[Translation Fwd] For the True Vision of Jeju, Let’s Start from the Renovation of the Public Discussion Society

Below arbitrary translations are from the parts of the Sisa Jeju special column, called, ‘For the True Vision of Jeju, Let’s Start from the Renovation of the Public Discussion Society’. This may help for people to see how the people in Jeju consider the reality and tasks of the Jeju Island.

It was written by Mr. Go Yu Gi, Chief of Secretary of the Jeju Solidarity for Participatory Self-Government & Environmental Preservation. He has worked in that organization for 15 years and has been one of the key activists for the Jeju naval base struggle since 2002 when the issue begun to be broadly concerned. However, his concern as a Jeju activist is more than the issue of naval base. In this column, he sees the Jeju Island as the possible model hoped to be an alternative for the developmentalism ideology that currently dominates the Jeju Island. (In fact, it can be said that the developmentalism has been the South Korea’s biggest obsession after the Korean War and division, has been driven with capitalism value and anti-communist ideology, contributing to strengthening of the power of the right wing classes and military dictatorships by mid-90s.)

He suggests ,for the vision of true Jeju, to start from the renovation of the society of public discussion. First it is the direction of the public discussion in which he asks the meaning of ‘progress’. He says the frame of its meaning should come out from the only economy-considered. Second, he says second issue is the subjects of public discussion. Seeing that the areas of the subjects of the public discussion have been dominated by so called the ‘opinion group’ of the dominating class, he emphasized to bring up the ‘field specialists’ whose self-taught knowledge, experience and wisdom have been accumulated through the direct field works and whose works should be connected, ‘coordinated’ by press & civil organizations and encouraged as the true subjects of public discussion. The translated parts here are; first part of how he sees the Jeju as ‘still preserved society’ but threatened by the direction of public discussion called, ‘developmentalism’ whose factual static shows far different results from its ideology; and the need to re-consider of ‘progress’ in different angle. The other parts were omitted in translation for length.

__________________________________________________________________

* Image source : same as the link

▲Go Yu Gi, Chief of Secretary of
the Jeju Solidarity for Participatory Self-Government & Environmental Preservation
▲ 고유기 참여환경연대 집행위원장

Sisa Jeju

For the True Vision of Jeju, Let’s Start from the Renovation of the Public Discussion Society:
[Special Column for the 1st Commemoration Year of the Foundation of Sisa Jeju]
Go Yu Gi, Chief of Secretary of the Jeju Solidarity for Participatory Self-Government & Environmental Preservation
Feb. 26, Friday, 2010, sisajeju (at)sisajeju.com

참다운 제주의 비전, 공론사회의 혁신부터 시작하자
[시사제주 창간 1주년 특별칼럼] 고유기 참여환경연대 집행위원장
2010년 02월 26일 (금) sisajeju (at)sisajeju.com


Days ago, I have visited Muju, Jeollabuk-do, while I joined the meeting for which all the local organizations in South Korea gathered.

For this writer, Muju has been the place where the vivid nature of the high mountains and deep valleys exists, in my imagination.

However, the real condition of Muju where I have actually visited was very heartbreaking. While the commercial facilities like night-long illuminated quarters in the Dukyoo Mt. National Park was not so different from those of any other National parks, I could not but automatically sigh when I faced the looks of the ski field that extended to the 1600 M height of the mountain top. I lost words as I heard that the Hyangjeock, the highest peak of the mountain could be reached by 20min. walking distance by using the ski field gondola.

Compared to that, the Jeju is still healthy. Its preservation has relatively been better than any others among the national parks. Even though people say, ‘development’, and ‘development’, the living nature is still breathing everywhere and the beautiful landscape view has not lost its light in the Jeju [Island]. The ‘Olle’ that has brought the rapid & hot trend of itself, has showed that Jeju could go forward for the Mecca of the nature-friendly slowness and health. Further, it has increased vividness to the local villages that have been alienated due to the ‘roundabout roads’ that have been differently formed every other day, and has shown the enough possibilities of the Jeju as the economic model where the agriculture economy has been revived again despite small degree.

# ‘Olle’ and ‘Do Not Ask’ Developmentalism

The Jeju has kept the controversy on development and preservation for last decades. Even though, as the economic logic has become dominant, the controversy itself seems to become the object of aversion among the many Island people, still many Island people are pointing out, economy and ‘environment’ as the most important tasks of the governing Island, at the same time. Even though it seems divisive, I accept this as the demand for the development policy that attaches importance to the nature of Jeju. Such balance sense of the public opinion of the Island people is keeping Jeju as the beautiful place that human can live.

Since when the aspect of the public discussion of Jeju society has changed into the atmosphere that suggests to stop controversy and to ‘make’ something or whatever’. In fact, one can confirm that there are tremendous numbers of ‘not-to-ask supporting class’ in the classes of policies such as naval base and profit-oriented hospital. In cases of casino, cable cars are same as well. The logic says to at least make a try without counting this and that. In a way, it is a part enough understandable in the situation when the breakthrough for the progress of Jeju seems far away.

[...]

# For the vision of true Jeju, lets’ start from the renovation of the society of public discussion

Now, Jeju is again in the cross -roads. The coming 10years will be the important period whether to make the development structure of ‘Jeju as it is’ symbolized by ‘Olle’ or to extend the current floating trend. I think it is not exaggerating to say that the coming 10years will decide the future direction of Jeju.

For that, the public discussion of the Jeju society has to be changed in two dimensions.

First, it is of the direction of the public discussion.

By now, the direction of the public discussion of the Jeju society has been to an ‘international freedom society’, in a word. However, the result of it can be said enough ‘failure’ just by the facts of; the economic index such as the lowest GRDP nationwide, the highest rate of the small business management nationwide, the highest rate of the irregular workers nationwide, and the highest rate of the basic supply-demand nationwide; and environmental index such as the highest reduction rate of the mountains and forests, highest rate of golf course and road development; and self-governing index such as the low level of self-support finance and the lowest rate of self-reliance finance nationwide. […] Especially the employment of the residents for the tourism development business, appears that more than 54% is the irregular job among the 4,611 of the practically employed human force.

The tourism policy is floating, as well. Even though people have recently been inspired as to say that the new chapter for 6million tourists has opened, the tourists’ travel expense costs have not greatly increased, despite the increasing trend of the tourists, thus the tourism income against the calculated cost of the service has been decreased and the domestic travel cost( from the standard of the nationwide) considered with the rise in prices, has been long time stagnant without big increment since 2000.

However, the public discussion of the Jeju, while not having gone beyond the frame of international freedom city, has been how to attract much foreign capital, how to reduce the regulations for that, and how to make the atmosphere of Jeju where the Island people could agree with it.

Now ‘progress’ should be the thing that contains the life condition & quality of the specific individuals. The era when ‘the development’ was the only thing to be explained for progress has gone. Rather, ‘Anti-development’ is pointed out for the important element of progress. The equality of ‘economic growth= progress’ has been fallen behind. Said of ‘progress’, the various elements of the non-economic area, such as culture, welfare, safety, and increment of direct democracy, ecology diversity, maturity of the social cultural system for peaceful communication, have become the important progress elements.

This enormously fits to the character of Jeju. The Jeju that has only 1% of all the nation economy area has the very big competition ability in the non-economic area.

It is only possible to see the vision of Jeju when one comes out of the frame calculated with the mathematical angle. [One] should put the Jeju in the angle of value and go forward toward the progress vision that fits for it.

[...]

[국문 번역] JEJU ISLAND HEATING UP AGAIN 다시 뜨거워지는 제주도

Image source: Sisa Jeju on Feb. 24, 2010

Bruce Gagnon blog on Feb. 26, 2010
Friday, February 26, 2010
2010년 2월 26일
JEJU ISLAND HEATING UP AGAIN
다시 뜨거워지는 제주도

The South Korean Navy Chief of Staff (center right) met with the governor of Jeju Island (center left) earlier this week. The bottom line is that the South Korean government wants to begin construction of the naval base on Jeju sometime in March.

해군 [참모] 총장 (오른쪽 중앙)이 제주도 도지사 (왼쪽 중앙) 과 이른 이번주[2월 24일]에 만났읍니다. 마지선은 남한 정부가 3월 언젠가 해군 기지 건설을 시작하려 원한다는 것입니다.

The Yonhap news reported that the South Korean national defense minister said, “The Jeju naval base is essential for strengthening the control ability on the southern area.” [Southern area is basically the sea lanes that China uses to import 80% of its oil.]

연합 뉴스는 남한 국방 장관이 “제주 해군 기지는 남부 지역의 통제 능력을 강화하는데 필수”라 말했다 합니다.” [남부 지역은 중국이 80% 의 석유를 수입하는 바닷길입니다.]

