| Chris Gelken 的个人资料Chris Gelken "Discovery"日志列表 |  工具  帮助 |
|
Chris Gelken "Discovery"Published articles and thoughts from Chris Gelken - Websites www.gelken.com / www.shirleyhan.com - Tune into Riding Home on Arirang Radio every weekday evening Monday to Friday between 7:10 and 7:15 for Chris' take on one of the day's top news stories. 2007年2月 From American Politics Journal, Feb 20, 2007So was it a good deal?
By Chris Gelken
It has been a week since parties to the six-way negotiations to close down North Korea ’s nuclear programs reached an agreement. So was it a good deal? After sifting through the comments of the best and the brightest, of the most informed, the simple answer is: we don’t know.
The step by step deal will, in the words of critics, “reward” Pyongyang with 50,000 tons of heavy fuel oil in return for freezing activity at its main reactor in Yongbyon. As the North proceeds to dismantle its nuclear infrastructure, it will receive more benefits in return, including more fuel oil, security guarantees and diplomatic normalization.
The Bush administration dramatically toned down its rhetoric and relaxed its hardline stance, leaving the parties with essentially a warmed up version of the 1994 Agreed Framework. Democratic Sen. Carl Levin told Fox News that, “Bush took two steps backwards when he took office by refusing to speak with North Korea . He took two steps forward in the past week or so.” Two questions immediately spring to mind. What possessed a Democratic senator to speak to Fox News, and what prompted Bush into this spectacular turnaround?
C. Kenneth Quinones, a professor of Korean studies at Akita International University in Japan was a member of the State Department negotiating team that resolved the first Korean nuclear crisis. He describes as “bleak” any chance that this current agreement will be successful. That is, to clarify, “bleak at best.” Obviously, not a lot of optimism there. Odd, considering it is very similar to the deal he himself helped broker as a member of the negotiating team for the 1994 Agreed Framework.
Further describing the deal as a “rush job,” Quinones blamed Bush’s “preoccupation” with Iraq and Afghanistan . Preoccupation? You are preoccupied when you accidentally drive your shopping trolley into the heels of the person in front of you waiting at the supermarket checkout. When you are presiding over a war on two fronts, a hostile Congress, and 517,000 hits on Google for “Bush gaffes” – that goes well beyond “preoccupation.”
Quinones assessment is surprising, however. In August 2005 he wrote in the Mainichi Shimbun, “The pace of progress toward a peaceful diplomatic resolution may seem like a ‘never ending story,’ but such a process greatly enhances prospects for a peaceful outcome. After all, erasing half a century of animosity between the United States and North Korea cannot be accomplished quickly.”
That was 18 months ago, and he was commenting on criticism of the 30 months of negotiations since the six-party process began in 2003. Now he describes it as a “rush job.” How very odd.
He explains his position by saying he believes the Bush administration was “desperate for an agreement, overextended in the Middle East, it cannot afford instability on the Korean Peninsula . Thus it shifted abruptly from an extremely hard line, to being mushy on North Korea .”
The United States has been in Afghanistan since 2001 and was already in Iraq when Quinones wrote his Mainichi article. Bush may be many things, but “mushy” he isn’t.
Something changed, obviously. Did Bush “cave in” to the North Korean’s or to a Democrat-led Congress? The trail of events suggest the latter. Bush’s United Nation’s ambassador and North Korea hawk, John Bolton, “resigned” less than a month after he was re-nominated by Bush. His re-nomination for the post came just a few days after the Democrats captured Congress in November midterm elections. Bolton knew for a certainty that Congress would never confirm his appointment. Bush’s Security Council attack dog had been muzzled.
The December round of six-party talks was effectively the last “hurrah” for the hardliners. By January the Democrats had formally taken control of The Hill, and the whole dynamic was changing.
It would be fair to say that conclusion of the Feb. 13, 2007 Beijing Agreement was generally considered unthinkable in December 2006. But to illustrate just how much things had changed, we now see Bush slapping down former close associates. John Bolton was very quick and extremely vocal in criticizing the Beijing Agreement. Bush hushed him, and said of the man who just three months ago he had re-nominated to lead U.S. foreign policy in the United Nations; “He is just flat wrong.” How very, very, odd.
Also commenting on the Beijing Agreement, former House Speaker, Newt Gingrich. He said he is “most skeptical,” suspecting that “ North Korea is lying again as it did by developing the uranium program.”
However, according to sources considered more reliable than the former speaker, North Korea ’s alleged highly-enriched uranium program is precisely that -- alleged.
This is an issue that Quinones and other commentators seem to have brushed under the carpet. It was there, last week, for all to see. Physicist David Albright was recently in Pyongyang for high-level talks. He later told the Reuters news agency, “he believes the U.S. analysis was flawed and no information has emerged supporting the claim of a large-scale North Korean centrifuge plant. There may never have been a plant under construction or even planned.”
(Full report: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N09302593.htm)
There are other authoritative reports that Washington may have overstated the uranium claims, that there is no substantive evidence to suggest that North Korea is in fact engaged in a highly-enriched uranium weapons program. But somehow that snippet slipped beneath the media and pundit radar. It certainly slipped beneath Newt’s.
But given Washington ’s intelligence gaffes over the past several years, perhaps it wasn’t missed by the puppet masters who pull the strings at the State Department and perhaps even in the Oval Office. Perhaps they thought it time to face the reality of the situation and stop basing their negotiating strategy on “suspicions” and “allegations” -- and base it on what they actually know. Or think they know, or as Donald Rumsfeld once famously and succinctly put it: “There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. These are things we don’t know we don’t know.”
Maybe, just maybe, the negotiators decided to go with the known knowns and leave the known unknowns and unknown unknowns for another time. Or is that too simple?
Postscript: As this article was being prepared, the head of South Korea ’s intelligence agency was quoted as telling a closed door parliamentary committee that he believes North Korea has a secret uranium enrichment program. Maybe something was lost in translation, but “believes” isn’t quite the same as “irrefutable, incontrovertible, evidence.”
2007年2月 From American Politics Journal, Feb. 7th 2007Six parties, six versions, one truth By Chris Gelken Feb. 7, 2007 -- SEOUL (apj.us) -- The six-party talks aimed at convincing, cajoling, bribing, browbeating or threatening North Korea into giving up its nuclear weapons program are about to get underway in Beijing. The world's media has put the Chinese capital back in the spotlight and for the next couple of days we will be hanging onto every soundbite by negotiators and talking heads to get an idea of what is really happening behind closed doors at the Diaoyutai State Guest House. What they don't say, however, is often as equally or more important as what they 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 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 in fact 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 after all. The Republican led congress which came into power shortly after the agreement was signed, then a few years later President George W. Bush, both harshly criticized the deal, saying it rewarded Pyongyang for bad behavior. So yes, the truth is 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 doesn't it? The six-party talks resumed last December after a 13-month hiatus following Pyongyang's decision to boycott the process in late 2005. 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. The fact is, 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 by sanctions 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 opened proceedings by reading 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 completely separate issue – in their words “a law enforcement issue” – and totally unrelated to the denuclearization talks. Not to North Korea they aren'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 a roadmap for nuclear disarmament, leaves one with the nasty 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 in the media at least kept to the facts, all of them. As the negotiators head back into the talks Thursday in Beijing, there is a atmosphere of optimism that certainly hasn't been seen in a very long time. But the potential for it all to go terribly wrong is already being made evident in pre-negotiation statements – mainly from the United States and Japan. Tokyo has made it clear they won't sign onto any agreement until the issue of Japanese citizens kidnapped by the North several decades ago is resolved. They want this on the six-party agenda, and the United States has endorsed the proposal. While one cannot have anything but sympathy with the families of the kidnap victims and fully understand Tokyo's desire to get to the truth, the six-party talks should not be held hostage to what is essentially a bilateral issue. After all, and in the interests of open handed fairness that Washington is famous for, the United States refused to discuss the financial sanctions issue within the six-party framework, insisting it was completely unrelated to the dismantlement of the North's nuclear weapons program. Decades old crimes of kidnapping – despicable as they were – are equally unrelated to the dismantlement of North Korea's nuclear weapons. Why has Washington so dramatically about-faced on what and what cannot be discussed multilaterally? Interestingly, U.S. negotiator Chris Hill told reporters on his arrival in Beijing that promises by North Korea, even signed and agreed to promises, would not be enough for the United States to lift those contentious financial sanctions. Interesting because previously Mr. Hill had emphatically insisted he had nothing to do with the financial sanctions and that they were a separate issue. A bit of an about-face on that too. Not surprising that North Korea frequently accuses the United States of negotiating in bad faith.
