Commentary

Guilty by omission

By Chris Gelken

What you don’t say is often as equally important as what you do say. Why certain things are left out of a statement or a story can often be put down to innocent omission, ignorance, time or space constraints (in the case of a newspaper) – or deliberate omission. And that makes it an unforgivable attempt to mislead.

For example: “The Agreed Framework deal eventually collapsed in late 2002 after Washington accused the communist regime of continuing with its nuclear development activity. Pyongyang later confirmed that it had in fact fired up its Yongbyon facility in contravention of the 1994 agreement.” True and factual in every respect.

The above paragraph has been reproduced in various forms many times in official statements, print and broadcast news over the past few years. The impression it imparts, however, is that North Korea unilaterally fractured the Agreed Framework. This fits very nicely with the concept of good versus evil, and the accepted perception that North Korea is a rogue regime that simply can’t be trusted to keep its word.

I am not suggesting for one second that North Korea isn’t governed by a rogue regime and can be trusted, but the addition of one extra sentence to the paragraph in question changes the entire dynamic of the statement.

“The North said it had grown frustrated at the slow pace at which Washington was implementing the agreement, accusing the U.S. government of dragging its heels on the construction of light water reactors and the delivery of promised oil supplies for much needed energy generation.” Also true and factual in every respect.

Unfortunately, this clouds the issue. Perhaps the North did have a genuine gripe? The Republican led congress (which came into power shortly after the agreement was signed) and later President George W. Bush harshly criticized the deal, saying it rewarded Pyongyang for bad behavior. So yes, they were dragging their heels on raising funds for the construction of promised light water reactors, and Congress often did not provide enough money to sustain the oil shipments. So, who broke the agreement first? Or at least, who broke the spirit of the agreement?

Once a few extra details are thrown into the mix it makes things terribly complicated.

The six-party talks resumed last December after a 13-month hiatus after Pyongyang boycotted the process. The “why” they boycotted the process is often left out, and when it is included, it is usually limited to something like “Pyongyang walked out in protest over U.S. financial sanctions imposed for money laundering, counterfeiting and other illicit financial activity.”

The crucial word “alleged” is rarely used, and to date no concrete and irrefutable proof has ever been presented to substantiate the claims made by Washington. So imagine this scenario; you, dear reader, are being punished and castigated by the international media for crimes you are only “alleged” to have committed. What would your reaction be?

When the talks reconvened last december, the North read out a shopping list of demands, first and foremost was a lifting of the financial sanctions and the release of some $24 million frozen in the accounts of a Macau based bank. The talks got nowhere. The North was accused of being intransigent and was universally blamed for blocking any progress in the talks that wound up with everyone making surly remarks and muttering threats.

The U.S. said the financial sanctions were a separate issue – in their words “a law enforcement issue” – and totally unrelated to the denuclearization talks. Not to North Korea it isn’t. They are upset, and angry. The timing of the economic sanctions, coming as they did just as Pyongyang and its six-party partners had reached a hard fought for agreement on the nuclear issue, leaves one with the suspicion – a suspicion widely held but vehemently denied – that Washington deliberately sabotaged the so-called September Agreement.

Conspiracy theorists suggest, among other things, that Washington needs North Korea as a bogeyman to justify its hugely expensive missile defense shield. Sounds plausible enough.

North Korea might be everything its critics claim it is, and more. It is certainly and verifiably guilty of human rights abuses, for example. But is it solely responsible for the nuclear crisis? Was it pushed to the precipice, or was it always their intention to go there?

In truth, perhaps a bit of both.  

By the same token, the United States may be playing the same nefarious games it did during the decades of the Cold War. Who knows? But we would certainly be making progress if we kept to the facts, all of them.

And the facts this week are; there is an opportunity for compromise in the talks on financial sanctions between Washington and Pyongyang currently underway in Beijing. As Washington repeatedly points out, we are not talking about a huge sum of money – at least not in the bigger scheme of things. So a small gesture here might go a long way to setting the stage for a more productive meeting when the six-party negotiations reconvene next week.

 (chrisgelken@heraldm.com)

Friday 13^th October.

We were checking headlines before first edition the other day and had one that read something like, “Washington's lack of knowledge about North Korea adds to problem,” Of course, it was too long for the page. Knowledge is synonymous with intelligence so I suggested, “Washington's lack of intelligence adds to problem.” That, not surprisingly, didn't make it either.

But it got me to thinking about how much we really know about the people we are willing to threaten or actually go to war against, and how much of what we think we know is real, imagined, or just simply made up to fit an agenda.

