Bush recieved the warmest of welcomes when he visited Georgia and Mongolia earlier this year. This is juxtapositioned against the strong opposition to his policies by US allies in Western Europe. What gives?
The world used to be bipolar: the Soviet Union and the US were the big boys on the block. But today the world is stuck somewhere between a US-dominated unipolar world and a multipolar world where the other centers of geopolitical might are the EU, China, and Russia. Plenty of countries feel threatened by these powerful states, the US included. But the result on the Eurasian landmass is that the US is finding new allies as the world adjusts to a multipolar reality.
The United Kingdom is our main ally inside the EU. Althouh a part of the union, Britain does not use the Euro and emphasizes the “one market” aspect of the union, not a unanimous foreign policy. There is no better way to limit EU meddling than by allying with a powerful country inside the union that wish to limit the scope of its power.
Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, and the Baltic Three fear Russia and yet are wary of Franco-German dominance in the EU. The US has brought all these countries into NATO, Poland has the fourth largest number of troops in Iraq, and Bulgaria and Romania are in the final stages of negotiating the installation of US “lilypad” bases.
Ukraine and Georgia look to the EU and the United States as their possible protectors in the face of Russian aggression.
Strong relations with Vietnam, Mongolia, and Japan can be attributed to the fear of China flexing its muscle in the region.
All of these countries save Vietnam have troops in Iraq.
In a word, we’re looking at Neighboring Balancers (Japan, Vietnam, UK) or surrounded Buffer States (Georgia, Poland, Mongolia, etc). These states aren’t necessarily threatened by the EU, Russia, or China. Instead, good relations with the US are based on how states percieve threats as opposed to what those threats actually are. And it works against the United States as well — China is making plenty of new friends in Central and South America because of the fear of US hegemony.
What does it all mean? Don’t take it too seriously when allies in Old Europe criticize US policy. The Cold War has ended, and so have the national interest of most countries have changed with the new geopolitical reality.
Superlative fun fact: the number one purchaser of US treasuries this year was… China? Japan? Nope, the UK — which purchased more than 4x what China bought last year. (Reason: pension rules have changed so liabilities in UK pensions must be matched by assets; long-term US treasuries are one of the easiest ways to do this.)
this discussion with kushibo is becoming a debate, not a discussion. i will just have to stop here.
anyway, as to sonagi, this is a one of the “sites”:http://www.yifan.net/yihe/novels/wars/yuanchao/yuanchao1.html
not really official, but you can find a lot of this in baidu/google.
this one clear stated NK crossed the 38 to start war.
第一，战役背景
1950å¹´6月25日，æœÂ?鲜战五°Ã§Ë†” Ã¥Â?”˜Ã£â‚¬”šÃ¥Å’—æœÂ?鲜人æ°”˜Ã¥” ”ºÃ¨Â¶Å è¿”¡38度线挔˜Ã¨ÂµÂ·Ã¦Ë†ËœÃ§Â«Â¯Ã¯Â¼Å’Ã¥Â?Œç¾Žå”ºÂ½Ã¦”?¯æŒÂ?
