DOCSLIB.ORG

Restoring Or Killing Rivers? the Political Economy of Sapjil and Citizens Movements in Lee Myung-Bak's South Korea 河

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Restoring Or Killing Rivers? the Political Economy of Sapjil and Citizens Movements in Lee Myung-Bak's South Korea 河 Volume 9 | Issue 48 | Number 2 | Article ID 3653 | Dec 01, 2011 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Restoring or Killing Rivers? The Political Economy of Sapjil and Citizens Movements in Lee Myung-bak’s South Korea 河 川を修復するのか、殺すのか−−李明博の韓国における四大江開発計画 の政治経済学と市民運動 SoonYawl Park Restoring or Killing Rivers?The rivers has had deleterious effects Political Economy of Sapjil and on many local communities and Citizens Movements in Lee Myung- has caused serious social and political conflict. bak’s South Korea1 SoonYawl Park The idea of large, even peninsula-scale (both South and North Korea) water works has been Korea’s rampant shoveling politics central to the political career of Lee Myung- bak, who became president of South Korea in In 2008 the government of Lee February 2008. The idea of a Kyongbu (Seoul- Myung-bak announced the Busan) canal linking the capital and the Sadaegang Saligi (Four Major southern city of Busan first appeared in the Rivers, Sadaegang, restoration) 1995 report, ‘A new Strategy for Reshaping the project, calling it also Korea’s National Land’. It would be 500.5 km in length, Green New Deal. Since then, 47-55 metres in width, and 4.0 metres in Korea’s Han, Nakdong, Geum, and (average) depth, with 17 lock gates, 16 dams, Yeongsan Rivers have been and 1 tunnel, costing 10 trillion won and ecologically and geographically carrying an annual load of 22 million tons, or transformed by dredging and weir one-quarter of the current freight traffic 2 construction. between the two cities. Lee, as a member of the National Assembly, took up the idea, but it The official aims of the project attracted little attention at that time. were declared to be: preventing flooding, addressing climate A decade later, in 2005 as mayor of Seoul, he change, resolving water scarcity, raised the same general idea, for a canal that and improving water quality. It would be about 540 kms in length. However, would also constitute a counter- the idea did not gain significant public support. measure against the world-wide A national survey found that 67.7 per cent of economic recession that followed people were against the idea, many deeming it the financial crisis of 2008, and a preposterous in terms of its economic, key policy component in a ‘low technical, civil engineering, or environmental carbon, green growth’ policy aspects.3 against global climate change and resource depletion. In fact, Then, as presidential candidate in 2007, Lee however, transformation of the expanded the idea into a scheme for a Korean 1 9 | 48 | 2 APJ | JF Grand Canal system, which would have a total length of 3,134 kms (2,099 kms in South Korea comprising 12 canals and including four major rivers; the Han, Nakdong, Guem, and Yongsan, and 1,035 kms, including five canals, in North Korea). It was nothing less than a design for national development and prosperity. It would cost 37.5 trillion won, create 700,000 jobs, lower logistical costs between Seoul, Busan, Incheon, and Taegu, contribute to flood control, regulate water quality, and promote the development of undeveloped local areas.4 As Lee gathered support during the presidential election, this project became the symbolic icon of his Korean growth-ism. Many welcomed it as part of a program to bring economic growth. His electoral triumph was in large part due to his grand economic recovery program rather than his detailed public pledges and despite widespread accusations at the time of serious moral and political flaws. The Four Rivers and Weirs As president from early 2008, however, Lee bowed to strong public opposition and deferred Opposition parties and progressive civil society this grandiose project. However, fromgroups - including environmental NGOs and the November of that same year, the Ministry of Peoples’ Committee to Stop the Killing of Land, Transport and Maritime AffairsRivers - contend that building weirs and announced the Four Major Rivers Restoration dredging the rivers will be more likely to plan. Work on the Four Major Rivers project devastate than to restore them. They believe then continued between 2009 and 2011, with a that, while the project will indubitably fatten budget of 22 trillion won, to which anconstruction companies, it will cause serious additional sum of about one trillion won has to deterioration in river system ecology and be added for interest etc. After massive damage local