“If the base is set up, it could become the tremendous special benefit to the Jeju Island people, such as population being increased by 10,000 and the economy being vitalized.”

"기지가 들어서면 인구가 1만여명 늘고 경제가 활성화되는 등 제주도민들에겐 상당한 특혜가 될 수 있다”

The villagers are banking that a lawsuit they are now pursuing, centered around environmental consequences of the base construction, will help them stop the base from being established.

마을 주민들은 그들이 현재 기지 건설의 환경적 결과를 중심으로 추진하는 법정 소송이 기지가 건설하는 것을 막느데 도움이 될 거라 생각합니다.

[ * According to the Jeju activists and villagers, the above lawsuit was applied in April, last year, and currently being moored in the Seoul Administrative Court. It is against the Minister of the National Defense department (a lawsuit for the confirmation on the cancellation of the approval on the executive plan of the defense & military facility). It is heard that the trial is on March 25 and the result would be mid-April, this year. ]

[* 제주 활동가들과 주민들의 말을 참고하면 위의 소송은 작년 4월에 신청된 것으로 현재 서울행정법원에 계류 중이며 이는 국방부 장관을 상대로 한 행정소송 (국방.군사시설 실시계획 승인 무효 확인소송)이다. 올 해 3월 25일 공판이 있고 결과는 4월 중순에 있다 함.]


The U.S. and South Korean government are expanding their military alliance - what they are calling "strategic flexibility" - to make it a more mobile alliance.

미국과 남한 정부는 그들이 “전략적 유연성”이라 부르는 군사적 동맹을 더욱 기동적 동맹이 되도록 확장하고 있읍니다.

Strategic flexibility is a transformation of, or critical departure from the traditional U.S. - South Korean military alliance, which was originally aimed at North Korea, stipulated in the US-SK Mutual Defense Treaty in 1953, right after the Korean war.

전략적 유연성은 원래 한국 전쟁 이후 1953년 한-미 상호 방위 조약에 명기된 것처럼 북한에 대적하기 위해 만들어진 전통적 미-남한 군사 동맹의 전환 또는 결정적 이탈입니다.

NATO will be utilized and expanded into East Asia to effectively surround and control China just as it is now being expanded eastward in Europe to surround Russia. Strategic flexibility also means that South Korean military forces will become more expeditionary as we today see them being sent to Afghanistan to augment the U.S. military occupation.

나토(NATO 북대서양 조약 기구) 는 그것이 현재 러시아를 봉쇄하기 위해 유럽으로 확장하는 것처럼 중국을 효과적으로 봉쇄, 통제하기 위해 활용되어 동아시아로 확장 할 것입니다. 전략적 유연성은 또한 남한 군대가 오늘날 미국 군대 점령의 증원을 위해 아프가니스탄에 보내지는 것처럼 남한 군대가 또한 기동적이 될 것을 의미합니다.

Thus the Navy base on Jeju Island will play a key role for the U.S. in its strategy of integrating the South Korean military into the broader U.S. imperial agenda. They call it "interoperability".

그러므로 제주도의 해군 기지는 미국이 남한 군대를 좀 더 큰 제국주의적 안건으로 통합하는데 있어 핵심 역활을 할 것입니다, 그들은 그것을 “상호 운용 interoperability” 이라 부릅니다.

The villagers of Gangjeong on the island, who will suffer from the base, will now sit in the middle of a dangerous chess game as the U.S. makes a move to checkmate Russia and China in the region.

기지로부터 고통을 당할 섬의 강정 주민들은 미국이 지역의 러시아와 중국을 궁지로 몰아놓는 위험한 체스 게임의 한 가운데 앉게 될 것입니다.

_____________________________________________________________________

1 Comments:
1코멘트

Blogger Ariel said...
블로거 아리엘이 말하길...

Hmmmmm, I wonder if it's possible to get China and Russia to weigh in against the construction of the naval base on Jeju Island.
흐음.. 중국과 러시아가 제주도의 해군 기지 건설에 대항해 끼어들 것이 가능한지 궁금하군요.

_____________________________________________________________________

* Related article 관련 기사

http://www.sisajeju.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=50319

Bruce Gagnon, spreading again his opposition against the Jeju Naval Base
: Expresses Concern that Gangjeong Villagers Will Sit in the Middle of the Dangerous Chess Game”
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Woo Seung-Ho (woodsstar12(at)sisajeju.com)

브루스 개그논, 제주해군기지 반대 입장 또 전파
"강정주민들, 위험한 체스 게임의 한 가운데 앉게 될 것" 우려 표명
2010년 03월 02일 (화)
우승호 기자 woodsstar12@sisajeju.com

[국문 번역]Text Fwd: Protest appeal against the Deployment of PAC 3 in Kurume City, Fukuoka, Japan 일본 후쿠오카현 구루메 시 PAC3 배치에 반대하는 항의 호소문

* Image source 자료 출처 : Kouichi Toyoshima and Anatakara.com

“We could not stop deployment of PAC3 to Kurume, but we have got many supports from abroad,
as well as from this country. I, as one of the coordinators of PNET, released a statement yesterday
and a local paper Nishinippon reported about it today.”
( sent by Kouichi Toyoshima on Feb. 25, 2010)

“우리는 구루메시에 PAC3 가 배치되는 것을 막을 수는 없었으나 [일본과] 해외로부터
많은 지지들을 얻었읍니다. PNET 코디네이터의 한 사람으로 어제 성명을 발표했고
지역 신문 니쉬니폰이 오늘 그 것을 기사화했읍니다.”
(2010 년 2월 25일 코우이치 토요시마 보냄)

(Source: Google)

Click for image for larger view
이미지를 클릭하시면 이미지 확대됨

Fukuoka Prefecture map 후쿠오카 현 지도
(Source: Google)

Click for image for larger view
이미지를 클릭하시면 이미지 확대됨
______________________________________________________________________________________

* For the related blog, go to HERE.
* 관련 블로그는 여기를 가시길.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Source 자료 출처: Anatakara.com (and also in ad9.org)

Protest appeal
항의 호소문

24 February, 2010
2010년 2월 24일

* By Koichi Toyoshima, Professor of the University of Saga
* 코우이치 토요시마, 사가 대학 교수

We protest against the deployment of PAC3 into the City of Kurume, and urge citizens of the city to stand up for eliminating the dangerous space war machine.

우리는 PAC3를 구루메 시에 배치하는 것에 대해 항의하며 위험한 우주 전쟁 기계를 없애기 위해 시의 시민들이게 일어나라고 촉구합니다.

Today, on Feb.24th, PAC3 was secretly deployed to Kouradai in the City of Kurume.

오늘 2월 24일, PAC3 가 구루메 시 쿠라다이에 비밀스럽게 배치되었읍니다.

This was the very day when we, P-Net, were supposed to have answers from the city authorities to our questions, after they had postponed it. They told us, on the very day of the deployment, that they would not ‘disclose the date of deployment. ‘

이는 우리 P-Net이 우리 질문에 대한 시 당국들의 대답을 그들이 연기했었던 이 후 받기로 된 날이었읍니다. 그들은 배치 바로 그날 우리에게 “배치 일정을 공개하지’ 않을 거라 말했읍니다.

This notification has become their actual refusal to answer our questions.

이 공고는 우리의 질문에 대한 그들의 실제 거절이 되었읍니다.

PAC3 deployment into Kouradai is part of the space militarization once called ‘Star Wars,’ which inevitably would doom the city to one of its established positions. For the City of Kurume to allow this deployment goes against ' The Declaration for Peace and the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons' the city itself adopted.

쿠라다이에 PAC3를 배치하는 것은 ‘우주 전쟁’이라 불리우는 우주 군사화의 일부분으로 그것은 시를 어쩔 수 없이 그 것의 건설된 일 부분으로 이끌고 말 것입니다. 구루메 시가 이 배치를 허락하는 것은 시가 채택했던 ‘평화와 핵무기 폐지를 위한 선언’에 역행하는 것입니다.

We are very disappointed at the content of the reply, almost business-like, having no reference to the issues we have questioned, as if to say that the city will not meddle in what the central
government does, being in obedient compliance with its direction. This attitude tells us that
the Mayor has almost abandoned his duty as head of this municipality.

우리는 마치 시가 중앙 정부의 방향에 복종하는 고분고분함으로 그 하는 일에 간섭하지 않을 거라 말하는 것처럼, 우리가 질문했던 이슈들에 대해서는 언급도 없이 비즈니스와도 같은 내용의 대답을 한 것에 대해 매우 실망합니다. 이러한 태도는 시장이 이 시읍면의 수장으로 그의 의무를 거의 포기했음을 말합니다.

