For years I marveled at the emotional and dramatic absurdity of Korea’s foreign policy, particularly as it was directed towards the best political, military and economic friends of Korea, the US and Japan, and how this damaged Korea’s national interests. For years President Roh openly expressed his interest in making Korea a “balancer” in East Asia—about as stupid as public diplomacy can get, which worked to alienate him from his US allies, which won him no new friends. Then there was Korea’s outraged reaction to Japan’s assertion that, Japan had sovereignty to rocks in the middle of the Japan Sea that Korea occupied militarily in the 1950s. Had they ignored this, the status quo would have been quietly preserved, but the loud, international outrage broadcast by Korea has ultimately resulted in many people believing that this is actually a proper border dispute. Basically, foreign policy is supposed to be handled by adults with a cool head, and an undergraduate with a basic foundation in realism or diplomacy could have picked apart the multiple and sophomoric stupidities in the conduct of Korean foreign policy.

Which brings me to Australia and its reaction to Japan’s whaling. For decades, Japan has hunted whales in international waters for “scientific research”, following an unorthodox reading of the treaty banning whale hunting, and sold the meat from the whales in Japan. This serves to preserve a few isolated communities with fisherman who hunt whales, but the meat is so unpopular it has a hard time being sold. The public in Australia are morally outraged by the hunt, seeing whales as the gentle and noble giants of the sea, and are appalled by Japan permitting and sponsoring the whale hunt. Australia has abstractly threatened legal action for years, although a winning legal action (except by outside observers), or how it would successfully be brought to the International Court of Justice. Japan basically thinks this is just Australian domestic electoral politics and is basically ignoring these threats of litigation.

Lacking a clear legal strategy, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has instead reverted to threatening and snubbing Japan in public, and recently announced a decision to skip a nuclear nonproliferation summit to be held in the US. Australia and Japan co-chair the International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament. The announcement also came just before Japan’s Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada made his first visit to Australia.

What can we make of Rudd’s grandstanding for cheap domestic political gain? Australia’s conservative opposition is bluntly honest. Deputy opposition leader and shadow foreign minister Julie Bishop said, after returning to Australia from a trip to Japan, the she detected “a sour note in the Australia-Japan relationship” caused by the threats and posturing by the Rudd government. East Asian specialist Malcolm Cook called it “Australia’s single silliest strategic decision.”

The risks to Australia? It sours a relationship with a longstanding trade partner and its newest military ally; it could be cut out of the proposed East Asia regional community; and it undermines Okada, probably the strongest and most influential proponent of Australia in the new government. A government can denounce Japan’s whaling and not frenzy itself with self-righteousness—just look at New Zealand, which has a relatively careful policy on opposing Japan’s whailing activities with the clear objective of killing the fewest whales, preferably none, and achieving that objective with utmost urgency. Indeed, this policy is most certainly “realist” and “realistic.” But you could get more “Korean” in your foreign policy with the drama of Rudd’s government on the topic. I can only look forward to watching its spectacular failure, especially as it should help him with short-term domestic victories and perpetuate his term in office.

NEW DEHLI, India – Recent publication of graphic images of cows at an American slaughterhuose released by the Indian Cultural Affairs Office on Thursday mean a stronger legal case against cattle consumption, the Indian government says. Indian government officials have been monitoring American slaughterhouse activity and the nation is still considering what kind of legal action is available, should be taken, and which institutions and individuals should be targeted.

The picture above was released by the Indian Cultural Affairs Office and shows a spinning sawblade about to slit the throat of one cow in an American industrial slaughterhouse. The cow swinging from the mechanical rack was in the same position 30 seconds before.

Environment Minister Gogel Ganguli says the pictures support India’s position in condemning cattle slaughter. “I think it’s explicitly clear from these images that this is industrial-style killing of cows.” Agricultural Minister Kumar Patel said the “shocking images” would support international legal action to stop the mass factory farming of cows that claims the lives of more than a hundred million cows a year in the United States alone. It is not yet clear how the pictures were obtained.

The US State Department has condemned the Indian government and media for “creating emotional propaganda to mislead the public.” The Agricultural Department has further asserted that instead of publication of images that insight fear and hate, “we must handle the issues calmly and avoid damaging friendly relations.” The United States was particular concerned about one leading media report titled, “Death! Dismemberment! Exclusive footage of America’s shocking cattle slaughter!”

Complicating the debate is the finding that red meat can directly and indirectly cause a wide variety of health problems including cancer, high blood pressure, heart disease, and obesity. But the findings have not swayed US government officials. As part of the regular US rebuttal of India’s beef with these matters, Washington says its slaughter is legal and part of its historical food culture. The Hindu practice of revering cows in India is not a value that should be exported overseas at the expense of friendly relations, said a government spokesman.

Yet international pressure on the United States is growing. Jolipimp Wigglebottom, the environment commissioner of ASEAN, released a statement reading in part, “the graphic images on our television screens bring home the reality of cattle slaughter.”

Amid the tensions, a poll published Wednesday said that nearly two-thirds of Americans back beef consumption, although support is apparently waning among vegetarians.

Author notes: Image taken from the documentary film Our Daily Bread. Actual method of execution was either electrical or captive bolt. Thanks as always to Party Pooper for creative inspiration.

Via Wikipedia comes this fascinating visual timeline of the demarcation of the borders that make up Australia’s six states, two major mainland territories, and other minor territories that exist today.