Thanks for the summary. I think the situation is different than that presented in the show. I was in South Korea during the time that the South Korean government announced its claims and had a chance to talk with a lot of people, and also see how the political dynamics unfolded.
It is my strong impression that this was a South Korean government effort to take advantage of an accident (caused either by the U.S. or a reef). The current South Korean government is quite reactionary. The president Lee Myung-bak is very anti-north and as soon as he was elected he renounced past agreements between the two previous South Korean presidents and the North. Over the last year, his standing with the South Korean people fell quite low, over his North Korean policy, his determination to destroy the environment, his commitment to allow US beef into South Korea, his crackdown on labor and social movement groups, and on and on. This sinking was an opportunity for him to finalize the break in relations with the North that he wanted and also to attack opposition parties for being soft on national security. The South Korean government delayed a long time in its investigation and then a few days before local elections were to take place announced that it had proof that the North had done it. The US immediately offered support. There is nothing naive about the current South Korean government--it is out to intensify tensions on the peninsula and didnt need the US to tell it how. The early claims about possible US responsibility came from the fact that there were war games going on right before the sinking. Participating in those war games was a US ship that had mine laying capability, especially of a specific type of mines that are called rocket mines. When they detect motion they shoot up and explode the target. The early theory was that some mines were laid during the war games and left activated by mistake and to cover up US responsibility the South blamed the North. However, as more evidence has emerged, it now appears that the destruction to the ship is not consistent with a mine or torpedo. And in fact, the first radio call for help by the ships captain said that the ship had hit a reef. The ship was a relatively large one to be in such shallow waters. The critical point, here, is that there is absolutely no grounds for believing that the North was responsible, but the South and the US are happily using the incident for their own purposes. For the US, it is a gain because it enables them to argue the importance of keeping bases in Japan and it also enables them to strengthen the current right wing government in the South that supports US military bases etc. Marty On 7/13/2010 3:18 PM, Julio Huato wrote: > To comment on Marty's note: > > In the TV show, Fidel said that the most logical explanation for the > incident came from an U.S. analyst on the web who (as I understand) > argued compellingly that a 1950s' Soviet torpedo from a North Korean > submarine was no match for the sophisticated, well-armored, > U.S.-manufactured South Korean boat (which, according to Fidel, used > very high-tech metallic alloys in its armor). The analyst conjectured > that what sunk the boat was a powerful mine, most likely U.S.-made and > planted by U.S. agents. Fidel noted that the South Koreans were > deceived at first by the U.S. They were led to believe that a North > Korean submarine had shot the boat. But then, as the issue could be > brought to discussion at the UN Security Council, rather quietly, the > U.S. and South Korea dropped the issue. Fidel seems to believe that > the U.S. deliberately tried to create a casus-belli incident against > North Korea. Fidel also said that Kim Jong Il's trip to China was > likely aimed at showing the Chinese that North Korea had nothing > whatever to do with the boat incident, and he (Fidel) noted that China > has veto power in the UN SC. As things in the Korean peninsula didn't > work out for the U.S., then the pressure for war shifted to the > Persian Gulf. In that case, the U.S. managed to persuade Russia and > China to pass a harsh resolution against Iran, which provides cover > for the U.S. (and Israel) manoeuvres. > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
