Senses

The sound of moving water: It is thunder in the white sky. The endless breaking of the ocean haunts the girl in the cage. It roars and rampages, loud enough to scare the little girl away. Then next moment, it becomes a lullaby, the most powerful mistress of the dark night. It whispers with its sweet and tender lips: the invitation of the night. Embracing the girl in the darkness, the lullaby never seems to stop.

Scent of her hair: When she let her hair down, the glimpse of a dark cascade running through her delicately curved shoulder and to the bottom of her spine blinded a boy. The candle light in the room reflected its bright darkness. While soaking fingers through the shiny cascade, the heavenly scent of her hair tickled his nose. Even a glass of tropical cocktail sipped near the Indian Ocean cannot be as heavenly as this.

Seeing a flamenco dancer: In the picture, she wears a satin bra with sleeves and a split skirt that reveals the entire length of her legs as she lunges on the ground. Her eyes are smudged in dark makeup, and on her lips, there sits a seductive smile. She is driven into ecstasy and knew in every fibre of her being that she had been dancing like that for thousands of years. She seems to indulge herself in the whirl of wind and divine madness.

Letter by Hussein, Written After Conviction.

Saddam Hussein wrote soon after receiving his death sentence,

“I say goodbye to you, but I will be with the merciful God who helps those who take refuge in him and who will never disappoint any honest believer,” the letter said. “I call on you not to hate, because hate does not leave space for a person to be fair and it makes you blind and closes all doors of thinking.” The letter, which was posted on a Baath Party Web site and received extensive coverage on Arabic TV news stations.

Being convicted of crimes against humanity for his part in the execution of 148 men and boys in the northern town of Dujail, Hussein might aim to redempt himself through this message or he simply still stive to seek sorts of justification/inevitability concerning the matter for calling out for his final revolt. Whichever reason he had in his mind at that time, he certainly seemed much more fragile and fatigued just like an ordinary old man next door. This made me wonder how putting an old man into death would bring out justice and political impacts as the majority - here, majority means those in power within Iraq and outside of the nation - wishes. I have to say I am concerned it will more or less result in the exact opposite consequences from what those in power believe because of a few obvious reasons as below.

First, he still isn't fully aware why he has to be judged by those who he doesn't acknowledge as legitimate. This means he will be unlikely cease to persuade those still following him that all his conducts were righteous and his suffers at the present is caused only because the power is in wrong hands, if not saying it should belong to him. Second, he perceived himself as a righteous martyr, this certainly doesn't help to redempt himself within the jurisdiction thereof. Third, currently leaders in Iraq, strongly backed by the U.S. want him dead badly, which can potentially make Hussein a sacrified victim by the west. Remember, the west practicalism, in particular, the American ones are not quite popular in the region. If this happens, the U.S. will only receive much more entangled hostile reactions from the indigenious people after his death, which is the last thing the west wishes to see. Having Hussein as a national hero slaugtered by the U.S. will only make it harder for the U.S. to proceed whatever they need to do in the region. In addition, now Hussein is a 70-year-old man, no where else to run, what's the point to be so hurry?

We see arguments everyday to ban the execution by law. Depriving rights to speak and move freely will probably bring about what everybody wants rather than murdering him, thereby possibly triggering backfires in already excessively complicated situations. You see, the last thing we want to see is making him remembered as a martyr died for what he believed, which will only give him a chance to live eternality.

장준하. (Jang, Jun-ha)

다음은 명동성당에서 있었던 장준하의 영결미사때 추기경 김수환이 한 강론의 일절입니다.

"그의 죽음은 별이 떨어진 것이 아니라 죽어서 새로운 빛이 되어 우리의 갈길을 밝혀주기 위하여 잠시 숨은 것 뿐입니다."


Below is a prayer by the Cardinal Kim, Su-hwan at Jang's funeral held in the Myoung-dong Cathedral in 1975.

"His death does not imply a bright star vanishing into the oblivion, but a star being reborn as a new light guiding us to a pathway that we're supposed to follow."

Alexa: Indeed, for some, death isn't an end, but is a magnificent new start to live eternity.

leaving vs. staying

Reading Ham Seok-heon's writings in his book containing his perspectives on history and Korea therein tossed me a question this morning. He described leaving as a habitual status of preemptive mankind whom no civilization or fertile intellectual heritage were given to be cultivated. He defined it was only after the mankind decided to settle down when it began to develop civilization and prevail the wealth. Is it really leaving deprives the prosperity and settling secures it contrarily?

Leaving.
People leaves where they belong for some time of their life for various reasons. Certainly, there are political reasons for those troubled for their political believes in their mother countries and left with not much choice but leaving. For those ambitious enough to be willingly pushing themselves in a bigger market may also choose to leave for the hopeful betterment. Yes, maybe the common ground for those chosen to leave is no possession. They are often a group of people who got nothing more to lose. Either they are yound and full of energy, i.e., poor and impulsive so that unknown world and hidden danger therein only encourages their curiosity, but not deserts them in an ambiguous hesitation. In this sense, having no possession may be a pre-requisition for leaving where you belong. Here status of "no-possession" can not only be interpreted as a physical non-possession, but also as a mental non-possession.

Staying.

Holiday.

I send the warmest hug and kiss to everyone, have a merry Christmas and happy new year!


- Season's Greetings from Seoul -

The Pattern May Change, if ...

December 10, 2006
By ADAM NAGOURNEY

AFTER a 217-year march of major presidential nominees who were, without exception, white and male, the 2008 campaign may offer voters a novel choice.
But as Barack Obama, the senator from Illinois whose father is from Kenya, spends this weekend exploring a presidential bid in New Hampshire, and Hillary Rodham Clinton, the first woman to represent New York in the Senate, calls potential supporters in Iowa, the question remains: are Americans prepared to elect an African-American or a woman as president?
Or, to look at it from the view of Democrats hungry for victory in 2008, is the nation more likely to vote for a woman or an African-American for president?
Without question, women and blacks have made significant progress in winning office. The new Congress will include 71 women — one of whom will be the first female speaker of the House — compared with 25 when Representative Geraldine Ferraro, a Queens Democrat, became the first woman to run as a major-party vice presidential candidate in 1984. There will be 43 blacks in the new Congress, compared with 13 when the Congressional Black Caucus was formed in 1969. A Gallup Poll in September showed a steady rise in the number of people who expect the nation to elect a woman or an African-American as president one day: Americans, it seems, are much more open to these choices than, say, someone who is an atheist or who is gay.
Times are indeed changing. But how much?
Over the past of the past eight years, in the view of analysts from both parties, the country has shifted markedly on the issue of gender, to the point where they say voters could very well be open to electing a woman in 2008. That is reflected, they say, in polling data and in the continued success of women running for office, in red and blue states alike. “The country is ready,” said Senator Elizabeth Dole, the North Carolina Republican, who ran unsuccessfully for president in 2000. “I’m not saying it’s going to happen in ’08. But the country is ready.”
By contrast, for all the excitement stirred by Mr. Obama, it is much less certain that an African-American could win a presidential election. Not as many blacks have been elected to prominent positions as women. Some high-profile black candidates — Harold Ford Jr., a Democrat running for the Senate in Tennessee, and Michael Steele, a Republican Senate candidate in Maryland — lost in November. And demographics might be an obstacle as well: black Americans are concentrated in about 25 states — typically blue ones, like New York and California. While black candidates cannot assume automatic support from black voters, they would at least provide a base. In states without big black populations, the candidate’s crossover appeal must be huge.
“All evidence is that a white female has an advantage over a black male — for reasons of our cultural heritage,” said the Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, the civil rights leader who ran for president in 1984 and 1988. Still, he said, for African-American and female candidates, “It’s easier — emphatically so.”
Ms. Ferraro offered a similar sentiment. “I think it’s more realistic for a woman than it is for an African-American,” said Ms. Ferraro. “There is a certain amount of racism that exists in the United States — whether it’s conscious or not it’s true.”
“Women are 51 percent of the population,” she added.
Many analysts suggested that changing voter attitudes can best be measured in choices for governors, since they, like presidents, are judged as chief executives, rather than legislators. There will be one black governor next year — Deval L. Patrick in Massachusetts, the second in the nation since Reconstruction.
By contrast, women will be governors of nine states, including Washington, Arizona and Michigan, all potential battleground states in 2008, a fact that is no doubt viewed favorably by advisers to Mrs. Clinton.
“Voters are getting more comfortable with seeing governors as C.E.O.’s of states,” said Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, a Kansas Democrat. Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm, a Michigan Democrat who won a second term last month, said in an interview that when she first ran, she had to work harder. “Not this time,” she said in an interview. “They are used to a woman being governor.”
Of course, governors don’t have to handle national security. And Mrs. Clinton has used her six years in the Senate to try to counter the stereotype that women would not be as strong on the issue, especially with the nation at war. Mrs. Clinton won a seat on the Armed Services Committee, and was an early supporter of the war in Iraq.
Mr. Obama is in many ways an unusual African-American politician, and that is why many Democrats, and Republicans, view him as so viable.
Mr. Obama is a member of a post-civil-rights generation of black politicians and is not identified with leaders like Mr. Jackson and the Rev. Al Sharpton of New York, who are polarizing to many white voters. He has a warm and commanding campaign presence that, as he showed in Illinois, cut across color lines.
Donna Brazile, a prominent Democratic strategist who is black, said that she had been deluged with e-mail messages from people looking to volunteer for Mr. Obama — and that most of the requests were from white voters.
Moreover, there is abundant evidence that attitudes toward black candidates are changing among white voters. In Tennessee, Mr. Ford lost his bid to become the state’s first black senator since Reconstruction, but by only three percentage points.
Surveys of voters leaving the polls showed that 40 percent of white voters supported Mr. Ford, compared with 95 percent of black voters. More intriguing, the final result was the same as what the exit polls had suggested. Before this, in many races involving black candidates, the polls predicted that they would do better than they actually did — presumably because voters were reluctant to tell questioners they did not support the African-American.
That said, Mr. Ford lost his race after Republicans aired an advertisement that Democrats said was explicitly racist. Many Democrats said a lesson of the loss was that racial appeals still have force, particularly in the South.
Race and gender are big issues in American politics, but they are not the only ones, particularly in the coming race. Mr. Obama, should he run, may find his lack of experience will be far more troublesome to voters than his color. He is 45 and serving his first term as senator.
Mr. Obama said that many black voters he spoke with have serious questions about whether America is ready to elect an African-American president.
“I think there is a protectiveness and a skepticism within the African-American community that is grounded in their experiences,” Mr. Obama said in an interview. “But the skepticism doesn’t mean there’s a lack of support.”
David A. Bositis, senior political analyst with the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, a nonpartisan Washington group that studies black issues, said that it would certainly be hard, but not impossible for an African-American candidate to win.
“I certainly felt in the ’90s that if Colin Powell had been nominated on a major party ticket, he would have had a very good chance to win,” Mr. Bositis said. “If it’s the right black candidate, I do think there is propensity to elect a black. But it has to be the right black candidate.”
Jeff Zeleny contributed reporting.