communities. They suspect that expenditure on the main rivers, in August 2011 the “Four Rivers” project is simply a return in disguised form of the discredited Grand Canal Lee shifted his attention to the tributaries of project of 2007. the four major rivers, spelling out works to be carried out between 2012 and 2015, with an The Grand Canal project provoked intense additional budget of 20 trillion won. social conflict and controversy and was criticized for the nation-wide environmental Overall, therefore, a staggering 42 trillion won degradation it would cause, and because of its (about $US33 billion at exchange rate of 1,200 non-democratic decision making procedures. It won to the dollar) is being appropriated for the also seemed at odds with mainstream thinking construction of weirs and the dredging of river in other advanced economies because of its bottoms on the country’s four major rivers and focus on revitalizing the Korean economy their tributaries. through construction.5 An August 2010 national 2 9 | 48 | 2 APJ | JF survey conducted by Kyunghang Sinmun and A metamorphosis of shoveling the Korea Society Opinion Institute showed opposition averaging 63.5 percent (31.4After Lee assumed the presidency and began percent saying it should be immediately halted pushing determinedly forward with his grand and 32.4 percent that it should bepublic works design, steamrollering critical or ‘downsized’.6 A May 2011 survey using text dissenting voices, the opposition quickly took analysis on SNS (social network service) shape, including the showed that opponents outnumbered supporters of the project. • People’s Action for Nullifying the Grand Canal (link), • Pilgrims for Life and Peace or Peoples Serving River of Life (link), • National Association of Professors against the Canal (link), • A Society of Religion and Environment to nullify the Canal project (link), and • Peoples who stop the Shoveling Trends of national opinion (figures in in the Four Rivers (link) percentages)7 Public opposition to the project peaked in mid- June 2008, coinciding with the explosion of During the 3 years from 2008, the Lee public wrath against the government’s decision government’s persistent promotion of the Four to resume the import of beef from the United Rivers project suggested an obsession with States.9 Anti-government demonstrations and large-scale public works, stemming from the gatherings involved more than one million belief shared by the president and his key staff people. that it would help to accomplish the so-called “747” vision (annual growth of 7 per cent, per People who participated in the anti-government capita income of $US 40,000 within a decade, candle-light demonstrations over a three month enabling Korea to become one of the world's period demanded that the government end the top seven economies), proclaimed during the Grand Canal project, stop the privatization of presidential election campaign in 2007. Despite the health care system and state-owned firms, serious controversy, civil society protests, and and continue the ban on beef imports from the negative national opinion,8 from November US. In the face of public wrath, presidential 2009 16 weirs were built and much dredging approval ratings fell to 17.8 per cent in July undertaken. 2008. Just five months into his presidency, the Lee government had lost the political ability to In securing the necessary budget, and in its enforce policy. These circumstances forced Lee efforts to change national opinion, the Lee to step back, saying that he would not push government adopted illegal procedures and ahead with the policies including the Grand expedients. These are discussed below. Canal project if people did not agree to it.10 3 9 | 48 | 2 APJ | JF After his apology and retreat, the protest and In approving beef imports from the US and demonstration movement quickly subsided. resuming talk of privatization of the health care Then, however, the Lee government turned its system and of state owned firms, the Lee attention to civil society, especially anti- administration tended to announce and enforce government movements. Police andits policies unilaterally and with little notice. mainstream media joined in trying to crush This was possible because the Grand National critical voices from civil society, the police Party (GNP), which it dominated, held a arresting activists without warrant, blocking majority in the National Assembly.14 Backed by gatherings opposing government policies, and the conservative mass media and judicial suing many civil activists and NGOs including system, the Lee government was able to even non-political internet cafés such as the overcome criticisms from civil society and