From the reply by Mayor, we cannot see at all whether or not he has considered several messages sent to him from inside and outside Japan, including Prof. Toshihide Maskawa, the Nobel Prize winner for physics, and Mr. Bruce Gagnon, a peace activist in the USA, and Sung-Hee, Choi and Wooksik Cheong , peace activists in South Korea.

시장의 대답으로부터 우리는 그가 노벨 물리학상 수상자, 토시히데 마스카와 교수, 미국 평화 활동가 브루스 개그논, 그리고 한국 평화 활동가, 최성희와 정욱식등으로부터 온 일본 국내와 외국의 몇 가지 메시지들을 고려했는지 안했는지 전혀 알 수가 없읍니다.

As in the messages sent by Korean activists, military buildup can never be progressed without
enhancing regional tension. Additionally, this is the MD system with the overwhelming attack
capability operated jointly by the US forces and JSDFs, with the latter likely to have the
unconstitutional‘ war potential’ to attack its opponent’s soil. Therefore, it is easy to imagine
our neighboring countries may feel threatened.

한국 시민들이 보낸 메시지에 있는 것처럼, 군사적 축적은 지역적 긴장을 강화하지 않고서는 진전되지 않습니다. 게다가 이는 미국 군대와 일본 자위대에 의해 연합 작전되는 압도적인 공격 능력을 가진 MD 시스템으로 [자위대는] 그의 반대자의 땅을 공격할 ‘비헌법적’ 전쟁 잠재성을 가질 가능성이 높습니다. 그러므로 우리 이웃 국가들이 위협받는 것으로 느낄 것은 쉽게 상상이 됩니다.

Now, it is our turn , as citizens of Kurume, Fukuoka, to be asked on war and peace with a
familiar question whether we should accept this deployment, thinking PAC3 could intercept
a missile conveniently coming into its range or we should envision the regional peace by
attaching importance to the process of the détente in East Asia and trust-building in the region.

이제 후쿠오카 [관구] 구루메시 시민들로서 PAC3가 거리내 도달하는 미사일을 요격할 수 있는 것을 생각하며 우리가 이 배치를 받아들일 것인지 우리가 동북아 긴장 완화 과정의 중요성을 부여하여 지역적 평화를 전망할 것인지 전쟁과 평화라는 낯익은 질문을 받는우리의 차례입니다.

This is not only a regional matter but also a question of gravity, transcending the localism,
demanding imagination on our part.

이는 단지 지역적 문제가 아니라 우리의 입장에서 상상을 요구하는 것으로 지역주의를 초월하는 중대한 문제입니다.

Let’s unite the wisdom and action of every one of us, as a resident in this city, one in this prefecture.

이 현의 하나인 시의 거주자로서 우리 각자의 지혜와 행동을 모읍시다.

Koichi Toyoshima, Professor of the University of Saga

코우이치 토요시마, 사가 대학 교수

Coordinator
Kyushu Network of Anti-PAC3 and Pro-Article 9 Movements

코디네이터
큐슈 넷워크 PAC3 반대와 헌법 9조를 지키는 운동

http://pegasus1.blog.so-net.ne.jp
http://stop-pac3.blog.ocn.ne.jp/blog/

Text Fwd: “Make an Alternative for the Simultaneous Holdings of Six-Party Talks-Peace Forum”

▲ The Solidarity for Peace And Reunification of Korea (SPARK), opening the press interview
in front of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade Department, Jongno-Gu, Seoul, on Feb. 26, 2010,
urged for the “stop of the Minister level strategic talks aiming the permanence of the SK-US Alliance
(Photo by Cho Sung-Bong, Tongil News)

_____________________________________________________________________________________

* Below is the arbitrary translation of most part of below Tongil News

Tongil News
“Make an Alternative for the Simultaneous Holdings of Six-Party Talks-Peace Forum”:
Solidarity for Peace And Reunification of Korea (SPARK) in the Press Interview, before the ‘SK-US Minister Level Strategic Talks’
Feb. 26, 2010, Friday
Koh Sung-Jin (kolong81(at) tongilnews.com)

While the ‘SK-US Foreign Affairs and Trade Department Ministers Level strategic talks’ is being planned to be hold on Feb. 26, the Solidarity for Peace And Reunification of Korea (SPARK) urged [the both governments of] ROK & US, simultaneous holding of the Peace Agreement and Non-nuclearization negotiation, as soon as possible.

The SPARK having the press interview in front of the Foreign Affairs and Trade Department, Jongno-gu, Seoul, in the morning of same day and saying, “ The Minister of the Foreign Affairs and Trade Department, ROK and the Secretary of the State Department, US, seem to make the last negotiation on the resumption of the six-party talks and opening of the peace agreement negotiation through this minister level strategic talks,” announced that, “We urge the both Minister (ROK) and Secretary (US) to make an alternative to hold the six party talks and Korean peninsula peace forum, at latest, before April 12 when the nuclear security summit meeting is hold.”

The ‘SK-US strategic talks’ this time is after 4years of the first meeting between Ban Ki-Moon, the Minister of Foreign Affairs & Trade Department and Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State Department, at the time, in January 2006, and for the first time since the Lee Myung-Bak government reigned.

Through the Press Interview statement, the SPARK saying, “ The Non-nuclearization of Korean peninsula and Peace agreement are the core issues that the both countries of the NK-US demand each other and connected issues that can not be separated each other. Through the failure experiences of the six party talks, centered around the issue of the non-nuclearization of the Korean peninsula, it is clear that it is difficult to discuss any of them first’, repeatedly emphasized [the need] of the simultaneous parallel drive for the both of the peace agreement and non-nuclearization of Korean peninsula.

For this, “ The Obama government should withdraw the demand to NK of the returning back to the six party talks as soon as possible and the Lee Myung-Bak government should withdraw unrealistic claim of ‘opening of the peace agreement negotiation after the progress of the discussion on non-nuclearization’ that could not be regarded just as the chaining of the prompt opening of the six party talks and Korean peninsula peace forum.

The SPARK, while claiming that the both authorities of the ROK and US “should actively enter for the dissolution of the sanction against the North Korea, which the North Korea demands for the condition formation of the talks,” urged that “The North Korea should stop the nuclear weapon related activities.”

“ The talks would be for the SK-US alliance to be an invasive alliance and to be permanent.”

The SPARK, foreseeing that there would be the discussion to concretize the “ Joint Vision for the SK-US alliance” that was agreed upon by the Summits of the both countries last June in the strategic level talks between the ROK-US, this time, and predicted that the United States’ intention to make all-over of the strategic flexibility of the USFK and even to enforce the strategic flexibility of the ROK troops, would appear.

They saying that, “ The series of the movements like these are for transformation of the defensive nature of the ROK-US alliance to the invasive one and for aiming for the permanence for the ROK-US alliance,” pointed out that “The United States is intending to last her domination even though the Korean peninsula peace system and North East Asia peace security system would be established, and the pro-US-anti-NK power class, represented by Lee Myung Bak government are intending to keep their vest rights which are anti-nation and anti-unification.

They said that, “ We resolutely oppose the SK-US strategic alliance that makes permanence of the invasive SK-US alliance, that deepens of the subjugation to the United States, and that adds burden to the people, and strongly denounces the minister level strategic talks for the realization of it.”

[…]

A Disgrace Day for the South Koreans: The National Assembly Decided to deploy troops in Afghanistan

* Videos Fwd from the site of the Civilian Alliance Against the Redeployment of Troops to Afghanistan. The first was screened in the rally of 'No Dispatch of the South Korean Troops’ on Feb. 20, 2010'. The second was Feb. 20 rally.

No Dispatch of the Korean Troops to Afghanistan

Youtube URL(RANGZENKOREA)


Youtube URL(MediaVop)


_______________________________________________________________________
The National Assembly of South Korea passed the bill on Feb. 25 to send the South Korean troops to Afghanistan for two year and six months term.

The Korea Times says,

'The National Assembly passed a motion to dispatch civilian workers accompanied by security forces to Afghanistan in a vote of 148-5 with 10 abstentions.

Lawmakers of the opposition parties walked out of the Assembly's main chamber before the vote to express their objection. Legislators of the governing Grand National Party voted for the proposal.

The endorsement paves the way for stationing up to 350 workers and troops in Parwan Province near Kabul from July 1, 2010 to Dec. 31, 2012 to support the Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT).

Currently, 30 civilians are working on reconstruction efforts at the Bagram airbase, providing vocational programs and police training.

Opposition lawmakers have opposed the troop redeployment to Afghanistan, arguing it will make South Korea a major target for international terrorism.'

