Korean Presidential Hopeful Calls US Military an “Occupying Force”
This is what the Korean left does, re-write history to fit their political narratives:
Gyeonggi Governor Lee Jae-myung, a frontrunner among candidates for president from the ruling Democratic Party (DP), made bombshell remarks last week. In a trip to Andong, North Gyeongsang, his hometown, Lee said, “Pro-Japanese forces maintained their ruling system in collaboration with the U.S. occupation force in Korea after its liberation from Japanese rule.” His portrayal of South Korea as a country that “could not be founded in a clean way from the start” has stirred much controversy after Kim Won-wung, chairman of the Heritage of Korean Independence, called the American forces an “occupation force” and the Soviet forces a “liberation force” in a virtual speech to high school students earlier. Even after his comment triggered a sensation, Gov. Lee claimed that the U.S. forces defined themselves as an “occupying force,” urging his opponents to first reflect on their “lack of knowledge about history.”
The historical perspectives Lee has demonstrated are very inappropriate — and dangerous — for a presidential hopeful. His distorted view of history seems to have originated from the now-defunct theory widely shared by democracy activists in the past. But Lee’s views are wrong. While the Soviet military government established a Communist regime led by its puppet Kim Il Sung in North Korea, a divergent mix of the anti-Communist faction, the nationalist faction and the socialist faction fiercely competed with one another under the rule of the U.S. military government in South Korea.
Lee’s claim that South Korea was ruled by pro-Japanese forces after liberation is also misleading. The heads of the three branches of the government were all independence fighters. Our founding president Syngman Rhee and Shin Ik-hee, the founding speaker of the National Assembly, both fought against Japanese rule as top officials of the Provisional Government in China. Our first Chief Justice Kim Byung-ro also served as chairman of an influential anti-Japanese group. Ministers of the first government led by Syngman Rhee also were mostly independence fighters.
Joong Ang Ilbo
You can read more at the link, but the term liberation force I think is more appropriate to describe the US forces that moved into South Korea after the defeat of the Imperial Japanese during World War II. However, Korean leftists like the term occupation force that carries negative connotations while using liberation force to describe the Soviets. It is almost like the leftists wish the Soviet Union occupied the entire peninsula after World War II.
As far as the pro-Japanese comments, the US military initially kept Japanese government administrators in place until they could be replaced by a new Korean government. Would Lee Jae-Myung have preferred the disaster that was de-Bathification in Iraq when all the government officials were fired that help lead to the post-war chaos in that country? The keeping of Japanese administrator temporarily ended up being a wise decision that led to a smoother transition of power to the new ROK government.
I remember one one of the first talks when I arrived in 2ID in 1989 was to explain in a thumbnail SOFA laws and that we were NOT an occupation force and to expect either the ROK government and/or the UCMJ to come down on us if we acted stupid in the villes. That is exactly why GI used to post the monthly court martial reports frome USFK.
This is another good example of why it’s time for USFK to leave. They don’t want us here. They don’t appreciate us. Let them defend themselves, then, and we’ll stand off in the distance. If they need us, they can call us, if their pride will let them.
Governor Lee has just basically accused Korean conservatives and anyone even vaguely pro-American of collaborating with an occupying force, making such people all traitors. Good luck with all that, Mr. Lee.
Leftist in America cast the founding of our nation as a crime, now leftist/commies in Korea trying to paint a similar picture of South Korea to justify tearing down the system. All these commies using the same play book.
The key missing point is that the Soviet Union despite being an “allied nation” did not move a single soldier toward the Japanese until the US dropped the first nuke on Japan. The US liberated Korea, there were many assisting efforts but the Soviet Union was not one of them until after Japan was registering they were already defeated. The USSR divided Korea with the help of the CCP. The US united Korea twice.
We all know who Korean Man is voting for.
I mean, he’s not technically wrong historically… but read a crowd, man.
Attacking the South Korean left for wanting the eventual departure of US forces is also attacking them for wanting peace; they go hand in hand. The US is in Korea because it benefits both countries, but as time goes on, it benefits the US more than South Korea as hostilities defuse.