the ‘café for people who love to public sphere and to restrict their activities. cook’.11 Conservative mass media such as Chosun ilbo, Joongang ilbo, and Dong-A ilbo Although Lee in June 2008 expressed regret reported perfectly legitimate gatherings and that his project had been and stated that he demonstrations as serious social disorder, and would refrain from pursuing the Grand Canal urged the government to enforce the law project in order to avoid national conflict over strictly. One internet blogger who had adopted it”, just one year later he and the ruling GNP the pen name “Minerva” was detained on a forced through three media related bills, charge of spreading malicious rumors harmful including revisions to the Broadcasting Law, to the government’s economic policies and instigating distrust in government policy.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A PARTNER for CHANGE the Asia Foundation in Korea 1954-2017 a PARTNER Characterizing 60 Years of Continuous Operations of Any Organization Is an Ambitious Task
    SIX DECADES OF THE ASIA FOUNDATION IN KOREA SIX DECADES OF THE ASIA FOUNDATION A PARTNER FOR CHANGE A PARTNER The AsiA Foundation in Korea 1954-2017 A PARTNER Characterizing 60 years of continuous operations of any organization is an ambitious task. Attempting to do so in a nation that has witnessed fundamental and dynamic change is even more challenging. The Asia Foundation is unique among FOR foreign private organizations in Korea in that it has maintained a presence here for more than 60 years, and, throughout, has responded to the tumultuous and vibrant times by adapting to Korea’s own transformation. The achievement of this balance, CHANGE adapting to changing needs and assisting in the preservation of Korean identity while simultaneously responding to regional and global trends, has made The Asia Foundation’s work in SIX DECADES of Korea singular. The AsiA Foundation David Steinberg, Korea Representative 1963-68, 1994-98 in Korea www.asiafoundation.org 서적-표지.indd 1 17. 6. 8. 오전 10:42 서적152X225-2.indd 4 17. 6. 8. 오전 10:37 서적152X225-2.indd 1 17. 6. 8. 오전 10:37 서적152X225-2.indd 2 17. 6. 8. 오전 10:37 A PARTNER FOR CHANGE Six Decades of The Asia Foundation in Korea 1954–2017 Written by Cho Tong-jae Park Tae-jin Edward Reed Edited by Meredith Sumpter John Rieger © 2017 by The Asia Foundation All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced without written permission by The Asia Foundation. 서적152X225-2.indd 1 17. 6. 8. 오전 10:37 서적152X225-2.indd 2 17.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S.-South Korea Relations
    U.S.-South Korea Relations Mark E. Manyin, Coordinator Specialist in Asian Affairs Emma Chanlett-Avery Specialist in Asian Affairs Mary Beth D. Nikitin Specialist in Nonproliferation Brock R. Williams Analyst in International Trade and Finance Jonathan R. Corrado Research Associate May 23, 2017 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R41481 U.S.-South Korea Relations Summary Overview South Korea (officially the Republic of Korea, or ROK) is one of the United States’ most important strategic and economic partners in Asia. Congressional interest in South Korea is driven by both security and trade interests. Since the early 1950s, the U.S.-ROK Mutual Defense Treaty commits the United States to help South Korea defend itself. Approximately 28,500 U.S. troops are based in the ROK, which is included under the U.S. “nuclear umbrella.” Washington and Seoul cooperate in addressing the challenges posed by North Korea. The two countries’ economies are joined by the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA). South Korea is the United States’ seventh-largest trading partner and the United States is South Korea’s second- largest trading partner. Between 2009 and the end of 2016, relations between the two countries arguably reached their most robust state in decades. Political changes in both countries in 2017, however, have generated uncertainty about the state of the relationship. Coordination of North Korea Policy Dealing with North Korea is the dominant strategic concern of the relationship. The Trump Administration appears to have raised North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs to a top U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S.-South Korea Relations