It made infuriated all the concerned Korean people. The people will not forget the day the bill was passed and will continuously resist against the injustice against of dispatch, occupation and war in Afghanistan.
______________________________________________________________________

Many organizations released the statement to denounce the decision of the National Assembly on Feb. 25

Below is the arbitrary translation of part of

Statement by the Center for Peace and Disaramament, People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (PSPD) on Feb. 25, 2010 (sent from Jieun in the same organization)

We Will Remember

The responsibility for all the disasters and conflicts that would be brought out by the [decision of] the redeployment to Afghanistan is in the hands of Lee Myung-Bak government, Grand National Party and 148 congressman who cast the votes in favor.

The National Assembly of South Korea has finally thrown the great disappointment to the South Koreans. On [Feb.] 25th, today, the bill on the agreement on the re-dispatch to Afghanistan was passed by the general meeting of the National Assembly, in which 148 were in favor of bill, 5 in opposition and 10 in abstention, among the current 163 members, while parts of the Democratic members left [as symbol of resistance] against the bill. The National Assembly self-posed itself as the rubber-stamps for the government bill of the redeployment to Afghanistan, while neither the high opposition of public opinion, existing promise of the withdrawal of troops [by the former government], not the safety threat to people by terror, were considered.

[...]

Even though the [South Korean] government directly violated its negotiation on the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan with people and damaged the National Assembly’s constitutional right, by requesting the deployment of the unprecedented long term, two years and six months, the majority of the congress men, lead by the Grand National party, not only aided but rather promoted it by leading it. The favoring 148 votes will be recorded in history as the proof of the fallen dignity of the people and National Assembly, this country.

We will remember this disgrace without fail and will ask responsibility for all the disasters that would come to our people and all the historical crimes that would be brought out by this vicious war, to the related personnel in the government and congress men.

Text Fwd: Kim Tae-Young, Minister of National Defense, “[We] Would Have the Ceremony for Starting to Work on the Jeju Naval Base in March.”

* Below is arbitrary translation of the linked article




Sisa Jeju
Kim Tae-Young, Minister of National Defense, “[We] Would Have the Ceremony for Starting to Work on the [Jeju Naval Base] in March.” :
The Navy Explains It Means, “The Setting to Work Would Be Naturally Started as the Related Procedure for Permission Would be Finished by Then”
Feb. 24, Wednesday, 2010
Kang Soo-Jung reporter (kkangsoo83 (at) sisajeju.com)

Kim Tae Young, the Minister of the National Defense Department, announced that, related to the Jeju naval issue construction, “ [the Dept.] would have the ceremony for the starting to work in Match and would complete it by 2014.

According to Yonhap news report, Minister Kim, speaking on the issue related to the Jeju naval base, in his special lecture by invitation from the Marine Strategy Research Institute, ROK, in the War Memorial museum, Yongsan, Seoul on Feb. 24, “ Even though many classes are still opposing it, [we] would have the ceremony to start the work in March and complete by 2014.”

The Yonhap news reported that Minister Kim saying, “The Jeju naval base is essential for strengthening the control ability on the southern area”, told “If the base is set up, it could become the tremendous special benefit to the Jeju Island People, such as population being increased by 10,000 and the economy being vitalized.”

Otherwise, the Jeju Island has announced its measure that it would send an opinion to the government so that the ceremony to start work on the Jeju naval base construction business, which had been planned on Feb. 5, in the beginning, could be processed after all the finish of the administrative lawsuit and administrative procedures.

Related to above, Park Sung-Su, the Lieutenant Colonel of the Jeju naval base construction business, elucidated that, “ [The Minister] was meaning the concept of rather than ‘the ceremony to start the work’, of his [rough layout] that the procedures for the reclamation of the public water or for the permission related could be finished then and the setting to work could naturally be started [by the time].

Otherwise, Jung Ok-Keun the [soon-to be-retired] Navy Chief of the Joint Staff, who has visited the Jeju Island and met Kim Tae-Hwan, the current governor and [who has recently announced his non-running for governor’s office, for June 2 election, said [the military] would hear the opinion of the Island people and deliver [people’s] difficulty to the higher offices, and he would agonize with the Island people.”

[He had the secret meeting with the Jeju Governor on the day.]

Text Fwd: USFK Seeks to Expand Role Outside Peninsula

____________________________________________________________________________
Note:

1. “Strategic Flexibility” is the word that was concerned by many activists, here in Korea since 2002 . Please see this site.

The National Campaign for Eradication of Crimes by U.S.Troops in Korea

http://usacrime.or.kr/

(Find English in the top right, then look for the article No. 31, named
‘Realignment of U.S. Forces in Korea and Changes in US-ROK Military Alliance(Oct 2008)’


‘Negotiations on the relocation of U.S. bases within the ROK were initiated by U.S. demand. The U.S. wanted to manage the USFK in a more efficient manner; For example, they sought to reduce the number of army bases by combining bases and army Training Areas, while simultaneously expanding the air bases and exclusive U.S. marine Training Areas. As a result of the negotiations, the ROK and the U.S. signed the Land Partnership Plan1) in 2002.

The U.S. did not stop at simply obtaining the efficient management and reinforcement of Air Force and the Navy (marines). The U.S. also sought to attain the flexibility and option to dispatch its excellently trained USFK to other battlefields in the region.’


2.The strategic flexibility is a transformation of or critical departure from the traditional US-SK alliance, which was based on the alliance against the North Korea, stipulated in the US-SK Mutual Defense Treaty in 1953, right after the Korean war. The transformation meant the USFK in the SK and further, the South Korean troops would involve in any war lead by the US imperial war. The NATO is utilized and expanded to East Asia to effectively integrate the command and control of the Asian countries. Its content has been more and more concretized as you see the current SK dispatch plan to Afghanistan, whose congress pass is expected this Feb. 18. You may refer to the below.


"joint vision for the future ROK-US alliance" (June 16, 2009)

http://www.spark946.org/bugsboard/index.php??dummy=1245146968&BBS=eng_2&action=viewForm&uid=33&page=1

‘The ROK government's decision to send more troops to Afghanistan endangers the lives and the national sovereignty of the Afghan people. Furthermore, it violates the ROK Constitution, which disavows aggressive war (article 5, paragraph 1) and violates the ROK-US Mutual Defense Treaty (articles 2, 3), which authorizes operations only on the Korean peninsula, and is applicable only on occasion of the armed aggression from outside.’


3. How the transformation of SK-US alliance affects the Japan-US alliance, you may refer to here. It was just accident that I found these two articles below. But it may help.

http://www.drc-jpn.org/AR-7E/Ohkushi-03e.htm
Changing US-ROK Alliance and Japan


'The realignment of the USFK will increase the relative weight and the role of the US forces stationed in Japan. It is highly possible for the US to deploy the Air Force fighter troops to Kadena and Misawa AFBs and the bomber troops to Guam Island rather than to augment the force in South Korea. And additional Carrier Battle Group will be dispatched to the adjacent sea. Moreover, there is a movement to reorganize the US Navy Assault Landing Force in Sasebo to "the Expedition Attack Group (ESG)", adding four combat warships equipped with Tomahawk cruise missiles. The ESG is considered to execute the preemptive strike strategy by heightening the readiness and mobility with missile attack and fleet defense capability in addition to the landing operation. Furthermore, several plans are reported to strengthen the logistic function in East Asia, such as the expansion of the maintenance and supply facilities of the USFJ bases in Japan, and the newly established North-East Asian Command that integrates the USFK and the USFJ.'


http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/121577.html
U.S. Japan Envision 'Interoperability' in Troop Realignment Plan:
U.S.-Japan Agrees New Alliance in Washington

‘Zama is expected to play a key role in contingencies in areas surrounding Japan such as the Korean Peninsula and the Taiwan Strait. In a situation where the U.S. is set to reduce its military presence in South Korea, the new U.S. Army command to be set up at Camp Zama would assume charge in an emergency on the Korean Peninsula.

The agreements put the finishing touches on such thorny issues as the transfer of some 8,000 U.S. Marines from Okinawa to Guam, which will eventually facilitate the deployment of U.S. forces to Southeast Asia, a region the U.S. sees as a hotbed of terrorism.

The two countries’ respective headquarters in Japan will be brought together to strengthen interoperability between the Japanese and U.S. forces in hopes of maximizing the benefits at the lowest cost possible. Including the latest decision, there have been three major occasions of U.S. military forces in Japan undergoing structural changes since the early years of the Cold War, and the changes have been made in a way to deepen their bilateral alliance, experts note.

Meanwhile, the headquarters of a Ground Self-Defense Force Central Readiness Force Command will also be transferred to Camp Zama by 2012, a move that will enhance the interoperability of the two countries' forces and pave the way for the operational integration of the flagship forces. In this context, Japan's Air Defense Command will be moved to the headquarters of the U.S. 5th Air Force at Yokota Air Base in Tokyo by 2010 while acting as the headquarters for MD (missile defenses) functions.’

