perhaps the only good news is it's not over yet. What Seoul does in the aftermath of the crisis may be its only hope for being able to hold its head up.
To run from Afghanistan now with its tail between its legs would be a tragic mistake. The South Korean leadership should renounce its agreement to the Taliban and not withdraw its 200 troops from Afghanistan.
If anything, troops should remain because the hostage crisis proves their work is not yet done. South Korea must unequivocally show that hostage-taking - and unfortunate agreements struck during a hostage crisis - are not binding or legitimate in any way.
South Korea is now a liberal democracy that ranks as the world's 11th largest economy. This international stature confers more than bragging rights; it means the country bears a responsibility to demonstrate leadership and to uphold the principles it shares with its allies throughout the globe, including in troubled parts of the world such as Afghanistan.
It is ironic that the aid workers at the center of this ordeal clearly felt this sense of commitment, yet their president does not.
Hancho C. Kim is a Korean-born American citizen who has spent 27 years living in Seoul. In 1979 he was incarcerated for 4� months in connection with the "Koreagate" political scandal. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
hubba bubba
Joined: 24 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Exactly. Don't they know that to Koreans contracts and agreements are just guidelines? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hubba bubba wrote: |
| Exactly. Don't they know that to Koreans contracts and agreements are just guidelines? |
Like I said before, just tell them that you are waiting for "Mr. Kim" to approve the cash. Any day now. The Taliban will eventually stop calling. After all, they need to understand the Korean 'special situation'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nautilus
Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Location: Je jump, Tu jump, oui jump!
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| hubba bubba wrote: |
| Exactly. Don't they know that to Koreans contracts and agreements are just guidelines? |
Like I said before, just tell them that you are waiting for "Mr. Kim" to approve the cash. Any day now. The Taliban will eventually stop calling. After all, they need to understand the Korean 'special situation'. |
Yes. Sorry, the korea economy is bad now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
riverboy
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
Location: Incheon
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LOL!
Not to defend the Korean gov't for negotiating with the Taliban, but can you imagine the candlelight vigils, and protests held for the hostages. Not to mention the fact that they were all from Gangnam and I am sure thier church has a few political insiders. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
knickerbocker
Joined: 19 Sep 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 8:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| hubba bubba wrote: |
| Exactly. Don't they know that to Koreans contracts and agreements are just guidelines? |
I take it you have some baggage in this department.
I hope you're not arguing that Korea should "honor" its pact with the Taliban. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
