This news is probably not surprising to anyone that was following Korea issues during the Roh Moo-hyun administration:
In a story submitted to the Monthly Chosun magazine, investigative journalist and conservative idealogue Cho Gap-je claims that during his 2007 summit with late North Korean leader Kim Jong-il, late President Roh Moo-hyun basically told Kim he had worked to reduce pro-American opinion in South Korea and lessen American influence.
Basing his claims on testimony from multiple officials who’d seen the summit transcript, Cho says Roh told Kim “we” (i.e., South Korea, or at least his government) were “working hard, too.” He told Kim USFK was to leave the capital region and Seoul was to regain wartime operational command. Even better, he told Kim that recent opinion polls showed South Koreans considered the United States the biggest threat to South Korean security, followed by Japan and then North Korea, and that this was “something you couldn’t even imagine a decade ago” and “the result of persistently promoting independent diplomacy and inter-Korean cooperation.”
Roh also allegedly suggested then-US President George W Bush, Kim and him declare an end of the Korean War and hold talks to sign a peace treaty. Kim apparently showed interest in this. [Chosun Ilbo via the Marmot's Hole]
You can read the rest over at the Marmot’s Hole to include how Roh bragged about preventing the updates to OPLAN 5029.
![[Valid RSS]](http://rokdrop.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/valid-rss-rogers.png "Validate my RSS feed")
6:21 pm on November 24th, 2012 1
Eventually kushibo will come around to the Glans Plan, and then it will be unanimous. To remind:
1. PRC stays out.
2. ROK annexes DPRK.
3. USA gets out.
6:29 pm on November 24th, 2012 2
I hope he thought about everything he had accomplished before he jumped off that mountain. Nothing.
7:29 pm on November 24th, 2012 3
I am always a little suspicious about these types of “revelations” just before an election.
7:58 pm on November 24th, 2012 4
#1 Glans I only see 4 hitches in your plan.
1. PRC
2. ROK
3. DPRK
4. USA
12:23 am on November 25th, 2012 5
@3
While there is little doubt about the political aspect to this “revelation” that also doesn’t mean it isn’t true. This just sounds like something Noh would have said. Not surprising.
12:55 am on November 25th, 2012 6
Glans’ innocent naivety is so refreshing on the internet.
Like a kid looking through the glass at a department store toy display…
2:29 am on November 25th, 2012 7
#5
I’m just asking what’s the point of making such claims at this time with nothing more than hearsay as evidence? You know what they say about extraordinary claims?
As far as sounding like something he would have said, would he have been so clueless as to sellout an ally while he knew he was being recorded for official record?. If he was secretly recorded in North Korea it would likely have been by the North Koreans, so were they the source of the so-called official transcript?
3:24 am on November 25th, 2012 8
Another case of him saying whatever he thinks his audience wants to hear without considering the consequences of his words. Besides, he openly bragged that he had never set foot in the US.
7:16 am on November 25th, 2012 9
2 ID Doc, you have correctly identified the four centers of resistance to the Glans Plan. It’s so obviously the right plan that it would be adopted overnight, were it not for those four (plus kushibo). MTB’s influence is utterly negligible.
2:47 pm on November 25th, 2012 10
Actually, I also disagree with the Glans plan. I believe China should develop the DPRK starting from the border areas and the moving toward South Korea. South Koreans won’t really unify with North Korea if it’s too poor.
3:57 pm on November 25th, 2012 11
Glans, you’re admitting that all four points of your Three Point Plan don’t work? How is this MY fault?
Yes, it would be nice to have a reset button, put Korea back to the way it was in the 19th Century, but with all the modern conveniences. But you know, REALITY? Yeah…
But I do like that you’ve changed the order of the Glans Plan, it makes it looks less like you’re blaming the U.S. as an Occupier Force, and distributing the “blame” a bit more equitably. Nice. Baby Steps. Keep it up.
4:06 pm on November 25th, 2012 12
MTB, I have never revised the Glans Plan for Korea. Those have always been the three steps, in exactly that order.