On war.

If there's any that I have believed since puberty, a war cannot be an option in whatsoever circumstances. But, today I unexpectedly faced a strong argument claiming that it is worth having wars sometimes. An article from the New Yorker, chronicling the life and political believes of a second-elected Democrat, Mr. Barrack Obama, contained slightly different perspective from what I thought he had. Hear me out.

I could definitely see why Americans are so excited by Mr. Obama's political emergence. Just by looking closely at his biography, one can easily recognize his life well representing that of a contemporary everyman of America . He was born as a result of an inter-racial marriage, which made him keenly involved in the immigration reform bill. He appears as a black (his father was an African foreign student from Kenya) but lived with the whites. (his father left him and his mother when he was two and went back to Kenya, since then he mostly lived with his grand parents. He describes in his book "Dreams from my father" that his father's complexion being pitch black, whereas his mom's being milkish white.) Additionally, he's been through certain amounts of despair and solitude as a child whose background was relatively marginalized from a perspective of a standardized social hierarchy - a black kid from a broken family. Having grown up with his grandparents, one of whom worked as an insurance dealer, which turned out to be unsuccessful, he never felt that he was privileged, at least in terms of the capitalist social norm that has been prevailing in the nation. The dramatic turn of this fourty-someting man came with his entrance to the Harvard Law School. Upon completing the degree and earning a stepstone to move up, he decided to land himself in a desolate place in Chicago instead of taking offers from the top legal firms in the country. (His close friends testifies in the book that he could've gotten any position if he wanted by the time of his graduation.) Providing legal services to mostly less educated and less benefited African Americans and new immigrants populated in the little town he stayed, in many ways, cultivated his political ambition. The most impressive factor of his CV is not that he successfully became able to present himself in a higher social class in spite of a less previliged background he had, but he still seems managing to keep his faith to support those he grew up with, i.e.. those who need assistance to sustain themselves as his priority. That indicates how strongly he is self-disciplined and dedicated for what he believes. Certainly, putting oneself into difficult positions for someone's else's sake is not the best thing most of the ordinary would hope, in fact, most of us are busy for avoiding those if possible.

Now, this is a script of Q&A session held in downtown Chicago in the fall of 2002.

“I noticed that a lot of people at that rally were wearing buttons saying, ‘War Is Not an Option,’ ” he said. “And I thought, I don’t agree with that. Sometimes war is an option. The Civil War was worth fighting. World War Two as well. So I got up and said that, among other things.” What he said, among other things, was “I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.” Invading and occupying Iraq, he said, would be “a rash war, a war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.”

Upon reading his answer, the familiar slogan of his, "War is not an option," became a stranger to me, because I have understood it as he was agaisnt all wars regardless of any circumstances. Upon directly/indirectly witnessing so many fights waged between parties of which believed in the motives they had and seeing more of destruction and despair rather than hope and future therein, the conclusion I come up with was there is no excuse strong enough to rationalize a cause of war. But now Obama, one of the rare I begin to look at closely hoping that I finally found someone I can be role-modeled, said that some wars are worthy of fighting. That evokes some old questions. Now. then, who would ever be entitled to judge which wars are worth fighting and which are not. And how would they get the legitimacy of their judgement? Or, wouldn't there be any other option but to wait until the history makes its own judgement of the events? Then, how does his argument have a legitimacy until he confirms with the judgement in front of the history??

On the other hand, we need to keep in mind that most of human developments have been achieved through fights between groups whose interests were acutely conflicting to each other. Women's suffrage finally achieved in 1940s after a lot of people shed efforts and sacrifices, Gandh's non-violence resistance won the independence from the imperial Britain after claiming countless lives, Martin Ruther King's famous speech of "I have a dream" moved hearts of the world but later on he had to pay it with his own life, and the 3.1 Movement became the initiative of independence movement against the imperial Japan in Korea but also claimed many casualties. All of the above examples were fights in a sense that one or both part(ies) got wounded as a consequence, and most of us will probably evaluate them as great achievements in human history. However, look at the middle east today. People there fight, probably they've been fighting since the mankind began to exist on this planet, and seemingly they will not stop in any foreseeable future. There have been young men willingly dedicated their lives for attacks on many many occasions. From the perspective of Arabs (Palestines), there were divine sacrifices for greater causes, whereas from the rest of the world, they're more likely seen as hostile actions against innocents - media in the west conveniently call it a terrorist action. Then, think hard here. Is this a worth war or not? If you can answer this, how can you distinguish your reason from those advocating the rationalization of Gandhi's non-volence resistance, the 3.1 movement, and Rev. King Sr.'s resistance movement?

As another example, the death of Pinocchete. He fought for his office by having the U.S. supported military strength, and ruled the nation for many years. In the course of his regime, many had suffered from tortures, imprisonment, and even death. Now he is dead. And would everyone be happy?? To everybody's surprise, still fair number of people in the nation were reportedly was mourning for him. What about Fidel Castro? He is more adored by his people than the Pinnochete by his. Then, really,, who are we to judge which fights are worth waging and which are not??

Peanut Brittle.

This fast version of peanut brittle is yummy and kid-friendly with its measuring and mixing, but particularly good for a game of Candy Land while it's cooling. Note: the microwave makes this a simple, fast treat, but the syrup comes out very hot, and pouring it is a parent's job.
INGREDIENTS1 cup sugar1/2 cup light corn syrup1 cup dry-roasted peanuts1/8 teaspoon salt1 teaspoon butter or margarine1 teaspoon vanilla extract1 teaspoon baking soda
HOW TO MAKE ITIn a 1 1/2-quart microwave-safe bowl, stir together the sugar, syrup, peanuts, and salt, mixing well. Microwave on high for 6H minutes. (Times will vary depending on microwave wattage. We based these times on an 850-watt oven.) Carefully swirl the butter or margarine and vanilla extract into the mixture; don't stir. Microwave for another 30 seconds. The peanuts should be light brown, the syrup will have darkened slightly, and the mixture will be very hot (300° on a candy thermometer). Add baking soda and gently stir the mixture until it's light and foamy. Pour it onto a lightly buttered cookie sheet. (Tip: For a thinner brittle, first warm the sheet in the oven.) Let the brittle cool for 30 minutes to 1 hour, then break it into small pieces. Makes 2 pounds.
WRAPPING IT UPOur colorful gift boxes are simply plain candy boxes, available in several sizes from stores that sell candy-making supplies. We stamped ours using inexpensive patterned stamps (available at craft and fabric stores) and acrylic paint in bold holiday colors. You can also use homemade potato stamps and the like. Tip: For mess-free stamping, we like to use aluminum pie tins. Squirt in some paint, spread it into a thin layer with a paintbrush, then dip in the stamps. Once the gift boxes are dry, layer the brittle with waxed paper to keep the pieces from clumping. To give your presents an even more elegant look, first line the boxes with paper doilies.

나는 누구인가?

나는 누구인가?
남들은 종종 내게 말하기를
감방에서 나오는 나의 모습이
어찌나 침착하고 명랑하고 확고한지
마치 성에서 나오는 영주 같다는데
나는 누구인가?
남들은 종종 내게 말하기를 간수들과 대화하는 내 모습이
어찌나 자유롭고 사근사근하고 밝은지
마치 내가 명령하는 것 같다는데

나는 누구인가?
남들은 종종 내게 말하기를
불행한 나날을 견디는 내 모습이
어찌나 한결같고 벙글거리고 당당한지
늘 승리하는 사람 같다는데
남들이 말하는 내가 참 나인가?
나 스스로 아는 내가 참 나인가?
새장에 갇힌 새처럼 불안하고 그립고 병약한 나
목 졸린 사람처럼 숨을 쉬려고 버둥거리는 나
빛깔과 꽃, 새소리에 주리고
따스한 말과 인정에 목말라하는 나
방자함과 사소한 모욕에도 치를 떠는 나
좋은 일을 학수고대하며 서성거리는 나
멀리있는 벗의 신변을 무력하게 걱정하는 나
기도에도, 생각에도, 일에도 지쳐 멍한 나
풀이 죽어 작별을 준비하는 나인데

나는 누구인가?
이것이 나인가? 저것이 나인가?
오늘은 이 사람이고 내일은 저 사람인가?
둘 다인가?
사람들 앞에서는 허세를 부리고,
자신 앞에선 천박하게 우는소리 잘하는 겁쟁이인가?
내 속에 남아있는 것은
이미 거둔 승리 앞에서 꽁무니를 빼는 패잔병 같은가?

- Dietrich Bonhoeffer -

Isaiah 50 - Israel's sin and the servant's obedience

2 When I came, why was there no one? When I called, why was there no one to answer? Was my arm too short to ransom you? Do I lack the strength to rescue you? By a mere rebuke I dry up the sea, I turn rivers into a desert; their fish rot for lack of water and die of thirst.

Jonah's Prayer

1 From inside the fish Jonah prayed to the LORD his God. 2 He said: "In my distress I called to the LORD, and he answered me. From the depths of the grave [a] I called for help, and you listened to my cry.
3 You hurled me into the deep, into the very heart of the seas, and the currents swirled about me; all your waves and breakers swept over me.
4 I said, 'I have been banished from your sight; yet I will look again toward your holy temple.'
5 The engulfing waters threatened me, [b] the deep surrounded me; seaweed was wrapped around my head.
6 To the roots of the mountains I sank down; the earth beneath barred me in forever. But you brought my life up from the pit, O LORD my God.
7 "When my life was ebbing away, I remembered you, LORD, and my prayer rose to you, to your holy temple.
8 "Those who cling to worthless idols forfeit the grace that could be theirs.
9 But I, with a song of thanksgiving, will sacrifice to you. What I have vowed I will make good. Salvation comes from the LORD."
10 And the LORD commanded the fish, and it vomited Jonah onto dry land.

