Photos Fwd: No FTA! No MD! No US-ROK alliance but Yes, Peace treaty! 한미FTA 반대! 미사일 방어망 반대! 자유 무역 협정 반대! 그러나 평화 협정은 예스!

______________________________________________________
* More details come later on . Please come by later.
* ROK means Republic of Korea.
______________________________________________________

* All the image source: Solidarity for Peace And Reunification of Korea, Nov. 9, 2010
평화와 통일을 여는 사람들, 2010년 11월 9일(클릭)

아래 집회의 국문 성명서는 여기를 클릭.

한미정상회담에 즈음한 134차 자주통일평화행동

134 Self-Reliance, Unification and Peace Action
upon the ROK-US Summit meeting

대미 종속 심화하는 한미FTA 반대한다!
We oppose ROK-US FTA that deepens the ROK subordination to the United States!

2010. 11. 9. 12시 미 대사관 앞
In front of the United States Embassy, 12pm, Nov. 9, 2010

What will be achieved by the ROK-US summit meeting, this time?
Compromise on the ROK-US FTA/
Sanction & oppression against North Korea with joining Missile Defense/
and permanent & subordinate ROK-US alliance!

Activists delivered a protest letter to the United States embassy.

ROK-US FTA? Absolutely No!!(SPARK)

A performance during the rally (Original photo source: Yonhap News)
The United States is stepping on South Korean military sovereignty by agreeing with the ROK government that has proposed the former a postponement of the transition of the Operational Control right for its own interest. For the latest development of the ROK-US alliance, see HERE.

Peace Agreement is the only way that will make silent
of the belligerent policies of the United States government.
Throwing shoes to the aggressors could be another way.

[국문] Text Fwd:[PSPD Commentary ] on the 42nd SCM

Peace Disarmament Team, People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, Oct. 13, 2010
참여연대 평화 군축팀, 2010년 10월 13일

[논평] 공격성 강화된 한미동맹 - 42차 한미연례안보협의회의(SCM)

- 북한 급변사태 대비 군사개입 계획은 국제법에 반하는 공격행위
- 핵우산 등 확장억제정책 강화, 북한에 대한 비핵화 요구와 상충
- 한미 군사동맹의 세계 군사개입 확대는 한미상호방위조약 위반
- 천안함 대응 자족적 평가, 유엔사 중립국위원회 문제제기는 외면

지난 10월 8일, 워싱턴 D.C에서 제 42차 한미연례안보협의회의가 개최되었고 한미 양국이 합의한 공동성명이 발표되었다. 국방부에 의해 발표된 공동성명은 한미군사동맹이 점점 더 공격적으로 전환되어 가면서 역내 군사대결구조를 강화하는 장본인으로 되어가고 있음을 보여준다. 참여연대 평화군축센터는 이에 심각한 우려를 표명한다.

이번 한미연례안보협의회의에서 합의된 주요 내용은 1) “불안정한 사태”를 한미 공동성명에서 공식적으로 명시함으로써 북한의 급변사태에 대한 준비태세 공고화 2) “확장억제정책위원회”를 제도화해 나가기로 합의하는 등 미국이 한국에 제공하는 핵우산, 재래식 타격 능력 및 미사일 방어능력 등의 확장억제정책 강화 3) 한미동맹의 강화와 더불어 한미동맹의 범주를 범세계적으로 확장하는 것이다. 이 내용들은 천안함 사건 이후 한반도에서 강화되고 있는 대북 대결 태세를 한층 강화시킬 뿐만 아니라, 한미상호방위조약을 위반하는 내용도 대거 포함하고 있다.

우선 이번 한미 공동성명에서는 처음으로 “불안정한 사태”라고 북한 급변 사태를 공식적으로 명시했다. 그동안 한미 양국은 이미 개념계획 5029의 작전계획화 등을 통해 이른바 ‘북한 급변 사태’에 대한 군사적 대응책을 추진해 왔다. 이번 한미연례안보협의회의를 거치면서 이 같은 양국의 군사적 개입계획이 더욱 구체화된 것으로 분석되고 있다. 한미 국방장관이 이번 회의에서 하달한 '전략기획지침(SPG)'에 의해 새롭게 구체화 될 작전계획의 구체적 내용은 알려지지 않고 있지만, 그간 한미연합사 등이 부분적으로 언급해온 것으로 비추어 볼 때, 전면전 등의 직접적인 무력 위협이 존재하지 않을 경우에도 ‘유사시’ 휴전선을 넘어 북한지도부를 체포하거나, 북 군사 행정 기구들을 접수하고 북한에 대한 안정화작전을 진행하는 등의 직접적인 군사적 점령계획을 포함하는 것이다. 이는 ‘방어’에 목적을 둔 한미상호방위조약에 반할 뿐만 아니라 국제법적으로는 침략행위로 간주될 수도 있는, 매우 공격적인 것이다. 한미 군사당국은 이 같은 군사개입계획의 개발을 즉각 중단해야 한다.

둘째, 성명은 한미동맹의 강화와 더불어 한미군사동맹 개입범위의 세계적 확장을 강조하고 있다. 성명에서는 “한미동맹을 양자, 지역, 범세계적 범주의 포괄적인 전략동맹으로 구축해 나간다는 양국 정상의 공약을 재확인”하였다며 “광범위한 범세계적 안보도전에 대처하기 위한 한미 간 협력을 증진해 나가기로 약속하였다”고 밝히고 있다. 이미 한국군은 아프간에서 그리고 미국이 진행하는 이른바 ‘대테러전쟁’의 또 다른 전선인 아덴만에서 미군과 군사적 행동을 함께 하고 있다. 그리고 레바논, 아이티같이 미국의 이해관계가 직결된 지역에 PKO를 파견하고 있다. 이는 ‘전략적 유연성’이라는 이름으로 주한미군이 세계분쟁에 직접 차출되는 것뿐만 아니라 한미군사동맹 자체가 전 세계로 확산되고 있음을 여실히 보여주고 있다. 이번 성명을 통해서 이러한 경향이 더욱 강화되고 있음이 재확인되었다. 이번 협의회에서 채택된 ‘국방협력지침’은 상호방위조약을 언급하면서도 “21세기 지역･범세계적 안보에 전략적으로 기여”하는 한미군사협력이 상호방위조약에 부합하는 지에 대해서는 구체적 언급을 회피하고 있다. 그러나 한미상호방위조약의 방위범위는 양국 영토에 대한 태평양지역에서의 위협이다. 그 이상의 동맹세계화는 이 조약의 방어목적에 위배된다. 특히 범세계적 안보에 전략적으로 기여하는 것은 “대한민국은 국제평화의 유지에 노력하고 침략적 전쟁을 부인한다”고 “국군은 국가의 안전보장과 국토방위의 신성한 의무를 수행함을 사명으로 한다”라고 명시되어 있는 헌법 5조의 평화조항에 위배된다.

