Former South Korean President Park Geun-hye doesn’t have a ton of fans right now. The former president was ousted and is currently facing corruption charges. At one point toward the end of her presidency, her approval rating fell to a measly 4 percent. But now there is apparently one more thing she has to worry about: North Korea.

While North Koreans have never been too fond of their neighbors to the south–technically speaking they are still at war–they appear to have a particular hatred for the former South Korean president. In an announcement on North Korea’s state-run television, the state claimed that it had discovered a “revelation” that implicated Park and her National Intelligence Minister in organizing an assassination attempt in 2015 against Kim Jong-Un, the leader of North Korea.

Representatives from the North Korean government declared her actions “unpardonable”and issued a statement on North Korean state-run TV, saying she should receive: “A miserable dog’s death any time, at any place and by whatever methods from this moment.”

This announcement may have come as a response to an article published in a Japanese newspaper, Asahi Shimbun Daily, on Monday. It cited an anonymous source that claimed Park had approved of a plan to oust Kim from his position.

This is the second time in as many months that North Korea has accused the South Koreans of an assassination plot. In May, the North Koreans accused South Korea of teaming with the CIA in a biochemical attack against the supreme leader.

Alternately, North Korea’s claims could be based on the attack that killed Kim Jong-un’s half brother earlier this year in a Malaysian airport. That attack may have triggered internal fears that the North Korean government is vulnerable to assassination attempts. However, that theory might not hold up because others have claimed that the assassination of Kim’s brother came from inside the government in the first place.

North Korea has attempted to assassinate leaders of South Korea before. In 1983, North Korean assassins attempted to kill then-South Korean dictator Chun Doo-hwan when he was visiting Burma, but the attack was unsuccessful.

Park already has enough problems to contend within in her own country. In December of 2016 it was alleged that she abused her power, supposedly accepting bribes and leaking classified information to an influential friend. The South Korean Parliament suspended her powers in December 2016, and in March she was removed from power by a South Korean court and then arrested.

It’s incredibly unlikely that current South Korean President Moon Jae-in would grant an extradition request from North Korea. He recently visited Washington to meet with President Donald Trump. The two leaders were slated to discuss the ongoing tensions between the three countries and a possible joint response to the North’s development of nuclear weapons.

James Levinson

James Levinson is an Editorial intern at Law Street Media and a native of the greater New York City Region. He is currently a rising junior at George Washington University where he is pursuing a B.A in Political Communications and Economics. Contact James at staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post North Korea Proclaims a Death Wish for Former South Korean President Park Geun-hye appeared first on Law Street.

South Korean President Moon Jae-in is officially in D.C. to meet with President Donald Trump. Elected in May, following the impeachment of South Korea’s former leader, Moon comes to Washington with a vision on how to deal with North Korea that is much different than the Trump Administration’s.

Moon has scaled back maneuvers that could be seen as aggressive toward North Korea, while stressing the importance of dialogue with his country’s northern neighbor. Trump, on the other hand, lacks a coherent Pyongyang strategy, and has flirted with both an armed response and a diplomatic one.

Before the two leaders met, Moon, who landed in the U.S. on Wednesday, sought to highlight the countries’ common interests. To kick-off his first visit to the U.S. as president, Moon visited a Marine base in Quantico, Virginia, and laid a wreath to commemorate the Marines who died fighting in the Korean War. He used the occasion to underscore the U.S.-South Korea alliance.

“Together we will achieve the dismantlement of North Korea’s nuclear program, peace on the Korean Peninsula and eventually peace in Northeast Asia,” Moon said. Later, in a speech to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Moon highlighted South Korea’s economic and trade ties with the U.S., and called for further cooperation. He said:

The U.S. market share in Korea’s import market has increased and Korea has also seen an increase in its share of the U.S. important market. Expansion of bilateral trade is enriching the daily lives of our peoples…Both our countries have new governments in place; let us become best partners by creating new jobs in our countries. Let us move forward hand in hand toward a path of joint and common prosperity.

Despite the very real economic and military ties between Washington and Seoul, the presidents are bound to clash when it comes to North Korea. Moon is South Korea’s first liberal president in decades; he supports increased dialogue and investment with Pyongyang rather than the more military-based, isolationist approach of his conservative predecessors.

Moon also recently delayed the deployment of additional missile defense batteries supplied by the U.S. He said the delay is intended to provide time for an environmental review. But some analysts see it as a move to placate China, which opposes the system, known as Thaad. Still, where Moon and Trump might bump heads most forcefully is on how to deal with North Korea in the immediate future.

The Trump Administration’s most recent public comments on its North Korean strategy came on Wednesday, from National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster. The U.S. is preparing “all options,” McMaster said on Wednesday, “because the president has made clear to us that he will not accept a nuclear power in North Korea and a threat that can target the United States.”

Under Kim Jong-un’s leadership, North Korea has increased its ballistic missile tests over the past few years. The launch frequency has increased since Trump took office, and Kim has stated his nuclear arsenal is nearing the capacity to strike the continental U.S. with a nuclear-tipped missile.

Though analysts say Pyongyang is months, if not years, away from acquiring such capabilities, the threat is growing by the day. In addition, thousands of U.S. soldiers are spread across South Korea, Japan, and Guam, all of which are currently within North Korea’s range. A few months into his tenure, Trump seemed to have embraced the idea of using China to bully the North to curtail its nuclear ambitions. That tact has apparently failed. Last week, Trump tweeted:

While I greatly appreciate the efforts of President Xi & China to help with North Korea, it has not worked out. At least I know China tried!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 20, 2017

On Thursday, the Trump Administration tightened the screws on China, imposing sanctions on a Chinese bank that deals with North Korea. On Wednesday, in a stark reminder of the threat North Korea poses, its state-run news agency issued a “death penalty” on former South Korean President Park Geun-hye and her former spy chief. Accusing the former president of attempting to assassinate Kim, the statement said, she might receive a “miserable dog’s death any time, at any place and by whatever methods from this moment.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Trump and South Korean Leader Moon Jae-in Meet Despite Different North Korea Strategies appeared first on Law Street.

During a meeting in Seoul on Tuesday, South Korean and U.S. officials described guidelines the two allies would follow in dealing with North Korea, which tested a powerful missile on Sunday. With a new administration installed in South Korea last week, a uniform approach between the U.S. and South Korea toward North Korea is facing new uncertainties.

Moon Jae-in, who was elected president last week, is the country’s first liberal leader in years. He supports a more dialogue-based strategy in cooling the North’s nuclear ambitions than his U.S. counterpart, President Donald Trump. The Trump Administration has previously indicated “all option are on the table” in regard to responding to the North Korean threat–including a pre-emptive military strike. But now, U.S. and South Korean leaders appear to be on the same page.

Yoon Young-chan, Moon’s spokesman, detailed the approach to North Korea he discussed on Tuesday with Matthew Pottinger, the Asia director on the National Security Council. “First, the ultimate goal is to completely dismantle the North Korean nuclear weapons,” Yoon said. “Second, to that end, both sides will employ all means, including sanctions and dialogue. Third, dialogue with North Korea is possible when the circumstances are right. Fourth, to achieve these goals, South Korea and the United States will pursue drastic and practical joint approaches.”

Liberals in South Korea, including Moon, favor a diplomatic approach–like increased economic investment–to dampen the nuclear threat from its northern neighbor, in contrast to South Korean conservatives’ hard-line approach. Previous diplomatic overtures to North Korea have failed, and critics say investment from past liberal administrations in South Korea have ironically boosted the North’s nuclear capabilities.

Both Trump and Moon have indicated they would be willing to meet with North Korea’s young leader, Kim Jong-un. North Korean and South Korean leaders last met for face-to-face talks in 2007. In launching a missile test on Sunday, by some estimates its most powerful yet, North Korea reminded the world that its nuclear and military ambitions remain unbroken. The missile flew nearly 500 miles before falling into the sea.

South Korean officials recently said that North Korea’s nuclear program is progressing at a quicker pace than expected. And despite its failed launch last month and recent slaps on the wrist from China, its foremost trade partner and benefactor, North Korea remains a threat to the U.S. and its allies in the region, namely Japan and South Korea.

On Tuesday, U.S. and South Korean officials said a summit meeting between Moon and Trump could come as early as next month. Last Wednesday, when Moon was sworn in at the National Assembly, he said he would “do whatever it takes to help settle peace on the Korean Peninsula,” adding: “If necessary, I will fly immediately to Washington.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post U.S. and South Korean Officials Outline New Approach to North Korea appeared first on Law Street.

With France’s consequential election just around the corner–the final round is Sunday–it’s easy to forget another key U.S. ally is set to choose its next leader in the coming days: South Korea.

Taking place just over a month after former President Park Geun-hye’s impeachment, South Korea’s presidential election could have wide-ranging effects on how the U.S.–and its Asian allies–deals with the threat posed by North Korea.

Early voting began on Thursday at 3,510 stations across the country; the official vote takes place next Tuesday, May 9. Moon Jae-in, a 64-year-old former human rights lawyer, is the current front-runner, polling far ahead of his opponents. A center-left member of the Democratic Party of Korea, Moon favors engagement with his northern neighbor and, eventually, reunification.

“The North and South were one people sharing one language and one culture for about 5,000 years,” he told Time Magazine in a recent interview. “Ultimately, we should reunite.”

The son of refugees from North Korea, Moon could add a layer of complication for U.S. policy in the region if elected. For one, he opposed the deployment of the Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) anti-ballistic missile system, which was recently deployed in a South Korean village. The system is meant to defend against missile launches from the North, but China, an important ally of the South and a vital patron of the North, strongly opposes THAAD.

As the U.S. aims to further isolate North Korea, the likely next leader of South Korea might choose the opposite path. The U.S. House of Representatives just passed a measure to squeeze Kim Jong-un’s regime with tighter sanctions; the Senate is expected to pass the measure as well.

President Donald Trump has pressed China to do more to pressure North Korea to reign in its nuclear weapons program. Analysts predict the North is readying its sixth nuclear test in a decade, which could further increase tensions.

Moon, who narrowly lost to Park in the 2012 election, hews closer to the “sunshine policy” of former President Roh Moo-hyun, whose government he also worked for. That policy called for economic investment with North Korea, as a way to deepen ties between the North and South. Millions of dollars were poured into the North, and critics contend the policy bolstered the North Korean regime’s nuclear program.

Ahn Cheol-soo is Moon’s top competitor. His North Korea policy is at the other end of the spectrum and more in-line with the isolationist approach of the United States. Ahn, who supports the THAAD system, recently said, “If the North is about to launch a nuclear attach, we should first strike the source of attack.”

Ahn and Trump share another similarity: both went to the Wharton business school at University of Pennsylvania.

Despite his softer stance on North Korea, Moon sounds prepared to cooperate with both the U.S. and China. At a campaign event in April, Moon said he will “create a government most feared by North Korea, most trusted by the United States and most reliable for China.”

He also sounds confident that he and Trump will be able to reach common ground. “I believe we will be able to share more ideas, talk better and reach agreements without difficulty,” he said.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post What Does the South Korean Election Mean for the U.S.? appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

The Search for Steve Stephens Continues

Police officers in Cleveland are looking for a suspect who fatally shot an elderly man yesterday and shared the murder on Facebook. The suspect, Steve Stephens, claimed that he was going to kill more people and police have warned the public against approaching him, as he is armed and dangerous. He is believed to have left the state and the warning has been expanded to the whole Midwest.

Cleveland police chief says they know Steve Stephens is out there: “We talked to him via cell phone.” pic.twitter.com/Hwxn4oL9jK

— Fox News (@FoxNews) April 17, 2017

The disturbing Facebook video has been taken down, but reportedly it showed Stephens driving in his car, complaining about a woman, and then saying he found somebody to kill as he approached an elderly black man. That man was later identified as Robert Godwin Sr. He was 74 years old. Stephens made Godwin say the woman’s name and then told him, “She’s the reason, uh, this is about to happen to you,” before shooting him. Authorities found no links between Stephens and Godwin.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: April 17, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

As tensions on the Korean peninsula continue to heat up, Chinese and South Korean officials met in Seoul on Monday and agreed to strengthen sanctions on North Korea if the state continues to carry out nuclear tests. As the two parties finalized the agreement, South Korea had to respond to news that the United States Navy dispatched a strike group to the Korean peninsula. Many in the region, and throughout the world, fear the U.S. strike force might exacerbate an already fractious situation.

The Chinese-Korean agreement on sanctions comes just before a busy period on the North Korean calendar. April 15 marks the beginning of the country’s most important holiday. The “Day of the Sun,” which actually involves three days, commemorates the birth of the country’s founder and first president Kim Il Sung. April 21 honors the birth of Kim Il Sung’s mother and April 25 is Military Foundation Day. The fear is that April’s festivities could motivate Kim Jong Un to order another round of missile tests as a show of national strength. The Chinese and South Koreans hope their threat is enough to discourage any holiday testing.

