[Kim Seong-kon] Avoiding U.S.-centric perspective

Before jumping into a hasty conclusion, we need to perceive things from different angles and perspectives. For example, even cute animals like rabbits and deer may evoke varied reactions from different people. One would think most people would find it very romantic and peaceful to watch rabbits or deer roam in one’s backyard. To many Koreans, such a scene may evoke the atmosphere of paradise indeed. 

When I expressed my desire to live in such a

romantic environment, my American friend immediately shattered my naive, pastoral fantasy, stating, “To the owner of a house, a rabbit or a deer is a pest. They eat up all the budding plants in your garden. One day I’ll look in my garden and find all of my beautiful tulips gone! Tulip bulbs are their favorites.” At that moment, I realized one man’s paradise could be another’s nightmare. Indeed, everything looks different depending on one’s point of view.

Recently, when I was preparing for my return trip to Seoul from my sojourn in the States, my American friends strongly advised me not to return to Korea. “Are you out of your mind?” they told me. “Why would you go back to the most dangerous place on earth?” They seemed to firmly believe that war is imminent on the Korean Peninsula.

“It’s not what it looks like,” I tried to assure them. “North Korea is probably bluffing, as usual. We’ve been threatened for the past 60 years but nothing disastrous has happened so far, except for a few regional clashes.” But my American friends did not buy my logic. In their minds, a North Korean attack is inevitable.

Recently, the New York Times carried an article entitled, “Bomb North Korea, Before it’s too Late,” written by Jeremi Suri, a professor of history at the University of Texas at Austin. In his provocative article, Suri, who has presumably never been to Korea, insisted that the United States exercise a surgical strike on a North Korean missile launcher before it is too late. He justified such a plan as an act of self-defense. Isn’t it common knowledge, however, that a first strike is not defensive, but offensive? You cannot deliver a punch first simply because there is a possibility that the other party may strike you soon.

Suri also seemed oblivious to the devastating consequences that would result from such an attack. As professor Hans Schattle of Yonsei University aptly points out, the bombing of North Korea would inevitably result in the loss of millions of lives in South Korea. If the bombing campaign is executed by any chance, North Korea will immediately retaliate, attacking Seoul with heavy artillery.

Then South Korean’s spectacular economic prosperity and her glorious civilization will be gone with the wind. When asked about the loss of innocent lives in South Korea during the U.S. bombing, will the Americans who supported the bombing mutter like Clark Gable, “Frankly my dear, I don’t give a damn?” Perhaps Suri would justify the loss of life as inevitable collateral damage to protect the American people. But he should remember that the lives of foreigners are just as precious as the lives of U.S. citizens.

Suri’s call to bomb North Korea reminds me of the U.S. bombing of Cambodia in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The bombing campaign killed so many innocent Cambodians, and yet, those who approved of it did not care about the lives of a people in a remote country in Asia. Edward Said pointed out that the high ranking U.S. government official who signed the paper approving the bombing was a man who loved literature and read Laurence Stern’s “Tristram Shandy.” How someone who loved literature could authorize the bombing raids that would kill so many innocent people escapes me.

Living comfortably in the mainland United States, where there has been no war since the civil war in the 19th century, many Americans often seem to be hopelessly naive, and unfamiliar with the harsh realities of other countries. Even experts such as professor Suri can advocate mistaken policies by adopting a one-sided, U.S.-centric perspective. In order to put an end to the so-called American innocence, and before making any hasty decisions or mistakes, American opinion leaders should come to Korea first, experience and understand the current situation firsthand, and see the situation in the Korean Peninsula from different angles. Otherwise, they may lead the innocent American people in the wrong direction.

South Korea is surely different from Iraq or Afghanistan in many respects. Despite the precarious situation and the incessant threats from North Korea, South Koreans live peacefully, and will continue to do so. We know things are different this time, because North Korea has deadly nuclear weapons in their hands. Nevertheless, we do not need to resort to extreme measures now. We advise American opinion leaders to perceive the Korean situation from as many angles as possible before making hasty recommendations.

By Kim Seong-kon

Kim Seong-kon is a professor of English at Seoul National University and president of the Literature Translation Institute of Korea. He can be reached at sukim@snu.ac.kr. ― Ed.