|
This page is graphically intense with long load times due to photos. However, the photos and narratives by the men who served at Osan Air Base makes the wait well worthwhile. The opinions expressed are those of the author and in no way represents any official statement of Osan AB or the USAF. 
RETURN TO MAIN TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgement: Special thanks to Jack Terwiel , Capt, USAF (Ret) of the Osan Retired Activities Office for photos of base (past and present). Special thanks to Jackie Turner , 7th AF Historian, and John Okonski , 51st FW Historian, for their assistance with photos and guidance on the history of Osan AB. Special thanks to Ms. Jin Dal-lae and other staff members of the Jisan-dong Ward Office for taking the time to research and provide historical materials on Songtan and Pyongtaek City. Thanks to the Shinjang 1-dong Ward Office for taking time to provide information on the roads in the area. Thanks to the Seojong-dong Ward Office staff and Chief of the ward Office, Choi Yun-su , for their help in providing maps to unravel the confusing boundary issues. Much of the information on Pyongtaek City and the Songtan area was extracted from the Pyeongtaek City History, Pyeongtaek Si Sa .
1970s View of Osan AB (USAF Photo) CAMP HUMPHREYS HISTORYCamp Humphreys (K-6) Camp Humphreys is 4 miles northeast of the city of Pyongtaek, and adjacent to the town of Anjung-ri. It is 1 mile northeast of Seojeong-ja and approximately 30 miles south of Osan City. Camp Humphreys is located 55 miles south of Seoul on Highway #1 and eight miles east-southeast of Highway #1 on highway #45. It is eight miles west of the Bay of Asan on the west coast of Korean peninsula.The immediate area around Camp Humpreys is mostly agricultural and consists mainly of rice fields. There are some rolling hills in the vicinity, but for the most part the elevations are less than 150 feet. Urban areas are situated mostly to the northeast of the airfield. The Ansong River passes 3 miles to the northwest of the camp. The Ansong River flows from the east to west toward the West Sea. About 12 miles west of Camp Humphreys the river widens and empties into the Asan Bay, near the now defunct Koon-ni Range. Weather Although Dujeong-ri is next to Camp Humphreys, to the south, most of the haze and smoke that affects the airfield comes from Pyongtaek and Seojeong-ja. The numerous areas of water around Cp Humphreys has a significant effect on the local weather. The abundant moisture is responsible for most of the fog and stratus which occurs in the area. This is especially true from the spring through fall. Generally flat terrain from the south through west allows advection of fog and stratus from the river, bay, or West Sea. Even when no fog or stratus is over the Asan Bay/West Sea, the extra moisture advected with a light westerly wind at night can cause problems when combined with radiational cooling. The Ansong River to the northwest can also contribute to the fog problem. The river is very close to the airfield and fog is advected in during periods of light northwesterly flow. When an easterly wind occurs during the night or early morning fog will normally not form, or will dissipate rapidly. Since the mountains the east help to produce a downslope wind this results in a drying and adiabatically warming effect in the low levels. Another good moisture source for fog are the irrigated rice fields which contain standing water during the growing season (May-September). There are various seasonal effects from the local bodies of water. The West Sea provides moisture for snowshowers during the winter as cold air is advected over the relativel warmer West Sea. Although Cp Humphreys is somewhat protected, if the winds are from 260-300° then snowshowers will be advected over the airfield. During the spring and summer land/sea breezes can set up during periods of weak pressure gradients. The Asan Bay can channel winds when the prevailing direction is 270-310°, this is especially common during the winter after a frontal passage. Thunderstorms occur mainly during spring through fall with most of the convective activity associated with the polar and monsoonal front. Airmass thunderstorms usually occur further inland over the mountains. (Source: Global Security.org for details of Camp.) Camp Humphreys is also a growing community with new construction of troop barracks, BOQ s, a youth center, an 80 room lodge, a mini-mall and family housing to name a few. On Camp Humphreys there are six family housing units that are designated for the command positions and their Sergeants Majors. Phase I of a three phase program of 180 units has just opened in August 2003. With new construction and renovations of BOQ s and troop billets, many soldiers are being issued statements of non-availability to reside off-post. The Housing Office on Camp Humphreys assigns family housing, BOQ/SBEQ s and offers referral services for off-post housing. Family members are authorized to visit with service members during their tour to Korea. Permission is required in advance to ensure that the visit is not longer than 30 days. Camp Humphreys Lodging is available on a space available basis for family members or hotel arrangements can be made through the Lodging office. (Source: ArmedForces.net.) On 1 Jun 2006 it was reported that workers were in the early stages of building a new fitness center at Camp Humphreys that officials say will be the U.S. military’s biggest in South Korea. The center — complete with a gym, indoor pool, running track and four-story parking garage — is one of three fitness facilities currently under construction at Camp Humphreys. The post is slated eventually to become the U.S. military’s top headquarters installation in South Korea and its largest installation on the peninsula. The center is an $18.4 million project set for completion in January 2008. Going up next to Soldiers’ Field, it will stand three stories and measure 109,512 square feet of indoor space. Among the larger center’s features will be an eight-lane, 25-meter indoor swimming pool; a 626-foot indoor running track, separate rooms for cardio fitness, circuit training, free weights and group exercise; basketball and racquetball courts; a martial arts training room, and climbing walls. Blueprints also call for locker, shower, sauna and steam rooms, an equipment-issue area, administrative offices, classrooms and a multipurpose meeting area for social activities. Also planned are a lounge and snack bar and an outdoor recreation pavilion. The parking garage will house 200 spaces and be connected to the center by an enclosed sky bridge. Work began in January at Camp Humphreys on two other gyms, each to cost about $7 million. One, in the MP Hill section of the post, is due for completion by February 2007; another, in the post’s Zoeckler Station area, is to be completed by May 2007. Each will be a two-story structure with 45,000 square feet of space. Of the three new facilities, only the largest will have a pool and running track. Hanjin Heavy Industries and Construction Company Ltd. is building the largest facility. The other two are being built by the Namwha Construction Company Ltd. Both firms are under contract with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (Source: Stars and Stripes.)  Family Housing Camp Humphreys (2002) Major Units at Camp Humphreys (2006)
Expansion of Camp Humphreys and LPP Under the 2002 Land Partnership Plan (LPP), the U.S. military agreed to return more than half the land it uses as bases in South Korea. The area to be returned amounted to 41.14 million pyeong (135.8 million sq. meter), 55.3 percent of the 74.40 million pyeong currently occupied by the U.S. military. In exchange, the agreement called for 1.54 million pyeong of land to be newly granted to the U.S. forces. In Mar 2004, the U.S. and ROK are negotiated an amendment to the LPP whereby the land grants planned for Uijongbu and Ichon was cancelled, and a larger grant of land at Camp Humphreys provided instead. On 1 June Yonhap News reported that the USFK had requested South Korea grant for 3.2-3.3 million pyeong of land in Pyeongtaek. Later the land was increased to 3.5 million pyeong and approved by the National Assembly. (See Anti-US Expansion Protests in the Pyongtaek Area (Jan 2006-???) for detailed 2006 chronology of events.) PYEONGTAEK AREA EVENTSJanuary 2006Pyeongtaek Expansion Plan (Jan 2006) On 6 Dec 2005, the South Korean government released details of a plan to spend $19 billion to improve infrastructure, upgrade technology and expand public space in Pyeongtaek, future home to much of the U.S. military in South Korea. The 15-year plan calls for changes from improving the city's seaport to building a high-tech agricultural center to soundproofing buildings, according to the Korean Ministry of Government Administration and House Affairs. One estimate projects that Pyeongtaek's population will more than double in the next 15 years, from 360,000 to 800,000 by 2020. Korea Base/Camp Location Map However, it stated that 80 percent of the land for the Camp Humphreys move was procured, but 20 percent still needed to be "condemned" through the courts. Though construction at Camp Humphreys is underway, the expansion of the perimeter has not taken place pending the procurement of the remaining lands. The land procurement process was to have been completed at the end of 2005. Until the land is formally transferred to the USFK, the perimeter expansion cannot take place. Joongang Ilbo, 5 Dec 2005 stated the government would invest more than 18.8 trillion won ($18.1 billion) by 2020 to develop Pyeongtaek. The Home Affairs Ministry said the money is to help increase the population of Pyeongtaek to 800,000, from the current 360,000. The ministry said nearly 1.5 trillion won will be spent to improve farms, build industrial complexes and develop tourist facilities near Pyeongtaek Lake. The Defense Ministry also said it will invest nearly 1.4 trillion won on roads, parks and noise-proof facilities for residents. The ministry will also construct housing for relocated residents. More than 16 trillion won will be invested to develop harbors in the region along with other industrial development projects. (Source: Joongang Ilbo, 6 Dec 2005.) Site alterations for American military base vex the allies (Jan 2006) On 9 Jan it was announced that the US and the ROK were haggling over U.S. demands for additional construction work at Camp Humphreys. "We are reviewing a request by U.S. Forces Korea to raise the level of the ground by two to three meters (7-10 feet) at the new base site in Pyeongtaek," a senior official at the Ministry of National Defense said. The request was made in November, he added.  Camp Humphreys (K6) (Pyeongtaek Times) According to the official, the United States said the 2,328-acre site was vulnerable to flooding from a stream nearby (Ansong River). The additional work, he estimated, would cost up to 600 billion won ($607 million), and Seoul rejected the request both for reasons of cost and because it would be difficult to find enough soil to raise the elevation that much. The U.S. military estimated the cost of the additional work at $505 million, he added. (SITE NOTE: The difficulty in finding fill is hogwash as the ROK simply cuts mountain down to get the soil as a standard practice. There is a small mountain range about 7 miles south of Camp Humphreys with tops to 958 feet. Larger mountains are located NE-E-SW, all within 20 miles with tops to 2293 feet directly south and tops above 1000 feet mainly southeast.) At a meeting last month to discuss the matter, Seoul reportedly said that embankments along the stream would provide sufficient protection; Washington reportedly disagreed, calling for protection that would ensure the safety of the base in a 50-year or 100-year flood in the area. Seoul is responsible for the land cost, construction costs and moving expenses for the Yongsan Garrison in Seoul, but will foot the bill only for the land to be used by the U.S. 2d Infantry Division, now stationed north of Seoul. The United States will pay for new facilities and for moving its troops into their new quarters. The ministry reportedly will commission its own study on the question of vulnerability to flooding as it prepares for more bilateral meetings in March. (Source: Joongang Ilbo.) Readers of the Lost Nomad Blog commented that the "stream" (jeon) is really the Anseong River (kang) and in their opinion it is a legitimate concern. The area in question are now rice paddies. Some posted that the Camp Humphreys flood of 1998 is an example of this being a flood plain area -- though the levees appear to be 25-30 feet high. The problem is that the flood waters have a tendency to bypass the levees and follow the roadways -- as they do in Seoul during its annual floods. On 21 Jan Defense Minister Yoon Yoon Kwang-ung denied any alleged discord between the allies. The two sides have reportedly been at odds over a U.S. request for raising the ground at Camp Humphreys. Last November the U.S. military asked the Korean government to fund the flood control project.) February 2006Claim Stray Bullet Hits House outside Camp Humphreys (Feb 2006) According to the Stars and Stripes on 16 Feb, a Korean man who lives near Camp Humphreys told local police a bullet from the installation struck his house on 9 Feb. Police in Pyeongtaek said they found a hole about 4 inches in diameter in the side of the house. But they turned up no evidence it had been produced by a bullet or other projectile. The house is in Pang-sung, a section of Pyeongtaek City that includes Anjung-ri, where Camp Humphreys is located.Police said a lab sample they took from the hole would be sent to the Korean National Institute of Scientific Investigation for analysis. They identified the resident only as a 58-year-old man with the last name Lee. Police said Lee told them a loud explosion shook his house Feb. 9 around 4 a.m., and he thought his boiler had burst. He later discovered the hole, he said, and believed it came from a weapon fired inside Camp Humphreys, police said. U.S. Forces Korea said in a written statement Tuesday that South Korean police on the afternoon of Feb. 9 “conducted an investigation of a possible stray bullet from Camp Humphreys. “Investigators found no evidence of a stray bullet or believed that any damage was caused by the U.S.,” the statement read. "Upon completion of the investigation, the KNP closed the case due to lack of evidence.” Meanwhile, a civic group opposed to the U.S. military’s presence in South Korea staged demonstrations in Seoul to call attention to Lee’s complaint. The Pan-Korean National Task Force Against Expansion of U.S. Bases in Pyeongtaek demonstrated outside South Korea’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) and the U.S. Embassy, calling for a careful investigation of Lee’s complaint, said Kim Yong-han, a leader of the Task Force. Kim said his group wants anyone responsible for endangering Lee to face “punishment.” The MND referred queries to USFK. Constitutional Challenge Rejected on Pyeongtaek USFK Move (Feb 2006) On 24 Feb it was reported that the Constitutional Court rejected a petition by Pyeongtaek residents to declare the agreements between South Korea and the United States in 2004 to relocate U.S. military installations unconstitutional. The petition was filed by about 1,000 people, most of them Pyeongtaek residents. It claimed that the move, which they said was agreed to without the concurrence of the National Assembly in violation of the Constitution, would put unreasonable burdens on Korean taxpayers. The court said the petitioners had no standing in the matter, saying that they would have had to demonstrate a direct attack on their constitutional rights, which they had not. Ministry of Defense Form "Special Team" for Yongsan Relocation On 26 Feb 2006, the Defense Ministry said it would organize a separate body to deal with the relocation of the U.S. base from Yongsan to Pyeongtaek. An official said, "The ministry plans to launch a team in March to take care of the relocation. The team will be in charge of negotiations with the United States and the construction of U.S. bases." The team will be composed of around 80 government officials from the foreign, construction and environment ministries, combining previous departments related to the project. "Local governments and the ministries could not agree on the construction of facilities at the bases, including electricity, roads, railroads and others," the official said. He added that the body will be established under a presidential or prime ministerial decree. (Source: Joongang Ilbo.) (SITE NOTE: With the move to take place starting in 2006, it is strange that another layer of bureaucracy has been added to the mix. It is also strange that the ministries cannot agree on the construction of facilities even though this was previously negotiated at the Ministerial level -- and now want to "negotiate" at the working level. In one sense it is a good idea, though the USFK created a position at Camp Humphreys headed by a Brig General in 2005 to coordinate the various aspects of the move already. In another sense we are wary that this could be simply another foot-dragging move as it will be by Presidential or Prime Minister decree. However, at the same time, the Minister of Defense warned that the move from Yongsan cannot be delayed without reprecussions from the US. The FINAL plan for the relocation to Camp Humphreys from the DMZ area and Yongsan still had not been approved by the ROK as of Feb 2006.) March 2006Rowdy Camp Humphreys Soldier Gets Jail and Discharge An example of a soldier out of control was epitomized when Pfc. Kellyene A. John was sentenced to one year in prison, a bad conduct discharge, reduction to E-1 and total forfeiture of pay and allowances. On 1 Mar the seven-member jury found John guilty of an array of charges. Of four counts of assault, she was found guilty of three -- including punching one soldier in the head; and punching another on the back of the head, shoulder and then hitting his head with a beer bottle Three of the assault counts and one of the drunk-and-disorderly counts grew from 7 Sep 2005 events at Camp Humphreys. According to the prosecution, the violence began when John's boyfriend took offense at another soldier who made no response when John asked for a cigarette. The boyfriend confronted the soldier, setting in motion a series of violent incidents. (NOTE: Her boyfriend had a separate court martial and received jail time, but no discharge.)Other charges stemmed from an off-base Osan AB incident. The charges involving misconduct toward a noncommissioned officer and resisting apprehension arose from a 5 Sep 2005 incident in which Air Force security police assigned to Osan Air Base were summoned to the nearby Asia Hotel on a noise complaint from hotel staff. The officers were sent to a hotel room in which John was an occupant. During a noisy confrontation with the officers, John, the jury found, was disrespectful to 51st SFS USAF TSgt. George F. Roach by yelling and bumping him with her head. She disobeyed his lawful order to back up and cease screaming. April 2006Camp Humphreys FINALLY has Master Plan for USFK Relocation -- BUT WHOOPS... (Apr-May 2006) On 11 April 2006, the Chosun Ilbo reported that Brig. Gen. Steven Andersen announced that a long-awaited master plan for the move to the new base has been agreed in consultation between the US and ROK side. Andersen said the already existing 547 million sq.m Camp Humphreys there will serve as the core of the base, with an additional 8.55 million sq.m in Daechu-ri and Dodu-ri added to the grounds. Personnel at the base will increase exponentially from 9,000 people to 44,531 by the end of 2008. Of that number, 14,491 will be U.S. service members -- with the rest being dependents.The Master Plan that the two countries are jointly writing is a key blueprint in deciding the specific reorganization timetable, design standard of buildings and size, total relocation costs, and the sharing of costs between the two countries for relocating. The U.S. takes the initiative in framing, but it has to discuss and review details with Korea. The Ministry of National Defense is concerned about the MP delay following the illegal farming situation by some residents and members of the pan-national committee against the expansion of U.S. military bases in Pyeongtaek. But on 27 Apr 2006, the Donga Ilbo ran an article that the Master Plan was again delayed until September. Details were sketchy but it appears that the cost-sharing issues are the primary problem. The repeated delays have sparked concerns that the original plan to finish relocating by 2008 could be hampered. The article is as follows: ROK Surveyors Start Three Months Late A geographic survey of the Camp Humphreys site started on 15 May, some three months later than planned. A team of surveyors from the Korea Cadastral Survey Corporation measured the boundaries of the site and set up markers at 50-100 m intervals. The survey will continue until the end of the month, a Defense Ministry official said. “Once the KCSC completes its job, the two military authorities will conduct a joint survey of the site,” the official added. USFK Command and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Far East District will separately conduct an investigation of the sites where foundations are to be laid, with excavation work planned in some 115 areas. (SITE NOTE: There are some serious disagreements dealing with flood control still unresolved.) Meanwhile, the government will wait for three or four months before moving locals out of villages near the site. "Although we ordered locals to leave by the end of June, we can't force them out," said Yoo Jong-sang, a government official in charge of the matter, said. "We will take legal action first by applying for an injunction." (Source: Chosun Ilbo.) May 2006Anniversary of Kwangju Incident (May 2006) Activists attempted to link the Kwangju riots to the fight over the disputed lands outside of Camp Humphreys. The Pan-National Committee publicized the effort via the internet and progressive newspapers, but the turnout was less that expected. The plan of the activists failed as there was not an upsurge of popular dissent -- and the protest fizzled. There is less interest in politics amongst students and there is a shift to a conservative viewpoint as indicated on numerous surveys. Much of this is due to dissatisfaction with the "reformist" policies of President Roh -- and spills over into the activism which is normally associated with the "progressive" or left-leaning position.BACKGROUND: "Kwangju incident" of May 1980 was in fact a major 10-day civil uprising in the ROK that resulted in the death of 191 Koreans. It erupted on the 17th of May and control of Kwangju was restored on the 27th of May. (NOTE: The term "rebels", "rebellion", and "revolt" cause harsh responses from Koreans with respect to this incident. Instead the preferred terms are "democracy fighters" or "freedom fighters". The term "riots" and "civil disorder" are unacceptable by the people of Kwangju as it embodies the idea of "mob rule.") However, recently released documents show that as early as 7 May, U.S. officials in Seoul and Washington were aware that the Korean military was planning to use Special Forces trained to fight behind the lines in a war with North Korea against unarmed student and worker protests spreading throughout Korea. June 2006Pyeongtaek merchants ask Col Taliento to resign (June-July 2006) In the on-going story of how Col. Michael Taliento has taken HIS problem and made it THEIR problem. According to the Stars and Stripes about 300 South Korean merchants gathered outside Camp Humphreys’ gates on 26 June to demand Col. Michael J. Taliento’s resignation following his decision to place two local bars off-limits to soldiers. The problem lies is in the simple fact that the US military drinking age is 21 while the off-base ROK drinking age is 20. The bars are located on the ROK territory and Col Taliento is mandating restrictions based on something that is NOT illegal off-base. In the past, Taliento mandated that the clubs enforce the underage drinking rule by checking IDs at the door. However, the US military would NOT provide any military personnel to enforce its rules. It is very plain to see the injustice of this system.Taliento told the Stars and Stripes he placed Duffy’s Club and the Bay Watch Club off-limits for serving alcohol to underage soldiers. The USFK raised the legal drinking age for its personnel to 21 on Nov. 1, 2004. South Korea’s drinking age is 20. The USFK perception -- which Taliento is mandating -- is that if off-base bars sell alcohol to underage USFK personnel, the USFK can place those bars off-limits. Taliento stated that "I represent the command," and have to "enforce the command policies and the law," he said. But he stressed that he doesn't have the authority to override USFK regulations. Taliento said undercover Army Criminal Investigative Command agents tracked the violations several weeks ago as part of a joint crime suppression team with South Korean police. (NOTE: In the past thise "joint crime suppression team" did NOT appear to include any KOREAN police in the sting operations. Taliento seems to construe that ROK police acquiescence to a "monitoring" operation is "active" participation in a sting operation. Under Korean law, these "entrapment" circumstances have been ruled in 2006 by the Korean Supreme Court as illegal when it threw out a conviction of a drug smuggler entrapped by the ROK Police. In effect, the USFK Army CID knowingly allowed the underage parties to enter the club creating an "entrapment" scenario. According to the bar owners is was a "sting operation" in which the bar owners were set up to fail. The agent who ordered the alcohol was of legal drinking age while the agent who paid was underage. Kim Ki-ho of the Anjung-ri Merchants Association said USFK personnel on 30 June admitted fault in the recent undercover investigations.) “They basically monitored and evaluated the effectiveness of the ID-carding process,” Taliento said. He added, “We had told the community we would do these checks.” The two offending bars were not doing the ID checks and they attended an Area III Armed Forces Disciplinary Control Board to explain their side of the story where Taliento made the decision to place the clubs off limits -- informing the club owners of the decision by letter on 23 Jun and the ban went into effect on 26 Jun. South Korean news reports stated that merchants at the protest claimed Taliento was acting like an “occupying forces commander,” who was enforcing his own rules that affected the local economy. One Anjung-ri business leader said local merchants see Taliento’s enforcement efforts as overzealous, and want the U.S. military to replace him. The merchants were to held a 3 p.m. demonstration on 27 Jun outside the camp’s main gate to underscore their objections to Taliento. The merchants also claimed Taliento enforces a midnight, not 1 a.m. curfew, during weekend nights. Taliento said that's not the case, but that his December decision to curtail late-night bus service on Humphreys may have led to that belief. He said that discipline problems, including underage drinking, fighting and other misconduct were occurring on the buses, which were running until 2 a.m. Under current rules, the last bus runs from the main gate to the barracks area at midnight, meaning soldiers must either be on the bus, pay for a taxi or hike a couple of miles home late at night. But that doesn’t mean that they can’t stay out until 1 a.m., he said. (SITE NOTE: The net effect is that if the bus service stops at 12, the soldiers must be out of the bars by 11-11:30 to get a ride to the barracks. Taliento cannot claim any "misconceptions" as he -- following common-sense -- knew the consequences of his decision.) Taliento stated that he would reinstate the old bus schedule provided “that we have in place a tenant commander support program that helps place leaders on the buses and around the installation where we have had cases of misconduct,” he added. (SITE NOTE: Again he admitted that it was HIS problem, but it in fact impacts the community. In admitting it was his problem, he also stated his solution but he has taken no action since DECEMBER 2005 to implement such action.) Taliento said he was confident that the situation would be resolved through “communication and dialogue,” and will talk to association leaders this week. “There needs to be a shared sense of ownership and responsibility,” in the support of these USFK policies, he said. “… It’s my hope that this will be resolved. (SITE NOTE: The last time Taliento used his "communication and dialogue" technique in 2005, he forced all bar owners and bar girls into a "training session" at an off-base hotel under the threat of off-limits sanctions. At the "training session" he called the bargils to their faces prostitutes and the bar owners brothel owners and trained them on the "law" as he saw it dealing with off-limits sanctions. The owners in turn promised to terminate any workers found guilty of prostitution -- knowing full-well that the ROK police would not arrest any workers -- and terminate contracts with agencies found to be involved in human trafficking.) (Source: Stars and Stripes.)   