North Korea has few international allies and is heavily reliant on its diplomatic and economic relationship with China. While China’s agreement with South Korea will not go unnoticed above the 38th parallel, North Korea rarely demonstrates the kind of obedience China might expect from its dependent client state.

North Korea has a long history of shirking China’s wishes in favor of its own agenda. In the past, China was often willing to fund the regime and look the other way whenever North Korea misbehaved because it acted as a strategic buffer with South Korea and, by extension, the United States. While China publicly opposed North Korea’s efforts to obtain nuclear weaponry, Chinese trade with, and aid to, North Korea remained largely the static after Kim Jong Il ordered the country’s first round of tests in 2009. However, this dynamic may be shifting.

The relationship between the two countries seems to have deteriorated since Kim Jong Un ascended to power. Kim Jong Il visited China seven times in the last 11 years of his life, while Kim Jong Un has yet to meet with the Chinese President Xi Jinping. Many believe the Chinese President firmly dislikes the Supreme Leader. Recent talks between China and South Korea could accelerate the growing rift between China and North Korea. China may soon be unwilling to forgive a North Korean state headed by a leader who it does not trust.

While it is unclear whether regional pressure will be enough to prevent more North Korean tests, Chinese and South Korean negotiators would have certainly preferred it if the United States had not sent a naval strike group to the region. South Korea’s chief nuclear envoy Kim Hong-kyun said that the two countries did not discuss the possibility of an American strike on North Korea, but President Trump’s snap decision to bomb a Syrian air base late last Thursday, as well as recent statements by both Trump and his Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, have put many on alert.

Even if the fleet’s deployment was a symbolic display of power, there is a good chance the simple presence of a U.S. strike force will make matters worse. Whereas Kim Jong Un may have considered standing down in the face of Chinese sanctions, the arrival of a U.S. naval fleet could push him to order more tests.

Although China appears increasingly frustrated with Kim Jong Un, it is not yet willing to take actions that might threaten the future of the Kim dynasty or the North Korea state. Meanwhile, the United States is taking steps that are unbeknownst to those in the region, including South Korea. The international community is at least cursorily united against Kim Jong Un’s nuclear ambitions but has yet to form a combined front. The messy and disjointed way in which international actors are approaching North Korea may well rile up Kim Jong Un and push him to lash out.

Callum Cleary

Callum is an editorial intern at Law Street. He is from Portland OR by way of the United Kingdom. He is a senior at American University double majoring in International Studies and Philosophy with a focus on social justice in Latin America. Contact Callum at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Nuclear North Korea: Can China, South Korea, and the U.S. Unite? appeared first on Law Street.

The United States recently sent a missile defense system to South Korea in order to protect the country and deter its northern rival in the wake of repeated missile tests. However, the situation is complicated by the fact that while the United States and South Korea see the move as defensive, others in the region see it as aggressive. Specifically, China and Russia, along with North Korea, see it as an act of American belligerence meant to undermine their own deterrent capabilities. Arms races and missile defenses have a long history and their presence can often ratchet up situations as much as they calm them down. Read on to learn more about the history of missiles, missile defense, and the ramifications of these systems.

History of Missiles

Crude rockets were developed all the way back in 13th century China. They were used occasionally over the next few centuries but were not heavily utilized because their paper or wood shells often made them inaccurate and they lacked enough power to cause major damage. This began to change in late 18th century India, when Tipu Sultan, leader of the Kingdom of Mysore, used metal-tubed rockets against the British. The metal tubes not only increased accuracy but also increased pressure, making them considerably more powerful.

Following this improvement, rockets started being used with increasing regularity. While missile testing and research advanced during World War I, modern missile technology would not be ready for a couple of decades. World War II saw an explosion of rocket use with the introduction of land-based, vehicle-based, and even human-operated rockets. Following the war, the two resulting superpowers began testing missiles with greater frequency and their respective ranges and destructive power gradually increased.

When it comes to missiles, several important distinctions can be made. The most basic distinction is between what separates a bomb from a missile. Bombs are unguided and have no propulsion system, whereas missiles do. There are two additional differences that determine the type of missile. Ballistic missiles have two phases, the first is the powered guided phase, during which the missile is propelled onto its given trajectory. Once the fuel runs out, the missile enters its second phase where it is essentially guided by the laws of physics. Ballistic missiles are very hard to intercept.

The second type of missile is the cruise missile. Cruise missiles are essentially airplanes with explosives attached. Thanks to their navigation features, such as wings and even GPS, cruise missiles are very accurate and can be aimed at extremely small targets like doors. Due to their maneuverability, cruise missiles are even harder to intercept than ballistic missiles. Both ballistic and cruise missiles can carry nuclear warheads, although cruise missiles typically carry smaller payloads than ballistic missiles. Along with these two classifications are several others that distinguish between things like how a missile is launched, its target, and the terminology used in different countries.

The U.S. Missile Defense Program

When it comes to missile defense systems, the current landscape consists of the United States, and then everyone else. Since halfway through the 1950s up until 2000, the United States spent over $100 billion on missile defense and is the only country, in fact, to commit a significant portion of its defense spending to this specific cause. While the U.S. has spent a significant sum on missile defense, its actual commitment to the technology has waxed and waned over time.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s administration began the missile defense program in response to the Soviets developing nuclear missiles. The first missile defense system was deployed by President Richard Nixon as a response to a Soviet defense system and in order to help the U.S. position in arms treaty negotiations. Support then dropped under President Gerald Ford, who saw the system as ineffective. Nonetheless, large expenditures continued under President Jimmy Carter and then ballooned under both President Ronald Reagan and President George H.W. Bush. The first Bush Administration finally cut back the missile defense budget following the collapse of the USSR and defense efforts were refocused on combatting accidental launches.

However, President Bill Clinton signed the National Missile Defense Act in 1999, signaling a shift back to a focus on missile defense. President George W. Bush was a strong supporter of missile defense and increased spending on defense systems significantly. In 2002 the Bush Administration actually withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in order to advance its missile defense system. Former President Barack Obama also supported a variety of missile defense initiatives, both in the U.S. and abroad; however, he did reverse some of President Bush’s efforts to place a defense system in Europe.

The current U.S. missile defense system consists of several parts, each of which focuses on missiles at a different stage of flight. The first stage of flight is the boost phase, which occurs when a missile is being propelled by an engine or fuel source. The second stage is the midcourse phase, which is when a missile is done launching and starts on its course to the target. Third is the terminal stage, which occurs when the missile reenters the earth’s atmosphere and continues until impact or detonation.

The five primary components of the U.S. missile defense system have different launch locations in order to intercept missiles in specific stages of flight. The ground-based system focuses on missiles at the midcourse phase. The Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, located on submarines, can intercept short, medium, and intermediate-range missiles during their midcourse phase. The Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) component is launched from a truck to defend against short and medium-ranged missiles during their midcourse and terminal phases. The Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) component is designed to defend against short and medium-ranged missiles in their terminal phase. Finally, the space-based surveillance system is attached to three geosynchronous satellites to provide information and early warnings of missile launches.

The United States is not the only country with a missile defense system. Russia also maintains its own system based around Moscow. In addition, several other countries have their own defense systems. For example, Israel has its “Iron Dome” system in place to protect against local attacks and other systems for long-range missiles. While a few countries have some form of missile defense, a larger number have missile technology and could conceivably develop missile defense capabilities. As of 2014, 31 countries had some form of ballistic missile technology, although the capabilities of some of those countries, such as Afghanistan, are currently in doubt.

Complications of Installing Missile Defense Systems 

The THAAD missile defense system in South Korea is certainly not the first time the U.S. or another country has installed defense systems in other countries, and the United States has already installed the same system in its territory of Guam to counter the North Korean threat.

While the placement of missile defense systems is often controversial, it is fair to wonder if all this concern over the installation of missile defense systems is warranted. The reason for this is two-fold. Every existing defense system is severely limited in comparison to the offensive capabilities of many countries. Specifically, the missiles used for defense cost much more than the offensive weapons, so there are fewer of them. The current cost balance means that it is considerably cheaper for countries to build new missiles than it is for the United States or any country to defend against them. Current systems are also not equipped to handle a strike as large as countries like Russia or China could potentially launch given their weapons stockpiles.

The other major issue is that defensive missile technology is not very reliable. This has been the case in the past too–the initial U.S. missile defense system was viewed as so ineffective that it was scrapped in 1974. This issue continued through the Gulf War when the Patriot System had a considerable difficulty intercepting fairly primitive Iraqi rockets. Even the current systems, in tests, have shot down less than half of the missiles they targeted since 1999. Because tests are typically done under ideal conditions, recent results have cast doubt on the effectiveness of the current system.

Despite the existing limitations of missile defense technology, these systems are still viewed as a threat by other countries. The thinking goes that they encourage the opposing side to build up their missiles to counteract the missile defense system, essentially creating an arms race. In the recent circumstances–both in Guam and now South Korea–China’s concern has focused on the radar technology included in the THAAD system, which China fears will be used to spy on it. While both the U.S. and South Korea have emphasized that the system is only there to protect against potential launches from North Korea, the Chinese have responded by placing economic sanctions on South Korea.

The accompanying video looks at the THAAD system and why China does not want it installed on the Korean Peninsula:

Missile Treaties

To counter fears of an arms race and other threats, numerous treaties have been ratified to reduce the number and types of missiles in the field. The most important treaty regarding missile defense was the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty signed in 1972. The purpose of this treaty was to prevent arms races by limiting defense systems that would neutralize attacks. The idea was that both sides having the ability to destroy each other would serve as a deterrent. If one side developed an effective missile defense system, the other would need to make faster or more lethal missiles, leading to a consistent buildup.

This logic was fairly effective and, along with the inability to develop an effective missile defense system, prevented the U.S. and the Soviet Union, and later Russia, from developing adequate defense systems. However, in 2002, the United States withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty because it wanted to develop a more robust system. But all the United States has developed so far is an unreliable and expensive system that has still left many uneasy.

Conclusion 

Missiles are an old and well-tested technology capable of delivering nuclear weapons around the globe with considerable precision. Conversely, missile defense is still relatively untested and often fails to provide what its name would literally suggest. Why then are certain parties so reassured by missile defense and others so agitated?

The answer is that every missile defense system is at the same time a missile launcher and when a system is close to a foreign border it makes the situation uncomfortable. It also forces the countries involved to continuously counter each other’s capabilities. This has been the case in several instances throughout history and will likely continue as long as adversaries are placing their missiles close to one another. While there have been treaties in place to address this issue, the most important one was nullified by U.S. withdrawal. The future then is likely to continue much as the present–barring one country or a group of countries offering to disarm.

Michael Sliwinski

Michael Sliwinski (@MoneyMike4289) is a 2011 graduate of Ohio University in Athens with a Bachelor’s in History, as well as a 2014 graduate of the University of Georgia with a Master’s in International Policy. In his free time he enjoys writing, reading, and outdoor activites, particularly basketball. Contact Michael at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post What Does it Mean for the U.S. to Put a Missile Defense System in South Korea? appeared first on Law Street.

Michael Flynn Wants Immunity Before He Talks

There’s a new development in the investigation into ties between the White House and Russia. Former national security adviser Michael Flynn said last night that he has information to spill and offered to tell all about it. But his lawyers said that he won’t reveal anything until he is promised immunity. Donald Trump commented on the development on Twitter this morning.

Mike Flynn should ask for immunity in that this is a witch hunt (excuse for big election loss), by media & Dems, of historic proportion!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 31, 2017

An immunity deal would make it pretty much impossible to prosecute Flynn, and asking for it is a common procedure in such a high-profile case. But it definitely raised a lot of questions about what exactly he knows. Many Democrats quickly pointed out his 2016 comment about Hillary Clinton, “when you are given immunity, that means you probably committed a crime.”

“When you are given immunity, that means that you have probably committed a crime.” — Michael Flynn in September of 2016

— Lauren Duca (@laurenduca) March 31, 2017

As of early Friday morning, a senior official from the Senate Intelligence Committee turned down Flynn’s request for immunity, but this story is still unfolding.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: March 31, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Prosecutors in Seoul said on Monday that they would pursue an arrest warrant for former South Korean President Park Geun-hye, who was unseated from office earlier this month by the Constitutional Court. The Seoul District Court will examine the prosecutors’ request in a hearing scheduled for Thursday morning. If the request is granted, Park, 65, would be the first president to be jailed since the 1990s, when the former military dictators Chun Doo-hwan and Roh Tae-woo were arrested on charges of sedition and mutiny.