çš”žÃ¥Â?—韩å” ”ºÃ©ËœÅ¸Ã¥Â±”¢Ã¥Â¼â‚¬ 激战〔š6月27日，美唺½å”¦Â¬Ã§”žÂ¶Ã¤Â»Â¥Ã¥”¦Â¶Ã¦ÂµÂ·Ã¥” ”ºÃ¥’Œç©ºå” ”ºÃ§”ºÂ´Ã¦Å½Â¥Ã¥”¦Â¥Ã¤Â¾ÂµÃ¦Å“Â?鲜，åÂ?ξ—¶æ´¾
éÂ?£å”¦Â¶Ã§Â¬Â¬7舰队侵唦¥ä¸ÂÃ¥”ºÂ½Ã¥Â?°æ¹¾æµ·å³¡ï¼Œ
以æ¦劔ºÃ©ËœÂ»Ã¦Å’ ä¸ÂÃ¥”ºÂ½Ã§Â»Å¸Ã¤Â¸â‚¬Ã¯Â¼Å’解æ”?¾åÂ?°æ¹¾ã€”š6月30日，美唺½é™” Ã¥” ”ºÃ§Â¬Â¬Ã¥”¦Â«Ã©”º” Ã¥”ºÂ¢Ã¥” ”ºÃ§”ºÂ´Ã¦Å½Â¥Ã¥Â?”šÃ¥Å  äº” æœÂ?鲜
çš”žÃ¥Å“°éÂ?¢ä½œæˆ˜ã€”šÃ§Â¾Å½ Ã¥”ºÂ½Ã¤Â¸ÂºÃ¤Â½Â¿Ã¥”¦Â¶Ã¤Â¾ÂµÃ§”¢Â¥Ã¨Â¡Å’å¾”žÃ¥Â?ˆæ³”¢Ã¥Å’”“，åÂ?ˆäºŽ7月7æ—¥æ“Â?纵èÂ?”?Ã¥Â?ˆå”ºÂ½Ã©Â?žæ³”¢Ã¦Å½Ë†Ã¦Â?Æ’Ã¥”¦Â¶Ã¦Å’”¡
æ´¾åÂ?¸ä»¤å®˜ç»Ÿä¸€æŒ”¡Ã¦Å’¥ä¾µæœÂ?Ã¥Â?”žÃ¥”ºÂ½Ã¥” ”ºÃ©ËœÅ¸Ã£â‚¬”š
从æ¤美唺½å°±æ”°“çÂ?€”èÂ?”?Ã¥Â?ˆå”ºÂ½”Â?çš”žÃ¦——Ã¥Â?·ï¼Œçº åÂ?ˆæŒ”¡Ã¦Å’¥æ”°â‚¬Ã¨Â°“”èÂ?”?Ã¥Â?ˆå”ºÂ½Ã¥” ”º”Â?Ã¥”¦Â¬Ã¥Â¼â‚¬Ã¥Â¯Â¹Ã¦Å“Â?鲜è¿”ºÃ¨Â¡Å’ä¾µ
產¥æˆ˜äº”°Ã£â‚¬”š
…..
美唺½æ”?¿åºœæ— è§” ä¸Â
Ã¥”ºÂ½Ã¦”?¿åºœçš”žÃ¨Â¦å”˜Å Ã¥’Å’Ã¥”ºÂ½Ã©â„¢”¦Ã¨Ë†” 论çš”žÃ¨Â°Â´Ã¨Â´Â£Ã¯Â¼Å’于10月1日攚Â?甞¶è¶Š返¡Ã¤Â¸”°Ã¥”¦Â«Ã§ÂºÂ¿Ã¯Â¼Å’甓¯ç”¹”šÃ¥Å“°åÂ?”˜Ã¥Å’—æœÂ?鲜馔“
都平壤和东部锡Â?锢”¡Ã¥”¦Æ’山田地返ºÃ©â‚¬Â¼Ã¯Â¼Å’并多次派éÂ?£ç©ºå” ”ºÃ¨Â½Â°Ã§”šÂ¸Ã¤Â¸ÂÃ¥”ºÂ½Ã¤Â¸Å“北边境çš”žÃ¤Â¸â‚¬Ã¤Âº”ºÃ¥Å¸Å½Ã©”¢”¡Ã¥’Å’
乡æÂ?”˜Ã¯Â¼Å’还甹”šÃ¥Â¦”žÃ¥Â?«åš£ï¼š”é¸Â绿江并ä¸Â?是把两唺½(挔¡Ã¤Â¸ÂæœÂ?)截甞¶åˆ” 开皔žÃ¤Â¸Â?Ã¥Â?¯é€¾è¶Šçš”žÃ©Å¡Å“ç¢Â?”Â?