2007年2月 CommentaryCommentary
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. 2007年1月 From The Korea Herald January 6th, 2007Commentary
Get smart, or get Thatcher
By Chris Gelken
Trade unions, according to the Wikipedia definition, are; "A continuous association of wage-earners for the purpose of maintaining or improving the conditions of their employment."
I think the key words here are "continuous" and "maintaining" -- two things that many Korean trade unions appear to have no concept of. After the violence in Ulsan on Thursday, it is apparent that leaders of the Hyundai Motor Co. union could use the services of a good dictionary. Sure, everyone deserves a fair day's pay for a fair day's work. Unscrupulous employers who pay fat bonus checks to themselves and their top executives while crying poverty as they deny benefits to the blue collar workforce, well, they deserve to be brought down a peg or two. The smart employer is one who makes sure his workforce is happy and well fed. And in Korea these days, one that provides maternity benefits and a child care center. It helps guarantee continuity, stability, productivity and so on and so forth. All important things to a company's bottom line. The boss doesn't necessarily need to be a 24-hour cash dispenser for his staff, but being a bit too tight fisted isn't such a clever move either. Lurking out there on the shop floor are the union organizers. Make no mistake, they are reading the business dailies to check on the stock price and who got paid what and what for. Conspicuous displays of wealth are not appreciated by someone sitting on the bus after a 12-hour shift. If they think there is some surplus cash in the kitty, they'll be at the door demanding a fair and equitable share out. Korea's chaebol oligarchs probably still haven't fully come to terms with the concept of collective bargaining and a "reasonable" share-out of the spoils. The unions, meanwhile, have forgotten how to ask nicely, if they ever knew how in the first place. The global notoriety of Korea's unions pre-dates the entertainment phenomenon Hallyu -- and will probably outlive it too. But we have a conundrum. The first rule of capitalism dictates that a company minimizes costs and maximizes profit. The workers, remember, are cost, and the profit goes to the boss, his sons, and the shareholders. Korean conglomerates love that first rule. There has to be a common ground where both sides get something they can be satisfied with, though one side is usually more satisfied than the other. Going back a few years to another time and another place, it is hard to conceive the power that British trade unions held over the country and the government. After an economic upswing in the early 1960s, by the 1970s the economy was under siege and the enemy at the gates were Britain's powerful trade unions. It was a world almost turned upside down. For a relatively short time it was great for the blue collar wage-earners, they were often banking more than their employers. But industries, Britain's proud auto sector for example, began sinking into a decline from which some of them would never recover. But unions were implacable and continued to demand a bigger share of a shrinking pie. Britain simply became uncompetitive. The out of control union virus was killing the host. Unemployment skyrocketed. And then came Margaret Thatcher, Britain's Iron Lady of politics. Through a rapid fire string of anti-union policies and laws followed by a stand up and knock down fight with the coal miners' union, Thatcher dealt a blow to union power from which they too never recovered. It was ugly at times, and Thatchernomics allowed free rein to British business leaders to once again rule the roost, and roll back many of the benefits that workers once had. The gap between rich and poor widened. The pendulum had swung, from one extreme to another. Britain became profitable, a safe place to invest. After a few hiccups -- including rioting in the streets -- the good times began to roll. Korea certainly doesn't want to repeat the mistakes of Britain in the 1960s, '70s and early '80s. But then, it doesn't have to. British companies in those days didn't have many of the opportunities that Korean companies have today. Large among those opportunities is; if it becomes too costly to produce the goods at home, then the company will open a factory where it can realize the potential of the "first rule" to its maximum. Exhibitions of union-orchestrated violence such as we witnessed at the Hyundai Motor Co. New Year's ceremony in Ulsan, did more to strengthen Hyundai's resolve to move production and jobs overseas, than it did to maintain or improve the conditions of their Korean employees. It will be fun to see how quickly the government changes the tax regime when Hyundai cars become an import. (chrisgelken@heraldm.com) 2007年1月 From The Korea Herald, January 3rd 2007The hagwon from hell?
By Chris Gelken "It was simply awful," a former teacher at the Jeju International English village told The Korea Herald. "I was being screamed at and threatened by the director." In tears, the teacher called the police. A couple of uniformed officers showed up at the village the next day and in a conspiratorial manner ordered the teacher, "Keep this visit a secret, we have been investigating this school for some time." They told her to "sit tight" and continue to behave as a model teacher for the final two weeks of her contract. Showing great presence of mind, the teacher asked for the policeman's details in the event she needed to contact him again. When it came time for her to leave, the village director, identified as Lee Chan-won, refused to pay her final salary. She contacted the police officer, and together with an interpreter, they went to the local Labor Board office. In the car, the officer quizzed her about the school and the activities of her boss. The Labor Department was sympathetic but said unfortunately there was nothing they could do to force the director to pay her, at least not before her flight left later in the day. A few weeks later The Korea Herald called the police officer to ask how the investigation was going. Rather surprisingly he categorically denied the school was under any sort of investigation. He told us he was at the school to check on the passports and other documents of the teachers, a routine visit to see if they were legal and qualified, he said. Obviously this turn of events warranted further investigation. The Korea Herald contacted the Immigration Department to ask if it was normal for police officers to make these "routine" visits to hagwons and English villages. The Immigration Department's investigative branch told us the police have absolutely no authority to conduct document checks of this nature, routine or otherwise. They emphatically told The Korea Herald that documentation checks are the exclusive domain of the immigration and education authorities. When confronted with the statements from immigration, Jeju police cheerfully told us that Seoul had got it wrong, and such checks were commonplace. Someone obviously has it wrong. Director Lee later told The Korea Herald that at no time or for any reason had Jeju police ever had cause to visit the English village. The operators of the Jeju village also run the Oxford English language hagwon in Seoul. The Korea Herald has received a litany of complaints against Lee, his wife Jasmine, and other senior staff. The complaints and accusations range from tax fraud associated with the "After School" program, forging teachers' signatures on fake contracts, failing to provide promised or adequate accommodation, non-payment of salary, forcing teachers to work in locations other than the one on their visa, illegal contracting out, and threatening behavior. The list is long and very disturbing. Teachers have told us about multiple visits to immigration, the Labor Department, and the police. One particular teacher and his partner told us the immigration officer they spoke to offered the information that the school and its directors were under investigation. The Korea Herald contacted this particular immigration officer in early October and asked him about the complaints and the alleged investigation. "Nothing has been proved," he said, essentially confirming that some sort of investigation was taking place. The officer said he'd invited Lee to present himself for an interview, but he hadn't shown up. "I called him again and told him to come to the office. He said he is in the country but very busy and would come in later. We are now still waiting," he said. Another appointment had been made for the Friday following our initial phone call. In a later conversation with The Korea Herald the immigration officer admitted that he had actually gone to Lee's registered place of business. "We went to see the man in person but could not meet him. He had moved or something." Or something? The immigration investigative branch told The Korea Herald that failing to inform the authorities of a change of registered business address would leave the hagwon directors -- and possibly even the teachers -- liable to prosecution. That was two months ago. The Korea Herald contacted immigration again a couple of weeks ago and asked how the "investigation" was going and if the officer had managed to catch up with the elusive hagwon director, Lee. According to the officer, the director still hadn't shown up. In a telephone interview, Lee categorically denied he had ever been contacted by immigration in Seoul and invited for an interview. He also asserted that his registered place of business had not changed in the past three years. A former recruiter for the Oxford School/Jeju International, meanwhile, was delighted to speak to The Korea Herald. In January 2006 they recruited several teachers to work at the Jeju village. Soon after their arrival, the teachers were suddenly hauled before immigration and accused of working in a location other than stated on their visa documents. The recruitment agency was also called in for questioning. "We arranged for the teachers and did the paper work," the recruiter told us, "but then Lee illegally changed the documents to show the teachers were supposed to be working in Seoul." Anxious to restore their reputation, the recruiters filed a complaint against Lee, who in turn accused them of being complicit in the illegal activity. "We eventually learned that the immigration office had come to the conclusion that Lee was lying and we had nothing to do with the changes," the recruiter told us. The agency has had no contact with Lee or his business for almost a year, and advises all reputable recruiters to do the same thing, "Mr. Lee is really a bad and rude man," they told The Korea Herald, "he has a really bad way of doing business." It is well established that Lee and the highly questionable way he conducts his English teaching enterprises have been brought to the attention of the authorities on several occasions. The lack of initiative shown by the police, labor, and immigration departments to conduct a thorough and coordinated investigation is nothing short of disgraceful. The Korea Herald made repeated attempts to contact the hagwon/village for comment, and only at the last minute managed to speak to Lee through his interpreter. Lee told us he had never forged or altered contracts, denied he had been called in for questioning by Seoul immigration, and dismissed claims by Jeju police that they routinely visited the English village. (chrisgelken@heraldm.com) From The Korea Herald, January 2nd 2007Washington's rope trick
Commentary
By Chris Gelken
As usual at this time of year people often find themselves reflecting on where they were 12 months ago, and where they expect to be a year from now. Certainly, North Korea's Kim Jong-il is hoping he will be exactly in the same place he is right now. Doubtless the dramatic pictures of his "axis of evil" counterpart Saddam Hussein taking his last few steps to eternity on the gallows probably gave him a little pause.