셋째, 성명은 미국에 의해서 제공되는 핵우산, 재래식 타격 능력 및 미사일 방어능력 등의 확장억제 정책 강화를 공약하고 있다. 성명에 따르면 “확장억제의 실효성 제고를 위해 확장억제정책위원회를 제도화”하는 등 “확장억제를 강화”하겠다고 밝히고 있다. 그러면서도 한편으로는 북한에게 “모든 핵 프로그램과 핵무기 추구를 포기”할 것을 촉구하고 있기도 하다. 이것은 미국이 제공하는 핵억지력에 더욱 더 의존하는 정책을 채택함과 동시에 북한에 대해서는 핵억지력 보유를 포기하라고 요구하고 있는 것이므로 설득력이 없다. 이것은 또한 남과 북 두 지역 모두에서의 ‘비핵화’를 천명했던 한반도 비핵화 공동선언을 위반하는 것이기도 하다.

넷째, 천안함 사건과 관련하여 공동성명에서는 “천안함 사태에 대한 최종 합동조사결과 보고서가 발간된 것과 천안함 침몰에 관한 특별조사에 대한 유엔사의 특별 보고서가 유엔 안보리에 제출되어, 안보리 공식문서로서 정식으로 회람된 것을 환영 한다”고 밝히고 있다. 그러나 사실 천안함 최종보고서가 발표되었음에도 불구하고 천안함 침몰에 관한 의문점들은 여전히 풀리지 못했으며 여전히 전문가들에 의한 문제제기가 이루어지고 있는 상황이다. 유엔에 제공된 유엔사의 특별 보고서에는 ‘한국정부와 유엔사의 제한적 정보 제공’에 대해 문제제기하는 중립국감독위원회 관련국-스웨덴, 스위스, 폴란드 대표들의 보고서도 첨부되어 있다는 점에 대해서 양국은 외면하고 있다. 천안함 침몰의 원인이 명백하게 밝혀지기 위해서는 한국 정부가 천안함 관련한 정보를 국민과 국회, 그리고 중립국 대표들에게 상세하게 공개해야 하며, 나아가 러시아, 중국, 북한 등이 참여하는 국제공동조사와 국회 국정조사가 보장되어야 한다.

이번 성명에서 합의된 ‘국방협력지침’을 보면 “한미상호방위조약 상의 원칙과 목표를 지속적으로 추구할 것“을 분명히 밝히고 있다. 한미상호방위조약에 따르면 ”어떠한 국제적 분쟁이라도 국제적 평화와 안전과 정의를 위태롭게 하지 않는 방법으로 평화적 수단에 의하여 해결하고 무력에 의한 위협이나 무력의 행사를 삼가 할 것을 약속 한다“고 한다. 그러나 위에서 살펴본 바와 같이 이번 42차 한미연례안보협의회의의 공동성명 내용은 ‘평화적 수단’에 의한 해결을 위한 노력은커녕 남북 대결 태세를 강화해 한반도에서의 긴장을 강화시키고 심지어 한미상호방위조약을 위반하고 있는 내용이 대부분이다. 한미 양국은 한반도와 지역의 평화를 위협하는 한미군사동맹의 공격적 전환 작업을 중단해야 한다.

더불어 우리는 한미연례안보협의회의가 가진 구조적 문제점에 대해서도 지적하고자 한다. 군사적 위협을 강조하고 압도적 군사적 우위확보와 공격적 군사개입을 해법의 중심에 놓는 군사협력기구인 한미연례안보협의회의는 그 군사주의적 패권적 접근법으로 인해 도리어 지역 내에서 군사대결의 악순환을 불러오고, 새로운 군사적 위협을 부추기는 부정적 구실을 하고 있다. 양국 정부는 한미연례안보협의회의 같은 냉전적이고 폐쇄적인 논의 틀이 아닌 다른 대안적 논의 틀을 마련해야 한다. 그 핵심은 이른바 ‘국방전략’ 논의에 대한 민주적 통제를 강화하고 소위 군사전문가들이 제공하는 위협분석에 대한 민주적 이견제기 기능을 강화하는 것이다. 한미 양국 정부는 양국 시민들이 과연 어떤 위협이 문제가 되는지 재평가하고, 과연 군사적 해법 이외의 다른 해결책은 없는지 재검토하는데 민주적으로 참여할 수 있는 절차와 방식을 개발해야 한다. 한미관계의 바람직한 발전을 위해서는 양국 관계에서 군사적 관계가 차지하는 비중과 구실을 줄여야 한다. 이 요구에 부응하지 못하면 한미군사동맹은 갈수록 양국 시민들의 회의와 저항에 직면하게 될 것이다.

Photos Fwd:[Press Interview against the 42th SCM: Promptly Recover Wartime OPCON Right! Step for the Peace Treaty in the Korean Peninsula!

* All the image and content source: Solidarity for Peace And Reunification of Korea, Oct. 8, 2010

Abolish the Operation Plan 5015!

Abolish the Strategic Alliance 2015!

Abolish the ROK-US Defense cooperation guide line!

