Tweet of the Day: Time to Move On?

https://twitter.com/minseon_ku/status/1645534741834104834
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

1 Comment
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Stephen
Stephen
1 year ago

From the NYT article:

Four years ago, I participated in a panel discussion on Chinese state television and was asked how East Asian countries could cooperate better. When I started to say that vastly different political systems remained a stumbling block, the Chinese host cut me off, apparently trying to stop me from criticizing Chinese authoritarianism.

NYT epitomizes freedom of speech. Which exists in both Japan and the ROK to a limited degree and not at all in the PRC and the DPRK.

Minseon Ku 구민선

@minseon_ku

·

Apr 11

2) South Koreans can distrust both China and Japan at the same time, unlike his claim that they’re somewhat mutually exclusive (i.e. SK having to choose one over the other). Presenting contemporary security considerations in a binary lens is really outdated.

But it is a binary situation. Xi Dada has proclaimed: Two legs of the PRC and DPRK good. Four legs of the ROK, Japan, Taiwan and USA bad.

Disingenuous language, “they’re somewhat mutually exclusive” – somewhat? What does that mean? For it to be binary it is either OK, or not OK … there is no somewhat.

Then the claim that Dr. Sewong Koo is looking at contemporary security considerations through a binary lens?

Is Dr. Minseon Ku referring to this observation?

Many South Koreans fear that Beijing’s stated intention to “unify” with self-ruled Taiwan — militarily, if necessary — could drag us into a devastating regional conflict.

The littoral states of Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam have a “binary” view about the PRC’s nine-dash line in the South China Sea.

1
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x