French Doctors on Treating Kim Jong-il Since the 1990s; Confirms Stroke
French doctors have been treating North Korean elite – to include Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il – since the early 1990s. Rumors of European physicians treating the Kim Jong-il have been around for years, but the bizarre details were bound to surface sooner or later; here are a few (h/t PS) [original text in French, and in English via Google Translate]:
For the first time, French surgeons testify about their secret consultations with North Korean leaders for over fifteen years.
In spring 2004, Professor Yves Boin received a strange phone call. “The French intelligence services believed that I was in possession of a tube of blood of leader Kim Jong-il, who had AIDS,” said the neurosurgeon who was one of the first members of the French medical sector to care for dignitaries of the North Korean [elite]. (emphasis added)
A suggestion that Kim Jong-il had AIDS? First I’ve heard of that - sure to start new rumors. Dr. Roux also confirmed reports of Kim Jong-il’s stroke:
. . . in late October at the bedside of Kim Jong-il, François-Xavier Roux, chief of neurosurgery at the hospital Sainte-Anne in Paris, agreed for the first time To lift the veil on his mission to Pyongyang. “Kim Jong-il suffered a stroke, but it has not been made. Today, it is better. The photos that have been published seem current and authentic. It seems to me that Kim Jong-il is in control of North Korea. I can not say more, I am required to medical confidentiality and secrecy of State, “said the friend of Foreign Minister, Bernard Kouchner, a former him as the NGO, Medecins du monde. (emphasis added)
Details are given about a pacemaker for Kim Il-sung in November 1991, Kim Jong-il’s “cerebral hemorrhage” after falling from a horse in the early 90s, and more. Keep in mind that this is significant because it’s an unambiguous admission. Be sure to read the rest.
American Beef Now OK in ROK
Remember the mad protests about American beef in South Korea? The mass hysteria of biblical proportions (”cats and dogs living together!”) that gripped the country and led to its otherwise sensible president to apologize regarding the “hurried” negotiation over resumption of the importation of American beef?
Well, now, apparently, American beef is welcome in ROK again:
Now, in the winter of their consumerism, the people have changed their mind.
Low-priced U.S. beef has appeared in supermarkets here in recent days, after a decision by three major retailers to start selling it again, and the reaction has been brisk business and no political fuss. Fifty tons of U.S. beef disappeared from shelves the first day it was offered for sale.
“It is our national character to get upset easily and then to forget all about it,” said Park Eun-ah, 48, a romance novelist who lives in Seoul and Paris.
I don’t think this kind of mass emotional seesaw is uniquely Korean. Why, I recall just a few of years ago when President Bush was re-elected with an exclamation point and was hailed by most Republicans as one of the greats. Well, it took only a couple of years for that to change rather drastically.
The public is a fickle beast, especially in today’s 24-hour media cycle that can induce hysteria quickly. I suppose one idiosyncracy about South Korea, if there is any, is that the public mood swings are reflected in its rowdy “demo” culture of mass protests. We Americans largely outgrew that by the Seventies (except on some college campuses), but in Korea where the memory of mass demonstrations bringing down military dictatorships is vivid, the mass protest culture is still alive and kicking.
Still, American beef must now do what some American tourists and expatriates did during the rough times in Korea – pretend to be Canadians or, in the case of the beef, Australian:
Shin Mija, 40 was caught in the middle. She was happy to be able to buy U.S. beef again but said her two teenagers would not eat it. During the spring and summer, she said, her children had been convinced by protesters that American beef would give them mad cow disease. Shin bought it anyhow.
She said she would tell her kids it came from Australia.
The Trouble with North Korea
The trouble with North Korea is that nobody wants it — except the current ruling elite of North Korea itself.
In a previous post, I rather immodestly predicted that, should the Kim regime collapse in North Korea, a military junta backed by China would emerge, resulting in a Burma-ization of North Korea. I further speculated that in an increasingly Sinicized North Korea, the lot of ordinary North Koreans would be bleak.
I have given some further consideration to this topic and present additional thoughts below for a discussion.
Let’s examine the position and motivation of each external actor involved in “the North Korean problem.” First, the United States. By now, it is clear that neither the outgoing Republican administration nor the incoming Democratic one is serious about North Korea. With Iraq, Afghanistan, other aspects of the War on Terror and the latest economic malaise occupying the attention, North Korea would not even register as a serious policy issue but for its nuclear arsenal. Because of this, I suspect that Washington would not object to Chinese domination of North Korea provided the Chinese disarmed the North Korean nuclear arsenal in return.
It would not be too far-fetched to assume that many in Washington want the North Korean problem to simply go away and will make extraordinary concessions (to principle, mostly) to make this happen.
Ah, but what about the small, but vocal and occasionally effective (but generally ineffectual) human rights lobby in Washington? More on that below.
Second, China. Of all the external players, China desires control of North Korea the most. This stems from China’s desire to maintain friendly governments along its entire border as well as its sensitivity to an American outpost and ally on its border in mainland Asia.
Nonetheless, China does not “want” North Korea or its problems. As fierce a critic of Red China as I am, I must acknowledge that a direct rule of North Korea by China would probably be a material improvement for ordinary North Koreans compared to the native rule, whether the Kim regime or a military junta.
But a direct control of North Korea entails enormous headaches to Beijing, including a likely conflict with South Korea — which is why Beijing would “contract out” the administration of North Korea to a pliable North Korean military junta. In China’s view, economic exploitation of North Korea’s resources and its workers would be more than enough as long as its client government remains exactly that.