    U.S.-South Korea Relations Mark E. Manyin, Coordinator Specialist in Asian Affairs Emma Chanlett-Avery Specialist in Asian Affairs Mary Beth Nikitin Analyst in Nonproliferation Mi Ae Taylor Research Associate in Asian Affairs December 8, 2010 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R41481 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress U.S.-South Korea Relations Summary Since late 2008, relations between the United States and South Korea (known officially as the Republic of Korea, or ROK) have been arguably at their best state in decades. By the middle of 2010, in the view of many in the Obama Administration, South Korea had emerged as the United States’ closest ally in East Asia. Of all the issues on the bilateral agenda, Congress has the most direct role to play in the proposed Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA). Congressional approval is necessary for the agreement to go into effect. In early December 2010, the two sides announced they had agreed on modifications to the original agreement, which was signed in 2007. South Korea accepted a range of U.S. demands designed to help the U.S. auto industry and received some concessions in return. In the United States, the supplementary deal appears to have changed the minds of many groups and members of Congress who previously had opposed the FTA, which is now expected to be presented to the 112th Congress in 2011. If Congress approves the agreement, it would be the United States’ second largest FTA, after the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
    [Show full text]
  • Korea-U.S. Relations: Issues for Congress
    Order Code RL33567 Korea-U.S. Relations: Issues for Congress Updated July 25, 2008 Larry A. Niksch Specialist in Asian Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Korea-U.S. Relations: Issues for Congress Summary The United States has had a military alliance with South Korea and important interests in the Korean peninsula since the Korean War of 1950-53. Many U.S. interests relate to communist North Korea. Since the early 1990s, the issue of North Korea’s development of nuclear weapons has been the dominant U.S. policy concern. Experts in and out of the U.S. government believe that North Korea has produced at least six atomic bombs, and North Korea tested a nuclear device in October 2006. In 2007, a six party negotiation (between the United States, North Korea, China, South Korea, Japan, and Russia) produced agreements encompassing two North Korean and two U.S. obligations: disablement of North Korea’s Yongbyon nuclear installations, a North Korean declaration of nuclear programs, U.S. removal of North Korea from the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism, and U.S. removal of North Korea from the sanctions provisions of the U.S. Trading with the Enemy Act. In June and July 2008, North Korea and the Bush Administration announced measures to implement fully the agreements by October 31, 2008. The Bush Administration has subordinated to the nuclear other North Korean activities that affect U.S. interests. North Korean exports of counterfeit U.S. currency and U.S. products produce upwards of $1 billion annually for the North Korean regime.
    [Show full text]
  • The Beginning of a Better Future
    THE BEGINNING OF A BETTER FUTURE Doosan E&C CONTENTS Doosan Engineering & PORTFOLIO BUSINESS 04 CEO Message Construction COMPANY PROFILE 06 Company Profile 08 Corporate History 12 Socially Responsible Management 16 Doosan Group BUSINESS PORTFOLIO HOUSING 22 Brand Story 28 Key Projects 34 Major Project Achievements Building a better tomorrow today, the origin of a better world. ARCHITECTURE 38 Featured Project 40 Key Projects Doosan Engineering & Construction pays keen attention 48 Major Project Achievements to people working and living in spaces we create. We ensure all spaces we create are safer and more INFRASTRUCTURE pleasant for all, and constantly change and innovate 52 Featured Project to create new value of spaces. 54 Key Projects 60 Major Project Achievements This brochure is available in PDF format which can be downloaded at 63 About This Brochure www.doosanenc.com CEO MESSAGE Since the founding in 1960, Doosan Engineering & Construction (Doosan E&C) has been developing capabilities, completing many projects which have become milestones in the history of the Korean construction industry. As a result, we are leading urban renewal projects, such as housing redevelopment and reconstruction projects, supported by the brand power of “We’ve”, which is one of the most prominent housing brands in Korea. We also have been building a good reputation in development projects, creating ultra- large buildings both in the center of major cities including the Seoul metropolitan area. In particular, we successfully completed the construction of the “Haeundae Doosan We’ve the Zenith”, an 80-floor mixed-use building 300-meter high, and the “Gimhae Centum Doosan We’ve the Zenith”, an ultra-large residential complex for 3,435 households, demonstrating, once again, Doosan E&C’s technological prowess.