Banners of Anti-Taliento Stand (2 Jul 06) (Lost Nomad)   Banners of Anti-Taliento and Letter (2 Jul 06) (Lost Nomad) On 28 Jun, reports stated that the bar owners put themselves off-limits to GIs starting on 26 June. Angry Anjung-ni bar owners strung some "less than flattering signs strung up above the ville lambasting the CP Humphreys commander", according to a blog report.The signs claim the local commander has ruined their local economy and their livelyhoods. Every bar establishment had an apology letter taped to their door explaining they are closed because they just can’t take the interference anymore, and are shutting themselves down indefinitely. The letters indicated that they remained supporters of the soldiers, the US Army, and the US, but their angry was directed at Col Taliento for his "overzealous" use of off-limits sanctions using "credible evidence" as his justification. The merchants were holding daily protest rallies to dramatize their opposition to Taliento saying the bars would remain closed until further notice. They also faxed a letter to USFK commander Gen. B.B. Bell urging Taliento’s removal as Area III commander -- which the USFK stated had been received, but would not comment on. Protest ends on 30 June (June 2006) South Korean merchants halted a weeklong protest against the Area III commander and once again opened their bars and nightclubs to U.S. military personnel. Kim Ki-ho of the Anjung-ri Merchants Association and Yi Hun-hi of the Korea Foreigner Tourist Facility Association met on 30 June with Area III commander Col. Michael J. Taliento Jr. and Brig. Gen. Steven M. Anderson, deputy commanding general of U.S. Forces Korea (Advance Element). Bar owners objected to Taliento’s decision, saying the agent who ordered the alcohol was of legal drinking age while the agent who paid was underage. They called it a “sting operation” in which they were set up to fail. Kim Ki-ho said USFK personnel in the meeting admitted fault in the recent undercover investigations. Kim said future checks are to be conducted by U.S. military personnel, members of the merchant’s association and Pyeongtaek city officials. And while bars are required to do everything they can to prevent sales to minors, they won’t be held responsible for personnel who legally buy alcohol then sneak it to underage buddies. Taliento promised to reinstate late-night bus service that had been suspended in a move local merchants believed forced troops to return to base an hour before their official weekend curfew. Taliento has said discipline problems — including underage drinking, fighting and other misconduct — forced him to suspend the late-night on-base bus service in December. According to Kim, Taliento said the on-post service will begin running until 1:30 a.m. Kim also said that merchants and U.S. officials have agreed to meet monthly to discuss ongoing problems and seek improvements and solutions. “I am not entirely satisfied with today’s agreement, though some of our proposals and complaints are accepted,” Kim told Stars and Stripes. “There are still plenty of things that need to be fixed and improved.” Kim said military patrols through the district seem excessive and tend to create a hostile environment for off-duty troops trying to enjoy themselves. “When stationed in foreign nations, you have to get a good grasp of local people’s sentiments and try to understand them,” he said. You can’t win by “ignoring and fighting against residents’ feelings.” (Source: Stars and Stripes.) June 2006Five Clubs Become "21 and Over" Clubs (July 2006) Less than a month ago Yi Hun-hui, president of the Korea Special Tourist Association, Pyeongtaek Chapter, and Kim Ki-ho, president of the K-6 Merchants Association, called for Taliento’s resignation after he had placed two bars off-limits. Hundreds of bar workers gathered outside the camp to protest and the bars closed their doors to all U.S. troops for about a week. When they met and signed an agreement on June 30, Kim told Stripes that the U.S. military admitted fault in conducting undercover investigations at the bars. Kim later backtracked, telling Stripes that he had misunderstood what Taliento said at the meeting. As Taliento toured the bars, owners were quick to say they were following guidelines on keeping alcohol away from underage troops. Nearly every club had a sign posted on doors or in windows.At five clubs in Anjong-ni, effective immediately, customers must be 21 to even make it in the door. Previously, all the bars welcomed underage customers as long as they weren’t drinking alcohol. But the merchants must address potential drawbacks to that plan, he acknowledged. A policy soldiers perceive as “restrictive” could chase them from Anjung-ri to other areas, he said. The party district outside nearby Osan Air Base is only a $20 taxi ride away from Camp Humphreys. But there are other clubs in Anjung-ni that are still allowing underage troops inside, and it is viewed that not many people will leave the area looking for someplace better to party. A June 30 agreement between Taliento and two merchants’ associations required two clubs — the previously off-limits Duffy’s and Bay Watch — to ban U.S. troops younger than 21. Yi Hun-hui, president of the Korea Special Tourist Association, said this week that he decided to bar underage troops from his Enterprise Club. The owners of two other clubs — Maxim and Dixie Bell — also decided to ban anyone under 21. Taliento said the recent flare-up with the merchants wasn’t the first — and probably won’t be the last. When he arrived in 2004, he said, the military was taking a serious look at what was happening in the entertainment districts outside its gates, and he was given direction to tackle the problems. “I took that guidance and began to engage with the local community,” he said. The work included on- and off-base office visits and training and education sessions. The military created signs the bars could hang to warn troops of the drinking age, hand stamps so busy bartenders could keep track of which soldiers are old enough to drink, and calendars that show the day, month and year someone would have to have been born to be of legal age. Taliento said the military made those efforts to “help them help us manage our policy.” (SITE NOTE: Why should the USFK have to FORCE the ROK bar owners "manage THEIR policy"? Though minor in real world business dealings, on a higher level it is a matter of sovereignty rights where an external national interest is dictating policy to another national interest. But this is simply a mind-game subject.) In the agreement, the merchants agreed to:
In return, Taliento agreed to:
Taliento said he will have a Commanders' Engagement Program in place by Aug. 1 that will clear the way for the return of late-night base shuttle buses. He ended the late-night service last year due to discipline problems, including fights on the buses. Merchants had complained that even though troops can stay out to 1 a.m. on weekends, they felt like they had to be back by midnight so they could catch the last bus back to their living areas. Taliento said it'll be important to continue talking with city officials and merchants to find balance and "a way ahead that serves both of our interests." The move to keep troops younger than 21 — U.S. Forces Korea's legal drinking age — out of some of Anjung-ri bars follows a recent row between the merchants and the U.S. military's Area III leadership. In late June, Area III commander Col. Michael J. Taliento Jr. placed two bars off limits after an undercover investigation found they were selling alcohol to underage soldiers. In response, merchants associations closed all the bars to U.S. personnel, held daily protests and asked U.S. Forces Korea commander Gen. B.B. Bell to relieve Taliento of his command. On June 30, five days after the protests began, Taliento signed a memorandum of agreement with the K-6 Merchants Association and the Korea Special Tourist Association, Pyeongtaek Chapter. (Source: Stars and Stripes.) August 2006K-16 Build to Lease Concept The “build-to-lease” concept is being used successfully at a housing project under way at K-16 Air Base in Seoul, the first such project worked through U.S. Forces Korea. It calls for contractors to front the money to build, operate and maintain the housing and U.S. officials to agree to lease it for 15 years.Contractors must price construction competitively, establish and stick to a schedule, provide a letter of credit equal to 20 percent of the total development cost and follow U.S. law pertaining to the leases. Program manager Richard Bryon with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said contractors also must work with the Corps of Engineers, which will conduct technical reviews of bid proposals, provide construction oversight and certify any facilities before final acceptance. Bryon said all the buildings must meet standards — including Corps of Engineers’ safety standards — “before the customer starts paying rent.” At Camp Humphreys, the customer is the Installation Management Agency-Korea Region Office (KORO). U.S. officials hope to have two three-tower family housing clusters and one four-tower cluster of senior-leader quarters contracted and completed by 2009. They plan to release a request for proposal this fall; contractors will have 60 days to respond.Five to eight potential contractors are to be qualified by next summer, and the top two bidders will earn the contracts and are to start construction by fall 2007. Officials stressed the dates aren’t set in stone, but the contract will call for the family housing to be built within 24 months and the senior quarters within 20. The build-to-lease concept already is being used in Seoul. Under it, South Korean contractors are constructing a housing tower according to detailed U.S. standards. In return, USFK agreed to lease it for 15 years. While only about 5 percent of U.S. troops here have their families living with them, the goal is to increase those percentages, officials said. (SITE NOTE: Previous USFK stats listed 10 percent as the number of in-country families, but may have included families of contractors and DoD civilians.) “It may go up to 20, 30, 50 (percent) or whoever wants to bring their families,” said Kevin Shanahan, housing engineer with KORO, which will determine the housing units’ size and design. The key to keeping the troops and their families happy, Shanahan said, is to let them feel like they’re still living in the States when they’re within the camp’s perimeter.(Source: Stars and Stripes.) (SITE NOTE: We noticed in the article that there seemed to be some waffling on the Sep 22nd submission date that may be delayed due to expected announcements from the October SCM. If there are cuts or dramatic curtailments of manning -- especially over the cost-sharing issues -- there may be reductions in the needs for housing. As of August, this was all speculation.) November 2006Camp Humphreys' New Temporary Gates (Nov 2006) Camp Humphreys primary gate for construction has been the CPX gate to support the trucks entering the base to the construction sites. The Main Gate and CPX gate have been the primary entry points for years.Now temporary gates are in use to support the construction going on to expand the facilities. The existing temporary construction gates are Mool gate, a gate at the post's MP Hill and the Hamjeong gate south of MP Hill, officials said. The Mool gate is the only temporary gate currently in use. Construction vehicles use it but are restricted to a work site in its immediate vicinity and not permitted to traverse other parts of the post. The newest temporary gate is going in on the post's north, near the Desiderio Army Airfield runway. Workers at Camp Humphreys are building a temporary gate that will enable construction vehicles headed for the Zoeckler Station work site to bypass one of the post's more traffic-heavy areas. Zoeckler Station, in the post's northeast, is currently the site of several major construction projects. Ultimately there will be four temporary gates. Post officials can't open the other construction gates to traffic until the South Korean government transfers to the U.S. military lands on which those gates are located, Barkley said. South Korea is in the process of turning over thousands of acres to the military to enable Camp Humphreys to expand under terms of a South Korea-U.S. agreement. In addition, South Korea's defense ministry is weighing what safety and other impact the newest gate's use might have on bordering village Wonjong-ri.
New Barracks Complete (Nov 2006) On 9 Nov Camp Humphreys opened its latest facilities. The $27 million complex in the post’s Zoeckler Station section consists of two six-story barracks and a one-story dining hall that can serve about 376 servicemembers per meal. The complex also features volleyball and basketball courts and a covered picnic area. It's the largest barracks complex in Korea at this time. The complex will house and feed troops of three Army military intelligence battalions. As of 3 Nov about 110 soldiers had moved into the barracks. They began moving in Oct. 15. The dining hall has been serving three meals daily since Oct. 21. Each 102-room barracks building can house two soldiers per room. Rooms have a bathroom with shower and are wired to accommodate phone, Internet and cable TV hookups. Each building has an exercise room, laundry room and mud room on the first floor; a common kitchen on the second; storage areas on the third, fourth and fifth floors; a lounge on the sixth, and two elevators, said Greg H. Reiff, resident engineer for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Far East District resident office, Camp Humphreys. The new barracks now house soldiers from the 532nd and 3rd military intelligence battalions. Soldiers of the 527th Military Intelligence Battalion are to begin moving in later. Meanwhile, construction continues at Camp Humphreys’ MP Hill section on a similar but even larger barracks-dining hall complex. Two eight-story barracks towers and a dining hall that can serve 1,300 troops during a single mealtime are part of a $55 million project that also includes additional construction elsewhere on post. Construction on the MP Hill complex began in August and is to finish in June 2008. (Source: Stars and Stripes.) Landfill work at Camp Humphreys is first step in expansion (Nov 2006) Blanketing a 200-acre tract with a thick layer of dirt will be the first big step in getting land near Camp Humphreys ready for the post’s eventual expansion. The post is slated to triple in size and become the U.S. military’s chief installation in South Korea in coming years under a South Korea-U.S. agreement. The post will expand onto a 2,328-acre expanse of land near Camp Humphreys, which is in Pyeongtaek. A key first step is covering that expanse with landfill. The first part of that landfill project will occur on what planners call Parcel 1, which borders Camp Humphreys’ southwestern portion. Bids were still out on the contractors to handle the landfill job through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Far East District. Contract award was to be in Nov with the beginning of actual landfill work in early 2007 and finishing in about a year. Other Parcel 1 work also will be under way in that period. The landfill is needed to make the ground a more suitable surface for eventual building construction and will be laid over the entire expansion area. The U.S. military plans to spend an estimated $5 billion on construction as part of the Humphreys expansion. Plans call for building an array of structures, including barracks, headquarters, motor pools, training areas, family housing complexes, schools, and numerous shopping and recreational facilities. (Source: Stars and Stripes.) (SITE NOTE: Landfill is a problem at Camp Humphreys. The landfill that was excavated on Camp Humphreys found to be oil-contaminated (black soil) was trucked to an unknown location off-base for disposal by the contractor. Sources would only say it is "far away" from K-6. The soil that was not contaminated was reused as landfill on base in the construction of new facilities or dumped close to the camp. It appears that the US Corps of Engineers is distancing itself by making this a contractor problem and removing itself from US responsibility. Some would question this strategy.) Camp Humphreys expansion: Yongsan relocation plan approval expected in Dec. (Nov 2006) Several key events that will shift the Camp Humphreys expansion project into higher gear are due within coming months, said Army Col. Kurt J. Stein, deputy commanding general of the U.S. Forces Korea (Advance Element), the following are slated for construction on the first 200-acre portion of the land onto which Camp Humphreys will expand:
The post will expand its boundaries onto a neighboring 2,328-acre expanse the South Korean government has set aside for the project. A major step will be completion of a “master plan” for shifting U.S. forces to Humphreys, including those stationed in and north of Seoul. “We anticipate agreement on the final Yongsan relocation master plan in December,” he said, “and that’ll be a major accomplishment.” The plan is “simply a document that will realign the units, organizations, functions and roles into the Camp Humphreys hub,” Stein said. Also part of the relocation plan is the move of the Army’s 2nd Infantry Division, headquartered at Camp Red Cloud in Uijeongbu, north of Seoul. The eventual move is part of a larger plan under which the U.S. military will consolidate its forces into two regional hubs, one in Pyeongtaek in west-central South Korea, the other in the Daegu-Busan region in the peninsula’s southeast. The bulk of U.S. troops will be stationed at Humphreys, and USFK and 8th U.S. Army will move their headquarters to there from Yongsan Garrison. (SITE NOTE: When they first started the "hub" idea back in 2003, "regional hubs" were discussed. At first they looked as though they would designate Camp Humphreys/Osan AB/Pyeongtaek Harbor as one regional hub, and the Taegu/Pohang/Pusan area as the other regional hub. In Feb 2003, Donald Rumsfeld stated that he envisioned a force concentrated around "an air hub and sea hub." He did not elaborate, but it was apparent that he spoke of Pusan as the "Sea Hub" in South Kyongsang Province with a large training area near Pohang, just above Pusan in North Kyongsang Province. The air hub was not so clear, but Osan and Pyongtaek were mentioned. In Mar 2003, the Ministry of National Defense announced that wo bases in urban areas; Uijeongbu and Dongducheon would be moved south of the Han River initially, and the Yongsan Base in Seoul would be moved within four years, instead of the eight years, which had been set previously.Another major step will be setting up a “project management consortium,” a staff of South Korean and U.S. members who will oversee the design and construction phase of the expansion. “They will be the ones who actually execute — track, monitor and report,” Stein said. The consortium is to be in place within the next several months, he said. A third key step will be the laying of landfill on “Parcel 1,” the 200-acre tract that is the first portion of land scheduled for construction. Landfill work is expected to begin sometime in early 2007 and end within about a year. “And we’re still tracking to begin construction on the first buildings in 2007,” at Parcel 1, Stein said. Eventually, workers will lay landfill on the remaining portions of the expansion site, officials have said. (Source: Stars and Stripes.) (SITE NOTE: One can only hope that the Master Plan that was to be finalized in June -- then July -- then Sept -- then Dec -- ??? will finally be approved. However, we see major problems ahead for the Master Plan. At the heart of the Master Plan completion is the resolution of cost-sharing and relocation costs. Seohee Construction Gets Landfill Contract for First Parcel The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers awarded a $29.7 million contract to Seohee Construction Co. Ltd. of Seoul on 17 Nov and on 20 Nov issued clearance to start work. The 200-acre tract is the first portion of land scheduled for construction. The first work on the site will go forward on “Parcel 1,” a 200-acre portion of the overall expansion site, officials have said. The contract calls for Seohee to blanket the parcel with landfill and put in roads and a drainage system. An estimated 3 million cubic yards of soil is to be laid down there, officials have said. Later, a separate contract will be issued for building construction, Monaco said. The parcel is to be the eventual site of a barracks and dining hall, battalion headquarters, vehicle maintenance shops, administrative buildings, physical fitness center, sports field and a religious education center, project officials have said. Building construction is to begin in 2007, they’ve said. (Source: Stars and Stripes.) December 2006South Koreans in Pyeongtaek mixed on U.S. realignment plan According to a 12 Dec Stars and Stripes article, four out of 10 South Koreans in the Pyeongtaek area have favorable or very favorable feelings about the future U.S. military presence in this port city about 40 miles south of Seoul, according to a survey recently released by a South Korean government think tank. Of 1,000 people surveyed in Pyeongtaek in April, 41.9 percent said they have a positive perception of the American military’s planned growth, which will relocate U.S. headquarters from Yongsan Garrison in Seoul to Camp Humphreys in Pyeongtaek. But 38.3 percent said they disliked or strongly disliked the increased presence, which is a joint project by the South Korean and U.S. governments.Another 19.8 percent said they had no strong feelings one way or another, according to the survey done by the Gyeonggi Research Institute, a provincial government research center that covers the area from north of Seoul down past Pyeongtaek. When asked about the move of the 2nd Infantry Division — a unit now stationed closer to the North Korean border that includes thousands of young, single soldiers — opinions shifted. Nearly one in four Pyeongtaek residents said they strongly disliked the move. Kim Dong-sung, the researcher who headed the study, said this week that some of the most surprising findings involved what he called misconceptions by local residents of U.S. soldiers. Kim said many local residents imagine soldiers as rude and heavy drinkers, an image he said is more akin to experiences from the 1960s and 1970s.“It is very important to break that kind of old image,” he said during a telephone interview last week. Kim, who is on sabbatical this year at the University of Maryland at College Park, was in South Korea to present the survey’s findings to a group of government officials and residents in late November. (SITE NOTE: In order to reverse this perception, the ROK media must not jump on every incident involving a USFK military member as though it were a national outrage. The sensationalism panders to the underlying anti-American feelings in the Korean public in general. In a recent trial, a soldier hit a woman with a bottle over vague circumstances. Though the act deserves punishment, the treatment in the press was out of proportion to the numbers of cases of brutality by Koreans to both males and females while under the influence.) The overall report also included partial results from a questionnaire by 211 U.S. soldiers on Yongsan Garrison and K-16 Air Base, Kim said. That portion of the research was headed by U.S. Forces Korea’s community relations office, Kim said. Kim said the survey’s purpose was to hear from Americans and South Koreans about their perceptions of each other. Kim said he hopes by exposing these perceptions, both governments might work to foster better relationships between the groups. The questions asked of U.S. soldiers ranged from their exposure to the Pyeongtaek area residents to the benefits of the relocation plan. Nearly four out of five soldiers thought the move would benefit Pyeongtaek’s economy, according to the partial results released. Four out of 10 Pyeongtaek residents also thought their local economy would benefit from the move, according to the survey, which is available in Korean at: www.kydi.re.kr. When asked to rank the advantages of the move, 42.7 percent of those surveyed named the local economy, followed by 19.8 percent who said national security, 17.4 percent said new jobs, 8.3 percent said more subsidies for the local government and 5.3 percent said cultural exchanges between the two nations. When asked to rank the disadvantages, 30.2 percent said they feared a larger influence of drinking and prostitution in the area, which might in turn influence younger South Koreans. Tied for second on the list was rising crime and environmental impacts, such as noise pollution, at 23.1; third was restrictions on land use for private citizens at 14.8 percent and fifth was lower property values at 6.5 percent. (SITE NOTE: Korea has a sex industry that is estimated at $22 billion per year. Red light districts are sanctioned in most cities. Unregistered prostitutes that once worked in the red light districts have now moved into the neighborhoods after the police crackdown (mostly for international media show) in 2005. Besides, the GI business is considered "cheap trade" by the Korean prostitutes who have left it to Filipinas and other foreign nationals from impoverished countries. As to alcohol, those familiar with Korea know that drinking is part of the fabric of group dynamics in business and leisure. Thus the influence of GI drinking and prostitution are minimal.) Kim made several recommendations to both governments in his report. He urged the South Korean government to give Pyeongtaek local officials a larger voice when making decisions and assuaging conflicts that arise between the local community and U.S. servicemembers. To the Americans, Kim urged the commands to take a more active role in promoting the community relations programs already in existence. According to his survey, three out of four people know little or nothing about USFK’s Good Neighbor Program, a campaign that brings together U.S. servicemembers and South Koreans in a wide range of civic activities. (Source: Stars and Stripes.) South Koreans want U.S. troops to bring families A South Korean government research group will survey U.S. servicemembers with the hopes of encouraging more troops to bring their families along for long-term assignments. The Family and Women Development Institute of Gyeonggi Province plans to interview U.S. servicemembers early next year to discover what aspects of South Korean life might attract more families. Of the 29,500 servicemembers assigned to U.S. Forces Korea, only about 10 percent get financial support — including housing — to bring their families along. Because of that restriction, most assignments here last only a year. As the U.S. forces centralize at Camp Humphreys in Pyeongtaek in coming years, leaders hope to change that shortened, solitary assignment into a three-year stint with orders to bring family members along. In tandem with that move, local leaders say they want to provide housing and social needs that will better fit foreign families. Last week, the Gyeonggi governor Kim Moon-soo requested help from USFK commander Gen. B. B. Bell to conduct the survey. The local officials also are planning a trip to Okinawa to study examples of U.S. military families living abroad. (Source: Stars and Stripes.) (SITE NOTE: The only problem with this is that the ROK refuses to increase their cost-sharing which directly impacts upon the accompanied tours in Korea. This is why the ROK is NOT the area of choice for most personnel because of the unaccompanied tour. In the USFJ, 75 percent of married personnel are accompanied tours, while in Korea only 10 percent are accompanied. Even those that were accompanied live in substandard housing on the camps near the DMZ -- and even worse off-base.)  