The events in Baghdad are unlikely to encourage Kim to soften his position, quite the contrary. The controversial rush to judgment, sentencing and execution of Saddam Hussein could possibly play out as the second biggest mistake of the Gulf War -- the actual invasion still ranking as first -- with global ramifications. All of them negative.
Maintaining to the last that he was betrayed by the Americans, the clear message to tyrants and dictators around the world is that you are safe only as long as you remain useful. Depending which conspiracy or geo-political theory you subscribe to, axis of evil poster-boy Kim is probably scrutinizing his "use by date" and his diminishing options.
The bottom line, I suppose, is how much trust he feels he can safely put into the negotiating process to wind back his nuclear ambitions in exchange for a lifting of sanctions and a normalization of diplomatic and economic relations with Washington.
Since the latest round of six-party talks wound up in Beijing just before Christmas, tid-bits of information have been filtering out about what negotiating chips were actually put on the table.
Offering to take North Korea off the list of nations that sponsor terrorism, for example, will open the way for Pyongyang to obtain low interest loans from global financial institutions. Very nice, except most financial institutions are terrified of doing business with North Korea because of the possible repercussions. The offer would have to include guarantees that the U.S. Treasury Department would abandon its policy of trying to isolate North Korea economically. Without this, the offer is empty and meaningless.
Unfortunately for the negotiators, the economic sanctions are a "law enforcement" issue and are not, or so we are told, politically linked or motivated. Consequently, as chief U.S. envoy to the talks, Chris Hill, repeated time and again, they are not on the table.
So where does this leave the North Koreans? They could put their trust in Hill and the U.S. State Department, only to have Treasury work overtime to undermine their economy and destabilize the regime under the guise of "law enforcement" activities. On the other hand, they could hand Hill his hat and coat, and reinforce the general perception that they are a rogue regime unwilling to negotiate. This could lead to even harsher sanctions and a dangerous situation becoming even more dangerous and unpredictable.
Given this scenario, the North is rather caught between a rock and a hard place; damned if you do, damned if you don't. I cannot help but think of the saying: Give someone enough rope and they will hang themselves. Seems to me that while Washington talks about carrots and sticks, in reality it is just playing out rope. Saddam got his. (chrisgelken@heraldm.com) From The Korea Herald, December 29th 2006Roh takes aim
at Washington Commentary
By Chris Gelken
Love him or hate him, President Roh Moo-hyun is making absolutely sure you don't ignore him. Apparently unaware he is supposed to be a lame duck, Roh came out with all guns blazing in a speech to the National Unification Advisory Council last week.
Taking aim at the Americans, the military, his party, and his former prime minister, Goh Kun, the president essentially declared war on critics and rivals who were doubtless hoping he would accept his role of an "outgoing president" with good grace and simply fade away into oblivion. The target of derision for what the opposition claim are a raft of failed domestic policies, Roh has additionally been lambasted as an "appeaser" for his dogged determination to pursue his engagement initiative with North Korea. Questioning Washington's foreign policy these days or challenging them on issues related to Korea puts one in dangerous territory and immediately earns the pejorative of being a left-wing liberal and a cheerleader for anti-Americanism. Roh Moo-hyun is guilty as charged. Consequently the obvious conclusion is that Korea's president is a dangerous anti-American left-wing liberal with pro-North Korean tendencies. Or mad. Or so conservatives in the National Assembly and the media would have us believe. But in his alleged madness, the president may have hit the nail squarely on the head when he questioned the manner in which Washington has been conducting its diplomatic policy and negotiations process with North Korea. In his speech last week, Roh gave voice to widespread suspicions among so-called "conspiracy-theorists" that the U.S. Treasury Department had colluded with six-party negotiators from the State Department over the timing of its crackdown on the Macau-based Banco Delta Asia, something Washington emphatically denies. In September 2005 as the six-party negotiations in Beijing were winding down to their successful conclusion, the U.S. Treasury released a statement claiming (but has so far provided no conclusive evidence) that BDA was acting as North Korea's conduit for illegal funds, and was an active partner in laundering counterfeit U.S. dollars produced by Pyongyang. With the hard-won September Agreement roadmap for the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula signed and sealed, Treasury ratcheted up the pressure on BDA, forcing the bank to sever its correspondent links to Pyongyang and freeze all North Korean accounts held on its books. The financial screw had begun to turn. North Korea reacted, as was possibly Washington's intention, with its customary belligerence. They accused the United States of negotiating in bad faith, and tore up the September Agreement. The North's reaction, albeit a provoked reaction, allowed the Bush administration to claim the high moral ground and they quickly denounced Pyongyang's "unreasonable" behavior. Expressing disappointment, Washington added with a theatrical sigh, something to the effect that this is what happens when you deal with a rogue regime. When the six-party talks finally got underway again last week after a 13-month hiatus, the North opened its bid with the demand that Washington lift its financial stranglehold before any negotiations on denuclearization could take place. Once again, with theatrical exasperation, Washington's envoy told the participants, the press, and just about anybody else who was willing to listen; the financial action against the BDA was a law-enforcement issue, and had nothing to do with the nuclear negotiations. The North is being obstinate, U.S. envoy Chris Hill told reporters. For the sake of $24 million they are giving up some wonderful opportunities. So sad. So stupid. We are doing everything we possibly can, we are willing to compromise, they wailed, heaving exasperated sighs for dramatic effect. That has been Washington's line since the beginning, but obviously President Roh isn't buying it. And neither is anyone with common sense. Roh suggested Treasury and State were playing a cunning three handed "go-stop" - a Korean card game - in which these two conspirators were secretly ganging up on their mark to gain the upper hand. The timing of the Treasury's move on the BDA was just too convenient to be a coincidence. Convenient that is if you wanted to sink the September Agreement and still give the impression of being reasonable, of holding the high moral ground. It is beyond belief that two departments of the U.S. government dealing with North Korean issues were not collaborating, or at least exchanging memos. The move against BDA is part of a global effort by Washington to put a financial chokehold on the remaining countries of the "axis of evil" -- Iran and North Korea. This policy has been sanctioned by the White House, and in an interview with the Associated Press, Treasury Undersecretary Stuart Levey admits putting pressure on private banks and other institutions. "To figure out how to work with the private sector so they amplify what we want to have happen." And the financial collapse of the "axis of evil" is the thing that they "want to have happen." This course of action could not possibly go ahead without the consent of the Oval Office. Not unless you still believe the U.S. bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade was an accident because the most powerful nation on earth was using out of date maps issued by a French tire company. Given the current climate in relations with the North, a good many people would probably support a coordinated two-pronged approach by Treasury and State to bring a successful conclusion to the nuclear impasse. But when the parties involved attempt this foolish charade, it throws just about anything and everything they say into doubt. So were Roh's comments just another example of his anti-Americanism? Not really. Disagreeing or taking an opposite view from your friends isn't disloyal, especially when they are being so transparently disingenuous. (chrisgelken@heraldm.com) From The Korea Herald December 27th 2006The hagwon business
The English language teaching business here in Korea is a cash cow. An estimated 15 trillion won -- about $16 billion - a year is spent on English language private education expenses. This is based on 11.2 million students spending about 1.2 million won a year on classes with hagwons and private teachers. To put this into perspective, Korea spent the most on private education this year among the 30-member OECD, accounting for 2.9 percent of GDP. And those figures are set to increase.