〔šÃ¨Â¿â„¢Ã¥Â°Â±Ã¤Â¸Â?ä»”¦Ã¥Â¨Â?èƒÂ?çÂ?€åŒ—æœÂ?鲜çš”žÃ§”?Ÿå˜，åÂ?ξ—¶ä¹Ÿæ”ºÂ´Ã¤Â¸Â¥Ã©”¡Â?地å¨Â?èƒÂ?çÂ?€ä¸ÂÃ¥Â?Žäººæ°”˜Ã¥”¦Â±Ã¥’Å’Ã¥”ºÂ½Ã§Å¡”žÃ¥Â®”°Ã¥”¦Â¨Ã¯Â¼Å’
å¨Â?èƒÂ?çÂ?€ä¸”“產Œ皔žÃ¥’Œå¹³ã€”š
another “site”:http://www.fyjs.cn/bbs/htm_data/112/0510/42020.html
this is from a forum, but as you probably know, many research paper and academics in China post good essay (violates copyright) in internet fora.
_who fired the first shot? it is very clear now, it is NK_
(this also implied it wasn’t so clear in the texts in the past)
2ã€Â?æœÂ?鲜战五°Ã¦ËœÂ¯Ã¨Â°Â?æ”°“çš”žÃ§Â¬Â¬Ã¤Â¸â‚¬Ã¦Å¾ÂªÃ¯Â¼Å¸
è¦Â?是é—®1950å¹´6月25日是è°Â?æ”°“çš”žÃ§Â¬Â¬Ã¤Â¸â‚¬Ã¦Å¾ÂªÃ¯Â¼Å’现在已ç»Â?很明确五 ，是北æœÂ?鲜〔š
Further down in the Sina article,
“In mid-August, the Korean (æœÂ?鲜) army crossed the Naktong River and LIBERATED (my emphasis) much of the south. On June 28, the Korean army LIBERATED Seoul, on July 20, Daejon.” Liberated Seoul from who? The South Koreans?
The whole article blames the US for the war and describes Kim Il-Sung’s North Korea in very positive language, treating him as the legitimate leader of all of Korea and a fighter for unification, independence, and FREEDOM . Sina is a major Chinese portal.
ok, this one is official, from historian Shen Zhihua “link”:http://www.shenzhihua.net/cxzz/000022.htm
in the same site you can find his other publicationss/researches on the Soviet/China telegraph, about how divided CCP was about getting involved in the Korean war, and what Stalin, Mao and Zhou talked about China’s involvement.
he did not talk too much about who started the war. just this one sentence.
_korea war was started by the NK, this is no secret among international academics_
æœÂ?鲜战五°Ã¦ËœÂ¯Ã§”?±åŒ—æœÂ?鲜åÂ?”˜Ã¥Å ¨çš”žÃ¯Â¼Å’这一甚¹åœ¨å”ºÂ½Ã©â„¢”¦Ã¥Â¦ç”¢Å’Ã¥”¦Â¶Ã¥Â®Å¾Ã¥Â·Â²Ã§Â»Â?ä¸Â?是什么秘寔 〔š
Thank you for the links, Sunbin. The two webpages do acknowledge that the north fired the first shot, but otherwise, the language and content is the same as the Sina page. All of the sites squarely fault the US and the South for the war. All of the pages treat Kim Il-Sung’s invasion as war to unifty and liberate the South. The webpages correctly describe the participation of Japanese collaborators in the South’s government and the assassination of Kim Ku, but fail to mention how Kim Il-Sung murdered those who opposed his rule from the time he grabbed power in the north until his death. China is still defending its lips and teeth buddy more than 50 years later.
sonagi,
of course it is liberated:) you spent 4 years in China, right?
CCP liberated China from KMT as well :) LOL
what is wrong with this? In Chinese books, they would also say, The Union liberated the South from the Confederate.
of course it is positive on NK. how can you predict the 1990s famine when you were in the 1950s? Kim Il Sung’s NK was better than Mao’s China from 1965-1978.
of course china blames the US. if US were not involved (or UN, because USSR boycotted UN meeting), China would not have lost 1M soldier, and was isloated in the 1950s, embargo……China entered the war very reluctantly.
