By Thanks to the ROK Heads who have shared this article with me which is one of the biggest examples of shoddy journalism I have seen in quite a while in the Korean media. This article is in the Donga Ilbo in response to the recent GI crime incidents. I will quote the article in full and then provide my comments after various passages:
The string of sexual crimes committed by American soldiers in Korea in recent weeks is known to have resulted from reckless recruitment of men with criminal records, mental disorders or other problems.
According to U.S. Defense Department data released in 2008 by House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Rep. Henry Waxman, the number of U.S. Army recruits convicted of felonies such as robbery or assault more than doubled from 249 (based on U.S. Army statistics) in 2006 to 511 in 2007.
Waxman blamed unconditional recruitment of soldiers amid a shortage of military manpower due to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Felony Recruiting Myth
First of all the two soldiers accused of rape were both 21 year old Private First Classes so they were not recruited in 2006 so the linkage to felony waivers that year is irrelevant. Since the Donga-Ilbo wants to bring this subject up I have already debunked the felony recruiting myth years ago but I will address it again here.
Over 180,000 soldiers were recruited into the military in 2007 and only 903 recruits needed a waiver. That is .5016% of all recruits that needed a waiver which is hardly of concern. Also the claim that felony waivers are needed to meet recruiting numbers doesn’t hold up either. In 2007 the US Army recruited 80,635 soldiers. 511 of the soldiers had the felony waivers. If the US Army did not allow in every recruit with a felony waiver they still would have met the recruiting mission of 80,000 soldiers in 2007. The other important thing to realize is that these waivers are only issued on a case by case basis and signed off on by a senior field grade officer. The vast majority of the waivers are thefts and drug crimes. So if a teenager writes a bad check, shoplifts, or gets caught smoking marijuana, they shouldn’t be allowed in the military? If anything these are probably people that need to join the military to learn discipline. Out of all the felony waivers in 2007 only five were for sex crimes. Yes five people out of 80,000 recruited that year by the Army and this is something that is supposed to be leading to increased sexual assaults in Korea? By the way anyone wonder how many servicemembers in the ROK Army have felony convictions especially sex crimes? Maybe the Korean media has looked into this before, but I sure haven’t seen it.
The GI Crime Myth
The Donga Ilbo article goes on:
Analysts say crimes committed by American soldiers in Korea have increased in number because a considerable portion of inexperienced soldiers are deployed to Korea. The number of crimes committed by American soldiers in Korea surged from 207 in 2007 to 316 in 2010.
First of all young men whether they are in the military or not cause more crime than older men. So it is no surprise that younger enlisted Soldiers commit the majority of the crime. However, sending nothing but older personnel to Korea is unfeasible. You cannot have a military force filled with nothing but NCO’s and officers. Any military that is effective needs to be filled with young men trained to fight. The second thing I will point out from this passage is that these stats are not attributed to anyone. Where did the Donga-Ilbo gets these stats from? As ROK Heads know I have compiled USFK crime stats for years here on the ROK Drop from the USFK court martial results published every month just to be able to respond to blatant media fabrications which this obviously is.
Here is the real number of crimes committed by USFK servicemembers the last two years:
Number of Crimes Committed
- 2009: 98 crimes
- 2010: 153 crimes
As you can see this is much lower than what the Donga-Ilbo is claiming. So once again where did they get their stats? Also here is the number of USFK servicemembers convicted of crimes in Korean courts for the past 4 years:
USFK Servicemembers Convicted In Korean Courts
2007: 48 criminals
2008: 66 criminals
2009: 87 criminals
2010: 128 criminals
So overall there has been an increase in USFK crime, but not as bad as what the Donga-Ilbo is claiming. Also something else the Donga-Ilbo doesn’t point out is that the increase in crime is caused mostly by the fact that USFK is allowing more of its personnel to drive cars which means increased driving infractions that are handled by the Korean courts. Here is a list of traffic related crimes from 2010 compared to 2007. My one caveat is that bodily injuries are usually from injuries sustained from a traffic accident, but this is not always the case. Unfortunately the criminal prosecution results published by USFK don’t specify why the servicemember was convicted for bodily injury. So all bodily injuries being traffic related is an assumption on my part. Anyway here are the statistics:
Traffic Crimes from 2009 Compared to 2010
- Bodily Injury – 2007: 8 – 2010: 22
- Traffic Law Violation – 2007: 0 – 2010: 11
- Hit & Run – 2007: 1 – 2010: 9
- DUI’s – 2007: 13 – 2010: 28
- Violation of Auto Management Act – 2007: 0 – 2010: 3
- Total Traffic Crimes – 2007: 22 – 2010: 73
The driving change can be linked to an increase of up to 51 crimes in 2010 compared to 2007. This is important context when talking about GI crime that is not reported by the Donga-Ilbo. With that said that is why I have always believed that the best way to judge GI crime is to look at major crimes committed. The Korean National Policy Agencyconsiders Murder, Burglary, Rape, Larceny, & Assault as major crimes when compiling Korean crime statistics. So lets compare the number of major crimes from 2010 to prior years:
USFK Rate of Major Crimes from 2007-2010
- 2007 – 23
- 2008 – 15
- 2009 – 21
- 2010 – 48
So what crimes is causing the numbers to increase? When the numbers are analyzed the major crimes increased in 2010 because of because of burglary and assaults. Why are these crimes increasing? I don’t have the data to prove anything but it could be the curfew change has allowed servicemembers to be out later and thus increasing the amount of time available to get into altercations with Koreans. Like I said before this is just a theory with no data to support it since the court martial results do not provide any times when the incidents occurred.