    [Show full text]
  • 06 Session5.Pdf
    The 1st World Humanities Forum Proceedings Session 5 Organizers’ Parallel Session A. UNESCO: Towards a New Humanism B. MEST/NRF: Renaissance of Humanities in Korea C. Busan Metropolitan City: Humanities for Locality The 1st World Humanities Forum Proceedings Organizers’ Parallel Session A. UNESCO: Towards a New Humanism 1. Age of Abundance / Alphonso Lingis (Pennsylvania State University) 2. Subjectivity and Solidarity – a Rebirth of Humanism / In Suk Cha (Seoul National University) 3. Reconstructing Humanism / John Crowley (UNESCO) 4. Transversality, Ecopiety, and the Future of Humanity / Hwa Yol Jung (Moravian College) Session 5 Session The Age of Abundance Alphonso Lingis Pennsylvania State University What immense and growing abundance of commodities we see about us, the result of extraordinary technological advances in industry driven by information and communications technologies! Manufacture has acquired new and advanced materials, and daily contrives new inventions and devises new products. Biotechnology is increasing food production with genetically altered plants and animals, and soon, meat not taken from butchered animals but grown from stem cells. Production is no longer bounded by the limitations of human labor; electrical and nuclear energy power the machines and robots shape materials and assemble cars, jet airplanes, computers, and soon everything. Nanotechnology is beginning to assemble molecules atom by atom, on the way to manufacture computer circuitry out of sand, gold out of lead, even living cells out of atoms. We see ourselves beginning an essentially new kind of human existence, acquiring a new nature— postevolutionary, transhuman. We are awed, fascinated, but also bewildered by the prospect with an abundance beyond all our needs and desires; how shall we deal with it? We are watching extraordinary advances in biotechnology, which promise not only to cure and prevent diseases and correct defects, but, with pharmaceuticals, gene therapy and nanotechnology, to endow our bodies and our minds with greater and also new capacities.
    [Show full text]
  • Transformation of South Korean Politics: Implications for U.S.-Korea Relations
    THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION CENTER FOR NORTHEAST ASIAN POLICY STUDIES THE TRANSFORMATION OF SOUTH KOREAN POLITICS: IMPLICATIONS FOR U.S.-KOREA RELATIONS Dr. Sook-Jong Lee 2003-2004 Korea Visiting Fellow September 2004 The Brookings Institution 1775 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE, NW WASHINGTON, DC 20036-2188 TEL: 202-797-6000 FAX: 202-797-6004 WWW.BROOKINGS.EDU 1 The speed and scope of South Korea’s political development in recent years have been as impressive as its economic development in previous decades. Since the transition to democracy occurred, with the belated arrival of political liberalization and a return to direct presidential elections in 1987, virtually all realms of Korean society have democratized. • In the political realm, under the Kim Dae-jung government, power shifted from the Kyongsang area in the southeast to Cholla in the southwest. This horizontal power shift is important for ending the political dominance of the Kyongsang area. Regional competition in the public policy-making process has become more democratic. • Both the Roh government and National Assembly have become more accountable for the public’s welfare and are better monitored by the Korean people. The power of public authority was often unchecked and misused in the past. Now Korean voters and civic representatives monitor whether public officials and assemblymen represent the public’s interest and observe their due responsibilities. • In terms of civilian-military relations, the government has become fully civilian, as the Korean military was completely depoliticized in the early 1990s. The history of former generals seizing the presidency was denounced and two former presidents, Chun Doo-hwan and Roh Tae-woo, were convicted of crimes and sent to prison.