Kim Il Sung was a fighter for unification. he STARTED the unification war! LOL
it was about the cold war for god’s sake.
i thought we are talking about how facts were recognized, not how opinions were aligned with yours.
Tomorrow I’ll check out my middle school world history text to see if the Union did indeed liberate the South.
You are right that in 1950 North and South looked very different from today. It was hard to tell the good guys from the bad guys. However, it is 2005, and the Chinese can see the long-term outcome. I understand why the Chinese blame the US, but look at the war from a pan-Korean point of view. If the US had not helped the South, Korea would be united under the Kim Dynasty. There would be no prosperous South. The South is free, and someday the North will be, too.
sonagi,
read shen zhihua’s essay in the link above. he believe Stalin miscalculated US and encouraged Kim I-S. but this is his conclusion.
Ã¥” ·æˆ˜å’ξ”žÂ?诔 å½¢æ€Â?对ç«”¹Ã§Å¡”žÃ§”ºÂ´Ã¦Å½Â¥Ã¥Â?Žæžœæ˜¯é˜»éš”?五 大唺½ä¹”¹Ã©—´çš”žÃ¥Â¯Â¹Ã¨Â¯Â?Ã¥’Œæ²Ÿé€šï¼Œç”?±äºŽåÂ?ξ”“¹é™·å”¦Â¥Ã¤Âº” çÂ?” 解çš”žÃ§”ºÂ²Ã§”šÂ¹Ã¯Â¼Å’在夔žÃ§Â?” Ã¥”ºÂ½Ã©â„¢”¦Ã¤Âº”¹Ã¥Å ¡å’΍”ºÂ¸Ã¤Âº’Ã¥”¦Â³Ã§Â³Â»Ã¦—¶æ ¹æÂ?®ç”ºÂ´Ã¨Â§”šÃ§Å¡”žÃ©”?™è¯¯åˆ¤æ”“Â锡”¡Ã¥Â?”“五 é”?™è¯¯çš”žÃ¥” ³ç”“Ã¥’Œè¡ŒåŠ¨ï¼Œä»¥è”¡Â´Ã¤Â»ËœÃ¥”¡ÂºÃ¤Âº” 本æÂ?¥åÂ?¯ä»¥éÂ?¿å”¦Â?çš”žÃ¦Â²”°Ã©”¡Â?代价〔š50å¹´åÂ?Žå”ºÅ¾Ã©Â¡Â¾Ã¨Â¿â„¢Ã¥Å“ºåÂ?·å”¦Â¥Ã¤ÂºÅ’Ã¥Â?Â?Ã¥”¡Â 个唺½å®¶çš”žÃ¥Å“°åŒºæ€§ä¸”“產Œ战五°Ã§Å¡”žÃ§Ë†” Ã¥Â?”˜Ã¥Â?Šå”¦Â¶Ã¥Â?Žæžœï¼Œä¸Â?是令人深æ€Â?Ã¥Â?—？
if you are interested in, check out his other essays as well.
This is switching the topic, but right now I am watching Larry King Live on CNN. Heather McCartney is talking about that dog and cat fur video. Are you in the US?
BTW, I found Jie Hyun, a real live Korean, on another thread. I invited her to join our discussion. She is a South Korean, of course. Hope that’s okay. :)
in hindsight, yes, you are right.
as i noted before, many chinese netizen said “after sacrificing 1M lives, today i want to dig a hole if i am facing a south korean friends” — if i find such quote again, i will post it.
but you know, one shall not judge history with such hindsight.
NK could have a Deng, and SK couls have a Bastita, or Marcos, Suharto.
in you think along this line, and put ourselves into the shoes of the people in 1950s. you could see why there was really no right or wrong in these cold war conflict. — well, you could say all wars were wrong.