2차 한미연례안보협의회 에 즈음한 각계인사 선언 기자회견

“전시작전통제권 즉각 환수하고 한반도평화협정 협상에 나서라”

42차 SCM에 즈음하여 오바마 미 대톨령에게 보내는 공개 편지

각계인사 151인, 전작권 즉각 환수와 평화협정 촉구 <통일뉴스>

42차 한미연례안보협의회에 즈음한 공동대응 지역소식<대구>

Text Fwd: S. Korea, US defense chiefs to review joint defense posture

Korea Times

10-06-2010 17:43

S. Korea, US defense chiefs to review joint defense posture
By Jung Sung-ki

The defense chiefs of South Korea and the United States will meet later this week to review a series of recent joint military exercises designed to show a deterrence capability against North Korean provocation, defense officials said Wednesday.

The Security Consultative Meeting (SCM) between Defense Minister Kim Tae-young and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates will be held on Oct. 8 in Washington, D.C.

“This meeting with Minister Kim offers the opportunity to review recent joint military exercises, which are a manifestation of our close cooperation and the strong state of our alliance 60 years after the start of the Korean War,” Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell told reporters.

Morrell said Gates and Kim will reaffirm efforts to thwart any North Korean provocation, such as the sinking of the South Korean ship Cheonan in March.

In a separate news briefing, State Department spokesman Philip Crowley called on North Korea to refrain from any further provocations.

“We do not want to see any further provocative actions by North Korea under any circumstances, whether they're now or whether they're later, as we get towards the upcoming summit,” Crowley said. “We want to see North Korea act more constructively in the region. We'll respond to the extent that they do.”

Kim and Gates will also discuss a range of issues of mutual concern, such as the planned transition of wartime operational control (OPCON) in 2015 and the relocation of U.S. military bases to south of the Han River among other items.

President Lee Myung-bak and U.S. President Obama agreed in June to delay South Korea's taking back of wartime OPCON to December 2015 from April 2012, citing the need for the sides to prepare more for their joint defense capability in the face of nuclear and other threats from North Korea.

Photos Fwd: [SPARK] 105th Peace & Disarmament Rally [평통사] 평화 군축 집회

*Solidarity for Peace And Reunification of Korea
In front of the Ministry of National Defense,

105th Peace Disarmament rally, Sept. 28, 2010

국문은 여길 클릭

'Denunciation of the anti-submarine drill( Sept. 27 to Oct. 1, 2010) in the west sea'
‘Abolishment of the Strategic Alliance 2015 &
Prompt Recovery of [Wartime] Operational Control Right!’
‘Abolishment of the plan for the preparation of the sudden change aiming at the absorbing unification of North Korea with armed force!

Recovery of Operational Control Right Now! Yes, Conclusion of Peace Treaty!
No Security Consultative Meeting(SCM) that strengthens the invasive ROK-US alliance!


* Two Korean slogans say:
Absolutely no to the US base relocation, which hands over all burden to South Koreans!
Naval base doesn't fit to the Island of Peace, Jeju!

__________________________________________________________

* In front of Ministry of Defense, Sept. 27, 2010
Photos by Ryu Sung-Ho, Omynews

Stop the ROK-US anti-sub drill in the West Sea, which threatens the peace in the Korean peninsula!
Stop the war exercise that brings the militaristic tension!
_____________________________________________________
*Related blogs

Monday, September 27, 2010
Text Fwd: S. Korea, U.S. kick off anti-sub drills in Yellow Sea
남한과 미국, 황해에서 대항 잠수함 전쟁 연습 시작


Strategic Alliance 2015
전략적 동맹 2015

Text Fwd:[Translation] [SPARK] Commentary to Denounce the ROK-US Foreign and Defense Ministers’ Meeting

__________________________________________________________
* The below is the arbitrary translation of the Solidarity for Peace And Reunification of Korea (SPARK) commentary on July 22, 2010, right after the joint statement of the ROK-US foreign and defense ministers' meeting on July 21, 2010. The original SPARK Korean site can be seen HERE.
__________________________________________________________

한·미 외교·국방장관회의 규탄 논평
Commentary to Denounce
the ROK-US Foreign and Defense Ministers’ Meeting

침략적 한미동맹 영구화하는 ‘한·미 외교·국방장관회의’ 규탄한다!
We denounce the ROK-US Foreign and Defense Ministers’ Meeting
that makes the invasive ROK-US alliance perpetual!

By the Solidarity for Peace And Reunification of Korea (SPARK)

1. 아프간 전투병 파병 등 침략적 한미동맹 실행하는 ‘한미 외교·국방장관회의’ 규탄한다!

1. We denounce the ROK-US Foreign and Defense Ministers’ Meeting that carries on the invasive ROK-US alliance, such as the dispatch of the combat troops to Afghanistan!

한미양국의 외교·국방장관회의(‘2+2회의’)가 21일 서울에서 열려 ‘6·25전쟁 발발 60주년 계기 한미 외교·국방장관회의 공동성명'을 발표했다.

In the ROK-US Foreign and Defense Ministers’ Meeting of the both countries of the Republic of Korea and United States (so called ‘2+ 2 meeting’) that was held in Seoul on [July] 21st, [the ministers] announced the 'Joint Statement of ROK-US Foreign and Defense Ministers’ Meeting-On the Occasion of the 60th Anniversary of the Outbreak of the Korean War.'

양측은 2009년 6월 한미정상이 채택한 한미동맹 공동비전에 의거하여 “동맹협력을 양자적·지역적·범세계적으로 계속 발전시키기로 했다.” 양측은 지역 및 범세계적 도전에 대하여 동맹협력의 폭과 깊이를 확대하겠다는 의지를 반복해서 강조하고 있다.

The both sides saying that they “pledged to continue to advance alliance cooperation bilaterally, regionally, and globally,” based on the Joint Vision for the Alliance of the Republic of Korea and the United States that had been adapted by the summits of the ROK and United States in June, 2009, is emphasizing their will to extend the scope and depth of the alliance cooperation against the regional and global challenges to them.