The most important fact to point out is that despite the increase in GI crime, USFK still has a lower per capita crime rate than the general Korean population:
- Korea: 1 major crime out of every 128 people
- USFK: 1 major crime out of every 594 people
What is also interesting it was just back in July when it was reported that overall crime in the 2nd Infantry Division had dropped over the past 12 month period which the police chief of Dongducheon said was because of better educated Soldiers coming to Korea.
The SOFA Myth
Anyway the shoddy journalism from the Donga Ilbo continues:
Despite mounting crimes committed by American servicemen here, no effective measures or regulations are in place to punish them. Clause 5 under Article 22 of the Status of Forces Agreement on the deployment of U.S. forces in Korea suggests that even if an American soldier commits a violent crime such as murder or rape, Korean police can take the suspect into custody only when they directly catch him at the crime scene.
All the Korean authorities have to do is fill out paperwork requesting that a USFK servicemember be handed over to Korean custody. This is done to ensure that the rights of the accused servicemember are protected. A SOFA is a document signed between the United States and the host country of US military personnel in order to clarify each side’s rights and responsibilities in regards to a variety of issues that arise with the stationing of US troops in a foreign country.
A SOFA between different nations is never the same because each nation has different legal and political systems that influence the way in which a SOFA is written. For example in the United States people expect that someone accused of a crime should have the right to remain silent and have access to lawyer. With that it is important to realize with Status of Forces Agreements is that unlike civilians, troops are ordered to go overseas. Since troops are under orders they are owed the legal protections they would find in the United States. Ambassador Thomas Hubbard summarizes this best, “we sent them under our system, and we owe them those protections.”
Not all countries the United States has troops in respect these rights. For example the SOFA between the US and Japan allows the military to hold servicemembers accused of crimes until they are indicted by a Japanese court, to which then they are handed over to Japanese authorities. This holding of the servicemember prior to indictment is to protect their rights to remain silent, not to have coercive interrogation tactics used against them, and have access to a proper lawyer, which is not something readily available to them if held by local Japanese authorities. It is legal differences such as this that make detailed status of forces agreements necessary.
You can read more analysis about the SOFA at this link:
The Donga Ilbo’s criticism against the SOFA is especially ridiculous considering that USFK just handed over the Soldier accused of rape in Dongducheon just like all other GI criminals after the Korean authorities submitted the proper paperwork for his transfer.
The Donga Ilbo goes on:
In other cases, Korean police must hand over the suspect to U.S. authorities if requested.
Moreover, the U.S. military has the right to reject Korea’s request to put a suspect in detention if and when it finds even a slight chance that the soldier’s rights could be infringed on in a Korean criminal investigation or trial by a Korean court. For this reason, U.S. soldiers who commit crimes are detained mostly by military police of their own units rather than Korean authorities.
In addition, if the U.S. demands that Korea hand over jurisdiction, the latter has no choice but to do so except in cases in which the crimes are deemed “exceptionally serious.” For this reason, Korea has used its jurisdiction over a U.S. military suspect in less than 5 percent of all crimes committed by American soldiers stationed here.
Why doesn’t the Donga-Ilbo provide one example of when USFK refused to hand someone over? Just one please. Also once again, where did the stat of 5% come from?