No, NK could not have a Deng because KIS killed off anybody who opposed him. Thank goodness for China and the world that Deng fled to Guangdong and hid there and was not killed during the Cultural Revolution. I understand why Chinese netizens would rather dig a hole than face South Koreans. If China had not entered the war, there would be one united, prosperous, and free Korea.
Looking at Taiwan’s economic development, have you ever wondered what China would look like without the CCP?
well…there is no if in history. china might just be in another mess if CKS won the civil war. One of the reason for his reform in Taiwan (and became less corrupted) was because he lost the war.
the other reason for Taiwan’s success was the relatively smaller size.
however, there won’t be famine in 1959-61, or the mess in 1966-76.
but it is hard to say. taiwanese can tell you how horrible the old KMT was.
I read that in the early years, the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, and Cuba all experienced growth. The problem with Communist governments is that it’s hard to replace them after they’ve outlived their usefulness.
BTW, you didn’t tell me whether you are in the US.
great! would be interesting to hear what Jie Hyun say. :)
i heard about the McCartney/PETA/video story. this is a reaction from a “Chinese blogger”:http://lydon.yculblog.com/post.978943.html
Pingback: Strategy Unit - musing on global security issues, terrorism, energy, defense etc
What I find is there are always those who are paranoid about WWII in asia. Look at what Chinese and Korean leaders state these days about peace. Think how much their citizens are obsessed about their history. There’s no variety about opinion. They can’t be like this unless the government brainwash people with biased propaganta.
So what I means is … Knock it off!
Don’t be short sighted and discuss everything around the world! It’s not an asian history blog.
Agreed, and agreed. It’s partly my fault for egging people on.
What I find is there are always those who are paranoid about WWII in asia. Look at what Chinese and Korean leaders state these days about peace.
Yep. Invasion and brutal occupation will have that effect on some people.
Think how much their citizens are obsessed about their history.
Past actions provide an insight into future actions. It would be foolish to not be concerned about recent 20th century history.
There’s no variety about opinion.
Three days ago I heard a man make a speech at the Shilla Hotel saying that he admired Koizumi for actually taking the kidnapping of their citizens seriously, unlike his country, South Korea. I am not home, so I don’t have the quote.
And the next day at another rally, on the big screen behind the speaker was a picture of someone from another rally with a sign that says “22 million > Dokdo.”
How’s that for “no variety” of opinion?
I think you should amend your sentence to say, “According to the people in the echo chamber known as the Korea-related blogosphere, there is no variety of opinion in Korea.”
They can’t be like this unless the government brainwash people with biased propaganta.
One wouldn’t have to believe propaganda to be somewhat concerned about right-wing Japanese motives.
So what I means is … Knock it off!
Don’t be short sighted and discuss everything around the world! It’s not an asian history blog.
To a large extent, the problem is Roh and his administration. His ratings are in the toilet, and he thought he could boost them by playing the anti-Japan card. In order to do this, he had to scrap his predecessor’s (Kim Daejung) policy of not letting historical issues derail the Korean-Japanese future-oriented relationship.
And let’s not pretend that it’s just the Korean or Chinese side that’s “obsessed” with this history. The right-wing of Japan itself is just as obsessed with bringing their version of Japan’s “truthful” history: “The truth of modern Japanese history is now restored.”
I don’t know what to make of this China/Japan/DPRK/ROK discussion, but I can tell you that the majority of Americans under the age of 30 would have to think really, really, hard to figure out what was important about December 7th. I know that many, many, many Americans go to visit the Arizona memorial as well as the Iwo Jima and other WWII memorials around the country, but I am sure that most young people are convinced that the United States declared war on Germany and that Josh Hartman or whoever it was, was the American hero of Pearl Harbor. Most young AMericans have no interest in history, the world, or America’s place in it. It is not just world history there is no interest in, but American history that doesn’t involve themselves or someone they know.
“korea poll survey FYI”:http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200504/17/200504172206552209900090309031.html