As an American and a Soldier, I can only hope that the goal was for South Korea to eventually stand on its own, right? Maybe the military needs to rebrand more effectively as a regionally cooperative force instead of stabilizing, much like in Germany.
Or just yell about commies, that works too.
I still think you’re dusty in more than the britches. However, it probably is time to move on. Having a “rapid response force six months out would certainly be enough to deal with any of the external threats South Korea faces. And the internal threats are due to voter apathy.
>good example of why it’s time for USFK to leave.
Nope. If Lee gets elected, Korea will say, “then leave now”, the next time the US tries to blackmail for more money, or if the US says “we should leave because they hate us boo hoo cry cry”.
>We all know who Korean Man is voting for.
Nope. I never liked the man because he’s too economically radical supporting universal basic guaranteed income for the entire population. But for sure, if he gets elected I can see him playing hardball with the US playing games to squeeze South Korea.
>he goal was for South Korea to eventually stand on its own, right?
Absolutely correct. And I think someone like Lee is what exactly South Korea needs right now to break that psychological dependence on the US military. But I still wouldn’t vote for him though, since his advocacy of Universal Basic Income is just too scarily radical.
And as for you, ROKDROP, let’s take each of your point:
>“Pro-Japanese forces maintained their ruling system in collaboration with the U.S. occupation force in Korea after its liberation from Japanese rule.”
This is true. It’s fact. South Korea’s upper ruling class, the police, the civil servants, the military, etc etc, all collaborated with or worked under the Japanese once. And it was the US military that put these same people back in their positions in charge of the country. What makes this statement not true?
It was Theodore Roosevelt who made a deal with Japan in July 25, 1909 where by the US gets to have the Philippines in return for Japan to be allowed to grab Korea.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taft%E2%80%93Katsura_agreement
And to this date, this is why Japan is so openly defiant about the annexation of Korea. They say the colonization of Korea was all legal, internationally recognized, and approved by the US.
>Having a “rapid response force six months out would certainly be enough to deal with any of the external threats South Korea faces.
That’s not even necessary. Just eliminate the restrictions on South Korea to reprocess nuclear wastes, stop the restrictions on South Korea building nuclear powered submarines, and stop the restrictions on SK if it chooses to develop its nuclear deterrence. For that, Trump was open-minded, which I give heaps of praise for. All these steps wouldn’t even cost the US a dime.
Link to where you praised Trump on Rokdrop.
To be fair, the US forces stationed in Korea from 1945 to 1948 were occupation forces.
Same thing for Germany after WW2. Germany was divided into four occupation zones with the US, UK, France and the USSR each in charge of a zone. That period is called “Germany in the occupation period”.
However Lee should have been careful. He is not just the Governor of Gyeonggi Province but a presidential hopeful. Which means he should be careful with how he says things and expresses them since a lot of cameras and people are watching closely.
@Korean Man, we did the same thing in Japan & Germany after WWII. Obviously the German government collapsed and the vast majority of senior leaders were Nazis, put on trial and executed or handed long prison sentences. MacArthur pretended to do the same in Japan. It made sense to leave the power structure in place, especially at the provincial & local level to help maintain stability after the military occupation restored order. More recently our complete destruction of leadership in Iraq & Afghanistan did not achieve the desired results. It helped that Korea had a government in exile to come back and step into place. Just because Koreans collaborated with the Japanese doesn’t mean they agreed with their policies or goals.
He pretty much gave the Bruce Cummings textbook explanation.
@Korean Man, I have not heard the Taft Katsura argument in a long time. Here is my response to that claim:
https://www.rokdrop.net/2007/01/the-taft-katsura-agreement-an-american-sell-out-of-korea/
Only Korea is responsible for Korea’s plight in the late 1800s. Always looking backward not forward and the choose poorly. Japan embraced the future. Choices have consequences and hoping for a foreign power to save you is just foolish.