Message for the GIs at Daechuri Anti-US Expansion Protests in the Pyongtaek Area (Jan 2006-???)Background: NGO Activist Group Position on US Relocation(See Protests in the Pyongtaek Area (Mar 2005 - Dec 2005) for background. See My Hometown: Archive for video of background on Daechuri with interviews with residents. This is a very compelling video of the residents viewpoint. They are being forced to relocate with a pitiance of funds that will not be able to purchase new land. The government has not offered land swaps. The video tells of how the people reclaimed the land that the government now wants to transfer to the USFK. The video shows their anger at the situation. It also shows how the villagers futilely try to prevent riot police and MND personnel from entering their village by blocking their path. Though they are fighting a losing battle and being used as pawns by some activist groups, their message is one of a farmer and his land. Their anger at the Central Land Expropriation Committee refusal to meet them in Aug 2005. The video shows the sadness surrounding the situation as they realize that their plight is hopeless -- but vow to fight to the end in Nov 2005. We highly recommend all Americans at Osan and Pyeongtaek view this video with English subtitles to get a sense of the farmers plight. )Camp Humphreys Expansion (2002-2006) The Camp Humphreys expansion has come a long way since the ROK initially dragged its feet to prevent the move as they did not want their "tripwire" on the DMZ to disappear. However, it is STILL not signed, sealed and delivered. The ROK may receive its wish to have back its wartime control in the near future -- by 2012 ... OR SOONER. If the Combined Field Command is eliminated, there will not be a need for a large presence in Korea as they will move to Guam or Japan. This will leave in a hole of its own making -- and Camp Humphreys may be relegated to "follow-on" storage area -- with a minimal caretaker force. Under the 2002 Land Partnership Plan (LPP), the U.S. military agreed to return more than half the land it uses as bases in South Korea. The area to be returned amounted to 41.14 million pyeong (135.8 million sq. meter), 55.3 percent of the 74.40 million pyeong currently occupied by the U.S. military. In exchange, the agreement called for 1.54 million pyeong of land to be newly granted to the U.S. forces. In June 2003 after much hassling and recriminations, denials, posturings and setbacks, the USFK announced that the 8th Army was leaving Yongsan and moving south of the Han River to hubs in Osan and Pyeongtaek and Taegu/Pohang. The chief obstacle in the Future of the Alliance (FOTA) talks on 7-8 Jun 2004 was the size of the new, integrated U.S. military facility in Pyeongtaek and Osan. U.S. negotiators said they required 1,130 hectares (2,800 acres) to build a new base. South Korea offered 970 hectares plus an additional 30-hectare parcel, which would provide space for UN Command and Combined Forces Command headquarters. U.S. delegates reportedly requested that the Korean government provide 480,000 pyeong of land for the Osan/Pyeongtaek base site, in addition to the 3.12 million pyeong of land already provided, in exchange for returning an additional 11.18 million pyeong of land from U.S. 2nd ID bases along with the 41.14 million pyeong (135.8 million sq. meter) that the United States had already promised to return under the LPP. (See Relocation of USFK (2004) for details.) In November 2003, it was announced that 240,000 p'yeong of farming land was to be expropriated from part of P'aengseong-eup [in P'yeongt'aek City], the heads of 71 villages got together and formed the P'aengseong Response Committee. Since 26 Dec 2004, they have been on a sit-down strike in a tent on a farm road. The villagers took 24-hour shifts watching out for and impeding moves from the Ministry of Defense to expropriate their land. (Source: Korea Herald, 30 Jan 2004.) In 2004, the anti-war and unification NGO groups took the side of the farmers to assist their agendas and exploited the situation to inflame the community. The protests culminated in the violent confrontation in Jul 2004 where both demonstrators and policemen were hospitalized. (See Pyeongtaek Events: Protests above.) In Mar 2004, the U.S. and ROK are negotiated an amendment to the LPP whereby the land grants planned for Uijongbu and Ichon was cancelled, and a larger grant of land at Camp Humphreys provided instead. On 1 June Yonhap News reported that the USFK had requested South Korea grant for 3.2-3.3 million pyeong of land in Pyeongtaek. Later the land was increased to 3.5 million and approved by the National Assembly. The chief obstacle in the Future of the Alliance (FOTA) talks on 7-8 Jun 2004 was the size of the new, integrated U.S. military facility in Pyeongtaek and Osan. U.S. negotiators said they required 1,130 hectares (2,800 acres) to build a new base. South Korea offered 970 hectares plus an additional 30-hectare parcel, which would provide space for UN Command and Combined Forces Command headquarters. U.S. delegates reportedly requested that the Korean government provide 480,000 pyeong of land for the Osan/Pyeongtaek base site, in addition to the 3.12 million pyeong of land already provided, in exchange for returning an additional 11.18 million pyeong of land from U.S. 2nd ID bases along with the 41.14 million pyeong (135.8 million sq. meter) that the United States had already promised to return under the LPP. (See Relocation of USFK (2004) for details.) In Aug 2004, despite its agreement to procure land for the Pyongtaek relocation, the ROK was still offering "alternative" sites and stating that giving half of the land agreed on in 2004 was impossible. Donga Ilbo, "Government to Complete the Land Purchase Deal of the USFK Bases Relocation Site in Pyongtaek by Next Year" (7 Aug 2004) stated, The Ministry of National Defense announced that they plan to complete the purchase of the 3,490,000-pyong alternative site in the Pyongtaek area in the Gyeonggi province by the end of 2005. The site was designated for the relocation site for bases of the USFK's Yongsan and the 2nd Division."On August 8, 2005, the Ministry of National Defense (MND) announced it would begin the process of imminent domain and take by force the remaining 1,200,000 pyeong of land not yet purchased by the MND. Military officials stated on August 8 that of the 3,490,000 pyeong of future land necessary for base expansion in Pyoengtaek and Paengsong, and Osan Air Base, deliberations over 2,290,000 million pyeong of land had already been concluded. According to the Land Management Project Board, the arbitration process over the remaining 1,200,000 pyeong of land was proposed in September. The arbitration judgment was concluded in November. And in December, the process of land take over was begun. As of Aug 2005, of the 3,490,000 pyoneg of land to be transferred for base expansion, 96% of the land for Osan Air Base and 60% of the land in the Paengsong region (Camp Humphreys) had been signed and transferred to the MND. About 200 families lived on 680,000 pyeong of land that had not yet transferred to the MND (650,000 pyeong in the Paengsong region and 30,000 pyeong around Osan Air Base). Land not yet transferred also included 200,000 pyeong owned by Sejong University, and 208,000 pyeong of land whose ownership and registration is unclear. Also included are ancestral and inherited land. The end of November was the tentative date when the arbitration process for the Land Management Process was to be decided. The MND stated that if land owners requested to sign an agreement before this date, they would deal with the [land transfer] process. The MND also stated, "There will be no significant difference in compensation between those who sign an agreement with the MND and those who seek compensation elsewhere." (Source: Antigizi.or.kr.) According to the Stars and Stripes on 29 Dec 2005, "Under the amended Land Partnership Plan between South Korea and the United States, Camp Humphreys will triple in size, growing from about 1,230 acres to 3,558 acres by 2008. An estimated $5 billion is to be spent on construction alone. Its population also will increase, from more than 11,000 to 45,000, U.S. military officials have said. It eventually will be the site of U.S. Forces Korea headquarters, Combined Forces Command, United Nations Command and other units and organizations including ground combat and aviation forces, officials have said. While much construction already is under way at Camp Humphreys, the enlarging of its boundaries awaits completion of the South Korean government's land purchase effort." Pan-Korean Committee Viewpoint The "Pan-Korean Committee Against the US Base Extension to Pyeongtaek" claimed the agreement to relocate to Pyeongtaek was unfair in cost sharing and infringes upon the health of the people due to environmental damage as well as infringements on their human rights as lands will be taken away for use by the USFK. The following is a 9 Sep 2005 article by the Pan-Korea Committee, an umbrella group of Unification, Environmental, Anti-war and Social Welfare activist groups with a common interest in preventing the move of the USFK to Pyeongtaek. Movement against US Military Base Expansion for the Peace and Independence of The Korean peninsula (2005/09/09) Protests ContinueNormally the winter season brings calm as Koreans are normally "fair weather" protestors -- meaning the weather has to be clear. Normally the protests end in about the end of November and pick up again in the spring. However, the protests in the Pyeongtaek area have continued unabated because the situation is still not resolved. In Dec 2005, the ROK government revealed plans for an "international city" in Pyeongtaek and asked the citizens for their understanding. The "international city" -- most likely to be built in the Seojong-ni area outside of Osan AB -- is a blatant bribe to the citizenry of Pyeongtaek to support the move to the area. (See Pyeongtaek Expansion Plan (Jan 2006) for details.)Pyeongtaek in Gyeonggi Province, which is soon to be vacated by the US military, will be transformed into an industrial park and an international city equipped with a foreign school and a business center by 2020. (SITE NOTE: We hope the word "vacated" is a misinterpretation. The Pyeongtaek Mayor's Office stated, "In parallel with the proposed relocation of the US Forces in Korea, Gyeonggi plans to construct a free international city and international peace city in the northern and southern areas, respectively, as national projects.") In addition, the Pyeongtaek High-Speed Train Station will be built there and a 2 million pyong (6.6 million m˛) hinterland city will be built in Poseung-myeon.Though the land was supposed to be procured for the move of the troops off the DMZ by Dec 2005, the ROK government had only procured 80 percent with the remaining 20 percent -- mostly land directly outside Camp Humphreys -- to be condemned (expropriated) through the courts. However, the ROK did not initiate legal action until Dec 2005 typical of the "foot-dragging strategy" the Roh administration has undertaken from the start. Until the entire land agreed upon -- the base cannot expand its perimeter. The need for this land was agreed upon in 2003 in the Future of the US-ROK Alliance (FOTA) discussions when the decision was made to relocate the forces -- with initial land procurement date set for 2004. "Renegotiations" set the date to Dec 2005 and now it will be slipped further. (SITE NOTE: The return of land under the LPP is significantly different from this process as the LPP land was consists of land the ROK government did NOT pay any rent on. It has been used rent-free by the ROK -- and provided to the USFK for use. The new land around Pyeongtaek must be procured by the ROK government and placed under the Ministry of Defense before transfer to the USFK for use. Thus the process requires a much more complex process of locating ownership and procurement. If the owners refuse to sell, the land must be expropriated (condemned) for government use.) In addition, there is a looming conflict over the USFK demand that the area between the river and the camp be raised to prevent flooding under the 50-year and 100-year flood plain plan. The USFK demanded this be included in 2005, but the ROK has been opposed to the $500 million price tag increase -- as well as objections that there is not sufficient fill available to complete this project. (See Site alterations for American military base vex the allies (Jan 2006) for background.) As such the NGO groups have continued their protests in the Pyeongtaek area. The latest ploys have been to attack the use of contaminated bases to slow the relocation process -- as well as "renegotiating" the cost sharing process. These last two contention areas were resurfaced in Jan 2006. 10-11 Dec 2005 On 10-11 Dec 2005, there was a small protest march from the Pyeongtaek Train Station to City Hall, but the march was peaceful. However, it is very unusual for there was a cold snap that had hit the country. 
Pyeongtaek Protest (11 Dec 2005) (Tongil News) 13-14 Jan 2006 With the "expropriation" (condemnation) action through the courts of the last 20 percent of the farm lands -- along with the latest delay because of the USFK demand for fill of the low lying area -- NGO groups feel emboldened to press on with their protests. The following is from Croceviaterra: Proposal for International Solidarity Action on Behalf of Pyeongtaek PeaceOn 13 Jan 2006, a protest march with farm tractors and vans proceeded towards Camp Humphreys to commemorate the 500th day of the Pyeongtaek Farmers' Protest, but was stopped by a barricade of riot police buses that blocked the route. The relatively small group of between 400 jostled with the police, but as the standoff stretched into the night, it was resolved after local police arrived to disperse the crowd. Their permit was only for the daylight hours -- and the Constitutional Courts has upheld the right of the police to ban nighttime rallies. Though angered, the group dispersed. 
Pyeongtaek Farmers' Protest (13 Jan 2006) (Tongil News) On 14 Jan 2006 a peaceful rally was held in Pyeongtaek on an elementary school grounds. The group marched through the streets in darkness -- to flaunt the NHRC's latest "recommendation" to allow night-time demonstrations. About 4000 protestors turned out to celebrate the 500th day of the protest. Our old friend Rev. Mun Chon-Hyun, the radical Catholic priest from Kunsan noted for his inflamatory rhetoric, flowing white beard, and walking cane, attended the rally. A large bon-fire topped off the festivities. 
Pyeongtaek Protest (14 Jan 2006) (Tongil News) 6 Feb 2006 Very little heard of any protests in the Pyeongtaek Area during the winter as litigation proceeds to make way for the Camp Humphreys expansion, while other projects for Pyeongtaek expansion continue. However, in the lull, the activist groups are busy rallying the populations and starting on projects in preparation for the "Spring Offensive." The farmer groups who will lose their lands continue their protest in vinyl covered buildings and in meeting halls in deserted homes. The local schools are starting to have projects where the children paint portraits of the local farmers to show their support, and college students have erected protest sculptures along the roads in anticipation of the spring demonstrations. Farm vehicles sprout signs supporting the local farmers movement. There is also the problems with the costs for flood control that the USFK insists must be made along the river, which the ROK refutes. 
(L) Land where Camp Humphreys will expand into (R) Levee work along Pyeongtaek Lake in preparation for Camp Humphreys expansion projects (Tongil News) 
(L) Fr Moon Jeong-hyun, Anti-War Activist Group, meeting with leaders (R) Small "symbolic" protest to stop the Camp Humphreys Expansion (Tongil News) 
(L) Protest sculptures erected by college students along roads (R) Daechu Elementary School decorated with portaits of local farmers to show their support (Tongil News) (NOTE: Site of protest rally on 12 Feb 2006) 
(L) Deserted building used as Farmers Meeting Hall (R) Farmers Protest Group continues to meet in vinyl house (Tongil News) 12 Feb 2005 The National Police Agency said it would limit contact between activists and riot police at a rally scheduled for 12 Feb to protest the relocation of United States Forces Korea bases to southern Gyeonggi province. The Pan-South Korea Solution Committee Against U.S. Base Extension in Pyeongtaek, the rally organizer, earlier announced that 5,000 people would participate in the protest near the U.S. Camp Humphreys in Pyeongtaek. The demonstration by the Pan-Korean National Task Force Against Expansion of U.S. Bases in Pyeongtaek is set for 1-8 p.m. at Daechu-ri Elementary School outside Camp Humphreys' northwest sector. To prevent violent clashes, police in full riot gear would be INSIDE the U.S. base, police said, and uniformed officers would patrol outside with observers from the National Human Rights Commission. At a similar rally last July, hundreds of protesters and police were injured in scuffles. It also planned a candlelight vigil on 12 Feb at Pyeongtaek train station. On 13 Feb the Joongang Ilbo lauded the police and protestors avoidance of "more wire agency photos of protest-linked violence in Korea. Sobered by the deaths of two farmers last November and calls from the parents of riot police to end what they called a "culture of violence" in demonstrations, thousands of opponents of U.S. plans to establish a new military base in Pyeongtaek marched peacefully yesterday and respected police lines. Uniformed regular police guarded the "no-trespassing" line along the marchers' route. Heavily-armed riot police in battle gear were positioned inside existing U.S. bases in the area, but were not needed." (SITE NOTE: However, it should be noted the violent element who battled the police in Jul 2005 -- the student activists, mostly from the radical Seoul colleges, were NOT present in the march. The march consisted of Fr Moon and mostly local farmer groups. None of the Unification NGO group nor union banners were shown in photos.) Police estimated that about 3,000 demonstrators took part. Some fireworks were touched off, and the demonstration ran beyond its allotted time, but a police officer dismissed those problems as only minor infractions. Both protesters and police said they felt a difference. "Unlike in the past, it was nice to see the police holding back and guaranteeing our right to protest," said Son Young-woo, 36. A riot police officer who said he had seen action before agreed that things were different. "Last July, I felt that my life was being threatened, and I was afraid before I came here today. I am thankful that the protesters respected the police line." A lot of preparation went into making sure things would stay calm. Riot police were out of sight and organizers also posted people along the police line to help keep the march orderly. (Source: Joongang Ilbo.) (SITE NOTE: The main point was the non-violence was highly organized. The NHRC was there with observers. If there was violence, the protestors and the NHRC which had condemned the riot police for excessive violence when pipe-wielding protestors suffered head injuries and died. If there was violence, public support would have evaporated. There was a lot of items for show -- such as the Fr Moon, a catholic priest, bowing at the shamanistic altar where a pig's head with bills stuffed in its mouth was set up. Large posters were raised showing rice fields with bombs superimposed. At the Daechu Elementary School, the children flew kites while the adults railed against the Camp Humphreys move -- creating nice backdrops for photo ops.) 
(L) Reverend Moon leading protest march (R) Police line up on the "no trespass line" (Tongil News) 
(L) March along fence line (R) Bonfire at Daechu Elementary School (Tongil News) 
Group of ministers lead the Farmers in prayer for protest (Tongil News) 24 Feb 2006 Tongil News ran photos of the farmers planting their rice crop is a communal activity with the Fr Moon Jeong-hyun, Anti-War Activist Group, in attendance. The event was simply to keep the movement in the spotlight. The news that the Constitutional challenge of the move to Pyeongtaek was rejected by the Constitutional Court so the activists need to regroup. (See Constitutional Challenge Rejected on Pyeongtaek USFK Move (Feb 2006).) 3 Mar 2006 Tongil News ran photos and interviews with protest leaders such as the Fr Moon Jeong-hyun over the ROK government securing the disputed lands with a barbed wire fence. Also the Daechung Elementary School which had been used for protest rallies was placed off-limits to the protest group. In addition, the government would dig up the roads to prevent passage. OhMy News ran an article on the plight of the protestors. 
Fr Moon with farm protest leader (3 Mar 2006) (Tongil News) The following is a story in the Stars and Stripes about the recent event. 4 Mar 2006 A small protest was held on 4 Mar in the streets of Daechu-ri near Anjung-ni to demonstrate the groups concerns. Other acts were in the form of displays to publicize their plight. The march was peaceful, but the group vowed to continue its fight although the government would attempt to block them from their fields. 
Anjungni Protest (4 Mar 2006) (Tongil News) 
Anjungni Protest (4 Mar 2006) (Tongil News) 6 Mar 2006 A small protest was held at the gates of Daechu Elementary School where the protestors led by Fr Moon chained themselves to the gate. The police moved in and evicted the 250 protestors. Then the protestors marched to the cordoned area and were met in a face-off with regular police blocking their way. Neither side had weapons -- protestors no pipes or shredded bamboo nor police with armor or batons -- so the confrontation was simply pushing. The march was basically peaceful with signs proclaiming, "This Land is Ours." The impression of the Stars and Stripes article was that Riot Police were used. In fact the police were regular uniformed officers. The Riot Police were positioned INSIDE Camp Humphreys along the fenceline. 
Protest at Daechu Elementary School Gate (6 Mar 2006) (Tongil News) South Korean police fears of violence led to their aborting the 6 Mar attempt to force protesters — some of whom had chained themselves together — from a school near Camp Humphreys. Police on 6 Mar had positioned themselves near the school, where demonstrators had scheduled a 9 a.m. rally. But as the day progressed, police dropped any plans of immediately clearing the school grounds. Police detained about 30 demonstrators Monday, including those who had chained themselves together. But they released the demonstrators later in the day. The 6 Mar confrontation between police and demonstrators at the Daechu-ri Elementary School produced no injuries and protesters remained in place. The protesters have said they would hold firm in resisting the South Korean government's efforts to buy land adjoining Camp Humphreys and let the U.S. military use it. Some farmers have rejected the government's land payments and are refusing to leave. Some have said the buy-up forces them off land their families have farmed for generations. (Source: Stars and Stripes.) 
Face off at Cordoned area (6 Mar 2006) (Tongil News) The Stars and Stripes on 8 Mar ran the following article: On 9 Mar the Stars and Stripes stated that South Korea's Ministry of National Defense has neither disputed nor confirmed media reports that it plans to seal off some 2,000 acres of contested farm land near Camp Humphreys. The reports said the MND plans to enclose the land behind barbed-wire fences and set up security checkpoints in the area to prevent farmers from farming it this month. The farming season traditionally resumes in March with the arrival of spring weather. An MND official said the ministry would release a statement on the matter later. However, the MND has continued to delay any statement. (SITE NOTE: The problem is political. A government hardline could cause farmer protests over the potential US-ROK FTA agricultural opening and WTO rice import quota to spill over into this issue. Having exhausted its legal means to stop the loss of the lands, the NGO groups are now playing emotional cards of aged farmers trying to survive on the land of their ancestors. The chaining themselves to the gates of Daechuri school was all symbolic garbage intended for media publication in "progressive" newspapers.13 Mar 2006 The following is an editorial in the conservative Chosun Ilbo denouncing the "traveling circus" meaning the protestors that converge on the site for their own agenda. However, the editorial is also one-sided in that it condemns Fr Moon Jung-hyun, a Catholic priest from Kunsan who heads the anti-war faction (See Go Peace). Though we disagree with Fr Moon's viewpoint, we do not doubt his sincerity in his anti-war beliefs -- and ultimately anti-US presence in Korea. We have documented Fr Moon's travels first in Kunsan then onto Seoul and then in the DMZ area. At the time, we resided in Kunsan and breathed a sigh of relief as he moved his protests to other areas of Korea -- making life in Kunsan easier without the constant protests. Now we live in Songtan and Camp Humphreys is next door, so now we again pay close attention to Fr Moon. Fr Moon is a master of playing to the media and he should not be underestimated. After his arrival on the scene in Pyeongtaek, the ENGLISH on signs saying "Yankee Go Home" disappeared -- to be replaced by Hangul only signs. The current tactics play to the Korean people -- not to the international press. They know that anti-Americanism publicized in the international press will damage their campaign. The ploy is to influence the Korea people with symbols of old age farmers being torn away from their ancestral lands. These are powerful images to the Korean people dealing with the Korean respect for the elderly, for farmers, and for their ancestral homes. 
Cordoned off area and Anti-War artwork (11 Mar 2006) (Tongil News) In the article, it also mentions the Puan area and condemns the "traveling circus" for inflicting damage on the area and then leaving without an apology. At the time we lived in Kunsan and Puan was where we went on the weekends to the beach. The situation was the local farmers protested the government and local leaders agreed to the nuclear dump site without asking the local people. The direct benefits that were offered to the present site location residents was NOT the same offer made to the Puan people. The Puan people would have received a pitiance from the Roh administration while the Province reaped the major financial benefits. In the end, the locals did NOT want the site in their area despite all the promises of financial gain -- but the government persisted because no one else in the country wanted it in their backyard. The local government official who approved the deal was attacked and hospitalized. Violent protests were held and parents kept their children out of school -- just shy of the 120 days where the children would be set back a year. (See NGO Protests: October 2003.) This was a completely local protest -- though there were supporters from outside that joined the protest. (See Nuclear Protests in Puan and NGO Protests: November 2003: Violent Puan Protests and Fr. Moon at Anti-Iraq War rally.).) 14-15 March 2006 On 14 Mar the various farmer groups protesting the FTA agreement (red banners) -- along with elements of the anti-War movement protesting the Foal Eagle-RSOI Exercises (blue banners) -- joined with the Daechu-ri farmers (yellow banners) to march on the cordoned off area. The rice planting season was starting and the plan was to enter into the cordoned off area and start tilling the soil. Trucks carrying tractors were stopped on the road leading into the cordoned off area. On 15 Mar the South Korean government took control of the land and work crews began setting up fencing and digging trenches across roads to prevent farmers from working the rice fields, something growers have threatened to begin doing on 17 Mar in defiance of the expansion plan. "We are planning to set up barbed-wire fences," an official at South Korea's Ministry of National Defense said on 15 Mar. Some residents of Daechu-ri have said they are ready to face arrest and even death rather than allow the South Korean government to evict them from their homes. According to the Stars and Stripes on 15 Mar South Korean authorities under heavy police escort took the first steps toward sealing off a large tract of contested farmland that is to eventually become part of an expanded Camp Humphreys. About 120 workers under contract to the MND operated under the protection of some 4,300 riot-equipped Korean National Police officers who were moved into the area. The buses were parked just outside of Daechuri, but initially the riot police were not called in to keep a low profile. The assembled farmers marched to the area of the construction and then supposedly gained control of two backhoes -- though we only have seen photos showing one. At this point plain clothes police were called in to make arrests, while the riot police were used to surround the backhoes -- and prevent the protestors from using it as a propaganda source. The small protest group then pressed against the riot police lines. Some protestors -- including Fr Moon -- were arrested as they staged a "sit-down" in front of the police lines. The protestors started a scuffle in the moat-like ditch about 4 feet deep that had been dug by a large backhoe tractor within the cordoned area. Some leapt into the ditchand had to be dragged away by the police. Some local residents who opposed the expansion scuffled with South Korean riot police and four female protesters were injured and taken to area hospitals. One photo showed a woman crying loudly in the mud behind the riot police line. (The Tongil News ran coverage on the women hospitalized -- with one appearing to have a broken arm. Unlike the Stars and Stripes report, Tongil News listed five under treatment: Kim Weol-ju, 60; Yi Eun-pom, 72; Yoo Sung-ae, 64; Yi Yeon-ja, 65; and Kim Dae-im, 53.) Amnesty International claimed police used excessive force against several elderly farmers and human rights activists during protests to resist forced eviction from their land in Daechuri. It said the residents of Daechuri village, mostly farmers in their 60s and 70s, suffered bloodied noses and were pushed over while resisting the latest eviction attempt on March 15 and also during an earlier attempt to evict them on March 6. "Most of these villagers are very old and it is distressing to hear of force being used against them," said Rajiv Narayan, East Asia researcher at London-based Amnesty International. "Given their age, the police should take special care to ensure they are not hurt and to allow prompt medical treatment if they are - which does not appear to have been the case so far." Thirty-four protesters were arrested on March 15, including prominent human rights activist Park Lae-goon of Sarangbang Group for Human Rights and Cho Baek-ki of the Catholic Human Rights Committee. It was reported that 20 families out of 210 in the village have already left their land and another 80 families would eventually leave the village. "We urge the government to carry out a fresh consultation. It should ensure the villagers are not left homeless and give them reasonable compensation and alternative farming land close to their new homes." However, Defense Minister Yoon Kwang-ung on 20 Mar that the government can't delay the enforcement of the allies' deal any longer. Yoon said, "The government enforced legally approved and inevitable measures in Daechuri," for national security. (Source: Korea Herald.) Riot police only had shields without body armor so as not to escalate any conflict. Throughout this protest, it was apparent that the demonstration was to incite public outrage and the demonstrators posed with banners in front of the riot police lines for the media. It was also apparent that the riot police -- already under attack for supposedly using "excessive force" in other riots -- were attempting to not provoke any other incidents. The farmers then started fires using the rice chaff. The fire soon consumed itself leaving smoldering ashes. The demonstration was small in scope, but used all the dramatic publicity effects that are the stock-and-trade of Fr Moon. 