이는 2009년 6월 한미정상이 채택한 ‘한미동맹 공동비전’에서 천명된 ‘포괄적 전략동맹’에 따른 것이다. ‘포괄적 전략동맹’은 미국이 한반도 및 동북아시아지역 나아가 범세계적 범주에서 자신의 세계패권 실현의 도구로서 동맹국 한국을 이용하고자 하는 전략적 필요에 따라 추진되는 것이다. 미국은 동맹의 위계적 질서에서 한국의 지위를 높여 한국의 전략적 자원을 더 많이 영구적으로 동원하고, 대신 한국은 미국 지배의 위계질서 내의 지위상승을 통해 대외적 지위 상승을 꾀하려는 것이다.

It is to follow the ‘comprehensive strategic alliance,’ declared in the ‘Joint Vision for the Alliance of the Republic of Korea and the United States’ that the two summits of the ROK and U. S. adapted in June 2009. The ‘comprehensive strategic alliance,’ is being driven according to the strategic need of the United States who is to utilize the ROK, the alliance nation, as the tool for the realization of her global dominance in the scope of the Korean peninsula & Northeast Asia region, and further, of the globe. It is for the United States to mobilize more of the strategic resource in the ROK, by heightening the status of the ROK in the rank system of her alliance, while it is for the ROK to attempt the rise of her status in the external relationships through her rise of the status within the rank system of the U. S. dominance.

* To see the JOINT VISION FOR THE ALLIANCE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA (Washington, D.C., June 16, 2009), click HERE.


공동성명에는 테러리즘, 대량파괴무기 확산 문제 등이 포함되어 있다. 한국측은 아프간에 대한 치안·거버넌스·개발 지원 의지를 밝혔다. 이에 따라 아프간 ‘치안’을 명분으로 한국군 전투병 파병이 추진될 것으로 보인다. 또한 대량살상무기확산방지구상(PSI)에 따른 훈련이 추진되고, ‘미래 국방협력에 대한 동맹 비전’에 따라 한국의 MD 참여도 본격화될 가능성이 높아 보인다.

There were included the issues such as those on the terrorism and the WMD expansion in the joint statement. The ROK side expressed her will on the security, governance, and development in Afghanistan. It looks, according to it, the dispatch of the ROK combat troops to Afghanistan would be driven, under the pretext of the security there. Also, it looks there would be the high possibilities that the exercises according to the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) would be being driven while the ROK participation in the Missile Defense system (MD) would be in earnest, according to the ‘alliance vision for the future cooperation on defense.’

이는 한미동맹의 대미 종속성과 대북 적대성을 심화하고 침략성을 강화하는 것이다. 이는 한미동맹의 적용 대상과 범위를 대북 방어에 한정하고 있는 한미상호방위조약 위반이다. 이로 인해 우리나라의 자주권은 침해되고 남북관계 파탄과 군사적 긴장은 더욱 심화되며 한국의 국제적 위신은 실추되게 된다. 또한 우리 국민의 부담과 희생이 가중되게 된다.

[However,] it is to deepen the natures of the ROK-US alliance, such as those of subordination of the ROK into the U.S. and of the hostility against the North Korea, and to strengthen the invasiveness of that alliance. It is the violation of the ROK-US Mutual Defense Treaty that limits the applied target & scope of the ROK-US alliance to the defense against the North Korea. Therefore, our nation’s sovereign right would be infringed; the breakdown of the inter- Korean relationship and military tension [in the Korean peninsula] will be more aggravated; and the international prestige of the ROK would be fallen. The burden and sacrifice of our nation’s people will be aggravated, also.

* To see the ROK-US Mutual Defense Treaty, click HERE.

이에 우리는 자주와 평화·통일에 걸림돌을 놓은 한미 외교·국방장관회의 결과를 강력히 규탄한다. 우리는 불법적이고 불평등하며 반평화적인 상태를 구조화하는 침략적 한미동맹 강화 기도를 중단할 것을 한미당국에 촉구한다.

Therefore, we strongly denounce the result of the ROK-US foreign & defense ministers' meeting that put an obstacle in the self-reliance, peace and reunification [of Korea]. We call upon the ROK-US authorities to stop the scheme on the strengthening of the invasive ROK-US alliance that systemize the illegal, unequal and anti-peaceful condition.


2. 천안함 사건 빌미로 한 대북 적대정책으로 동북아에 신냉전 불러오는 한미당국을 규탄한다!

2. We denounce the ROK & US authorities that bring the new cold war in the Northeast Asia with their hostile policies against the North Korea under the pretext of the Cheonan ship incident!

공 동성명은 천안함 사건이 북의 소행이라고 단정하고 그에 대한 책임을 추궁하면서 “무책임한 행동에 대해 심각한 결과가 따를 것임을” 경고하고 있다. 한미양국은 그 연장선에서 세계 최강의 F-22 전투기를 포함한 항공기 200여대, 항공모함 조지 워싱턴호를 비롯한 함정 20여척, 병력 8천여 명이 참가하는 가공할 해상·공중훈련을 비롯한 대잠훈련과 대량살상무기확산방지구상(PSI)에 따른 해상 차단작전 등 일련의 대북 무력시위를 추진하고 있다. 뿐만 아니라 클린턴 미 국무장관은 "(핵) 확산 활동을 지원하는 개인과 거래주체에 대해 자산 동결 조치를 취하고 북한 무역회사의 불법 활동과 관련 은행들의 불법적 금융거래 지원을 중단시킬 것"이라고 밝혔다.

The joint statement being concluded with saying that the Cheonan ship incident is for the conduct [of the attack] by the North Korea and pursued with the questions of North Korean response to it, warns by saying that, “[T]here would be serious consequences for any such irresponsible behavior.” In prolongation of [the statement], The both authorities of ROK-US are driving for the series of the military power demonstration against North Korea, such as the submarine exercise that includes the terrifying sea & air exercise in which 20 F-22 fighter planes that are globally the most powerful, 20 naval vessels including the George Washington-the aircraft carrier, and 8000 force would join; and the maritime interception operation following the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI). Not only that, Clinton, the US Secretary of State announced that the U.S. would “take the measure to freeze the asset against the individual and transaction entity who support the [North Korean](nuclear) proliferation activity and make stop the support for the illegal financial transactions of the banks related to the illegal activities of the North Korean trade companies."