Watching the news this morning and learning that a British Army general believes that our continued presence in Iraq is making the situation worse, rather than better, again made me question why we are there in the first place.

The following article was first published in American Politics Journal in 1998, and interestingly enough, also contains a reference to the other story of the hour, North Korea. By coincidence too, Baghdad today is largely a smoking crater, though thankfully not a radioactive one.

-------

True Lies, The Anthrax Scare

By Chris Gelken

Looks like Tom Clancy is a popular author in Britain -- at least among the editors of the tabloid “The Sun” and spokespeople for the Prime Minister's Office. The recent alleged threat to flood Britain with the deadly anthrax virus is straight out of Clancy's “Executive Orders” -- except in the book the target was America, it was Ebola, and the nogoodniks originated in Iran.

I don't doubt for a minute that Baghdad has “plans” to attack the West with chemical and germ weapons. But I suspect the plans are more theoretical -- a sinister mental exercise -- than a seriously considered option. For one thing, using biological or chemical weapons on a civilian population is -- as Clancy explains in his book -- an attack using methods of mass destruction and there can only be one response.

Baghdad would cease to exist -- it would be reduced to one huge radioactive smoking crater. Frankly speaking I don't think Saddam Hussein is that insane. A religious maniac or some psycho political cell might consider doing it, but Saddam isn't religious, he's just a miserable, murderous SOB.

I figure there is a difference. I don't really think Saddam wants to die -- he doesn't strike me as the sort of thing suicide-bombers are made of.

Let's face it, an anthrax attack on London would be a bit dumb. With all the recent coverage pertaining to Iraq's alleged arsenal of biological weapons, it wouldn't take long before the British population took to the streets screaming for a nuke strike against Baghdad. It would be a difficult call for the British government to ignore. Guilty or not. The real sad thing about all of this is that Iraq will be the number one suspect if there is any biological or chemical attack on a Western country that currently supports continued sanctions against Baghdad. The real culprits could get away unpunished -- what a great opportunity the British media has created. Well done.

But the story did capture the headlines didn't it?

Just when we were thinking Saddam might have been mellowing out by opening up the Presidential Sites for inspection, there he goes again with some alleged despicable nastiness. When Richard Butler was saying that UNSCOM could possibly wrap up their work by the end of the year, and other folks were worrying that the lifting of sanctions would result in an oil glut triggered by Iraq, there is the world's number one bad guy back on the front page of every newspaper in the free world.

Have you ever noticed that “security” leaks never seem to bring us good news? Wouldn't it be great, for example, to learn via a leaked security document that China has been secretly destroying its nuclear weapons, or that North Korea doesn't actually have any. Nope, these leaks are always bad news for the peace-loving people of the Western democracies, and always finger a nation that we all love to hate.

I'm not saying that the anthrax story was planted - but I am seriously suggesting it. True or not, the timing was perfect.

- Chris Gelken

25 March 1998, Hong Kong

Another problem facing the sector is the thousands of illegal teachers, foreigners here on a tourist visa but picking up some pocket money teaching English. With so many illegals ready and willing to step in at short notice, it is hardly surprising that unscrupulous hagwon directors find it so easy to dismiss their legal teachers.

What is surprising is that the authorities are obviously aware of the situation but are apparently reluctant to do anything about it. Perhaps because of the dire need in Korea for even more English teachers. The Seoul Help Center, for example, receives hundreds of complaints from angry or distressed teachers, but apart from offering some useful information does not follow through with investigations into the shady business practices of some of the more notorious institutions.

This unfortunate situation has a number of negative consequences. First and foremost, the parents of students are being cheated. Tourists or unhappy teachers are unlikely to be providing any sort of quality education. Essentially, attending such classes is a waste of money. Second, foreigners who are already trying to cope with culture shock will feel even more marginalized and victimized, and this can easily translate into antisocial behavior.

It may be hoping for too much to expect the authorities to move quickly to clean up the EFL sector. In the meantime, parents or adult students can help by insisting to see the visa and other documentation of the teachers who will be conducting classes. Teachers can help by reporting illegal practices, such as the hiring of undocumented instructors.

Perhaps the English teachers' association KOTESOL could step up and take a more proactive role in fighting for the rights of legal, documented and professional English teachers.

The sector is long overdue for a shake-up, and there is no time like the present.

There can, of course be legislation. We can make it illegal to discriminate on the basis of gender, or set a benchmark on how far we can go in expressing ourselves before we become "politically incorrect." But laws, as the article on discrimination in the job market clearly shows, are often considered simply as guidelines - or ignored altogether.