Shady Statistics
Here in the final passage I think we can probably attribute all these shady statistics to this well known anti-US group:
A source at the National Campaign for Eradication of Crimes by U.S. Troops in Korea said, “To minimize punishment, U.S. authorities arbitrarily judge that most crimes were committed while on official duty and thus take away jurisdiction over cases from Korean authorities,” adding, “Even in cases where Korea holds jurisdiction, only one to two U.S. soldiers as defendants are given prison sentences per year.”
The utter lies allowed to be published in the Donga-Ilbo is really astounding. Once again can the Donga Ilbo provide examples of all these people getting away with being tried in Korean courts because USFK says they were on duty? The only examples I can think of are traffic accidents while driving military vehicles with the most famous example being the 2002 Armored Vehicle Incident. I would like just one example of a non-traffic related incident such as assault or rape where a GI was declared on duty to avoid being tried in a Korean court. I would like just one example. Then the claim that 1-2 servicemembers are given prison sentences per year in Korean courts is more lies. Just looking back at the ROK criminal prosecution results for this year, 7 GI’s were given prison sentences. So once again where did the anti-US groups stat come from?
USFK Needs To Do More
So I think I have made it pretty clear that this article is filled with lies that the Donga-Ilbo should be embarrassed by, but I’m sure they could care less because they are out to promote perceptions of American GI’s instead of facts. I just wish the USFK public affairs office would do more to counter this blatant propaganda instead of allowing it to circulate unchallenged in the Korean media. As long as USFK doesn’t dispute these lies by engaging the Korean media in Korean then the false stereotypes that many Koreans have of American GI’s will continue perpetuate.
4:00 am on October 11th, 2011 1
I would say that you’re on the dot about how many of these “crimes” were people involvement in a traffic accidents in which someone may or may not have been hurt (or more often, in which someone may or may not have fraudulently claimed to have been hurt). I’ve been told by a police officer that nowadays, if you’re a foreigner who’s involved in a traffic accident and the police determines that most of the blame falls on you, it’s automatically considered a crime and you’ll be fingerprinted. I know first hand it didn’t use to be like that.
4:05 am on October 11th, 2011 2
2. the finger printing thing is true…
4:26 am on October 11th, 2011 3
Your last statement needs to be heeded by USFK. But, will not even be considered. The last thing the “careerist” officer corp will do, is speak the truth and potentially be labeled as a trouble-maker. I haven’t seen one upper grade officer since 1988 with a pair of balls that would speak the truth on any matter unless it somehow led to “Highlight fodder” for their next promotion. I don’t see them getting away from this chicken-shyte posture anytime soon. Oh…and their teaching the young officers and enlisted that this is how one leads. The last true Chief I remember seeing in action was around 2000. Since then, it appears they have all become ” E-9 Yes-men” for the officer corp. So glad I retired when I did.
5:56 am on October 11th, 2011 4
“Over 180,000 soldiers were recruited into the military in 2007 and only 903 recruits needed a waiver. That is .005016% of all recruits that needed a waiver which is hardly of concern.”
*Correction needed to avoid accusations of shoddy journalism: 903/180000 *100 = 0.5016%, that’s 100 times more % of pardoned criminals in the army than you report.*
I like your article, very thorough analysis. I hope to see these recent events don’t blow up into another “we hate the Americans leftist civil unrest campaign”. I also hope the criminals realize that crime hurts more than just the victims.
6:06 am on October 11th, 2011 5
Maybe I’m late in the game and this topic’s been discussed over already but is there anyone that can hold these papers accountable for these irresponsible lies? Are we doing anything to pressure Korea?
6:11 am on October 11th, 2011 6
Smells like an election year is coming…
6:15 am on October 11th, 2011 7
Seoul city mayoral election will be held at the end of this month. Conservatives are lagging behind in the polls. The likely candidate to win is leftist with dubious views on North Korea. USFK personnels’ alleged rapes are not going to help the rightists. It may be of interest to both the US and incumbent S Korean goverment to swiftly bring an end to the case and have all American soldiers and their dependents involved in criminal offense to be prosecuted. Apology from top level official preferably Gen Thurman would keep the backlash down…Leftists are coming backnin full force. This is very precarious situation..
8:58 am on October 11th, 2011 8
So.. you are or were a soldier yes?
These kinds of stories in some way impact your reputation. If they are actual lies why don’t you take it to a court? Korean courts have upheld all kinds of judgments against the media, forced them to post retractions, apologies, etc.
5:28 pm on October 11th, 2011 9
Fanwarrior – GIKOREA is not usfk. He cannot suue on behalf of usfk. if someone like k edited my korean this would be fun to translate and send up as an editorial.
5:58 pm on October 11th, 2011 10
Who says he’d have to sue on behalf of USFK?