With figures like that, it would be naive to believe that some unscrupulous, if not downright criminal, individuals have seen the potential and are milking this cash cow for all they can get. There are, of course, measures in place to ensure that hagwons are operated in accordance with the law; that teachers are adequately qualified; and that the students are getting the best possible education in return for their money. Unfortunately, these measures are not being universally enforced -- at least not adequately. This is evidenced by the number of complaints received by the authorities from unhappy students and disgruntled teachers. In fact, some hagwons have such a poor reputation it is surprising they allowed to remain open, or that their owners are permitted to continue in business with little or no apparent interference. A suspicious mind or a conspiracy theorist may even suggest there is some collusion between the hagwon directors and the local authorities. The Korea Herald has received numerous complaints from English teachers in connection with breach of contract, apparent tax fraud, and even threatening behavior by hagwon directors. Many of these complaints are difficult to pursue because of a lack of substantive evidence. However, when one particular institute is cited repeatedly for a variety of "alleged" offenses, it is virtually impossible to offer that hagwon the benefit of the doubt, or ignore the possibility that this particular hagwon is receiving preferential treatment from the authorities, for one reason or another. 2006年10月 From The Korea Herald 1st November 2006Mixed reaction to domestic violence law
By Chris Gelken The same day that The Korea Herald published "The war on terror begins at home" (Oct. 25, 2006), the government's Ministry of Gender Equality announced revisions to the Prevention of Domestic Violence Law. This after some six months of considering proposals and recommendations from women's groups and related NGOs.
But reaction to the revisions, which took effect on Sunday, has been mixed. "The revised laws are clear in that their aims are to protect the victim and their human rights," Shin Yeon-sook, head coordinator of the Domestic Violence Prevention Program at the Korean Women's Hotline told The Korea Herald. "In addition," she said, "the revisions include secrecy acts and increased support for the victims." But the KWH is unhappy that the government did not accept suggestions for the establishment of a Domestic Violence Prevention Council. "Perhaps the government still considers domestic violence simply as a family or social problem, rather than as a crime," she said. "Support for victims by itself cannot solve the problem. It is important to revise the punishment for the offender, and this has not been adequately addressed." Shin is also disappointed by the fact that while the government said they would upgrade facilities and resources for the victims of domestic violence, they did not announce any detailed plans of how they will achieve this. "This can be seen as evidence that the government did not really consider what they are going to do in order to effectively apply the revised laws," Shin said. Although support for victims is important, Shin told The Korea Herald, what is more important is the recognition of domestic violence as a social problem and a serious crime. "In Korea, domestic violence continues to be addressed in terms of trying to keep the families together," Shin said. "In Germany, the U.K. and the United States, for example, the laws concerning domestic violence are focused on rehabilitation of the victims." This, Shin said, is what women's groups and other concerned NGOs consider the most important factor in helping the victims of domestic violence. (chrisgelken@heraldm.com) 2006年10月 From The Korea Herald 31st October 2006Does Korea have the formula for success?
By Chris Gelken
Earlier this month, the governor of Korea's South Jeolla Province, Park Joon-young, signed an agreement with Bernie Ecclestone, the commercial promoter of Formula One, to schedule a Formula One Grand Prix in Yeongam County once a year for seven years starting in 2010.
The event, considered the third-biggest sporting competition in the world after the World Cup and the Olympics with an average television audience of some 600 million, would put Korean motorsports center stage. But just for one week every year. And before anyone gets too excited, Korea and Ecclestone have been here before. A deal to stage Formula One in Gunsan 10 years ago collapsed when the proposed track was not developed. Ecclestone reportedly won an estimated $20 million payout from the Korean promoters. Despite this setback, he was in Seoul at the beginning of October to sign the deal that will see the construction of a 5.47 kilometer long track in Yeongam, 390 kilometers southwest of Seoul. The site will be developed by Korea Auto Valley Operation, a joint venture between South Jeolla Province and the Korean F1 promoter M-Bridge Holdings, at an estimated cost of about $265 million. J.J. Lee, a spokesman for KAVO says for a variety of reasons the Gunsan case and the project in South Jeolla do not really compare, not least of which was the Gunsan organisers' lack of experience in staging motorsports. "KAVO also plans to bring Formula 3 and Touring Car competitions to Korea to prepare fans for the F1GP," he said. "In addition we are planning an Motorsport Show exhibiting dazzling race cars along with a comprehensive F1GP publicity campaign." The news was generally welcomed by motorsport enthusiasts, but with the collapse of the Gunsan deal, and another wrangle over a track to stage Champ Car racing and Porsche Carrera Cup events in Ansan just southwest of Seoul still unresolved, there are concerns. "It is great news for Korean motorsport fans, but on the other hand I have some misgivings," said Chung Seok-tae, managing director of sports management and consulting company, SMS Korea. "Building a stadium and staging a Formula One event is tremendously expensive, and I am wondering where they can get the budget for this project." Other interested parties were more upbeat. "I am delighted," said Chris Aylett, chief executive of U.K.-based Motorsport Industry Association. "Korea has always seemed to me to be the perfect nation to join the impressive list of host countries, and it is long overdue." One of the best-known names in Korean motor sports is Jeon Hong-sik, managing director of Korea's only open-wheel racing team competing on international circuits. "Of course, it's not the best place to build an F1 circuit. Right now there's nothing there and it's a long way from Seoul," he told The Korea Herald, "All I can do is hope that there will be support from the local and central government to make this happen." At the same time, Jeon could not contain his excitement. "Without a doubt, this is the best possible news for E-Rain. We are currently the best positioned to contribute to the Korean F1GP project with our drivers, experience and proven success in international motorsports." Infrastructure is a critical factor in the success or failure of the venture, Chung Seok-tae said. "Yeongam is one of the lowest regions in the country in terms of population density and financial self-sufficiency." F1GP is a one-week event, Chung added, so the organizers are going to have to come up with something to fill the stands and pay the bills for the other 51 weeks of the year. Aylett is more optimistic. "I am sure those who are investing in the bid have full plans to attract the level of spectator audience. They will have also planned good transport links by road, rail and air," he said. Aylett, a regular visitor to Seoul for more than two decades, drew an interesting comparison with the Seoul Olympics in 1988, "I recall how little was in place four years before that event -- and yet with Korean determination all was ready and Korea delivered a wonderful sporting event. This will happen again, just as it did with the World Cup in 2002." KAVO's J.J. Lee says, "We plan to start building the track in 2007 for completion in 2009. When you consider Korea's construction environment, that's not an unreasonable period of time." Lee added that KAVO is optimistic about attracting funding from top Korean banks, investment companies and corporations. He said the cost of staging the F1GP will be about 10 percent of that spent on building stadiums and infrastructure for the 2002 World Cup, and that event is something Korea would host one time only. Korean pride will also be at stake, and with very limited exposure to F1GP, will Korean technical and engineering know-how play any significant part? SMS's Chung says at least in the short term he doesn't expect this will have any major impact on the local motor engineering sector, but says the potential for the future is huge. Aylett on the other hand says it will highlight the strengths of the local high-end engineering sector, and probably encourage more companies to become involved in motorsport programs, once they see how much global interest can be generated. Korea is the world's fifth-biggest car manufacturing country and has effectively shaken off its old image as a producer of "cheap and cheerful" but rather unreliable cars. E-Rain's Jeon Hong-sik says, "We are at a turning point. We can feel the effort of Korean carmakers. To make this happen, motorsports is essential and the Korean F1GP is essential, and 2010 will be a great motivation for them." There was a rumor last year, Jeon said, that Hyundai would join F1GP as a team. "So who knows what can happen?" And indeed who knows? Well, according to a report last week in the German auto magazine Automobilwoche, South Korea's top automaker is already in talks to enter its own team. The magazine quoted a Hyundai Europe manager as saying, "Talks with Formula One chief Bernie Ecclestone are in progress." So maybe the rumor may soon be confirmed as fact. In conjunction with the British Embassy, the MIA has organized two seminars in Seoul to promote motorsports, and Aylett said Korean engineers are now among the best in the world. "But they need to travel more," he said, "and see for themselves the opportunities." Motorsport Valley in the United Kingdom is to F1GP what California's Silicon Valley is to the computer industry. "The MIA and the British Embassy would be happy to organize visits for Korean engineers and potential teams to see at close quarters what it takes to be the best in the world." But what are the chances of actually seeing a homegrown Korean F1GP team, or even a Korean driver on the grid? "To be honest, it is quite hard to make it," Jeon said, "but by no means impossible." However, he said it would absolutely need to be a Korean driver who could put in a reasonable performance in front of a home crowd, and not simply an effort to satisfy national pride by having a Korean driver participate. Korea already has a small stable of talented drivers competing in Formula BMW and Formula Renault V6, and Chung thinks it is possible that one of them could be ready for 2010. "But again, a major issue here is where the money comes from. Who will support a budding F1 driver from now all the way to until 2010?" Who indeed. At about $1 million a year minimum to support a potential Korean Schumacher, that is quite an investment. Aylett suggests that the best Korean drivers should, along with Korea's top engineers, turn their eyes toward Motorsport Valley to develop their talent. E-Rain's Jeon says the search should begin right now. "We need someone who already has at least two years' experience in single seat formula racing in international events, and move them up to Formula 3 or higher for two years. That will be the safest way to go." By 2010 the driver could be an F1 test driver, or possibly competing in the championship itself. A Korean driver in an E-Rain or Team Hyundai Formula One car on the Yeongam grid by 2010? It's all a question of commitment, determination and talent. And money. Lots of money. Photo: Chris Gelken at the wheel of a Formula Renault at the Goldenport Circuit in Beijing, November 2005. 2006年10月 From The Korea Herald, 25th October 2006FACES OF KOREA -- Korean traditional artist Shin Ji-hyun practices his art outside Jongmyo in Seoul. Jongmyo is a popular meeting place for the city's senior citizens at the weekend, when they get together to enjoy the company of their contemporaries while listening to traditional Korean music and admiring the artworks on display. Photos: Chris Gelken
From The Korea Herald 25th October. 2006The war on terror begins at home
By Chris Gelken
It is something that crosses all cultural, economic, religious, educational and racial boundaries. And according to some statistics, it can be found in one in six homes here in Korea. Domestic violence is the terrifying experience of being attacked by a family member, usually a male, and most often physically. It is certainly something a person you know is suffering right now. Except you probably have absolutely no idea what is happening to them. Victims quickly become very accomplished at hiding the signs.