Impeached in December and formally removed from office on March 10, Park is accused of bribery, extortion, and abuse of office. In a statement, the Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office said Park “abused the mighty power and position and president to take bribes from companies and infringed upon the freedom of corporate management and leaked important confidential official information.”

Last fall, hundreds of thousands across the country began demanding Park’s ouster, as she was accused of conspiring with her longtime friend Choi Soon-sil to extort millions of dollars from South Korea’s largest business conglomerates, including Samsung, in exchange for political favors. Choi, an unelected, largely secretive presence inside Park’s inner circle of advisers, is in custody, along with the Samsung executive Lee Jae-yong. Both are being investigated on charges of corruption.

Park has publicly apologized for the allegations against her, but has consistently denied any legal wrongdoing. The prosecutors’ office, in its statement on Monday, said “there is a danger of her destroying incriminating evidence if she is not arrested.”

As president, Park was immune from a criminal investigation, but now, as a private citizen, she does not enjoy the same protection. If the judge in Seoul grants the prosectors’ request, Park will be held behind bars for up to 20 days, during which time the prosecutors will continue the investigation. A spokesman for Park’s Liberty Korea Party called the prosecutors’ request for an arrest warrant “regrettable.” The main opposition faction, the Democracy Party, called it “historic.” An early election will take place on May 9.

South Korea is facing a critical time in its young democracy: North Korea is firing off ballistic missile tests every few weeks, and relations with China are declining because of a defense shield the U.S. began deploying to South Korea earlier this month. Beijing views the missile defense system, or THAAD, as a threat to its own missile program. Park, for her part, is steadfast in denying any wrongdoing. “It will take time, but I am sure that the truth will be known,” she said a few days after her ouster from office.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post South Korean Prosecutors Seek Arrest Warrant for Former President Park Geun-hye appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Gay Veteran Group Banned From Boston St. Patrick’s Day Parade

A group for gay veterans that has walked in Boston’s St. Patrick’s Day parade for the past two years has been prohibited from participating this year by the organizers. The group, called OutVets, said it was banned from the parade because members were planning to carry a rainbow banner. An attorney who fought against the group’s participation said, “the symbols and activities associated with that community do not belong in the parade.”

The South Boston Allied War Veterans Council, which organizes the parade, faced immediate backlash and the mayor of Boston, Marty Walsh, said he would not walk in the parade unless OutVets were allowed back in. Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker also said he wouldn’t participate, and several companies said they would drop their sponsorships. Last night, the organizers announced that they are holding an emergency meeting today to discuss the matter.

So they can die for you but not march with you on St Patrick’s Day? These people sound wonderful.https://t.co/WdybZdY6B7

— Christian Siriano (@CSiriano) March 9, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: March 10, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

In a passing-of-the-torch meeting weeks after the election, President Barack Obama warned then-President-elect Donald Trump of the gravest threat facing America today: North Korea. Not a belligerent China. Not an adventurous Russia. Not terrorism. But North Korea, a tiny, starved nation led by a portly 33-year-old who launches ballistic missiles every now and then. 

A few months after Obama and Trump met, the North Korean threat remains as stark as ever: Kim Jong-un, North Korea’s leader, claims his country will soon have the capacity to strike the U.S. with a nuclear weapon; on Monday, North Korea tested four ballistic missiles simultaneously; and China, North Korea’s longtime security blanket, is wavering in its support. As North Korea continues to pursue nuclear weapons capable of striking the U.S., South Korea, and Japan, a dark cloud is slowly expanding over the Korean Peninsula, and the looming threat of potential conflict grows with each passing day.

Missile Tests

For the past year or so, North Korea has been flaunting its military capabilities for all the world to see. It tested a nuclear missile last January, and again in September. It has unleashed a flurry of medium and intermediate-range missile over the past few months. And on Monday, the North sent four missiles east toward Japan; they fell into the Sea of Japan, three of them dropping within the boundaries of Japan’s exclusive economic zone.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe called Monday’s test a “new stage of threat.” According to Abe, he spoke with Trump for 25 minutes to discuss a response to the threat. Last week, the North warned a test was on the horizon: “New strategic weapons of our own style will soar into the sky,” read a piece in the North’s state-run newspaper. Monday’s missile launch was a response to the annual joint-exercise between U.S. and South Korean military forces, a show of force that often draws an aggressive response from the North.

America’s Response

On Wednesday, Nikki Haley, the U.S ambassador to the U.N., said Kim Jong-un is “not a rational person.” Speaking after an emergency U.N. meeting on North Korea, Haley hinted the U.S. might be considering a military response to the North’s latest missives. “All the options are on the table,” she said. Sanctions imposed by the international community, while crippling for North Korea’s economy, have not had much success in reigning in its nuclear program.

The U.S. has already responded more forcefully to the North’s threat, deploying its Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense (Thaad) system to South Korea months ahead of schedule. Mounted on the back of a truck, Thaad detects incoming missiles and intercepts them mid-air. While the move might placate South Korea’s and Japan’s fears, it has heightened tensions with China, who sees Thaad as a check on its own missile launches.

China’s Response

China, for decades, has been the linchpin to North Korea’s survival. Beijing’s support for Pyongyang could be wavering, however, as it recently announced a year-long freeze on imports of North Korean coal. But while China traditionally responds to North Korean missile launches with a gentle “don’t do that again,” it has yet to show the appetite for anything stronger. On Wednesday, China issued its sternest warning to date, advising the North to cease its missile and nuclear launches in order to “defuse a looming crisis.”

In exchange, however, China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi suggested the U.S. and South Korea could end their joint-exercises. Both sides have balked at that suggestion, citing past failures in trying to engage North Korea diplomatically. What happens next is anyone’s guess–will China retaliate for the Thaad deployment? Will South Korea, Japan, and the U.S. preemptively strike North Korea’s nuclear facilities? What Obama told Trump in that private meeting in January may be slowly shifting from prophesy to a concrete global reality.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Is the U.S. Considering a Military Response to North Korea? appeared first on Law Street.

Lee Jae-yong, the vice chairman of Samsung, was indicted on charges of bribery and embezzlement on Tuesday. Lee is the most powerful South Korean business leader to be ensnared in the country’s longstanding corruption issues, which have reached the highest levels of the government, including President Park Geun-hye, who was impeached in December.

Lee, 48, is accused of giving a $38 million donation to Choi Soon-sil, an unofficial aide to Park who has been detained for months for funneling government funds to her private coffers. The special prosecutor that indicted Lee said in exchange for his donation, Park co-signed a highly controversial merger in 2015 that ultimately consolidated Lee’s hold on the company, and increased Samsung’s stock value by $758 million. Lee has been Samsung’s de facto leader since 2014, when his father suffered a heart attack.

“Samsung was directly linked to the influence-peddling scandal and was essential to the special prosecutor’s investigation,” said a spokesman for the special prosecutor that indicted Lee. “The indictment describes in detail the private conversation between Lee and President Park Geun-hye.”

South Korea’s economy is run by chaebols: family-run business conglomerates. In fact, the 10 largest chaebols account for 80 percent of the country’s GDP. Samsung is the largest chaebol; its products make up 20 percent of South Korea’s exports. For decades, chaebol leaders have been embroiled in corruption. Six of the top 10 chaebol leaders have been convicted of white-collar crimes, but have avoided jail time. 

Lee’s indictment comes at a moment of political tumult and a newfound hunger for cleaning up corruption in South Korea’s business and political worlds, which are often intertwined. Lee denies currying political favors with his donations to Choi. Four other Samsung executives were indicted on Tuesday; three of the four immediately resigned.

Lee is also being indicted on perjury charges, regarding a parliamentary hearing in December. At the hearing, Lee said he was unaware that Samsung’s donations ended up in Choi’s pockets. “President Park asked us to support the development of culture, sports and tourism,” Lee said at the hearing. “I wasn’t aware of Samsung’s payment to the two foundations, and I was only briefed after the fact.” The prosecutor apparently found evidence that Lee was fully cognizant of where his money was headed.

For the past few months, Samsung has been enmeshed in controversy. Last October, the company recalled two million Galaxy Note 7 phones, which had a tendency to burst into flames. And Park has been suspended since her December impeachment. Her case is being reviewed by the Constitutional Court, which will decide, likely in the next few weeks, whether to reinstate her or permanently remove her from power.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Vice Chairman of Samsung Indicted on Corruption Charges appeared first on Law Street.

South Korea’s spy agency told lawmakers on Monday that the February 13 assassination of Kim Jong-nam was ordered by his half-brother and leader of North Korea, Kim Jong-un. The plot was reportedly carried out by agents of North Korea’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of National Security, a secret police force that Kim often calls on to carry out arrests and executions of people he deems disloyal.

“The assassination of Kim Jong Nam was an act of systematic terror ordered by Kim Jong Un,” said Kim Byung-kee, a South Korean lawmaker, in a televised address on Monday. “The operation was conducted with two assassination groups and one supporting group.”

Agents from the two ministries, South Korea’s spy agency said, recruited the two women who ultimately did the dirty work of actually killing Kim Jong-nam. The women–Doan Thi Huong of Vietnam and Siti Aishah of Indonesia–are in police custody in Kuala Lumpur. Two other suspects involved in the plot worked for Air Koryo, North Korea’s state-run airline, and Singwang Economics and Trading General Corporation.

It all began on February 13. Kim Jong-nam, who has previously been targeted by his half-brother, was traveling from Kuala Lumpur to the Chinese territory of Macau, where he lives. While he was waiting at his gate, two women–believed to be Huong and Aishah–approached him from behind, and smeared his face with VX, a toxic nerve agent. Kim felt dizzy, and went to the assistance counter for help. He died less than an hour later, in an ambulance en route to the hospital.

Aishah, 25, told Malaysian authorities that she thought she was taking part in a televised prank skit. She was “not aware it was an assassination attempt by alleged foreign agents,” she said. Mohammad Farid Bin Jalaluddin, Aishah’s boyfriend, was also arrested and taken into custody to “assist” with the investigation. Most of the North Koreans who helped plan and execute the assassination have returned to the North; one is still believed to be in Malaysia, another has been arrested.

Kim Jong-un also ordered the executions of five members of the national security service, South Korea’a Yonhap news agency said on Monday. They reportedly “enraged” Kim with false reports–apparently not connected with the assassination plot–and were killed by anti-aircraft guns.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Did Kim Jong-un Order the Assassination of His Half-Brother? appeared first on Law Street.

As a ballistic missile launched skyward in the northern mountains of North Korea on Saturday, President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan were relaxing in Palm Beach, Florida. The two leaders were dining Saturday night at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort when the call came: North Korea launched an intermediate-range missile off its eastern coast; it traveled 310 feet before plunking into the Sea of Japan.

Hours later, at about 10:30 p.m., Trump and Abe delivered a joint-statement on North Korea’s latest provocation. Abe called the missile test “absolutely intolerable.” He added: “North Korea must fully comply with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions,” which implore the insular nation to halt its nuclear weapons program and missile tests, which have been consistently launched over at least the past year.

North Korea poses a challenge for Trump: its leader, Kim Jong-un, has shown a proclivity to provoke, and Trump has a tendency to respond rashly–and loudly–to provocation. But three weeks into his presidency, Trump seems to be adopting a muted tone toward North Korea, and in his remarks on Saturday, he showed that he won’t be easily baited into a conflict.

After Abe spoke, Trump took to the dais, and simply said: “I just want everybody to understand and fully know that the United States of America stands behind Japan, its great ally, 100 percent.” There was no direct mention of North Korea or its missile launch. It is unclear if Trump will respond in some other capacity in the coming days or weeks. But on Sunday, Trump’s senior policy adviser, Stephen Miller, hinted at how the U.S. might counter future North Korean threats.

#BREAKING: North Korea publishes video of yesterday’s missile test pic.twitter.com/0732BlcJ3m

— Amichai Stein (@AmichaiStein1) February 13, 2017

“President Trump is going to go to Congress and ask them to invest in our military so once again we will have unquestioned military strength beyond anything anybody can imagine,” Miller said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” Miller called the joint-statement between Abe and Trump a “show of strength.” But the absence of any mention of South Korea, the most vulnerable target of a missile launched from its northern neighbor, was rare for a U.S. statement following a North Korean missile launch.

“I was glad he issued the statement with the prime minister of Japan, but he ought to do it quickly with South Korea,” Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said on “Face the Nation.” He added: “South Korea is probably more susceptible to North Korea’s virulence than any other country.”

