Moon- "Sex Among Allies"

Moon's thesis is that these women were "instruments of promotion of two governments' bilateral security interests." This is a different way to think about the issue of security, because most interpretations focus on broader, more systemic, relations than those of individuals. But I think it is now important, in our more globalized world, that we do think about the relations between every combination of people, instituitions and governments. The fact that the camp women were a major piece of the interaction between the soldiers and the South Korean citizens is something that can't really be explained by the normal modes of discussion about security, but their interaction has become so entwined that it can't be left out when the South Korea-US relations are being analyzed.

{Prostitution as a symbol of US domination over South Korea in a neo-colonial status. Women's relationships with foreign soldiers personifies and defines the relationship between the governments. Moon}

US Military In Korea

Haselden's main argument is that Korea's reunification would change the current Northeast Asia security/military situation, with Korea, the US, Japan, China, and Russia. He also discusses how the combination of strong economies and strong militaries of East Asia would make the security situation around Korea unstable if US troop withdrawal created a power vacuum. Unified Korea would not be strong enough on its own to change the power structure in the absence of US troops, but if Korea sided with either Japan or China the regional security structure would change. Given how South (and North) Korea views China and Japan, they could potentially side with either country: South Korea has some distrust of Japan but a more working relationship with China and North Korea sides with its "Communist brother" China. Haselden says that the Koreas would resemble South Korea once unified because of the very obvious failure of North Korea, but he doesn't say whether Korea would side with Japan or China. He does say that "Korea's long mutual border, increased economic and political ties, and historical bond with China may lead to a stronger relationship with China, rather than Japan." (pg. 3).

I still am not entirely sure why South Korea would want reunification. I understand the concepts of Pan-Korean nationalism and anti-Great Power-ism, and even how the generation gaps plays into the equation but I'm not sure if all those factors add up to more than economic forces. North Korea's economy is so awful and South Korea's is quite good, so it seems to me like South Korea would be sacrificing prosperity and growth for cultural unity. I think I need to look more into this issue, maybe even do my paper on South Korea somehow, because I want to understand the culture/economy pieces of the Korean reunification issue.

The Struggle For And Against A Reunification of the Two Koreas: Pan-Korean Nationalism and Anti-Great Power-ism

The issue of North and South Korean reunification has many factors. Jiyul Kim describes some of these factors, like Pan-Korean Nationalism, Anti-Great Power-ism and US-South Korean relations. He also emphasizes how the generation gap between those who remember the Korean War and those who don't makes a difference in the individual's opinion of foreign policy and North Korea, the US, Japan, and China.

Since the collapse of the USSR, South Korea has started to view North Korea as another brother-victim of "Great Powers" instead of another Communist threat, which has lead to Pan-Korean Nationalism. That has also led to what Kim calls "Anti-Great Power-ism", the South Korean social movement that combines Anti-Americanism and a reaction against Korea being a "victim" of Great Powers, like the US, Japan, China, and the USSR, that the Korean Peninsula experienced since the late 19th Century.

Sheila Miyoshi Jager' article talks about Anti-Americanism (and Anti-Great Power-ism) in South Korea. This ties directly into the issue of security on the Korean Peninsula, because South Koreans are beginning to see the US as an imperialist threat, instead of relying on the Cold War power balance with North Korea as the common US-South Korean threat. She says that Anti-Americanism is nothing new to South Korea but what is new is the fact that the Anti-American sentiment has spread to all levels of the South Korean society, instead of being a more minority view. This has changed because of the rise of Pan-Korean Nationalism has lead to a desire for Korean unity, and the US's designation of North Korea as an "Axis of Evil" country has shifted the way South Koreans view America. Jager says that "More South Koreans today see the United States as a greater threat to their national security than North Korea."

If the South Korean government decides that the US is a bigger threat against North Korea than it is, relations could become strained. This is also exascerbated by the fact that the US still has many military bases in South Korea, bases that are becoming more unecessary ans more contentious as South Korea becomes even more self-sufficient and less threatened by North Korea.

Environmental Issues in Regional Context

Some of the major forms of environmental insecurities in the region are water and air pollution. Water pollution is caused by radioactive waste disposal, industrial waste dumping, oil spills, heavy metals and agricultural chemical runoff (Haque, pg. 213). Some examples of air pollution are emissions from coal-burning factories and power plants in China. Examples of air pollution are the use of products cntaining CFCs and an increase of greenhouse gasses emitted by industrial areas.

