"Sex Among Allies: Military Prostitution in U.S.-Korea Relations
The article by Katherine H. S. Moon portrays a very innovative way of looking at the sex trade industry in South Korea as a product of and essential component to South Korea's security, specifically the security provided by U.S. forces.
To summarize the issue, essentially Moon explains the history of sex trade in Korea. It began in WWII with comfort women for the Japanese forces in Korea. This was a forced business for Korean women under the oppression of the Japanese soldiers. Then, it continued all the way through the Korean War when American forces established clubs and bars for servicemen to pick up women and meet their needs. The industry is still going even today.
The Korean economy was so bad at the time that most women did not have employment and needed some means for providing for themselves and their families. This is how the relationship started. Then, as time went along, it became a staple for troops in Korea and the women who needed work. They each depend upon the industry of sex, or at the very least expect it. This is an interesting, yet disturbing situation.
On one hand, allowing sexual labor greatly threatens the security of the Korean people, especially the women who work, on a personal, health, and cultural scale. These women are not safe in daily life (my simple definition of security) because their health is at risk, they can become depressed from the work, and society shuns them for violating deep-rooted, ancient cultural norms (such as racial purity and sexual purity). This is a security crisis for an old, priceless nation of people.
On the other hand, taking away the sex trade industry also threatens security. Sexual labor brings economic security to the women who work, the clubs who own them, and the bartenders who serve them and servicemen drinks. The sex trade industry is also being portrayed by Moon and other scholars as a key ingredient in maintaining U.S. troops to protect South Korea from North Korea, China, and other outside nations (actors) that threaten their security as a nation. The availability of sexual partners on a whim, for cheap, is seen as a desirable part of a soldier's stay in Korea and necessary to keep troops coming back.
However, as Moon also sees, I do not think this is the case any longer. Korean people are seeing the terrible effects of such a relationship. They could once overlook these because of the military-based security benefits reaped from sex trade. However, the definition of security has changed and so have the climate.
People now see security as not just militarily based but culturally, economically, and socially. The climate now involves a pan-Korean nationalist movement to reunite North and South Korea, thereby eliminating an enemy and the need for the U.S. troops that fuel the sex trade. Thus, the sex trade threatens security in today's world moreso than it protects security. With reunification becoming a topic of conversation and possibly a movement, I believe there is no longer room for sex trade and that the women who's personal security is threatened by it have the chance for a safer, better life someday.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
FLEFF on Security in China
Zone of Initial Dilution
Through our class on security politics in East Asia, we have discussed and studied various security issues. We revisited an issue prevalent in China by viewing a foreign documentary on the points of destruction, displacement of persons, and pollution caused by the building of the "Three Gorges Dam" and other dams on the Yangzte River. The movie was, in fact, slow and only grazed the surface of the problem. However, it did put some visuals to the pages of articles we read throughout the class.
The thing I took away from the film was that there is a huge environmental crisis occurring as a result of the bridge's construction. However, two images served to show that even those sick and in danger of dying from the pollution and displacement see the benefit of the dams.
The first image was a billboard with a shining display of the words "Three Gorges Dam." The billboard was striking because of its placement among gray and decaying buildings and landscape. The sign was not vandalized, dirty, or anything of the like. This can be taken as the people living near the dam support the dam for what it can mean to China: more energy, renewable resources, and a boost to their expanding economy and place in the world. For them, it's a worthwhile sacrifice of their personal security for the security of China as a state and Chinese as a people. Or maybe it's cultural submission. The movie did not address this, but I believe it is one way to see the issue.
The second image was the still image of a rock and then the visitors center for the "TGD" (Three Gorges Dam). This shows that the government and the wealthier population of China also sees the benefits of the dams. This is a huge achievement and investment for China's future with regards to economy, an expanding population, and future environmental security issues. I think the movie shows that the dam can go either way. It can be a huge loss of human life that is unacceptable and China should find another way to provide clean energy for billions of people. Or.... the dam makes a big mess now to allow for a clean, happy tomorrow.
I think this is a horrible way to pave the way for future Chinese. The images of the documentary are destruction, poverty, and disregard for the peasant population of China. I think the upper class regards those displaced by the dams as disposable and stupid, as supported by many of the comments in a previously viewed film, China Blue. There are social, economic, and cultural forces at play here with regards to security and they are on the wrong side of human rights and moral issues.
Through our class on security politics in East Asia, we have discussed and studied various security issues. We revisited an issue prevalent in China by viewing a foreign documentary on the points of destruction, displacement of persons, and pollution caused by the building of the "Three Gorges Dam" and other dams on the Yangzte River. The movie was, in fact, slow and only grazed the surface of the problem. However, it did put some visuals to the pages of articles we read throughout the class.
The thing I took away from the film was that there is a huge environmental crisis occurring as a result of the bridge's construction. However, two images served to show that even those sick and in danger of dying from the pollution and displacement see the benefit of the dams.
The first image was a billboard with a shining display of the words "Three Gorges Dam." The billboard was striking because of its placement among gray and decaying buildings and landscape. The sign was not vandalized, dirty, or anything of the like. This can be taken as the people living near the dam support the dam for what it can mean to China: more energy, renewable resources, and a boost to their expanding economy and place in the world. For them, it's a worthwhile sacrifice of their personal security for the security of China as a state and Chinese as a people. Or maybe it's cultural submission. The movie did not address this, but I believe it is one way to see the issue.
The second image was the still image of a rock and then the visitors center for the "TGD" (Three Gorges Dam). This shows that the government and the wealthier population of China also sees the benefits of the dams. This is a huge achievement and investment for China's future with regards to economy, an expanding population, and future environmental security issues. I think the movie shows that the dam can go either way. It can be a huge loss of human life that is unacceptable and China should find another way to provide clean energy for billions of people. Or.... the dam makes a big mess now to allow for a clean, happy tomorrow.
I think this is a horrible way to pave the way for future Chinese. The images of the documentary are destruction, poverty, and disregard for the peasant population of China. I think the upper class regards those displaced by the dams as disposable and stupid, as supported by many of the comments in a previously viewed film, China Blue. There are social, economic, and cultural forces at play here with regards to security and they are on the wrong side of human rights and moral issues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)