According to the South Korean military and the U.S. Strategic Command, the missile was an intermediate-range Musudan missile. While it was the first direct test of Trump’s North Korean stance during his presidency, he did have a response to a North Korean threat while he was the president-elect. On New Year’s Day, Kim said North Korea was entering the “final stage in preparations” for testing an intercontinental missile, which could reach the U.S. Trump responded on Twitter:

North Korea just stated that it is in the final stages of developing a nuclear weapon capable of reaching parts of the U.S. It won’t happen!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 2, 2017

And while Trump made no mention of South Korea on Saturday, his Defense Secretary James Mattis visited the country in his first overseas trip a few weeks ago. He affirmed the U.S.’s commitment to the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) anti-missile system, which will soon be deployed to South Korea. “I talked to President Trump and he wanted to make a very clear statement about the priority that we place on this alliance between our two nations,” Mattis said.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post North Korea Tests Trump’s Resolve with Missile Launch appeared first on Law Street.

Prosecutors in South Korea named Samsung Vice Chairman Lee Jae-yong as a suspect in a bribery investigation that has rocked the country’s business and political establishment over the past few months. Lee will respond to questions from prosecutors on Thursday. Lee faced public questioning before parliament in early December, a rare public rebuke in a country where a handful of corporate elites hold sway and, before the bribery scandal came to light, were rarely in the public eye.

The scandal surrounding Samsung, and other South Korean conglomerates, runs from the top of the nation’s government to its leading business leaders. President Park Geun-hye was impeached last month, because of her relationship with an unofficial and highly influential advisor, Choi Soon-sil. Choi, the daughter of a religious cult leader, is accused of embezzling millions of dollars through her influence over the president. She is currently in prison.

Samsung, along with other multi-billion dollar companies, donated millions of dollars to two of Choi’s foundations. Prosecutors are investigating whether the payments were made to curry political favor with Park. Eight of South Korea’s top family-run businesses have reportedly donated 70 billion won ($60 million) to two foundations run by Choi. In a hearing before parliament last month, the business leaders denied that the payments amounted to bribery.

“President Park asked us to support the development of culture, sports and tourism,” Lee said in the hearing, referring to the payments he made to Choi’s foundations. “I wasn’t aware of Samsung’s payment to the two foundations, and I was only briefed after the fact.”

Samsung’s heir apparent Lee Jae-yong to be questioned over #ParkGeunhye‘s scandal https://t.co/esbajlESSE pic.twitter.com/1fGzBxicGX

— China Xinhua News (@XHNews) January 11, 2017

The investigation aims to determine whether Samsung’s payments were made to help secure the president’s support for a polarizing merger in 2015. Lee has denied that claim. In November, prosecutors raided Samsung’s headquarters in Seoul, pursuing an investigation into $3 million Samsung gave to one of Choi’s foundations; money that went toward her daughter’s equestrian training in Germany. Lee called that payment a “mistake.”

Park, whose relationship with Choi saw millions of South Koreans flood the streets in protest, was impeached last month. Her powers have been suspended while the case is being reviewed in South Korea’s Constitutional Court, which will either reinstate the embattled president, or officially remove her from office.

The bribery investigation comes in the middle of a rocky couple of months for Samsung. In October, the company recalled nearly two million Galaxy Note 7 smartphones, after customers reported their phones overheated, burned them and, in some cases, exploded.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post South Korean Prosecutors Name Samsung Exec as a Suspect in a Bribery Case appeared first on Law Street.

In a five-minute televised address on Tuesday, South Korea’s President Park Geun-hye, who has single-digit approval ratings after a scandal that rocked the nation, said that if parliament would like, she will “step down as president.” Tuesday’s speech was the latest in a string of public apologies since it came to light that she had received secret advice from the daughter of a cult leader and longtime friend, Choi Soon-sil, who she also allegedly helped embezzle millions of dollars.

“I will relegate the decision to the National Assembly, including the shortening of my presidential term and resignation,” Park said. “If the governing and opposition parties inform me of the way to minimize the confusion and vacuum in state affairs and ensure a stable transfer of power.”

With an impeachment vote initially expected on Friday, now likely to be pushed back, some saw Park’s speech as a way to deflect an immediate resignation, and delay relinquishing power through impeachment proceedings. Many opposition lawmakers rejected the idea of Park’s resignation residing with the National Assembly.

“This is nothing but a sly trick to avoid impeachment,” said Youn Kwan-suk, a spokesman for the main opposition Democratic Party. “What the people wanted was her immediate resignation.” Instead, lawmakers from opposition parties as well as Park’s own ruling party, Saenuri, will proceed with their impeachment efforts. A vote is expected on December 9.

Park’s first term was set to end in February 2018. That was before thousands took to the streets to protest and demand her resignation. A two-thirds majority of the 300-member legislature would need to vote for Park’s impeachment for it to pass, and the Constitutional Court would get 180 days to ratify the vote. If she were to be impeached, the similarly unpopular Prime Minister Hwang Kyo-ahn would assume the presidency.

Since the scandal took hold, members of Park’s cabinet have stepped down and she has ceded some of her powers. A few weeks ago, she gave parliament the ability to choose the next prime minister. With the looming impeachment vote and plunging approval ratings, Park’s speech signals she is aware that her previous concessions will not be enough.

“I am giving up everything now,” Park said. “I hope that the nation will find stability.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post With Impeachment Looming, South Korean President is Willing to Resign appeared first on Law Street.

The streets of Seoul were packed with thousands of protesters last weekend in the wake of a leaked email scandal concerning President Park Geun-hye. Park ordered ten members of her cabinet to step down because of their involvement in the scandal, and even Prime Minister Yoo Il-ho was pressured to step down, resulting in Yim Jong-yong being named the new finance minister and deputy prime minister.

The scandal stems from the interference of Choi Soon-sil, a longtime friend of President Park, in state affairs. Choi is the daughter of the cult leader Choi Tae-min, who was Park’s mentor until his assassination, and served as a close confidante for the President, allegedly having access to classified documents and important decision making procedures. There are even reports that Choi organized a secret cabinet of “eight fairies” who advised Park behind the scenes, despite not being elected officials or official presidential appointees.

Choi returned to Korea from Germany this week to cooperate with the investigation and was immediately placed under detention after prosecutors expressed fears that she might destroy evidence of her involvement. A tablet computer was found in her possession that showed evidence of her involvement in classified government affairs, including copies of speeches that President Park had yet to give. President Park acknowledged that she let Choi edit drafts of her speeches, which prompted an estimated 9,000 Koreans to march in protest, carrying signs reading “Who’s the Real President?” While editing speeches may not seem like a dramatic crime, Choi has been compared to Rasputin in Czarist Russia and those calling for Park’s resignation argue that Choi was attempting to interfere with the democratic process, molding the government to her own aims. Choi is accused of advising Park on political appointments and policy decisions, and using her influence to force corporations to donate to the foundations that she works with. As she was escorted into prosecutors’ offices this week, Choi stated on the record that she had “committed wrongs for which I deserve to die.”

South Korea’s constitution protects Park from criminal prosecution except in the case of treason or insurrection but that has not stopped calls for her resignation, especially from the younger population. Park’s presidential term will end in 2018 but with her ministers being forced out and her aides resigning, President Park may barely have a cabinet left to work with during the “lame duck” phase of her Presidency. With her reputation destroyed, Park will now most likely fail to push through the changes she had hoped to make to the economy. The protesters who rallied this weekend were doubtful that Park will face impeachment, as that process must be approved by the supreme court (which is staffed by presidential appointees), but hoped that her crumbling cabinet and rock bottom approval rankings will force her into resignation. And now, Park has had to give up her ability to select a new Prime Minister.

The vitriol expressed against President Park is eerily similar to that expressed against Secretary Clinton over her private email server. Both of their political careers have been so severely damaged by email scandals that they may never recover.

Jillian Sequeira

Jillian Sequeira was a member of the College of William and Mary Class of 2016, with a double major in Government and Italian. When she’s not blogging, she’s photographing graffiti around the world and worshiping at the altar of Elon Musk and all things Tesla. Contact Jillian at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post South Korea’s Email Scandal: Protests in Seoul appeared first on Law Street.

Like most of America’s longstanding allies, Japan is probably concerned, or at least surprised, about what happened here on Tuesday night. Japan, which the U.S. occupied for a time after World War II, now depends on the U.S. for almost all of its security needs–including deterring a nuclear North Korea and an encroaching China. As world leaders seek the ear of Donald Trump to probe whether his campaign rhetoric will hold once he takes office, Japan bursted out of the gate. In a show of good faith, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe held a 20-minute teleconference with Trump on Thursday and arranged to meet with him in New York next Thursday.

According to his deputy chief cabinet secretary, Abe told Trump that “a strong Japan-U.S. alliance is an indispensable presence that supports peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region.” And though Abe embodies Japan’s version of the “political establishment” Trump railed against during his campaign, the prime minister bit his tongue and chose to pursue the amicable relationship Japan has enjoyed with the U.S. for decades: “America will be made even greater,” Abe told Trump.

President Obama has often signaled a “pivot” to the Asia-Pacific region throughout his presidency–seen with the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a buildup of troops in the region, and engagement with its market, the largest in the world. Based off of Trump’s statements over the past few months, Obama’s Asia-Pacific vision and agenda could be upended by his successor.

“Of course they should pick up all the expense. Why are we paying for this?” Trump said, referring to the nearly 54,000 U.S. troops stationed in Japan. He has blasted the TPP trade deal, which Japan’s lower house of Parliament passed on Thursday. Trump has also toyed with the idea of Japan and South Korea building up their own atomic arsenals, which would scale back the U.S.’s role in defending both countries against China and North Korea.

President Park Geun-hye of South Korea also called Trump on Thursday, and stressed the importance of the U.S.-South Korea alliance in pressuring its erratic northern neighbor. Trump assured her that he “agreed “100 percent,” according to a statement Park released after the phone call. “We are with you all the way, and we will not waver,” Trump said in a statement.

It’s the unknown of Trump, as well as the unprecedented campaign he ran, that spooks Japan and other traditional U.S. allies in the region. Some in Japan worry that even if Trump does not abandon Japan and Asia altogether, he could place the region much lower on his priority list than Obama, creating a void of influence that China could fill. Additionally, building up a nuclear arsenal in Japan might be difficult, if not impossible, because anti-nuclear sentiment runs rampant in pacifist Japan, which technically does not even have a military.

“We should be aware that the U.S. will pay less attention to Asia,” Nikkei Shimbun, a Japanese financial newspaper, wrote in an editorial Thursday. “During the transitional period, China could make a new move in the South or East China Sea. The Japanese government needs to be ready for such a situation.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post With Trump as President, What’s Next for Japan and the U.S.? appeared first on Law Street.

South Korea’s president walked to a meeting with the speaker of Parliament on Tuesday, streaming past opposition lawmakers who held yellow signs that read “step down.” President Park Geun-hye did not announce her resignation during the rare meeting, but she did take a step in placating the opposition by weakening her powers: Parliament will now choose her prime minister, rather than allowing her unilaterally chosen nominee to hold the largely ceremonial post.

“If the national assembly recommends a new prime minister, I will appoint him and let him control the cabinet,” Park told Chung Sye-kyun, the speaker of Parliament, and a top leader of the opposition Democratic Party.

Park is responding to concerns from everyday South Koreans and lawmakers, many of whom are calling on her to resign completely. The country erupted when news broke of a scandal involving Park and one of her longtime confidants and unofficial aides, Choi Soon-sil. Choi, the daughter of a controversial cult leader, is accused of using her connections to Park to embezzle millions of dollars into two personal foundations, as well as offering unqualified advice to the president. Choi, along with some of Park’s aides, have been arrested. Others are being investigated.

“The crisis facing the president is a crisis in state governance and a crisis of the nation as a whole, and thus people are very worried,” Chung said during the meeting, adding: “Therefore, what is most important is placating public concerns.”

Park moved to do that by allowing Parliament to choose her next prime minister. Last week, Park unilaterally chose a new prime minister, Kim Byong-joon. Lawmakers were upset that she filled the post without consulting them, so to quell the uproar, she is allowing the legislature to deliberate on the decision. In the meantime, Kim will remain the prime minister designate, but will likely withdraw if he is not the legislature’s chosen candidate.

With 15 months left in her term, some opposition lawmakers, and some members of her own party, would like Park to stay out of government completely. Others are calling for her to partake only in foreign policy matters, leaving domestic matters for Parliament and others in the cabinet, including the new prime minister.

Over the weekend, tens of thousands of people protested in Seoul, and more mass protests are planned for the coming weekend. Meanwhile, Park has the lowest approval rating–five percent–since South Korea democratized in 1987.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post South Korean President Relinquishes Ability to Select Prime Minister appeared first on Law Street.

The story of Adam Crapser, 41, who was born in South Korea but adopted by an American couple at age three, has brought a lot of attention to the issue of international adoptees who lack American citizenship. Adam Crapser’s adoptive parents never filled out the necessary paperwork and now he faces deportation to a country he hasn’t seen since he was three, where he has no family or friends, and knows neither the language nor the culture. According to a Korean-American advocacy group, about 35,000 adoptees in the country lack U.S. citizenship, many times because the parents don’t know they need to fill out certain paperwork.