Judged by the way to judge others - following Arar's case upon Zaccardelli's foreseeable resignation

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Commissioner Giulliano Zaccardelli is sworn-in, before he testifies before the Commons public safety committee on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Tuesday, Dec. 5, 2006.
CREDIT: Canadian Press/Tom Hanson
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Commissioner Giulliano Zaccardelli is sworn-in, before he testifies before the Commons public safety committee on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Tuesday, Dec. 5, 2006.
OTTAWA — RCMP commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli said today he may have made mistakes when he first testified about the Arar affair before the Commons public safety and national security committee in September, but refused to say he misled the committee.
“I believe some aspects of my prior testimony could have been more precise or clearly stated. A number of misconceptions have resulted,” Zaccardelli told MPs, who peppered him with questions for nearly two hours, during his second appearance before the committee.
Later in the House of Commons, where queries about Zaccardelli dominated the opening of question period, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said he was “surprised” by Zacardelli’s change of story and that government “will study his testimony.”
However, he resisted demands to fire the commissioner immediately. “You can’t, in the government, just go out and fire people without due process,” Harper said.
Mahar Arar, a Canadian citizen, was arrested and deported by U.S. authorities in October 2002 and held in Syria until October 2003.
Justice Dennis O’Connor conducted an inquiry on the case and concluded in his report this fall that misinformation from the RCMP very likely led to Arar’s arrest in the United States and his deportation.
When Zaccardelli appeared before the committee on Sept. 28, he said he first learned of RCMP mistakes some time after Arar was imprisoned and that he informed senior government officials about the problems. Zaccardelli testified that he knew the RCMP were trying to correct the record with their U.S. counterparts while Arar was being detained in Syria.
But at a speech Monday and again at the committee meeting this morning, Zaccardelli told a different version of events.
He told MPs that he knew Arar was a “person of interest,” but did not learn that the RCMP had passed inaccurate information to U.S. authorities until much later, when he read O’Connor’s report.
Zaccardelli said today that his senior officers were not aware that Arar had been mislabeled or that false information had been passed on to U.S. authorities and, therefore, there’s no way he could have known because his senior officers are responsible for briefing him on such matters. Throughout his testimony, Zaccardelli repeated that he only learned the full scope of how the RCMP mishandled the Arar case when he read the inquiry report.
Zaccardelli explained the confusion about his earlier testimony by saying he was rushed to appear before the committee and inaccuracies may have arisen from his answers because he did not have sufficient time to prepare for his appearance.
He wanted to appear again before the committee today to “set the record straight,” Zaccardelli said.
He again shrugged off calls for his resignation, saying he never purposely withheld information or misrepresented facts.
“If I had been guilty of such actions, no one would have to ask for my resignation Mr. chairman. The facts of the matter are, however, that due to circumstances I have described we were unaware of some important information until the completion of Justice O’Connor’s inquiry this year. My colleagues and I deeply regret that mistakes were made but it is important to recognize that at all times we acted in good faith,” Zaccardelli said.
Also in question period, Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day denied accusations by Liberal MP Mark Holland that he interfered with the RCMP’s response to Justice Dennis O’Connor’s report.
Day, who in September said he had full confidence in Zaccardelli when he first testified before a parliamentary committee, was rather guarded in his support for the commissioner today.
“We want to study our response and we will come to our decision in a professional way,” Day told the House of Commons.
The minister would not answer whether Zaccardelli’s resignation had been asked for, saying only that the government is reviewing the facts, and did not answer a direct question about whether or not he still had confidence in Zaccardelli.
CanWest News Service
© CanWest News Service 2006

- Still further reading -
Arar's case blog at http://www.maherarar.ca/


Upon following the Arar's case, it seems apparent that there hasn't been much trace of justice to protect the human right of innocent personnel not only in North Korea but also both Canada and the US. Now the question is, would there be justice to recognize the injustice.

Season's greetings!

Sometimes, we are surprised realizing how life can be lit up with an exquisite joy by such a simple thing. If you're lucky enough, this is when you truly acknowledge the value of life and appreciate your existence on this over-crowded planet. Withdrawing myself from leisurely social life for sometime and being an inert as a result, the life style I have had could've been worrisome for some of my beloveds. Then, a friend, more precisely the whole family of a friend flew over all the way from Vancouver and saved my arse from being a complete couch potato this weekend. Still having an acute pain in the head and wondering if that's because of too much sleep over the weekend or still a lack of rest stacked from all the stress I earned from the previous week-long labor, I removed myself from the comport zone of the preciously warmed sofa and tv and prepared for an outing. Our rendezvous was arranged as usual at a downtown hotel lobby, whereabouts is famous for night scenery particularly during the winter since the city's mayor decided to decorate the district with thousands of different colored lights completing even more kinds of festive shapes. No doubt, there were shapes of Santa, snow, trees covered with snow, houses covered with snow over which Santa was flying on a sleigh carried by Rudolf, the reindeer. And this time of the year, you can frequently spot lovers kissing/embracing each other, young couples holding hands of their children running errands, a few weirdoes peeping at them with some unknown curiosity like myself. Although, eyes almost blinded by surrounding neon, I didn't cease to stare every single of them. Consequently, some moments later, the lights slowly faded into a big blurriness encompassing the whole world. How fascinating it was. Surely, the dinner with friends went smooth and even pleasant while we exchanging casual jokes to each other; remember, we don't joke around in Korea. Despite I always complain about people here being damn serious for literally about everything and anything, sometimes, realizing that I have become one of them gives me a sense of eeriness. Suffocated from constantly being serious at all times, I did enjoy making fun of each other and saying silliest ever comments in most awkward ways, which brought me a refreshing sense of vitality on life. Then again, I murmured to myself, "how jolly life can be!" Yey, the holiday season is around us now, and this time, I feel wonderful, and even become nervous as if I am a child waiting for a socks' full of presents from the Santa.

I send you the warmest hug and kiss for this Christmas!

Harper supports for having a Quebecois nation within a united Canada

Harper wants to recognize Quebec as nation within a united Canada

Carly Weeks
CanWest News Service
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
CREDIT: CP PHOTO/Jonathan Hayward
Prime Minister Stephen Harper (centre) receives a standing ovation as he introduces a motion to recognize that Quebecers form a nation within Canada during a speech in the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Wednesday Nov. 22, 2006.
CREDIT: CP PHOTO/Jonathan Hayward
Prime Minister Stephen Harper (centre) receives a standing ovation as he introduces a motion to recognize that Quebecers form a nation within Canada during a speech in the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Wednesday Nov. 22, 2006.OTTAWA — Prime Minister Stephen Harper surprised the House of Commons today by announcing his party wants to recognize Quebec as nation within a united Canada.Harper said the party is putting forward a motion to recognize Quebec’s nationhood within Canada in order to supersede a Bloc Quebecois motion that he says would virtually be a vote for separation from the rest of Canada. The prime minister said under the BQ motion that: “If we recognize Quebecers as a nation, we have to vote ‘yes’ in a referendum on separation.”An emotional Liberal Leader Bill Graham responded to Harper’s announcement by saying MPs have to “transcend” partisan differences to ensure Canada remains a united, strong country. The multicultural composition of Canada, which is the envy of the world, came to be because of Canada’s history as a bilingual nation, Graham said.He said it’s up to MPs to fight for the rights of a united Canada. Harper said Quebec forms a nation within Canada, but does not and should never form an independent society, he said. “Do Quebecers form an independent nation from Canada? The answer is no and it will always be no,” Harper said. Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe shot back, saying Quebec is a nation and should given rights, and that sovereignty is the best way for Quebec to develop fully.He said the only respectful option is to recognize Quebec as a nation without any conditions and said it’s not up to the prime minister to decide the future for Quebecers. The prime minister said Canada is an excellent example of unity and harmony in a divided world and said the party will “do what it must” to make sure the country remains united and free. Harper’s announcement follows news on Tuesday that the Bloc Quebecois would table on Thursday a motion calling on the House of Commons to recognize Quebec as a nation.The Conservative announcement comes as the Liberal party is putting together the final preparations for its leadership convention, scheduled to take place in Montreal starting, next week. The controversy began last month when the Liberal party’s Quebec wing endorsed a resolution to recognize Quebec as a nation.The resolution is to be debated at the convention. Michael Ignatieff, considered by many to be the front-runner in the leadership race, has made the issue a major focal point of his platform and has called for the eventual constitutional recognition of Quebec nationhood.CanWest News Service
© CanWest News Service 2006

photos

http://blog.naver.com/eunbokkim/130011267100

��� �� has invited you to view photos on Yahoo! Photos (101 photos).


����� has sent some photos to you!
If you can't see the button above, use this link: http://new.photos.yahoo.com/album?c=eunbok7&aid=576460762338939022&pid=&wtok=GGOThP_C2De6O1xBX6vXvg--&ts=1164035495&.src=phNote: This email invitation will expire after 90 days.

"The Tank Man"

Here is a film info. showed in 2006 Vancouver Amnesty International Film Festival, called "The Tank Man," in search of an anonymous young man who stopped a column of tanks rolling down the Tiananmen Square in the spring of 1989. For more details, visit http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tankman/view/. It certainly contains some mind-awakening images.

Seventeen years later, veteran filmmaker Antony Thomas goes to China in search of "The Tank Man." Who was he? What was his fate? And what does he mean for a China that today has become a global economic powerhouse?
Drawing on interviews with Chinese and Western eyewitnesses, Thomas recounts the amazing events of the spring of 1989, when a student protest that began in Tiananmen Square, the symbolic central space of the nation, spread throughout much of the rest of China. Several weeks later, when the government sent in the army to end the demonstrations, the citizens of Beijing poured into the streets in support of the students. "You had a million people on the street, minimum. ... That was unprecedented, definitely in modern Chinese post-revolutionary history," says John Pomfret, who was in Beijing at the time, reporting for the Associated Press.
The demonstrations ended in a massacre on the night of June 3-4, when the government sent the troops into the city with orders to clear Tiananmen Square. Eyewitnesses recount what happened -- from the first shots fired in the city's outskirts, to the students' withdrawal from the square in the early hours of June 4, to the Tank Man's courageous stand the following day.
From there, Thomas looks at what the Tank Man's life might be like in today's China. China observers and scholars, including Orville Schell, talk about the turning point the nationwide unrest of 1989 represented. "After the massacre of 1989, [Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping] in effect said, 'We will not stop economic reform; [but] we will, in effect, halt political reform.'"
Almost two decades later, the educated elite who led the protests of 1989 have benefited handsomely from China's rapid economic growth, but many Chinese workers still face brutal working conditions and low wages. "A lot of factories do not even have one day off," says labor expert Dr. Anita Chan who has been researching working conditions inside China for 15 years. "That means seven days a week, 13 hours a day."
In fact, some experts see the emergence of two Chinas: one modern, wealthy and urban; the other rural, poor and disenfranchised. There is evidence that unrest among workers and peasants is growing; in 2005, there were more than 87,000 "civil disturbances" in the country.
"China is on a knife's edge," says Dr. Nicholas Bequelin of Human Rights Watch. "If we in the West are not aware of this, the leaders in Beijing are very much so, and this is their top concern. They know that the stability is very fragile."
The Chinese government has responded to this threat by cracking down on dissent, and on the media. The regime has managed to erase the Tank Man's image, famous throughout the world, from Chinese memory. Thomas shows the iconic picture to undergraduates at Beijing University, the nerve center of the 1989 protests; none of them recognize it. Central to the regime's struggle to control information is its filtering of the Internet, a complex undertaking that raises serious issues about the role of Western IT companies in China's censorship strategy.
In the face of official silence about 1989 and the Tank Man, the program concludes with Thomas' quest to find out what became of the Tank Man and who he was. In the end, his identity remains a mystery, but the symbolism of his act of defiance continues to have power. "That story ... is not getting weaker because of time. Because we don't know who he is, it's actually getting stronger," says Xiao Qiang of the China Internet Project at the University of California at Berkeley. "In the long frame of history ... human freedom, courage, dignity will stay and prevail, and that's what that picture will testify [to] forever."

