Skip to main content

Walk - or run - away from Gaeseong (The Korea Times, July 9, 2013) by Casey Lartigue, Jr.



By Casey Lartigue, Jr.

The South Korean government is on the verge of snatching defeat from the ''jaws of victory" as it agreed to reopen the joint Gaeseong Industrial Complex.

Although I support a ''sunshine approach" in dealing with North Korea, I do believe the South Korean government made the right decision to withdraw from the Gaeseong complex in April when the North Koreans started acting like damned fools, yet again. The South Korean government pledged to financially support the South Korean companies suffering losses (an estimated $1 billion).

I oppose providing subsidies for businesses, but in this case, it is the best option to make a clean break. Offer payoffs to the South Korean companies doing business in the complex, then the South Korean government should wipe its hands of the complex. That's right, walk ― if not run ― away from the Gaeseong complex.

If South Korean businesses want to do business with the North Korean regime, they should not be blocked. It is inevitable that the North Koreans will use the complex as part of its ongoing game of chicken with the South and that the South Korean companies will eventually have their property seized or shut down.

The problem is that the taxpayers lose their shirts right along with those South Korean companies when the South Korean government stays involved.

I have watched South Korea long enough to know that the government here can't break its habit of being involved in everything, even having Cabinet meetings discussing whether or not men should be defined as hostesses or the appropriate lengths of skirts of ladies.

So the South Korean government will work with the North Korean regime to reopen the complex and maintain the guarantees for South Korean companies. Then the next time the North Koreans shut down the complex, the price tag will be $10 billion or some other ridiculous amount.

To be clear, I support a sunshine policy allowing businesses, individuals and charitable organizations to deal with the North Korean regime. But shouldn't it be obvious by now that the two Koreas won't come to a meaningful agreement?

The New York Times recently took a stroll through history, writing about squabbles between the two Koreas at their peace talks: ''During border talks decades ago, the sides took the competition over protocol and appearances to the extreme, with North Korean military officers secretly adding inches to the legs of their chairs so they would look taller than their counterparts across the table from South Korea and the United States. In those cold-war-era meetings, the sides usually exchanged invectives and retorts.

''But they also sometimes persisted in silence ― for over 11 hours in one session in 1969 ― challenging the other side to speak first. In the best-known contest of pride on the divided peninsula, North and South Korea once engaged in a race over which country could raise its national flag higher over the heavily fortified border. That battle was eventually settled with the North beating the South; today, the North's flagpole stands over 500 feet tall, beating the rival South's by roughly 200 feet."

Of course, there are many more examples not mentioned, such as high level meetings being delayed or halted because of disputes over seating arrangements.

I mention that because Gaeseong is just another bargaining tool between the two Korean governments, a chess game being played according to North Korea's rules.

Stephen Linton of the Eugene Bell Foundation pointed out at a Cato Institute event in 2010 that countries tend to adopt North Korea's tactics. ''South Korea tries to approach North Korea the way North Korea approaches South Korea, by funneling everything through government ministries, by strangling in a sense or denying its private sector full participation," Linton said. The result is too much government, not enough private sector activity in dealing with North Korea.

The South Korean government can, in this case, walk away from the industrial complex, cut the guarantees, and allow businesses to deal directly with the North Koreans.



Photo Casey Lartigue took during Prof. Lankov's presentation.

At his office, getting his critical but helpful advice about my projects.

I connected him with 10 Magazine for a speech in July 2013, then went to the subway to direct him to the location.

I arranged for Prof. Lankov and some refugees to be in a PBS special. He was on the phone, so they asked me to sit in his seat for a few minutes so they could adjust the lighting or whatever...

Prof. Lankov

Making!

HIS!

POINT!
Introducing Prof. Lankov to Yeonmi Park and Stephanie Choi (one of Yeonmi's 19 teachers in the Teach North Korean Refugees project that I am co-director of.


September 2011, Center for Free Enterprise. Prof. Lankov agreed to come over to my office to give a speech although he had no idea who I was.

