The "Korea Model" in Iraq

I have a couple of problems with the "Korea-Model" being implemented in Iraq. First of all, the idea of Korea has negative connotation. The Korean war was viewed as a failure for the United States by Americans. I suppose if we want to give the Iraq war an even worse name we should begin comparing it to Korea. Secondly, while Korea was easily split between, North, South and the DMZ Iraq will not be quite so easily divided. The Iraqi population is made up of many diverse groups, we can not hope to split the country and then continue to rule. Thirdly, with the "Korea-Model" the United States takes away Iraqi sovereignty from its people. The "purpose" of the Iraq war was to bring democracy to Iraq, with this plan we are basically ignoring our own reasons for entering Iraq in the first place. I think its terrible to even consider this plan,  not only does it go against democracy but it also continues to divide a war-torn nation. Iraqis should be allowed to define their own government and be allowed to deal with threats rather than continue to rely on the military presence of the United States to protect them from the people of their own nation.

Ideally, we should transfer the reigns to the Iraqi government and allow them to decide whether or not they want any US military presence, and no matter their decision we should follow their orders. Returning sovereignty to Iraq is key. We need to lessen the military presence their and the only way to do that is to allow Iraqis decision making power in their own lives. We can not force the increase of bases or the permanent installations of troops because it benefits our desperate attempts at natural resources. We need to recognize sovereignty and back away. The "Korea-Model" infringes on many of things Americans believe classify democracy, so obviously we can not follow that course of action. 

Why Some People Like Military Bases and Why Some Don't

After reading about the villagers in Korea I completely understand why they are opposed to the military base. As the one villager said, his ancestors are buried there, his children grew up there, and his sweat is in the fields, he has history there. The idea of the military coming in and forcing out villagers is awful. Just because the US military made a deal with Korea does not mean that villagers should be kicked off of land that is rightfully theirs. 

On the other hand...

I understand why people resist base closure. I live in midcoast Maine, and the closest base to my house is about 1/2 an hour away, and is in the process of being closed. The transformation from a military base into civilian businesses will not be completed till after 2010 when the military is completely moved out. The town of Brunswick is reliant on the military and military families to keep the economy strong. In these uncertain economic times, the closing of the Brunswick Naval Air Base has sent many in the area into a frenzied panic. 

"The base employs 2,687 active-duty personnel and 583 full-time civilian personnel. All of them will be gone by 2010. Base redevelopment officials say that including dependents, the base closing will represent a loss of about 5,000 people from the midcoast areas." 

For a town with a population of about 15,000 the removal of 5,000 economically stable families and individuals will potentially shift the entire midcoast economy. We are dependent on those 5,000 people to live and shop in the biggest city within a 45 minute radius. So I completely understand why many populations are dependent on the business of military bases. 

In the end though, I don't think it is possible to compare the Korean example and bases in the United States. US bases in foreign countries is most often seen as imperialism, whereas in the US we are taught that in order to support our bases we allow them to protect our homes. Also, the Korean examples seems so much worse because their is visible protest to the base. Granted, I wasn't alive for the arrival of the Brunswick Naval Air Station. Needless to say I have no problem with closing bases in foreign countries and returning sovereignty to its rightful owners, in the US however I begin to question the reasons. 

"Sex Among Allies, Military Prostitution in U.S. - Korea Relations" by Katharine H.S. Moon

The thing that saddened me most about the introduction to Moon's book was Korean society's embarrassment at what their economy and culture has forced some women into. Moon says that many women turn to prostitution because they are orphaned or widowed by war, or come from extremely poor families. Korean society dictates that prostitution is something terrible but at the same time seem to condone it for its military relations. It is hypocritical to banish prostitutes from accepted society but still condone the bars and clubs that market women. 

