Skip to comments.S. Korea: Roh Under Fire Over Wartime Command Withdrawal(not going down quietly)
Posted on 08/10/2006 5:24:36 PM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
|Roh Under Fire Over Wartime Command Withdrawal
In a statement, the ex-defense chiefs called on the government to seek public consent and parliamentary approval for the move, saying the transfer of operational command is a vital security matter and will cost the taxpayer an astronomical amount of money.
Former defense minister Kim Seong-eun said when he asked the former U.S. Forces Korea commander Gen. Leon LaPorte who first proposed the handing over wartime operational control, LaPorte said it was not the U.S. that wanted to hand it over, but the Korean government repeatedly insisted on withdrawing it. Kim quoted LaPorte as saying Washington told Seoul to take back the control if it wanted since a refusal could lead to an outcry from anti-American group in Korea and give the impression the USFK wanted to stay in Korea as long as possible.
The Constitution says the government must seek approval from parliament when Korea concludes a treaty limiting the nations sovereignty, the chief presidential security secretary Song Min-soon countered. But withdrawing wartime operational control of our troops from the U.S. is surely the opposite, making this not an issue that requires parliamentary approval. But I think that we need to brief the National Assembly appropriately on how the issue is progressing since it is a national issue the public are deeply interested in. Song also indicated that some of the former ministers have changed their tune. We have sought to withdraw wartime operational control from the U.S. since 1990, and some of those who now say that regaining it is unfeasible have participated in that process.
Meanwhile, a U.S. official involved in bilateral consultations on the issue Wednesday called highly inappropriate President Rohs insistence on using the word withdrawal instead of exercising sole control of Koreans troops. He said it seemed Roh was deliberately using the term to give South Koreans the impression that the nation is taking something that belongs to it out of U.S. hands. The official added Roh was wrong to say South Korea is the only nation that does not have operational control of its own troops since some NATO members such as the U.K. and Germany also agreed to transfer operational control to the NATO commander-in-chief in crises.
The U.S. official said the reason Roh portrayed almost all military issues between the two allies in the context of Koreas sovereignty despite the fact that wartime operational control is purely a military concept and has nothing to do with sovereignty was an attempt to appeal to voters.
The following is my reply from another thread. Some redundant information is there, but the whole content is pretty much relevant.
I REALLY want Roh's first name to be "Rut"
But... but... but... the college/university crowd absolutely ADORE him.
And they are Korea's future.
Give it 10 more years and the bulk of the SKorean populace will think just like Roh.
Well, actually, they did think like him in 2002~2005. There will still be some crowds who hang on to his way of belief and attitude. However, majority of them are fed-up now and will be.
They are all busy charting alternative course of action, based on centrism and moderation. Sounds familiar? With Roh now even playing with the foundation of national security, they are afraid of outright collapse of the S. Korean left. These days, many are calling themselves 'political right.' That is the way they can survive politically. 'progressive' is out, 'pragmatism' and 'centrism' are in for the erstwhile left crowds.
They still hate staunch political right, though. It will probably kill them to put up their mask to hide what they were and are and put themselves so close to the political right they have hated so long.
Then U.S. can punch through N. Korea's shield(S. Korea) and destroy
S. Korea N. Korea.
I am not
saying talking about the opposition party, but grass-root activists all over the country.
ROFL. You get a scooby snack for that one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.