* 'U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Wednesday that the United States would place new sanctions on North Korea, including asset freezes and blocking financial deals. Clinton also said that the United States would give U.N. Security Council resolutions 1718 and 1874 new, more stringent authority to force North Korea to end its illegal activities' (New York Times)

"We will implement new country-specific sanctions aimed at North Korea’s sale and procurement of arms and related material and the procurement of luxury goods and other illicit activities [...]" (Hankyoreh)

천안함이 북의 어뢰 공격으로 침몰했다는 한미당국의 주장은 국내외 전문가들의 과학적이고 객관적인 반론에 의해 그 신뢰성을 결정적으로 상실했다. 미국이 주도하는 유엔 안전보장이사회 대북 제재 결의도 실패하고 그나마 나온 의장성명에서도 공격의 주체로 북을 명시하지 못했다. 한미당국의 주장을 국제사회가 인정하지 않은 것이다.

The ROK-US authorities’ claim that the Cheonan ship had sunken due to the torpedo attack by the North Korea lost its trust because of the scientific and objective refutations by the domestic and overseas specialists. The UN Security Council’s sanction resolution against North Korea has failed and its Presidential statement that even so came out could not be named of the North Korea as the attack subject [behind the incident]. It means the international society did not acknowledge the claim by the ROK-US authorities.

이처럼 근본적인 불신의 대상으로 되고 있는 조사결과 발표에 기대어 한미당국이 대북 제재에 혈안이 되어 있는 이유는 한미당국의 불순한 의도 때문이다. 미국은 격변하는 동북아 정세에서 위기에 빠진 자국의 패권을 유지·강화하려는 것이고, 이명박 정부는 반북수구세력의 기득권을 지키고자 하는 것이다.

The reason that the ROK-US authorities are so bloodshot-eyed for the sanction against the North Korea, relying on the announcement of the investigation result that is the object of fundamental distrust is because of the impure intention of the ROK-US authorities. The United States is to maintain and strengthen her dominance that has fallen in the crisis in the circumstance of the Northeast Asia that undergoes the rapid change, while the Lee Myung-Bak government is to save the vested interests of anti-North Korean conservative powers.

한미양국의 강압정책은 북한뿐만 아니라 중국의 반발을 불러일으키고 있다. 이는 남북 대결의 격화뿐만 아니라 동북아에서 진영 간 대결을 초래하여 한반도 비핵화와 평화협정 체결 정세를 뒤로 돌리는 시대역행적인 행동이다. 이는 또한 “분쟁을 회피하고 상황악화를 방지하기 위한 목적으로 적절한 경로를 통해 직접 대화와 협상을 가급적 조속히 재개하기 위해 평화적 수단으로 한반도의 현안들을 해결할 것을 권장”한 유엔 안보리 의장성명에도 어긋난다.

The ROK-US authorities’ coercive policy is raising the repulsions not only by North Korea but also by China. [Theirs] is a retrogressive move to the current era, that retreats the conditions of the non-nuclearization of the Korean peninsula and conclusion of the peace agreement, by causing not only the aggravation of the confrontation between the South and North Korea, but also the confrontation between the camps in the Northeast Asia. It also deviates from the UN Security Council Presidential statement that “encourages the settlement of outstanding issues on the Korean peninsula by peaceful means to resume direct dialogue and negotiation through appropriate channels as early as possible, with a view to avoiding conflicts and averting escalation.”

* To see the UN Security Council Presidential statement regarding the Cheonan ship, please go to this site and move mouse down.

이에 우리는 은폐 조작된 천안함 사건 조사결과 발표를 근거로 대북 강경책을 펼쳐 동북아에 신냉전을 불러오는 한미당국의 행태를 강력히 규탄한다. 우리는 한미양국이 대북 적대정책을 중단하고 유엔 안보리 의장성명이 권장하는 대로 대화와 협상을 통해 한반도 비핵화와 평화협정 체결에 나설 것을 촉구한다.

Therefore, we strongly denounce the behavior of the ROK-US authorities that brings the new cold war in the Northeast Asia, by staging the hard-line policy against North Korea, basing on the announcement of the Cheonan ship investigation result that was concealed and manipulated. We call upon the ROK-US authorities to stop the hostile policy against North Korea and step for the non-nuclearization of the Korean peninsula and conclusion of the peace agreement through dialogue and negotiation as encouraged by the UN Security Council Presidential statement.


3. 군사주권 포기하는 작전통제권 환수 연기 중단하고 즉각 환수하라!

3. Stop the delay of the transition of the [war time] operational control (OPCON) right, that abandons the [ROK] military sovereignty, and immediately return the OPCON back to [the ROK]!

공동성명은 “2015년 12월 한국군으로의 전시작전통제권 전환을 포함한 새로운 계획인 ‘전략동맹2015’를 금년도 안보협의회의(SCM)시까지 완성하기로 하였다.” 여기에는 용산기지이전과 미2사단이전 일정 등도 반영될 것이라고 한다. 그렇다면 국방부의 부인에도 불구하고 방위비분담금의 미2사단이전비용 돌려쓰기를 포함한 기지이전비용도 함께 논의될 수 밖에 없을 것이다. 작전통제권 환수 연기 합의를 전후하여 7년이나 쟁점이 되어왔던 미군기지이전비용이나 시기 등에 대해 미국의 요구가 관철되는 방향으로 의견이 모아지고 있는 것은 우리의 판단이 틀리지 않음을 보여준다.