______________________________________________________________________

Korea Times
02-24-2010 21:02
USFK Seeks to Expand Role Outside Peninsula

By Jung Sung-ki
Staff Reporter

After its decades-long stationary mission in South Korea, the U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) is taking steps toward expanding its missions to outside the Korean Peninsula, which U.S. defense officials do not consider an acting war zone anymore.

The USFK says the so-called strategic flexibility will not hurt its security commitment to South Korea against a possible North Korean invasion and instead help ensure its stable commitment with longer, family-accompanied tours by U.S. service members here.

Still, there are worries that such flexibility for out-of-area deployment of US troops will weaken the combined defense posture against North Korea.

A senior official at the Ministry of National Defense said last week that South Korean and U.S. defense authorities had opened talks over the issue formally.

"The two governments had already agreed on the issue of strategic flexibility in January 2006, so both sides are discussing how and when the scheme will be implemented," the official said on condition of anonymity. "We're trying to finalize an agreement by the year's end, hopefully before the Security Consultative Meeting (SCM) in October."

The official noted his ministry was focusing on getting proper U.S. bridging capability of intelligence-gathering, surveillance and reconnaissance to South Korea despite the U.S. flexible troop redeployment.

No Immediate Plan to Redeploy Troops

The USFK says it has no immediate plan to redeploy troops from the peninsula but the issue will evolve in coming years. It said in a news release earlier this month that redeployment of troops could be possible in the late 2010s after close consultations with the Korean government.

There are currently about 28,500 U.S. troops serving in South Korea. Despite Washington's repeated promises there will be no further cuts to that level, concerns persist that some may be redeployed after Seoul takes back wartime operational control, or OPCON, of its troops from the U.S. on April 17, 2012.

The defense of South Korea "remains the core mission of U.S. forces in Korea and there will be no reduction of U.S. forces tied to wartime OPCON transition," the USFK said in the statement.

In 2006, South Korea agreed to the U.S. strategic flexibility plan aimed at changing the mission of American forces abroad from stationary ones defending host nations to rapid deployment troops that can be swiftly dispatched to other parts of the world where the United States faces conflict, based on mutual consensus.

The agreement, however, ignited concerns that it could weaken the deterrent capability against North Korea, whose nuclear and missile programs pose a grave threat to regional security.

Some are also worried that intervention by the USFK in other regional conflicts, such as the China-Taiwan sovereignty dispute, or the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, could have the nation tangled in hostilities with other countries against its will.

"The strategic flexibility is part of the U.S. military's broader plan to realign its overseas forces, so that's not directly related to Seoul's exercise of independent wartime operational control in 2012,'' a senior researcher of the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses (KIDA) said on condition of anonymity. "But it's quite certain that as Seoul assumes more responsibility for national defense in coming years, the U.S. military will have more flexibility in moving its forces in and out of the peninsula."

"The thing is how the U.S. will compensate for the `flow-out' capability," he added. "Personally, I don't believe there will be a significant security vacuum here due to the strategic flexibility scheme, given the U.S. military's overwhelming naval- and air-centric capabilities."

Another defense expert said the strategic flexibility of U.S. troops overseas is an unavoidable "trend.''

He said, "The strategic flexibility is not a matter of conflict but a matter of consultation or coordination. It's time for us to think of what we can get from the U.S. strategic flexibility, not what we can lose from it."

Given that the agreed 21st strategic alliance partnership calls for boosting bilateral cooperation in global issues, we can't and shouldn't deny the strategic flexibility mechanism, said the expert.

"The Lee government should think of how it will get this message across to the public and prevent unnecessary controversy over this issue," he said.

In June, Presidents Lee Myung-bak and Barack Obama issued the Joint Vision for the ROK-US Alliance at the end of their summit in Washington, D.C. The plan calls for building a broader alliance in the realms of politics, economy, culture and other areas, in addition to the security arena.

'No More Combat Zone'

The U.S. Department of Defense approved a new USFK policy in December 2008 that allows about half of its 28,000 troops stationed in South Korea to have their families live with them.

The move reflects a major shift in the American perception toward South Korea, which was once considered too dangerous for families in the face of North Korea's military threats.

The extended tour length will contribute to further solidify the Korea-U.S. alliance by forging lifelong friendships at the family level, USFK officials said. It will also help improve training for service members and reduce stress on troops who have to leave their families behind, they said.

``Tour normalization signals a strong and visible commitment by the United States to the Republic of Korea, reaffirming our intent to remain here for the long term,'' USFK Commander Gen. Walter Sharp said in an interview last year.

``I will say that tour normalization will help establish a strong alliance relationship,'' he continued. ``The principle institutions of the alliance today — the armistice, short tours and the contingency nature of the Combined Forces Command — all have crisis connotations.''

The planned transition of operational control of Korean troops during wartime from the United States to South Korea in 2012 and the tour normalization initiative will move U.S. troops beyond this ``crisis mentality,'' said the commander.

Under the new policy, troops serving in accompanied billets, including Seoul, Osan, Pyeongtaek, Daegu and Jinhae, will stay for three years, while those serving in locations just south of the heavily fortified border, designated Area I, such as Uijeongbu and Dongducheon, will stay for two years.

Unaccompanied tours for most troops will remain at one year, but some "key personnel'' will serve two years of unaccompanied tours.

gallantjung@koreatimes.co.kr

Text fwd: 'ROK-US Combined Defense More Effective to Counter NK'

'Kim Tae-young
Defense Minister'

Korea Times
02-24-2010 19:32
'ROK-US Combined Defense More Effective to Counter NK'
By Jung Sung-ki
Staff Reporter

Defense Minister Kim Tae-young expressed hope Wednesday that the U.S.-led defense system would stay intact in coming years amid the lingering North Korean military threat.

Referring to the planned transition of operational control (OPCON) of South Korean troops during wartime from the U.S. to Korean commanders in 2012, Kim said the military was putting forth the best efforts to take over OPCON in 2012.

He said the ROK-U.S. combined defense posture would be more effective in defending South Korea for the time being, given the lingering threat posed by North Korean missile and nuclear programs.

"I also hope that the U.S.-led defense scheme will remain further, given the North Korean nuclear and missile threat," Kim said at a lecture hosted by a naval defense research institute in Seoul.

"But the OPCON transfer is a promise between the governments, so if we ask to scrap the agreement, we must give away many things. If not, it's impossible," he said.

The minister anticipated that the year 2012 would be a "complicated" year, referring to North Korea's goal to become a "strong and powerful nation" by that time to mark the 100th birthday of the late North Korean founder, Kim Il-sung, and the planned presidential elections in South Korea and the United States.

Kim said President Lee Myung-bak and other diplomatic and defense officials were trying to deal with the controversy over the OPCON transition, hinting at a possibility of renegotiations with the U.S. government over the issue.

Seoul and Washington agreed in 2007 that Korean commanders would execute independent operational control of their troops during wartime beginning on April 17, 2012, with the U.S. military shifting to an air- and naval-centric supporting role.

The two governments plan to set up their own theater commands after disbanding the ROK-U.S. Combined Forces Command (CFC).

South Korea voluntarily handed over both peacetime and wartime operational controls to the U.S.-led United Nations Command at the outbreak of the 1950-53 Korean War. The command authority was later transferred to the CFC. Korea took over peacetime control in 1994.

Conservative forces regard the command changes as a U.S. move to reduce its security commitment to South Korea. They argue the smaller role of the U.S. military amid lingering threats posed by North Korea could tip the military balance on the Korean Peninsula.

Many defense experts say the South Korean military will not be able to establish an independent defense posture due to its lack of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) assets until 2012.

gallantjung@koreatimes.co.kr

Soon-to-be-Retired Navy Chief of Staff Visits Gangjeong Village. Why?

* Image source: Seogwipo Daily News Paper

Image source: Sisa Jeju on Feb. 24, 2010

Image source: same as the link above

* Below is the Summary from the Jeju medias. (Jeju Sori, Sisa Jeju, Seogwipo Daily News Paper)

Jeong Ok-Geun, the Chief of the Joint Staff [of the ROK military] , whose two year term will end in coming March visited the Jeju Island governor’s office, along with his fellow staffs, on Feb. 24.

According to the navy, the visit was realized to drive for the Jeju naval base as the Joint of Chief of Staff, Jeong is to be retired, soon.

While , the schedule of the ceremony to start work on the Jeju naval base was not publicly announced, he had the closed meeting with the governor Kim after the official meeting.

Governor Kim Tae Hwan is ending his term with the local election in June and has recently announced that he would not run for candidate for the June election.

Jeong Ok-Geun, the Chief of the Joint Staff is known that he would visit the Jeju Island Congress, and the planned area for the Jeju naval base following the meeting with the Governor Kim.