Before reading this article, I knew about military and prostitute relations and that they were common. But reading the stories and first-hand accounts of abortions, miniscule wages gave the whole thing a new sort of reality. In the "Hospitality - What Price" article I was really struck by the account of Inday, the mother of Maria. Because she couldn't work after the 5 month mark of her pregnancy, she couldn't afford a caesarean in order to save her child, nor drugs to dull the pain. I couldn't get over the treatment by the doctors and nurses and that they discharged her from the hospital when she so clearly needed help. The conditions that the Korean prostitutes must live under are horrifying. As a last resort they rely on their beauty and sexuality for survival and in turn must be ignored by traditional society. 

The whole dynamic of the situation upset me. That society forces women into these careers and then ostracizes them for their choices. The military and the Korean government and society are all equally responsible for the awful situation forced on the poor women of Korea, and should take responsibility and begin working towards a solution. 

Trouble Commenting

So I have noticed that people don't seem to know where to comment on my blog. You just have to click the pencil at the bottom of my posts to comment. So for future comments just do that. THANKS!

Diego Garcia

After reading through the websites outlining the Diego Garcia history I realized the articles said nothing about the native residents of Diego Garcia. So through a little internet surfing I come to realize exactly why the websites wouldn't say anything.... it's because the native residents of Diego Garcia were part of a forced migration during the 1960s and 1970s. The British and US governments settled an agreement to share the island for military purposes. The native people were relocated to Mauritius. I found it pretty difficult to find any information of the depopulation of Diego Garcia. The websites that we read for class seemed to care more about the flora and fauna of the islands than the people they had displaced. There is an active movement in progress for Diego Garcians to be allowed to return to their land, but little has come out of it. In the quest for military control and presence in the pacific both the UK and the US have displaced an entire population. It made me really sad to think about the native population being forced to migrate to Mauritius and then not being assimilated in to that culture. Essentially the natives of Diego Garcia are a stateless group because of the quest for military influence and power. Obviously, the right thing to do is allow Diego Garcians to return to Diego Garcia, but even with that right granted, there are still 16 seperate military commands on the island. The only way to rectify any of this is to demobilize and leave Diego Garcia so that future Diego Garcians can live in their own country without the threat of military presence.

Why Can't We Reduce the US Military Presence on Okinawa?

There were a few things in the speech by Ota Masahide that caught my attention...

1) That the occupation of Okinawa was in violation of the Hague Treaty. I guess I can understand why after WWII other countries might look the other way as the US violated an international treaty. The fear created from the War understandably made people scared to allow some countries free reign or to be militarily unsupervised. At the same time however, I think that Americans have lost sight of the fact that we became a country because we rebelled against foreign occupation. Certainly our occupation of Okinawa is quite similar. That part of the speech really upset me, but I guess I shouldn't be that surprised. The United States tends to do whatever they want and disregard concerns from other countries.

2) That 75% of the US bases in Japan are based in Okinawa and that Okinawa only makes up 1% of Japan's total area. Perhaps because Okinawa was the site of the only battle fought on Japanese soil during WWII the US put bases there. Or perhaps because the rest of Japan is able to pawn the bases of on the under-represented Okinawan population. The people of Okinawa carry the majority of the burden of placed on the Japanese by US military bases.

3) That Okinawan people only occupy 7 seats in the legislature out of 752. With that kind of skew on seats in the legislature it seems to be nearly impossible to ask the Japanese government for anything that might help Okinawa. They are a small island that is made to carry the burden of US military presence. The effects of which can be seen in their per capita income which is 71% lower than the mainland's or their unemployment rate which is double that of the mainland.

4) That US military personnel are committing crimes and not being held accountable. "American servicemen have committed 111 rapes, 23 murders, 357 robberies and 2, 479 burglaries." (262) The Okinawan population does not need the added stress of American servicemen committing crimes. This part was especially upsetting to me.

5) And finally, why can't we reduce the US military presence on Okinawa? I genuinely don't understand why we feel the need to have such a heavy presence on the Island. I understand the need to have a presence in Japan and in Asia, but I don't understand why it has to be so concentrated and large. It's time to start returning land to the Okinawan people and helping them return to a lifestyle of living that allows them to succeed.