The vacancy was for an administrator to liaise between the Korean and U.S. branches of a major retailer. This was not a position for an underwear model for Victoria's Secret. It was a job any man could do. It was a job a 45-year old could do. And being "white" certainly does not endow a person with any particular skills that would set them apart from anyone else.

So what was this? Legally it is discrimination on three counts. In reality, however, it is just another sad example of prejudice, unrealistic expectations and stereotyping.

Expectations

Discovery Channel was possibly deluged with complaints after the airing of "Da Vinci Declassified" on Monday evening. For more than two weeks the channel had been teasing the audience with a preview of the show that would reveal shocking facts and insights into the alleged Da Vinci Code and the keepers of the secrets relating to the Holy Grail, the Priory of Sion.

More than 25 million people have bought the book "The Da Vinci Code" by Dan Brown, and even more probably followed the gripping court case that alleged Brown had stolen the idea for his book from earlier, non-fiction, publications.

So intense has been the debate into the claims made in "The Da Vinci Code" that the Vatican even convened a special panel and a Catholic organization here in Korea called for a ban on the release of the movie version of the book starring Tom Hanks.

This was indeed serious stuff, taken very seriously by millions of people around the world. Someone with a serious and authoritative voice narrated the promo for the show, or "trailer." The channel encouraged the anticipation to mount by repeating the promo several times an hour. Unfortunately, what Discovery Channel delivered on Monday night was essentially a cartoon, flippantly narrated by someone who sounded about 17 years old.

Describing the experience as a disappointment is hardly adequate. While there were some extremely interesting revelations and solid facts presented during the one-hour production, they were delivered in such a way that did not do justice to the gravity of the subject.

But then, perhaps we were expecting too much. Perhaps we allow ourselves to be drawn into a fantasy, essentially of our own creation, and are then bitterly disappointed when the reality does not meet with expectations.

Life can be like that.

The real war on terror

According to statistics, domestic violence has been increasing over the past couple of years. Has it really?

Are we simply becoming aware of the magnitude of the problem because there are now more reporting channels. Or perhaps the victims are learning that there is an alternative, that help is available and are reaching out?

Perhaps we always knew how big the problem was, but just didn’t talk about it.

The most worrying statistic is the one for violence against children. More than 4,600 cases were reported in 2005, an increase of 19 percent over 2004. Remember, that figure is just for the reported cases.

There is no reason to assume that we will see any decrease in the number of reported cases, on the contrary, the figure is likely to increase.

This isn't a Korean problem, it is a global one. The statistics released by the Ministry of Health and Welfare are mirrored in reports from countries around the world.

How violent is our society? Why are so many still afraid to speak out?

We are bombarded with a daily round of glib soundbites and blazing headlines about the "war on terror" -- an abstract concept to many about a battle being fought somewhere else. The real battleground is here, in our homes -- and perhaps for someone reading this right now -- the terror is a far from abstract concept.

Are we being too cautious?

The interview with former Korea Herald staffer Paul White was hilarious. His humorous anecdotes about life at The Korea Herald in the 1970s had everyone here in tears of laughter. However, his blunt Yorkshire humor comes from an era before political correctness. Paul didn't slander or malign any ethnic or religious group, but was his clever use of English with its numerous double meanings politically correct?

 Are we becoming too politically correct to the extent that we are even censoring humor? The debate over what we should include in the article and what we should leave out got everyone thinking hard about where to draw the line on the limits of political correctness. Is the majority being held hostage by an over-sensitive minority? Are we being dragged into an ultra-conservative frame of mind that is robbing us of our sense of humor and the richness and diversity of the English language?

According to figures released on Tuesday, at the latest count 589 rebels have been killed so far this year with the loss of 20 members of the security forces. More than 39,500 soldiers are involved in the offensive that completely ignored national sovereignty and crossed international borders. Since 1984 about 37,000 people have died in the conflict - the vast majority of them civilians. Sorry, perhaps I should have mentioned this before, I am talking about NATO member and Gulf War ally Turkey, and its war on the Kurds.

The peasant masses would witness this painful sacrifice, and suitably impressed would continue to serve and support their monarchs, as loyal subjects would under such circumstances. One of the program's guest “experts” suggested that if elected representatives were required to undergo regular genital mutilation as part of their job, we might start to see some real dedicated and honest folks in government. Now there's a thought.....

Chris Gelken

Feb 18th, 1998, Hong Kong