Link to Korea Article

I found this article, from AlJazeera, and it fits this week's topic well.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/B2AC77A7-8A70-43D8-8307-9799670A2C48.htm

Week 9

I completely forgot to write a post last night, but one is forthcoming...

Week 9: Kim and Jager

In the Jager article, I was intrigued by the story Park Geun-byung teaches his students that depicts the USA as a dragon keeping the lovers on either side of the river from meeting. It is so interesting to learn about the way different countries educate students about their own, and other's, history. Honestly, the Korean War and Korean history were all but ignored in my schooling. However, from what I was taught, and most of what mainstream press has espoused, I was under the impression that the relations between ROK and DPRK were far more antagonistic and fragle than Jager's article suggests. I am then driven to wonder about the benefits to US foreign policy and military strategy that such a depiction may result in. I suppose a strong and dangerous DPRK and a weak, helpless ROK support the US power plays in the region, and allows for stronger rhetoric against nuclear development in DPRK and anti-communist sentiment. I am deeply disturbed by these likely possibilites, and by the foreign policy strategy they suggest, and how that US strategy functions around the globe, not just in relation to Korea. The state-centered security and military theory as is applies to US-Korean relations seems to be a distortion of reality, and I am bothered by learning of yet another instance where what I always believed to be true is only a version of reality, and one that promotes a sincerely "American" agenda.

Week 7: Haque

The interstate tensions were a new aspect that we have not covered as thoroughly, and one that I am especially interested in, so perhaps it is because I have kept these ideas in the back of my mind that I was not especially cognizant of their sudden predominance in the Haque reading. I am especially interested in the international/universal ideas of security, and how international relations, international bodies, and international policies are affected by the state centered security paradigm.

In Haque's article, the most pressing aspects I noted were from page 220 on, when he begins to dive into the interstate conflict and the need for reevaluation of policies and reform measures, including a revised international relations perspective concerning the idea of security. By incorporating poverty and small arms as well as industrial expansion and the indirect environmental consequences of economic growth and consumerism, Haque lays out a strong argument for changing the status quo concerning security in East Asia. Especially notable is the need, that we have already discussed, for these states to consider the conflict of interest between many new ideas of security, such as alleviation of poverty and provisions for basic needs, with their focus on economic growth and traditional responses to security threats with militarism.

The emphasis on the complex historical relationships that complicate contemporary regional efforts at cooperation is an important emphasis on Haque's part, and it is one we have not spoken of as much, and I hope as we explore the other countries more, we will begin to find more grounds for having discussions concerning the role of regional cooperation, and the complications of international alleigances and antagonisms.

I am, however, even more invested in understanding how we can reform security theory to reflect the changing ideas of what constitutes security, especially noting Haque's call to academics in the end. Today, it seems necessary for states to be central to the shift from state-centered security ideas to more multilateral ideas of security that would include micro/internal issues all the way up to international macro issues, and yet it is states that are most dedicated to national sovereignty, making it difficult to imagine a way for these ideas to truly shift. I think such a change will require a real ideological shift of immense proportions, and such a change seems almost impossible to come by in the face of such a long standing and entrenched notion of security.

Week 7: Economy and Fairclough

I had no idea that lead in toys and jewelry was from recycling electronics here in the US. It saddens me to think that we are not only extraordinarily wasteful, but when we try to recycle products that are otherwise very wasteful we are actually doing more good than harm in cases like these. It is frustrating to see that it is yet another area where the easiest and cheapest way out is the most dangerous, and China is embroilled in it because of the role it has come to occupy as world producer with the cheapest efficient labor. "It's too costly to make lead-free products," says owner Wang Qinjuan. "Chinese products have to be sold cheaply in foreign markets, or they are not competitive." I hate that Qinjuan is right, and it is a frustrating problem in that it seems not to have a solution, or at least not one that could be implemented soon. Where does one start when faced with problems that are threefold, such as this, and which are so international in their scope? The entire process is cyclical, which is infuriating, because there does not appear to be a beginning or end, only a constant, and how is one to work with that kind of continual downward spiral?