Riot Police Gather at Daechuri (15 Mar 2006) (Tongil News) 
Farmers and NGO Groups Rally at Daechuri (15 Mar 2006) (Tongil News) 
March to Cordoned Area (15 Mar 2006) (Tongil News) 
Digging of ditch in Cordoned off area (15 Mar 2006) (Tongil News) 
Protestors and Fr Moon hauled away from Ditch (15 Mar 2006) (Tongil News) 
Protestors and Riot Police at Ditch (15 Mar 2006) (Tongil News) 
Protestors Fire and Riot Police at Ditch (15 Mar 2006) (Tongil News) 
Protestors Fire and Smoldering Field at Ditch (15 Mar 2006) (Tongil News) 16 Mar 2006 According to the Stars and Stripes on 16 Mar, the Ministry of Defense said it was aborting efforts to seal off the large tract of contested farmland slated to become part of an expanded Camp Humphreys — but only temporarily. A spokesman said the ministry still intends to seal off the land and evict residents who have refused to move out. But officials have decided they will not disclose beforehand when government officials and their police escort will return to the area because they don't want to alert the holdout residents; instead, the officials will show up unannounced. On 16 Mar, villagers again attempted to get to the fields with tractors loaded on the backs of trucks but were stopped by police on the narrow country road leading to the cordoned off area. Small protest rallies were held in Daechu-ri. On 17 Mar, a small procession of tractors made it into the cordoned off area by going across the rice fields and using rice paddy roads (soft-shouldered dirt) where police vehicles could not follow. The banners were affixed on the tractors and front hoes as they made their ways across the fields. The buses of the riot police remained inside of Camp Humphreys. USFK Camp Humphreys officials, meanwhile, imposed travel restrictions on several areas outside the installation in case of further trouble between police and protesters. Inside Camp Humphreys, officials banned vehicles and pedestrians along the northern perimeter road, between the Third Military Intelligence Battalion headquarters area and the main gate of the South Korean Ministry of National Defense Compound in the Zoeckler Station section of the post. Also off-limits since 15 Mar was the entire town of Anjung-ri, including the commercial district just outside the post's main gate, frequented by many Camp Humphreys personnel. That restriction was to remain in effect until 8 p.m. 17 Mar. 17 Mar 2006 On 17 Mar there was a face-off between farm tractors and the lines of riot police on the road leading into the Daechuri area. The lines of tractors were stopped by the police and turned around. Besides some vocal harangues by the farmers, the protest was peaceful. In the cordoned off fields, a small demonstration was held again proclaiming the "The land is ours." In Daechuri, the farmers in tractors symbolically started to till "their" lands in defiance of the government order -- without any police in attendance. Approximately 263 acres of land were tilled. (NOTE: Tilling -- turning over the earth with tractors -- does not mean planting which would force the government to take action.) (SITE NOTE: See Save Pyeongtaek Farmers for the site of the activist farmer group.) According to the Stars and Stripes South Korean farmers who oppose the expansion of Camp Humphreys plowed up a section of rice fields on 17 Mar in a show of defiance against the government's claims to control of the land. "Although several thousand South Korean riot police stood ready in the area, authorities did not deploy them against the protesters, who plowed the land despite a government no-farming order. But officials said Friday they detained four people on charges of assaulting police officers and obstructing officials in the execution of duty. Two of the four were college students; the others were activists opposing the camp expansion, police said." (NOTE: As of 22 Mar all activists had been released except two.) "The government has taken legal control of the land and most residents have moved from their former homes. But some resisters have barricaded themselves inside the grounds of the local Daechu-ri Elementary School and have refused to leave. They include farmers and other local residents, as well as activists helping to lead the opposition. The South Korean Ministry of National Defense on Thursday said it will eventually clear the remaining holdouts from the area and seal it off so the expansion can proceed. They said they would not disclose when they would so they can show up unannounced." In Seoul, the farmers holding up stop-sign shaped placards with "Stop the Migun K'ichi" (soldier camp) on them protested in front of the Ministry of Defense building over the use of their farming lands for the expansion of Camp Humphreys. The small protest was peaceful. (SITE NOTE: See Antigizi.or.kr for the site of this group.) f The off-limits status of the entire town of Anjung-ri was extended "until further notice," a Camp Humphreys spokeswoman said Friday night. It had previously been set to expire at 8 p.m. 17 Mar. (NOTE: It was later cancelled when the protestors called off their scheduled 25 Mar protest in front of the Main Gate.) Later it was announced the Anjung-ri off-limits was lifted on Friday. The following villages and travel routes to them temporarily are off limits to U.S. military personnel: Daechu-ri, Bonjong-ri, Wongjong-ri, Nae-ri, Dodu-ri, Hamjeong 1-ri, Hamjeong 2-ri, and Duejeong-ri. The ban does not apply to personnel entering those areas on their way to or from work, Humphreys officials said. Inside the post, officials have banned vehicles and pedestrians along the northern perimeter road, between the 3rd Military Intelligence Battalion headquarters area and the main gate of the South Korean defense ministry compound in the Zoeckler Station section. 22 Mar 2006 The NGO activist groups called for a four-day protest at the Camp Humphrey main gate on 22 Mar. The demonstrations were to begin on 22 Mar (Saturday) and run through 25 Mar (Tuesday), from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. each day. Camp Humphrey announced that because of the protests the main gate may be closed without notice. Lawyers for a Democratic Society, which is part of the Daechu-ri protest committee, announced it would defend activists who face government action for resisting efforts to clear the land and evict the remaining residents. (Source: Stars and Stripes.) 25 Mar 2006 Activists who oppose the expansion of Camp Humphreys called off the four-day rally they had planned to start 25 Mar outside the post's main gate. Local merchants who support the Camp Humphreys expansion then canceled a counterprotest they had scheduled for 25 Mar, averting a potentially violent clash between the two groups. The problem for the activists is that they could not muster support from other activist groups as farmers were in Pusan and Tonghae protesting the first shipments of rice under the new WTO rice deal. The focus was also on Europe with the human rights conference in Brussels. Had the protests gone as scheduled, a confrontation between the two sides could have sparked "big trouble," said Kim Ki-ho, president of the Anjung-ri Merchants' Association. The merchants are angry with the demonstrators because recent anti-expansion protests led Camp Humphreys officials to place Anjung-ri off-limits temporarily to U.S. servicemembers, a restriction they have since lifted. Such restrictions cut into the business the local bar and restaurant district does with servicemember clientele, Kim said. Accordingly, he said, merchants see the rallies as harmful to local business. "So merchants members are very angry about that," Kim said. The merchants want the protesters to hold their rallies outside key South Korean government and U.S. military offices in Seoul, Kim said. 9-14 April 2006 According to the Stars and Stripes on 9 Apr, protestors stopped the government from digging up and filling the irrigation ditches with concrete. However, Korean news footage showed the government digging up the canals and pouring concrete into the sections. (SITE NOTE: Without water the fields are rendered useless. However, the government had to be on the lookout as the bypassing of the blocked sections using the farmer backhoes to dig ditches is still a potential area that must be watched closely. The problem is that the government does an action for show and then does not prevent their acts from being undermined.) According to the news footage, there were few protestors involved -- with most employing "lay-down" techniques to stall the operations. Riot police (unarmed) picked up and physically carried the individuals from the scene. The protestors were a very small group and were greatly outnumbered by riot police. Supposedly the farmers "dug up" the concrete blockages, but most likely they simply bypassed the blocked portions. The government had blocked three of the four irrigation ditches and by 14 Apr, the three ditches were flowing. The government then stated that they wanted to start a "dialogue" with the protestors to explain the situation. On 14 Apr the protestors staged a protest where approximately 2,000 protestors showed up in the Daechuri area. Merchants in the Anjungri area have stated that they would not welcome the protestors in their area as they are dependent upon Camp Humphreys for their livelihood -- and are the major beneficiaries from the expansion of Camp Humphreys by 2008. The protestors were further hampered as other farmer groups were engaged in protesting the import of foreign rice at the docks as well as protests in Seoul over the US-ROK FTA opening the agricultural markets. In the meantime, the Ministry of Defense asked the local Korean National Police to "protect" the perimeter, but the local police stated that it was not there job to become involved in "protecting" land in which the USFK does not reside. In other words, the local police refused to become involved in accepting responsibility for keeping the farmers off the land. 17 April 2006 The Ministry of Defense (MND) started pursuing plans to establish 2.85 million pyeong of land around Daechu-ri as a military facility protection zone. According to military officials on April 16, as soon as late April, the MND will hold a military facility protection zone examination committee meeting with the vice minister of defense as chairman, and recommend to the minister of defense to set the area around Daechu-ri as a military facility protection zone. Consequently, military forces and equipment will be allowed to be deployed there, and the MND will be able to directly control the land. It has been reported that after setting the area around Daechu-ri as a protection zone, in order to prevent civilian access, the MND will mobilize engineer equipment and soldiers and start the job of building a barbed wire fence that will surround all 25km around the protection zone. According to the Donga Ilbo on 16 Apr, "Such plans of the MND come as a result of its failure to halt the illegal farming activities of local residents and "Pyeongtaek USFK Base Expansion Opposition Committee" members. To stop the move, it tried to close down irrigation canals in two separate occasions: once on March 15 and another on April 7. The MND used about 700 employees of a private company on April 7 and closed down two irrigation canals that provided farming water to field around K-6 (Camp Humphrey) by filling them up with concrete, but local residents used excavators and restored the canals in only four days." It also seems that Gyeonggi Police Commissioner Eoh Chung-soo's statement that he could not accept MND's request for security forces, since the planned base relocation area is not a military facility protection zone, played a role in the decision of military authorities. According to Military Facility Protection Zone Law, if the minister of defense requests to police for security forces, the police must cooperate with such request. The third article of Military Facility Protection Zone Law stipulates that areas required for the facilitation of military operations, and for the protection of military facilities or the safety of local residents are set as restricted protection zones. According to military authorities, when set as a military facility protection zone, the exertion of property rights as well as the reconstruction or additional construction of local residents becomes strictly controlled, and military guards will be deployed in order to restrict the access of civilians. (Source: Donga Ilbo.) 23 April 2006 It was reported on 23 Apr that the MND submitted an application for provisional measures to the court regarding trespassing and farming prohibitions on the 2,850,000-pyeong site in Daechu-ri, Pyeongtaek City, Gyeonggi Province, being set aside as the planned location of a U.S. military base. This is a part of groundwork to designate the site as a Military Installation Protection District in order to prevent unlawful farming by residents and civic group members. (SITE NOTE: Supposedly the Suwon Court approved the ministry request regarding trespassing and farming prohibitions until 7 May.) A military source said that the MND asked the court for the off limits and farming prohibition on the 2,850,000-pyeong site in mid-April. The MND application reportedly said that "as the U.S. force relocation is a national enterprise, which Korea and U.S. agreed to and the National Assembly approved, and the ownership of the site had been transferred to the nation, any kind of farming activity or trespassing should be prohibited." A military official said, "Once the court accepts the prohibitive measures application, those who trespass or unlawfully farm on the site will be subject to fines or detention." The MND will deploy military construction support to stretch barbed wire around the 25-kilometer outer area of the site after moving forward with legal measures to strengthen the ownership of this site. At the same time, the MND is planning to obtain the national defense minister's sanction to designate the site as a Military Installation Protection District. In addition, the MND was informed by legal advisors that although rice seed residents have sown has grown over four to five centimeters long, the residents cannot claim ownership of the crops since the site is owned by the nation. (Source: Donga Ilbo.) In the face of this announcement, the protestors held a candlelight vigil on 23 Apr in Daechuri led by the Fr Mun. The group of 800 protestors conducted a peaceful protest that affixed lanterns to the fence of Camp Humphreys as a symbol of peace while participants held up signs depicting M-16 rifles with roses in the barrels. The situation is touchy in that the USFK can NOT involve itself in the tussle to gain control of the land, and worry that any force used against the elderly farmers might result in a backlash of anti-Americanism that might spread across Korea. Amnesty International has reported that the riot police used excessive force against the elderly protestors. The situation remained as a stalemate with the MND seeking to negotiate with the farmers to aid them in relocating. Supposedly 20 families have relocated, but 200 have remained. (See Korea Herald for details of situation as of 27 Apr 2006.) The following article appeared in the Stars and Stripes on 25 Apr 2006 about the current impasse dealing with the rice crops. 28 April 2006 The MND announced that it would put up a barbed wire fence around farming land in Pyeongtaek designated as the new site for U.S. Forces Korea headquarters BEFORE rice planting begins. This statement was odd as the farmers have already defied the MND and started rice planting. The impact appears to be that the MND wishes to prevent further rice planting. According to the MND this would be accomplished BEFORE 10 May. The ministry was trying to prevent locals and activists from planting rice there because they hope to delay construction of the new USFK base. The fence will be some 20 km long and 1.80 m high and surround the entire farmland. The ministry will be able to finish the work in a day and is considering whether to hire private contractors or mobilize military engineering troops for the work. (SITE NOTE: This appears to be simply stringing concertina wire. As of 1 May, officials were still exploring whether to declare the farmlands a military zone, which would include establishing checkpoints and other restrictions to public access. MND officials said on 27 Apr that South Korean military forces would be used to guard the barbed-wire fences.) Meanwhile, some 1,000 leaflets comparing protests against the base to the 1980 Kwangju Democratic Uprising have been distributed in Pyeongtaek. Under the title of "Pyeongtaek May Become a Second Kwangju," the leaflets demand, "The defense minister should resign because he defines the people of Pyeongtaek as enemies." (SITE NOTE: Though it was unclear who distributed them, the Pan Korea Committee is certainly at the root of this effort. The Fr Moon, the Catholic Priest heading the Daechuri protests, used to be the head of the anti-War NGO activist group and these tactics match this groups style to link the "fight for democracy" with anything that they oppose. The intent is to enflame the imagination of young students who provide the "shock troopers" of the protest as the farmers are much to old to protest -- and the other farmers are engaged in protests over the FTA and WTO rice market openings.) 
Small Unannounced Protest at Main Gate of Camp Humphreys (28 Apr 2006) (Tongil News) The MND said even if it mobilizes military forces to build the fence, they will not be allowed to carry batons and shields. "They will be unarmed and have construction equipment only, so they will not confront residents there directly," it added. (Source: Chosun Ilbo.) (SITE NOTE: This is in response to the Amnesty International claim that the MND and riot police used excessive force to oust elderly farmers protesting the eviction. Due to the delicate nature, the riot police have remained INSIDE Camp Humphreys and only appeared when there was a direct confrontation. Even then the riot police have attempted to remain unarmed -- except when the farmers started hurling mud and stones at them whereupon they picked their shields. None of the photos found on the Tongil News site have shown the riot police with batons -- only defensive armor.) The Stars and Stripes reported on 28 Apr that South Korean authorities would move soon to oust activists and others who have refused to give up their homes on farmlands near Camp Humphreys. The action, said Brig. Gen. Gyeong Jang-ho, chief of the U.S. Affairs division in the MND, would include an effort to clear resisters from their barricaded makeshift headquarters inside the Daechu-ri Elementary School and elsewhere on the contested lands. And it would aim to halt farmers from any further rice planting, which is seen as a potential obstacle to the government's control of the land. (SITE NOTE: Brig. Gen. Gyeong Jang-ho said South Korean military units would be used to help force protesters off the land before May 10. Both civilian contract workers and military engineer troops would aid the effort against the farmers, Gyeong said.) Most residents have moved out, but those refusing to go say it would be difficult for them, especially the elderly, to find work and start life over elsewhere. Some also say the government's money offer was too low. A ministry official said Wednesday that the operation against the school compound would occur sometime between April 27 and May 7. Gyeong said movement against the farming would come between April 27 and May 10. He said it has yet to be determined whether the move to halt farming would include tearing out crops already planted. Gyeong said officials were aware of a South Korean Supreme Court ruling in an unrelated case that, depending upon how it's interpreted, could bar the government from disturbing the rice crop once stalks grow past a few centimeters. He said defense ministry officials were examining how that ruling might apply to Daechu-ri. Conclusions are expected within 60 days. But he emphasized, the ministry is determined to go forward with its plans for the farm acreage and is determined to take whatever lawful means were necessary to do so. Officials also are weighing other possible measures against farming, including setting up barbed wire fencing in certain parts of the contested area. The government previously has made several abortive attempts to stop farming. In each attempt, government officials called off the effort in the face of scuffles with resisters and police. (Source: Stars and Stripes.) 
Fr Mun Honored at 1960s-style Protest Rally (29 Apr 2006) (R) Art sculpture on Daechuri Elementary school grounds with Peace Dove (Anti-war group) (27 Apr 2006) (Tongil News) 29 Apr 2006 An unannounced protest against the expansion of a U.S. military base south of Seoul drew hundreds of South Koreans to the entrance of the MND, near a main gate at Yongsan Garrison. The protest had no incidents. Two groups of protesters gathered near Yongsan and the ministry to protest plans by South Korea and the United States to move the U.S. Forces Korea headquarters south and triple the size of Camp Humphreys in Pyeongtaek. The first group of 80 people gathered closer to Gate 5 from 8:30 to 10 a.m., police said. The second, larger group of about 300, many apparently college students, gathered near the ministry's entrance to protest both the Humphreys expansion and tuition costs. (SITE NOTE: The students at the peaceful protest were an off-shoot of another violent student protest on 29 Apr. Some 5,000 university students led by the leftist Hanchongyeon student union rallied in downtown Seoul urging the government to nullify universities' decision to raise tuition fees.) Traffic flow at Yongsan was temporarily affected, but Yongsan was not the target of the protests. Meanwhile, in Daechuri the protestors held a 1960s-style rally that dealt more with symbolism than anything else. The leader Fr Moon was honored at the rally and the typical burning of images and sing-along performances and dance routines were held. It appears that the protestors have backed off and are awaiting the next move by the military -- the eviction of the protestors from their land. At that point, the protest movement will have a cause. 10 May is the deadline for the eviction so the next actions are by the MND. 1 May 2006 Hoping to persuade the residents of Pyeongtaek city to drop their opposition to the relocation there of the U.S. military base now in Seoul, the Defense Ministry negotiators on 1 May instead wound up in a stalemate. At the first meeting on 30 Apr, the two sides agreed to resolve the issue through dialogue. But at the meeting at 5 p.m. 1 May, neither side budged from its stance. The ministry had announced that it would evict residents and protesters in the city in Gyeonggi province from April 27 to May 7, but decided instead to hold the meetings. (NOTE: The Suwon Court gave the restraining orders for the residents farming and trespassing up to 7 May.) The ministry asked residents to stop farming on the site and let a limited number of government officials enter the village to conduct measurements and a geological survey for the transfer. Major General Park Gyeong-seo, a representative of the ministry, said the transfer would start this month because the delay could aggravate relations between South Korea and the United States. The relocation is supposed to be completed by 2008, but an official with the ministry said last month that the final timeline would be decided once a master plan is submitted in September. Representatives of the residents refused the proposal, arguing that they have almost finished planting their rice. They once again asked the ministry to reconsider the entire transfer plan. Kim Ji-tae, the leader of the residents' group, did not attend the meeting. Mr. Kim said he would not attend the meeting unless Defense Minister Yoon Kwang-woong did so also; the minister did not. Prime Minister Han Myeong-sook also had a meeting on the issue yesterday with Mr. Yoon, the defense minister, Lee Taek-soon, the commissioner-general of the National Police Agency, and other related government officials, and asked them to consider ways to help residents move from the site and find new ways to earn a living. (Source: < a href=http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200605/01/200605012240554339900090409041.html>Joongang Ilbo.) On 1 May the A senior Defense Ministry official said talks to resolve a stalemate over farmland in Pyeongtaek under claim from the ministry to enable the relocation of a United States military base may be abandoned if key figures of the farming community keep boycotting them. "(We) will continue to hold dialogues with the local residents and activists of the 'Pan-national Committee to Deter the Expansion of U.S. Bases'. But (we) will not advance the dialogue any further without representatives," said Maj. Gen. Park Kyung-seo, the chief of the government's U.S. base relocation task force. The 'Pan-national Committee to Deter the Expansion of U.S. Bases' is an umbrella protest group composed of 138 nationwide civic organizations including well-known civil rights campaigners Moon Jung-hyun and Moon Kyoo-hyun, both Catholic priests, as well as various anti-American government groups. Since last month the Defense Ministry has had a series of talks with the farmers and civic activist groups to try and find a peaceful resolution to the dispute. However, the dialogue has stalled because representatives of the pan national committee and farmers have refused to participate in the talks. (Source: < a href=http://www.koreaherald.co.kr/SITE/data/html_dir/2006/05/02/200605020037.asp>Korea Herald.) 2 May 2006 On 2 May, the ministry gave the protestors until 12 p.m. the same day to return to the negotiating table, but they refused, saying the ministry had no intention to sit down together with them for talks. MND officials said they would send military and other forces to the contested area unless the farmers state by noon on 2 May whether they will: (1) Cease immediately any further farming on the contested lands. (2) Pledge to avoid any further actions that could obstruct or harm government employees as they go about putting up fencing and otherwise preparing the lands for the Camp Humphreys expansion. According to the ministry, the two sides failed to find common ground on compensation and a construction timetable because of the civic activists' ulterior motive: a demand for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from South Korea. The minister stressed the government has sought compromise with Pyongtaek residents in a sincere manner, citing a total of 150 rounds of talks with farmers and activists since 2004, including three in April. The protestors claim the tight deadline left scant room for careful discussion among the villagers. "That's why I can say MND didn't have intention to have real discussion and they just pretend to have discussion," Father Mun Jyeong-hyeon, the Catholic priest helping to lead anti-expansion resistance, said. The ministry supposedly sent letters giving the holdouts until the end of June to leave, according to Fr Mun, but in May demanded they leave before 7 May. (SITE NOTE: The government will wait for three or four months before moving locals out of villages near the site. "Although we ordered locals to leave by the end of June, we can't force them out," said Yoo Jong-sang, a government official in charge of the matter, said. "We will take legal action first by applying for an injunction." (Source: Chosun Ilbo.)) 3 May 2006 The MND and the police have agreed to put up barbed wire fences around the area ear-marked for Camp Humphreys expansion in order to keep protestors from occupying the Daechuri elementary school and working the fields there. The government plans to mobilize a huge force of some 14,000 troops to evict the resistance on 4 May, raising fears of violent clashes with residents, activists and members of the Korea Confederation of Trade Unions camped out at the Daechu-ri Elementary School. The government in a statement said if things proceed quickly, the eviction and demolition of the school and installation of the fence could start early on the morning of 4 May. Some 110 companies of police (or 11,000 riot policemen) and 3,000 troops consisting of engineers and unarmed guards as well as private security firms have been mobilized for the operation. In response to the news, protestors called on all supporters to gather at the school and make a stand. A large-scale conflict seems unavoidable as local residents and activists have decided to fight. The Pan-national Committee to Deter the Expansion of U.S. Bases said, "We urge the Defense Ministry to stop the deceptive dialogue game, withdraw the violent ultimatum, and once again engage in true dialogue. If the ministry forces its way into the branch school and farmlands, we will fight to death." Already leaflets have compared the situation to the 1980 Kwangju Democratic Uprising, which was bloodily suppressed, and now there are slogans in the vein of, "We will unite with the workers of the North to fight against the U.S.," all of which bodes ill for the eviction. (SITE NOTE: This is as close to a declaration that there are pro-North Korean elements in the protest groups. This is the face-off expected after the negotiations to convince the protestors to leave failed. The anti-war element is counting on the radical student elements to join the fray. In Tongil News on 3 May, the photos showed that there were increasing numbers of youths massing at Daechuri in anticipation of a faceoff and holding rallies publicized by the Korean press.) 4 May 2006 The massive 10-hour operation to throw the activists out of their impromptu headquarters at Daechu-ri Elementary School saw 471 protesters from outside including students and members of civic groups and the Korea Confederation of Trade Unions arrested. There were near 100 reports of injuries. Police decided to punish all the violent protesters according to the law. Defense Minister Yoon Kwang-ung said in a statement, "The actions by some activists to use the people of the area as pawns in a political battle against a national project is detrimental both to the citizens living in the area and the national interest." Meanwhile, the National Human Rights Commission dispatched 13 investigators to the scene to ascertain no human rights violations occurred in the day's conflict. (Source: Chosun Ilbo.) (See US in Korea.org video of the protest. The video illustrates how violent the protestors were and also if you look closely how restrained the riot police were using only their shields against protestors (without batons) while being attacked with splintered bamboo poles. The riot police were slapped by women in the face and didn't react. Overall, the video shows the riot police used almost super-human restraint -- though they had overwhelming numbers to decisively crush any resistance with force. Any claims of abuse by the protestors are disbunked by this video assemblage. See Save the Pyeongtaek Farmers for links to Voice of the People videos of the various stages of development.)The operation began in early morning, with some units on scene by 2 a.m. or earlier. By 4:30 a.m., long convoys of police buses and construction vehicles, red lights flashing, converged on Daechu-ri from several directions. About 115 companies of police or some 11,500 started to pour into the area at 4:30 a.m. Along with the police were the reporters from TV and newspapers. The riot police were deployed to the area to clear protesters from their barricaded makeshift headquarters inside Daechuri Elementary School, while 3,000 unarmed soldiers, including 500 military engineers, were preparing for the fence construction. Engineers started setting up the wire fence around 7:30 a.m. with the help of 15 UH-60 helicopters. More than 11,000 South Korean police and 2,000 soldiers began work to evict residents from a small farming village starting at 6 a.m. Riot police armed with batons and shields confronted some residents wielding long sticks, while engineering corps soldiers set up barbed wire around the designated area. Residents, many of whom are elderly farmers, hoped to remain in their hometown. The residents' struggle to protect their hometown has also been joined by a number of activists opposing the U.S. base relocation project. (Source: Yonhap News.) Starting at 6 a.m. the about 3,000 riot police armed with batons and shields started to move into the area around the Daechuri Elementary School. Facing them were the activists -- mostly college students -- who had arrived the day prior and were massed in the school grounds while others lined the streets to greet new arrivals. The students attempted to block the streets with a sit-down, but the police approached the school through the rice fields. 
