A proud and grizzled veteran of the Korean War, which North
Korea calls the
Fatherland Liberation War, at a cemetery for war veterans: Are
the parties to
that conflict truly prepared to end it once and for all? Beijing says
Pyongyang
is, but Washington, Seoul and Tokyo appear not to be.
Chinese Second-Guessing of Korean War 'Pointless' (Huanqiu,
People's Republic of China)
While many Chinese today question their country's strong commitment
to North Korea, this editorial from state-run Huanqiu argues that the history of the war is a point of pride for
China, and marked a turning point after a period of historical humiliation for the
country. The editorial asserts that on the 60th anniversary of the signing of
the Korean Armistice Agreement, Pyongyang is prepared to sign a peace deal, but
Washington, Seoul and Tokyo appear not to be.
President Obama speaks on the 60th anniversary of the end of the Korean War, at the Korean War Veterans Memorial in Washington, July 27. While America says it is ready for peace, China questions its sincerity.
Sixty
years ago today [July 27], after three brutal years of war, commanders from
China, North Korea and the U.S. signed the Korean Armistice,
bring the fighting to an end. And for 60 years, although in the grip of the Cold
War, some semblance of peace and stability has prevailed on the peninsula.
Today,
North Korea, South Korea and the United States all held major ceremonies
commemorating the end of the conflict. While deep down the Americans know their
plans were frustrated, but the official line to veterans is that there are
"no regrets." As one of the main parties to the war, China sent a
senior delegation to North Korea, although up to yesterday, Beijing was still
unaware of what their official activities would be. China usually has a more
heavy emphasis on October 25, which was when the Chinese People's Volunteer
Army entered the war.
Over
the past few day, China's public has been looking back at the episode. It was
indeed unfortunate that the United States got all the way to the 38th parallel,
and many suggest a "rethink" of the great volunteer spirit of the
time. Public support for the war here is even inferior to that found in the
United States, when it has historically been the other way around.
In
recent years, opinions with unrealistic assumptions have surfaced, such as: If
China had not entered the war, Taiwan may have reunited with the Mainland,
China and the United States may have been friendlier toward one another, and
China's reform and opening-up may have occurred 20 years earlier. While these
assumptions sound somewhat sensible, they disrespect the millions of Chinese volunteers
who shed blood and sacrificed their lives on the Korean Peninsula.
Looking
back at history, it isn't hard to find flawed decisions. But one cannot take
pot shots at the past based on current international conditions. History is
often composed of a series of accidents. Even if somewhat accidental, China's
decision to help the North defend itself was the obvious choice at that time.
The
war remade the strategic landscape of East Asia. The six decades of peace on
the Peninsula was by no means just a result of the Armistice Agreement. The
painful and indelible memories of the war also played a fundamental role. After
all, whether an armistice or peace agreement, these embody the will and
interests of the parties involved.
The
strength of will shown by the Chinese People's Volunteers in the war impressed
the United States and the world. With scant supplies of food and clothing, and with
extremely backward equipment in comparison with the world's best-equipped military,
the volunteers proved their prowess by forcing the U.S. Army back to the
negotiating table. The way the episode enhanced China's confidence is hard to
measure, particularly after the nation was repeatedly trampled upon by foreign
forces in the previous century.
Both
the Korean War and conditions on the Peninsula today are historical outcomes and
have been integrated into China's development. In other words, it is useless to
second-guess what may have happened had China not joined the war.
For
21st century China, the Korean War is like a far away dream. The hardships of
those years compared to the lifestyle of Chinese today could not be more
different. It is a contrast that starkly illustrates China's 60 years of great
accomplishments. After turning many corners, China is finally restoring its
strength. For China, the war has faded.
Posted By Worldmeets.US
Along
the 38th parallel in Korea, however, the war is anything but ancient history - it
rages on. Sixty years after the war, neither the international situation
confronting Pyongyang nor the lives of North Korea's people have improved, and
in some ways they have worsened. The crisis on the peninsula has not been
defused. North Korea itself bears some responsibility for this - but not all. It
is a small vulnerable country that cannot even grasp its own destiny, let alone
the international situation. To assert that it is chiefly responsible is
patently absurd.
The still-secret Korean
Armistice Agreement on a table inside the Armistice
building at the 'peace village'
in Panmunjom, waiting the signatures of U.N.
and Communist delegates,
July 27, 1952.
A
lack of willpower by the parties has made stepping out of the shadow of the
Korean War most difficult. Is the United States willing to end the Armistice
and agree to a genuine peace? Although it says "yes," it does not
appear that it does. Is Japan willing to end the Cold War on the Peninsula?
South Korean desire for peace or "unification" also seems ambiguous
and half-hearted. Instead, except for a few hardliners, North Korea seems to be
the most eager to sign a peace deal.
In
China, some people say their country should give up on North Korea. Others
insist on unconditionally standing with our neighbor. The best is for China to
strike a balance between the two.
The
Korean Peninsula is a living fossil. We have an obligation to endeavor to make
the Cold War into such a relic rather than today's reality. If we were able to
do so, recollections of the Armistice Agreement would not have been as
significant as they were today.
