2024-03-01 17:04:27
Song Jae-yoon’s Sad China: The Chinese Dream of the Frontier <23회>
President Syngman Rhee inspects prisoners at the Sangmudae POW camp during the Korean War. /Public sector
“Founding War” or “Hundred Years’ War”?
Director Kim Deok-young’s documentary film “National Foundation War,” which revealed the truth about Syngman Rhee, is showing off its charm, surpassing 1 million cumulative viewers in just 27 days of its release. In an age where lies and fake news are rampant, the public is shocked by the power of facts that shatter false myths while watching the “Founding War.” I was helplessly deceived by the propaganda techniques of a fraudulent group that turned the Daedong River Bridge into a Han River bridge, and the propaganda techniques of a conspiratorial force that fabricated historical materials and manipulated information to accuse Syngman Rhee of being an assassin, massacre, violent criminal, adulterer, embezzler, pro-Japanese, and traitor. Citizens who have lived there are angry. Public shock and citizen anger are currently giving rise to a sudden Syngman Rhee phenomenon in Korea. It’s a relief, even though it’s a disaster. This is because the Republic of Korea cannot stand upright without a re-evaluation of Syngman Rhee.
Over the past 60 years, Korea’s academia, education, media, and culture and arts community have committed a collective distortion of history that turns Korea’s first president, Syngman Rhee, into a historical villain. In particular, extreme leftists who deny liberal democracy and seek to destroy the Republic of Korea have formed a unified front with North Korea’s Kim dynasty and have taken the lead in ‘killing Syngman Rhee.’ Eventually, a middle school history teacher screened the historical documentary “The Hundred Years’ War” (Institute of Korean Studies, 2012), which murders Syngman Rhee’s character with false information and fake news, during class.
At that time, when a student refuted that ‘Rhee Syngman was a democrat,’ the teacher said, “Raise your hands and go out into the hallway.” It was a moment when a teacher cruelly trampled on a student’s right to speak about common sense about history. This is a human rights violation that can never be tolerated in a liberal democratic country like the Republic of Korea, even if it is in North Korea or China. (February 20, 2024, Chosun Ilbo, “High school student who sent 10,000 won every month, 80-year-old attached poem to donation… 10 billion won raised for Syngman Rhee Memorial Hall.”)
Historical documentary produced by the Institute for National Studies in 2012<백년전쟁>> took two photos taken at different times and manipulated them into mugshots of criminal suspects. The manipulation technology using Photoshop surpasses the propaganda and agitation techniques of the Nazi propaganda department and the Hitler regime. In 2018, the court ruled that a lion was charged with defamation based on freedom of expression.<백년전쟁>> was found not guilty. /screen capture
North Korean-style political warfare, an operation to destroy the Republic of Korea
How can something so ignorant and ignorant occur in a school classroom in Korea, one of the world’s top 10 richest countries and a country with a developed pop culture? To explain the reason, we must pay attention to the political warfare waged against the Republic of Korea by the far-left totalitarian hereditary autocratic state called the “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.” According to the latest analysis by a U.S. military strategist, China today is waging a continuous political war targeting liberal countries around the world.
According to the basic line of the Chinese Communist Party, political warfare means “a war that is won without fighting.” Many people still think that “the absence of war is peace.” War at this time is limited to physical warfare, that is, armed conflict. Armed conflict is only one aspect of war. Since the Cold War, the communist regime has secretly infiltrated the liberal camp and waged political warfare even in times of “peace.” Political warfare includes psychological warfare, ideological warfare, propaganda warfare, media warfare, broadcasting warfare, academic warfare, cultural warfare, It unfolds as a complex war of position in all areas of society, including cyber warfare.
Even before the Korean War, North Korea adopted Soviet propaganda techniques and carried out Soviet-style political propaganda. /Monthly Chosun, 2014. 7.
Since the 1980s, South Korea’s so-called “progressive forces” have ideologically colluded with North Korea’s Kim dynasty and have been engaged in an ideological war to destroy the South Korean system. North Korea’s political warfare penetrated South Korea’s academia, education, media, and culture and arts world through South Korea’s Juche activist group in the 1980s and 1990s. For example, Jo Jeong-rae’s epic novel<태백산맥>> is a work that praises and glorifies the joint operation of the South Korean Workers’ Party partisan forces and the North Korean Kim Il-sung regime to drive out “American imperialism” and “Rhee Syngman’s puppet party,” and 7 million copies were sold. Without historical background knowledge<태백산맥>Anyone who reads > cannot help but recognize Kim Il-sung’s invasion of South Korea as a “war of national liberation and unification” and the “Rhee Syngman cabal” as the “culprits of division” and “puppets of the U.S. imperialists.”