Popular posts from this blog

Common Sense on North Korea (Korea Times, April 2, 2012)

By Casey Lartigue, Jr. As interesting as Kookmin University professor Andrei Lankov’s writings are, there is nothing quite like attending one of his lectures. He can barely restrain himself behind the podium, often pointing and waving his arms. I also enjoy his unscripted speeches, but his answers in Q&A sessions are like the difference between watching Michael Jordan shoot baskets in warm-ups and an actual game. I have finally discovered the secret behind Lankov’s consistently solid analysis about North Korea: Use common sense. At an Asan Institute conference last summer, he argued that North Korea watchers should try to understand North Korea from its perspective. Don’t most people know that you must understand the mindset of others you are dealing with? Yet, common sense in theory gets ignored politically. From the North Korean perspective, nuclear weapons are the best thing they’ve got going. They will NOT give them up easily, even if President Obama ...

Get rid of that watermelon!

Part 1: When I was a youngster I used to collect Confederate money, posters and photographs with caricatures of blacks, and "No blacks allowed signs." I loved the money because it was a reminder of how far the sorry Confederacy had fallen. I had one poster of a dark-skinned black boy munching on a watermelon. I would look at that small poster and wonder, "What in the world is wrong with anyone wanting to eat watermelon?" Yes, white people, I'm talking to you. Your parents, grandparents, and other ancestors who thought making fun of blacks for eating watermelon were crazy ! Even people who say that nothing has changed in race relations must acknowledge that the many stereotypes of blacks are no longer prevalent. But then, there are also some ready to remind us of days-gone-by by debunking stuff that doesn't need to be debunked today. According to the Washington Post: The sound you just heard was yet another racial stereotype going kersplat ! Some ...

Rich talking back

The rich are talked about very often in negative terms, but how often do the rich respond in kind? Australian billionaire Gina Rinehart, who inherited most of her money but apparently has also done very well with it, recently railed against class warfare and had some advice for the non-rich : "There is no monopoly on becoming a millionaire," she writes. "If you're jealous of those with more money, don't just sit there and complain. Do something to make more money yourself - spend less time drinking, or smoking and socializing and more time working."   She complained about politicians raising taxes, regulations that slow investment, and other anti-business policies that harm the poor. "If you want to help the poor and our next generation, make investment, reinvenstment and businesses welcome."

To be a good volunteer, use your brain (Korea Times, December 5, 2012)

By Casey Lartigue, Jr. There is probably an unwritten rule that a celebrity offering to do volunteer work for a good cause should immediately be embraced. Well, that’s not what happened to Jeong So-dam, the glamorous Korean cable TV announcer when our paths crossed on Nov. 29. Ms. Jeong was the MC of an event about American political philosophy hosted by the Association for Economic Evolution. During my speech about American libertarianism since 1940, I discussed my volunteer work for North Korean refugees. After the speech, Jeong approached me, asking how she could help. I gave her the same tough love I give to potential volunteers by asking: “Who are you?” After all, if you are Bill Gates, then open your wallet. If you speak four languages, then help with translation work. So I first stress to potential volunteers: Use your brain. Tell us about your skills and interests so together we can figure out your initial role.  Jeong was good-natured about it, rather than c...

Why I won't go to North Korea (Korea Times, December 27, 2012)

By Casey Lartigue, Jr. “Have you ever been to North Korea?” This is the question I am almost always asked here in South Korea when people learn that I have become an activist for North Korean escapees. My response is curt: “No.” “Do you plan on going?” they ask next. My answer remains the same: “No.” When they start to ask a follow-up question, I cut them off: "No." People are often just trying to make conversation, I know, but I am blunt for a reason: I am not interested in going to North Korea as long as North Koreans are held captive. I could go one day, but for now, I can do without a government-guided tour by " men-stealers and women-whippers ," to borrow a phrase from American abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison. I don’t mean to criticize people who have gone to North Korea for political, educational, business, religious reasons or just plain curiosity. However, some people push me on the issue, ― and I push back. A good friend wh...