The joint statement says that the both “[Ministers] also decided to complete a new plan, Strategic Alliance 2015, by this year's Security Consultative Meeting (SCM), including the transition of wartime Operational Control (OPCON) to the ROK military in December 2015.” It says the schedule of the relocation of the Yongsan garrison and 2nd Division of the US Army would be included in the plan, too. If then, [we suspect that], despite the denial of the Ministry of National Defense, ROK, the base relocation cost including the diverting of the defense sharing cost for the relocation cost of the 2nd Division of the US Army cannot but be discussed [in the SCM]. The thing that the opinions on the cost and term for the relocation of the US base, that have been the controversy points for seven years, are being converged toward the direction in which the U. S. demands are to be fulfilled, timing before and after the agreement on the delay of the OPCON transition, shows that our judgment is not wrong.

전시작전통제권은 군사주권의 핵심이기 때문에 어떤 이유와 조건도 없이 즉각 환수되어야 한다. 그럼에도 불구하고 한미양국이 가당치 않은 이유를 들이대면서 작전통제권 환수를 연기한 것은 우리나라의 군사주권 회복을 또다시 미루는 것으로서 규탄 받아 마땅하다. 게다가 이와 연관시켜 미군기지이전비용마저 추가적으로 부담케 된다면 우리 국민은 이중의 피해를 입게 된다.

Since the wartime operational control right is the core of the military sovereignty, it should be immediately recovered without any reason and condition. Nevertheless the ROK-US authorities have delayed the transition of the OPCON with the unreasonable reasons and they deserve the denunciation for the delaying again of the recovery of the military sovereignty of [ROK]. Furthermore, if the ROK should additionally charge the relocation cost of the US bases [in Korea], with the cost being related [to the delay of the transition of the operational control [right], the people in our nation would get the double damages.

이에 우리는 군사주권의 핵심인 작전통제권 환수 연기를 강력히 규탄한다. 우리는 작전통제권을 즉각 환수하며 환수 연기와 연관된 미군기지이전비용 등의 추가 부담 기도를 즉각 중단할 것을 요구한다.

Therefore, we strongly denounce the delay of the transition of the [war time] operational control right that is the core of the military sovereignty. We call upon the both authorities to immediately recover the [wartime] operational control right [to the ROK] and to immediately stop the scheme on the [South Koreans’] additional charge of the relocation cost for the US base, in relation to the delay of the [war time] operational control right.

2010. 7. 22.

July 22, 2010

평화와통일을여는사람들

Solidarity for Peace and Reunification of Korea

(상임대표 : 문규현, 배종열, 홍근수)

(Executive Co-representatives: Fr. Moon Kyu-Hyun, Bae Jong-Ryol and Rev. Hong Geun-Soo)

Text Fwd: S.Korea may shoulder expenses for USFK Yongsan Garrison relocation

'Residents of Pyeongtaek City, Gyeonggi Province members of civic organizations hold a banner that states, “The U.S. Army should leave immediately,” during a demonstration, November 2007. The demonstration was held to voice opposition to the plan to relocate the U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) Yongsan Garrison in Seoul to Pyeongtaek.'

Hankyoreh
S.Korea may shoulder expenses for USFK Yongsan Garrison relocation
Posted on : Jun.29,2010 12:13 KST

The Cheong Wa Dae under President Lee Myung-bak and the Ministry of National Defense have repeatedly stated that South Korea will not be bearing any additional burden if the schedule for the transfer of wartime operational control (OPCON) is postponed until Dec. 1, 2015. Many observers, however, have been saying that the country has found itself at a great disadvantage in discussions on the expenses of relocating U.S. military bases to Pyeongtaek City.

Sejong Institute Senior Researcher Hong Hyun-ik said on Monday that while the relocation of the Pyeongtaek base was postponed due to the U.S. financial situation, “since the wartime operational control transfer was postponed at South Korea’s request, the conditions have been formed for the expenses of building the Pyeongtaek base to be shifted to South Korea.”

The Cheong Wa Dae (the presidential office in South Korea or Blue House) cited the completion of the United States Forces Korea (USFK) base relocation to Pyeongtaek in 2012 as one of the reasons for postponing the date of the transfer of wartime operational control three years and seven months past the agreed-upon date of April 17, 2012. Both South Korea and the United States agree on the relocation of the Yongsan Garrison to Pyeongtaek, scheduled to take place around 2015. Discussions, however, have remained difficult as South Korea has called for the relocation of the U.S. Second Infantry Division headquarters in Uijeongbu to Pyeongtaek in 2015 and the U.S. has called for relocation in 2016.

The reason for the stalemate in relocation discussions is the difference in opinions on the two countries’ share of the expenses for the move. According to a project management firm’s December 2008 comprehensive facilities plan, the relocation of the Yongsan garrison is set for completion in late 2014, and the U.S. Second Infantry Division headquarters in 2016. For several years, however, South Korea and the United States have been unable to agree upon their shares of the construction costs.

During the discussions, the United States argued that completing the Pyeongtaek base construction by 2015 would require a budget of $600 million per year, and that it would have to extend the construction period because it was only able to secure $300 million. This applied indirect pressure upon South Korea to pay additional expenses if it wanted to finish the relocation by 2015.

Military officials and experts predict a greater likelihood that the United States will use the Cheong Wa Dae’s policy of completing the Pyeongtaek relocation by 2015 as a means to transfer relocation expenses to South Korea during the discussion process. There is also a chance it will call for additional amendments not in the existing agreement, such as lodging for family members accompanying the U.S. forces.

Also noteworthy was the fact that on June 16, ten days before the announcement of the agreement to postpone the transfer of wartime operational control, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced that he would be cutting the U.S. defense budget by around $100 billion over the next five years due to the fiscal deficit. The War on Terror has caused the U.S. defense budget to balloon from $316 billion in 2001 to $693 in 2010.

“The relocation of the Yongsan Garrison and U.S. Second Infantry Division headquarters has nothing whatsoever to do with the wartime operational command transfer issue, and has been delayed due to issues such as the construction plans,” said Deputy Defense Minister Jang Kwang-il.

