Korea vs. America?

Submitted by Joshua Davis (Republic Of Korea), Jan 18, 2003 at 19:03

2003.1.19 Daegu, South Korea

Dear Mr. Pipes:

Thank you for another great article, "Europe vs. America." I am an American evangelical who has spent the last 8 months in this southeastern city of the Republic of Korea. My time has been well spent. Being a religious person, South Korea has been a great place to be. While it has been known most recently for its Christian growth lately, the rich history of Buddhism tells much of the story of spiritual life here. There are seemingly endless temples to visit, many old structures with brilliant architecture. To generalize, the South Koreans are Eastern- very spiritual and on sometimes given to a mystical interpretation of life. My fellow Christians here are serious about their prayer lives, something I find inspiring.

And yet I must confess disappointment with the evangelical movement here, in its complicity with recent events. You no doubt understand that two U.S. soldiers in an armored vehicle on June 13 of last year struck and killed two South Korean girls, Shim, Mi Son, and Shin Hyo Soon, both 14 years of age. While their deaths were tragic, the following propaganda which sucked up their legacy to form an ultimatum to the U.S. regarding the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) and its logical conclusion- the removal of U.S. forces, was perhaps as tragic if not more so. In all fairness, I do not know Korean and have not followed this issue daily. Nevertheless there is a constant campaign even now- using the faces of the two deceased girls on banners- to shame the U.S. for its behavior.

Which begs the question, why? One does not need to be a fan of conspiracy theories to link a few realities together. Dictator Kim Jong Il, a "playboy madman," as I like to call him, willingly sells weapons to Israel's enemies, including the Iranians. Do Kim's actions have moral consequences? Of course. And yet Roh Moo Hyun rides to the presidency with a groundswell of opinion to "tell America the truth." (It is tragic that Roh's main opponent, Lee Hwae Chan, was qualified for the position.)

So where is the dissidence regarding the double-standard being applied- (North) Koreans can sell weapons with no remorse to remorseless people in order to further the work of anti-Semitic murder- this is okay. But Bush- what a terrible guy, a thug, really. He must revise over 50 years of history in a moment, but not before yielding in repentance to any number of concessions regarding the punishment of specific soldiers and the immediate withdrawl of all troops south of the 38th parallel. Evangelicals here seem oblivious.

King Solomon once said, "He who rejoices at the misfortune of another will not go unpunished." Sometimes I am tempted to gloat over a future scenario where, after having withdrawn these U.S. troops, the North Koreans level Seoul causing horror. But this would not be all. For all of the "Sunshine" of Presidents Kim (Dae Jung) and Roh, the now-throttled people of South Korea gasp- "How is it that we cannot have free elections, or free trading, or..." I shun this scenario, for high principle demands it.

Yet shunning ill will is not for everyone, of course. What of the coward who, on June 20 of last year- one week after the killing of the Korean girls, broke into the village of Itamar (south of Nablus) and slayed mom Rachel Shabo, 40, and her three boys, Neria, Zvika, Avishai, aged 16, 12, 5, respectively? (One Yosef Twito, 31, died while trying to defend the family.) Was Arafat sorry? Did he agree to withdraw the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigages from the Middle East, those who were connected to the crime? The killer had no contrition, no repentance. But here is the South Korean connection- the killer was not necessarily an anti-Semite. Of course his actions were anti-Semitic, but the assumption to be made was that he was an ignorant man who finally acted on the propaganda which he had been fed his entire life.

Evangelicals here perhaps share the weaknesses of evangelicals everywhere. We have a great history of spiritual leaders, including Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Whitefield, Edwards, Spurgeon, Billy Graham, etc. Yet ours was badly dogged by the anti-intellectual fundamentalism of the last century. We are often reactive, especially when our "rightful place" at the head of the debate on ideas is being occupied by someone offering, well, ideas. Perhaps the most common reaction to our insignicance regards language. Someone says something profound, something we do not understand. So we confuse- often deliberately, words and their meanings. And polite words are the best words.

Perhaps evangelicals here can provide some clarity for our day regarding truth and consequences. As in- when we see a man who supports terrorism to further religiously-motivated murder- do we give a damn?

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".