    [Show full text]
  • The US in South Korea
    THE U.S. IN SOUTH KOREA: ALLY OR EMPIRE? PERSPECTIVES IN GEOPOLITICS GRADE: 9-12 AUTHOR: Sharlyn Scott TOPIC/THEME: Social Studies TIME REQUIRED: Four to five 55-minute class periods BACKGROUND: This lesson examines different perspectives on the relationship between the U.S. and the Republic of Korea (R.O.K. – South Korea) historically and today. Is the United States military presence a benevolent force protecting both South Korean and American interests in East Asia? Or is the U.S. a domineering empire using the hard power of its military in South Korea solely to achieve its own geopolitical goals in the region and the world? Are there issues between the ROK and the U.S. that can be resolved for mutually beneficial results? An overview of the history of U.S. involvement in Korea since the end of World War II will be studied for context in examining these questions. In addition, current academic and newspaper articles as well as op-ed pieces by controversial yet reliable sources will offer insight into both American and South Korean perspectives. These perspectives will be analyzed as students grapple with important geopolitical questions involving the relationship between the U.S. and the R.O.K. CURRICULUM CONNECTION: This unit could be used with regional Geography class, World History, as well as American History as it relates to the Korean War and/or U.S. military expansion OBJECTIVES AND STANDARDS: The student will be able to: 1. Comprehend the historical relationship of the U.S. and the Korean Peninsula 2. Demonstrate both the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 3 Korea Section
    The Future of America’s Alliances in Northeast Asia Edited by Michael H. Armacost and Daniel I. Okimoto THE ASIA-PACIFIC RESEARCH CENTER (APARC) is a unique Stanford University institution focused on the study of contemporary Asia. APARC’s mission is to produce and publish Asia Pacific–focused interdisciplinary research; to educate students, scholars, and corporate and governmental affiliates about the importance of US-Asian relations; to promote constructive interaction to understand and resolve the region’s challenges; to influence US policy toward the Asia-Pacific; and to guide Asian nations on key foreign relations, government, political economy, technology, and social issues. Asia-Pacific Research Center Stanford Institute for International Studies Stanford University Encina Hall Stanford, CA 94305-6055 tel 650-723-9741 fax 650-723-6530 http://APARC.stanford.edu The Future of America’s Alliances in Northeast Asia may be ordered from: Brookings Institution Press Department 029, Washington, DC 20042-0029, USA. Tel. 1-800-275-1447 or 202-797-6258. Fax: 202-797-2960 Attn: Order Dept. Online: bookstore.brookings.edu Asia-Pacific Research Center publications, 2004. Copyright © 2004 by the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without written permission of the publisher. First printing, 2004. ISBN 1-931368-06-6 iii CONTENTS Preface / v Daniel I. Okimoto INTRODUCTION The Future of America’s Alliances in Northeast Asia / 11 Michael H. Armacost America’s Asia Strategy during the Bush Administration / 25 Kurt M.
    [Show full text]
  • Consolidation of Democracy in South Korea?