(L) Rally at Daechuri (R) Sit down to block the roads (Tongil News) 
Activists lining the road to greet supporters (Tongil News) At about 8 a.m., the police neared the Daechuri Elementary School and were met with a fire break set up by the protestors. The flames were doused and the police advanced on the compound. Police stormed the compound at 9:17 a.m., were inside the school building by about 10 a.m. When the police entered the school ground they were attacked by activists with pipes and long bamboo sticks. Riot police armed with batons and shields fought pitched battles with hundreds of locals and activists wielding splintered bamboo sticks and hurling rocks. The activists were not prepared for the massive onslaught. Even though the police were only armed with shields and batons, their sheer numbers overwhelmed any protest. When the activists attacked the police line, they were separated easily and then beaten to the ground with shields -- and then stomped by boots of the police. The attack on the police line with steel pipes was not taken kindly by the police and TV footage showed activists with bloodied heads being hauled away from the scene. Interestingly, the TV news did not show any of the police officers who were injured by the protestors. 
(L) Police Move Towards Daechuri Elementary School (R) Protestors set field afire (Tongil News) 
(L) Police Move Through Fired field (R) Face off with Protestors inside Compound (Tongil News) 
Start of the Confrontation 
(L) Police in control of School Yard (R) Face off with Protestors inside Compound (Tongil News) 
(L) Police move on School Building (R) Police Protect their heads (Tongil News) After securing the playground area. Fire trucks were called in to direct their firehouses on the buildings more for psychological effect. The police then moved into the building while using their shields to protect their heads from the objects hurled down on them from the students in the second floor. According to the Stars and Stripes, "The hot, hazy day saw fierce close-quarters clashes in which frenzied protesters who were holed up inside the school smashed out windows and hurled at police whatever objects came to hand, including stools, window frames, paint cans, metal pipes, rocks and bottles. Police countered with riot batons and shields. At several crucial intervals, they trained water cannons and hoses to tumble protesters from their places." 
(L) Police move on School Building (R) Police confrontation in Stairwell (Tongil News) 
(L) Police move on School Building (R) Protestors hangon to window frames to fight removal (Tongil News) 
(L) Inside of Building (NOTE: Splintered bamboo that act as knives to slice police) (Tongil News) (R) Police Enter Building Around 10 a.m. the police entered the building as a few protestors attempted to block their entrance. Force was met with force and again bloodied protestors were hauled out of the building. The students then attempted to have a sitdown on the floor, but the police simply dragged them out as they tried to hold on to anything to prevent their removal. The activists led by Fr Moon Jung-hyun then climbed to the roof of Daechu Elementary School to protest. Those on the roof displayed signs in defiance, but were convinced to come down peacefully due to the futility of the situation. TV footage showed Fr Moon climbing down the ladder, though he walks with the assistance of a cane. Once the protestors were cleared off the roof, the wrecking crews moved in to demolish the school. Large backhoes punched in the windows. The fire department then doused the building with water before the heavy equipment started the demolition of the building. In the meantime, the temporary "vinyl houses" that had been used by the protestors were also cleared away. While police worked through the day to take control of the school floor-by-floor, room-by- room, workers used backhoes to knock down trees, statuary, scaffolding, basketball backboards and other school playground items. Work gangs also hauled down a long plastic shelter the resisters had used for candlelight vigils and other meetings. By 5 p.m. the last resisters were in police custody and work crews were beginning to ready the structure for demolition. The large "forkcranes" (backhoes) made short work in demolishing the structure's front wall. (Source: Stars and Stripes.) 
Protestors led by Fr Mun atop the Roof (Tongil News) 
Vinyl houses on school grounds torn down (Tongil News) From 100 to 150 police officers were injured, police officials said. About 37 protesters were injured in the course of the day, a South Korean government official said. However, the Korean newspapers reported that about 120 policemen and protesters were injured in the clash with 471 initially arrested, but the numbers climbed to 524 by the end of the day. The National Human Rights Commission dispatched 13 investigators to the scene to ascertain no human rights violations occurred in the day's conflict. Police said 210 were injured in the incident -- 117 police officers and 93 protestors -- and the vernacular dailies Kyunghyang Sinmun and Hankyoreh also claimed injuries to some of their reporters covering the scene. However, there are questions whether law enforcement authorities went for excessive force in suppressing the demonstrations, with some observers ridiculing the methods of the police raid as a ``rabbit hunt.'' Park Soon-hee, a human rights adviser at the National Police Agency (NPA), who was at the protest scene, criticized police suppression as an ``embarrassing moment.'' (Park Soon-hee is NOT with the KNP, but instead part of the National Human Rights Commission under President Roh. The agenda of the NHRC is questionable -- and many of its efforts have done serious damage to the morale of the riot police -- as Roh intended.) ``It would not be so far-fetched to call Thursday's situation a `blood bath,'' Park's aid in an interview with local radio broadcaster CBS. He described Thursday as a ``dark moment'' of the Roh Moo-hyun administration. ``It seemed as if law enforcement authorities were conducting a military operation on their own countrymen. Police officers were beating down protestors with their batons and shields and there were a lot of bloody faces out there,'' Park said. The civic group Sarangbang Group for Human Rights released a statement denouncing the police suppression of the Pyongtaek rallies, going as far as to compare the incident with the Kwangju uprising of 1980 when more than 200 pro-democracy protestors were killed during a government suppression of the rally. (Source: Korea Times.) 
Injured Protestors Constrained (Tongil News) After the demolition had rendered the building unusable, residents shouted their rage at the riot police. In TV footage, the old residents of Daechuri could be seen venting their frustration on the police lines by throwing dirt and stones at close range at the riot police. 
Daechuri Elementary School Demolished (Tongil News) 
Protestors led by Fr Mun atop the Roof (Tongil News) While the police were beginning to mass around the Daechuri Elementary School, the army sent in their engineering teams to string the concertina wire around the protected area. At 7:30 a.m. the Defense Ministry sent in a force of some 3,000 including 600 army engineers and 700 private security personnel as well as earthmovers and other heavy equipment. The group made headway on a 29 km barbed-wire fence near Camp Humphreys. 
Army Engineers setting up barbed wire fences (Tongil News) 
(L) Army Engineers at work (Tongil News) (R) Army Engineers setting up barbed wire fences (Korea Times) 
(L) Army Engineers setting up barbed wire fences (R) Helicopters bringing in supplies (Tongil News) 
Army Engineers setting up barbed wire fences (Tongil News) The operation ended at 4 p.m. At that time, the ministry informed the Pyeongtaek mayor the area is now a military facility protection zone. From now on, no one will be allowed to come and go at the site aside from traveling on designated roads. Any construction or expansion of buildings in the area will have to be discussed with the military authorities. (Source: Chosun Ilbo and Tongil News.) Military engineers erected 15.5 miles of barbed-wire fencing around the contested farmland. Authorities were tol keep a guard force in the area, which will be subject to access restrictions common to military installations. Military guard posts were set up every 100m on the fence perimeter, and an unarmed team consisting of two soldiers was standing security duty. Furthermore, tents were set up near every guard post. All the news programs featured the story on the evening news -- with many attempting to show the history of the area. Some news programs showed the new "villas" being erected in anticipation of the military families that will be arriving in the area. Others showed the "human interest" stories of old residents with complaints against the GI presence. Interestingly, none of the bar owners association was interviewed -- only scenes of Americans in Anjungri outside Camp Humphreys (K-6). The Defense Ministry denounced the "outside" agitators. Defense Minister Yoon Kwang-ung said in a statement, "The actions by some activists to use the people of the area as pawns in a political battle against a national project is detrimental both to the citizens living in the area and the national interest." 5 May 2006 5 May was Buddha's Birthday and a national holiday -- though called Children's Day by everyone -- but hundreds of protestors again scuffled with the police and soldiers in Daechuri. (See Go Media Action for video of students breaking through police line and joining those inside Daechuri. Most of the scuffles were ineffectual and the students were attacking without weapons.) The Defense Ministry said it was considering providing army engineers dispatched to Pyongtaek with protective gear such as shields, batons and gas masks to ensure their safety. The ministry also planned to build more barricades near the wire fences. During the 5 May confrontation, dozens of soldiers were injured. Eleven were injured seriously enough that they were taken by helicopter to a military hospital. Two of the soldiers were severely wounded. The Defense Ministry said it is considering providing army engineers dispatched to Pyongtaek with protective gear such as shields, batons and gas masks to ensure their safety. The ministry also plans to build more barricades near the wire fences. Videotape footage shows that single protestors did make it through the concertina wire -- hastily dropped off by helicopter -- that was strung only one row deep and not anchored yet. The army military police were seen chasing them down the intruders and containing them using force as the protestors struggled. In other instances, the riot police chased the protestors through the rice paddies. Later that evening, the villages cut through the wire with wire cutters and entered the cordoned off area. This time according to a plan by the village leaders, they attacked unarmed soldiers inflicting great bodily harm to some soldiers. (SITE NOTE: We saw videos of the attacks on the soldiers on 5 May inside the protected area -- taken from long distance on the outside of the concertina wire. The soldiers didn't have a chance. The protestors forced their entry by cutting the fence and then attacked the soldiers -- all unarmed because of the sensitivity of the situation -- with bamboo pikes (slim bamboo splintered at the end and very flexible to act like a knife at the end of a whip). The soldiers didn't have a chance -- the pikes were 8 feet long and the isolated soldiers were simply sliced up like sashimi. These are the radicals that the USFK is facing in the street protests. These are the Hanchongreon "storm troopers" and radical elements of the KCTU.) Korean TV showed footage of the interviews with the military who were attacked. It appears that public sentiment is shifting to the Ministry of Defense because of the radical attacks -- and the people involved are NOT from the Daechu area. The Chosun Ilbo printed clips of the video footage that showed that the activists were the ones attacking the unarmed solders. "The footage contradicts activists' claims that they were violently handled by soldiers, showing activist chase and kick retreating soldiers (above), and soldiers jump into ditches to avoid protestors wielding bamboo sticks whose ends were split to make them more lethal. (Source: Chosun Ilbo, 9 May 2006.)) 
Army Engineers securing fence line ``We requested court warrants to arrest 37 protesters wielding iron pipes and bamboo sticks against law-enforcement authorities to disturb the lawful eviction of activists from state lands,'' said Lee Kwi-nam, chief of the prosecution's public security bureau. The 37 arrested protesters are all affiliated with student organizations and labor groups, and do not include farmers, Lee said, adding that the prosecution will sternly deal with those who ``challenge government forces.'' The prosecution also plans to request warrants for between 60 and 100 demonstrators for cutting wire fences around the base site which is designated a military protection zone, and beating unarmed troops guarding the site on 5 May. Prosecutors are seeking to arrest those who allegedly masterminded the fence-cutting scheme, including Kim Ji-tae, head of Taechuri village. (Source: Korea Times.) The following is a news article in the Donga Ilbo on 6 May. The interesting point is that the largest numbers of arested who were from the outlawed Hanchongryeon -- which President Roh wanted "legalized." For the first time, the riot police are encouraging their policemen to respond to internet allegations -- and are intent on denying the radical element usage of the internet to their advantage. 8 May 2006 From the Uri Party and President Roh there has been silence about the incident. Though the president is fond of speaking to the public directly via the TV or internet, he didn't say a word of concern about the affair until 5 May in which he said, "We've been greatly indebted to the U.S., but we cannot afford to be obliged to the U.S. forever." An editorial in the Chosun Ilbo pointed out that it sounded like an invitation to the anti-American activists. Though the MND continues to condemn the incident and the Prosecutor's Office continues to state it will prosecute the protestors, there seems to be a road-block being erected on the part of the courts and the Uri Party. The courts seem to feel the protestors pose no flight risk and do not need to be arrested. However, the Prosecutor's office also is NOT going after the leaders FIRST -- instead attempting to round up the followers. Then there are problems that many of the attackers of the ROK military were apprehended outside the fence as they tried to escape -- thus making it more difficult to prove that they were involved in the attack. The Uri Party is not making any comment because it does not want to offend the Democratic Labor Party radicals whose members were involved in the Daechuri incidents. They need their votes to pass their legislation. However, conservative papers are condemning the protestors, but the progressive papers are showing their support for the "people's movement." On 8 May, the MND announced that the soldiers were provided with helmets, shields and batons for "self-protection." The MND then stated that the protestors would be "court-martialed" -- as there are laws provided for destruction of military property. This is in response to the protestors cutting the concertina wire and attacking the unarmed soldiers. The prosecutor's office requested arrest warrants, but the courts turned down most stating that the individuals did not show a risk of fleeing or destroying evidence. The Anti-American elements geared up for a massive 10,000-strong protest on the weekend on 13-14 May. According to the police, the opposition groups planned to stage a demonstration in memory of the 1980 Kwangju Democratic Uprising, with which they have compared their movement. On14 May the police said the activists aimed for demonstrations in Daechu-r, Dodu-ri and Pyeongtaek City. In response, the police stated that they would attempt to block entry into the Daechuri area. However, the activists equated the crackdown by Chun Doo-hwan in Kwangju and this eviction of farmers from legally obtained lands to stir up feelings of anti-Americanism, hatred of the military dictatorship and inspire the young radicals to violence in the name of "democracy." "There is absolutely no relation between the two, and the opposition groups are distorting the truth when they compare the soldiers patrolling the site of the base" to the brutal suppression of the Kwangju Uprising that saw many protestors killed, a police officer said. (Source: Chosun Ilbo, 9 May 2006.) 11 May 2006 The activist groups were relatively quiet though small demonstrations made the news every night. The nation was focused on the possible confrontation on 13-14 May. Some 20,000 protesters from various locations were set to hold two major rallies, 13 May in Seoul's Gwangwhamun district, and 14 May in Pyeongtaek. In Pyeongtaek, the activists will hold simultaneous demonstrations with the activist groups at Daechuri and the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) protesting at Pyeongtaek City Hall. (SITE NOTE: The police warning to the US Embassy warned on 3,000 activists on 13 May in Seoul and 3,000 activists on 14 May in Daechuri. At Daechuri about 2,000 initially showed up on 14 May, while the KCTU rally had about 350 people in Pyeongtaek.) The government was attempting to use the press to show that the activists did NOT have universal support in the ROK. Unlike the massive anti-American demonstrations of 2002 in which ALL Koreans condemned the US, this demonstration seems to lack the popular support despite constant efforts in the leaders rhetoric to link this "struggle" to the Kwangju Uprising. According to a survey, eight out of 10 Koreans were against the violent protests against the relocation of the U.S. military base to Pyeongtaek City, Gyeonggi Province. The research firm TNS conducted a telephone survey on May 7 on 1,000 men and women over 19 years old at the Office for Government Policy Coordination's request and published the results on 11 May. According to the survey, 81.4 percent of the surveyed thought that "violence should not be used to solve the problem, no matter how big it is." But 17 percent answered, "The relocation of the U.S. army base should be deterred, even if violence is used." (Source: Donga Ilbo.) 65.6 percent are opposed to civic activists' involvement in the issue. The survey also showed 74.5 percent feel it is premature for U.S. forces to withdraw from the Korean Peninsula while 22.2 percent voted against both the U.S. presence here and the base relocation plan. (SITE NOTE: This is basically the same results as seen in 2005. The majority of the people do not want the US to leave Korea -- YET. In other words, most Koreans support the Americans leaving Korea, but the majority do not feel it is the right time. Thus the opinion of not supporting the violent protests, does not necessarily mean the ROK citizenry supports the indefinite presence of the USFK.) On 11 May, representatives of about 300 civic groups expressed support for the Camp Humphreys project, 70 kilometers south of Seoul, and called on leftist activists to cancel mass rallies planned for the weekend. The groups said they would hold their own rallies in Pyeongtaek on May 20 and in Seoul on May 23. Meanwhile, the Pan-national Committee to Deter the Expansion of U.S. Bases, a coalition of 138 leftist civic groups, reaffirmed its plan on 10 May to go ahead with mass rallies in Seoul and Pyeongtaek. The Anjungni Chamber of Commerce is vehemently against the anti-US military protests for business reasons and have vowed to confront any protests in their area with a counter-protest. The Paengseong Storekeepers United Association plans to hold a demonstration supporting the relocation of USFK bases in front of Camp Humphreys on May 14, with about 200 members participating, making demonstrations both of supporting and opposing the relocation be held on the same day. (Source: Donga Ilbo.) Tongil News ran an article on 11 May showing the various activist Catholic/Protestant/Buddhist priests/monks gathered at the site of the now demolished Daechuri Elementary School to pray in unison on 11 May 2006. The activists are making the most of photos of elderly women and farmers praying and pleading with the police lines. Meanwhile, the government continued to demolish the irrigation canals to the land and dug ditches near the fence line. In addition, the single concertina line was now a double concertina line with added barricades. Both sides were massing their forces and planning their strategies for the 13-14 mass demonstrations promised by the activist groups. On 12 May in a prepared statement, Prime Minister Han Myung-sook said that her government admitted there had been a lack of dialogue between the authorities and the residents before going ahead with the plan. (SITE NOTE: Some people may dispute this statement.) But she said that the government will now make a concerted effort to resolve the ongoing dispute by sharing opinions with the people concerned. The Police are also beefing up their forces -- but silently the ROK Army is also ensuring their forces are protected as well. Preparing against the illegal demonstration, military engineers also wore protective gear and strengthened their security posture by increasing the number of guards. Furthermore, they established a multi-level defense line by digging deeper the ditch surrounding the outer fence perimeter up to a depth of three to four meters, and setting up additional barbed wire inside the water-filled ditch. Soldiers were digging trenches inside a concertina-wire barrier and filling them with about three feet of water. They also were backing the barrier with a five-foot high bank and have placed 20 barricades on roads into Daechu-ri. Police stated that they would block all roads to Daechuri village to prevent demonstrators from approaching the land designated for the base expansion. Police said they will deploy riot police at the entrances of expressways on Saturday to block demonstrators coming from Seoul from entering the town. On Sunday, 18,000 riot police will be deployed on the farmland to deter the planned rally and guard the fenced-off site. In April, officials said they would allow holdout residents to stay in Daechu-ri until the end of June. There, thus far, they remain -- but some claim they have "hidden" some 600-800 outsider protestors in their homes. (SITE NOTE: The government will wait for three or four months before moving locals out of villages near the site. "Although we ordered locals to leave by the end of June, we can't force them out," said Yoo Jong-sang, a government official in charge of the matter, said. "We will take legal action first by applying for an injunction." (Source: Chosun Ilbo.)) 13 May 2006 Yonhap News stated that thousands of anti-U.S. activists and students hit the streets in Seoul to protest plans to expand Camp Humphreys. The police issued a warning that 3,000 were expected between 4 - 8 pm, but the protest was a bit larger. At 5:30 it was estimated that 3000 had gathered in protest. At night, some 6,000 protesters staged a candlelight vigil next to the Gwanghwamun intersection in central Seoul in which they called for the release of activists detained during protests against the expansion earlier this month. Tongil News showed a small number of students from Hanchongryeon staged a protest at the Ministry of Defense. About 700 student activists rallied in front of the Defense Ministry in Yongsan, Seoul, urging the defense minister to resign and take responsibility for the two bloody clashes between activists and riot police. The Defense Ministry deployed 1,000 soldiers inside the office area to cope with possible infiltration. Besides throwing stones over the KNP buses blocking their way at the MND, no major clashes with riot police were reported. 13 May saw rallies of altogether 45,000 members of the coalition in Seoul. They gathered in places like Yongsan near the Defense Ministry and converged on downtown Gwanghwamun around 7 p.m., blocking roads leading to Jongno, before 2,000 of them moved on to Hongik University late at night. Meanwhile at Daechuri at 11:20 at night, 11 farmers sat peacefully on the road leading to Daechuri along the police line blocking the way into the town. 
(R) Candlelight Vigil (L) Gathering in Streets (13 May 2006) (Tongil News) 
Hanchongryeon Students at the Ministry of Defense (13 May 2006) (Tongil News) Since early morning on 13 May, police forces blocked the main roads that lead to Daechu-ri and Dodu-ri, Wonjeong and Bonjeong intersections, setting up two to three lines of police barricades as well as checkpoints. Small groups of police occupied the Daechuri Elementary School to prevent it from being a rallying point. Daechu-ri villagers, meanwhile, continued farming by plowing their rice paddies with tractors and sowing rice seeds. Police concerned with a possible clash with the villagers did not halt the plowing. (Source: Donga Ilbo.) 
(R) Army Gathering Long Bamboo Sticks (L) Riot Police moving into area (13 May 2006) (OhMy News) 
(R) Riot Police in area (L) Dug up area with Barricades (13 May 2006) (OhMy News) 14 May 2006 Camp Humphreys issued travel restrictions for 14 May. Bus service on Sunday between Camp Humphreys and Osan Air Base was halted but shuttle buses running inside Camp Humphreys was not be affected. Government vehicles were banned from driving off-post Sunday except for "essential" missions. Pyeongtaek's train station, adjacent shopping district, city hall and adjacent downtown areas were also off limits. An off-limits restriction on travel in or between all villages bordering Camp Humphreys was extended. The only exception was for people going to or from their homes. Travel was banned along the northern perimeter road inside the camp, as well as walking, hiking, running or biking in the area west of Camp Humphreys to the Anjung River. A total of 100 people including Daechu-ri residents and committee members, held a "Pan National Meeting for Peaceful Farming" at Peace and Art Park in Daechu-ri. The rally was peaceful -- but police were also standing by just in case at the Daechuri Elementary School. Early in the day Yonhap News reported that between 2,000-4,000 militants, shouting "Yankee go home," clashed with riot police in a remote farming village on Sunday, opposing plans to expand a U.S. military base there. The demonstrators from the Hanchongryeon, or the Federation of Korean University Student Councils, and the Korean Confederation of Trade Union attempted to enter Daechu-ri in the beginning of the morning but failed thanks to a block from the police. (SITE NOTE: Finally, Yonhap News printed the phrase "Yankee Go Home" as Korean sentiments. Though the protestors have been stating this on their signs all along -- only it was usually in hangul stating "American Soldiers Go Home" -- the news media has refused to use this phrase in English translations of news reports. For the video of protest go to OhMy News.) To bypass the police cordon, the unarmed students gathered at a remote school and walked several kilometers along paddy dikes to reach the village where they confronted police and rallied for about eight hours on a road in Bonjeong-ri, Paengseong-eub. The protest broke up at about 4:30 p.m. Some 1,000 students scuffled with the riot police while trying to break through the police cordon line. After being deterred from entering the villages, protesters staged sit-in demonstrations in front of the police line. According to Yonhap News, "Withdraw U.S. military forces. Pyeongtaek is our land," protesters shouted as they kicked and punched riot police who formed human barriers against them. ... Students, many of them wearing gauze masks apparently to conceal their identity, vowed to break through the police lines. A South Korean military helicopter showered down leaflets warning that protesters who would violate the fenced-off military zone could face punishment under military laws." Separately in the center of Pyeongtaek, a city of 350,000, several hundred protesters, mostly workers, held a rally, demanding the cancellation of the U.S. base expansion project. After the rally, the workers planned to march a few kilometers through the city and may try to join the students, organizers said. (Source: Yonhap News.) Riot police and protesters scuffled during the protest. Some 196 companies of riot police numbering 20,000 were mobilized to stop the protests, in which 36 protestors were taken into custody for throwing stones at police. Five people were taken to nearby hospitals, including two policemen, after smaller clashes between police and protestors. But by Korean standards, the protest was peaceful and residents of the area were notable by their absence. (SITE NOTE: The students usually attack when they have a numerical advantage on their side. The students were outnumbered three-to-one so some of their confrontations lacked any violent conviction. On TV it showed the students striking a policeman to the head, and immediately a baton was swung at the activist from the another policeman. However, the police did not pursue or attack -- only defend. The riot police were ordered to use restraint -- or else.) The feared large-scale violence, however, was averted as protestors refrained from using lethal tools like steel pipes or bamboo sticks while police stopped short of full-scale suppression. The government and some local residents' groups have complained that the turmoil there was imported by activists opposing the U.S. military presence in Korea. Four thousands protesters who had gathered from around the country tried to converge at a farm village inside the designated base area, which has been fenced off and is guarded by military troops and riot police. Failing in that effort, the demonstrators moved on to a nearby village where they waved placards, shouted slogans through loudspeakers and in many villagers' eyes made a nuisance of themselves on what should have been a peaceful Sunday in rural Korea. There was a small counterdemonstration by 150 residents of other nearby villages, who gathered to show their support for their American soon-to-be neighbors and their contribution to the local economy. Through their own loudspeakers, the local demonstrators ordered the anti-base group out of the area; some pushing and shoving ensued. (Source: Joongang Ilbo.) 