Anti-totalitarianism theorist Syngman Rhee’s insights
When the former Soviet Union collapsed and communist governments in Eastern Europe went bankrupt, intellectuals in the Republic of Korea fell into the anachronism of glorifying the partisan struggle of the South Korean Workers’ Party and Kim Il-sung’s invasion of South Korea in the name of “national unification” and “people’s liberation.” South Korea’s far-left forces were waging a proxy political war against North Korea that was destroying South Korea from within. The forces that deny and disparage the founding of the Republic of Korea always wield the knife of character assassination towards Syngman Rhee. Why should it be that way?
This is because Syngman Rhee was the greatest theoretician of his time who had already seen through the political warfare of communist forces in the 1950s and urged anti-communist solidarity among liberals around the world with detailed political logic. September 25, 1955, Washington, USA<이브닝스타(Evening Star)>> is the Sunday edition<선데이스타(Sunday Star)>> published Syngman Rhee’s poetic essay, “Is coexistence possible?” over five pages. It had been two years since the Korean War entered a ceasefire with the armistice agreement on July 27, 1953. In the Soviet Union, Khrushchev, who came to power after Stalin’s death, was calling for “peaceful coexistence.”<이브닝스타>> was a so-called ‘Newspaper of Record’ widely read throughout the United States. In particular, in the 1950s, when Syngman Rhee’s poetics were published, this newspaper was at its peak with a printing press that produced millions of copies.
In his essay on this issue, cool-headed theorist Syngman Rhee exposes in detail the reality of the ideological war waged by communists in times of peace and urges a strong response from the liberal camp. This article is also as powerful a sentence as “Why did I stand alone?” introduced in episode 22 of “Sad China.” Each sentence contains the insight of a theorist, the strategy of a strategist, the insight of a prophet, and the conviction of a politician. What more to say? This writing by President Syngman Rhee is the greatest masterpiece in Korean diplomatic history and an important document that will remain in Korean constitutional history. Would it be an exaggeration to say that it feels real and timely even when reading it now, almost 70 years later?
As in the last episode, this time the full text will be fully translated and presented to the world. In this article, Syngman Rhee called for an active response from the liberal camp against the communist forces’ “war of ideology,” but as “The War for the Foundation of a Nation” points out in detail, he himself called for a “war of ideology” in the reality of the Republic of Korea, which is overflowing with fake news and historical distortions. became the biggest victim of Let’s throw away all preconceptions for a moment and listen to Syngman Rhee’s words from 69 years ago. As the editor puts it, “regardless of whether one agrees or not,” no one can deny the historical importance of this article.
On September 25, 1955, “Sunday Star,” the Sunday edition of Washington’s leading newspaper, “Washington Evening Star,” published Syngman Rhee’s poetry on five pages. / Evening Star, The Week Magazine, September 25, 1955. Page 7.
“Is coexistence possible? (Is Co-Existence Possible?)”
(Editor) At a time when the world is busy discussing peace, we are publishing a stern warning from a famous politician who lost half of his country to communist forces.
Syngman Rhee, President of the Republic of Korea
(Translation: Jae-yoon Song, Lee Dong-min)
Question: Today’s question comes from Michel Malter from San Mateo, California. Ms. Malter asked, “Is honorable co-existence possible?” and specifically requested an answer from South Korea’s President Syngman Rhee. Whether you agree or not, readers will think that President Syngman Rhee’s vivid on-the-scene report on Korea under armistice is an important aspect of the world issues that will be discussed at the International Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in Geneva next month.
Answer: Starving for peace always puts us in danger of being willing to give up the struggle. Especially when the way of giving up the struggle is veiled, conciliatory, or concealed so that it cannot be easily seen.
In fact, today the risk of the free world being absorbed by communism is greater than ever. This is because the clear minds of many people in the free world are clouded by excessive hopes and groundless confidence. The basic fact that communists are plotting to conquer the world has not changed one bit, but free countries are helplessly deceived by the Kremlin’s false coaxing and superficial appearance.
In times like these, even the highest leader of a democratic nation would do well to read the story of “Little Red Riding Hood” again from children’s storybooks. Then they might be able to see the wolf’s greedy eyes and sharp teeth right under the grandmother’s hat worn by Nikolai Alexandrovich Bulganin (1895-1975; Prime Minister of the Soviet Union during the Khrushchev era, 1955-58).
Communists know openly that communist ideology is no different from the core ideology of past Chinese politics. That is, “there is only one sun in the sky, and there is only one ruler on the earth.”
Evening Star, The Week Magazine, 1955. 9.25. 34면.
Under the democratic tradition, we consider the absence of war to be peace. However, communist philosophers have developed a new method of conquest through ideological warfare. In the future, if we do not understand this and learn effective means of counterattack, we will fall into a labyrinth. If we briefly review recent history and the current world situation, we can find a clear clue as to how the ideological war is being waged.