The Ministry of Defense has not given any official explanation to date on the specific date of the relocation or the scale of expenses shared between South Korea and the United States. It has cited as a reason for the lack of explanation the fact that discussions have remained “under way” on the USFK relocation since beginning in 2008.

Please direct questions or comments to [englishhani@hani.co.kr]

__________________________________________________________

* Related article

Hankyoreh
[Editorial] Ratify OPCON transfer delay at the National Assembly
June 29, 2010

Excerpts:

“The Lee Myung-bak government and conservative newspapers have claimed that wartime operational control has nothing to do with military sovereignty, but this is a falsehood. They have stated that wartime operational control is exercised in accordance with agreed upon guidelines from the South Korean and U.S. presidents within the framework of the Security Consultative Meeting (SCM) and Military Commission (MC). This, however, is merely a formality. It is self-evident that the commander of Combined Forces Command (CFC), who is also the commander of the U.S. Forces Korea (USFK), will follow the directions of the U.S. president in an emergency. It is a reality that OPLAN 5027, which is a plan of action for a full-scale war on the Korean Peninsula, is being planned by United States Pacific Command (USPACOM). The fact that the United States would push a security response in an emergency on the Korean Peninsula in accordance with their own strategic judgment is also a source of instability resulting from the deferment of military sovereignty.”

“In particular, it is necessary to make public the entirety of the negotiating process and what was discussed, if only to reduce suspicions of a political exchange through major South Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA) concessions. The Lee administration has merely stated that Kim Tae-hyo, presidential secretary for national security strategy, began discussing a delay in the transfer of wartime operational control in early February. Despite the fact that the United States likely requested something in return from South Korea when the country first requested the delay in wartime operational control transfer, there has been no explanation. There has also been no explanation about the progress of the KORUS FTA negotiations.”

Text Fwd: Closed-door negotiations may push OPCON transfer to 2015

Hankyoreh

Closed-door negotiations may push OPCON transfer to 2015

: Diplomatic sources say S.Korea and the U.S. discussed an OPCON transfer delay, but will not go public with the plans until Saturday’s summit Posted on : Jun.26, 2010 Modified on : Jun.26,2010

President Lee Myung-bak and U.S. President Barack Obama will discuss delaying the transfer of wartime operational control (OPCON) when the two meet in Toronto on Saturday (local time). Neither leader, however, has officially stated the way in which discussions over the issue have unfolded thus far. An examination of statements given by government officials and diplomatic sources indicates that a decision in principle has already seemingly been reached.



Multiple diplomatic sources involved with South Korea-U.S. relations said Friday that they understand that through closed-door contacts over time, the South Korean and U.S. governments have virtually reached an agreement to postpone the transfer of wartime operational control, which was initially scheduled for April 17, 2012, three years to 2015.

“U.S. forces in Japan, which are linked to U.S. forces in South Korea, are scheduled to complete their redeployment by October 2015, and from a purely military technology perspective, even if the transfer of operational control is delayed to October 2015, the United States would not have to make any changes to its global military strategy,” said a government official. “It seems predictions that the move of U.S. bases to Pyeongtaek will be complete by around 2015 have been factored in as well.”

There are many, however, who predict that during the Toronto summit, no concrete mention of the timing of the delay will be made; rather, after the two leaders have expressed a direction in principle, the details will be worked out through follow-up negotiations between South Korean and U.S. military officials.



The South Korean and U.S. governments have until recently repeatedly said that the transfer would proceed as scheduled, but in fact, there have reportedly been under-the-table negotiations on the issue of delaying the transfer since last year. Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan told local and foreign journalists Thursday that the government began to recognize changes in the situation when North Korea conducted its second nuclear test (on May 25, 2009). The under-the-table negotiations reportedly began in earnest last December, when a key figure in Cheong Wa Dae’s office of the senior secretary for foreign affairs secretly visited the United States, informing not even the South Korean ambassador in Washington, to meet with White House and State Department officials. The United States was reportedly negative at first regarding South Korea’s request to delay the transfer, but it began to adopt a more positive attitude towards the matter in March-April.



The problem is that the fine-tuning on a key point of contention of the alliance was conducted via high-level, secret negotiations focused on Cheong Wa Dae and the White House while virtually excluding the ministries and departments in charge of the issue in both countries. In response, Defense Ministry spokesman Won Tae-jae said during an open briefing Friday that the Defense Ministry has not conducted any negotiations with the Untied States over delaying the transfer. Foreign Ministry officials have responded by saying they know nothing, and official of the South Korean embassy in Washington say they have not been ordered by Seoul to do anything regarding the issue. The U.S. Pentagon is reportedly opposed to delaying the transfer as it stands. In fact, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said at a press conference after the 41st Security Consultative Meeting (SCM) in October that he was “absolutely certain” operational command would be transferred on April 17, 2012.

Please direct questions or comments to [englishhani@hani.co.kr]

______________________________________________________________

* Related article (* Informed by Rick Rozoff on June 28, 2010)

Obama: U.S. Extends South Korea Wartime Control To 2015
: Defense News
Agence France-Presse
U.S., S. Korea Defer Command Transfer To 2015
June 27, 2010

Text Fwd: U.S. receives criticism for contrasting Korea-Japan policies

Hankyoreh
U.S. receives criticism for contrasting Korea-Japan policies
: Critics say flexibility over S.Korea’s OPCON transfer while rejecting Japan’s request to move a Marine Corps Air Station tarnishes the U.S.’s policy credibility and consistency
Posted on : Jun.26,2010 18:37 KST

The Barack Obama administration’s contrasting attitudes regarding moving the Marine Corps Air Station Futenma in Japan and the transfer of wartime operational control (OPCON) in South Korea have become a source of controversy. This is because the United States has shaken off requests by Japan’s Democratic Party government to renegotiate the deal to move Futenma outside Okinawa prefecture, with Washington basing its rejection on a deal worked out with the previous Japanese government led by the Liberal Democratic Party. Meanwhile, the United States has reportedly agreed to discuss delaying the transfer of wartime operational control to South Korea when President Obama meets with President Lee Myung-bak in Toronto on Saturday, leaving behind an agreement made with the Roh Moo-hyun administration.