(R) Massing for March (L) Students Harassing Police at K-6 Fence (14 May 2006) (OhMy News) 
(R) Police Move into Area (L) Protestors March into Area (14 May 2006) (OhMy News) 
(R) Massing for March (L) March to Police Line (14 May 2006) (OhMy News) 
Confrontation (14 May 2006) (OhMy News) 15 May 2006 Teams from the Korea Cadastral Survey Corporation began measuring the boundaries of the expansion site on 15 May, the first of several preliminary steps to ready the land for development. The next step is for a historical survey team to complete its inspection. Then the USFK will conduct its own independent survey of various sites. 16 May 2006 The Korean media continued to "evaluate" the protest that fizzled in depth. The the Pan-National Committee to Deter the Expansion of U.S. Bases said the police blockade last weekend prevented its demonstrations then from being carried out "satisfactorily." Despite the outcome that was not as planned, the committee started to make plans for another large-scale protest at Daechuri on June 11. The last time the activists tried to link the protest to the Kwangju riots -- though the similarity of the two escaped everyone. This time around the activists are trying to link the protest to the anniversary to the deaths of two middle school girls crushed by an Army tracked vehicle on 13 Jun 2002. This led to the massive anti-American demonstrations and swept President Roh -- who jumped on the hate US bandwagon -- into office. However, the committee is scheduling the protest for 11 Jun so more people can attend. The Korea Confederation of Trade Unions, the Korean Federation of University Student Councils, the Democratic Labor Party and affiliated organizations that constitute the coalition plan for protests that draw some 10,000 participants. After the protest fizzled, there was a backlash by conservative newspapers against the Pan-National Committee actions and they have for the first time started to voice opinions that are just a fraction away from calling the activists "communists." The shift is partially due to the multiple-published surveys that more of the young are shifting to conservative views -- and the expectation of a rejection of the progressive Uri Party in the May 31st elections -- along with the rejection of "pro-North Korea" policies of Roh Moo-hyun. The conservative papers feel more confident in attacking the Roh administration as they have a bone to pick with Roh over the press law (now under deliberation in the Constitutional Court). The Chosun Ilbo had an editorial on 18 May that stated, "In the minds of the Pan-National Committee, the Republic of Korea is a country that should never have been born or should be absorbed into the North Korean system as soon as possible. That became clear during the protests against the Pyeongtaek base. Protestors planted not the Taegukgi ? the South Korean flag -- but pan-Korean flags in the rice fields. They attacked troops from the Republic of Korea with split bamboo sticks and cut barbed-wire fences to trespass on military facilities. The Pyeongtaek coalition says on its homepage it opposes the relocation of U.S. bases "because it is designed to launch a preemptive attack on North Korea." That betrays a mindset more concerned about the security of the Kim Jong-il regime than the Republic of Korea. They live here, but their true fatherland is elsewhere." (SITE NOTE: This indictment against the activist groups was the first time we had seen such words in print in Korea. We have been saying this same thing for years, but this is the first time a KOREAN has agreed with us.) 18 May 2006: Holdouts Given More Time Meanwhile, the government will wait for three or four months before moving locals out of villages near the site. "Although we ordered locals to leave by the end of June, we can't force them out," said Yoo Jong-sang, a government official in charge of the matter, said. "We will take legal action first by applying for an injunction." (Source: Chosun Ilbo.) In April the Ministry of Defense had given the holdouts until June to move -- but now has extended the time to the end of October. Obviously the reason is that the master plan has not been approved -- and the USFK has requested an extension for the master plan as there are so many obstacles -- the primary one being the cost-sharing issue. However, the question that came out was -- DID THE ROK GOVERNMENT REALLY OWN THE LAND IN THE FIRST PLACE? IF IT DOES, WHY DID THE GOVERNMENT WANT TO GO TO COURT? The answer came back that the government did NOT want to exacerbate the conditions by using force in evicting the elderly farmers -- regardless that the government had the supposed right under law. Instead, it went to the courts to gain clear rights to the land -- and thus bypass another ruling that land with rice growing above a certain height cannot be turned over. Farmers earlier this spring defied a government farming ban at the site and planted a new spring rice crop in hopes of delaying the expansion project. The government position was that they owned the land BEFORE the farmers planted the rice. This needed to be clarified IMMEDIATELY as the rice was sprouting at the time. According to the Stars and Stripes South Korean authorities have extended by four months the deadline for holdout residents living near Camp Humphreys to move from their homes. "We have to consider their right to live there," one of the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity. The government would follow the court's rulings in the eviction matter, and would seek a court's go-ahead before using force to evict the holdouts, the source said. The residents are living on part of a 2,328-acre expanse of farmland that the government bought -- the exact term was "expropriate" (condemned) -- in 2005 toward Camp Humphreys' eventual expansion. While most residents have moved out, some have refused to leave. About 90 or more families are still living in two villages near Camp Humphreys — Daechu-ri and Dodu-ri. One official said authorities believe the holdouts number about 300, mostly in Daechu-ri. On 18 Mar the task force team under the Prime Minister's Office telephoned leaders of the protesting residents, and invited them to talk about additional compensation measures. The residents rejected the talks, and demanded that the police chief and defense minister step down. They also asked the soldiers guarding the site to leave so they can resume farming. Thus the position of the residents is one of unwillingness to relocate regardless of compensation. On 18 May, an open letter in English was circulated to solicit international support. The Anti-gizi (Anti-camptown) posted the letter on their site on 6 June 2006.) It read in part, "Toward the Peaceful Solution of the Pyungtaek Problem: 5.18 Declaration on Emergency Situation --The government must be ready for the totally new negotiation for the relocation of the US bases!-- May 18th, 2006 26 Years Ago Today When 5.18 Gwang Joo People's Struggle Broke Out! We got together here with the desperate sense of crisis, as democracy, human rights, and peace were overridden.In a surprising twist, Kim Dong-min, co-president of the Citizens' Coalition for Democratic Media, a left-leaning media monitoring civic group, resigned on 19 May amid harsh criticism over his column on May 12 for Government Briefing, a news portal operated by the Government Information Agency. He stated liberal media groups -- including the daily newspaper Hankyoreh, and online media such as OhmyNews, PRESSian, and the Voiceofpeople -- had printed favorable articles about the protesters in Pyeongtaek. (SITE NOTE: These are radical anti-American news sources. Hankyoreh is a supporter of the Roh administration policies.) In his column Mr. Kim asserted that the liberal media presented one-sided claims by the Pan South Korea Solution Committee against U.S. Base Extension and were excessively tolerant of the protesters' violent rallies. Expressions used in Hankyoreh's reports such as "war" and "military operation" to describe the riot policemen's preparations for the rallies exaggerated and distorted facts, he said. "In Hankyoreh, there was only brutal oppression by the authorities and peaceful actions by residents, but no reports about the violent protesters, which seemed to be led by Hanchongryon, a student activist group," he wrote. Reacting to Mr. Kim's column, members of the monitoring group and liberal media groups turned on him and forced his resignation. (Source: Joongang Ilbo.) 20-21 May 2006 A series of rallies for and against the U.S. army base relocation were held one after another in Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi Province, over the weekend, but did not cause any conflicts. According to the Stars and Stripes on 19 May about the 20 May pro-American rally at Anjungni, "Pyeongtaek merchants who say they're fed up with anti-U.S. protests plan a large rally Saturday to voice support for Camp Humphreys' eventual expansion and the continued U.S. military presence in South Korea. Organizers said the rally aims in part to counter recent, violent anti-U.S. protests by activists who oppose the expansion project and want a U.S. military withdrawal. "They just say, 'All the GI go back to the States,'" Kim Ki-ho, president of the Anjung-ri Merchants Association, said of the anti-expansion protesters. The association is sponsoring Saturday's pro-U.S. rally. "We don't want" U.S. forces to leave South Korea, Kim said. "We need American soldiers … to stay in Korea for our … defense from North Korea or China, something like that." The Association predicted 4,000 people would join the rally, set for 2 p.m. near the post's main gate. They include South Korean military veterans, merchants and clergy, and others from 30 to 40 organizations in the Seoul-Pyeongtaek region. On 20 May a total of over 1,500 members of conservative groups, including the Paengseong Merchants Association in Pyeongtaek, the War Veterans Social Club in Pyeongtaek, and the National Council for Advancement, held a rally for governmental authorities before the main entrance of Camp Humphreys (K-6), a U.S. army base, to denounce the opponents of base relocation. The conservatives insisted that the government accelerate the relocation to strengthen the Korea-U.S. alliance and national security, saying that "no attempt to bolster leftist ideological conflicts challenging governmental authorities should be excusable." On 20 May Kim Ki-ho, head of the Anjung-ri Merchants Association, said about 2,000 people, about half of them South Korean military veterans and the rest Anjung-ri residents, held a peaceful two-hour rally Saturday afternoon to voice support for the expansion plan and for the U.S. military's continued presence on the peninsula. The speakers also warned anti-U.S. protesters that they face a hostile reception in Anjung-ri from local merchants irate over loss of business resulting from the demonstrations as the GIs have gone to the Shinjang Mall at Osan AB for bar entertainment. Kim said the merchants are ready for physical confrontations with anti-U.S. protesters should they select Anjung-ri as part of their march route for any future rallies in Daechu-ri. (Source: Stars and Stripes.)The Pyeongtaek Affairs Committee consisting of civic society groups in Pyeongtaek held "a marathon race against the U.S. army base relocation to Pyeongtaek" in the Pyeongtaek public stadium on the morning of 21 May. The marathon was publicized in Tongil News, but there was not a large turnout and was mainly students that ran along the main boulevards. The voluntary activities for rural communities, which the Korean Teachers and Education Workers' Union and the Coalition of Korean University Students scheduled on rice field in Daechu-ri over the weekend, were cancelled. (Source: Donga Ilbo.) After the attack on Park Geun-hye, chairwoman of the Grand National Party while campaigning on 20 May, the polls show that there was a negative reaction against all the "progressive" parties -- as one of the persons arrested was a dues-paying member of the Uri Party. Meanwhile, the Paengseong Affairs Committee (PAC), comprised of residents in Daechu-ri and in Dodu-ri, Paengseong said yesterday that the Special Commission on USFK Affairs under the Prime Minister's Office proposed an official talk to resolve the relocation issue on May 20. An official of the PAC said, "The special commission called some PAC senior management members on May 17 requesting an online talk, which we rejected. But, at this time, we are planning to notify the time and place for the requested talk after discussion with residents, since the request was delivered through an official letter." (SITE NOTE: The willingness to enter into negotiations is a positive step and indicates the realization that protests did not achieve the results they intended. There was no national support for their protest -- and the dwindling numbers of activists joining the protest has led to their decision to open negotiations. Though given an extension until October to move out, the ROK government has gone to court to eliminate the last potential legal roadblock over the rice fields that have been planted. If the courts rules in favor of the government, the farmers will have lost everything -- and the farmers will be evicted on disadvantageous terms. There will be no more negotiations.)  The cartoon compares President Roh Moo-hyun to the attacker of Park Geun-hye, Chairman of the GNP, who had her face slashed with a razor knife while campaigning on 20 May 2006. In the photo, President Roh is the attacker and the helpless elderly female is Daechuri (right). The cartoon is from the radical left news source, Tongil News, and shows the frustration of the left-leaning activists as the support President Roh and the Uri Party had once given the activists has vaporized. Instead, now Roh is now viewed as the attacker of the elderly farmers as he represents the government. 2 June 2006 The government held a first formal meeting with residents of Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi Province on 2 Jun to discuss the relocation of USFK headquarters there. The two sides agreed to deal with the problem through discussions from now on after violent protests last month turned the site into a battleground. (SITE NOTE: The residents saw the futility of fighting as the national support by activists did not materialize -- leaving the residents to face the consequences.) Kim Chun-seok, the assistant secretary of a Special Commission on USFK Affairs, and two other officials met with Lee Sang-yeol, the leader of the residents organization in Paengseong and two others. "As this was only the first meeting since formal dialogue was proposed, we mainly just listened to what the residents had to say," Kim said afterwards. Their demands include an apology for damages due to the base relocation, and release of those arrested in the protests. (SITE NOTE: The chances of getting an apology for damages is slim but the release of those arrested is possible after a "cooling off" period. Currently the national sentiment is against the violent protestors who were captured on tape with sharpened bamboo poles.) "The main thing is that we've agreed to solve the problem through talks, and we will discuss the points of contention at our next meeting" on June 7, Kim added. The government said last month that if the residents came forward, it could discuss additional compensation for those whose homes and farmland were expropriated to make way for the base. (Source: Chosun Ilbo.) 7 June 2006 Pyeongtaek District Court issued an arrest warrant for Jitae Kim, chairman of the Paengsung Countermeasures Committee. A Statement by Pan S.Korea Solution Committee against US Base Extension in PT stated there was a substantial warrant review dealing with the arrest of Jitae Kim that lasted over 2 hours. Via his attorney, Mr. Kim mentioned to the court how unfair, indemocratic and even dangerous the project of the US base expansion is. Mr. Kim was returned to jail. Residents demanded in the meeting with the police that they release Mr. Kim and stop measuring the land. but the results were negative. Father Mun Jeong-hyeon began to fast and one activist in prison also started to be on a hunger strike to support him. (Source: www.antigizi.or.kr.) 18 June 2006 On Sunday, June 18th, 2006 approximately 5,000 people from around Korea marched in Pyeongtaek toward Daechuri and Doduri, vocalizing their opposition to the expansion of the American base there according to activist sources. The Stars and Stripes warned USFK forces to stay away from the area. However, the World Cup fever sweeping the country detracted from media attention on this protest.   (L) Protestors Rally for March on Daechuri at 12:30 (18 Jun 2006) (Tongil News); (R) Daechuri Protestors Enter Through Rice Fields (18 Jun 2006) (Tongil News) In preparation, the ROK Army behind the concertina wire armed themselves with bamboo spikes. Unlike the protestors in May who attacked the unarmed ROK soldiers with splintered bamboo acting like sashimi knives, these pikes were made of two slender eight-foot long bamboo poles taped together for strength -- as defensive weapons in case the protestors attempted to breach the concertina wire. No confrontations were reported.   (L) ROK Army behind concertina wire with bamboo pikes to repel any potential attacks. (18 Jun 2006) (Tongil News); (R) Army helicopters over ROK Army controlled area in Daechuri (18 Jun 2006) (Tongil News) Approximately 200 supporters were inside the village, despite heavy police opposition, shouting from the rooftops. The activists were confronted by the riot police on the roads and at one point, it turned into a pushing contest as the protestors tried to push a "container house" blocking the road out of the way with the protestors pushing on one side and riot police on the other. The protestors finally managed to march from Daechuri to Doduri and back to Daechuri by marching through the rice fields.   (L) Protestors on Daechuri rooftop (18 Jun 2006) (Tongil News); (R) Daechuri Protestors Shoving Match with Container house (18 Jun 2006) (Tongil News) Daechuri Protestors Enter Through Rice Fields (18 Jun 2006) (Tongil News) College students in small inflatable rafts -- approximately eight -- sailed out onto the river between the main area of Pyeongtaek and the villages, apparently to hold a demonstration on the water. They then crossed the river and into the village as the police stood by, helpless, and very much occupied with the 5,000 marchers who were all marching on the villages from various parts of the area.   (L) Protestors on Rafts (18 Jun 2006) (Tongil News): (R) Daechuri Protestors Confront Riot Police on Roads (18 Jun 2006) (Tongil News) It is reported that the Korean national police force mustered for the day numbered some 11,000 men. There are no reports of excessive violence or serious injuries.  Riot Police Buses with Protest Banners along road (18 Jun 2006) (Tongil News) Save Pyeongtaek Farmers reported that the government's planned date to begin demolishing empty homes in the villages was 30 June. "The government has signed contracts for "hired civilian workers" who are known to be plain clothes ex-military strikebreakers." A campaign to find "peace observers" to protect homes was started but there was little public support expected. On 30 Oct, the government's planned to start the forced evictions of all residents. Calls were made for "Peace observers" and village defenders to be living in the villages before this time. Many reported that the 18 Jun action "reinvigorated" the movement to save the farming villages, which was dealt a major blow on May 4th, with the destruction of the Daechuri primary school and the laying of Concertina razor wire around the villages. Many villagers expressed their renewed hope that they will, indeed be able to keep their homes. (Source: Save Pyeongtaek Farmers.) 4-7 July 2006 The activist movement has been sidetracked by the US-ROK Fair Trade Agreement negotiations...with protestors disrupting the meetings and staging large protests in Seoul. As such, the local area has been relatively quiet. KBS aired a special on "60 Minutes" that attempted to equate the Daechuri struggles with the activists in Okinawa and Japan -- but never mentioned the glaring differences between the Japanese activist aims and the ROK aims. In the TV special, the farmers were given air time to voice their grievances -- but it seems to be all too late. The special did show the abandoned houses that were leveled -- while the die-hard farmers were still planting their crops despite the eviction order. On 4 July, anti-American activists began a five-day march from Seoul to Pyeongtaek to protest plans to expand Camp Humphreys. Fifty members of the Pan-National Committee to Deter the Expansion of Pyeongtaek U.S. Base were to walk 91 kilometers from the presidential office of Cheong Wa Dae to the town of Daechuri. They will hold rallies outside the Defense Ministry in Seoul and a detention house in Pyeongtaek where some of their colleagues are being held in custody. The coalition also said popular actors Choi Min-sik, movie director Bong Jun-ho and other prominent figures from various sectors have joined their 571-member group. However, this march was over-shadowed by the FTA protests and the pending missile "test" launches by the North. There did not appear to be much support for the march -- except by the farmer groups, but they were tied up in Seoul with the FTA protests. 7 July 2006 Activists planned a march on 7 July with about 200 people who were to march from Suwon Train Station to Suwon Air Base and from Osan Subway Station to Osan Air Base’s main gate. They were expected to stay overnight outside Osan -- and most likely a counter-demonstration by the Merchant's Association would probably be scheduled as the area would most certainly be declared off-limits and cut into the area business. The planned demonstration at Osan AB fizzled and the only indication of a protest was the large banner at Shinjang mall that stated the the Shinjang Mall Merchants "Emphatically Object" to any protests that damaged their business. Notice that it was not a condemnation of the protest -- only a condemnation of effects to their business. In other words, the meaning was to protest somewhere else. This was not a political message -- simply a "keep out" sign from the businesses. 8-9 July 2006 On 8 July the march was to continue to Pyeongtaek City Hall, then to Pyeongtaek Train Station and from there to Daechuri. On 8 July Yonhap News reported that 400 protesters rallied outside the Pyeongtaek train station. However, on 7-8 March nothing appeared in the Tongil News that would normally monitor the march. Instead all the attention was detracted by the 100,000 that were expected to demonstrate against the FTA in Seoul on 9 July. More than 40 South Korean protesters who opposed Camp Humphreys’ expansion were jailed in Pyeongtaek after violent clashes on 8 July with pro-U.S. residents and local police. Police said 42 protesters were jailed for holding an unauthorized rally outside a local police station. Police said they were members of the Task Force To Oppose the Expansion of the U.S. Bases in Pyeongtaek. The protesters spurned a police order to halt the rally and then resisted when officers sought to disperse them, according to the Gyeonggi Provincial Police Agency. (Source: Stars and Stripes.) 300 members of the Nationwide Response Committee Against Expansion OF U.S. Base Expansion(NRC) marching from Pyong-taek Station to Daechu-ri on 9 July were blocked by 100 egg-throwing merchants, and decided to end (their march), out of concern for their safety. They are to gather again at Pyong-taek Station at 1pm, July 9th and march toward Daechu-ri. A van containing three protesters of the NRC drove toward the entrance of Daechu-ri, a village near Camp Humphreys, to check reports that a large group of pro-U.S. South Korean demonstrators was formed to block any anti-U.S. rally in the village. The activists said that around 9 p.m. the van was met by 200 members of the Anjung-ri Merchants Association at the Won-jung Intersection, which is the entrance to Daechu-ri, Paeng-sung Town, Pyong-taek City. The Anjung-ni merchants allegedly blocked the van's path, pulled the occupants from the van and began beating them. The activists were quoted as saying three members of its group were attacked, and that one man remained hospitalized for treatment of cuts and fractures, including a head injury. An NRC member Mr. Kwak (age:33, Daechu-ri, Paeng-sung Town) sustained head injuries and was treated at a nearby hospital. Mr Kwak claimed, "Upon hearing that merchants had gathered at Won-jung Intersection, I went there to see if marchers' safety can be ensured, when merchants swore at us and dragged me off the van, and hit me with square bars." Five companies of riot police were deployed around Anjung-ni, in anticipation for clash between merchants and NRC, but no police presence where the violence occurred. (SITE NOTE: Later in July the activist groups protested that the police had done nothing to apprehend the culprits. The police reaction was to simply disregard the message in disgust.) Kim Ki-ho, president of the Anjung-ri Merchants Association, said on 10 July that at least two association members were injured in the clash with the protesters and were hospitalized. One senior member of merchants' organization said, "I have not heard any specific facts on the violence. We, merchants, had endured enough for last two years. We won't tolerate out-of-town entities interfering (our affairs.) We will stop them with our force." (SITE NOTE: This hostility to the activists is the same that was seen on 7 July at Osan AB's main gate by the Shinjang Mall merchants. Some GIs read a "dollar motive" for the merchants actions, but this not be any more so than in Osan AB. The problem is that the activists are targeting THE MERCHANT areas for the protests. The merchants are making no political statement -- only a business statement. Don't screw with the monies I earn. I need to survive after the hard times the base/camp have placed me under with their off-limits/underage drinking/curfew sanctions.) Nothing was reported of the 9 July march to Daechu-ri, but all non-residents of the area were turned back by Police roadblocks. The march was overshadowed by about 100,000 people who were expected to show up near Seoul City Hall to protest the ROK-U.S. Free Trade Agreement. 22 July 2006 First the hysteria of the North Korea missile "tests" on 4 Jul, Typhoon Ewiniar and then the monsoon floods in early July prevented any protests -- as Koreans are primarily "fair weather" protestors. Thus the Pyeongtaek protests against the Camp Humphrey expansion by the evil "mikgun" (soldiers) of 8 Jul was rescheduled. The march directly to Daechuri failed due to the roads being blocked by the police buses. After the obligatory pushing match with riot police, the protestors then marched to Daechuri using the back roads and farmer lanes between the fields. The marchers were followed by an entourage of photographers that were hoping for a violent confrontation. Instead it was a rather boring face-off and then the march to Daechuri via the back roads. The protest was peaceful with a crowd estimated at 700 people. More and more Koreans are shunning the move as the reality is starting to alight that the US may simply pull out if the protests continue. If this should happen, the effects on the local economy may be devastating. Thus the populace is simply staying away from these protests. However, expect more protests as the September deadline for the Camp Humphreys Master Plan completion -- or perhaps lack of it -- nears.   (L) Protestors on chant defiance against the "Migun Kiji" (Soldier Camp) (R) Protest Performance condemning Roh, Bush and MND (22 Jul 2006) (Tongil News)  Protestors on march through fields (22 Jul 2006) (Tongil News)   Protestors on march through fields (22 Jul 2006) (Tongil News) 31 July 2006 On 31 July there was a small candlelight vigil headed by Fr Moon at Daechu-ri. The small group performed skits, but the demonstration did not attract much media attention. The public support for the Daechu-ri farmers has been waning as the spotlight shifted to the ROK-US FTA protests along with the North Korean missile test issues. Though the radical Federation of Student Councils (Hangchongyreon or FTC) has centered its focus on the base expansion, it is focusing its attention on the camps/bases -- not the farmer issue. At this time, it appears the activists have deserted their brethren in Daechu-ri that they said they would join with in their fight "to the death." On 31 July, a small group of perhaps ten people chanted in front of the Osan AB Main Gate protesting the "Strategic Flexibility" policy of the US in Northeast Asia. Though the Tongil News had an article on this protest, most of the article dealt with the supposed "danger zones" (noise, fire, explosive, missile targeting, etc.) surrounding Osan AB. Unfortunately for these protestors, the situation is out of their hands -- and there is nothing more to be said on this issue. The US will forge ahead with its policy -- while the ROK has "abstained" from giving its approval. The die has been cast and in the October Security Consultative Meeting (SCM) expect to hear some bad news for Korea. The concerns for life at Osan by contractors may become an issue. The Shinjang Mall businesses position on these protests is that they "emphatically disapprove" of these protests that affect their businesses. Protests tend to shut the Main Gate and stop GIs from spending their money downtown.   (L) & (R) Protest in front of Main Gate at Shinjang Mall (31 July 2006) (Tongil News)   (L) & (R) Protest in front of Main Gate at Shinjang Mall (31 July 2006) (Boram O'Sullivan) 12 Aug 2006 10 a.m. anti-U.S. civil gathering in front of Pyeongtaek Train Station with 2,000 attendees. The group then march from the station toward Daecuh-ri. The group was confronted by riot police with the unification group separated by container buildings. The protestors were mainly college students wearing Unification blue t-shirts with red bandanas to cover their faces. Besides the students pulling over one container building, the confrontation was non-violent. At 7p.m. a candlelight rally was held. At Osan AB in anticipation of a possible protest, five buses of riot police arrived. Because of the heat, none of the riot police suited up and instead made their presence seen throughout the Mall area by marching in groups in their black and red T-shirts. But no protestors showed up. The protests at Pyeongtaek was off-set by a rally at Seoul Station with 5000 people, including 10 former defense ministers, 500 generals and many old veterans wearing their uniforms and ribbons. Protestors demanded a halt to discussions to dismantle the CFC and an official apology from Roh, calling on politicians to make clear their opposition to dismantlement of the joint command structure. They also demanded that what they said were pro-North Korean groups pulling strings behind the scenes be investigated. After the speeches, the protestors marched peacefully to Namdaemun (South Gate). 13 Sep 2006 A sign that the Daechuri issue is a lost cause is that the activist leader Fr. Moon showed up in September at activist rallies protesting the Fair Trade Agreement. He started with the Missile Defense System (MDS) protests in 2000 in Kunsan, moved to the hate campaigns in Seoul in 2002, then moved to Daechuri in 2004 to protest the move to Pyeongtaek. He is still at the forefront of the Camp Humphreys protests, but it looks like he might be moving on again. On 13 Sep hundreds of workers on Wednesday began demolition work at a site designated for expanded U.S. military facilities. Before the work started at 7 a.m., 18,000 police officers and 485 construction workers made the rounds of 90-170 houses in four villages from which people were evicted to make sure that no one remained there. The initial demolition was of only 88 of the 220 houses in the four villages to be evacuated; the razed homes were those owned by residents who have already received government compensation for their land and dwellings. Ten buildings occupied by protesters were excluded from the project, in an apparent effort to avoid - or at least delay - further clashes at the site. A total of 40 houses were excluded from the demolition work because the remaining occupants and protesters occupied them. Some farmers and organized protesters have defied government orders to leave the site and attempted to block government efforts to evict them.  Daechuri Demolition (13 Sep 2906) (Korea Herald) The Defense Ministry gave advance notice that the removal would come sometime in the week. The demolition was originally planned for July, but was delayed due to the government's prolonged negotiations with residents, according to officials. The Ministry of National Defense, aided by police, razed abandoned houses on 13 Sep at Daechuri. The police had sealed off the area before the demolition work began, although some protesters have been squatting in a few of the houses. After police officers confirmed which buildings were to be demolished, each house was flattened in about 10 minutes by construction workers with heavy equipment. Former residents of the houses have moved to other locations after agreeing to a compensation deal with the government. About 590 out of 680 households have left the region. The remaining 40 houses, where protesters are camping, and common utility buildings such as warehouses were not included in the demolition plan, the ministry said.  Daechuri Demolition (13 Sep 2906) (Korea Herald) Dozens of local farmers and anti-U.S. activists protested near the police cordon and occasionally scuffled with riot police, though no serious injuries were reported. Police detained 23 activists who attempted to break through a police barricade that led to the site allocated for the U.S. base. In Seoul, a protest organization complained to reporters in front of the Defense Ministry headquarters about the day's events. "Because the government used force to tear down the houses, many people were injured and arrested," said the Pan-South Korea Solution Committee Against U.S. Base Extension in Pyeongtaek. (Source: Joongang Ilbo and Korea Herald.) 2 Oct 2006 According to theDonga Ilbo Paengseong County held a Residents Harmony Feast at the Western Multipurpose Hall. The feast was held outside of the site reserved for the base, and the Local Countermeasures Committee which is opposing the move did not attend, making it a party which only half the members attended. Around 100 people were present, such as 10 locals opposing the move, 70 locals from Daechu-ri, Dodu-ri, Yoo Jong-sang deputy secretary of planning at the Office for Government Policy Coordination, Park Gyeong-seo head of U.S. army base relocation project at the Ministry of National Defense, Mayor of Pyeongtaek Song Myeong-ho. The "feast" lasted for two hours. This was the first event that took place since talks between the government and Pyeongtaek National Countermeasures Committee for the Obstruction of U.S. Army Base Expansion was discontinued in June of this year. It took six talks with the opposing locals to prepare this event. Park Jong-myeong (66, Dodu2-ri), representative of locals, said, “There have been many conflicts between the people who left the town and those who remain, but we are all victims. From now on, we wish the government would confer with the locals to promote a project that will not bring about disunion.” Yu also said, “I wish today’s event will become a place where the locals and government can forget about the hostilities created in the process of promoting the relocation project, and make harmony with each other.” However the event did not go smoothly, with the leaders of the Local Countermeasures Committee absent, and some opposing locals shouting, “Stop this deceptive event,” near the end. Head of the Cooperative Enforcement of Pyeongtaek National Countermeasures Committee, Park Rae-gun (45), claimed, “How can it become a Residents Harmony Feast, just because some opposing locals are present. The government’s attitude is very sneaky. On the outside, it asks to hold talks, but behind everyone’s back, it uses conciliatory measures, and holds parties to show to the media.” Business Director of Paengseong Locals Countermeasures Committee Kim Taek-gyun (42) said, “With village head of Daechu-ri Kim Ji-tae in confinement, and the locals holding a candle ceremony everyday to defend their homeland, this sort of event will only bring new confrontation and conflict.” The Office for Government Policy Coordination announced, with 40 more locals of Daechu-ri, and Dodu-ri agreeing to move out, 50 out of 92 families opposing the forced removal remain in the U.S. army relocation site. Last month the government demolished 90 empty houses, and soon it will complete the master plans for the formation of the relocation base, and commence work on the foundation such as trial digging of cultural assets and construction of drainage facilities. Development of the site will start as of next April. (Source: Donga Ilbo.) 14 Oct 2006 Mimicking the Shinjang Mall US-ROK Friendship Culture Festival, the Anjung-ri Merchants Association hosted the Korean/American One Heart Festival on 14-15 Oct in the shopping and bar district just outside of Camp Humphreys. “We hope that the festival will bring U.S. soldiers and local people to seek one heart, unified, after undergoing the Daechu-ri conflicts,” , Kim Ki-ho, the association's president said. “The festival will help us to strengthen our friendship and boost the local economy.” The protests prompted military commanders to place some areas outside base off-limits, including shopping district Anjung-ri. In turn, the merchants complained of lost business. Kim said the group has invited Col Taliento, Area III Commander who they have been at odds with in the past, to the festival, as well as military members and Insuni, a famous South Korean-American singer. Other events slated include traditional folk music, a childrens’ drawing contest and karaoke contests. The festival also was to include a 1.5-kilometer march at 1 p.m. Saturday, starting outside Humphreys’ main gate. (SITE NOTE: The Festival was on the same dates as the Osan AB Air Power Day which drew crowds from outside the local area, as well as Camp Humphreys.) 3 Nov 2006 Police they planned to keep riot police units around Camp Humphreys. The 14 units comprising 1,400 riot police will replace police troops to more effectively secure the site designated for a U.S. military base expansion. Police have dispatched 32 rotating units to fend off attempts by local residents and anti-U.S. activists to break into the fenced land. (Source: Korea Herald.)  Beefing up security (8 Nov 2006) (Tongil News) 8 Nov 2006 According to the Joongang Ilbo on 7 Nov 2006, a South Korean man convicted of fostering violent resistance to the Camp Humphreys expansion project in Pyeongtaek has been sentenced to two years in prison. Kim Ji-tae’s sentence in Suwon District Court came after he was convicted of instigating violent protests on farmland near Camp Humphreys, according to the JoongAng Ilbo report. Kim Ji-tae, village chief of Daechu-ri and chairman of the Paengsung Countermeasures Committee, was taken into custody on 5 Jun after the violent attacks at Daechu-ri. At the time, residents demanded in the meeting with the police that they release Mr. Kim and stop measuring the land. but the results were negative. (Source: www.antigizi.or.kr.) The court said Kim was personally responsible for violence that has marked opposition to the project, and that he had fostered defiance of public authority, the report said. “Considering that Mr. Kim was a catalyst for a large-scale violent protest in which bamboo sticks and iron pipes were wielded, his crimes cannot be taken lightly,” the report quoted a judge as saying. The report quoted one activist, Choi Yeon-chul, as saying the sentence was out of proportion with those of similar cases. The activist accused the court of trying to inhibit future protests. (Source: Stars and Stripes.) (SITE NOTE: The government is finally taking a stand on the Camp Humphreys expansion and sending a message to activists that further violence will not be tolerated in the project to be started next year with land fill operations off-base. However, though Kim was sentenced to two years in jail, most of these types of offenses usually end up with suspensions for two-three years...meaning that he will probably be quietly released on probation. In fact, the violence was at the hands of the student activists from Hanchongryon acting as the "soldiers" for the violent demonstrations.) 22 Nov 2006 On 20 Nov antiwar activist Cindy Sheehan, center spoke to about 75 area residents of Daechuri. (Sheehan's son Casey died in Iraq in 2004. She has since gained international prominence as an activist opposing the Iraq war and the Bush administration.) Sheehan and about 20 other activists from the United States spoke against the project during a candlelight vigil in Daechuri in a show of “solidarity” with local residents opposing the installation’s expansion. Sheehan was part of a group of about 20 activists from the United States who are in South Korea this week to oppose the expansion project and a proposed South Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement. “The farmer group had invited me to come to observe” the conflict over the expansion, Sheehan told Stripes before a candlelight vigil in the village. “This gives me a lot of concern … that our military is doing that to them.” Sheehan said the expansion project was objectionable partly because it has resulted in the dislocation of residents, separating them from their farms, schools and homes. “I think it’s a human-rights issue,” she said. Monday night’s candlelight vigil in Daechu-ri went forward inside a large concrete building a short distance from the camp’s perimeter. Seventy-five area residents sat on silver-colored mats, candles burning in front of them. Most appeared elderly or of middle age. The visiting activists spoke briefly in turn, praising the residents for resisting the expansion.  Protest Group against Base Expansion (22 Nov 2006) (Tongil News) A succession of speakers called for the ouster of the U.S. military from South Korea, and deplored variously Bush administration “militarism” and U.S. foreign policy. “I am humbled by your courage and your integrity and your perseverance,” Sheehan told the residents. “In the United States and here in Pyeongtaek you have a great struggle … we’re all struggling against Georgie Bushy and his militarism.” Sheehan’s sister Dede Miller, of Los Angeles, told the audience, “I’m just very sorry for what my country is doing to yours.” Miller said she and Sheehan would work to “stop the crazy people that are running our country right now.”  Sheehan with pin of her son killed in Iraq (22 Nov 2006) (Tongil News)  Sheehan sisters with misspelled signs (22 Nov 2006) (Tongil News) When a bus transporting the activists pulled up to the police checkpoint that blocks entry into Daechu-ri a phalanx of blue-clad police was in position behind steel barriers, the first two ranks of officers equipped with riot helmets and shields. After an interval of about 10 minutes, police allowed the bus to proceed through the checkpoint. The candlelight session lasted about an hour and the activists were scheduled to spend the night in Daechu-ri. Sheehan and other activists were allowed into that zone to hold a candlelight vigil and spend the night with the village’s residents. Sheehan also took time during the protest to remember her son, Spc. Casey Sheehan, who died in Sadr City, Iraq. She held up a picture of him on a button and posed for photographers. “We are not against the troops themselves,” Sheehan said as a few soldiers in uniform walked along an overpass above the protesters. “We’re against their leaders who deploy them carelessly.” (Source: Stars and Stripes.) (SITE NOTE: According to blog posts, Camp Humphreys was locked down for an hour and a half because of the activists presence. Our opinion is that this is simply a publicity stunt (photo op for the NGO activists) as the Daechuri matter is all but over. Notice that the "protest" only lasted an hour. The shame is that these "outsiders" are giving false hope to the elderly farmers who are going to be legally displaced. The NGO activists were using the elderly farmers for their own anti-American purposes by offering the elderly farmers hope that the entire process can be reversed. The truth was that the battle was over. Their cause is lost.Then Peace activist Cindy Sheehan and a handful of other Americans on 21 Nov in the afternoon held their passports in front of South Korean riot police outside a main gate onto Yongsan Garrison, requesting a meeting with U.S. Forces Korea’s commanding general. Last week, she and Medea Benjamin, a member of a women’s peace group called Code Pink, requested a meeting with Gen. B.B. Bell to discuss the expansion of Camp Humphreys in Pyeongtaek. They were told no one appropriate could meet with them. Their blue booklets and their chants for the U.S. military to halt base expansion plans south of Seoul went unanswered during the 40-minute long protest. “My father served at this base,” Sheehan said as she stood in front of Gate 5 at Yongsan Garrison. “I have the right as an American to come onto this base.” Unfortunately, she doesn't have a clue as what it entails to gain entry to a USFK base. (Source: Stars and Stripes.) 18 Dec 2006 According to the Stars and Stripes on 18 Dec, a South Korean judge in Pyeongtaek imposed jail sentences on six people convicted of leading violent protests against the Camp Humphreys expansion project. Pyeongtaek Chief Judge Sung Ji-yong on Friday sentenced three people to 18 months in jail after they were convicted of interfering with the execution of government duty and holding unlawful protests. Three other people drew 18-month jail sentences for convictions on the same charges, but Sung suspended the sentences for two years. Last month, a man convicted of fostering violent resistance to the expansion project was sentenced to two years in prison. Kim Ji-tae was sentenced in Suwon District Court for instigating violent protests on the contested lands near Camp Humphreys. In related news, residents who have refused to move from land earmarked for the Camp Humphreys expansion are there unlawfully and must leave, South Korea’s high court ruled. The Seoul High Court, however, set no deadline for the 74 residents to vacate their homes in Daechu-ri and Dodu-ri villages, which border Camp Humphreys. The MND has agreed not to demolish the homes of the remaining holdout residents until they leave. But South Korea’s Ministry of National Defense on 18 Dec said a deadline would be set for sometime in January or February. An MND spokesman noted that is also the period in which workers are slated to have begun the first phase of development of the land. The court’s ruling upheld the relocation efforts, saying the government had legally bought the land and was within its rights to insist the remaining residents leave. The court also noted that the government was making payments to those asked to move. South Korean army troops have since turned the tract into a restricted-access military zone with razor-wire barriers, water-filled trenches and other obstacles. Troops now garrison it round-the-clock. (Source: Stars and Stripes.) Miscellaneous Links:
 Condoleezza Rice, Sec of State (Feb 2006) Discussion ItemsThe topics was to cover not only bilateral issues, such as the North Korean nuclear standoff and the South Korea-U.S. alliance, but also global and regional issues of mutual concern, including global terrorism and the political situation of Northeast Asia. Specifically, the agenda was to include talks on the transfer of U.S. Forces Korea camps, strategic flexibility, the redemption of Korea’s Operational Control Authority, free trade agreement negotiations between Korea and the U.S., and other pending issues. In addition to the ongoing struggle between Japan and China over sovereignty, Japan’s views toward its past history and other potential conflicts in Northeast Asia will top the agenda. There were major military issues that needed to be discussed. First was the reluctance of the US to release technology that would allow the ROK to buy Isreali AWACS aircraft. Second was the issue of the WRSA-K which went defunct in Dec 2006. The ROK has munitions that supposedly would only be able to support its ROK forces for 30 days -- instead of the 90 days which it is planned for. Then we have the ROK move to "demilitarize" the DMZ which defeats the US presence in Korea. Of utmost importance was the use of the USFK forces in a regional peace-keeping role that the ROK opposes but states that it has no control over the USFK forces in a back-handed slap at the US. The other main issue was the war-time control of the ROK troops by the ROK -- which would spell the death knell for the Combined Forces Command (CFC). With the current developments in Japan and Guam, the ROK had better be careful to NOT ask for too much. They may get what they wish for and it will be a point of no return for the ROK-US alliance. In 2005, the 5th AF moved to Guam and 13th AF moved to Hickam. Hickam will be an overall Pacific area war-fighting force, but a special force will be dedicated to the Korea flashpoint. It appears that Guam will be the headquarters of this force with the building up of the 36th Air Force Expeditionary Unit on Guam -- along with the relocation of the 3rd Marine Expeditionary Unit headquarters element with 7,000 troops to Guam. The sub-unit at Camp Zama with I Corps could replace the CFC function in the blink of an eye -- and everything is downhill for the ROK after that. The US moved a brigade with all its heavy armor with three months notification (2d Bde, 2d ID to Iraq in 2004) to never return -- and the same could be done for the rest of Korea. This is an open threat that no one wants to mention publicly. The Results: According to Yonhap News on 19 Jan 2006, South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced agreement on "strategic flexibility" of American troops stationed in South Korea, a policy allowing U.S. forces to swiftly move to and from host nations to areas of conflict or of other military needs. On strategic flexibility, the statement reflects both the needs of the U.S. and concerns of South Korea. "The ROK, as an ally, fully understands the rationale for the transformation of the U.S. global military strategy, and respects the necessity for strategic flexibility of the U.S. forces in the ROK," the statement reads. "In the implementation of strategic flexibility, the U.S. respects the ROK position that it shall not be involved in a regional conflict in Northeast Asia against the will of the Korean people." (SITE NOTE: Bottomline is that the US as before was going to proceed with its strategic flexibility -- with or without the ROK's permission. In essence, it states the ROK is welcome to stay out of the regional role the US and Japan will now jointly pursue. The US specifically states that it does NOT EXPECT the ROK's participation in its strategic plans for the region -- but this is also can be read as meaning the US does NOT WANT the ROK participation at this time. The painful episodes of getting the ROK support for the Iraq coalition in 2003 ended in the US pulling out the 2d Bde 2d ID from the ROK after Roh's foot-dragging to send 3,600 troops in 2004. Interestingly, the ROK used the same example to illustrate that the US-ROK alliance could deal with deployments, "The government explains that the two countries are capable of dealing with emergency situations because they share a relationship based on trust, and points to the deployment of 3,600 USFK troops to Iraq in 2004 as an example." HOWEVER, the ROK interprets the statement, to mean that when conflicts occur between China and Taiwan or the U.S. and China, the USFK must have the consent of South Korea if they are to be engaged. The ROK objects to the USFK forces being used in a regional role as it may leave a security vacuum if the troops are deployed. Until this use of USFK forces is put to a test, no one really knows what will happen. The specific details have not been agreed upon regarding the strategic flexibility of the USFK. Therefore, a possible conflict over USFK operations cannot be ruled out. There is a possibility of a conflict of national interests between the U.S., with its global strategy responsibilities, and South Korea, with its top priority being stability on the Korean peninsula. In Seoul on 21 Jan anti-war protestors showed up with signs that said, "Cancel the ROK-US Strategic Consultation" as they interpreted the agreement to mean that the US would use Korea as a base of operations in case of a regional dispute involving the Korean neighbors. The drive toward military innovation that has gained momentum since the 1990s has further accelerated the relocation of U.S. forces stationed overseas. The revolution in military affairs (RMA) refers to a fundamental transformation in military operations and strategy that transpired in the process of amplifying combat capabilities by linking ISR (intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) and PGMs (precision guided munitions) with highly sophisticated C4I (command and control, communication, Computer, and Information) via advanced IT technology.4) The so-called system-of-systems that obtains accurate information through sophisticated battlefield awareness capabilities and relays it to the shooter has proved its effectiveness in wars in the Gulf, Kosovo, Afghanistan and, more recently, Iraq.  Two USFK soldiers in full battle-gear lie wide awake on their bunks, ready to be dispatched at a moment’s notice to a trouble spot anywhere in the world under a new policy of “strategic flexibility” the Korean government finally agreed to endorse on Thursday. “Bad luck,” the Korean soldier on the next bunk commiserates. (20 Jan 2006) (Chosun Ilbo) (NOTE: Notice the stereotype Americans with the white "big nose" and black "big lips" -- in all anti-American cartoons, these stereotypical images of Americans persist.) The touchier issues of the ROK defense capability and its change in status of the US from a patron to "supporting partner" was side-stepped and these discussions will be left to the Secretary of Defense and ROK Ministry of Defense. The turn over of wartime control of the CFC and the WRSA-K discussions will be part of these talks. The timing of this and the equivalent Japanese government talks are interesting. It is also interesting that the Japanese Defense Ministry officials, JSDF officials and Diet members involved in military affairs were all visiting Washington in Jan discussing the details for the upcoming US-Japan Reorganization and Restructuring of the JSDF pact expected in Mar 2006. Any major changes in the ROK-US military agreements are contingent on the outcomes of the Japanese agreement -- and progress on changing the Article 9 of the Japanese Peace Constitution.) On 21 Jan 2006 Defense Minister Yoon Kwang-ung said that he opposed any expansion of South Korea's military operations outside the Korean Peninsula because it could cause security instability and trigger an arms race in East Asia. South Korea "basically understands and respects" Washington's needs for flexible troop deployment incorporated in its new global strategy. "But we are concerned about the possibility for us to be implicated in Northeast Asian conflicts against the will of Koreans because of the 'strategic flexibility.' Following the agreement, the two sides will resolve U.S. forces' flexible movement on a case-by-case basis when a crisis emerges in the region. (Source: Korea Herald.) Although Seoul and Washington have a wide range of bilateral channels, the point of the new strategic dialogue was for the two countries to commit to regular meetings every year. Kim Sook, director-general of the North American affairs bureau at the South Korean Foreign Ministry, said there will be follow-up negotiations at the deputy-minister level. U.S. Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns is expected to visit Seoul around April for these discussions, Kim said. Ban and Rice are expected to hold a second round of the strategic dialogue later this year. At the same time, the Security Consultative Meeting (SCM) in Oct 2006 will address the security/defense issues. (SITE NOTE: Our opinion is that these talks separate the two conflicting interests of the US State Department and the US Defense Department. The two pursue different strategies and methods to achieve the same goals. In the past -- especially under Colin Powell -- the two US Departments were at odds with each other strategies.) The key initiatives set down for future strategic dialogue include "cooperation and coordination of efforts to promote freedom, democratic institutions and human rights worldwide, cooperation on fighting terrorism, strategies to fight transnational pandemic disease, and developing approaches to multilateral peacekeeping and to disaster management." (SITE NOTE: This involves common-sense cooperation efforts in combatting the recognized common enemies of the avian flu and terrorism -- while agreeing to cooperate in the Iraq mission and global disasters.) At a regional level, the two countries agreed to "maintaining a strong U.S.