A correspondence on Nov. 14, 2006

Thanks for your intuitive email that I now only received this morning (sorry, i haven't checked emails for a couple of days). It seems many agree it is the Kim Jeong-il's regime that causes this abyss not the people, and this is why the humanitarian aids from the outside should not be annulled. Some may see this as irresponsible since they claim that most of aids go and maintain the military guarding the regime. However, it also is true there have been more and more North Korean defectors coming out of the nation and seeking refugee status in neighboring countries, since the NK widened its economic and cultural contacts with other countries. More contacts with the outside may fatten the regime partially, but we shouldn't disregard that it would also enlighten people therein, who had been blinded and brainwashed for a half century. They say workers at Gaeseong Industrial Zone get paid almost three times more than any average paid workers in the nation, and South Korean tourists visiting Mt. Geungang have become a direct and/or indirect source to deliver the news from the outside to the people in the enclosed country.
At the end, it would be people who change things, or am I too naive?? I think "stick" foreign policy of the Bush administration will only tighten up the NK and only be manipulated by the Kim's regime to more intensively propagandize its people, e.g., the hostile American will stike them, hence they need to be armed or even preemptively stike the US's allies, etc.
One of the critical differences in a point of view between people there (in the west, or somewhere NK's nuke missile cannot reach) and here (including South Korea, Japan, and China), we cannot just afford to take a risk of observing the current on-going situation as NK having "only" played with its bargaining tool to get what they want. We simply can't ignore the slightest chance of possibility that NK would do what it said to do. In this sense, Japanese react on the occasion is somewhat interesting.

Weather here now is quite crisp yet very pleasant most of time except the early dawn that I have to get up for work. Tomorrow, I have a dinner party (well, more likely a simple supper) with colleagues from the last year, which is kind of exciting since I haven't seen some of them for a while. Oh, and I found a nice and quiet cafeteria nearby my office that I can be less bothered by coworkers, so that I can read leisurely and actually breathe. They make the best chocolate, and freshly baked cheese sandwich in town, no doubt!

I wish you're well,

Alexa.

To whom it may concern;

One day prior to 2006 Election in the U.S., and one day after Saddam Hussein got sentenced to death by hanging, this morning the climate in Seoul was dropped down to around 3~4℃, a huge change only within a few hours of time. One of my friends who live just outskirt of Seoul sent a text message through cell phone this morning to welcome the first snow of the year, which wasn’t actually happening in the city I live. Indeed, the winter has arrived.

How are you? I am sure the weather change there won’t be as dramatic as the one here, but since the whole northern hemisphere now turns into the opposite side from the sun, it’s probably a good idea to prepare a scarf, gloves, and some of usual winter gears, oh, not to mention your umbrella.

North Korea’s nuke issue seemed to be relatively sunk below the surface, well at least for now since the Bush administration is so busy with defending itself for the coming election. The polls indicate, according to the New York Times, democrats will overweigh the republicans, which seems rather predictable even for me. The current administration has provided enough reasons for people to be against; suspension of Habeas corpus during “war on terror,” which led the U.S. to violate some fundamental concepts of human rights and eventually deprive its persuasiveness when it denounced the human rights violation in the North Korea; abyss created by the U.S. military involvement in Middle East; accordingly increasing American casualties, not to mention the casualties of the indigenous; substantially neglecting the nuke development of NK by failing its hawkish foreign policy therein; causing a devaluation of the currency; etc. This can go on and on. In accordance with the consequence of the election, the Korean politics will inevitably be influenced, like most of the other nations in the world, hopefully for the better. In case the democrats win, the “sunshine policy,” which has been pursued by the former president Kim, Dae-jung and the current president Noh will find its way out from the mudhole elaboratively planned by the hardliners in the nation. You wouldn’t believe how disgraceful these political games prepared by the hawk look at the moment. For example, last week, the main opposition party, Grand National Party that used to be led by the daughter of the notorious deceased general Park, Jeong-hee, claimed that a few lawmakers of a progressive party are guilty of being espionages of the North Korea, for the god’s sake, the MCcarthyism is reviving in this country, and you will be awed how powerfully destructive to be labeled as a communist is here.
Apparently, not being able to hermit himself in the critical moments, the former Nobel Peace laureate, Kim Dae-jong broke the silence and publicly has had some meetings with some important political players domestically and internationally. It is true the current administration has lost significant voting power since it has not been so successful in some fields, most significantly, not able to meet the expectation of his main supporting group consisting of youth, farmers, and other relatively left-wing tendency voters. What I am afraid is the nation may soon turn back to its authoritarian-like era that everything was so rigid mostly in very unproductive ways.

I occasionally hear about Vancouver through friends visiting here from time to time, and every time I encounter them, I become very awed how fast time goes by. Can you believe it has been almost a year and nine months since I left the city if not counting the short visit there last winter?

I hope all are fine with you, and talk to you soon.

Truthfully yours,

Song of Solomon

I am the rose of Sharon, and the lily of the valleys.
Like a lily among thorns, so is my love among the daughters.
Like an apple tree among the trees of the woods, so is my beloved among the sons.
I sat down in his shade with great delight, and his fruit was sweet to my taste.


Song of Solomon 2:1 - 4

Ginkakuji Vs. Kinkakuji Temple in Kyoto

The glitz of its brilliant interior of Kinkaku-ji(金閣寺) reflects a glorious past it once savored. But I have to say gold doesn't have the gentle dignity of silver which becomes more charming as it ages, and so the temple seemed t be decorated like an old woman with too much makeup, whereas there was real artistry in the fade color of wooden structure perfectly harmonized with its surrounding green of the hills where Gingkgku-ji(銀閣寺) was serenely embraced.

Gingkaku-ji(銀閣寺); shown left and right below.
In 1482 Shogun Ashikaga Yoshmasa constructed a villa here as a genteel rtreat from the turmoil of civil w. The villa's name translates as 'Silver Pavilion,' but the shogun's amition to cover the building with silver was never realised. After Yoshimasa'sdeath, the villa was converted into a temple.

Walkways found after approaching the main gate between tall hedges prior turning sharply into the extensive grounds include meticulously raked cones of white sand (assumingly symbols of a mountain and a lake), tall pines and a pond in front of the temple.

Kingkaku-gi(金閣寺); shown right top.
The famous Golden Temple is one of Japan's best-known sights no matter how I felt about the structure compared to Gingkaku-gi. The original building was constructed in 1397 as a retirement villa for Shogun Ashikaga Yoshimitsu. His son converted it into a temple. In 1950 a young monk consummted his obsession with the temple by burning it to the ground. The monk's story was fictionalised in Mishima Yukio's The Golden Pavilion.

In 1955, a full reconstruction was completed that exactly followed the original design, but the gold-foil covering was extended to the lower floors.

setLayoutPhoto2Preview("free", "1", "0", "0", "http://blogfiles.naver.net/data18/2006/11/5/295/SSA40473-eunbokkim.jpghttp://blogfiles.naver.net/data20/2006/11/5/70/SSA40464-eunbokkim.jpghttp://blogfiles.naver.net/data18/2006/11/5/91/SSA40479-eunbokkim.jpg");

A sonnet.

I heard splashing on the boat
her bare feet
And sensed in our faces
the hungry dusk
My heart swaying between her
and the street, the road
I don't know where I found the strength
to free myself from her eyes
to slip from her arms
She stayed, crying through rain and glass
clouded with grief and tears
She stayed, unable to cry
Wait! I will come
walking with you.

miguel otero silva.

setSlidePhoto2View("0", "2", "550", "413", "http://blogfiles.naver.net/data19/2006/11/6/20/che10_the_most_famous-eunbokkim.jpghttp://blogfiles.naver.net/data17/2006/11/6/151/che9-eunbokkim.jpg");

Swing, baby, swing~!

Regardless of rumors of the neighboring nation preparing its second nuke test despite all the condemnation from the international society, the life in Seoul still moves fast. People still smile, have meals, go to work, make love, buy stocks, and do stupid things here and there, everyday.

Routines of life perhaps is the strongest force of all. No matter how terrified past you have, it will be forgotten gradually, and no matter how splendid love you had, it will also be faded away as time goes by. Who are we to claim any in front of the great tide of time?

Am I now talking like a pessimist or a someone sitting on a grayline stuck between the black and white, and not bothered by any? Well, maybe I am, but naturally I am not born with the fortune. Particularly, those reside in Korea and know of me for an extended period of time, without much exception, advise me not to act in a way that I want. Obviously, they fully understand how stupid and impulsive I can be from time to time, and how the society currently I live in is not affectionately reacts to a kind of people like myself. ^^

You see, it's exactly like choosing a pair of shoes in this country. If you're a woman, you're not looking for shoes that fit to your feet and feel comfortable therein, but you're asked to find shoes look great. Whether they fit to your limbs isn't a question you're supposed to ask. Either you have to deform your feet into those horribly painful shoes or walk with bare feet.

Why not make shoes that actually fit?

Why not change those don't fit to the real into those actually fit?

Why not swing as you please?