As long as he was or is a soldier in Korea I would think that the case could be made that these lies harm his reputation despite them not specifically being about him.
6:37 pm on October 11th, 2011 11
This was in the Financial Times, about the SOFA’s immunity of GI’s from being prosecuted by the local law. It looks like Financial Times agrees with Donga Ilbo that Americans are immune to local laws.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/a229ee38-f355-11e0-b11b-00144feab49a.html#axzz1aWjWz4yu
High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a229ee38-f355-11e0-b11b-00144feab49a.html#ixzz1aWkijRbf
Iraq threatens to break military links with US
By Camilla Hall in Abu Dhabi and Anna Fifield in Washington
Baghdad is threatening to break its military relations with Washington at the end of this year and use private contractors to train its armed forces, as the two sides struggle to agree on terms that would see a small number of American troops remain in Iraq next year.
The two sides have agreed in principle that several thousand US troops should stay in Iraq in a training capacity after the official end of the American mission at the end of the year, but they have become bogged down over whether to grant US troops immunity from prosecution if they commit crimes.
More
On this story
US and Iraq make slow progress over troops
Iraqi forces tackle twin attacks in Anbar
Iraqi factions wrangle over gas reserves
Port rivalry tests Iraq-Kuwait relations
People power keeps lights burning in Kirkuk
The Iraqi government was already training pilots with Lockheed Martin, from which Iraq recently bought F-16 jets, Ali al-Dabbagh, Iraqi government spokesman, said on Monday.
“When we buy [military] equipment, there’s a possibility that …training could go ahead” on “commercial” terms, he said in an interview at a World Economic Forum event in Abu Dhabi.
However, commercial training is unlikely to replicate the scale of what the US could offer. Iraqi and US officials have been locked in talks for months over the shape and size of a continued presence after the current mission ends on December 31.
A number of Iraq’s political blocs agreed last week to US troops remaining in a training role beyond the end of this year on the premise that they would not be granted immunity from Iraqi law.
“We are ready to discuss the options available without immunity and a different definition for the trainers,” Mr Dabbagh said.
But immunity from prosecution under local law is part of all US “status of forces agreements” (Sofa) with host countries, including Japan, South Korea, Germany and Iraq.
The pacts stipulate that local courts cannot try US military personnel, including for premeditated crimes committed by off-duty forces. This has proved controversial in many host countries, including Japan, where US soldiers have been accused of rape on the island of Okinawa.
The Pentagon said it was considering the Iraqi statements. “We are in the process of discussing these matters with the Iraqi government,” said George Little, the Pentagon spokesman. “As a general principle, US service members serving overseas require appropriate legal protections.”
Both sides want the US to retain a residual training force in Iraq but the details have proved thorny, not least because Iraqi politicians do not want to appear to be encouraging a continued “occupation”. A new Sofa must be approved by Iraq’s parliament.
A US official played down the recent posturing, saying that it appeared to be for domestic purposes.
“We understand that the immunities issue is a sensitive issue in Iraq, so it’s highly likely that Iraqi officials are taking a hard public stand on it while negotiations are underway,” he said.
7:45 pm on October 11th, 2011 12
Tom, why do you so continually make yourself look so bad?
You have been reading and commenting here for years. You have been hit over the head repeatedly with facts. Facts you can’t actually run or hide from, but you continually do so. The more you throw up links and items that either don’t say what you say they say – or can’t stand up to a basic fact check, you make yourself look more and more blinded by race.
You know – somewhere in your brain – that GIs in Korea are not “immune” to the Korean court system. Over the past 6 or 8 years, you’ve seen case after case where a GI was accused of a crime and found guilty in a Korean criminal court and put in that Korean prison housing GI and other foreign nationals. But, your racial bias just won’t let you process it.
I saw this same thing with my adult students in the late 1990s. They told me GIs are never held accountable in Korea. I didn’t know any better. Then, a GI crime would happen, and later another, and later another, and each time, we’d read pieces of news articles where the GIs were definately tried in a Korean court and found guilty and put into a Korean prison. But they would still insist GIs are never held accountable.
Even the editor of the Korea Times did the same thing back in 2001 or 2003 – after either the Yongsan Water Dumping case that spawned The Host or the Armored Vehicle Accident. He claimed the more recent hit-n-run case would be the “first time” USFK allowed a Korean court to hold a trial for a GI if USFK handed him over. His newspaper had covered several high profile court cases since at least the late 1990s which I had read, but his brain just would not let him acknowledge it because it would crush one of the biggest myths the society held near and dear.