They grew up as American citizens, then learned that they weren’t @PriscillaStoneS @adam_crapser @NYAdoptEquality https://t.co/o8A9E1u7Fb

— Frank Ligtvoet (@frank_ligtvoet) September 3, 2016

Adam Crapser, who until recently lived in Vancouver, Washington, with his two daughters and pregnant wife, was adopted with his sister and taken to the U.S. His only belongings when he arrived were a Korean bible, a pair of rubber shoes, and a stuffed dog. But seven years later the parents, who had been abusive the whole time and punished the siblings by locking them in a dark basement, changed their minds and abandoned the kids. At age ten, Adam Crapser was separated from his sister and passed through several different foster homes.

By the time he was 12, Thomas and Dolly Crapser adopted him, but that didn’t make life easier. The couple also had two other adopted kids and several foster children, and all of them were abused. The parents allegedly taped the children’s mouths shut with duct tape, slammed their heads into door frames, and hit them. According to the AP, the couple was arrested on charges of physical and sexual abuse and rape in 1991, but Thomas only got 90 days in jail and Dolly three years of probation.

.@repzoelofgren what can be done to help #adamcrapser? https://t.co/3w4Hcx4MLr Appalling abuse by ICE after a lifetime of abuse.

— Peter Delevett (@peterdelevett) October 27, 2016

Before the Crapsers were criminally charged, they had kicked Adam Crapser out of their home before he had any chance to collect his belongings. In an attempt to retrieve his Korean bible and rubber shoes from when he was little, he broke into their house, which led to charges of burglary. Later in life he got in trouble with the law for unlawful possession of a firearm, assault after a fight with his roommate, and for calling a son he had with an ex-girlfriend despite a protection order.

“I made a lot of mistakes in my life, and I’m not proud of it,” Adam Crapser told the New York Times magazine. “I’ve learned a lot of lessons the hard way.”

As a sister and mother of international adoptees, this story breaks my heart and infuriates me in all kinds of ways. https://t.co/GgVYKIzr4D

— Jeanne Ryan (@Jeanne_Ryan) October 28, 2016

In 2000, Congress passed a law that gives automatic citizenship to adoptees, but only future adoptees or children under 18. Adam Crapser wasn’t covered but had to apply by himself. At the beginning of the year he came onto the immigration authorities’ radar when he applied for a green card and his previous convictions showed up. Another law, that was made stricter after 9/11, made him deportable because of his previous crimes. Even though he is now a responsible father of three, soon to be four, he was taken away from his family and put in an immigration detention center for nine months. During a hearing on Monday, he waived an appeal since he desperately wants to get out of there and be with his family.

“He will be deported as soon as Immigration and Customs Enforcement makes the necessary arrangements,” his attorney Lori Walls said to the AP. “Adam, his family, and advocates are heartbroken at the outcome.”

That someone who was taken from his home country at such a young age will now be sent off to a place completely alien to him and forced to split up from his wife and children, simply because of neglectful adoptive parents, has caused an uproar on social media. Many are pleading for the White House to step in.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Korean-American Man Who Was Adopted When He Was Three to Be Deported appeared first on Law Street.

Newt Gingrich and Megyn Kelly Go At It On Fox News

Here at RantCrush we love rants and tirades of all kinds. Especially ones involving Trump surrogates and news anchors who just don’t give a damn. Newt Gingrich and Megyn Kelly went at it last night after Kelly pressed Gingrich on Trump’s sexual assault accusers. So, Gingrich accused Kelly of being “fascinated with sex.”

via GIPHY

This is when things started to get not so sexy…you can watch for yourself here:

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: October 26, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

On a North Korean state news broadcast on Friday, an anchorwoman gazed downward as she read a prepared government statement: “Scientists and technicians of the Workers Party of Korea carried out a nuclear explosion test to judge the power of a nuclear warhead.”

“We will continue to strengthen our nuclear capabilities to protect our sovereignty. We have now standardized and minimized nuclear warheads… We can now produce small nuclear warheads any time we desire,” the anchor said.

Along with the country’s official statement, evidence of a nuclear launch came through an artificially caused 5.3 earthquake, detected by the U.S. Geological Survey near the site of previous nuclear test launches by Pyongyang. 

The test represents the fifth nuclear test conducted by North Korea, and the second in 2016. The first was in January. According to the South Korean Defense Ministry, Friday’s test was North Korea’s most potent to date. Since October 2006, when North Korea began testing its nuclear capabilities, the explosive power of its tests have steadily grown, from less than one kiloton of energy in 2006 to six to seven in 2013. Its latest attempt registered at 10 kilotons. For context, the atomic bomb the U.S. dropped on Hiroshima, Japan in 1945 was 15 kilotons.

Under heavy international sanctions and facing weakening ties with nearly the entire international community, minus China, which it still trades with, North Korea has been conducting missile tests seemingly every week. Most recently, it launched three ballistic missiles last week toward Japan, one of which landed within 155 miles of a Japanese island. North Korea’s bombastic leader, Kim Jong-un, is increasingly worrying the international community with his antics.

North Korea claims successful test of nuclear warhead, its 5th and potentially most powerful https://t.co/6r9Lyg4otI pic.twitter.com/RMFHhvPnRp

— CNN (@CNN) September 9, 2016

North Korea faced condemnation from its Pacific neighbors as well as international actors. President Obama, in a statement released Friday morning, said the U.S. condemns “in the strongest possible terms as a grave threat to regional security and to international peace and stability.” The test represents a “flagrant violation of multiple UN Security Council Resolutions,” the statement said.

Occurring just days after the G-20 summit in Hangzhou, China, a meeting between leaders of the world’s leading industrial powers, the test came at a peculiar time: Friday marks the 68th anniversary of North Korea’s founding. While it is unclear whether the latest test demonstrates an ability to launch an actual nuclear warhead mounted atop a missile, Obama and his allies in East Asia are certainly taking the test as a credible threat.

In his statement, Obama said he spoke with President Park Geun-Hye of South Korea and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan, reiterating America’s “commitment to provide extended deterrence, guaranteed by the full spectrum of U.S. defense capabilities.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post North Korea Launches Nuclear Missile Test appeared first on Law Street.

With its recent series of missile tests and blustery rhetoric, North Korea is cultivating an atmosphere of paranoia in the Pacific and prompting America to collaborate more closely with its Pacific allies. The nuclear nation’s latest provocation came at dawn on Wednesday, when two Rodong missiles launched from a province in the west toward the Sea of Japan in the east. One missile fizzled quickly and plunked down into the sea, while the other continued on for 620 miles, South Korean and Japanese officials said, making it one of the North’s furthest reaching missile tests yet. The most concerning element of Wednesday’s launch: the second missile landed within Japanese maritime territory, as it flew well within Japan’s 200-mile exclusive economic zone, or EEZ.

The latest round of missile tests comes at a tense time between North Korea and the U.S. North Korea took umbrage with the direct sanctions the U.S. recently placed on its Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un (they also targeted other high-ranking members in Un’s cabinet), as a former diplomatic corridor between the two nations was shuttered. The North Korean diplomat who used to head that channel said the U.S. sanctions amounted to a “declaration of war.” Heightening tensions between North Korea and the U.S., South Korea recently agreed to deploy the U.S.-built THAAD missile system–a truck mounted missile interceptor–that has also angered China.

Wednesday’s launch of two mid-range missiles–Pyongyang is thought to possess an arsenal including 300 Rodong missiles, which have a maximum range of 800 miles, far enough to strike mainland Japan–were condemned by government officials in Japan, South Korea, and the U.S. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan called the episode a “serious threat to Japan’s security” and an “unforgivable act of violence.” Japan recently released its annual defense report, which, according to South Korea media, refers to North Korea’s nuclear threat as “grave and urgent.”

Washington, which maintains strong economic and military ties with Japan and South Korea, also denounced the North’s most recent test. “This provocation only serves to increase the international community’s resolve to counter [North Korea’s] prohibited activities, including through implementing existing U.N. Security Council sanctions,” said Gary Ross, a Pentagon spokesman and naval commander.

In June, North Korea sent a series of Musudan missiles to an altitude higher than it had in the past, signaling its readiness to strike U.S. military bases in Japan, or its southern neighbor, South Korea. The North’s increased military flexing might be a pre-emptive response to joint military exercises set to take place between the U.S. and South Korea later this month, as it usually amps up its weapons testing in the months leading up to the annual military exercises. In an interview with The Associated Press, Han Song Ryol, the North Korean diplomat who said the U.S. had already declared war on Pyongyang with their sanctions, said if the August exercises go as planned, North Korea has a “self-defensive right and justifiable action to respond in a very hard way.”

And indicating just how serious this latest threat is being taken by the international community, the U.S. and Japan called an emergency meeting with the United Nations Security Council for Wednesday afternoon.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post North Korea Continues to Test Missiles; Emergency U.N. Meeting Called appeared first on Law Street.

The annual joint military exercises between the United States and South Korea usually elicit ominous threats of retaliation from North Korea. But in an interview on Thursday with the Associated Press, Han Song Ryol, the North’s only diplomatic tether to the United States, effectively declared war, referencing sanctions targeting Kim Jong Un as crossing “the red line.”

In early July, after a United Nations Human Rights Commission report detailed a host of human rights abuses in the isolated nation, the U.S. imposed sanctions on Kim Jong Un and 22 other high-ranking government officials. It marked the first time sanctions targeted Un, though the West has routinely sanctioned the country as a whole.

“The Obama administration went so far to have the impudence to challenge the supreme dignity of the DPRK in order to get rid of its unfavorable position during the political and military showdown with the DPRK,” said Han, using acronym for his country’s official title–Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. In response to the sanctions, the North cut off its only line of communication with the U.S., known as the New York channel, which was essentially a diplomatic post in Manhattan. Han has held that post for nearly two decades, as the director-general of the U.S. Affairs Department for the North’s Foreign Ministry.

A senior Obama administration official told Politico a few weeks ago that the sanction against Kim Jong Un and others in his government was meant to send a message: “if you become involved in abuses like running concentration camps or hunting down defectors we will know who you are.”

Joint military exercises–the Ulchi Freedom Guardian–are conducted by the U.S. and South Korea every August, and Han warned that if this year’s display goes as planned, then the North has a “self-defensive right and justifiable action to respond in a very hard way.” The U.S., he added, “has already declared war against the DPRK.” Last year’s Ulchi, which included 50,000 South Korean soldiers and 30,000 U.S. soldiers, nearly resulted in clashes between the two Korean nations, with tensions higher than ever before.

North Korea’s nuclear program has been maligned by the rest of the world and historically, the main target of U.S. and U.N. sanctions. But Han insisted it is indeed the U.S. who is irresponsible with nuclear weapons and other advanced military tools, saying:

It is not us, it is the United States that first developed nuclear weapons, who first deployed them and who first used them against humankind. And on the issue of missiles and rockets, which are to deliver nuclear warheads and conventional weapons warheads, it is none other than the United States who first developed it and who first used it.

Whether or not the U.S. “red line” crossing will indeed lead to war with North Korea is foggy, but with its citizenry impoverished and its global reputation sinking, anything is possible.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Did North Korea Just Declare War on the U.S.? appeared first on Law Street.

On Wednesday the U.S. sanctioned North Korea’s leader Kim Jong-un for human rights abuses for the first time. There are already sanctions on the country for its nuclear activities, but this is a unique step since it names the dictator himself, as well as 10 other prominent figures, by name. These sanctions are seen as a stepping up of the United States’ efforts to control and isolate the Asian nation. Now North Korea has offered a denuclearization plan–if the U.S. agrees to its demands.

Only one day after the news about sanctions on Kim Jong-un, Pyongyang released terms for a deal. North Korean leaders want the U.S. and South Korea to give them information about American nuclear weapons in South Korea, pull out those weapons, and a guarantee from Washington that it will not use nuclear weapons against North Korea, reports news agency TASS, among other terms.

However, in the statement cited by TASS it also says that unless the U.S. agrees to these conditions, North Korea will continue to build up its nuclear forces—both in quality and quantity.

South Korea has welcomed the U.S. sanctions and hopes that they will raise international awareness of how serious North Korea’s human rights violations are.

South Korea welcomes first US sanctions against Kim Jong-un https://t.co/KiVbJH3bup #UFO4UBlogAsia

— UFO4U@NEWS (@UFO4U) July 7, 2016

The Human Rights Abuses

North Korea “continues to commit serious human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, arbitrary arrests and detention, forced labor, and torture,” said the State Department in a statement about the human rights sanctions.