    ACTA UNIVERSITATIS STOCKHOLMIENSIS Stockholm Oriental Studies 21 CONSOLIDATION OF DEMOCRACY IN SOUTH KOREA? Gabriel Jonsson STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY 2014 © Gabriel Jonsson and Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis 2014 The publication is availabe for free on www.sub.su.se ISBN electronic version 978-91-87235-63-4 ISBN printed version 978-91-87235-64-1 ISSN 0585-3559 Department of Oriental Languages Stockholm University Stockholm 2014 Order AUS publications from : http://sub.su.se/online-shop.aspx Acknowledgements Firstly, I wish to extend my gratitude to those who have been kind enough to offer their assis- tance during the preparation of this book. This stimulating project would never have reached completion without two research visits to South Korea in 2010 and 2012. I therefore would like to acknowledge Torsten Söderbergs stiftelse [foundation] for providing research grants in 2010 and Magnus Bergvalls stiftelse [foundation] for providing research grants from 2011- 2012. A grant from Stiftelsen Lars Hiertas minne [The Lars Hierta Foundation] in 2013 is also greatly appreciated. In South Korea I wish to thank two former presidents of the Korea Institute for National Unification, PhD Suh Jae Jean and Kim Tae Woo, for allowing me to study at the institute. As a guest researcher, I benefited greatly from my affiliation with the institute in terms of colla- tion of relevant material and in establishing valuable contacts. The National Archive kindly provided the author photos of the five presidents who were in power from 1988-2013 and whose terms in office are the focus of this study. In addition, I wish to express my gratitude to anonymous readers of the manuscript.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S.-South Korea Relations
    U.S.-South Korea Relations (name redacted), Coordinator Specialist in Asian Affairs (name redacte d ) Specialist in Asian Affairs (name redacted) Specialist in Nonproliferation (name redacted) Analyst in Asian Affairs (name redacted) Analyst in International Trade and Finance March 28, 2016 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov R41481 U.S.-South Korea Relations Summary Overview South Korea (known officially as the Republic of Korea, or ROK) is one of the United States’ most important strategic and economic partners in Asia, and since 2009 relations between the two countries arguably have been at their most robust state in decades. Several factors drive congressional interest in South Korea-related issues. First, the United States and South Korea have been military allies since the early 1950s. The United States is committed to helping South Korea defend itself, particularly against any aggression from North Korea. Approximately 28,500 U.S. troops are based in the ROK and South Korea is included under the U.S. “nuclear umbrella.” Second, Washington and Seoul cooperate in addressing the challenges posed by North Korea. Third, the two countries’ economies are closely entwined and are joined by the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA). South Korea is the United States’ seventh-largest trading partner and the United States is South Korea’s second-largest trading partner. South Korea has repeatedly expressed interest in and consulted with the United States on possibly joining the U.S.- led Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) free trade agreement, which has been signed, though not yet ratified by the current 12 participants.
    [Show full text]
  • Living in Seoul
    Living in Seoul 2015 Living in Seoul English Edition Living in Seoul Guide for Living in Seoul English Edition SEOUL GLOBAL CENTER | Tel_ 82-2-2075-4180 Fax_ 82-2-723-3205 http://global.seoul.go.kr English Edition contents Immigration 08 Visa 09 Stay 14 Foreign Registration 16 Overseas Koreans 18 Re-entry Permission 19 Departure 20 Q&A Transportation Accommodation 22 Using Public Transportation 38 Types of Accommodation 22 Subway 40 Types of Lease Contracts 25 Intra-city Buses 43 Real Estate Agents 27 Taxis 45 International Districts 29 Transit Cards 48 Purchase Procedures for Foreigners 30 Express Buses 49 Making the Move 31 Trains & Planes 51 Electricity 34 Q&A 51 Gas 52 Water Service 53 Q&A Garbage Disposal Communication Education Driving 56 Preparations for Garbage Collection & Banking 106 Education System 132 Driving in Seoul 57 General Waste 106 Educational Options 137 Penalty Points for Traffic Violations 57 Food Waste 66 Communication Facilities 107 Preschools 138 Penalty Points from Traffic Accidents 58 Recycling 71 Postal Services 108 Foreign Schools 139 Purchasing a Vehicle 59 Large Waste Matter 75 Telephone Services 114 Korean Language Education 144 Resident Prioritized Parking System 61 Recycling Centers and Flea Markets 78 Banking 116 Libraries & Book Stores 144 Rental Cars 63 Q&A 82 Q&A 119 Q&A 145 Motorcycles 146 Traffic Accidents 147 Q&A Employment Medical Services 86 Scope of Activities and Employment for Foreigners in Korea 122 Korean Medical System 86 Employment Procedures by Visa Status 123 Medical Services for Foreigners
    [Show full text]