For the video, see Jeju Sori on Feb. 24, 2010

Photos Fwd: No Lotte, No Golf Course in the Gyeyang Mountain, Incheon on Feb. 21, 2010

* Sent from Roh, Hyun-Gi (Secretary of the ‘Civil Council against the Golf Field and for the Incheon Civil Park) on Feb. 24, 2010

* Simultaneous action to keep Gyeyang Mt. by Incheon citizens on Feb. 21, 2010


* Related blog:
http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/2009/10/no-lotte-no-golf-course-in-gyeyang.html
Friday, October 30, 2009
No Lotte, No Golf Field in the Gyeyang Mountain, Incheon

Text Fwd: PROACTIVE ORGANIZING GETS BEST RESULTS

Bruce Gagnon on Feb. 24, 2010 (and blog)
PROACTIVE ORGANIZING GETS BEST RESULTS

I had an email this morning from a very well intentioned activist in another part of the country urging people to turn out today for an "emergency" vigil to mark the death of the 1,000th U.S. GI killed in Afghanistan.

Without trying to put down this effort I must say I don't think it is the most effective way to organize to stop endless war. Why is it an emergency when the 1,000th soldier dies? What about the 500th GI or the 10,000th innocent civilian killed in that war torn country? And probably most importantly, in what way is the organizer of the "emergency" demo educating his fellow local citizens about the real impacts of these wars?

I'm not against demos, I love them and think they have their important role, I organize a weekly vigil in my town. But most peace vigils have not changed the message on their signs since the 2003 shock and awe began. By now the public has read the signs that read War is not the anwer, No blood for oil, or Bring Our Troops Home Now. OK, they get it. So let's adapt the message and advance the agenda to a new level.

We often in the peace movement are in a reactive mode. But in order to successfully achieve our goals of ending war we have to flip the switch and become more proactive and force those in power to be reacting to us. Unless we begin to have a strategic discussion within the peace community then this will not likely happen.

The Bring Our War $$ Home campaign is just one illustration of this proactive process. In the state legislature in Augusta, Maine there are now a couple of state representatives circulating a letter amongst their peers that calls on our Congressional representatives in Washington to vote against further war funding. We now have local peace groups all over the state urging their state senators and representatives to sign onto this letter. This is causing some intense reflection on the part of many of these folks as they are having to deal with two key issues. One is that local and state politicians like to maintain that foreign policy is not in their area of responsibility. The other is that some of them have a hard time asking a fellow Democrat to stand up and buck the president on war spending. So this puts all of these elected officials in a reactive posture.

Just today we heard that last night in Bangor, Maine an activist stood up during their town hall meeting and spoke about the Bring Our War $$ Home Campaign. About 20 others stood with him and his high school age daughter passed a petition through the crowd and had folks sign it. She and another high school friend have been widely circulating the petition which calls for funding things like public education and the girls intend to bring this to their congressman asking him to stop voting for war funding.

This is an example of bringing the war message right into the daily life of the public and connecting it directly to their concerns about declining local government services. These local organizers are connecting the war to the local "emergency" and people can begin to understand that link and they can react to it.

What is also happening is that our two Congresspersons from Maine that represent us in Washington are starting to feel the heat from this campaign and they are having to "react" outside of their usual boxes. So when we crawl outside our normal safe organizing boundaries, by creating a proactive anti-war campaign, it causes ripples that force everyone else down the line to readjust. That is what you would call a movement. It's physics really, every action out of the ordinary causes a reaction.

Yesterday fellow Veterans for Peace member Tom Sturtevant from Winthrop, Maine came by the house to borrow our Bring the War $$ Home campaign banner. He is introducing a resolution in his community and wants to hold the banner in front of the town hall for a week or so prior to bringing the resolution to the city. So he is ensuring that some new kind of debate is going to happen in Winthrop about the war - not just the old "bring our troops home" that by now is stale and lifeless. Instead its a new and vital message he is interjecting into the consciousness of his town - a message they are not used to seeing from the peace movement and they will now have to think about it.

This same kind of organizing is now happening in Portland, Brunswick, Bath, Windham, Augusta, Deer Isle, Solon, Showhegan, Freeport, Farmington, and many other communities across Maine. Letters are appearing in virtually all the newspapers across the state on this theme and people are being forced to think about the wars in a new way.

All of us, if we truly want to advance our peace movement, must reassess whether our local work is reactive or proactive. The sooner we begin to do that the less "emergency" demos we will have to organize when the numbers of dead U.S. GI's reach 1,500 or 2,000 or more.

Bruce K. Gagnon
Coordinator
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)

No Missile Defense, No Cluster Bombs!

No arms race in the North East Asia!! No MD!(SPARK)

No Poongsan, cluster munitions production & export company! (SPARK)
Remove the non-humanitarian cluster munitions, weapons of mass destruction! (SPARK)

Join the Convention on Cluster Munitions! (SPARK)
No MD that makes China enemy! (SPARK)
Stop the plan to join the MD (SPARK)
Stop the HHOP (Humphreys Housing Opportunity Program)) construction business
that makes the USFK as the invasive forces to overseas! (SPARK)
(* The HHOP here concretely means rental housing for the USFK and their families, Pyeongteak)

'South Korea, join the Convention on Cluster Munitions! (SPARK)'

South Korea, join the Convention on Cluster Munitions! (SPARK)


* SPARK means Solidarity for Peace And Reunification of Korea

* Below is rough translation from the SPARK site.

[98th SPARK Peace Disarmament Rally for the abolishment of the cluster munitions and for joining of the convention on the cluster munitions]
: Simultaneous actions for the abolishment of the cluster munitions in front of the Defense Department, Poongsan headquarter (Seoul), and Angang factory of Poongsan (Kyungjoo)

Noon, Feb. 23 (Tuesday), 2010
Place: In front of the civil service consultation center, Ministry of the National Defense dept.


1. Cluster munitions of which a big bomb contains the small bombs, from 2~3 at least to 2,000 at most, and that bursts by spreading those, are the weapon that indiscriminately scorch the vast areas and an anti-humanitarian weapons, to the degree that 98% of the killed by them are the civilian.

2. Even though South Korea is one of the representing cluster production and export countries, she has not joined the Convention on the Cluster Munitions. And at least $80.8 billion won budget[about $ 76 million] of the cluster munitions [for storage] is included in 2010 defense budget.

3. Hanwha is exporting 2.75 inch MPSM (Multi-Purpose Sub-Munition) that is jettisoned from the helicopter or aircraft, while Poongsan is producing, selling and exporting the 155mm Dual-Purpose Improved Conventional Munitions (DP-ICM) that is used by K-9 self-propelled gun. The South Korean cluster munitions production companies of Hanhwa and Poongsan are becoming the targets of the international denouncement as those are designated as the ‘companies for investment ban’, each in Dec. 2006 and Jan. 2008, by the Norwegian GPDC whose motto is the ethical investment.’

4. On Feb. 23, Tuesday, the SPARK [did] the 98th SPARK Peace Disarmament Rally; for the abolishment of the cluster munitions; for urging the South Korean government to join the convention on the cluster munitions; for stopping the negotiation to join the US MD system; and for urging to stop the permission on posing and conditional use of the rental housing for the USFK families (The cost for that illegal practice would be from South Korean people’s bloody tax]. The SPARK [has also done] one-man protest simultaneously in front of the Poongsan headquarter, Angang factory of the Poongsan.


Peace Disarmamnet team, SPARK


The endorsers

Solidarity for Peace And Reunification of Korea
Sharing Culture
All Together
Share Culture of the University Students
And New Progressive Party


* There are other organizations who actively protest against the Cluster munitions, as well. Please see HERE.

Photo Fwd: Catholic Four Rivers protest

Hankyoreh
Catholic Four Rivers protest
Posted on : Feb.23,2010 11:58 KST

Fathers of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace and other Roman Catholic followers march to demand an end to the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project at the Haman weirs located in Changnyeong City, South Gyeongsang Province, on Feb. 22.

Photo by Kim Tae-hyung/The Hankyoreh

© 2006 The Hankyoreh Media Company

[국문 번역] Text Fwd: No PAC-3 in Kurume City, Fukuoka, Japan! [일본 후쿠오카 구루메시 PAC-3 배치 반대]

__________________________________________________________________________

Update : on Feb. 24, 2010 from Kouichi TOYOSHIMA
엎데이트: 2010년 2월 24일, 코우이치 토요시마로부터

'Dear friends,
친구들

According to the website of Ministry of Defense, PAC3 missile was deployed to the Koradai Base in Kurume City.
국방 장관의 웹사이트에 따르면 PAC3 미사일이 구루메시 코라다이 기지에 배치되었다 합니다.

http://www.mod.go.jp/j/news/2010/02/24a.html

This is just the day the Mayor of Kurume City postponed the answer to our questions.
이는 구루메 시 시장이 우리의 질문에 대답을 연기한 날입니다.