It goes on to describe the political prison camps that are still in use in the country, holding family members and even children of those accused of crimes. The State Department estimates the number of prisoners to be between 80,000 and 120,000. Freedom of speech, media, expression, and religion are heavily restricted and guarded.

North Korean workers are often sent abroad to make money to send back to the homeland, in order to get around different sanctions, according to human rights groups cited by Huffington Post. These workers go to countries without much control over companies’ conditions, such as Poland or Russia. People work up to 70 hours a week without proper pay—most of the money is sent to the government—while their wives and children are held “hostage” in Pyongyang. If a worker defects, the family members are punished, or in a few extreme cases, killed.

What Do The Sanctions Mean?

The sanctions toward Kim Jong-un and the 10 other men are mostly symbolic, but mean that U.S. companies are prohibited from collaborating with any of the people on the list. U.S. companies can also not do any business with Kim Jong-un or any international companies that are under his control. Any assets belonging to Kim Jong-un in the U.S. will be frozen.

This could be the start of a wave of additional sanctions and have a worldwide effect, according to USA Today, since it would be risky for any international companies or banks to have anything to do with the individuals on the list. Hopefully it will push North Korea in the right direction. But analysts doubt it will have any effect on the leader, who just created a new State Affairs Commission that will take care of all national and foreign affairs. Who’s in charge of that? Kim Jong-un himself, of course.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post North Korea Replies to U.S. Sanctions on Kim Jong-un appeared first on Law Street.

Do you have a bunch of old flash drives lying around, filled with college essays, or downloaded episodes of TV shows, or even just empty? In the age of online storage and the cloud, flash drives have seemingly joined CD-Roms and floppy disks as practically defunct storage devices. But a new project called “Flash Drives for Freedom” wants to put your old flash drives to work–by sending them to North Korea.

The concept is a lot simpler than it sounds. One of the ways that North Korea’s oppressive regime keeps a hold on its citizens is by constantly exposing them to propaganda. By exposing North Koreans to other media–for example, Korean-language Wikipedia pages, or South Korean TV shows–they can discover the world outside North Korea’s oppressive borders. Some American imports have also been popular, including the parts of the Seth Rogan and James Franco movie about North Korea, “The Interview,” the Hunger Games franchise, and the ABC show “Desperate Housewives.”

The content put on the flash drives is curated by North Korean defectors who have managed to escape, and they’ve done focus groups with refugees to try to figure out what kind of content will be most effective. The project is a joint effort between the Human Rights Foundation and a California-based start up called Forum280, and works with groups that smuggle goods into North Korea. The project is asking for people to donate their old flash drives; according to the project’s website:

Each year, these groups collectively smuggle fewer than 10,000 flash drives. They could send many more, but are limited by the fact that they have to purchase the drives on the internet at retail cost. By gifting them drives, Flash Drives for Freedom allows them to focus in 2016 on programs and future work rather than spend time and money on purchasing equipment.

The flash drives are smuggled in through a few different methods–by foot, as well as by balloon. Obviously, given the difficulty of these methods, some of the flash drives don’t reach their intended destinations. But, the effort is still remarkable. As Alex Gladstein, Chief Strategy Officer at the Human Rights Foundation, told Angela McCormack and Tom Tilley of Hack:

Every single flash drive that we send in is a window to the outside world for someone in North Korea. Now what they do with that information – that’s not up to us, it’s their decision…Perhaps they do nothing, perhaps they decide to escape. Perhaps they decide to challenge their local authority. There could be a million different ways that they end up living their life…It doesn’t really matter what kind of information people are getting, as long as it’s different to the stuff they’re being fed, the propaganda they’re being fed every day.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Flash Drives for Freedom: Smuggling Information into North Korea appeared first on Law Street.

On December 28, 2015, South Korea and Japan entered into a monumental agreement as the countries addressed the injustices made against “comfort women“–approximately 200,000 South Korean women who were recruited into prostitution and servitude by the Imperial Japanese Army during World War II. Women, some as young as 11, were kidnapped during this time, forced into sexual bondage and servitude where they were raped, tortured, and subjected to extreme violence by Japanese soldiers in “comfort stations” found in Japanese military camps. To date, this barbaric and horrific behavior left an open, festering, and unaddressed wound causing heavy tensions between the two nations for several decades.

The agreement reached required action on both sides as Japan admitted that it was “painfully aware of responsibilities from this perspective,” referring to the attack on the women of South Korea’s honor and dignity. Japan sincerely apologized–something it was not willing to do before as it questioned whether it was responsible for the development of “comfort women,” and additionally, it agreed to provide ¥1 billion ($8.3 million) in government funds to the South Korean women subjected to prostitution during WWII by the Japanese Army. In compliance with the agreement, South Korea agreed to accept the monetary compensation through a fund rather than a direct compensation to the women who had suffered so that the “money didn’t represent direct compensation for wrongdoing.” Critics of the agreement noted that the development of a fund rather than direct compensation was Japan’s way of avoiding the recognition that the women recruited into prostitution were done so “by the Japanese government and military systematically.”

Regardless of criticism, the landmark agreement reached between Japan and South Korea is a big deal for human rights. While forced prostitution, sex slaves, and human trafficking in Asia may not call for direct attention from the West, the trade is a massive violation of human rights and a booming business–as it is “the fastest growing industry in the world, and the second largest business after arms dealing in the 21st century.” Read on to learn more about “comfort women,” the wound left by the Imperial Japanese Army following WWII, and the attention that comfort women have brought to the human trafficking violations occurring today.

“Comfort Women” Beginnings

In August of 1910, Japan annexed the sovereign nation of what once was Korea and begun its 35-year-long imperial hold over the area and its people. In 1931, Japan launched what presumably would be noted as the start of WWII with its invasion of Manchuria, which ultimately led to its progression through China and Southeast Asia.

During this time, Japanese soldiers began to develop areas within their military camps dubbed “comfort stations” where they would be able unwind after long days of fighting and obtain sexual services. These stations were full of kidnapped and imprisoned women that were raped and forced to service soldiers dozens of times per day.

Japanese soldiers largely recruited women from Korean communities by luring them with promises of good jobs in big cities. Their dreams quickly came crashing down as they were locked up in three foot by five foot rooms in Japanese military bases and suffered the harshest of conditions–forced into sexual servitude, which at certain times could reach up to 60-70 encounters with soldiers per day. As war ensued, the Japanese military’s numbers increased and the soldiers began raiding villages and simply taking women as they pleased and killed anyone that stood in their way or protested against their behavior. The more need or desire that was expressed by the soldiers, the more brutal and barbaric the recruitment and treatment of comfort women became. Furthermore, women were cramped into tight spaces only separated by a tatami or a mat that did not reach the floor leaving the women exposed to others during rapes and beatings and allowing for sound to travel easily from cubicle to cubicle.

Accordingly, to ensure that a young woman was a virgin or of very immature sexual status and development, Japanese soldiers specifically targeted young women between the ages of 14-18. Women who tried to fight for themselves ended up dead or sterilized. Survivors of these horrendous crimes recounted the following:

We had to serve over 5,000 Japanese soldiers as sex slaves every day – up to 40 men per day. Each time I protested, they hit me or stuffed rags in my mouth. One held a matchstick to my private parts until I obeyed him. One Korean girl caught a venereal disease from being raped so often and, as a result, over 50 Japanese soldiers were infected. In order to stop the disease from spreading and to ’sterilize’ the Korean girl, they stuck a hot iron bar in her private parts. –Testimony of Chong Ok Sun

One day, a new girl was put in the compartment next to me. She tried to resist the men and bit one of them in his arm. She was then taken to the courtyard and in front of all of us, her head was cut off with a sword and her body was cut into small pieces. –Testimony of Hwang So Gyun

Venereal disease and fear of pregnancy plagued the women that were forced to service Japanese soldiers. One woman recollected that her son was born mentally handicapped because of the numerous diseases she had caught during her servitude. They were also expected to continue serving even through their menstrual cycle. The “Ten Day Report of the 21st Army Unit of the Japanese Army stationed at Kwandong, China, from 11 to 21 April 1939″ highlighted the fact that approximately 1,000 “comfort women” served 100,000 soldiers in that specified region during that time. Their service was required even in the harshest, most unacceptable of conditions, otherwise, these women met death.

Due to the lack of specific and official documentation, many of the injustices done to the young women kidnapped from their homes in Korea during WWII were not addressed. Very few documents throughout the course of history have directly been linked to the Imperial Japanese soldiers’ barbaric behaviors and actions. The substantive and now recognized facts pertaining to the recruitment and treatment of comfort women during this time was easily refuted post WWII as it was only recollected testimony from the victims and survivors themselves.

This is precisely why Japan long refused to acknowledge that it was responsible for the horrors done to comfort women. As decades passed and South Korean survivors demanded an apology without avail, Japan continued to ignore or defend its soldiers’ reprehensible acts. This emotional and dark past drove territorial disputes and in some cases caused the nations to work against each other on issues that threatened both due to geographical and geopolitical standing, such as “North Korean belligerence and Chinese assertiveness.” Japan and South Korea’s move to formulate an agreement and put the dark past behind them has allowed for some people of South Korea to feel as if justice was finally served and granted the two nations the ability to move forward in cooperation.

Modern Day Slavery: Sex and Labor Trafficking

It’s very difficult to estimate the exact number of modern-day human trafficking victims however, current data finds that approximately 36 million people are being trafficked, nearly 2/3 coming from Asia. While this industry is dark and dirty, it keeps growing because the revenue generated has totaled approximately $150 billion in profit. The international community has, to date, been unsuccessful in tackling human trafficking, both sex and labor trafficking, due to its inability to decipher the populations being affected, the geographical locations that face the most dire circumstances, how to properly define the issue, and how to enforce the agreements that have been in place but fail to be followed by local law enforcement of the regions suffering. The fact that it took Japan several decades to recognize its injustices and begin the reconciliation process with South Korea and its victims highlights the difficulty in showing harm done and getting all parties to listen for a meaningful resolution.

Weak national legislation and corrupt government conduct has contributed to the growing human trafficking problem in Asia. For example, all Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, are part of the “Bali Process on People Smuggling, Trafficking in Persons and Related Transnational Crime,” which is a non-binding and voluntary forum created in 2002 that is co-chaired by the governments of Indonesia and Australia. Even with their involvement in such forums, and considering the fact there are only a few ASEAN nations that have yet to pass anti-trafficking laws, there is still a growing challenge in getting these countries to take practical action to combat human trafficking–funding for projects that are not a priority is next to impossible. Trying to find funding for such projects in nations where poverty levels are high and government funds depleted poses a significant challenge to victimized and suffering communities.

Human trafficking is not simply a problem to throw money at–it requires a plan with a solution, education of victims and law enforcement, and an adequately functioning government that will enforce the laws and procedures that it has agreed to regarding trafficking. The issue ultimately becomes local level enforcement, something that the international community has desperately failed to resolve.

Conclusion

While absolutely nothing will free these survivors of the grotesque crimes they endured, Japan’s recognition of the injustices done to South Korean women during WWII is a step forward in reconciling the deep and unapologetic wound left by Japanese soldiers, one that had thus far been denied altogether or swept under history’s rug. The agreement made between Japan and South Korea at the end of December not only sought to right the wrongs made at the hands of Japanese soldiers, but brought to light the horrors of human trafficking and modern day slavery that still largely exists in Asia.

Regardless of the difficulties that human trafficking presents for both survivors and advocates, it is clear that the agreement between South Korea and Japan has placed the horrors of sex trafficking and forced prostitution on a recognizable world stage, particularly by the West. It has worked to restore a sense of dignity and humility back into the lives of former comfort women that are still living today with the scars of a dark and unimaginable past and sought to provide funding to survivors in South Korea for the wrongs endured.

Resources

Primary

The Wall Street Journal: Full Text – Japan-South Korea Statement on “Comfort Women”

Additional

Yahoo! News: South Korea, Japan Agree to Irreversibly End “Comfort Women” Row

The Wall Street Journal: Japan, South Korea Agree to Aid for “Comfort Women”

The Huffington Post: The History of ‘Comfort Women’: A WWII Tragedy We Can’t Forget

 Vox: “Comfort Women”: Japan’s 70-Year Sex Slavery Controversy, Explained

United Nations: Economic and Social Council

 National Public Radio (NPR): Elise Goes East!: Revisiting a UN Report on ‘Comfort Women’ as Shinzo Abe Tours the US

Heritage: Combating Human Trafficking in Asia Requires U.S. Leadership

IRIN: Analysis: Southeast Asia’s Human Trafficking Conundrum

Ajla Glavasevic

Ajla Glavasevic is a first-generation Bosnian full of spunk, sass, and humor. She graduated from SUNY Buffalo with a Bachelor of Science in Finance and received her J.D. from the University of Cincinnati College of Law. Ajla is currently a licensed attorney in Pennsylvania and when she isn’t lawyering and writing, the former Team USA Women’s Bobsled athlete (2014-2015 National Team) likes to stay active and travel. Contact Ajla at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Human Rights Justice Served as Japan and South Korea Address Violations Against “Comfort Women” appeared first on Law Street.