The United States ignored a request to renegotiate by the former Democratic Party government of Hatoyama Yukio, who pledged in last August’s general election that he would move Marine Corps Air Station Futenma to, at the very least, a location outside of Okinawa. The United States pressured Tokyo to carry out an agreement made in May 2006 to move Futenma to Camp Schwab in Henoko, a coastal location near the city of Naho in northeast Okinawa, and the Democratic Party government was forced to “surrender.” As a result, the Social Democratic Party left the coalition government and the Hatoyama cabinet collapsed.



In response to “double moves” regarding major pending security issues in South Korea and Japan, the Center for Peace and Disarmament of the People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (PSPD) released a critical editorial Thursday saying it could not help but be suspicious of the policy consistency and credibility of the Obama administration. PSPD also sent an official letter to the U.S. embassy in South Korea asking that it reveal the U.S. government’s official direction on the issue.

A former high-ranking official said Friday that the United States absolutely needs the original plan for the Futenma move to be executed, but it is likely willing to delay the wartime operational command transfer in South Korea because Washington has made the determination that a short delay would not harm the overall transfer, and that it can receive a number of concessions from South Korea in return. The official also said that in either case, U.S. policy consistency and credibility would necessarily take a hit.

Please direct questions or comments to [englishhani@hani.co.kr]

Text Fwd: U.S. troops to redeploy abroad in future to meet security challenges: commander

* Image source: Tongil News
‘Walter Sharp, Commander of the United Sates Forces of Korea, speaking to the U.S. soldiers,
before Obama’s consolation visit to them in the Songtan AFB, Pyeongtaek, Nov. 19, 2009’
(Image source: Tongil News)

Yonhap News
By Hwang Doo-hyong
WASHINGTON, Dec. 14 (Yonhap) -- The United States said Monday it will deploy some of its troops in Korea to other conflict regions in the future to meet growing security challenges both regionally and globally.

"We also need to have our forces in Korea in the future to be able to more regionally engaged and globally deployed," Gen. Walter Sharp, commander of U.S. forces in Korea, told a forum at the Center for Strategic and International Studies here. "Regionally engaged and globally deployed, but never forgetting that our No. 1 responsibility in Korea is to defend the Republic of Korea if we did go to war."

Sharp's remarks are in line with those of Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who said earlier this month that the Obama administration will follow up on the strategic flexibility posture drawn up by the Bush administration for rapid deployment of U.S. troops abroad to conflict regions.

"The idea of strategic flexibility is one we are addressing with the South Korean leadership," Mullen said. "We think it is very important, part of a strategic concept for security both for the region and globally."

About 28,500 U.S. troops are currently deployed in Korea as a legacy of the 1950-53 Korean War.

Mullen also said in October that discussions are under way about rotating U.S. troops in South Korea, although he added, "We are very committed to 28,500 troops' presence in South Korea. That's strongly reaffirmed by President Obama, both publicly as well as his meetings with President Lee (Myung-bak)."

Sharp explained the contradiction in Mullen's remarks, saying some of the 28,500 U.S. troops to be deployed abroad will eventually return to South Korea, where their dependents reside.

"Sometime in the future we could have forces that could, with consultations between both nations, be able to deploy, either ourselves or together, in different places around the world," Sharp said. "But not deploy away and not come back to Korea, but deploy away with the families remaining in Korea, and then come back to Korea after the deployment, never forgetting our No. 1 responsibility."

South Korean officials have denied media reports about a possible troop reduction in Korea, prompted by remarks by Obama to American soldiers in Seoul last month. "The story of your service goes beyond this peninsula," Obama said. "Others among you served in Afghanistan. Others among you will deploy yet again."

Seoul officials have said they had never discussed a troop reduction with the U.S., adding that Obama's remarks should be seen as a routine rotation of troops without reducing the number.

In announcing the plans to send a 140-strong Provincial Reconstruction Team to Afghanistan next year, accompanied by about 320 troops for their protection, South Korean Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan recently said that increased aid to Afghanistan by South Korea is linked to the stable deployment of U.S. troops in the Korean Peninsula.

Sharp said that the redeployment of U.S. troops in Korea will take place in close consultation with South Korea.

"The regional engagement and global deployment, we are not ready for that to happen today," he said. "We have to be able to work through, but be able to at least have the ability to be able to look at where do we want, what capability do we have in the alliance that can help both regionally and globally and the security and the challenges or opportunities we have."

On South Korea's retaking of the wartime command control of its troops from the U.S. in 2012, the U.S. commander said, "The OPCON transfer will take place on the 17th April, 2012."

"I am convinced that we will be militarily prepared for that," he said. "OPCON transition does not mean an independent OPCON. We will still be in the alliance and the coalition will still be committed to fight side by side."

hdh@yna.co.kr
(END)


* More related blogs

http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/2009/12/four-party-talks-no-re-dispatch-to.html
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Four Party Talks! No Re-Dispatch to Afghanistan! No Illegal Defense Sharing Cost! And Returning Back of the Dongducheon USFK Base, Soon!

http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/2009/11/text-fwd-us-soldiers-in-korea-negative.html
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Text Fwd: US Soldiers in Korea Negative About Rotation to Middle East


* Related article

Korea Times
12-15-2009 19:04
USFK Commander Hints at Troop Redeployment
By Jung Sung-ki, Staff Reporter


* Related Korean article

Tongil News
Sharp, “ Overseas Deployment of the United States Forces of Korea (USFK)… Along with the South Korean Soldiers”:
Clearly Shown of the ‘Strategic Flexibility’ between the R.O.K.-U.S...
“ Loosened of the Reins, with the Launch of the Lee Myung-Bak (2MB) Government.”
샤프 "주한미군 해외배치... 한국군도 함께"
한.미 '전략적 유연성' 가시화... "MB정부 들어 고삐 풀렸다"
Dec. 15, 2009
Jeong Myung-Jin (mjjung@tongilnews.com)