We now start our effort to remove this war machine from our city.
우리는 이제 우리의 도시로부터 이 전쟁 기계를 제거하기 위한 우리의 노력을 시작합니다.

Kouichi TOYOSHIMA
코우이치 토요시마

豊島耕一
http://blog.so-net.ne.jp/pegasus/
http://www.geocities.jp/chikushijiro2002/Default.html
http://pegasus.phys.saga-u.ac.jp/
佐賀大学理工学部物理科学科
840-8507　佐賀市本庄町1
phone/fax: +81 952-28-8845'

__________________________________________________________________________

* Image source: same as the below link

Bruce Gagnon blog on Feb. 22, 2010 브루스 개그논 블로그
Monday, February 22, 2010 2010년 2월 22일
SPACE AND BASES 우주와 기지들

'We've learned of another Japanese community that PAC-3 "missile defense" systems will be likely deployed in. Called Kurume-City, activists there are now working hard to raise debate about the destabilizing nature of these deployments. I was asked to write a letter to the mayor of Kurume and I immediately did and the letter was sent to the local newspaper and they printed it. In my letter I told the mayor that the PAC-3 is part of the U.S. first-strike attack program now under development that is ultimately being aimed at China as the Pentagon surrounds them.'

‘우리는 또다른 일본 공동체에 PAC-3 “미사일 방어망” 시스템이 배치될 것 같다란 것을 알게 되었읍니다. 구루메시라는 곳에서 활동가들은 이 배치들의 불안정한 성격에 관해 토론을 일으키려 열심히 일하고 있읍니다. 저는 구루메 시장에게 편지를 쓸 것을 요청 받았고 즉시 했으며 그 편지는 지역 신문에 인쇄되었읍니다. 제 편지에서 저는 시장에게 PAC-3는 현재 개발중인 미국 미사일 공격 프로그램의 일부이며 국방부가 그들을 둘러쌈에 따라 궁극적으로 중국을 목적으로 하는 거라 말했읍니다.’

___________________________________________________________________

* For more on the opposition movement against the PAC3 in Kurume city,
see:
구루메시의 PAC3 반대 운동에 관해서 더 많은 사항은 여기를 참고하시길 (일어/영어)

http://blog.so-net.ne.jp/pegasus/

http://www.geocities.jp/chikushijiro2002/Default.html

http://pegasus.phys.saga-u.ac.jp/

Anatakara.com

___________________________________________________________________

* Below is from Anatakara.com

http://stop-pac3.blog.ocn.ne.jp/blog/2010/02/pac3_c57c.html

http://stop-pac3.blog.ocn.ne.jp/blog/files/koukaisitumon.pdf
Feb. 16, 2010
2010년 2월 16일

Toshinori Narahara, Mayor of the City of Kurume

토시노리 나라하라, 구루메 시장께

Japanese ruling coalition and the Ministry of Defense are going to deploy PAC 3 to
JASDF Kouradai Sub Base in the City of Kurume, Fukuoka, in February after the previous PAC3 deployments in SDF Bases in Ashiya and Tsuiki also in Fukuoka.

일본 지배 연합정부와 국방부는 2월에 후쿠오카 구루메시, 일본 자위대의 쿠라다이 하부 기지에 PAC 3를 배치하려 하는데 이것은 역시 후쿠오카에 있는 아시야와 추이키의 자위대 기지들의 PAC 3 배치에 이은 것입니다.

The deployment of PAC 3 is part of the US Missile Defense system. Deployment of the
MD system, which is called ‘the shield for preemptive strike,’ further enhances missile crises.

PAC 3 배치는 미국 방어망 시스템의 일부분입니다. “선제 공격을 위한 방패’라 불리는 MD 시스템의 배치는 미사일 위기를 더 심화시킵니다.

In the past, Russian government even said that if the US MD system was to be deployed in
the eastern Europe, then Russia would attack it. Considering this, PAC3 deployment to Kouradai Sub Base would oblige citizens of the city to live under a situation where they might suffer possible war disasters, their wish for peace and maintenanceof the Article 9 trampled over.

과거에 러시아 정부는 미국 MD 시스템이 동유럽에 배치된다면 러시아는 그것을 공격할 거라고 까지 했읍니다. 이를 고려할 때 쿠라다이 하부 기지의 PAC3 배치는 시의 시민들을 가능한 전쟁 재난으로 어쩔 수 없이 고통을 당할 상황 아래 둘 것이며 시민들의 평화와 헌법 9조 유지를 위한 염원은 짓밟힐 것입니다.

Seen in its right perspective, PAC3 flies only 20km, and has no proven effect without enough
numbers of confirmed successful hitting cases in realistic tests. In the current world situations
where many peoples are faced with difficiulties, how can we tolerate our hard-earned money
being spent on this kind of incomplete weapon system?

제대로 보면, PAC3는 단지 20 km 를 날 뿐으로 실제 실험들에서 확인된 성공적 명중의 충분한 사례들이 없는 등 증명된 효과가 없읍니다. 많은 이들이 어려움에 직면한 현재 세계 상황에서 우리가 어떻게 어렵게 번돈을 이 불완전한 무기 따위에 소비하는 것을 참을 수 있단 말입니까?

The issue of PAC3 deployment not only concerns locals but also lives and ways of living of all
the citizens in a broad sense. However, the Ministry of Defense requested the municipalities
designated for the deployment that they refrain from announcing the details until after the
planned PAC3 deployment to Ashiya and Tsuiki SDF Bases (and partly to Kasuga ) were over,
and indeed they were brought in to those places without our knowledge of its coming into
the bases. These posture of the Ministry of Defense toward local citizens ominously remind us
without fail of the detestable secrecy practice of hiding military information during the WW2
under the then military rule in Japan.

PAC3 배치 이슈는 지역민들 뿐만이 아니라 더 넓은 의미에서 모든 시민들과 삶과 생활 방식에도 관심을 둡니다. 그러나 국방부는 배치가 지정된 시의 시읍면에 아시아와 추이키 자위대 기지들에 (그리고 카수가에 부분적으로) PAC3 배치가 끝날 때까지 세부들을 알리는 것을 삼가하도록 요청했으며 실제로 그것들은 그 지역들에 온다는 것을 우리가 모르는채 들여져 왔읍니다. 지역 시민들을 향한 이러한 국방부의 자세는 영락없이 일본 군사 지배하 2차 대전 당시 군사 정보들을 은폐하는 혐오스런 비밀 행동들을 음울하게 연상시킵니다.

For these reasons above, we oppose the scheduled deployment of PAC3 to Kouradai Sub Base.
We request that the Mayor of the City of Kurume agree to our statement and answer sincerely
to our questions below.

위의 이러한 이유들로 우리는 쿠라다이 하부 기지의 예정된 PAC3 배치에 반대합니다. 우리는 구루메 시의 시장이 우리의 성명서에 동의하며 아래 우리의 질문들에 성실하게 답변하길 요청합니다.

(1) Whether or not you are agree to the forthcoming deployment of PAC3 to Kouradai Sub Base

(1) 당신께서 쿠라다이 하부 기지에 예정된 PAC3 배치에 동의하는지, 하지 않는지 알려주시기 바합니다.

(2) Whether or not you have received so far any previous notice from the Ministry of Defense
regarding the purpose, volumes, date of the above-mentioned deployment. If you have,
whether or not you have an intention to disclose to the public the information on the date of
the notice and how it has come to you ( such as in a document or so).

(2) 당신께서 국방부로부터 위에 언급된 배치의 목적, 양, 일시등과 관련해 지금까지 사전 공지를 받은 적이 있었는지 아닌지 알려주시기 바랍니다. 받으셨다면 당신께서 대중들에게 공고 일자등에 대한 정보및 그것이 어떻게 당신께 왔는지 밝힐 의사가 있는지 묻고 싶습니다. (문서등의 양식으로 말입니다.)

(3) In case the Ministry of Defense contacts the City of Kurume as to when they are carrying out
the above-mentioned deployment, whether or not you disclose the information to the public.

(3) 국방부가 구루메시에 연락, 어느때고 그들이 위에 언급된 배치를 들여올 경우, 당신께서 대중에게 정보를 밝힐 의사가 있는지, 없는지 묻고 싶습니다.

( Incidentally, the Ministry of Defense issued a document to the related municipalities which said that those municipalities were supposed to refrain from announcing the deployment dates to the public. To our question regarding this document, the spokesperson of the Ministry has said, ‘ the legal legitimacy of the document is not clear, so the disclosure of the deployment date is up to the decision by the municipalities.’)

