The Korean War and Xi Jinping

A few months ago I wrote a post about the Korean War and how the dominant narrative here in the PRC about the start of that bloody conflict has changed over time.  While it’s true that the nitwits in the CCP (and the academics who shill for them) frequently rely more on “truthiness” than actual evidence when discussing history, in the case of the Korea even the most hardcore sheep couldn’t continue to bleat the previous party line that it was the US and the American ROK puppets who invaded the north and started the war.

Well, as any partially housebroken border collie can tell you — herding sheep is a hard way to make a living.

Speaking at an event commemorating the 60th anniversary of China’s ‘volunteers’ entering the Korean War, CCP heir apparent and hair product aficionado Xi Jinping once again let the gel do the talking:

In his address on behalf of the CPC Central Committee and the CMC, Xi said that the Chinese movement 60 years ago was “a great and just war for safeguarding peace and resisting aggression.”

“It was also a great victory gained by the united combat forces of China’s and the DPRK’s civilians

Competing nationalisms in Northeast Asia

In an op-ed piece published in today’s International Herald Tribune, Philip Bowring warns that for all the attention paid to popular nationalism among Chinese youth, nationalism in Korea potentially could be just as damaging to regional stability.

While the recent flap over imports of U.S. beef dominates the headlines and the US-ROK strategic partnership remains a sore subject for many Koreans, I would argue that it is the relationship between Korea and its larger neighbor China that is the most fraught with the complications of extreme popular nationalism.

Korea and China have had long historic ties dating back to a time before there was even a “China” or a “Korea” as we understand those terms today, and that gets us to the crux of the problem: the extension back through time of present day national boundaries, definitions of ethnicity, and geopolitical concerns.

For all their historical links with China, Koreans sometimes like to see themselves as kin, however distant, of the non-Han peoples of mainland Northeast Asia now under Chinese and Russian rule.

The surge in national sentiment owes much to the fact that few southerners now see North Korea as a real threat. Pity has replaced fear. But China

South Korea’s beef with the US

Excellent piece in today’s NYT by Choe Sang-hun on the fallout from Korean President Lee Myung-bak’s decision to lift a five-year ban on imports of American beef.  As Choe argues, this was always about far more than food safety, a point that seemed lost on US Ambassador Alexander Vershow, who poured gasoline on the fire by suggesting that fears of beef imports would be alleviated as “Koreans begin to understand more about science.” 

This is a small country in a strategic location with a deep sense of grievance about being manipulated by the great powers around it. Chinese emperors demanded tribute from Korea; Japanese occupiers forbade Koreans to speak their own language; American, Chinese and Russian cold war rivalries divided Korea in two. While mostly approving of their alliance with the United States, South Koreans remain acutely sensitive to any suggestion that they must do America’s bidding…

To many South Koreans, however, the beef dispute is not entirely about health concerns or science. It is not entirely about the economy, either — beef from the United States is half the price of homegrown meat. To them, it is also the latest test of whether their leader can resist pressure from superpowers, even if there is

Korea-China history wars, Part XIIVIWHOCARESXI

Why can’t everybody stop fighting? Can’t we just all get along? Oh yeah, I forgot…because in East Asia, the study of history and the need to save political face while symbolically shifting ancient boundaries around to meet contemporary geo-political exigencies go together like a horse and carriage, PB&J, and Harry & Sally.

Digital Chosunilbo goes to the mat against the “Northeast Project” of CASS….again. Seriously, I study this stuff for a living and even I’m starting to get beyond the point where I care. It’s like one of those reality shows where two contestants just can’t stand each other and at first it’s a huge ratings boost until finally it just becomes inane and shrill and they both get voted off the island.

Anyway….according to Chosunilbo (and this is their translation, I haven’t seen a copy of the offending paper yet) a soon-to-be published report by the Northeast Project claims:

“Just like Koguryo, a group of people from the Buyeo tribe, an ethnic minority in an ancient Chinese borderland area, established Baekje,” the book says. “As its people were of the same lineage as the Koguryo people, Baekje was a

Korea Times: "US Textbook Wrongly Identifies Korea’s First Kingdom"

Via The Korea Times: You know this is the sort of thing that is going to get some attention over here. A history textbook used for SAT prep in the United States misidentifies the Silla Kingdom (57 B.C.E.-935 C.E.) as Korea’s first kingdom while ignoring the Goguryeo Kingdom (37 B.C.E.-668 C.E.).

A South Korean civic group considers the slight more than a mere error in fact-checking. “This is in line with China’s attempt to remove Gojoseon and Goguryeo from the history of Korea. It confirms China’s global strategy for making it happen,” said Park Ki-tae of something called the Voluntary Agency Network of Korea.

Some scholars in China claim that the Goguryeo (located in what is today North Korea and Northeastern China) was founded by a “Chinese” ethnic minority group–meaning the minority group originated in what is today China–and thus the Gogureyeo is really a “Chinese” kingdom. You can imagine how this goes over in Seoul and Korean high school textbooks have been one of many fronts in this war. (As well as figure skaters and telenovelas–go figure.) You can read more about this here and here.

Mr. Park here seems to be jumping at some pretty faint shadows, but