You want to know the Glans Plan for Israel/Palestine? One step: the entire Jewish population of Israel/Palestine emigrates to the United States. This plan, like my plan for Korea, is so obviously correct that it will never be adopted, either.
4:16 pm on November 25th, 2012 13
That wasn’t a summit meeting, it is was nK’s top agent in south Korea reporting in….
4:22 pm on November 25th, 2012 14
Meh, I’m not going to go Archive Trawling, but I definately remember it being:
1. USA Gets Out
2. ROK annexes DPRK
3. PRC Stays Out
But while I’m sure the U.S. wouldn’t mind leaving, it would leave a power vacuum what will most definately be filled by someone. And if you don’t believe that, you ARE as naive as Ralphie.
As for Israel/Palestine, why not the reverse of the Glans Plan? The Palestanians emigrate to Jordan and/or the other Arabic countries?
Sounds like Same-Same to me.
6:09 pm on November 25th, 2012 15
Do we really need to worry about China?
6:15 pm on November 25th, 2012 16
MTB, you “definately” remember wrong. The Glans Plan for Korea has always been: 1, PRC stays out; 2, ROK annexes DPRK; 3, USA gets out.
Why should Jewish people leave Israel/Palestine? Because it’s undesirable real estate. Location, location, location! Let the Palestinians and the Arab Israelis enjoy life among their neighbors, while Jewish former Israelis prosper in the good old USA.
6:24 pm on November 25th, 2012 17
Look up “you are clown shoes”, Glans.
Teadrinker, you have not argued. “Arguing” requires that you counter opposing statements with facts or opinion clearly based upon facts.
Why don’t you write more about your education “research” in the same detail that Sonagi writes about education. That would be more convincing than angry insults or referrals to the published work of others.
7:21 pm on November 25th, 2012 18
Glans said:
Unexpected support for the Glans Plan? The Marmot reports on Trump’s idea that South Korea should pay for its own defense, and he links to John Derbyshire at NRO. They seem to like Glans Step Two, the US gets out.
Step Two? I didn’t change your words, there would have been no point.
But no matter the order, the four sticking points remain:
1: The PRC won’t stay out. Never have before in the LONG history of Asia, don’t see it happening in the future.
2: The DPRK would be firmly opposed to annexation by the ROK. Too many “Big Fish” living in an exceedingly small pond. And the ROK did pay attention when East Germany came back into the fold of Germany. Rather expensive “victory” for the Germans.
3: As long as the PRC and DPRK are potential hot spots, the USA is not going to give up a beachhead.
But you are right, for some reason I was thinking you had your number sequence in reverse order. It’s still as naive as Ralphie, but it was usually 1: PRC stays out, 2: DPRK/ROK become best buddies, and 3: USA hits the bricks. Usually.
Oh, and making fun of my spelling? Well, if you can’t present a legitimate point, nit pick. Works almost as well…
8:01 pm on November 25th, 2012 19
No MTB, nothing about buddies. Step two means DPRK goes away, ROK remains.
8:37 pm on November 25th, 2012 20
Well, a mindset that leads to flashlight guns and poison pens isn’t going to go away through wishful thinking.
There are a lot of people who think they have a simple solutions to complex problems. And they are usually wrong. Left, Right, Center, Undefinable. Doesn’t matter.
8:53 pm on November 25th, 2012 21
Korean reunification is #1 priority for both countries. How is Roh Moo-hyun “anti-American”, when back in 1960s, Park Chung hee also wanted to lessen American influence and wanted to become a sufficient nuclear power. So Park Chung hee was “anti-American”?
9:05 pm on November 25th, 2012 22
MTB Rider, you’re wrong.
1. PRC involvement with DPRK has only happened during Korean war when Kim il Sung asked them for assistance if his invasion of ROK went wrong. PRC is cautious about DPRK, and its influence in DPRK is limited with aids and support.
2. It’s obvious DPRK is opposed by annexation of ROK but they do support reunification. DPRK back in 1990s wanted a reunification with two governments intact, a sort of confederation.
3. The only reason why US has a real presence in ROK is because ROK wants them. Without ROK support, US wouldn’t have any. Within Asia-Pacific region, US has presence in Australia and Japan.