Solving the Korean Stalemate, one step at a time

IN 1994 the North Koreans expelled inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency and were threatening to process spent nuclear fuel into plutonium, giving them the ability to produce nuclear weapons.
With the risk of war on the Korean Peninsula, there was a consensus that the forces of South Korea and the United States could overwhelmingly defeat North Korea. But it was also known that North Korea could quickly launch more than 20,000 shells and missiles into nearby Seoul. The American commander in South Korea, Gen. Gary Luck, estimated that total casualties would far exceed those of the Korean War.
Responding to an invitation from President Kim Il-sung of North Korea, and with the approval of President Bill Clinton, I went to Pyongyang and negotiated an agreement under which North Korea would cease its nuclear program at Yongbyon and permit inspectors from the atomic agency to return to the site to assure that the spent fuel was not reprocessed. It was also agreed that direct talks would be held between the two Koreas.
The spent fuel (estimated to be adequate for a half-dozen bombs) continued to be monitored, and extensive bilateral discussions were held. The United States assured the North Koreans that there would be no military threat to them, that it would supply fuel oil to replace the lost nuclear power and that it would help build two modern atomic power plants, with their fuel rods and operation to be monitored by international inspectors. The summit talks resulted in South Korean President Kim Dae-jung earning the 2000 Nobel Peace Prize for his successful efforts to ease tensions on the peninsula.
But beginning in 2002, the United States branded North Korea as part of an axis of evil, threatened military action, ended the shipments of fuel oil and the construction of nuclear power plants and refused to consider further bilateral talks. In their discussions with me at this time, North Korean spokesmen seemed convinced that the American positions posed a serious danger to their country and to its political regime.
Responding in its ill-advised but predictable way, Pyongyang withdrew from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, expelled atomic energy agency inspectors, resumed processing fuel rods and began developing nuclear explosive devices.
Six-nation talks finally concluded in an agreement last September that called for North Korea to abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs and for the United States and North Korea to respect each other’s sovereignty, exist peacefully together and take steps to normalize relations. Each side subsequently claimed that the other had violated the agreement. The United States imposed severe financial sanctions and Pyongyang adopted the deeply troubling nuclear option.
The current military situation is similar but worse than it was a decade ago: we can still destroy North Korea’s army, but if we do it is likely to result in many more than a million South Korean and American casualties.
If and when it is confirmed that the recent explosion in North Korea was nuclear, the international community will once again be faced with difficult choices.
One option, the most likely one, is to try to force Pyongyang’s leaders to abandon their nuclear program with military threats and a further tightening of the embargoes, increasing the suffering of its already starving people. Two important facts must be faced: Kim Jong-il and his military leaders have proven themselves almost impervious to outside pressure, and both China and South Korea have shown that they are reluctant to destabilize the regime. This approach is also more likely to stimulate further nuclear weapons activity.
The other option is to make an effort to put into effect the September denuclearization agreement, which the North Koreans still maintain is feasible. The simple framework for a step-by-step agreement exists, with the United States giving a firm and direct statement of no hostile intent, and moving toward normal relations if North Korea forgoes any further nuclear weapons program and remains at peace with its neighbors. Each element would have to be confirmed by mutual actions combined with unimpeded international inspections.
Although a small nuclear test is a far cry from even a crude deliverable bomb, this second option has become even more difficult now, but it is unlikely that the North Koreans will back down unless the United States meets this basic demand. Washington’s pledge of no direct talks could be finessed through secret discussions with a trusted emissary like former Secretary of State Jim Baker, who earlier this week said, “It’s not appeasement to talk to your enemies.”
What must be avoided is to leave a beleaguered nuclear nation convinced that it is permanently excluded from the international community, its existence threatened, its people suffering horrible deprivation and its hard-liners in total control of military and political policy.

by Jimmy Carter, the 39th president, is the founder of the Carter Center and the winner of the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize.

The perpetual Kyoto.

Faithfully following footsteps from travelers who already swept through the land, without much hesitation, I chose Kyoto as a destination for three precious days of my annual share of day-offs. Tokyo, despite all the splendid metaphors to describe the city, failed to attract my attention enough due to this unexplainable resistance of mine toward any large-scaled cities. All I wanted for the days that I can solely spend for myself is simply being away from what I am already comfortable with, mostly hustle and bustle of a city life, and feeling somewhat adventurous in the middle of the unknown. And, my longing finally seemed to find a happy medium in the old city of Kyoto.

Gion 祇園

Romanticized all over by the story of “Memoirs of Geisha” by Arthur Golden that I read long ago while traveling South East Asian region, I savored each step of the evening stroll in the street of Gion. Blurrily illuminating lights from lanterns hanging along the stretched allies only doubled up the fantasy I had. Glimpse of women sitting humbly on the floor of bars behind lanterns that I passed by made my heart pounding as if time flew backward and I was in the amid of the most beautifully wrapped secret of Geisha, the artistic courtesan of traditional Japanese culture.


Limbs felt heavy as if they were tied to a block of stone from the hours of pilgrimage-like walk around the temples and shrines during the daytime, yet strangely I prowled after, without feeling much fatigue, old allies of the Gion, which seemed endlessly stretching out into the oblivion of the night.

Gion, only a few minutes walk from Keihan Shijo Station, is a famous Geisha district on the eastern bank of Kamogawa Street. It falls roughly between Sanjo-dori and Gojo-dori (north and south, respectively) and Higashiyama-dori and Kawaata-dori (east and wst, respectively). This beautifully preserved pleasure district of Gion is accompanied by traditional wooden buildings and hanging lanterns, thereby creating a wonderful atmosphere of old Japan, and is best to visit in the late evening.

Dark days of democracy

(Another scrabble written a while ago.)

Is democracy such a useful political thought as the US provocatively claimed, really?
This may appeal to some too hostile intro enough to brand me as a communist worm if still McCathy followers are around. But, really, think about it.

Yes, it was a military junta that uprised and took a power in Thailand a week ago, the survey tells a very confusing story that makes us hard on defining the characteristics of the junta. It says the majority of Thai population has been severely opposing to the governing (well, now a former governing) Prime Minister Taksin especially since early this year when his tax getaways became a huge scandal in the nation. Those indicated as a majority seemed backing the coup and there were photos of civilians giving out flowers to soliders in tanks. Even the King, supposingly widely admired, granted the coup and vertually weighing more significance of pseudo-legitimacy of the coup. If everything written on major newspapers since the incident is true, can we argue that the action taken by the military junta in Thailand defied the concept of democracy? It seemed certainly not ignoring the willings of majority Thais. Yet, nor it took a conventional form to practice democracy such as campaigning, debating, getting elected, and finally being legetimately appointed by the national assembly,. Then, it would come down to a question whether a methodology matters in democracy. An article with the same title in this week's TIMES clearly sees it matters.

The writing must be written by largely two assumptions.
First, the surveys that have been released are not containing the absolute truth, i.e., there may be false involved in the survey by the military junta eliminating the opposing voices from the pool. If so, certainly, what they did cannot be justified or defined in any ways within the boundary of concept of democracy.
Second, the survey reflects the current affairs in the nation well enough, but people in the country weren't just well organized enough to effectively influence the regime and make a change of their own in a democratic way, thereby failing a reform at an initial stage before the situations got worse. Otherwise, people are not intellectual or enlightened enough to be able to distinguish what they're supposed to do from not. That is, people in the nation were simply after what the others seem after. In either case, the efficiency of the democracy cannot be satisfactorily explained. For the former case, voices of people were united but couldn't find a way to efficiently apply to the existing bureacracy. For the second case, there were united voices of the majory but they were not the voices of awared ones, and thereby only resulting the nation into a deeper quagmire. Whichever it was, the ruling ideology of the contemporary world affairs only implies its flaws.

Now, looking into another side of the world, Afganistan. You see, after the US waged war against terrors and targetted and invaded the country, the propaganda the US heroically has used was to spread the great idea of democracy. There were a war, bloodsheds, unspeakable destruction under the splendid name of democracy. And, once the US reckoned the situations were over and they set the "democratic" election expecting "suppressed" people in the country under the Taleban regime to elect pro-american indigionous allies, no doubt believing the US as liberator. Taaraa~~ what happened? They elected Hamas for a winning party, the "terrorist organization" the US was so desperately wanted to get rid of was elected through a "democratic" election.
How on earth anyone can explain this stunning consequence? I bet Bush's grandpa wouldn't think of any persuasive answer for this. Then, if democracy is nothing but a good illusion, the US's war on Middle East is also nothing but a flaud?

Can one save all?

Paul Rusesabagina (played by Don Cheadle) in "Hotel Rwanda," a newly released film in Seoul, is a character whose exceptional talents to associate with high socialites in the nation. And his blessed talent came in handy when everything being thrown to a total chaos. He had an intuition to see upcoming events and a sharp observation to untangle complicated matters. Thanks to having him around, more than a thousand Rwandans saved their lives and so did many "whiltes," mostly foreign guests who stayed at the hotel where Paul worked as a house manager.

However, even this distinguished character had a flaw. He trusted the UN, the west, "the whites," and all the other glorious illusions they brought to the country. When Hutus started the massacre against Tutsis, he went around and comforted Tutsi neighbors including his own wife and her family by saying that the international community won't sit around and just watched this inhumane atrocity happening. Guess what? They did. The helpless UN Peace Force commander Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Romeo Dallaire played by Nick Nolte was rather pathetic and torn by totally overwhelming atrocities he witnessed and dispair from not being able to draw any aids from the UN, or not even an international attention on the issue. No wonder why Dallaire had severely suffered from a mental disfunction afterwards. The scene when the mission of a newly dispatched peace keeping force was only evacuating "whites" and leaving devastated Rwandans behind was clearly indicating there indeed exists a crossline among the man kind, and questioning the foundation of the UN.

We have been calling out for a reformation of the UN for decades that the UN must be a place we talk about the harmony and peace for all, not a place where nations pursue only their nations' priorities. However, it is easier to say than to be done as always. Things regarding the issue seem far to go and throwing out tasks to us, today.

Plead for an action in Darfur.

I saw this on the BBC News website and thought you should see it.** Clooney call for Darfur action **George Clooney has called on the international community to bring an end to the violence in the Sudanese region of Darfur.< http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/check/nolavconsole/ifs_news/hi?redirect=st.stm&news=1&bbram=1&bbwm=1&nbram=1&nbwm=1&nol_storyid=5347434 >
#Attachment from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darfur
Darfur crisis
Main article: Darfur conflict
The region became the scene of a bloody rebellion in 2003 against the Arab-dominated Sudanese government, with two local rebel groups - the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) and the Sudanese Liberation Army (SLA) - accusing the government of oppressing non-Arabs in favor of Arabs. The government was also accused of neglecting the Darfur region of Sudan. In response, the government mounted a campaign of aerial bombardment supporting ground attacks by an Arab militia, the Janjaweed. The government-supported Janjaweed were accused of committing major human rights violations, including mass killing, looting, and systematic rape of the non-Arab population of Darfur. They have frequently burned down whole villages, driving the surviving inhabitants to flee to refugee camps, mainly in Darfur and Chad; many of the camps in Darfur are surrounded by Janjaweed forces. By the summer of 2004, 50,000 to 80,000 people had been killed and at least a million had been driven from their homes, causing a major humanitarian crisis in the region.
On September 18, 2004, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 1564, which called for a Commission of Inquiry on Darfur to assess the Sudanese conflict. On January 31, 2005, the UN released a 176-Page report saying that while there were mass murders and rapes, they could not label it as genocide because "genocidal intent appears to be missing".[11] [12]
In May 2006 the main rebel group, the Sudanese Liberation Movement, agreed to a draft peace agreement with the Sudanese government. On May 5th, the agreement, drafted in Abuja, Nigeria, was signed by both sides.

Global Day for Darfur.