“Avengers: Age of Ultron,” the latest hit in the Avengers franchise, debuted in theaters recently and made more than $200 million in a single weekend. The surprising part however, is that it earned that $200 million outside the U.S., before the movie even opened stateside. The increasing globalization of the film industry is abundantly clear. But the changes in the film industry aren’t just reflected in the exports of American movies to foreign audiences. There are also many nations expanding into the industry. Read on to learn about the globalization of the film industry, and its worldwide ramifications.

The American Film Industry: Changes From Sea to Shining Sea

While Hollywood is facing greater competition from abroad in almost every aspect of the film industry, it is still the dominant player globally. In 2014, for example, the top ten most profitable movies were all made in the United States.

Hollywood has had to adjust to a changing customer base. Nearly 60 percent of the box office hauls taken in by these big productions came from abroad. This means that the success of the Hollywood movie industry is driven more by foreign markets than domestic. In fact, the number two market for Hollywood films, China, is predicted to surpass the American market by 2020.

In response to this changing environment, Hollywood is increasingly relying on big-budget blockbusters. These movies have been particularly marketable specifically because of their simple plot lines, which often avoid nuanced or culturally specific stories that might get lost in translation. Additionally, Hollywood often adds extra scenes to movies released in other countries, sometimes featuring actors from those countries, in order to make them more relatable. This has meant making changes to movies, too. For example, in the remake of “Red Dawn,” the nationality of the invading soldiers was changed from Chinese to North Korean in order to avoid alienating the Chinese movie audience.

Foreign Film Industries: The Veterans

Although Hollywood, as a result of globalization, is facing stiffer competition abroad, there has long existed a traditional foreign film industry. The center of this industry is located in Europe

European Film Industry

While every country in Europe makes movies, five countries in particular make up 80 percent of the market: France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy, and Spain. The industry itself is also massive in scope, including 75,000 companies and 370,000 workers across Europe.

In addition to the number of people involved, Europe is also home to some of the most prestigious events in cinema. Perhaps the most famous is the Cannes Film Festival in France. This event has taken place nearly every year since 1946, with filmmakers from all walks of life competing for the coveted Palme d’Or prize for the best film in the competition.

Despite the success of the film industry in Europe, it has struggled to deal with foreign competition, particularly Hollywood. As of 2013, 70 percent of the European film market was dominated by American films. This is in stark contrast to a much smaller 26 percent coming directly from European sources.

But as Hollywood has made efforts to keep its industry relevant, so has Europe. One of the most prominent attempts has been through the LUX competition. Seeking to address one of the most glaring problems in Europe’s film industry–distributing and dubbing movies in all the languages spoken in Europe–the films involved in this competition are sub-titled in 24 different languages so as to be accessible to a wide audience.

Film Industries Down Under

Australia and New Zealand also have prominent film industries. While Australia is currently dealing with losing out on some projects because its tax credits are not competitive enough, there is a strong tradition already in place. For example, “Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith” as well as the “Matrix” trilogy were both filmed there.

The New Zealand film industry is strong and thriving. This has been the result of two forces. First, home-grown production of films such as “The Piano,” which won three Oscars in 1993, has helped promote the industry. There has also been a rise of recognizable talent coming out of the country, including director Peter Jackson. Like Australia, New Zealand has also been the location of major Hollywood productions such as “Avatar,” “King Kong,” and “The Last Samurai” to name just a few.

Rising Stars

Other countries are continuing to create voices of their own through national film industries. Three of the most successful countries in creating major movie industries of their own have been India, Nigeria, and South Korea.

India

Although Hollywood is the most profitable film industry worldwide, India’s is the most productive based on its sheer number of films. India’s film production is so prodigious that it has earned a nickname of its own: Bollywood, in reference to the city of Mumbai. In fact, India’s industry is so expansive that the Bollywood moniker is really only applicable to Mumbai–other regions and cities have film industries of their own that have spawned similar nicknames, such as “Kollywood” and “Sandalwood.”

While the Indian film industry has been a compelling force for more than 100 years, it has seen a huge jump in growth recently. From 2004-2013, gross receipts tripled and revenue is estimated to reach $4.5 billion next year. With those kinds of numbers, India’s film industry promises to continue its upward trajectory in money and influence.

Nigeria

The Nigerian film industry also produces more films per year than Hollywood, and it has the similar nickname “Nollywood.” Nigeria’s films are often lower-budget productions that are released directly to DVD and often not even filmed in a studio. Nonetheless, the Nigerian film industry is influential enough regionally that neighboring countries fear a Nigerianization effect on their own cultures.

The Nigerian film industry is so popular that the World Bank believes that with the proper management it could create a million more jobs in a country with high unemployment levels. The film industry in Nigeria already employs a million people, making it the second-largest employer in the country behind the agricultural sector. Still, for Nigeria to be on the same level as Hollywood or Bollywood, many issues would have to be addressed, in particular the high rate of film pirating. The video below explores Nollywood and its impact on Hollywood.

South Korea

South Korea also has a strong film industry, although it doesn’t have a catchy nickname. While it does not generate the volume of films of Bollywood or Nollywood, it does have the advantage of being the go-to destination for entertainment for much of Asia, particularly China and Japan. South Korea’s movies resonate both domestically and regionally because they often play on historical conflicts that affected the region as a whole. The film industry there also received a boost when a law was passed stating that at least 40 percent of films shown in South Korea had to be produced there, forcing local companies to step up and fill the void.

What does film industry globalization mean?

Money

One of the most obvious implications of globalization is financing. Several major Hollywood studios including Disney have bankrolled films in Bollywood. This is in an attempt to harness the massive potential audience there. Financing is a two-way street however, and when Hollywood struggled for funds following the 2008 recession it received loans and financing from Indian sources.

Culture

Another implication is cultural. In many countries, the government has posted quotas or imposed tariffs on foreign films to limit their dominance domestically. These laws are aimed specifically at American movies. One of the motivations for these rules is the competition American films provide. In basically every domestic market worldwide, Hollywood movies have a larger share than the domestic industry. Secondly, movies are seen as cultural pillars, so leaders are interested in preserving, and even promoting their own culture over that of a foreign entity like the one presented by Hollywood.

Like financing, cultural considerations also have a return effect on Hollywood. In order to attract more foreign viewers, Hollywood movies have simplified story lines and included more actors from different locales. In effect, Hollywood has had to become more diverse and open in order to appeal worldwide. This effect may actually dilute any would-be American cultural overload as well, as these movies are incorporating more global cultures in order to be competitive.

Globalization is a give and take. There has been a long-standing fear of globalization leading to Americanization; however, as the film industry has shown, for American filmmakers or any others to be competitive globally their themes and characters must be global, too. Additionally the invasion of Hollywood movies has also encouraged many domestic industries to build up their own audiences and industries that had been neglected before.

Conclusion

Hollywood has long dealt with issues, ideas, and events that have stretched the world over, and it is now dealing with competition as diverse and far reaching as the topics of the movies it produces. The Hollywood film industry had remained the dominant player in the industry by leveraging foreign markets. Globally this has also meant the incorporation of more films and actors from traditional markets such as Europe. It also means the rise of movies and stars from non-traditional markets as well. Thus the globalization of the film industry has meant many things to many different people, but what it has meant to everyone involved from production to consumption is greater access and opportunity. Hopefully, the global film industry will continue along this path.

Resources

Arts.Mic: Three Countries With Booming Movie Industries That Are Not the U.S.

BBC: How the Global Box Office is Changing Hollywood

Vanity Fair: Avengers Age of Ultron is Already a Huge, Hulking Hit at the Box Office

Business Insider: The Highest Grossing Movies of 2014

Grantland: All the World’s a Stage

Law Without Borders: The Intersection of Hollywood and the Indian Film Industry

Los Angeles Daily News: Why TV, Film Production is Running Away From Hollywood.

European Parliament Think Tank: An Overview of Europe’s Film Industry

BBC: Australia Film Industry Hurt by Strong Currency

International Journal of Cultural Policy: Cultural Globalization and the Dominance of the American Film Industry

UN: Nigeria’s Film Industry a Potential Gold Mine

Festival De Cannes: History of the Festival

100% Pure New Zealand: History of New Zealand Screen Industry

Michael Sliwinski

Michael Sliwinski (@MoneyMike4289) is a 2011 graduate of Ohio University in Athens with a Bachelor’s in History, as well as a 2014 graduate of the University of Georgia with a Master’s in International Policy. In his free time he enjoys writing, reading, and outdoor activites, particularly basketball. Contact Michael at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Globalization of Cinema: What’s Next? appeared first on Law Street.

With the recent attack on Charlie Hebdo staff in Paris, freedom of speech at large was assaulted. To show that freedom of thought has not–and will not–be eliminated, I thought I would illustrate several recent court decisions across the globe that have advocated for freedom of expression.

Joseph Stalin’s Grandson

According to the Russian News Agency, Joseph Stalin’s grandson had his defamation lawsuit complaint dismissed, which claimed that the newspaper Novaya Gazeta defamed his grandfather in a 2009 article. Yevgeny Dzhugashvili filed a lawsuit against the Novaya Gazeta in 2010 for publishing articles about shooting prisoners in 1940 in Katyn, Poland.

In explaining its decision, the European Court of Human Rights claimed that the article “concerned an event of significant historical importance and that both the event and historical figures involved, such as the applicant’s grandfather, inevitably remain open to public scrutiny and criticism.”

South Korean Journalists

Two South Korean journalists were acquitted Friday of charges that they defamed the South Korean president’s brother, Park Ji-man. The journalists, Choo Chin-woo, a reporter for SisaIN, and Kim Ou-joon, a host of a political podcast, stated that Ji-man might have been involved in the murder of Ji-man’s relative, according to The New York Times.

Choo and Kim were originally acquitted in October 2013, but prosecutors appealed the verdict. The prosecutors sought long prison terms, and several free speech organizations protested the second trial, claiming that the prosecutors were causing the journalists to censor themselves.

This win is big for freedom of expression advocates because of South Korea’s perceived lack of tolerance for dissent among critics. In particular, critics point to the burden of proof in defamation cases within South Korea, which is placed on the defendant, rather than on the prosecution.

Super Bowl Prostitution

Earlier this week, Janice Lee, who was the subject of a TMZ article last year entitled, “Super Bowl Prostitution Bust,” sued several media outlets, most notably TMZ and the New York Daily News, for defamation.

Lee’s complaint claims that TMZ’s article contained false statements of fact, such as Lee’s business was a front to funnel profits from pimps, according to Entertainment Law Digest. Lee’s complaint alleges that she sells wigs and has “never touched illegal drugs and has never engaged in prostitution or the operation of a prostitution ring.”

TMZ’s article also stated that Lee was in a “a small army of Asian hookers … who take credit cards.” Moreover, the article included her picture and referred to her as an “arrested prostitute.”

Lee says in her complaint that she has been “humiliated among millions of readers and all of her community as a criminal; as a prostitute; as a gang member and as part of an organized criminal enterprise.” Lee is seeking an injunction that would cause the media outlets in her complaint to clarify and retract any false statements about her.

Joseph Perry

Joseph Perry is a graduate of St. John’s University School of Law whose goal is to become a publishing and media law attorney. He has interned at William Morris Endeavor, Rodale, Inc., Columbia University Press, and is currently interning at Hachette Book Group and volunteering at the Media Law Resource Center, which has given him insight into the legal aspects of the publishing and media industries. Contact Joe at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Recent Defamation Decisions Show Freedom of Speech is Alive and Well appeared first on Law Street.

The United States and North Korea have had an acrimonious relationship for more than 60 years. America has not only invaded North Korea, but also maintains support for North Korea’s enemies as well as levies punitive sanctions. North Korea conversely has persistently agitated the United States with provocations, both against it and its allies in order to seek an amendment to the sanctions.

With all this in mind then, it is fair to explore how this relationship became so toxic. Certainly war couldn’t be the only factor as the United States now has working relationships with Japan, Germany, and even Vietnam following large-scale wars with each. The answer must lie somewhere else and thus it is important to explore the history of the relationship between the two nations and some of the major flash points.

History of Communist Korea and the Korean War

Although people have been living on the Korean peninsula where North and South Korea sit for thousands of years, North Korea in its current form is relatively new. Near the end of WWII in 1945, Soviet troops kicked out the occupying Japanese forces in the northern parts of Korea. The Americans forced out Japanese forces in the south. It was assumed that at some point the two Koreas would then become one, although exact dates and times were never set. One thing was clear though, the groups deciding the future of Korea did not really include the Koreans themselves, but rather the world’s major powers.

