'저는 그들의 땅을 지키기 위하여 싸웠던 인디안들의 이야기를 기억합니다. 백인들이 그들의 신성한 숲에 도로를 만들기 위하여 나무들을 잘랐습니다. 매일밤 인디안들이 나가서 백인들이 만든 그 길을 해체하면 그 다음 날 백인들이 와서 도로를 다시 짓곤 했습니다. 한동안 그 것이 반복되었습니다. 그러던 어느날, 숲에서 가장 큰 나무가 백인들이 일할 동안 그들 머리 위로 떨어져 말과 마차들을 파괴하고 그들 중 몇몇을 죽였습니다. 그러자 백인들은 떠났고 결코 다시 오지 않았습니다….' (브루스 개그논)





EMERGENCY IN GANGJEONG ON SEPT. 2! (See the below blog)

URGENT PLEA: DEAR FRIENDS of JEJU ISLAND, ISLAND OF WORLD PEACE (Click!)

Please check HERE(Click) for continuous updates of emergency in
Gangjeong, Jeju Island since Aug. 24, 2011 and site links on the struggle against Jeju naval base construction !

8월 24일 및 이후 제주도 강정 마을 긴급 관련, 계속되는 영문 업데이트 및 국문 사이트, 링크들은 여기(클릭)를 보세요!

RELEASE Kang Dong-Kyun(Gangjeong village mayor, 54), Kim Jong-Hwan(villager, 54), and Kim Dong-Won(photographer, 25)! (Facebook: Click HERE)

강정 마을회 까페 사이트(클릭) 강정 마을회 웹사이트(클릭)


Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Text Fwd: President Lee uses weak analogy to justify OPCON delay

'The President Lee Myung-bak.'

Hankyoreh
President Lee uses weak analogy to justify OPCON delay
: The president failed to mention NATO nations maintain a significant level of sovereignty in wartime situations
July 13, 2010

President Lee Myung-bak said Monday that his decision to delay transferring the wartime operational control (OPCON) of South Korean troops from the U.S. was inevitable in light of regional and global security concerns.

President Lee stated that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which is controlled by a U.S. commander, is a basic framework for the security of Europe with a number of strong countries.

Our OPCON issue should be also understood from the perspective of East Asian and global security,” Lee said in his 43rd radio address.

“Some criticize the adjustment of the timing of the OPCON transfer, citing the right to self-defense,” Lee said. “However, it was a substantial and sovereign choice based on South Korea’s needs.”

Lee’s explanation over the NATO‘s wartime operational control, however, was incorrect.

To begin, South Korea’s OPCON is completely entrusted to the U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) commander, but NATO’s decision to deploy troops is determined by unanimous agreement of the members that may also exercise their right to veto. That is, an invaded NATO member’s wartime operational control is not automatically entrusted to the NATO commander.

Furthermore, members of NATO can regain their operational control according to their own judgment.

Additionally, USFK commanders have control over all South Korean troops except for Special Forces. The NATO commander, however, has command over just 10 percent of the troops. Thus, NATO members may wield operational control over 90 percent of their troops, even during a wartime situation.

Source: the Hankyoreh and Yonhap News Agency

No comments:

Post a Comment