Five New Kinds of War
1. Social Unrest. First, wherever social ills or economic inequality exist, communists are keenly aware and exploit the situation to their advantage. As they did in the UK this year, they are infiltrating trade unions, inciting strikes and stoking class hatred. They have already penetrated unions on a formidable scale in France and Italy, and to a significant extent in Britain and the United States. Also, in places where there is racial conflict, they quickly assume themselves as defenders of the underdog. In areas where colonialism is an issue, every effort is made to fan the flames of nationalism and intensify racial hatred.
So they [인종 갈등이 존재하는] Mississippi and South Africa[남아프리카공화국의 전신]is a friend of racial equality, [식민주의가 문제인] In Vietnam, India, and Indonesia, they are the enemies of racial equality.
2. Civil Disorder. Wherever conflict explodes violently and leads to rebellion, communists provide full support to those who overthrow law and order. In Indochina, they have already achieved some success and their overthrow operations are steadily progressing. In French North Africa and the Mau Mau country, communists are using all their power to viciously undermine democratic alliances by exploiting local demands for independence.
3. Neutralism. Communists preach a policy of “neutralism” wherever they can persuade people that if they want to be safe they must break ties with the free world. Over the past few years, they have achieved remarkable results in pushing the leadership of some countries in the so-called Asian-African region, including India, Burma, and Indonesia, in that direction.
Evening Star, The Week Magazine, 1955. 9.25. 36면.
4. Economic Pressure. In addition, communists are visiting various regions around the world where they have not yet established themselves among the newly reorganized world powers. Japan, which lost the recent war and has a bleak economic outlook, has become a place where communist forces are looking to infiltrate. They promise to provide the Japanese people with markets and a source of raw materials, as well as to help restore its former military empire. They continue to brag to the Japanese that Japan’s colonies (including Korea) that were lost in World War II could become Japanese again.
5. War Scares. Lastly, they appeal the fear and danger of a new world war through constant propaganda towards war-weary countries like Britain. Their logic is that only when free nations abandon all defensive measures that could lead to actual fighting can the competition for global hegemony be suppressed by the gentlemanly dimensions of propaganda and economic competition.
Meanwhile, the United States has been leading the free world in striving to crush this global conspiracy of communism on multiple fronts. The United States has many advantages, most notably the freest and most productive society in human history, but it is not temperamentally well-suited to such struggles.
Danger to Freedom
The core issue is the nature of democracy itself. The people of the free camp will rise up and fight when a clear challenge to freedom comes. They will fight not only for their own freedom, but also for the freedom of their neighbors and allies. However, since the free camp enjoys great economic prosperity, they try to avoid fighting as much as possible, but each time they do so, a large sacrifice is incurred. These characteristics are a serious threat to freedom and a tremendous asset to the Soviet Union when waging an ideological war.
The free world has been greatly indebted to America’s incomparable generosity and sacrifice, and among them, we Koreans owe the greatest debt. However, the miserable reality is that even if the generosity was great enough to make great sacrifices during the Korean War, the essential purpose of the United States’ generosity cannot be achieved if it is offset by useless compromises such as the armistice negotiations that came later in Korea.
Still Losing
Americans will naturally ask me. Why are you complaining when your country has benefited more than any other country thanks to America’s magnanimity? My answer is this: I must carry out my clear mission to help the great American people avoid making the tragic mistake of thinking they are over the global warfare that they are actually still losing.
Right now, communists are loudly calling for “peaceful co-existence.” But they are only seeing an opportunity to inexorably intensify the five forms of world struggle I outlined earlier. They want America’s resistance to their systematic ideological offensive to loosen.
“Peaceful coexistence” is exactly what the communists won in Korea through the ill-fated armistice agreement signed at Panmunjom. For most Americans, Korea is just a distant country, and the Korean War is bound to be considered a thing of the distant past. But from my position in this very critical part of the Cold War struggle, I see every day clear evidence of how the Communists are breaking their own most solemn promises. Here is part of that record.
● According to the armistice agreement signed against my wishes at Panmunjom, the communists promised not to bring any air force into North Korea. But they have already brought in at least 300 jet fighters and many more types of military aircraft. And they restored 35 airfields and built 12 new airfields to accommodate more fighters and bombers.
● According to the armistice agreement, the communists were to immediately repatriate all prisoners who wished to return. However, they delayed the release of the last remaining U.S. pilots for two years, and are still detaining about 20,000 South Korean soldiers and dozens of our civilian abductees.
● According to the Armistice Agreement, a neutral countries Armistice Monitoring Committee was to be established to enforce compliance with the Armistice Agreement. The UN nominated Switzerland and Sweden as truly neutral countries, but the Communists added Poland and Czechoslovakia, two Russian puppet states.
Evening Star, The Week Magazine, 1955. 9.25. 37면.