우연하게도 국방부는 관계된 시읍면에게 문서를 공고했는데 그것은 시읍면들이 대중에게 배치 일정을 알리는 것을 삼가하도록 되어있다고 말하는 것이었읍니다. 이 문서에 관한 우리의 질문에 대해 부서의 대변인은 ‘문서의 적법성[시읍면에 알릴]은 분명하지 않으므로 배치 일정 안내는 시읍면의 결정에 달렸다고 말했읍니다,’)

We would like to ask you to answer these questions in the form of a document till Feb.22nd.

우리는 당신께서 이 질문들에 문서 양식으로 2월 22일까지 답변해 주시길 요청하고 싶습니다.

___________________________________________________________________
source: Anatakara.com

* Bruce Gagnon's below letter was translated in Japanese and loaded in the local newspaper.
[아래] 브루스 개그논의 편지는 일본어로 번역되었으며 지역 신문에 실렸다.

Dear Mayor:

친애하는 시장님:

It has come to my attention that the PAC-3 missile systems are soon to be deployed in Kurume-City.

PAC-3 미사일 시스템이 곧 구루메 시로 배치된다는 것이 저의 주의를 끌게 되었읍니다.

The PAC-3 systems are part of the U.S. first-strike attack program aimed at China.　For some years the U.S. Space Command has been computer war gaming a first-strike attack on China, set in the year 2016.

PAC-3 시스템들은 중국을 향한 미국의 선제 공격 프로그램의 일부입니다. 몇 년동안 미 우주 사령부는 2016년을 가정, 중국에 대한 선제 공격 컴퓨터 전쟁 게임을 해왔읍니다.

In that computer war game the U.S. trys to destroy the 20 Chinese nuclear weapons that are now capable of hitting the west coast of the continental U.S.

그 컴퓨터 전쟁 게임에서 미국은 미 대륙 서부 해안을 현재 명중할 수 있는 20개의 중국 핵 무기들을 파괴하려 시도합니다.

But a few of the Chinese nuclear weapons are not destroyed in the first attack by the U.S. military and China then fires them in a retaliatory strike. It is then that the PAC-3 and Aegis destroyer based missiles are used to take out China's retaliatory strike.

그러나 약간의 중국 핵 무기들은 미국 군대의 첫번째 공격에 의해 파괴되지 않고 그러면 중국은 보복 공격으로 그 남은 핵무기들을 발사합니다. 그러면 그 때가 PAC-3 와 이지스 구축함에 기반을 둔 미사일들이 중국 보복 공격을 제거하려 사용될 때입니다.

It is very clear that your city will be now be drawn into the middle of the nuclear arms race. Your community will become a nuclear target as well.

그러면 당신의 도시가 핵무기 경쟁의 와중으로 끌어들여질 것이 분명합니다. 당신의 공동체는 핵 명중 대상이 또한 될 것입니다.

I would hope that you would speak out and say that you do not want your city to become
a base for the U.S. first-strike attack program.

저는 당신께서 발언하여 당신의 도시가 미국 선제 공격 프로그램을 위한 기지가 되는 것을 원하지 않는다고 말씀하시길 희망합니다.

In peace,

평화로,

Bruce K. Gagnon 브루스 K.개그논
Coordinator 코디네이터
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
우주의 무기와 핵을 반대하는 글로벌 넷워크
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)

__________________________________________________________________________
* source: Anatakara.com

* 'Prof. Masukawa received the 2008 Nobel Prize for
Physics along with Prof. Makoto Kobayashi
(Wikipedia: 益川敏英)'
'마수카와 교수는 마코토 고바야시 교수와 함께 2008년 노벨 물리학상을 받았다.'

Space militalization goes against the spirit of the Article 9
우주의 군사화는 헌법 9조의 정신에 거스른다.

— A Japanese Nobel laureate asks mayor to consider well
_ 일본 노벨 수상자, 시장에게 잘 고려할 것을 요청

http://pegasus1.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2010-02-18　


Toshinori Narahara, Mayor of the City of Kurume

토시노리 나라하라, 구루메 시 시장님

Dear Mayor Narahara,

친애하는 나라하라 시장님,

I would presume you have been very committed to your work for the city.

저는 당신께서 시를 위해 매우 사명감을 갖고 일해오셨다고 추측합니다.

Recently I have heard that PAC3, the ground-based interceptor system is soon to be deployed in the City of Kurume.

저는 최근에 지대 요격 시스템인 PAC3 가 구루메 시에 곧 배치될 거라는 것을 들었읍니다.

It is well known that PAC3 is part of the so-called Missile Defense system, operated along with SM3, which is launched on the Aegis-outfitted destroyers.

PAC3 가 이지스 구축함에 장착되는 SM3 와 함께 이른바 미사일 방어 시스템의 하나로 작동되리라는 것은 잘 알려진 사실입니다.

Considering this, I cannot help but say that PAC3 is part of what constitutes, in the excuse of ‘ defense,’ a system of waging war from space, all of which used to be called ‘Star Wars.’

이를 고려할 때 저는 PAC3가 ‘방어’란 구실아래 우주로부터 전쟁을 수행하는 시스템인 ‘우주 전쟁’이라 불리는 총체를 구성하는 일부라고 밖에 말할 수 없읍니다.

This kind of space militarization will never contribute to peace, and also it runs counter to the spirit of the Article 9 in our constitution. From my standpoint with which I am opposed as a scientist to the utilization of science and the militarization of space, I am gravely concerned about this situation.

이러한 우주의 군사화는 결코 평화에 기여하지 않을 것이며 또한 우리 헌법의 9 조의 정신에 역행하는 것입니다. 과학의 [악]용과 우주의 군사화에 반대하는 과학자의 제 위치에서 저는 이 상황을 무겁게 우려합니다.

I would like to ask you from the bottom of my heart for the full and deliberate consideration on
accepting this scheduled deployment in the light of your responsibility as mayor for protecting
the safety of the citizens.

저는 당신께 제 마음으로부터 시민들의 안전을 보호하는 시장의 책임이란 면에서 예정된 배치에 관한 완전하고 신중한 고려를 구할 것을 부탁드리고 싶습니다.

Sincerely yours,

성심으로

Toshihide Masukawa
Prof.of physics
Kyoto Sangyo University

토시히테 마수카와
물리학 교수
교토 산교 대학




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
関連　related article: 久留米市民より公開質問状　—高良台へのPAC3 配備を目前にして

(任意参照)
ノーベル賞受賞者たち、オバマ大統領へミサイル防衛システム配備に反対と警告
http://www.space4peace.org/bmd/laureates%20warn%20obama.htm
5 July 2009 2009년 7월 5일
Nobel Laureates Warn Obama Against Missile Defense Deployment
노벨 수상자들, 오바마에게 미사일 방어 배치에 반대해 경고하다.

___________________________________________________________________
* source: Anatakara.com

Japan PAC-3 deployment map
일본 PAC-3 배치 지도

(source as in the link. English added on image)

Click for image for larger view
이미지를 클릭하시면 크게 보임

2006/9 嘉手納（沖縄　米軍) 　Kadena. Okinawa, US' MD
2006년 9월 카데나, 오키나와 미국 MD 배치

2007/3 入間（埼玉） 　 Saitama
2007년 3월 사이타마
　　　
　 同/11 習志野（千葉） Chiba
2007년 11월 지바

2008/1 武山（横須賀） 　Kanagawa
2008년 1월 가나가와

　 同/3 霞ヶ浦（茨城） 　Ibaragi
3월 이바라기

　 同/5 浜松 （静岡） 　Shizuoka
5월 시즈오카

2009/2 岐阜、 　　　　 Gife
2009년 2월 기푸

　　 /６　白山（三重） 　 Mie
6월 미에

　　 /８ 饗庭野（滋賀） Shiga
8월 시가

　　 /１０ 芦屋(福岡） 　　Fukuoka
10월 후쿠오카

　　 /12　 築城(福岡） 　 Fukuoka
12월 후쿠오카

　　　　　 高良台（福岡） Fukuoka

___________________________________________________________________

Click for image for larger view
이미지를 클릭하시면 크게 보임

* The above Images and English captions were thankfully provided, with the solidarity messages,
by Makiko Sato on Jan. 17, 2010, For more, see HERE.
위의 이미지들과 영어 캡션들은 연대 메시지와 함께 2010년 1월 17일
마키코 사토에 의해 감사히 제공되었읍니다. 더 자세한 내용은 여기를 클릭

Makiko Sato has also translated the article: ‘Pentagon Wants South Korea In Missile Shield System’
and ‘United States, Stop the Enforcement [of South Korea] to Join the MD System!’ see HERE.
마키코 사토는 '미 국방부는 미사일 방패 시스템에 한국을 원한다'와
'미국, 남한에게 MD 시스템을 참여하길 강요하지 말라! 를 번역했다. 여기를 클릭.

*