tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38578087.post2476864938659744368..comments2023-07-02T05:23:38.595-05:00Comments on Korean Historical Controversies: Anti-Americanism in Korea: Love/hate, expectation/disappointmentKirkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07842044872387705911noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38578087.post-17350327779386949532008-02-13T14:37:00.000-05:002008-02-13T14:37:00.000-05:00I believe you are exactly right when you say that ...I believe you are exactly right when you say that the US is a nation state seeking its own national interest. That is the primary duty of a "Nation". A nation, if it can be imagined as a living breathing organism, operates by instinct in a very self centered way most of the time. Varying governments do what they feel is right for their nation at that time. For that reason it is quite difficult to compare early 20th century Woodrow Wilson (who by the way has come under fire for his racist beliefs;simply "google" Woodrow Wilson and racism to see what I mean) Policy toward Korea to Jimmy Carter's embattled foreign policy decisions in the later half. (see Iran hostage crisis) A government's foreign policy evolves over time, as you well know. I think an argument can be made that the US was not considered (nor did it consider itself) a "global power" in 1919; But rather an "emerging" power. The bad taste of WWI was still in the mouths of the world and picking and choosing one's "battles" was the order of the day. Couple that with Western,frankly, ignorance and racist apathy towards countries in east Asia and you are left with the lassiez-faire attitude toward Japanese imperial behavior. Fast forward to Kwangju in the spring of 1980; You can see a US administration up to its ears in the Iran Hostage crisis, negotiations for normalizing relations with China removing nukes from South Korea as well as drawing down troop levels. It would be hard to see the Carter administration getting in the middle of a revolt in Kwangju.<BR/>I am by no means defending the actions of the US on these two events but rather seeking to put them into perspective. I share your feelings that US intervention was in order in both situations. As it was needed in Rwanda, Sierra Leon and continues to be in order to this day in the Sudan.<BR/><BR/>So what should Korean people think of the US? Disappointment in foreign policy may seem like a one way street coming from the US. And American rhetoric seems to only lead Korea into trouble (Iraq, Afghanistan)with little gain for Korea. I also think that as South Korea moves closer to China and the EU in the coming decades it will meet similar disappointments in foreign policy.<BR/>So,there is no way, perhaps, for the average person not working in /studying international politics to see the relationship between countries as anything but in terms of friend or foe comparatives. Those of us fortunate enough to have the opportunity to work/study in these international fields must remind the populous that there are no "friends" in international relations only "allies" and there is a big difference between the two.Justin-B형https://www.blogger.com/profile/09160177722173165843noreply@blogger.com