● According to the Armistice Agreement, this committee was to regularly inspect “ports of entry” in both North and South Korea to block power build-ups that violated the Armistice Agreement. However, by stationing its headquarters on our side, the committee closely and continuously monitors all military developments in South Korea, while its communist members veto all efforts made by truly neutral members to inspect the military situation in North Korea. .
● According to the Armistice Agreement, neutralized pre-war[=비무장지대] Neither side was allowed to increase its military power. In reality, the forces of the UN-Korean forces were drastically reduced as all of the US troops except for two divisions and almost all of the remaining UN forces withdrew. On the other hand, according to the Swedish and Swiss members of the monitoring committee, there is “reason to believe” that personnel, heavy artillery, tanks, and supplies were transported into North Korea on several trains in direct violation of the armistice agreement.
● According to the Armistice Agreement, the Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission was not allowed to do anything other than inspect ports of entry and exit to ensure that military power build-up was blocked. However, looking at the reality, the Polish and Czech members have established a network of secret agents throughout South Korea for the purpose of subversion, subversion, and espionage from their bases in our territory. For this reason I have repeatedly called for their withdrawal from our territory, but they remain here and continue their daily efforts to destroy our free government.
● According to the Armistice Agreement, political talks were to be held to discuss the peaceful reunification of Korea no later than October 28, 1954. However, no such talks were held until the end of April 1954. Moreover, the communists did not accept any proposals for the reunification of Korea other than those that guaranteed the expansion of their control over the entire country.
● According to the Armistice Agreement, the end of the fighting was to result in the final fulfillment of the United Nations policy of restoring all of Korea to a “free, democratic, and reunified nation.” However, if you look at the reality, communists have been abusing the Armistice Agreement as a stepping stone to achieve the communistization of the entire Korea, which they strongly desire.
All of this explains why I reject the idea of “peaceful coexistence” with communists. Whatever promises they make, they immediately start breaking them. Whatever plan they agree to, they immediately distort it into an opposite program for further conquest. The “coexistence” they speak of means the surrender of the free world into their hands without war or sacrifice on one’s part.
It is clear that for communists coexistence means insuring their own methods of continuing conquest, but it is not at all clear what coexistence means for the leadership of democratic countries.
Evening Star, The Week Magazine, 1955. 9.25. 39면.
For the leaders of the free world, does coexistence mean “de-escalation”? So what does that phrase mean other than a relaxation of alertness? Does it mean disarmament? Isn’t it obvious, then, that while democracies are disarming, the Soviet Union will continue to build up modern weapons for surprise conquest?
Counter-revolutionary movement? (Counter-Revolution?)
Do democratic countries hope that they can win the ideological war on the illusion of coexistence? So by what means do they intend to demand that the Communists give up the five forms of aggression I have outlined? And what kind of programs do democratic countries have in order to develop their own ideological counter-revolutionary movements?
Finally, if free nations accept coexistence as their goal, what are they to do with the 900 million people who are already languishing behind the Iron Curtain and the Bamboo Curtain?
If you ask me what I can do to avoid being swept away by the wave of gradual surrender, my answer is simple. I will do what I have always done whenever the basic security and freedom of free countries and people are threatened. I will fight back, and I will fight with a bold determination to win.
This is not an advocacy of preventive war. I believe that neither Russia nor Red China now has the will or ability to wage a global hot war. Red China looked quite fierce during the first few months of fighting in Korea. But that’s because the United Nations refrained from strategic bombing of Red China’s bases and insisted on fighting with one hand tied. Even under such unfavorable conditions, the UN and ROK forces soon exposed the communist army as a paper tiger without endurance.
According to my sober judgment, I believe that the liberal camp can achieve great results simply by strongly demanding that the communists keep the promises they made at Yalta, Potsdam, and Panmunjom. I am convinced that we should not make any new promises with them now that they continue to break the promises we have already made.
The original plan of Soviet imperialism was gradualist conquest. Small and weak regions have been subjugated without resistance from the West. The larger conquest of China was achieved through skillful obfuscation. More dangerous are the Soviet methods of weakening and neutralizing resistance within the citadels of countries too arrogant to surrender outright.
On the afternoon of August 13, 2022, participants of the August 15 National Workers’ Congress and Independent Peaceful Unification Rally held in front of Sungnyemun Gate in Jung-gu, Seoul are marching towards the Yongsan Presidential Office. /Chosun Ilbo
Half the World
This process has already progressed so far that it would be accurate to say that Russia today completely dominates or controls well over half of the world. All of this was accomplished in less than a lifetime, and most of it in just 10 years.
Seventeen years ago, Neville Chamberlain (1869-1940; British Prime Minister, 1937-40) returned from Munich with a document that he proudly declared “Peace for Our Time.” We now know what a tragic mistake he made. Let us not repeat his mistakes. <계속>
1709332825
#International #political #theorist #Syngman #Rhees #insight #coexistence