9:41 pm on November 25th, 2012 23
Before the PRC, it was simply China, and Chinese/Korean relations were not exactly friendly at all times in all ways. The Three Brothers of China/Japan/Korea got along when they needed to, fought when they had to, and basically dealt with each other as need be, depending upon their own goals. Same as every other country in the world sitting next to another country.
Ming Dynasty/Joseon Dynasty got along
Qing Dynasty/Joseon fought and forced King Injo into submission
They make movies and TV series about these things, you know. Also Wikipedia, and even a few books written in English.
Glans’ plan won’t work until human nature changes completely, and men are no longer capable of evil for personal gain. Don’t see that happening anytime soon…
10:11 pm on November 25th, 2012 24
MTB Rider, I don’t fully agree.
Sure, Korean-Chinese relations weren’t good at times and sometimes it was. The so called “three brothers” didn’t got along most of the time but the firm ties with Korea and China was strong as seen in Imjin wars and the Korean war. However, Korea never got along with Japan, probably only a short-time when Joseon Korea and Tokugawa Japan did have some good ties and that was probably it.
12:06 am on November 26th, 2012 25
#20,
“Korean reunification is #1 priority for both countries. ”
No it isn’t.
3:20 am on November 26th, 2012 26
Glans wrote:
Not bloody likely.
I’ve already dealt with the Glans Hope STARTING HERE and HERE.
6:02 am on November 26th, 2012 27
That may be, kushibo, but once you advocate the Glans Plan on Monster Island, PRC, DPRK, ROK, and USA will hurry to adopt it.
MTB, you think the present arrangement is permanent? DPRK always protectd by PRC, USA troops permanently based in ROK? Until human nature changes? Empires and republics rise and fall all over the world, but DPRK and ROK are forever? Not even kushibo could believe such a thing.
1:33 pm on November 26th, 2012 28
Glans (#26), if there are any Chinese people monitoring my blog (and there may be) then I’m pretty sure that the powers that be in Zhongnanhai would reject anything I advocate when it comes to the Koreas.
That’s why I won’t be replacing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton anytime soon.
3:57 pm on November 26th, 2012 29
In hindsight, this is probably a reasonable position. Not the cozying up to the NorKs. No, that is pointless. But getting away from America makes perfect sense.
In the coming years, the US is going to be overwhelmed paying for Scumcrat programs like Obamacare, Obamaphones, eternal unemployment benefits, food stamps, etc. to afford to do much on the peninsula beyond maintaining a force about the size of the UN Honor Guard Company. Nah, its time for ROK to go back to Chinese vassal state status. Going under Japanese orbit would be preferable, but that’s not likely to happen!
4:06 pm on November 26th, 2012 30
No, Glans, I don’t think things last forever. Not even the current Global Climate!
Nor do I think the DPRK will last forever, when a few key deaths (natural or otherwise) could completely destablilize the regime.
But I also don’t think posting the same naive nonsense day after day will change anything either. Otherwise I’d post something like The MTB Rider Plan:
1. Everybody buys a good, high end bicycle
2. People ride them, get in shape
3. Happiness and less pollution and less traffic!
Yes, wonderful thoughts, but getting other people onboard is the tricky part.
But my new bicycle computer computes Carbon Credits! Where do I go to cash them in?
4:48 pm on November 26th, 2012 31
MTB Rider, they already run that bicycle program in NorKia.
It’s called the: “No Hydrocarbon Resources, Insufficient Hard Currency to Pay for Imports and Russia Cutting off Cheap Oil” progam.
Seems to be working quite well.
5:10 pm on November 26th, 2012 32
As I was saying, I’m not worried about the Chinese. They have an aircraft carrier on which you can’t land airplanes…and watch the video I linked above.
#29,
So, your plan is selling overpriced bicycles to people…Sounds to me like you pulled that one out of Mao’s playbook, you damned pinko.
