Korea, Ukraine and the UN

 I remember when North Korea invaded South Korea.  Harry S Truman was often a lucky man. In 1950 the world, most of it, at least the white and western portions, believed in the United Nations.  And the Soviet Union sometimes boycotted sessions of the Security Council. The invasion happened during a boycott, so the Security Council was able to agree on the use of force to oppose it.  

(For those many people who don't know the structure of the UN, almost all "nations" are included in the General Assembly (which in 1950 also included Ukraine plus another Soviet republic as well as the USSR) but the Security Council was supposed to be the fast-acting executive body with five permanent members (the WWII allies of USA, UK, France, (Nationalist) China, and USSR plus a rotation of other members. Each of the permanent members could veto action, which during the course of 72 years has eroded the UN's ability to act.)

So the Korean War was not the US and South Korea against North Korea and eventually Red China--it was the UN against the Reds. Wikipedia says 21 countries contributed troops, though the US provided the bulk of those coming from outside Korea.

So 72 years later we have a country invading another country, one of the permanent members of the Security Council, and neither Russia nor China is boycotting, so it's impossible for the Security Council to act. If it were possible, then NATO would have had cover to provide planes and troops to war. But as it is the UN becomes even more irrelevant.

I shed a tear for the dreams of the people after WWII who thought they'd fixed the problems of the League of Nations and the UN would lead the way to a better world. 

This Kind of War

This Kind of War is by T.R.Fehrenbach.  The Kindle version was on special the other day, so I bought it.  The Korean War was the first war I experienced, through the newspapers, the newsreels, and magazine articles.  The book was written in 1963, long enough after the war's end for some perspective, long enough ago to offer some insights.  (Fehrenbach was an officer in the 2nd Division, a unit which features prominently in the book, but he doesn't cite his experience explicitly.) I've read something about the war since, especially a bio of the general commanding the 1st Marine Division focused on the battle of the Chosin Reservoir.

He alternates between a focus on individual battles and individuals and a broad general picture of the war.  It's still recommended by figures like Sen. McCain and Gen. Mattis.

Some things which struck me:

• the learning curves of the various militaries involved. The North Koreans, Chinese, South Koreans and US all came into the war with different backgrounds; the first three were able to learn  from the experience while the US was handicapped by the rotation policy.
• the writer's surprise at the ability of Japan to rehabilitate American equipment, a reminder of how far Japan has come since my boyhood when they made cheap toys.
• serious omens for our experience in Vietnam.
• [updated: the author's prediction South Korea would forever be a basket case dependent on US, although that's more definitive than his actual words--a reminder of how limited our vision of the future can be]

Korean War--Who Fought

Feeling nitpicky today so this Times piece upset me.  It's a discussion of Vietnam and Korea relationships, quite good in most resspects.  But this:

Vietnam’s ties with North Korea were strengthened during the Vietnam War, when North Korea dispatched dozens of fighter pilots to combat the Americans. At least 14 North Korean military personnel were killed in action in Vietnam. (About 300,000 South Koreans fought on the American side.)

What's wrong? The last sentence.

Those of us old enough to remember know that technically the United Nations fought against the North Koreans and later the Chinese.  (The Soviets had been boycotting the Security Council so were not around to veto a resolution authorizing UN action against the invaders.)   It was a UN coalition fighting, including British and Turkish troops as I remember it.  (Wikipedia) 

But what really jars is the idea that South Korea fought on the American side.  The war was sold to the U.S. and UN as a fight against the North Korean invaders in which the UN was coming to the aid of South Korea, so we were fighting on South Korea's side.  Since then there have been challenges to that narrative by some historians, but I think the consensus still generally supports the original take on the situation.

North Korea and the US

If I consider Pres. Kim to be rational, this is what I imagine his ultimate goals/wishes would be, in no particular priority:

• security guarantees from the US
• nuclear weapons and missiles
• peaceful unification of the peninsula under his leadership, being an autocracy like China's Xi
• economic aid from South Korea and where ever.

For the US, our goals would be:

• no nukes or missiles
• no unification or unification under the South's system
• no proliferation or transfer of nuclear or missile technologies.

I suspect the minimax solution, assuming both sides are rational is trading NK aid and security for verified agreements on nonproliferation, and kicking the unification question down the road.  

It's possible that Trump's clownish antics will provide enough cover and distraction for the US to give up its, and his, proclaimed goals denuclearization. 

Korean Tidbits: the Wall and High Speed Rail

Two bits from the blog on the Winter Olympics:

1  Korea once imitated China in many things, including building a wall (on top of the hill in this photo):

 

2  On high speed rail:

The amazing thing to me coming from California is that they built this 120 km extension and built six new stations in less than 4 years. So far, we have been working for 3+ years on a 191 km section of high speed rail (the first such project in the US) along highway 99 in the Central Valley (as part of an eventual system running from Los Angeles to San Francisco). So far, we have no continuous track or working trains at a projected cost of $10.6 B. To be fair, most of the rise in costs has been a pile of lawsuits by opponents designed to slow down progress and increase costs until they are so high that everyone will give up. Having ridden on these types of train in Italy and Japan, I hope we will persevere. 

Traffic Control in Korean Restrooms

Can't resist blogging this from my cousin's Olympic blog:

"That gives us just enough time to hit the restrooms. I don't think I've mentioned them so far, but they are worthy of mention. Korea is one of the most technologically based countries on Earth so I guess that it is no surprise that the toilets have more buttons on them that seem possible. But did you know that they have a sort of air traffic control board in the front of the restroom? A video monitor shows you which stalls are open and whether each stall has a western style toilet or a traditional "squat" toilet. I can't speak for the women, but I notice that the men don't pay any attention to the video board and will often stand waiting at a closed door when the board says that there are clearly open stalls. The other interesting thing is that the women who clean the restrooms don't give you any advanced warning when they go in to clean, they just barge in."

Big Issue: Shape of the Table

I remember when the US and North Vietnam spent  months negotiating over the shape of the table at which to conduct peace talks in Paris (1968).  It may be an issue for the Kim Jong Un/ Donald Trump talks (i.e., is it strictly bilateral or does South Korea want a representative, and if SK is in, how about China and Japan--one of the papers had a photo of the 6-sided table China constructed for the last time there were negotiations, six-party negotiations.

Imprisonment and Clemency: Two Examples

The Washington Post has two articles which offer perspectives on punishment and clemency:

This Metro article reporting on MD judges concerns about life sentences for juveniles:

A central question for the Maryland Court of Appeals is whether a young person can be sentenced to life without what prison reform advocates say is any realistic chance of release. The cases follow several Supreme Court rulings that distinguish between adult and juvenile offenders, who the court says are not as culpable and have a “heightened capacity for change.”
The high court in 2016 prohibited mandatory life sentences for juveniles without parole and has said young offenders must have a “meaningful” chance to show they have matured and to be released.

Then there's this Chico Harlan article about a North Korean spy who successfully bombed a South Korean airliner, killing 115 people, during the run-up to the Seoul summer Olympics.  She's living quietly as the mother of two teenagers.

The contrast between the situations is stark, mind-blowing in fact.