According to figures from the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family, in 2004 there were a total of 90,497 reported cases of domestic violence. By 2005, that figure had risen to 111,191 and in the first six months of this year 65,385 cases were reported to the authorities. These are the "reported" cases; experience however, shows that most incidents are not reported. Depending on your point of view, whether you are an optimist or a pessimist, there is good news, and there is bad news. "The increase in the number of reports is not due to an actual increase in the number of domestic violence cases," Shin Yeon-sook, head co-coordinator of the Domestic Violence Prevention Program at the Korea Women's Hotline told The Korea Herald, "but an increasing awareness among women of their rights and the availability of organizations to help them." Domestic violence cases, she said, account for about 30 to 40 percent of all the calls to their hotline, and that proportion has remained similar over the years. But this also clearly shows that efforts to reduce the incidence of domestic violence are failing. And failing miserably. "The support system for victims is far from sufficient," she said, "and the central and local governments must take domestic violence more seriously." Shin said the government needs to change its perception that violence in the home is simply the result of private domestic problems, and that laws need to be introduced to protect the rights of victims. "Problems have arisen because of the low rate of prosecutions," Shin said. "We are proposing to the National Assembly a revised bill in which police intervention is increased and culprits are subjected to reasonable penalties." Concerns are rising, however, regarding an alternative revision that is being proposed that will suspend the indictment of an offender until after "adequate consultations" have been conducted. "This suspension of indictments in favor of counseling could lead to domestic violence actually not being recognized as a crime," Shin said. A 2004 survey by the Korea Women's Hotline revealed that a large number of people consider domestic violence simply as a "dispute" between the husband and wife, but statistics provided by the agency show that more than 31 percent of the cases reported to them involved near fatal force or lethal weapons. Margaret Wong, the director of Harmony House in Hong Kong insists, "If you hit someone on the street, it's a crime. If you hit someone in the home, then it's still a crime." The agency says the first line of defense is the police who are called out to a disturbance, but their training is inadequate. "With the enforcement of the Prevention of Domestic Violence Law in 1998, there were instances of widespread training and a protocol for dealing with domestic violence has been produced," Shin said. "However, a continuous training system has not been set up, and this leads to the personal views of each police officer affecting the outcome of domestic violence cases." The reasons why an individual becomes an abuser can be as varied as the classifications of abuse, such as actual physical violence, psychological neglect, humiliation, sexual abuse and rape, among others. But why do they do it? "In my experience about 99 percent of cases are where the husband uses violence against his wife," Shin said, "and most of the men beat their partners because they can." Alcohol is often cited as an excuse, Shin said, but the fact is a much larger proportion of people who drink do not become violent. "Therefore the predominant reason for being violent toward the wife is that violent men do not see their wives as an equal." Alarmingly, Shin told The Korea Herald, about 70 percent of the cases of violence towards the wife also involve the children. "However, because the laws and the departments handling the two offenses are different, there is a lack of coordination in handling the cases." What is equally alarming is there are only some 44 safe houses in Korea where victims of domestic violence can seek temporary refuge. "Each house can accommodate up to 10 victims at one time," Shin said, "and while most of them try to accommodate children, some of them do not allow the victims' children to accompany them." To illustrate the size of the problem and what still needs to be done, compare Korea¡¯s 48 million population and 440 places available in safe houses, to Hong Kong's 160 places serving a population of about 6 million. And Hong Kong NGOs say demand still far outstrips supply. Domestic violence is a grim reality, not just here in Korea, but everywhere else. The work of NGOs usually focuses on the empowerment of women, giving them the support they need to break out of an abusive and potentially dangerous relationship. After conducting literally hundreds of interviews with NGO workers and victims, one particular quote from a European victim stands out as a source of inspiration. "Don't feel isolated, don't feel alone. And don't let fear paralyze you." You can contact the Korea Women's Hotline nationwide on 1366. Foreign residents and visitors should call the police and then contact their embassy for assistance. From The Korea Herald 25th October, 2006Are we being too sensitive?
One of the great things about language, any language, is the way we can play with it. Tonal languages are the most fun. Chinese or Thai, for example. Just the slightest mistake in tone or inflection can change an innocent inquiry or greeting into an obscene or extremely funny statement. And naturally, any native speaker on the receiving end is going to react. Of course, those of us with a working knowledge of those languages can make the mistakes "accidentally" on purpose, simply to provoke a reaction, or break the ice through a little linguistic humor. Even the so called mono-tonal languages, such as English or Korean, have their inflections and their double meanings. So even the right word taken in a slightly different context, a misplaced word, or the wrong emphasis on a syllable, can be so very rib-ticklingly funny. The Korea Herald generously provides its foreign staff with a Korean language teacher, and to be honest, earnest and professional as she is, her use of English sometimes has us in stitches. She certainly doesn't seem to take offense, and is not shy about having a bit of a snigger when our attempts at Korean fall way short of expectations. Are we offended? Not at all, and why should we be? The more negative and unprintable responses to last week's article by Chung Jin-hee often focused on a foreigner's determined attempts to learn the Korean language being abandoned because Koreans: a) Hate foreigners, b) Refuse to respond even when you speak Korean perfectly, c) Laugh in your face when you make any attempt to communicate. One contributor even claimed it was commonplace to ask eight different people the same simple question before getting any acknowledgement. This writer has certainly raised a giggle or two with my feeble French, German, Dutch, Spanish, Japanese, Cantonese, Mandarin, Thai, Tagalog and Korean. And no, I don't "speak" all those languages, but have made the effort to learn the basics. The only place I think I had to ask more than four people for directions before getting a useful response was Russia, and that's because I don't speak a word and was silly enough not to buy a phrase book at the airport before going. Or maybe it was Scotland -- the language is equally unintelligible to an Englishman. 2006年10月 A thought for today...Friday 13th 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 2006年10月 From The Korea Herald 13th October 2006Comrade G.I. Joe
arrives in Busan By Chris Gelken
As the world watches and waits for the latest developments in the tense situation unfolding on the Korean Peninsula, a unique and strange story is about to be unveiled to audiences at the Pusan International Film Festival this coming Monday evening.
From VeryMuchSo Productions, the British producers of the memorable and award-winning "Game of Their Lives" (2002) and "A State of Mind" (2004) comes "Crossing the Line," which tells the story of U.S. Army deserter James Dresnok. It details why a young American soldier walked away from everything he knew and was familiar with, and entered an unknown world full of uncertainties. In 1962, Pvt. Dresnok crossed what at the time, and certainly remains to this day, is the most heavily fortified border on earth -- the Demilitarized Zone separating North and South Korea. Filmmaker Nicholas Bonner, who first met Dresnok in June 2004, said at the time Dresnok appeared to be living a simple life, working as a part-time English teacher in Pyongyang. In an interview with The Korea Herald earlier this year, the producers said while the first two films received wide critical acclaim, this one is bigger, better, and in their words, "out of this world." The film focuses on four Americans who defected from the United States to North Korea while they were stationed as soldiers in the South. "Of those, two died in the 1980s and 90s," the company said, "A third, Charles Jenkins is now in Japan, and the fourth, James Dresnok, is still living in Pyongyang." The film contains extensive interviews with Dresnok and his thoughts on various issues. Despite the high technical quality and content of VeryMuchSo productions, the company maintains a fairly low profile when on location. "It is usually done with a very small crew," they said. "The crew for 'A State of Mind' was just three people. Daniel Gordon was the director, Nick Bennet the cameraman, and with Nick Bonner doing just about everything else necessary from soundman to second camera." VeryMuchSo Productions has certainly broken new ground in North Korean film production, at least in the unprecedented access they have been given. Their first major project documenting the lives of the celebrated 1966 North Korean World Cup soccer squad is a case in point. "The football players of 1966 are great heroes there, but they are private citizens, and private citizens in North Korea don't normally get documentaries made about them," the company said. That was a very important first step. Going into peoples' homes and interviewing people who were not celebrities for "A State of Mind" was another breakthrough. The new film, "Crossing the Line," interviews many people, the families and the people involved. VeryMuchSo credits much of their success to the cooperation of the North Korean authorities, in particular the Korean Film Export and Import Corporation. "The productions are a collaborative effort," the producers said, "and we generally work with the same people all the time. They are really nice guys." (chrisgelken@heraldm.com)
Photo courtesy of VeryMuchSo Productions 2006年10月 From The Korea Herald 4th October 2006Building homes and hope
By Chris Gelken
Cities around the world on Monday celebrated World Habitat Day to promote socially and environmentally sustainable metropolises, with the goal of providing adequate housing for all.