This brain-block thing got even more ridiculous for me when I researched and found that the first GIs held for trial in a Korean court happened in 1968….1968!
8:08 pm on October 11th, 2011 13
So are you telling me that the complaining Iraqis, the complaining Germans, the complaining Japanese, and now the Brits in their article are all wrong at the same time? The whole world is wrong. The only ones right are the US military.
8:18 pm on October 11th, 2011 14
Tom, there is no way you can be that dense. If you can only view an issue from a single perspective, only one side, despite your feelings; you are intellectually challenged and you will never be capable of truly understanding. Therefore rendering you arguments moot.
9:31 pm on October 11th, 2011 15
Regardless, sex offenders shall be tried swiftly and fairly in the court of South Korean law and with substantiated evidence prosecuted for their crimes. USFK should and must come up with its plans to prevent repeat of such crimes occurring in South Korean territory.. Or else Korean public will demand for changes to SOFA however misguided.
10:36 pm on October 11th, 2011 16
If someone ever comes up with an absolutely foolproof plan to prevent people from doings stupid criminal things they will patent it and have limitless wealth for life.
10:44 pm on October 11th, 2011 17
“If someone ever comes up with an absolutely foolproof plan to prevent people from doings stupid criminal things they will patent it and have limitless wealth for life.”
Well, then so be it…
10:50 pm on October 11th, 2011 18
I’ve said this before: Take any population pool the size of USFK – with most of them being in their late teens to mid-20s – and you’ll see similar types of crimes and percentages.
How big is Korea’s largest university?
If most Korean women reported rapes, you would recognize similar occurrences with that pool of young people.
You’d see similar numbers in other crimes too.
11:06 pm on October 11th, 2011 19
USFK is EXCEPTION… it is America in the face of general Korean populace…
From now until end of next year will be politically sensitive period for both the U.S. and South Korea.
South Korea will have general election in April that would change the political landscape of National Assembly and in December, President of South Korea will be elected.
Leftists who supported Roh Moo Hyun are back in full force. They are taking advantage of the sagging support of President Lee Myung Bak and his Hannara Party.
It’s probably in the best interest of the U.S. and USFK to get its act in order in whatever ways to not get itself involved in the local politics.
Remember, in 2002, Roh Moo Hyun got elected in part thanks to those two girls killed by an American Tank. However inadvertent the accident was the result speaks for itself.
Crime rates of USFK personnel cannot be compared to any average… one is more than enough.
My concern is USFK crime rate is and will be similar to general average or below.
I hope the pinkos do not take advantage of it next year…
Seoul Mayoral race is practically decided with pinkos is heavy lead. It is lost election for the Conservatives who generally are for the KOR-US alliance.
Next year’s general election is risky but Presidential election is where we draw the line. It shouldn’t be lost or this country will go through a major change.
Many Americans may like it though: You will have changce to get your boys and girls home permanently from the Korean Peninsula which you loathe vehemently.
11:17 pm on October 11th, 2011 20
18. A similar sampling of the local population would be much higher. Not to mention social and cultural definations and attitude toward “rape”. For instance, good Korean girls often say “no” while pulling you toward them while in the US everything is supposed to stop, immediatley, no matter what, the very second it is uttered; even then it may “legally” be too late. The overarching issue is much more complicated though these specific incidents may not be.
11:40 pm on October 11th, 2011 21
Now Homeboy is fretting the possible damage to the US-SK relationship during Korea’s election cycle?
I guess we have another Tom hanging around.
2002 had the World Cup. Without that, Roh would never have gotten elected, because the armored vehicle accident would never have (re)energized as much of the population as it did. Roh barely squeaked out a win even with the perfect storm. Take away the WC, and he wouldn’t have.
5:50 am on October 12th, 2011 22
It would be interesting to see the numbers on rapes commited by Korean nationals outside of Korea.
6:11 am on October 12th, 2011 23
I saw him on KBS just now. Short guy (as in shorter than his police escorts), baseball cap covering his face. Looked like dyed red hair. Is he really US Army?
5:31 am on October 21st, 2011 24
Private “K”. What is “K”? Kafka, Katusa, KoЯny?
Private J has his name splashed all over Korean media but Korean media goes all kwiet on K.
M’kay!
5:58 am on October 21st, 2011 25
#23 I guess he dyed his arm hair too?
http://www.vop.co.kr/A00000437207.html
6:07 am on October 21st, 2011 26
Yr rite. He looks like O’Konnor with that color.
Still poor ol’ J gets his name splashed all over Korea.