Raising awareness around the world about what has been going on the other side of the world, Darfur, Sudan, September 17 was named as "Global Day for Darfur," and there had been peace rallies in major cities including London, New York, Vancouver, etc. Below is an article about it by BBC.

World rallies for peace in Darfur

Rallies and silent protests are taking place around the worldProtesters demanding an end to conflict in Sudan's Darfur region have been staging a day of global demonstrations.
Activists rallied in several major cities, calling on Sudan to allow UN peacekeepers into Darfur, where tens of thousands of people have been killed.
In London, there was a rally outside the Sudanese embassy, while thousands protested in New York's Central Park.
Khartoum has dismissed the protests, saying those taking part have been misled by the international media.
Up to two million people have been displaced in three years of conflict in Darfur.
The US and France have both said a genocide is taking place, with the US directly accusing Khartoum of responsibility.
On Saturday UK Prime Minister Tony Blair wrote to leaders of the European Union, calling the situation in Darfur "unacceptable" and urging them to take a common stand on the issue.
'Misunderstanding'
Rallies took place in some 30 cities around the world.
Unfortunately, the people in the West, in Europe and the United States are moved by the media
Ali KartiSudanese junior foreign minister
In pictures: Darfur rallies
Blair urges EU Darfur unity
Send us your views
Among those involved were the South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Canadian General Romeo Dallaire, who headed the UN peacekeeping force in Rwanda during that country's genocide in 1994.
About 20,000 people gathered in Central Park to press the US government for action.
Former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said: "The world must act and it must do so now because time is not on our side."
BBC world affairs correspondent Mike Wooldridge says the issue is likely to be a key one at this week's UN General Assembly.
In Cambodia, devastated by the Khmer Rouge genocide in the 1970s, a candle-lit vigil was held in the capital, Phnom Penh.
Speaking ahead of the protests, Sudan's junior foreign minister, Ali Karti, said the demonstrators were misunderstanding the situation in Darfur.
"Unfortunately, the people there in the West, in Europe and the United States are moved by the media and the media is unfortunately moved by political agendas," he said.
Khartoum says it is defending the territorial integrity of Sudan against rebels backed by neighbouring Chad.
Peacekeeper doubt
Steve Ballinger, a spokesman for Amnesty International, rejected Mr Karti's interpretation of events.

Refugees from fighting in Darfur tell their stories
In pictures
"The situation is dire already in Darfur, and it is only going to get worse when the African Union troops leave at the end of this month, unless the UN peacekeeping mission is allowed back in," he said.
Seven thousand African Union peacekeeping troops are due to leave Darfur at the end of September, but Khartoum has refused to allow UN peacekeepers to take their place.
The government has stressed that any UN troops entering Darfur would be met with armed resistance.
On Saturday 1,000 volunteers from a pro-government militia marched through the streets of Khartoum threatening to kill any uninvited UN visitors, the BBC's Jonah Fisher reports from the city.
Violence in the region is reported to be rising again, drawing criticism from figures as diverse as the UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, and actor George Clooney, who this week implored the UN Security Council to act.

Korea, now.

This morning, when I served my daily ritual of reading a newspaper in an unbelievably packed subway cart while struggling not to lose a balance with tip-toed high heels, being pushed by and forcefully bouncing back the overly swollen body (it takes years of self-disciplined force to get to this enlighted stage, you see ^^;), a breaking news snatched my attention. "A coup d'etat in Thailand while its PM was away.."

The title reminded me of a sudden-death question once one of the roommates asked. It was when the president's impeachment was passed at the national assembly in Korea. "Would there be a coup, then??" Even considering she wasn't exactly a Korean expert, the question shocked me. But the awkward feeling was surged into my head as I hesitated to find an appropriate answer. Well, wishful comments like "what do you think the level of Korean democracy is at?" or "How on earth can you even imagine such a thing?" only lingered within my mouth.

Shaking the oblivion residing in your now comfortably settled body and soul, it is only for twenty something years that you have enjoyed 'coup-less' relatively civilized democracy in this complicated peninsula. Since the story on coups wasn't completely estranged to us, I read it with great concern that I may be no longer able to get those soothing Thai massage when visiting cozy parlours in Khao San street, not to mention about the most favorite beach of all, Kho Phi Phi in southern province, holy coconut~!

Anyways, the concern slowly moved to the land of my own. Its neighboring countries, i.e., Japan and China now almost openly express their expansionist ambitions surprisingly smiliar to those demostrated during the WWII, for China's case a little earlier than that. The next possible Prime Minister of Japan, Shinzo Ave (we.ll..., we'll see the result by tonight) will unlikely stop the controversial visit to Yasukuni Shrine as well as the frenzy nationalist movement to change its constitution article 9 that has barred Japan from expanding its military power. Not to mention that Japan has been distorted some significant historical events regarding the atrocities it committed during the war in the textbook, now China faithfully decided to join the Japanese footsteps. Indeed, there are no such a thing as 'friends' or 'enermies' in international affairs as somebody said.

Domestically,

Art of playing.

Play is an important part of our daily lives, as evidenced by the old advertising slogan "A Mars a day helps you work, rest and play". Of course, many people prefer to substitute words such as 'coffee' or 'non-prescription drugs' rather than 'Mars', but that's really their own business. It's the other elements in the slogan that are important, especially 'work': play is a key factor in the work/life balance. Whenever an employer tells you that they encourage a healthy work/life balance, don't assume that this means 50/50. They actually mean 95/5. After all, they're not paying you to have a life, are they? (If they actually are, then tell me where you work.)That said, work can afford some opportunities for play as well. Playing air guitar while sitting in an office swivel chair can be pretty fun, provided no-one has noticed you. The only trouble is if you put a bit too much gusto into the power chords, as this accidentally pushes your chair across your little area of open plan, knocking you straight into the recycling bin, as well as ripping your headphones out, thereby opening up your music to the entire floor. Not that I know this personally, you understand. (Whistles nonchalantly.)Playing upThere's nothing quite like a good hands pounding on the table, bawling your eyes out, toddler-style tantrum, is there? So cathartic and so immature at the same time. I regret the fact that because we have grown up, started jobs and relationships, incurred financial and social responsibilities and are just so fran-tic-a-lly busy, we don't get to have a loud, no-holds-barred tantrum any more. Or at least, we're not supposed to, despite the fact that the pressures on us are greater. It seems very inequitable that when we are young enough to jump up and down legitimately, howling in anger, there is actually very little for us to shout and scream about, yet when we are old enough to have job, money or personal worries, it is not really acceptable to sit in the middle of an office, legs crossed, screaming to high heaven and crying like a baby.Well, I think that we should bring tantrums and playing up back into adult life. If we get all the horrible things like bills to pay and meetings to attend, then I think we should be allowed some of the decent things as well, starting off with the inalienable right to holler and launch hissy fits as and when we deem necessary. Further items on this Regression Manifesto will include the right to sulk, the right to claim "you just don't understand me" and then stomp off to our bedrooms, the right to do our homework in front of the television, and the right to wear whatever damn underwear we want when we get run over in the street.Playing hard to getIf you are coy, then you'll already know. If you're not, then I'm not telling.Playing into their handsIt's that particular moment when you realise, "I've been had" accompanied by a slight sinking feeling in your stomach and generally also partnered by the beginning of laughter from others. Walking straight into a trap, be it verbal or a practical joke, or even just being set up to supply an answer that had already been predicted; these are just a few ways of playing straight into somebody's hands. They have you where they want you, you have swallowed the bait and they are now reeling you in. However, unless you are prepared to take the radical step of never saying anything and never going anywhere ever again, there isn't an awful lot you can do about playing into people's hands, I'm afraid. Vigilance is your best option. Oh, and a very low gullibility level will help no end also.Playing awayDon't ever think you won't get caught. You will. Don't ever think you won't hurt people. You will. Don't ever think it won't haunt you. It will. Don't ever think that it's not a bad idea. It is. Don't ever think that you won't lose friends. You will. Don't ever think that it's worth it. It isn't. Don't think you'll keep it secret. You won't. Don't ever think that tears won't be cried. They will. Don't ever think that it's just the way you are. It isn't. Don't ever think that you're being clever. You're not. Don't think you won't feel ashamed when you look back. You will.Playing for keepsThere is a time when playing stops being fun and suddenly gets very, very serious. Whether it's a 'friendly' game of pool, a kickabout in the park or even a poker night at a friend's house, however much you are enjoying simply playing, a competitive edge enters the game at some point and remains there, under the skin. I remember that playing Trivial Pursuits at college was possibly one of the most competitive things I have ever done: out of the players, two were graduate students who already had their Firsts, two of the others would go on to get Double Firsts, the another player got a 2:i and then there was me. Oh dear. As they were predominantly English Lit students, the Art & Literature category of questions quickly became a bloodbath, as you might imagine, and it was arguably the quickest game I have ever played (and lost quite badly).Although it's not quite the same as the 'win at all costs' strategy of game-playing, when you switch from a gentle, well-isn't-this-fun mode into a destroy-destroy-destroy mode, playing for keeps isn't all that easy to conceal. In a 'friendly' game of pool, for example, the sudden and insistent snookering of your opponent will be pretty obvious and very likely to push them into an equal tactic of attrition. Chess, despite stalemates, has never been anything other than playing for keeps and so neatly avoids the courteous first few moves before the deluge. Of the more physical sports, you know things are going badly when a little game of three or four people playing keepy-uppy descends into a mélee of twelve or so people performing sliding tackles, grabbing shirts and making sure that they foul everybody bar that big bloke who spent some time inside, so don't mess.Playing by the bookNo matter where you are, what you are doing, or who you are with, one of the people around you will be the rules person. You know what they're like: all events must be played out according to his/her little book. The type of person who whips out a calculator when the bill for dinner arrives, the person who insists on making an entire cinema row move because they have to sit in "their" seat, the person who doesn't believe in tipping because it isn't in their rule book. This level of formal, constricted thought is liable to get more relaxed people whipped up into a frenzied rage. "Can't we just go out and see what happens?" is the lament, while the response is invariably something along the lines of "But what's the plan?" Although this person will be invaluable when the car breaks down, when someone gets ill or when the fate of the world is at stake, while you're just going out for a few beers, they will be massively irritating. There are times when the book should be shelved and left at the library.So, play up! Play up! And play the game. If you're not winning, you're not cheating well enough.