5:13 pm on November 26th, 2012 33
“In the coming years, the US is going to be overwhelmed paying for Scumcrat programs like Obamacare, ”
You’re so clueless. The US government has been paying more per capita than any other country on medical care for years, even before Obama’s plan. And where is your health care system ranked, by the way? 37th in the world. If anything, you need to move closer towards real universal health care.
5:58 pm on November 26th, 2012 34
32:
“And where is your health care system ranked, by the way? 37th in the world.”
Ranked 37th by retards like yourself. Maybe the UK and Canuckistan can pull up some of the slack. Oh wait, both nations are neck deep in providing shitty nationalized healthcare and can’t afford more than a large SWAT team’s worth of Soldiers, a Cessna and a couple SS Minnow sized ships.
Tom really was right for the most part…
6:42 pm on November 26th, 2012 35
#34,
The OECD’s experts are “retards”? Right, sure, if you say so. The rest of your “argument” is not even worth commenting about. In Dallas, eh? Figures.
7:02 pm on November 26th, 2012 36
35: OECD? Headquartered in France??? Hahahahahahahaha!!!!!
As to the rest, you really shouldn’t put scare quotes around the word argument when you didn’t even try to challenge what I stated. Seriously, your counter just simply stated US healthcare sucks (which it doesn’t…yet). You didn’t even hit my core point that the US will be too weak in the future to help ROK. Now its back on the little yellow bus for you.
1:50 am on November 27th, 2012 37
Glans, HERE is the Kushibo Plan:
I never leave my phone off during business hours in Beijing.
3:01 am on November 27th, 2012 38
Now that’s a plan that deserves discussion. There are flaws and problems that need to be worked out, but at least it’s founded on reality and not idle daydreams.
Oh, and at Teadrinker: I’ve been called worse by better.
5:48 am on November 27th, 2012 39
No, kushibo, Korea should not give any ninety-nine year lease. It would be very convincing evidence that China wants Korean territory. The point of Glans step one is to prevent such a thing. The border of Korea is the Amrok and Tumen Rivers and Mt. Paektu. Glans step two means all of the peninsula comes under the authority of the Republic of Korea with its capital in Seoul. The Korean minority across the rivers will remain citizens of China.
Korea will assume full responsibility for its national security and territorial integrity. I hope the unified Korea will have peaceful, mutually beneficial relations with all its neighbors, but my government and I can’t guarantee that. Glans step three means they’re on their own.
When the powers concerned see that Monster Island, the world center for analysis of Korean issues, supports this plan, they’ll have political cover to make the necessary compromises.
7:23 am on November 27th, 2012 40
36
Good luck on paying of that second mortgage you’ll need to take out on your home if you ever need surgery.
38
Cognitive dissonance…figures.
And third reason why your wasting time and money taking China seriously: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/oops-chinas-communist-party-paper-hails-nkoreas-kim-134241354.html?.tsrc=lgwn
1:57 pm on November 27th, 2012 41
off and you’re…I hate typing on a smartphone.
6:59 pm on November 27th, 2012 42
insert obama into that pic and we have a winner!!
7:28 pm on November 27th, 2012 43
#42,
Need I remind you the pictures Republican politicians posing with third-world country dictators with a big shit-eating smile on their faces?
8:23 pm on November 27th, 2012 44
#43, HERE is one.
8:26 pm on November 27th, 2012 45
Glans wrote:
We already have convincing evidence.
I’m being a realist. What does China want and what doesn’t it want? It wants an outlet to the East Sea (Sea of Japan). It doesn’t want a refugee crisis. It doesn’t want an unpredictable state on its borders. It doesn’t want an anti-Chinese insurgency in an occupied territory or within its own borders.
Mine is a win-win situation that forces China to play nice in order to renew the 99-year lease while giving up an extremely minimal amount of territory to get a whole lot more.
Neither of the Koreas has a real reason for holding China and its trade back from the East Sea, at least none that comes anywhere near the value of what is lost.
2:03 am on November 28th, 2012 46
As any good agent of the Dear Leader would.
Roh Moo-hyun was a North Korean sleeper agent who was killed by his handlers when he was no longer useful to them. Suicide? Yeah, right!