Originally the United States and the Soviet Union discussed creating a trusteeship in which the countries would only govern in Korea until Korea was ready to govern itself; however, when a provisional democratically elected Korean government proved ineffective, the Soviets rejected further efforts, leading the U.S. to appeal to the United Nations. The United Nations decreed there should be one government and the South followed through by electing a pro-democratic government. The Soviets rejected this election.

Instead, one year later, the North Korean Communist Party was created with Soviet-sponsored guidance. One of its leaders became the founder and eventual leader of North Korea two years later in 1948, when Kim Il-Sung declared the nation the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). In response to the communist overtones of the government established in the North, in 1950 South Korea declared its independence, leading to a North Korean invasion and the beginning of the Korean War.

Following the North’s invasion and thanks to the Soviet Union’s boycott of the United Nations, the United States was able to have the actions condemned and create a multinational force to come to the aid of the South. Aid was needed too, as the North Korean advance had almost completely overrun the entire peninsula when the American-led effort began to materialize. Led by George MacArthur, the Americans pushed the North Koreans out of the South entirely.

MacArthur wanted more, and thus aimed to push them all the way back to the Yalu River on the border of China. In response the North Koreans were assisted by Chinese soldiers, who despite taking heavy casualties pushed the American coalition back near the thirty-eighth parallel where the borders had been at the start. What followed was a stalemate that saw more action outside of Korea, where MacArthur was recalled after calling for an escalation to the conflict including the use of nuclear weapons against China. The conflict finally reached a ceasefire in 1953 following the election of President Eisenhower. The map below shows the progression of the war; the red represents North Korean forces, and the green South Korean forces. 

Map Courtesy of Roke via Wikimedia

While the conflict technically ended in 1953 with the deaths of more than 50,000 Americans and over a million Koreans and Chinese, it is important to note that the war is not officially over. An armistice was indeed signed, but that only ended the conflict; technically the war is not over until a peace treaty is signed. Also interesting is that South Korea was not a signatory to the armistice. Regardless of the exact terms the war left the Korean peninsula divided into two very different nations. Watch the video below for a good overview of the war.

North Korea and the United States: Post-Korean War

The Immediate Aftermath

Despite its infrastructure being basically destroyed by U.S. bombing, coupled with the fact that it lost nearly 12 percent of its population, the North actually rebounded well following the war. This was due mostly to huge infusions of aid from both China and the Soviet Union. This assistance led to rapid industrialization through the rest of the 1950s and on through the 1960s, with North Korea being the more economically advanced Korea at the close of the decade.

Following this, however, the North Korean economy began to slow down as it started to exhaust its industrial capability and accrued massive debt in search of new technology from the West. While North Korea sputtered, the nation to the south took off. Since 1950, the economy of South Korea has grown by an average of seven percent, with only two years of negative growth during a crisis in the mid-nineties. The last year that North Korea’s GDP equaled that of the South was 1976, according to a study published by the CIA.

Unlike the North, the South’s economic rise was not predicated on heavy industry, but instead on international trade. Utilizing a well-educated workforce and a campaign of state intervention in which money was funneled into particular companies whose families were trusted by the government, known as chaebols, companies from the South such as Samsung were enabled to grow into multinational corporations capable of competing with any western firms. South Korea was also able to adapt in a time of turmoil, namely by overhauling its inept financial system which was exposed following the Asian financial crisis in 1997-1998. Thus by the end of 2013, South Korea’s economy was the world’s fourteenth largest. Watch the video below for a comparison of the two economies.

South Korea has also been enabled by its political transformation. For roughly the first 40 years after independence, the South was ruled by strongmen. These leaders engaged in every measure of violent repression imaginable and in many ways mirrored their counterparts to the north. However, with the democratically elected Roh Tae-Woo in 1987, that began to change. Following him were two more democratically elected presidents who were not linked to the old regime, as Roh was. This marked a major turn toward liberalism for South Korea.  Nonetheless, with the election of Park Geun-Hye, the daughter of one the most notorious South Korean authoritarian leaders, questions still remain.

North Korean leadership has been much more clear cut since the end of the war. Specifically, since the end of the Korean War the North has been ruled solely by the Kim family, who has created a cult of personality in North Korea in which they are portrayed as gods.

Assasinations and Attacks

While North Korea may have given up hopes for military conquest, at least temporarily, following the war it still tried to ensure its agenda by less direct means. This played out primarily though assassination attempts against South Korean political leadership, seen as puppets for a U.S. master. From the late 1960s through the early 1980s several assassination attempts were carried out on the president’s life, and while they all failed, one in 1974 led to the death of the first lady. In 1987 the North stepped up its efforts by bombing a South Korean Airliner, which garnered it a place on the list of the countries that support terrorism as designated by the United States. Since then North Korea has been even more overt, now occasionally actively attacking South Korean military units, and most importantly building and testing nuclear weapons.

The North Goes Nuclear

In 1985 North Korea signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Chief among the treaty’s goals is limiting the number of countries with nuclear weapons. In 1993, North Korea was accused of running a nuclear weapons program. In response, it threatened to leave the NPT and was only pacified in the following year when it was given aid in order to halt its program.

For the next eight years the North promised to halt its program in exchange for nuclear power plants built by the United States to provide electricity, as well as the loosening of sanctions and more aid. In 2002 it was revealed that North Korea had continued with its nuclear weapons program and by 2003 had withdrawn from the NPT. The next few years featured six-party talks in which North Korea tested increasingly long-range missiles and made threats in exchange for aid and other concessions. In 2007, North Korea finally confirmed its first test of a nuclear weapon. Since the test in 2007, North Korea has allegedly tested nuclear weapons twice more, while also continuing to make threats with the goal of attaining incentives such as aid and the easing of sanctions.

Much of this see-sawing has to do with North Korean leadership. Since the inception of the nation more than 60 years ago, North Korea has been ruled solely by one family, the Kims. Currently Kim Jung-Un is Supreme Leader following in the footsteps of his father, Kim Jung Il, and his grandfather, Kim Il-Sung. If there is any question about the power wielded by these men one only has to travel the streets of Pyongyang where portraits of them are everywhere and people flock daily to their birth places as a sign of deference to their greatness.

Potential Future Outcomes

While the world hopes for a breakthrough, the reality of any such event happening soon seems bleak. This begins and ends with the Kim dynasty; as long as this family is in charge there is unlikely to be any sudden liberalization. Each ruling Kim is perceived as the father of his people and also god, so it seems unlikely the people of North Korea would suddenly rise up and overthrow the government. The only group that could potentially topple Kim is his inner circle; as long as they are comfortable and worried for their own safety, which is likely following the execution of Kim’s own uncle last year, a coup seems unlikely. In addition, no matter how bad famine gets it is unlikely to have any impact on the great leader’s status.

U.S. vs. North Korea?

Like Iraq and Iran, North Korea was labeled by President Bush in 2003 as part of the axis of evil. Unlike Iraq, however, North Korea has a powerful ally in China, which has already shown a willingness to come to its aid, making North Korea an unlikely target of American invasion. China does not want to see North Korea fall because it creates a buffer between it and U.S.-backed South Korea, and also because the potential wave of refugees who would flood into China following the fall of North Korea could be very destabilizing.

North Korea has a big army and its people are indoctrinated into a cult that worships the Kim family, not conditions conducive for being greeted as liberators. The country also has nuclear weapons in some form. While its ability to hit the U.S. mainland remains in doubt, that would be a big risk for any American president to take without major provocation. The video below offers the potential outcome of North Korean-U.S. conflict.

Conclusion

As 2015 dawns, the demilitarized zone (DMZ), which divides the two Koreas and countless families, is still the most heavily armed border in the world. At any one time North Korea, the world’s fifth largest army by total numbers, has 75 percent of its 1.1 million member force stationed there. Across the line is an American contingent numbering as many as 37,000 men supported by the majority of the South’s 650,000 strong group. At any provocation these two sides could engage and the tenuous armistice signed more than 60 years ago could vanish.

All hope is not lost, however. As the Kaesong Industrial Complex–a complex in which South Korean companies are allowed to manufacture goods in the North–shows, there is still opportunity for change. For true change to occur in this relationship, North Korea would have to alter just about its entire society, which is unlikely. Additionally though, the United States must also change its attitude to the upper half of the hermit kingdom. As the Sony Hack, which quite possibly may not have been carried out by North Korean hackers but was attributed to them immediately, showed, the bad blood built up between these two nations has made it hard for any real dialogue to occur.

This is a real problem too, as dialogue is necessary to settle grievances. An example of the value of simply speaking to each other is recent attempts at normalcy between the United States and Cuba, which also seemed unfathomable before they began. While that situation was very different and required assistance from the Pope, change has to start somewhere.

Resources

Primary 

World Bank: GDP Rankings

Additional 

BBC: North Korea Profile

United States History: The Korean War

National Campaign to End the Korean War: Korean Peace Treaty Campaign

Country Studies: The Post-War Economy

New Jersey Government: Fact Sheet: the Korean War

Foreign Affairs: Six Markets to Watch South Korea

Guardian: Timeline

CNN: North Korea Nuclear Timeline Fast Facts

CNN: Witness

Daily News: Kim Jung Un

Economist: George Bush and axis of evil

Quora: Why Hasn’t the US tried to take down North Korea

CNN: North and South

Guardian: FBI Doubts

Michael Sliwinski

Michael Sliwinski (@MoneyMike4289) is a 2011 graduate of Ohio University in Athens with a Bachelor’s in History, as well as a 2014 graduate of the University of Georgia with a Master’s in International Policy. In his free time he enjoys writing, reading, and outdoor activites, particularly basketball. Contact Michael at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The US and North Korea: The Relationship at the 38th Parallel appeared first on Law Street.

So, it seems the self-touted “fearless” leader of North Korea is suffering from some sort of ankle, foot, or other lower body-related ailment. Until footage surfaced of Kim Jong-un walking with a cane, he hadn’t been seen in over a month. He was last seen before his disappearance attending a ceremony commemorating the twentieth anniversary of the death of his grandfather, the first leader of North Korea.

His sudden absence kicked off a slew of strange, but somewhat positive events, including a high-status official admitting to the use of prison camps in North Korea. Prior to this statement conceding simply that they exist, North Korean officials denied it wholeheartedly. Admitting the truth is the first step to making progress.

While he was gone, political leaders from North and South Korea met to discuss the state of affairs between the enemy nations. They sat at the SAME table in the SAME room and even appeared to share a laugh about the SAME remark. Even a forced laugh is a step in the right direction as far as foreign relations go.

OMG, North Korea, you have the BEST sense of humor…

Kim Jong-un’s sister, Kim Yo-jong, was thought to be in charge of the country during his absence. This should have pleased feminists — “yay women in power” and all — despite the fact that she was probably just as bad as her brother.

Yes, the time of his unexplained absence could have been seen as a nice time. Theoretically, we could all look back on it as fondly as an old, single cat lady would reminisce about her senior prom. Unless she is a single cat lady by choice because she hates people, in which case her overbearing mother probably forced her to go to the prom in order to live vicariously through her daughter.

However, despite the good that occurred in his absence, the international community didn’t seem thrilled. Let’s all admit it, we sort of…missed Kim Jong-un. I mean, I sure did — it was tough to find things to poke fun at during his absence. The international media had a bit of a collective panic attack inquiring where the man could possibly BE!

Come back to me, Kim Jung Un!

Now our buddy Kim Jong-un is back, most likely along with his bull-like determination to thwart or prevent any positive relationships from forming between his “perfect” nation and other parts of the world. No one knows how to rule a kingdom of isolation better than he does. I think if he were to claim that Disney stole the plot for Frozen from his life, he would be more likely to win damages than that woman from the U.S. I mean, he is EXACTLY like Elsa in that they both run isolated kingdoms and have a sister. Woah, crazy similarities! North Korea is also cold. WHAT? Maybe he even has some powers to freeze things with his emotions and the media doesn’t know about it yet! Disney clearly based Elsa off of Kim Jong-un. Those creative thieves!

I digress…

Welcome back, Kim Jong-un! Time to start doing the crazy things for which you are known, so we all have something to make fun of. Maybe something a little more bonkers than usual to make up for lost time. It’s good to have him back, isn’t it?

Comedic gold

Marisa Mostek

Marisa Mostek loves globetrotting and writing, so she is living the dream by writing while living abroad in Japan and working as an English teacher. Marisa received her undergraduate degree from the University of Colorado in Boulder and a certificate in journalism from UCLA. Contact Marisa at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post We Missed You, Kim Jong-un appeared first on Law Street.