-ROK alliance to contribute to peace and stability in Northeast Asia, leading possibly to an eventual regional multinational mechanism for security cooperation." On the North Korean nuclear issue, the two ministers reaffirmed that Pyongyang "must return promptly" to the six-party talks and that the focus of future discussions in Beijing must be on steps to implement the Sept. 19 joint statement. The parties "touched upon" the six-party talks and talked about human rights issues in North Korea. (SITE NOTE: This is mouthwash. Sweet-smelling gargle that politicians spit out. The Roh demand for "war-time control" and the US reaction of shutting the CFC down was side-stepped. South Korean-Japanese relations, South Korean-Chinese relations and how the foreign minister viewed those relationships were discussed. The US has informally stated that the ROK furor over the Yasukuni Shrine impedes good relations. The US-Japan are in sync on North Korean actions, but the ROK will go its own way...which is something that WEAKENS the alliance. The refusal of the ROK government to address the human rights abuses in North Korea that is plain to the world which the US condemns further weakens the alliance.) Ban and Rice also emphasized economic ties between their governments, discussing "ways to further deepen bilateral economic cooperation." Trade officials of the two countries have suggested that an agreement is imminent on starting negotiations for a free trade agreement. (SITE NOTE: The Roh administration wishes to have a one-sided FTA which benefits the ROK, but does nothing for the US. The ROK's protectionist practices -- and now substituting red tape for the protectionist tariffs -- continues to be a road block. There was talk of it at the start of Jan 2006, but the talk soon became one of "maybe later" by mid-January. The opening of the beef market was in work after the ROK closed it due to the "mad-cow disease" scare. The outlook as of March 2006 was dim for any agreement on a FTA in the near future.) Activist View of Strategic Flexibility Agreement (Jan 2006) The response from the anti-war NGO activist groups was immediate with strong claims that the Government had "sold out" Korea. The following is from an essay, "Strategic Flexibility of U.S. Forces in Korea", by Lee Chul-kee. Lee Chul-kee, a professor in international relations at the Dongguk University, writes, "We must build a cooperative multilateral security system for Northeast Asia, instead of a bilateral alliance system. Peace and reunification of Korean peninsula will be possible only when Northeast Asian order becomes multilateral, balanced and cooperative." We notice that Lee parrots Roh Moo-hyun's "cooperative economy" with the North, multilateral alliance (meaning China, North Korea and South Korea) and Korea being the now discredited "balancer" role between the major powers. Lee's views reflect the myopic self-centered activist positions of the anti-war and Unification groups positions on the "Strategic Flexibility" issue. Throughout their arguments underlies their skewed self-centered national outlook that Korea is somehow essential in the US world "hegemony" plans -- when in truth, Korea is simply a "player" -- not a "shaker and mover." The following was reprinted in Nautilus on 11 Mar 2006. The news flashed from Washington at dawn of the last 20th was in a word shocking. At the first Korea-US ministerial-level 'strategic dialogue' held in Washington, Korean side suddenly accepted the "strategic flexibility of the U.S. Forces in Korea (USFK)" which had been the top diplomatic and security issue pending between two countries.Suit filed against Roh over Strategic Flexibility (Mar 2006) On 20 Mar 2006, Rep. Roh Hoe-chan from the Democratic Labor Party filed a suit with the Constitutional Court against President Roh Moo-hyun, claiming the president infringed parliamentary rights over ratification of the treaty. This is the first time in judicial history that a National Assemblyman has filed a lawsuit against the president. The lawmaker saud the president and Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon pressed ahead with the deal with the U.S. government and forced acceptance of the agreement through a joint announcement in order to avoid parliamentary ratification in January. Rep. Roh also said he is considering a bill to ban the movement of U.S. forces outside the peninsula as part of his campaign to abolish the strategic flexibility agreement. However, the government dismissed his claims as groundless, saying the agreement doesn't require parliamentary ratification because it doesn't violate the Korea-U.S. mutual defense treaty. (Source: Korea Herald.) Gen LaPorte: Seoul Can Take Wartime Command "When Ready" (Jan 2006) Gen Leon J. LaPorte stated on 26 Jan 2006 in his farewell address before retirement that South Korea will recover wartime operational control of its armed forces when its military capability improves enough to achieve a ``self-reliant'' defense posture. In 2005, Gen LaPorte called the Combined Forces Command (CFC) the "cornerstone" of the US-ROK military alliance on the 25th Anniversary of the CFC hinting that if the ROK persisted in their demands for a "self-reliant" defense, the USFK may be dramatically altered. (SITE NOTE: Without the CFC, there is no reason for the USFK to exist --IF ALTERNATIVE BASING ARRANGEMENTS EXIST. The US has been attempting to disengage from South Korea since the 1970s under Nixon, 1980s under Carter, 1990s under the Nunn-Warner Agreement, 2000s under Bush. The precedent has been there since 1949 when the US laid out the Dean Acheson line that led to the Korean War. The bottomline is that the US has ALWAYS wanted out of Korea -- but ALWAYS determined to protect Japan first. This has ALWAYS been the reality.) The main point is that the US strategic belief is that the role of air power has changed the face of warfare on the peninsula. It is the belief that once the air war has been neutralized, the ROK Army can defeat the North by themselves with the assistance of the US Army (attack helicopters and fire suppression directions). In effect, the US forces are changing to high-tech and become smaller and more mobile. This in turn will impact the face-off of two static forces (North and Forces) which is based on 1950s strategies. The US believes that its air power will disintegrate the North's centralized command and supply in the early stages of the war leaving the North's forces without support or direction. This is the central crux of the much discussed Oplan 5029. The first role is to contain the North's forces until the reserve forces arrive. Then the fight will move North to collapse the North Korean regime. LaPorte stated that the U.S. government fully supports the transfer in responsibility in the ROK-U.S CFC. As for the timing of the transfer, however, LaPorte said, ``I don't believe there is any set timeline at this point. I think that has to be discussed further.'' ``The United States is prepared to move as rapidly on this issue as the ROK government or its military believe it is prudent to do,'' said LaPorte. When Sec of Defense was pressed on setting a timeline, he replied that it would be "appropriately accelerated" when the time was right ... meaning just about anything. (SITE NOTE: However, in viewing the regional situation, it is plain to see that the developments in the ROK are contingent upon the Japan-US Military Restructuring treaty to be signed in Mar 2006. If Article 9 of the Japanese Peace Constitution is changed, the change would be indeed accelerated. The CFC function could be moved to Camp Zama under I Corps -- where elements of the 1 Corps was moved in July 2005. The USFK in the ROK would be reduced to a three-star position with the four-star already residing at Camp Smith in Hawaii in the new combat command created in Aug 2005. 5th Air Force has already been relocated from Yokota, Japan to Anderson, Guam -- and 13th Air Force relocated to Hawaii. If the picture is not getting clearer -- the 3rd MEU Hq section will relocate from Okinawa to Guam. Many changes are still up in the air on the Japan treaty -- but it will certainly "accelerate" things once signed. During the brinksmanship in 2004 with the massive buildup at Guam, the use of Guam as a staging base for action in Korea was tested. The carrier group exercised off Guam -- while at the same time stood ready for deployment to waters off Korea. When it was drawn down, a "Contingency" Group was formed to handle future influxes of troops. The mobility section of the Anderson area was changed to civilian contract meaning that they are building up a long-term deployment center.) The USFK maintains about 30,000 troops here as a deterrence against North Korea. The number of troops is to be reduced to 25,000 by 2008 under Washington's plan to reorganize its global forces. In his New Year's news conference, President Roh Moo-hyun unveiled plans to speed up talks on the issue of regaining wartime command from the United States at an early date, within this year if possible. He described the matter as a ``very complex issue,'' referring the current armistice on the Korean Peninsula. ``By resolution, there are 17 nations that have continued to say they would support South Korea during times of crisis. So if you have changed commanders, an issue such as the U.N. command and support of U.N. nations also have to be addressed,'' he added. (SITE NOTE: Without the CFC, the mainly ceremonial UN command could be dissolved. However, the political problem is that IF the North attacked after the UN command was resolved, it would not be easy to mobilize a world force again. The ROK is betting everything that the North will NOT attack.) South Korea reclaimed the authority to control its military during peacetime in 1994. But wartime control has remained in the U.S. hands since the Korean War. As part of efforts to achieve a ``cooperative but more self-reliant'' defense capability, the Roh administration has sought to take back control of its military during wartime from the U.S. government. The two countries plan to launch SEPARATE task forces responsible for studying the issue in an in-depth manner next month. (Source: Korea Times.) Gen. Leon J. LaPorte told local press on 27 Jan, “The United States is prepared to move as rapidly on this issue as the Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea military believes it prudent to do.” “Determination has to be made in terms of capabilities,” the general said. The statement came a day after South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun said he hoped for an agreement by the end of the year for Seoul to remain in charge of its own forces if conflict erupts. (Source: Stars and Stripes.) US to Give Seoul Digital Map (Jan 2006) The U.S. National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency promised to deliver the ``digital topography intelligence" to South Korea. It will provide the digital maps and video images, which will help South Korean cruise missiles fly close to the ground to avoid radar detection. Supposedly this was communicated to Kim Jang-soo, Korean Army Chief of Staff, on his visit to Washington. This would be part of the turn over of the "critical tasking" for return artillery fire if the North opened a barrage on Seoul. The digital map is the exploitation and analysis of geospatial information to describe, assess, and visually depict physical features and geographically referenced activities on the Earth. It contains information, collected from U.S. military spy satellites, that could be used ``in times of emergency'' to conduct surgical strikes. The South Korean Army has an outdated version of the digital map, which also was provided by the United States in 1993. It reportedly has not been updated since. South Korea's commercial satellites are currently used to produce digital maps, but they are not suitable for military operations due to relatively poor resolution of images. Not date was given as to when the data will be transferred. South Korea's Air Force has also planned to import a military software, named Digital Point Positioning Data Base (DPPDB), from Washington to enhance its ability of attacking underground bunkers. But it has faced troubles, as the software is one of the items that are regulated by the U.S. Arms Export Control Act. The military forces frequently use DPPDBs for precise coordinate derivation to support the targeting and mission planning requirements of a variety of weapons systems. It is called a data base as it is made up of the rectified aerial imagery and the support data needed to exploit that imagery. (Source: Korea Times.) (SITE NOTE: The US has become wary of allowing technology to be transferred to the South as it may end up in the North -- and the protection of confidential material is also suspect. There is very little trust between the ROK and US in the intelligence area. The interesting point is that it has been a decade since the ROK had the updated imagery. The point is that the US has been reluctant to share intelligence with the ROK. But the date being 1993 would place the last update in the Kim Young-sam administration when there supposedly was no conflict between the US and ROK. After Kim Dae-jung took office -- and especially after his "sunshine policy" was announced -- the flow of intelligence was limited. But the distrust worked both ways as the ROK refused to share any first-hand intelligence received from defector debriefings.) Preparations underway in Pusan for Turnover of Camp Hialeah (Jan 2006) U.S. military units and organizations are to vacate Camp Hialeah by August 2006. The installation is to be shut in December. Closing Camp Hialeah comes as part of a larger plan. The United States is shutting down many installations around the peninsula before shifting the bulk of its forces to two regional hubs, one in Pyeongtaek, the other in the Daegu-Busan region. The Pusan American School will close after 46 years because it's located inside the Army's Camp Hialeah, which the U.S. military will vacate in 2006 and turn over to South Korea in 2007. Pusan American opened in 1960 as a small elementary school, adding a high school in 1967. It now has about 30 staff, including teachers, clerical and other employees. Of this year's students, 71 are from the U.S. military community. The other 24 are U.S. citizens whose families work in the Busan area. They pay tuition, ranging from about $14,640 to $16,830 per year and will have to find other means of education. As soon as classes finish, the movers will arrive. February 2006US and ROK Military Alliance in Big Trouble (Feb-Mar 2006) Starting in openly in 2003, the whole fiasco of the US-ROK alliance continued unabated with the ROK refusing to pay for its "share" of its defense and openly supplying aid to the North. However, both the ROK Foreign Ministry and Ministry of Defense continued to maintain the relationship was strong. In turn, the US and USFK officials ALWAYS used terms to indicate the alliance was solid and unshakeable. (See Military Events: US and ROK Military Alliance in Trouble (Apr 2005-Dec 2005).)The tensions are not new -- they have ALWAYS been there from the start of the Roh administration in 2003. The following is excerpted from CNS.news in 2 Jan 2003. Amid continuing tactical differences between Seoul and Washington and attempts by North Korea to drive a wedge between the two allies, South Korean lawmakers Thursday planned to discuss concerns about a possible reduction of U.S. forces in their country. (SITE NOTE: It was not the North driving the wedge -- it was Roh trying to drive a wedge between the US-Japan alliance. The tri-national agreement to act with "one voice" on the North Korean problem became a farce with the ROK attempting to be the negotiator in the nuclear talks. The North has told the ROK to its face that it does NOT want it to be in this role -- and only wants bilateral talks with the US.)Signs that the Alliance Changing The fact is that there is indeed some deep problems as the ROK under Roh Moo-hyun continued to move towards the left and attach itself to the North. The crux of the problem is that the ROK in supporting the North has negated the very reason for the existence of the USFK. The ROK has continued to push for a "self-reliant defense" with the ROK having authority of its forces in case of a war.  Cracks in US-ROK Alliance (Chosun Ilbo) The ROK-US tried to work out the problems under the Future of the Alliance (FOTA) talks but that did not work out. Then they decided to shift it to the Security Initiative (SPI) and finally at ministerial level talks At the Security Consultative Meeting (SCM) in Oct 2005, Donald Rumsfeld announced that the US would no longer be a "patron" of the ROK military, but rather become a "partner" in the relationship. In other words, the US was NOT going to pay for the massive upgrade programs that the ROK needed to undertake to become "self-reliant," but would remain a "partner" -- under the Mutual Defense Treaty -- to "support" the ROK in case of hostilities. At the same time, the US agreed to "accelerate appropriately" the process that would turn over the war-time control to the ROK -- but left the time-table open. In Jan 2006 USFK out-going commander Gen. LaPorte stated the turnover rotated around the ROK having the capabilities to assume the role. The ROK embarked on a program to upgrade the ROK forces with hi-tech weaponry. Unfortunately, the bill would be $692 billion over a period of 15 years -- that the ROK simply cannot afford with its present shortfalls in funding. (NOTE: The ROK is a formidable force, but nothing that is even in the same league as the high-tech weaponry of the US. However, the ROK assumptions is that the North will not attack its "brother" and therefore, much of the defensive hardware is not required. For example, after years of debate, the ROK still does not have its own PAC-3 Patriot defenses -- and continues to "negotiate" with Germany for its used PAC-2 missiles -- and after four years it is supposedly to be finalized in 2006. Another example is that the ROK assumed the artillery suppression role in case the North fired on Seoul -- but the US had to provide it with the digital maps and video images as their data had not been updated since 1993. (See US to Give Seoul Digital Map.) The problem is that the US is reluctant to provide it with the Digital Point Positioning Data Base (DPPDB) software to enhance its ability of attacking underground bunkers as the software is one of the items that are regulated by the U.S. Arms Export Control Act. In fact, the US refused the sale of its UAV to the ROK. The biggest cliffhanger is the changes to Article 9 of the Peace Constitution and the Japan-USFJ Restructuring to be signed in Mar 2006. Once changed, the basing of troops in Guam and Japan may lead to the elimination of the CFC -- and reductions in USFK forces.) US Stance on North Korea Hardens The failure of the last round of six-party talks where the North demanded that the US back off on its financial sanctions as a prelude to resumption of the talks. The US position was that the sanctions had nothing to do with the nuclear issue. The fight had raged for some time in the US between the moderates who wanted the nuclear problem to be resolved through the six-party talks and the hard-liners who wanted the North to be isolated and brought to heel by economic sanctions. The hard-liners finally prevailed. The Bush dictum of "you're either with us or agin' us" was put into effect. The US State Department put out the word of the hardline stance -- and US Ambassador Vershbow to Korea started the vilification campaign of the North -- who shot back that Vershbow was a "tyrant" masquerading as a diplomat. His remarks were seconded by the Secretary of State Rice, but Vershbow continued to act as the lightning rod. The Bush administration took a three-prong attack on the North. The first was to attempt to cripple the North financially and isolate it from its sources of revenue -- drugs (mostly metamphetamines), contraband (primarily counterfeit brand-name cigarettes), counterfeiting (primarily US "supernotes") and sales of WMD. After 15 years of investigations, the counterfeit money issue was pursued with a vengence. The US approached Asian countries to garner support to force the North to stop its counterfeit operations. The US brought charges against the Bank of Macao for its money laundering operations for the North and shut down its operations. However, the ROK took the position that it needed more "proof." The North's commercial companies used for the money-laundering operations left Macao for mainland China. The Chinese started their own investigation and reached the same conclusion. Then the US put a full-court press on Asian countries to support the US position with briefings of Asian allies to provide them with evidence the US had garnered. On 8 Feb 2006, it was reported that Kang Sang Choon (66), Kim Jong Il’s chief of staff and secretary of the Worker’s Party of North Korea, was arrested by Chinese police in Jan 2006 for illegally transferring real estate ownership in Macau. Kang was released the following day. According to a number of sources familiar with North Korea, shortly before Kim Jong Il visited China (from January 10 to 18), Kang was arrested by the police after it was revealed that he had illegally transferred ownership of a patch of land he owned there three or four years before. The South Korean government has recently confirmed this fact. Kang was known to have been arrested during Kim’s visit to China, which led to various suspicions on the background of his arrest. (Source: Donga Ilbo.)As the North was identified as a "terrorist state" the US froze the assets of companies doing business with the North. It then added the charges of contraband cigarettes that were being smuggled throughout the world. But in this respect, the US was more worried that the North Koreans ability to smuggle cigarettes into the US, could also be used to smuggle in WMD. The KEDO Project for the North's nuclear reactor project was finally put to bed -- after years of the ROK attempting to keep the project open. The ROK had promised electrical power to the North on condition that it give up its nuclear ambitions -- but it seems the Unification Ministry has "forgotten" about the nuclear ambition caveat and is progressing with the project as though the nuclear problem was resolved. This has brought criticism from former President Kim Young-sam and a slew of critics who say the South can't even provide enough for the South, much less provide a multi-billion dollar project to the North. (See KEDO Project Finally Dead!! (Jan 2006) for details.) The US had hoped to once again have a unified tri-national front on the North Korean problem -- but the ROK continued to be adamant that it would support rapprochement with the North through "humanitarian" aid and commercial enterprises. On the other hand, the Japanese were in sync with the US purposes and had closed off the flow of money and espionage to the North by limiting ferry ships entry until they could meet the safety and insurance requirements. In June 2003, nearly 2,000 inspectors went to the port of Niigata to check for customs and immigration violations, infectious diseases, and safety violations on the North Korean vessel Man Gyong Bong-92. North Korea responded by immediately ceasing all ferries traveling between the two countries and cancelled a port visit by an unnamed vessel believed to be involved in espionage. (NOTE: Ferries have restarted visits.) In 2006, there were other considerations for the Japanese cooperation with US efforts as the Japanese prepared to submit the Article 9 changes to the Peace Constitution -- spurred by the threat North Korea poses of a nuclear missile attack -- and sign the Japan-USFJ restructuring package in Mar 2006. However, the ROK has taken the stance that rapprochement was more important and has expanded its programs to support the North's economy -- most noticably through its tourism and Kaesong industrial sites. Then the US sought concensus with its Asian partners to cease food aid to the North until it could have verifiable inspections on the distribution of the donated foods. This had been a primary criticism of the World Food Program (WFP) before it ceased its food operations in the North in Dec 2005 at the request of the North. The WFP departed the country upon the North's request. The North stated that it no longer needed the food aid because it has sufficient food from its domestic production as well as "other sources." This shifted the burden of supplying the North with sustenance on the Chinese and South Koreans. Japan sided with the US and stated it would cease its promised food aid until its abduction issues with North Korea were resolved. After the stopping of international food aid, the ROK continued to supply "humanitarian" aid to the North, including rice, fertilizer and clothing shipments. The third step was to attack the North through the spread of weapons of mass-destruction (WMD). The North had been providing SCUD missiles and submersible boats to countries to obtain hard currency. The US used the "proof" of the North supplying uranium to Libya -- and then linked the North to the rogue Pakistani nuclear scientist in its nuclear program. It then sought to link it to Iran in its nuclear ambitions -- and in Jan 2006 with the Iranian issue being referred to the UNSC, the taint had rubbed off on the North. That the US is tracking every North Korean vessel leaving their ports is a given. With the US spy satellite capabilities and advanced imagery techniques, there is very little the North Koreans can hide -- even if they load the ships at night. In 2003, a North Korean vessel with missiles was stopped by Spanish naval forces after being tracked by US spy satellites that it was carrying missiles -- but later released as the missiles were found to be a legal sale. In 2004, there was the well-publicized shipment of heroin that was dropped in Australia and the North Korean ship was stopped on the high-seas and the crew arrested. Thus the US spearheaded in May 2003 the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) through international agreements and partnerships that would allow the US and its allies to search planes and ships carrying suspect cargo and seize illegal weapons or missile technologies. It envisions partnerships of states working in concert, employing their national capabilities to develop a broad range of legal, diplomatic, economic, military and other tools to interdict threatening shipments of WMD and missile-related equipment and technologies. On June 4, 2003, during testimony before Congress, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security John R. Bolton announced that the United States had, within the previous two months, intercepted aluminum tubes likely bound for North Korea's nuclear weapons program and a French and German combined effort had intercepted sodium cyanide likely bound for North Korea's chemical weapons program are examples of recent interdiction successes. (Source: GlobalSecurity.org.) On July 23, 2003 a USA Today report indicated that the United States had reached an agreement with Japan, Australia, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, the Netherlands, Bulgaria, and Spain to intercept North Korean ships suspected of carrying narcotics or weapons materials. Since 2003, international exercises have been conducted in both the Mediterranean and Coral Sea areas. In 2006, the ROK did not want to join the PSI for fear of its impacting its relationship with the North, but it also feared world public opinion if it didn't join the fight against nuclear proliferation and WMD. As such, it said it would send "observers" of the training exercise -- but would not participate. The U.S. in trying to broaden participation in Central and East Asia in the PSI put a "smiley face" on it by saying that South Korea is not a participant in the U.S. initiative on detecting and interdicting weapons of mass destruction (WMD), but is "cooperating closely with the efforts." However, on 29 May 2006, the Associated Pressreported that the PRC and ROK have canceled participation in a multinational naval security exercise. The drills began on 27 May with Japan and three other participants -- the US, Canada and Russia. The ROK said it was because of concerns that part of the exercises may upset the DRPK ROK Resorts to US Lobby to Polish its Image With the rising anti-Americanism in Korea (i.e., the Oct 2005 MacArthur Park statue incident and the violent July 2005 protests at Camp Humphreys), the public opinion in the US was slowly turning against the ROK and US congressmen were openly questioning the US-ROK alliance. Things had deteriorated to a point that in Nov 2005 it was reported that the Korean Embassy in Washington was enlisting the help of a professional lobbyist -- run by a Korean American -- as part of efforts to improve the country's battered image in the U.S. Congress. It was to be the first time in 30 years since the illegal lobbying activities of maverick fixer Park Tongsun in the mid-1970s blew up in a scandal known as "Koreagate" -- leaving lobbying since then to the embassy staff. A diplomatic source said whenever the Korean government faces criticism in Congress, it blames "misconceptions" among congressmen when it should be blaming inadequate PR. Supposedly the campaign was to cost $1.2 million. (Source: Chosun Ilbo, "The Gov't Needs W1.2 Billion to Deceive America," 2 Nov 2005.) Ironically, a month later the arrest of South Korean businessman Tongsun Park -- the 1970s "Koreagate" lobby -- again tarnished the ROK lobby effort. He was accused of accepting millions of dollars from Iraq in the UN oil-for-food scandal and arrested by the FBI in Houston in Jan 2006. (See Former "Koreagate" Figure Indicted in Food-for-Oil Scandal: Korean Image in US Gets Dirtier and Dirtier (Jan 2006) for details.) The ROK lobbying was not looking to be off to a good start. Situation Comes to a Head After the US surfaced the counterfeit currency issue, the South attempted to sit on the fence claiming it needed more proof. (See Counterfeit "Supernotes" Furor Continues (Jan 2006) for details.) On 23 Jan, the visiting U.S. delegation met with Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MOFAT), the Ministry of Finance and Economy (MOFE) and the Korea Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) officials to discuss the counterfeiting issue. A U.S. investigation team headed by the Treasury Department's deputy assistant secretary for terrorist financing and financial crimes, Daniel Glaser, presented Korean officials with its evidence that North Korea is engaged in counterfeiting U.S. dollars. The team was met by Kim Sook, the director-general of the North American affairs bureau in the Foreign Ministry. |