And later this month a team of volunteers from Habitat for Humanity Korea will be heading to India to participate in the Jimmy Carter Work Project 2006 to do just that; provide environmentally friendly, adequate homes for low income families.
They'll be joining the former U.S. president, his wife Rosalynn, and thousands of other volunteers from around the world to build homes in a village near Lonavala, southeast of Mumbai in Maharashtra state on India's west coast. In addition to the volunteers from Korea, teams will be arriving from Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, New Zealand, Australia and the United States.
Over a period of a week, the 2,000 strong army of workers will build 100 homes for local families in need of a simple, decent place to live. The average Habitat house covers an area of some 17 pyeong (53 square meters) and costs about $25,000 to build. The simple structures are quick and relatively easy to construct, but are sturdy enough to provide ample protection from the elements.
The Jimmy Carter Work Project has taken place each year for the past 22 years. In 2001 the project came to Korea where some 9,000 volunteers converged on six different sites to build 136 Habitat homes.
HFH Korea is one of the most active groups in the global Habitat community, building homes both here and overseas. The local group developed what they describe as the Korea Blitz Build, where hordes of volunteers descend on worksites for one week in July or August. However, HFH Korea says there is usually some maintenance or repair work going on somewhere, so volunteers are always needed.
Volunteers for HFH come from all walks of life, and some of them have never before even picked up a hammer or saw, let alone have practical homebuilding experience. But there are always plenty of experts on hand to ensure that the work is done properly and the homes are of a professional standard, especially when it comes to safety such as electrical wiring. Visit http://eng.habitat.or.kr to learn more about how you can participate in helping underprivileged families put a decent roof over their heads. (chrisgelken@heraldm.com) From The Korea Herald October 5th, 2006Playing hardball
in Pyongyang by Chris Gelken North Korea captured world headlines again Tuesday with its bombshell announcement that it "will" test a nuclear device. While Pyongyang asserted its sovereign right to conduct the test in response to what it described as threats from the United States, it also hinted that a test is not imminent. A statement released by the official Korean Central News Agency said the test would go ahead when all precautions were in place to conduct a safe and controlled detonation. Against this backdrop of apparently intractable and inevitable confrontation between Pyongyang and Washington, other, and perhaps more pragmatic agencies are hard at work to defuse the tension and find a way out of a situation that could so easily spiral out of control. It has often been said that biggest business deals and the most significant political agreements have been negotiated over a decent dinner and a drink, or somewhere between the tee-off and the "19th" hole on a golf course, rather than in a boardroom or the more formal setting of a summit, Reminiscent of the "soft ball" ping-pong diplomacy that led to diplomatic reconciliation and ultimately thriving trade between Beijing and Washington, the Korea Sports Marketing Group, the Korea Chamber of Commerce (Pyongyang) and Beijing-based Korea Business Consultants in conjunction with Avid Golf Management, are organizing the Business Golf Challenge at North Korea¡¯s Taesong Golf Course between Oct. 28 and Oct. 31. "What we do in business is just press on with the need to help facilitate business and trade, and bring investment into a business community that welcomes us," Roger Barrett, managing director of KBC told The Korea Herald. "We have parceled business and golf together to remind people, or more likely to open their eyes to the fact that North Korea is more normal than the world media would have us believe." Western participants will be given the opportunity to mix in a relaxed atmosphere with their Korean counterparts over a 18-hole course, mixing business with pleasure. Organizers say the trip is particularly suitable for those who have always wanted to visit North Korea, and is specifically designed to be both informative and fun. Apart from golf, there will be a business seminar outlining opportunities for investment and trade, visits to factories and other Pyongyang based enterprises. "You do not even have to be a golfer," say organizers, "the package is designed to be good fun, and who knows, golf may even change some stereotype perceptions of the country." (chrisgelken@heraldm.com) 2006年9月 On the subject of the Thai military coupWatching television coverage of the Thai military coup, and reading reports in the English
language press, I became increasingly surprised that no mention was being made of the
eventual outcome of the last coup, which took place back in 1991. One television station even interviewed a former
Thai senator, and failed to mention that this senator's father was the prime minister ousted in that 1991
military takeover, a power grab that eventually led to the tragic events of.......
Black May.
It was a bright day. And very hot. I pulled a sweat soaked bandana from A group of soldiers were standing idle under the shade of some trees Relieved of my camera bag's weight I sat down on the curb and pulled out His M-16 rifle lay on the ground between us. I looked at it and then at In what must have been one of the most efficient clean up operations The M-16 looked freshly cleaned. But then so did the soldier. His I reluctantly hauled myself to my feet. I had to make my way across town
19 May 1998 Hong Kong From The Korea Herald, September 18th 2006Businessmen accuse U.S.
of indiscriminate sanctions by Chris Gelken
The United States and Japan are expected to ratchet up financial sanctions against North Korea this week. The move is in line with a United Nations resolution condemning Pyongyang for its missile test launches in July, and comes a year after Washington ordered American banks to stop dealing with the Macau-based Banco Delta Asia. The U.S. Treasury accused the bank of acting as a money-laundering conduit for North Korea, and of other illegal activities. The bank denied the charges, but froze more than $20 million in North Korean accounts. Pyongyang responded by withdrawing from the six-party talks on its nuclear development programs, a process that only days before had reached what participants described as a landmark breakthrough. In recent weeks the United States has been piling on the pressure, urging financial institutions around the world to curb any financial activity with the North. Scores of banks in Singapore, China, Hong Kong, Vietnam and Mongolia have stopped doing business with North Korea, according to the U.S. Treasury's Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, Stuart Levey. The United States has insisted that there be no link between efforts to restart the stalled six-party talks on the one hand, and punishing North Korea for its alleged economic crimes on the other. However, businessmen intimately familiar with the situation think this is the wrong policy. "Proper banking channels remain key to providing assurances to larger companies that 'normal' business can be conducted," said Roger Barrett, managing director of Beijing-based Korea Business Consultants. "The threat that the U.S. may act against a bank or a company's U.S. business interests if they deal with the North is indeed a deterrent to market entry," Barrett told The Korea Herald. "It is worth noting that encouraging and providing for more legitimate business does actually provide a practical alternative to dependence on missile sales and other alleged financial malpractices,' he said. For foreign businesses already established in the North, it has been a difficult year and many see their options narrowing. Felix Abt from the Pyongyang-based European Business Association says they are considering various strategies, but would prefer to keep details confidential. "Essentially, those who can afford a longer term business vision think they can still weather the latest U.S. attacks on their legitimate business," he said, "But those who cannot are more worried." The fact that the United States does not distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate business, and that it tends to criminalize foreign and Korean businesses, said Abt, "Is a challenge to us." He accused Washington of simply making wholesale accusations. "This is more convenient for them than offering specific proof on specific wrongdoings, and quite understandable in the absence of any serious evidence," he said. KBC's Barrett said the accusations still remain unsubstantiated allegations, "Both the Russian Foreign Minister and officials in South Korea have recently stated clearly that these allegations may have been valid in the 1980's and early 90's - but where is the contemporary evidence?" Barrett said "the continuous castigation and condemnation of legitimate business" is obviously a deterrent to companies wishing to take advantage of the opportunities in North Korea. "Even respected senior statesmen, former President Jimmy Carter for example, are saying that such a policy is 'evil' and that it is a step in the wrong direction," he said. Abt added that it isn't only legitimate business which is suffering. "In the case of PyongSu Pharmaceutical, there are now difficulties in transferring money to foreign suppliers which is causing substantial delays in the launch of new and effective medicines that are so badly needed," he told The Korea Herald. And in a statement reminiscent of the situation in Iraq in the 1990's, Abt said, "Thus it is the ordinary and the needy North Korean patients that have to suffer from the consequences of these U.S. sanctions." Abt, Managing Director of the PyongSu Pharma J.V., will open a bank account abroad on behalf of that company. This will allow donors to transfer money to have pharmaceuticals produced or imported by PyongSu and distributed to needy patients all over the DPRK, bypassing U.S.