Haque states four things that have lead to environmental degradaton: 1) population pressure caused by increasing population 2) the intensive process of land development and urbanization 3) the rapid rates of industrial expansion and 4) the exceptionall high economic growth rate. All of these factors lead to governments priortizing their policies, with environmental concerns coming in at the bottom of the list, after other concerns like population, economy, and industry. Because, after all, governments are supposed to protect and provide for the people but not necessarily the environment. And its really hard to deny and justify denying people food and shelter who are desperately in need of it so that the government can protect the environment. This isn't to say that people can't be fed and sheltered while the environment is protected; but many, if not all, of these countries do not have to resources to do both at the same time, leading to the massive environmental degradation that is rampant in the area.

Economic Growth and Environmental Protection

In a globalized economy, environmental and health issues are shifted from developed countries to un- or under-developed countries, like lead from th US being shipped to China for recycling. That recycled/reused lead is then making its way back into products made for the US. Fairclough says that this is "closing a globilization loop in which toxic materials from high-tech garbage are turned into potentially dangerous gooods for kids and shipped back." Not much is being done to regulate the export of "non-hazardous" materials like the e-waste that is being recycled for its lead components becasue the EPA doesn't classify the e-waste components as hazardous. In this situation no one wins.

Some of the Chinese companies and manufacturers claim that "buyers know what they're getting and say using lead is the only way to offer low prices that foreign purchasers are willing to pay". I don't know if I agree with that statement or if I think that the manufacturers are just trying to cover their tracks. I feel, as a consumer, that I have no idea what I'm getting when I buy products. I also am kind of lazy and don't make an extreme effort to check where the product I am buying is manufactured. Maybe I should start doing that though. But, at the same time, the manufacturers or the companies that sell those products should make a little bit more effort to protect or inform the consumers rather than ignore them and hope they don't start a lawsuit later. I also thought it was very characteristic of the US government to begin to research the problem of exporting e-waste to "get an idea of the problem's global scope," rather than doing something concrete about it.

Labor Testimony

Kernaghan's report describes all the abuses that Chinese factories routinely do. He gives examples of specific toys/companies (Barbie, Speedo) that have factories in China and what kind of abuses they do. He tells how much pay the workers are docked, how much overtime pay is denied them, and how much the finished product is marked up. He explains what the company spends thier money on because they obviously do not spend that money on their workers' well-being. His lists of these abuses and the money and percentages of wages denied to workers became very repetitive very quickly. Simply giving an example of one or two specific products and the abuses those companis practice and then listing other companies that do the same thing would have been just as effective.

Kernaghan makes the very apt point that American consumers would be horrified if they knew the way the products were made and how little the factory owners regard human rights. He then goes on to say that the reason American consumers don't know these practices is because the companies that own theses factories do everything in their power to keep this information hidden. I personally am horrified by these practices, but most of the ability to change these practices lies with the consumer; if the consumer is ignorant of these practices and has no viable option but to purchase those products, not much change for the better can occur. Which is just the way these companies want to keep it. Also, Kernaghan states that there is more than enough money in the companies' vaults to change their practices to adopt more humane ones, but the practices remain hidden and the profits increase, so the company has absolutely zero incentive to spend money on changing their practices. Without major incentive, these companies will just continue to pocket the profit they make, it is naive to think that they will be inspired to change their ways because they have obviously made the conscious decision to operate inhumane factories.

Cheek- Living with Reform and "China Blue"

Since the new economic reforms in 1989, China has fractured into several different classes of citizens. The first class is the rich, who have amassed great wealth and luxury and make up a tiny percentage of the population. The next class is the middle class, who can afford to have an apartment and education for their children, some consumer items, and family vacations. These two classes have a tentative hold on the class conflict situation, but are fearful of the lower classes. The next class is the working class, who can barely afford to live and are very wary of layoffs and unemployment. This class is volitile and prone to protests, but that's only because they know they should be treated better. The final class is the underclass of migrant workers composed of people from rural areas who move to the cities to find work, who have absolutely no rights and are forced to work in apallingly horrible conditions for practically nonexistent pay. All of these classes are exclusive, isolated, fearful of the other classes and are quickly becoming more and more seperate from each other. If you are in one class there is no way for you to advance to the next higher class, there is no opportunity to do so.

Some of these conditions were highlighted in the movie "China Blue". Jasmine, a young girl from a rural province, moves to the city to work in a factory. The movie shows how much they are forced to work, how their pay is cut for any reason, and how they are absolutely mistreated by the management. What sickened me the most was that the owner of the factory actually thought he was helping out the migrant workers because they were subhuman enough to need that kind of atmosphere in order to work and that they wouldn't know any better. Also, there are labor and minimum wage laws in China, but no one follows them because they wouldn't be able to compete with other factories if they did. The workers work for more than 15 hours a day in terrible conditions, with little food and no rest and make only several cents a day. I can barely believe that the factory owners and the government can rationalize this kind of treatment, it is absolutely awful.