함석헌 선생의 역사 분류에 관하여

다음은 [브리태니커백과사전 CD GX], 한국브리태니커, 2004에서 발췌한 중세시대 유럽, 중국, 한국에서의 민중봉기에 관한 요약입니다. [브리태니커백과사전 CD GX], 한국브리태니커, 2004에 의하면 민중에 의한 반란은 근현대, 중세를 막론하고 인간의 역사상 계속 존재하여 왔던 것은 아닌가 생각하게 합니다. 또한 민중반란이라는 것이 근본적 속성상 힘을 지니지 못하고 있는 자들에 의한 몸부림이라는 점에서 시간을 막론하고 그 반란(혁명)이 성공할 때보다는 실패하거나 금시 과거의 형태를 돌아가버린 듯한 형태를 띈 적이 많았던 것 같습니다. 이 또한 현대라고 하여 많이 다른 것 같지는 않습니다. 하지만 현대의 민중들이 중세나 근대의 민중들과 비교하여 다른 바가 있다면 "선거권"을 갖고 있다는 점이 아닌가 합니다. 다시말해, 투표를 통하여 권력자들에게 직접적으로 영향력을 행사함으로써 그들의 통치방식을 평가할 수 있다는 점입니다. 따라서 현대 이전의 민중들이 갖고있던 힘에 비해 확실히 차별될 수 있는 영향력을 가지고 있다고 보아도 무리는 없을 것 같다는 생각도 듭니다.

그러나, 아래에 간단히 열거되어 있는 예를 통해서도 나타나듯이 중세, 근대의 민중이 사회와 역사 전반에 걸쳐 이룩해온 영향력을 간과하는 것에는 무리가 있습니다. 그 실패 여부를 떠나서 다수의 민중이 목숨을 담보로 일으킨 민중봉기의 사례들은 어떠한 형태로든 그들이 속한 사회와 나아가 역사의 변화를 가져왔다는 것이 일반적 평가인 것과 맥락이 같습니다.

이러한 의미에서, 저는 아직도 2차 대전 이전까지의 수천년의 역사를 소수 영웅에 의해서만 이루어진 시대이고, 그 이후 현재까지만의 민중(씨알)의 시대라고 정의하는 것은 무리가 있다고 생각합니다. 또한, 만일 꼭 제시된 세가지 시대로 나누는 것이 옳다면, 2차대전을 전후로 나누는 것보다는 투표권의 형성 전후로 나누는 것이 더 합당하다고 봅니다.


#첨부

유럽의 농민반란

14세기 이후 집중적이고 대규모로 발생해 플랑드르, 프랑스와 영국에서는 14세기 이후, 독일에서는 15세기 초반 이후, 러시아에서는 17세기 이후에 많은 농민반란이 일어났다. 발생시기와 양상, 직접적 계기는 지역마다 조금씩 차이가 있지만 근본적인 원인은 봉건지대와 농노제를 축으로 한다. 저항에 대항하기 위해 영주층이 실시한 부역제 강화 등의 봉건반동정책이 반란을 촉발하기도 했다. 영주권의 문제를 넘어서 국가의 과중한 조세징수에 대항하여 발생하는 경우도 있다. 1358년 자크리(Jacquerie)의 반란, 1381년 와트 타일러의 반란이 대표적이다. 17~18세기 절대왕정 아래서도 이런 봉기가 여러 차례 발생했다. 사회분화가 진전됨에 따라 흉년·물가앙등을 계기로 빈농, 도시빈민들의 폭동이 영주·지주·부호·곡물상인에 대한 공격으로 발전하기도 했다. 농민반란은 진행과정에서 폭동과 학살을 수반하기도 했으며, 자연발생적이고 비조직적이었다. 무장도 곤봉이 주가 될 정도로 열악했다. 이들은 국왕과 영주의 군대에 의해 모두 철저하게 진압되었다. 그러나 농민반란은 유럽 봉건제의 질적인 변화를 촉진하는 역할을 했다. 농민반란을 계기로 영주제의 재편성, 국왕권의 강화가 나타났으며, 노동지대의 화폐지대로의 이행, 구래의 예속적인 농노제에서 영주와 농민간의 봉건적 계약관계로의 전환을 촉진하는 역할을 했다.

중국의 농민반란중국에서는 진(秦) 왕조 성립 이후 청말에 이르기까지 거대한 농민반란이 끊임없이 이어졌다. 중국의 농민반란은 실제로는 농민을 필두로 수공업자, 염업노동자, 운송노동자, 유민 등 각 계층이 참여한 민중항쟁이었다. 대체로 사회체제의 모순에 의해 부의 편중현상이 심해지고, 토지를 잃은 농민이 증가하며, 전제왕조의 수탈과 국가체제의 문란이 심화되었을 때, 이의 시정, 토지의 균분, 귀천의 철폐 등을 외치며 농민반란이 발생했다. 때로 황건(黃巾)의 난, 백련교도의 난과 같이 종교운동의 성격을 띠기도 하고, 반원(反元), 멸만흥한(滅滿興漢) 등 이민족 지배에 항거하는 민족운동과 결합하기도 하나 그 근본은 민중의 생존권을 지키기 위한 항쟁이었다. 중국의 농민반란은 한 왕조의 말기에는 반드시 거대한 농민반란이 발생한다고 할 정도로 규모와 연속성에서 세계사에서 특출한 위치를 차지한다.이런 것들로는 진의 진승(陳勝)·오광(吳廣)의 난(BC 209~208), 왕망(王莽) 정권 하의 녹림(綠林)·적미(赤眉)의 난(17~27), 한말 황건의 난(184~205), 당의 황소(黃巢)의 난(875~884), 송의 왕소파(王小波)·이순(李順)의 난(993~995), 원의 홍건의 난(1351~67), 명의 등무칠(鄧茂七)의 난, 유육(劉六)·유칠(劉七)의 난(1510~12), 이자성(李自成)·장헌충(張獻忠)의 난(1627~46), 청의 백련교의 난(1796~1805), 그리고 근대적 농민전쟁으로도 분류하는 청말 태평천국의 난(1850~64) 등이 있다. 농민반란의 구호는 실현되지 않고 농민반란의 지도자가 수립한 정권은 다시 전제왕권으로 돌아갔지만, 농민반란은 기존 사회체제의 변화에 결정적인 역할을 했다. 일례로 황소의 난은 장원제를 기반으로 하는 당의 귀족세력을 몰락시키고 지주제에 기초한 사대부 계층의 중앙집권적 관료국가를 형성하는 계기가 되었다.
한국의 농민반란사료에 기록된 최초의 대규모 농민반란은 9세기말에 전국적으로 발생한 농민반란이다. 이것은 신라의 지배체제를 마비시키고 후삼국시대를 여는 계기가 되었다. 2번째는 고려 중엽인 12~13세기이다. 대토지겸병의 발달과 이자겸의 난부터 무신난으로 이어지는 중앙정계의 혼란에 따른 국가기구의 부패에 따라 전국에서 농민반란이 발생했다.반란은 문신정권의 부활을 기도한 조위총(趙位寵)과 결합하기도 했으나 보통 차별대우를 받던 서북면 지역주민이나, 천민촌락인 향·소·부곡, 그리고 노비가 주동이 된 경우가 많았다. 그러나 이들은 대개 고립분산적으로 전개되었다. 후기에는 반란군간의 연대가 일부 이루어지기도 했으나 중앙에 최씨정권이 들어서고 이어 원의 침략과 지배가 시작되면서 원과 고려정부의 군대에 의해 농민반란은 진압되었다. 하지만 이것은 향·소·부곡의 철폐, 노비제의 개선, 군현제와 외관제 정비 등 사회전반에 걸친 개혁을 초래하여 중세사회의 발전에 획기적인 계기로 작용했다.조선 전기에는 조사의(趙思義)의 난, 이시애(李施愛)의 난과 결합한 함경도 농민들의 봉기, 임진왜란 중에 발생한 이몽학(李夢鶴)의 난이 유명하나 이전과 같은 전국적인 위기상황은 없었다. 그러나 16세기 이래 지주제의 발전과 부세제도의 문란에 따른 소농민의 몰락이 가속되어 갖가지 분쟁은 계속 발발했으며, 이들과 봉건정부 지주층 간의 긴장은 계속되었다. 이것은 1811년 평안도 농민전쟁, 1862년의 전국적인 민란, 1894년 갑오농민전쟁으로 표출되었다.출전 : [브리태니커백과사전 CD GX], 한국브리태니커, 2004

My good granny

This granny I see every Friday evening sitting on the stairway of the subway station on my way home, she's probably around mid-80 year old living along if she has a home at all, living day by day from changes she gets on the street. She is the sweetest old lady I've ever encountered since my mother-side grandma. She seemed reckless when I first time saw her there, not even had an energy to lift up her face buried by a hat she forcefully pushed down. When striving to initiate a conversation, she hardly looked at me, although a sense of appreciation was there, I knew. So that was my first encounter with my favorite granny ever.

A couple of months have been passed now. She's still there every Friday, she said she usually spends whole day hoping to earn small amount of money for sustaining her checkered life. A good twenty dollars will do her for any whole week. Suddenly, I was curious, curious about who she was/is, what's in her mind when she's receiving coins carelessly dropped into the ripped red plastic basket she preciously holds in her bosoms, and how she would feel if someone strikes a conversation.

So I started to talk. And she listened. She hardly said anything in return on the first day. But now I know she doesn't happen to have any child, married once but became a widow soon after, worked as a housemaid for a now well-off man who she became embraced as almost a member of his family, etc. While narrating pieces of her life here and there, she maintained smile on her face. Was she because she remembered them fondly of, or she was simply happy that day? I wondered again.

It's Friday today, she'll be on the stairway by now.

winds of change

Morning breezes still warm yet crisp on my cheeks, a short walk to my office from Yeoksam station I savored the precious moment. Before even noticing any, smiles were spreading on my face and arms wide open. Ruminating what went on yesterday evening, I once again realized how grateful and beautiful place I am in.

There are times of doubts, of course, for everyone. Doubts on herself/himself, doubts on profession, doubts on beloveds, or even doubts on life itself. It seems an endless tunnel in pitch darkness only throwing a sense of confinement to those stucked therein. Here, without doubt, it is easy to fall into a hasty oblivion conluding there is no end for life in a confinement and decry the absolute being for putting us such a situation and leaving us all alone. Well, perhaps he did so to give us a chance to get us ready for whatever he prepared for us at the end of the tunnel. I believe we all know of it in the deep down from our heart, yet cursedly or not, the mankind is destined to disremember things buried in the past. We, sometimes, are not just able to see what is clearly laid right in front of us, not believing what we know or see, and denying the absoluteness, thereby choosing an ultimate death. Why?

I feel changes in wind, the wind to take me where I know it exists.