-policies. But Abt said, "I will have to carry the money from abroad in my luggage all the way to the factory in Pyongyang." Given Washington's position, businessmen are urging the European Union to be more proactive, and say the situation could provide opportunities for European-centric companies. "If the dollar is causing problems for our customers, as it has clearly done," Barrett said, "then we encourage businesses to take advantage of the North's move into the 'Euro-Zone' back in November 2002." Unfortunately, Barrett said, Washington reacted by cutting off correspondent banking links. A positive development, Abt and Barrett both agree, is the recent takeover of the Daedong Credit Bank, a majority foreign owned bank in Pyongyang, by Koryo Asia Limited, which is headquartered in Hong Kong and has offices in London. Daedong's general manager, Nigel Cowie, said he is very pleased with the purchase of Daedong by Koryo, which also acts as financial advisor to the Chosun Development and Investment Fund. Chosun, also based in London, plans to raise more than $50 million for investments in North Korea. "We see it as a vote of confidence in our bank, and I'm looking forward to a successful future," Cowie told The Korea Herald. Barrett added that having Koryo challenge the blanket sanctions is a welcome move that should serve to provide assurances that businesses can operate free from interference. "It will highlight the fact that there is a legitimate and important market in a country to feed and clothe 23 million people, simultaneously providing more manufacturing employment opportunities." Barrett said the way forward is to remain confident, and simply be more creative and innovative, "just as you would be in any other market." One such creative initiative, he said, is a plan to mix business and the ever popular sport of golf. "The Business Golf Challenge will offer a three day overview combination of business, golf, and sightseeing at the beautiful Lake Taesong course," he said. "Let business and trade drive understanding and create a platform for positive progress," Barrett said, "and get it out of this sand bunker." (chrisgelken@heraldm.com) 2006年8月 From The Korea Herald August 23rd 2006Cutting down the EFL jungle
People are beginning to sit up and take notice of the deep-rooted problems in Korea's English-language teaching sector. The Korea Herald's articles highlighting these problems have looked at the causes and the consequences. There is no one single answer, no single problem, and the issues are complex and interconnected. But rather than being overwhelmed by the problem and simply doing nothing, or at least nothing constructive, there are steps that can be taken now to begin an overhaul of a system that has run out of control. The Education Ministry told The Korea Herald that it is planning an organization that will manage all issues related to foreign teachers. However, there is no timetable. The existing rules were designed when foreign teachers numbered in their hundreds. That figure has exploded into thousands and the playing field has changed. The new program will be operated by the National Institute of International Education Development. The Korea Herald is pressing the government for more details on their program and a realistic implementation date. The Korea Herald suggested than an existing organization such as KOTESOL could step in and take a more proactive role. While understanding the issues and sympathizing with teachers who find themselves victims, KOTESOL said they had no plans to expand their purview to become a quasi-union. They kindly gave permission for their letter to The Korea Herald to be reprinted below. Another nasty aspect of the problem has been the proliferation of race-baiting and defamatory comments on internet message boards, both Korean and English. Moderators and users of these boards can begin today to reduce tensions by acting responsibly. The government is considering what some may consider draconian measures to regulate these boards, so it makes good sense that the users do it themselves before giving the authorities the excuse to step in and do it for them. As our lead story today clearly demonstrates, this is a message to Koreans and foreigners. Tourists on extended visas earning extra cash by teaching English are another complicating element. Students and documented teachers can immediately begin to protect their interests by reporting illegal practices. There is an enormous amount that needs to be done, but the wheels are beginning to turn. You can help The Korea Herald keep them turning through your letters. You can help to keep this issue in the spotlight and effect positive change. From The Korea Herald August 23rd 2006Blacklist invades the privacy
of foreign English teachers By Chris Gelken and Cho Ji-hyun
Privacy is defined as a state of being let alone and able to keep certain, especially personal, matters to oneself.
However, the privacy of some allegedly irresponsible foreign English teachers is being outrageously, and possibly illegally invaded on the website of a group called the Korea Foreign Teachers Recruiting Association (www.kftra.co.kr).
The association blacklisted some 20 foreign teachers who they say caused trouble or who were accused of some manner of wrongdoing. The alleged crimes of these individuals included what is described as "doing a midnight run" - leaving suddenly without notice, arriving for class drunk, and even of sexually harassing students. The latter being an extremely serious charge, and one that should not be made lightly or without evidence.
"The website was launched in February because there are many illegal foreigners in Korea that are not qualified to teach English here," said Choi Hyeok, president of the association. "Even though a great number of educational institutes were experiencing similar difficulties, we didn't have a place that can share this information."
Until Thursday of last week the blacklist enabled anyone who had prior access to the private details of a teacher, to list that individual's full name, passport number, birthdate, photo and their alleged crime on the association’s website.
After The Korea Herald challenged the operators, the association deleted the passport numbers and birthdates of the teachers.
However, the teacher's names and their alleged crimes are still being published. By law, even the names of suspects in high profile criminal cases are protected until they are indicted by prosecutors.
For example, a legal expert told The Korea Herald, the full names of the French couple who prosecutors have identified as the parents in the now well-known case of the 'freezer babies' were kept private for more than three weeks before their lawyer gave the media permission to release their identities.
Some, or perhaps even all of the teachers on the list may have caused problems at their academies, or so called "hagwons" in Korea, as claimed in the posts. On the other hand, they may be completely innocent, and simply the target of a disgruntled hagwon director or a student with bad grades who bears a grudge. The fact that the people who contributed to the blacklist can hide behind anonymous user-names means none of the claims can be checked for accuracy before they are viewed by the general public. This immediately calls the process into serious question on both legal and moral grounds.
In an attempt to address the situation, last Wednesday a poster using the name "Westerner" wrote: "Do you guys know the laws related to defamation of character? Stating the passport number can bring a lot of trouble. Be ashamed of yourselves." A couple of hours after this post first appeared, the board moderator deleted it.
According to the law, personal information is something that belongs to a specific individual and is a tool that can identify the individual.
"Because a match can come up between a passport number and an individual, we can say a passport is personal information," said an official at the headquarters for e-gov at the Ministry of Government Information and Home Affairs.
Even without the passport number, if the full name and the reason the teacher is on the blacklist is being posted together, that is enough for the teacher to sue the accuser on charges of defamation of character, said a lawyer who only wanted to be identified by his surname "Lee."
"It doesn't matter whether the information is true or false, but if the post had the purpose of defamation, the accuser can be punished," Lee said. "Especially if the person-in-charge of the website didn't fact check the information beforehand."
Lee said it is entirely possible that the individual making the claims on the website had a personal agenda, unrelated to any alleged wrongdoing on the part of the accused.
If the information was not revealed for the public benefit, there is a better chance of punishment - serving time in jail or paying a fine - for the information provider, Lee said. But only the victims can file a lawsuit, he added.
Also, for disclosing personal information, an individual can served up to three years in prison or pay up to 10 million won in fines, according to the law.
Although the privacy of an individual should be protected, many are voicing opinions that a system that can easily do background checks on an applicant for the post of teacher should be made available to schools.
Some have cited the case of John Mark Karr, now the chief suspect in the murder of six-year-old beauty queen, JonBenet Ramsey. Karr taught English for a few months at a Korean academy in 2002. Thai officials arrested him last week for a crime he claims to have committed 10 years ago in the U.S. state of Colorado. A teacher blacklist may have revealed that he had at one time lost his teaching license for possession of child pornography, according to supporters of a blacklist.
Because the demand for native English teachers outweighs the supply in a number of Asian countries, critics have claimed it is too easy for many candidates with forged credentials or criminal records to come and teach in Korea, according to numerous recruiters.
Lee Seung-hae, who works for the online recruiting website Eicoedu, said a resume is what many recruiters depend on when they select their candidates.
"I wish we had an organized system that can check such personal information since the demand for native-speaking teachers is getting higher and higher," he told The Korea Herald, "but I know it won't be so easy." (chrisgelken@heraldm.com) From The Korea Herald August 16th 2006The EFL Jungle
It is fairly apparent that there is a serious problem in the way in which Korea's private English-language institutes, or "hagwons," are being operated. Interviews with teachers suggest the practice of deducting income tax and pension contributions from a teacher's salary, but not paying that money to the authorities is rife. Unfair dismissal in the final month of a contract to avoid paying the severance bonus is also widespread, according to teachers and other experts questioned by The Korea Herald.