Third, South Korea. For a long time, it was given that South Koreans desired reunification with their Northern brethren. That assumption can longer be accepted at face value. It is clear that many, perhaps most, South Koreans care more about their standard of living than saving their Northern kin with their kindness and purse. This is particularly so in light of the potential world-wide recession.
Not only have the South Koreans been scared away from reunification by their study of the cost of the German unification, their growing contacts with the often malajusted and violent North Koreans have increased their disdain for and fear of the latter. Many South Koreans do not believe that most North Koreans can be rehabilitated and integrated into their capitalist society, nor are they willing to try.
Many South Koreans, too, want the North Korean problem to simply go away. The more pragmatic among them would like to assist North Korea and “coax” it into Chinese-style economic reform so as to lower future costs of reunification and certainly to reduce the number of refugees who would flood South Korea.
Indeed, it appears only the fringe elements of both the Korean right and the left still desire unification on the grounds of either ethnic solidarity or principle.
Japan and Russia are peripheral to the issue at the moment and are likely to remain so. The European Union is a non-player.
Among the external actors, only the Western — that is, largely American — human rights lobby wants North Korea’s regime to disintegrate today, followed swiftly by South Korean annexation (for the record, although I am no longer an active member of this coalition, I am sympathetic to its views and goals). Those in the human rights lobby tend to view any “unreciprocated” economic assistance to North Korea with great hostility. They correctly believe that such an assistance would sustain a monstrous regime that deserves a quick death. Thus they frequently describe those elements in South Korea and America that advocate economic assistance to North Korea as useful idiots and fellow travelers of Kim Jong-Il.
But therein lies a moral dilemma. Clearly, substantial economic aids to North Korea would improve the lot of North Koreans, however marginally. They might even save some lives.
Of course, the human right lobby would argue that the assistance would delay the death of the regime and prolong oppression and misery. But this assumes that there is a light at the end of the tunnel, i.e., that reunification with the South would occur eventually.
But what if that were not the case? What if the current trajectory continued and the South Korean alienation with North Koreans increased and the desire of the former for reunification declined still?
Considering that no external government wants the administration of North Korea, except perhaps the most unpalatable one (i.e. China), at what point does humanitarian economic aid to North Korea become a necessary evil to improve the lot of North Koreans, in the potential absence of realistic and better alternatives?
I am beginning to grapple internally with the possibility that the position of the human rights lobby might ultimately be wrong for the right reasons while the useful idiots might be right for the wrong reasons.
I am no longer certain what the right answer is, and I invite comments and discussions from the readers.
German Soldiers Too Fat to Fight
There was a time when German soldiery was feared for its vaunted combat effectiveness. The Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld, who later achieved immortality as the prophet of military transformation (The Transformation of War) made his early reputation as a combat historian with an insightful comparative study of WWII German and American combat effectiveness (Fighting Power: German and U.S. Army Performance, 1939-1945).
The study demonstrated definitively the combat superiority of the German soldier and the reasons for that effectiveness (now commonly bandied about terms like internal cohesion, individual initiative, Auftragstaktik or “mission-type tactic/orders,” etc.).
Alas, half of century of near pacifism has done its work and the vaunted German soldiery is no more:
Now Germany’s battered military reputation has received a further humiliating blow. According to official reports, the 3,500 troops in northern Afghanistan drink too much and are too fat to fight. A German parliamentary report has revealed that in 2007 German forces in Afghanistan consumed about 1.7 million pints of beer and 90,000 bottles of wine. […]
The physical condition of the soldiers was already in question after a German armed forces report found that 40 percent of its soldiers aged 18-29 were overweight, compared to 35 percent of the civilian population of the same age.
The report, published in March, concluded that the Bundeswehr lived on beer and sausages while shunning fruit and vegetables.[Boldface mine.]
Jawohl, deutsche Soldaten!
What (West) Germans do, South Koreans often copy: is overweight and drunk ROK soldiery next?
“Running Dogs of Kim Jong-Il”
On the one hand, there was the North Korean defector-turned-anti-North Korea-activist, trying to send balloons with anti-Kim Jong-Il messages. On the other side were pro-North demonstrators (from the labor unions) trying to stop him. The result was, at least according to the WaPo, a brawl (make sure to watch the video attached to the article):
“You are the running dogs of Kim Jong Il!” he shouted. “You are trash!”
“You are afraid of unification!” they shouted back.
More on the balloons:
Balloons became part of Park’s life when he learned that the South Korean Defense Ministry had used them to deliver propaganda to the North, a practice that ended after a conciliatory North-South summit in 2000.
The long, tube-shaped balloons that Park launches are made by hand from sheets of vinyl and filled with hydrogen at the border. Helium is too expensive, Park said.
He said he has sent nearly 2 million anti-Kim leaflets north by balloon. Since April, he added, each of the waterproof leaflets has been attached to a U.S. dollar bill. Funding comes from individuals in South Korea and the United States, he said.
Running dogs, gas pistol, soccer-kick to the head of a commie-sympathizing labor union activist, it was all just another day at the DMZ (although, to quibble, I believe Park yelled “Mi-Chin-Nom-Ah,” which is more “you crazy bastards” rather than “running dogs”).
I miss the good old days when the access to the DMZ was more tightly controlled and there were occasional exchanges of gunfire with North Korean forces, especially if the odd Russian or two visiting the other side of the DMZ tried to defect.
Anti-Kim messages are great, but maybe sending these would be more useful to Kim-hating North Koreans.