Denying war responsibility - a thought upon Koisumi's visit to Yasukun

The Facts
Throughout the late 18th century to the early 19th century, East Asia became doomed because of the forcible influx of foreign countries, mostly from the west except from Japan due to its successful implementation of Meiji Restoration. During the Japanese occupation throughout the whole Asian region and the Pacific War, Japan had committed unspeakable atrocities, which now considered as crimes against humanity. The Rape of Nanking and the sexual slavery of “Comfort Women” have received extensive coverage in both the academic and popular presses recently. And there have been numerous other cases being claimed by victims over the last half century such as the massacre on Korean minority aftermath of Kando Great Earthquake; the forcible relocation of the Chinese and Korean laborers who toiled under brutal conditions in civil engineering, mining, and heavy industry; indiscriminate machine-gunning, incendiary shelling, and bombing of civilian targets in China; the extermination of villages in Manchuria by murder, pillage, and burning; the illegal use of biological and chemical weapons in warfare; the vivisection and murder of human subjects for purpose of medical education and experimentation; ongoing and often fatal environmental degradation caused by poison gas and bombs abandoned by the Japanese military after the defeat; the systematic looting of hundreds of thousands of irreplaceable books from Chinese libraries; and the plundering of Asia’s wealth (Schalow, 2000, p. 7).

Forgotten Responsibility
The issue of Japan’s war responsibility broadly defined as the criminal acts of war for which Japan should be held legally and morally accountable (Schalow, 2000, p. 7). There were the moments that Japan had to face its war responsibility. Soon after the WWII, some hundreds of Japanese officials were brought into the international court of Tokyo Tribunal for the interrogations regarding to war crimes they committed. However after a long war that Japanese saw the death of several million Japanese servicemen and civilians, the fate of these few officials did not attract the public attention almost at all within Japan. Hidden behind the national-wide humiliation of the defeat and harsh lives after the war, the issues of the Japan’s war responsibility seemingly had been forgotten. The issue was mostly dealt by the victors - allied forces - through the international tribunal. However, according to Dower, the result drawn out from the tribunal was only prosecuting a few high ranked military officers, high bureaucrats. No captains of the war economy and virtually none of the civilian ideologues in politics, academe, and the media who helped prime the pump of racial arrogance and fanatical militarism paid for the terrible crimes those men on the front committed (Dower, 1999, p. 449). Along with the insufficient punishment and favorable conditions of San Francisco Treaty with the U.S., the responsibility Japan was supposed to take for the atrocities have been conveniently forgotten.

Origin of Japan’s Justification on War
Since Meiji period Japan’s attempts to establish “a rich and strong nation” by unifying all the scattered strengths under the emperor seemed to work out as Japan planned. Quick adaptation of western civilization enabled Japan to build up strong social and military infrastructure, and by the beginning of WWI, Japan was ready to compete with other ‘civilized’ countries in the west. The nation’s operating mechanism, which was heavily focused on the military built-ups, brought the emergence of Japan as a new super power in the international society compatible to the west. The prestige of the military in the popular mind and the attitude of superiority among the military itself contributed to the military growing sense of independence (Hanneman, 2001, p.39). The militarized Japan’s government system became strengthened by the deep resentment of Meiji restoration deprived much of its tradition in return to the quick adaptation of western civilization. The rush modernization that swept the country since the Meiji period made Japanese feel like their past had been obliterated. Hence the appearance of extreme nationalistic movement in the 1930s could be understood as a consequence to this, an attempt to bring back the traditional pride that had seemingly been sacrificed during the Meiji era (Hanneman, 2001, p. 43). Also the growing sense of isolation because of the Exclusion Act, which Japanese interpreted as a rejection of the west, reinforced the militarization of Japan. To make things worse, Great Depression outwardly and Kanto Earthquake inwardly devastated the country. This social, political and economical environment was ripe for Japan to develop an extreme nationalism and eventually lead a war that the world had to suffer.
Kita Ikki’s theory of ultra-nationalism stressing Japan’s mission as liberator of Asia against the west, at last, provided the perfect excuse for Japan to wage a war as well as to suppress many Asian countries. Kita is often regarded either as a great thinker and theoretician of Japanese ultra-nationalism, totalitarianism, fascism or the first real Japanese social revolutionary. Yet Szpilman describes him as a person full of contradiction. He thought of the Emperor as an organ of the state and called for confiscation of all imperial property, yet he worshipped the Emperor Meiji and tried to curry favor with the Crown Prince. He railed against capitalist evils, but gladly received large sums from Mitsui zaibatsu, the incarnation of Japanese capitalism. Though he opposed Western presence in China, he hoped to develop that country with the help of American capital. He recommended an alliance between the United States and Japan, yet almost in the same breath he attacked the U.S. President, Woodrow Wilson, as ‘a great fool’ and ‘a worthless mediocrity.’ (Szpilman, 2002, p. 468)
In a sense, Kita’s perception of Japan in the international politics was carved by paradoxical world view that Japan had indulged in since the Meiji era. The sense of loss in return for the rushing adaptation of the west, which they considered as an ultimate enemy was prevailed in Japan in its 1930s and Kita’s writings were well reflecting the stream of thoughts. Armed with Kita’s ultra-nationalistic ideas, Japanese must feel legitimate and even proud to ‘liberate’ its neighbor countries from the common enemy of west. The surrender speech of Emperor Hirohito also clearly showed Japan’s world view of the time saying, “We cannot but express the deepest sense of regret to out allied nations of East Asia, who have consistently cooperated with the Empire toward the emancipation of East Asia.” The mentality of Meiji era was again emerged during the American occupation period in Japan and provided self-justification of the war. Since Japan found an ‘ideal’ cause of war, it must not have been a serious matter for Japan to consider over the war responsibility. Once again, Japan had to “suffer what was insufferable” in order to regain its full strength to counter the west and Japan had an obligation to become a ‘liberator’ or a ‘protector’ of Asia against the ‘evil’ west. Within the grandeur thoughts of Japanization of Asia, Japan must have felt perfectly justified regardless of how much the people of countries Japan invaded had been suffered under its occupation.

Possible Causes of Japan’s Denial on War Responsibility
The lack of public attention within Japan as well as the insufficient root-outs of persons who were responsible of war crimes provided the potential reasons that the issue has not been dealt in proper manner. Especially the question of Emperor Hirohito’s war responsibility, which was double-edged sword because it provided the peaceful and whole American occupational reign in Japan yet it represented the double standard of decisions from the Tokyo Trial by exempting the head of the perpetrators from the punishment. Hirohito died in 1989 with a good old age, his image was so completely sanitized that political leaders from all over the world came to pay tribute at his funeral. And many loyal Japanese did conclude that if the emperor was blameless, so were they (Bix, 2000).
The more sad fact is that the younger generation of Japan is thus largely ignorant of the facts and perceives Japan only as a victim of war, not as a perpetrator or aggressor. The Japanese ignorance about Japan’s role in the war is more a product of deliberate mis-education than of oversight. School textbooks, which in Japan must pass the scrutiny of the government’s Ministry of Education, convey to Japan’s children a carefully controlled image of wartime Japan. Until lawsuits in the 1980s challenged the Ministry of Education’s whitewashing policies, textbooks were not allowed to say that Japan had invaded China, only that Japan “entered” China; the Nanking massacre (when acknowledged at all) was nothing more than a small-scale military “incident” resulting from a unfortunate breakdown in military discipline; the annexation and occupation of Korea and the increasingly draconian policies towards Koreans were barely touched upon. In short, any actions that might place the emperor, the state, or the ruling elite in a bad light were excised from the history books (Schalow, 2000).
Also eventual defeat of Japan as a result of two powerful atomic bombs fallen in Hiroshima and Nagasaki led to have Japanese perceive themselves as victims not as perpetrators. Because of the incident, Japan, in a way, was provided with justification for devising a cultural discourse in which Japan is the innocent victim rather than the guilty perpetrator. The post-war literature of Hiroshima and Nagasaki appears to provide convincing testimony that no one was made to suffer more terribly in the war than the Japanese themselves (Schalow, 2000).

Avoiding War Responsibility
Owing to the all combined reasons, Japanese government has been capable of refusing to accept accountability and apologize for war crimes they conducted. This has infuriated and insulted not just survivors but many Asian people and their governments as well. The visitation of Japanese Prime Minister to Yasukuni Shrine always has been provoking great resentment in Asia especially in China and Korea yet the claims from it neighbor countries have never been affected to Japan’s nationalistic routines. Enshrined in it are Class A war criminals and lesser war criminals along with others who died in the wars; a shrine visit would be equivalent to a German chancellor visiting a memorial dedicated to Hitler and his Nazi henchmen. Understandably, a visit to the shrine is anathema to victims of Japan’s aggressive wars (The Associated Press, 2001; Herskovitz, 2001). Regarding to this, Dower addresses in his book Embracing Defeat, “One of the most pernicious aspects of the occupation [of Japan] was that the Asian peoples who had suffered most from imperial Japan’s depredations – the Chinese, Koreans, Indonesians and Filipinos, had no serious role, no influential presence at all in the defeated land. They became invisible.” (Dower, 1999, p. 27) More than fifty years after the end of the war, a review of the Japanese government’s actions suggests a nation unwilling to acknowledge and accept responsibility for its past atrocities. On the other hand, neither did the international community provide conditions favorable to holding Japan accountable (Lee, 2001).
Bibliography
1. Bix, Herbert, Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan, Harper Collins, New York, 2000
2. Buruma, Ian, The Wages of Guilt: Memories of War in Germany and Japan, Random House Ltd., Sydney, 1994
3. Dower, John W., Embracing Defeat; Japan in the Wake of World War II, W.W. Norton & Company / The New Press, New York, 1999
4. Dower, John W., Japan in War and Peace, New Press, New York, 1993
5. Hanneman, Mary L., Japan Faces the World 1925-1952, Longman, New York, 2001
6. Article, The Showa Emperor and War in Modern Japanese History: Reassessment and Contemporary Implications, Japan Forum, March 2003, Vol. 15, Issue 1
7. Kohei, Hanasaki and Ichiyo, Muto, Decolonialization and Assumption of War Responsibility, Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, April 2000, Vol. 1, Issue 1
8. Lee, Ivy, Probing the Issues of Reconciliation more than Fifty Years after the Asia-pacific War, International Quarterly, Winter 2001, Vol. 19, Issue 4
9. Norihiro, Kato, Discussing Post-Defeat Japan, 1998
10. Pyle, Kenneth B., The Japanese Question; Power and Purpose in a New Era, The AEI Press, Washington, D.C., 1996
11. Sand, Jordan, Historians and Public Memory in Japan, History & Memory, Fall/Winter 1999, Vol. 11, Issue2
12. Schalow, Paul, Gordon, Japan’s War Responsibility and the Pan-Asian Movement for Redness and Compensation: An Overview, East Asia: An International Quarterly, Autumn 2000, Vol. 18, Issue 3
13. Sigur, Christopher, Renewing the U.S. – Japan Relationship, USA Today Magazine, Jan 2002, Vol. 130, Issue 2680
14. Szpilman, Christopher W.A., Kita Ikki and the Politics of Coercion, Modern Asian Studies 36, 2, Cambridge University, 2002, p. 467-490