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. From The Korea Herald August 9th 2006How did it get this bad? (Part 1)
By Chris Gelken
Immature and completely unprepared to face the realities of life, or a victimized group with solid grievances? It depends on who you ask really. Perhaps it is a little of both. They are often the target of derision on Korean language message boards and pilloried in the press as a bunch of overpaid layabouts. On the other side of the coin, the demand for native speaking English teachers is growing.
According to official figures obtained on Monday, there are some 13,774 legal, documented and to all intents and purposes, professional English teachers here in Korea. Unofficial figures estimate there are at least twice that number of undocumented and unqualified foreigners working as teachers in Korean schools. In a recent article, Miok Yoo of the Seoul Help Center told The Korea Herald that a significant number of the calls to their help desk came from distressed or angry foreigners hired to work here as English teachers. Five minutes' research on the internet will throw up enough horror stories relating to breach of contract, unpaid overtime and severance bonuses, failure to reimburse airfares etc., to convince even the most skeptical that there is a big problem out there. This should throw up an immediate red flag to anyone considering coming here to teach English. But according to Sara R. Avrams, a former legal educational advocate in the United States, and now an English instructor at a school in Gangwon Province, most people simply do little or no research. "They usually only start the research after they are signed, sealed and delivered, and smell the rats up close," she told The Korea Herald." Even the ones that do research are often fooled with false promises. "The attractions are rent-free accommodation, travel opportunities, free airfare, excitement, and of course in many cases, recruiters who lie through their teeth, exaggerate, and promise what they can't deliver," Avrams said. "They rely on the naivety of the recruits." Paul Robertson, CEO of the EFL-Law website, an information resource for expat English teachers, is frequently called on to give advice to teachers in trouble. "I think the major problem is the small hagwons who should never have been allowed to hire a foreigner. They are badly run, flout Korean laws, and deceive the teacher who ends up as a victim." So once ensnared what can the hapless victim do about it? "There are numerous laws that govern the industry," Robertson said. "I think the legal resources are sufficient, but the problem is the foreigners' lack of understanding of the Korean legal system." Another problem, according to Avrams, is that official channels seem to handle issues within the framework of the culture from which they stem, "and in short, Koreans don't complain. When they do, it is usually done within the school. They rarely seek outside help." Avrams says the official channels will sometimes soft-pedal the gravity of the issue. Rather than rushing to court, they will often encourage the teacher to try to reach an agreement with the school. "They are not trying to protect the employer, I think. They are aware that if they have to enforce a rule on behalf of the employee, the employee will likely be fired." Avrams says in her experience, once a formal complaint is lodged, the authorities will contact the employer and try to repair the problem. (chrisgelken@heraldm.com)
From The Korea Herald August 16th 2006How did it get this bad? (Part 2)
By Chris Gelken
Out of all the foreign English teachers working here in Korea, it would be virtually impossible to accurately determine the percentage who find themselves victims of dishonest practices by "hagwon" or school directors, conned by recruiters, or who simply didn't read the really small print on what can often be very confusing contracts.
But according to Jung Bong-soo, a lawyer with the KangNam Labor Law Firm, the problem is not as widespread as many people believe. "Of course there are teachers who will get into a dispute with their boss," he told The Korea Herald, "and I have helped them get severance pay, delayed wages and so on. I have also managed to help teachers who were unfairly dismissed. But out of all the teachers here, I believe only about 5 percent ever run into problems. I think this is quite a normal figure in any society." Jung said he is confident that the labor law is applied equally to Koreans and foreigners, an assertion supported by Paul Robertson, CEO of EFL Law - with some conditions. "The law courts are always available to foreigners. I think the resources are sufficient," he said. "But the problem is a lack of understanding of the Korean legal system among foreigners." Sara R. Avrams, a former special education legal advocate who now works as a teacher in Gangwon Province, says the figure quoted by Jung is a little misleading. "I would think the number of teachers working for hagwons and having problems is more along the lines of 70-90 percent. The number who actually seek help is probably closer to 5 percent." If a foreign teacher believes they are being treated unfairly, their first point of contact should probably be the Seoul Help Center, a government-run agency where they will be directed to the relevant labor office for their district and, if necessary, a labor lawyer. "The government does enforce rules when complaints are filed," said Avrams. "In my limited experience, for the most part, official agencies will call the employer, inform them of the rules and expect that the employer will repair the problem." It all sounds so simple and easy, once you know the rules. In fact, given that the law is explicit and reportedly enforced, it should be quite an exceptional event when an English teacher posts a "help" message on an EFL message board. But perhaps the operative word in the previous quote by Avrams is "expected" rather than "enforce." Many of these issues do not arise until the last month of a teacher's contract, Robertson told The Korea Herald. "Many small hagwons do not pay taxes, pension or health benefits. And at the end of the contract, they attempt to cheat the teacher out of their severance pay." With the hapless teacher racing against the clock to resolve the issue before their visa expires, time and experience in manipulating the system are on the side of the school. The odds of seeing justice run its course are stacking up against the victim. "By the time things get really bad, most victims aren't willing (or can't afford) to stay around to see the case to the end, they'd rather just go home," said Avrams. "So while the issue of the complaint may be officially 'resolved,' the end result can and often is bad for the employee. And the school is free to go out and get fresh meat," Avrams said. For the majority of teachers who come here to work for the smaller hagwons or schools, as opposed to universities or more reputable institutes, the EFL sector is a dangerous minefield for the unwary and inexperienced. Teachers contacted by The Korea Herald for this article mostly agree that a standardized contract and a formal, credible teachers' association to represent them would go a long way to clean up the EFL sector. Union membership is an option. "If the labor department recognizes the foreign English teacher as a legal employee, based on the Korean labor laws, the foreigners can join any union," Huh Man-yook, a Labor Department official told the Korea Herald. However, teachers we spoke to said language difficulties and the overly political nature of many unions here is a disincentive to join. KOTESOL, the Korea Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, an established teachers' association that boasts both foreign and local members, has been suggested as the most viable candidate to fill this void. The association's president, Louisa T. C. Kim, told The Korea Herald that they are considering these issues and are preparing to respond. Robertson, however, isn't optimistic that KOTESOL has the potential to be a significant player in the sector. "Even if KOTESOL did have the legal ability to act as a quasi-union, the vast majority of foreign teachers in Korea are not members, thus it would have little or no impact unless KOTESOL extended its services to members and non members alike." Avrams is also doubtful that any association would have the necessary clout to intervene in disputes between teachers and schools. "Mediation requires voluntary participation by both parties, employer and employee. And the key to effective mediation is a level playing field." And in a society where employers have traditionally held all the power, Avrams said, it will take Herculean efforts to level that playing field. (chrisgelken@heraldm.com)
2006年8月 From The Korea Herald, August 2nd 2006Be careful what you wish for
The government is planning to tighten its grip on the internet. In a move to curb what the authorities describe as "escalating online slander and privacy violations under cover of anonymity" on Korean message boards, a new set of regulations will be sent to the National Assembly next year for endorsement.
A quick look around a handful of English-language message boards that have carried this news suggests a significant number of "netizens" would actually welcome some effective policing of the internet. The rules will force users of boards taking more than 200,000 hits a day to use their real names when making comments on message boards. This will include boards hosted by the traditional media, including The Korea Herald. According to reports, Uri Rep. Byun Jae-il said, "Considering the big impact online newspapers have on our society, we also decided to consider lowering the bar." Lowering the boom would be more accurate. A small minority of net users are believed to be responsible for the overwhelming majority of crude, insulting and race-baiting remarks posted on message boards. But everyone will be bound by the new rules. How long will it take for these rules to be expanded in their scope? Currently, English-language boards will probably escape regulatory control, but for how long? How will these rules influence free expression of the non-malicious kind? Who will eventually decide what is acceptable and what is not -- board moderators and users, or a government bureaucrat? Moderators of message boards should have been the first line of defense against letting things get out of control. But they have proved they are not up to the job. Net users were the second line of defense. But by generally tolerating and not speaking out against the worst kinds of posts, they have also proved unable to keep their own house in order. Can these message boards police themselves, or do they really need government intervention? But be careful what you wish for; you might just get it. (community@heraldm.com) |
|
|||||||||||||
发送私人消息
订阅 RSS 源
告诉朋友
添加到 Live.com
添加至您的网络
订阅提醒
|
|
