From: An-Ly Yao <anlyyao@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Date: 06 Sep 92 04:35 PDT
Subject: Re: A Korean view on ROC/ROK/PRC relati
Nf-ID: #R:ut-emx.uucp:79193:cdp:1474900022:000:3125
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!anlyyao    Sep  6 04:35:00 1992


How do you know, that the payment of 200 milloin US$ (or 2 billion US$) is
an ROC invention? The sad thing is, it really might be an invention. But
unfortunately there is fertile ground in Korea for spreading gossip. This
affects important decisions (mobile phone, high speed train) and the culprits
you can find in politics as well as in journalism. Here you never really
know, what is "totally" true and what isn't.

If you want to understand, why the Korean government had been labeled "amateu-
rish" in processing the whole thing, you and I are in the same situation as
above. The Taiwanese claim to have been informed too late and on the other hand
you read "facts", that they have been informed one week earlier or more. What
I know from my own experience: Most Chinese here (ROC and PRC) where expecting
the ROK to switch from ROC to PRC. But the official statements (or what you
could read about it) where contradictory, i.e. explicit denials until 2 days
before an official announcement.

However, we do not only have to rely on the Korean and Chinese press. We just
simply compare Korea's behaviour to what the USA did 1979, or we look at
France, Japan and Singapore. In all cases high ranking envoys had been sent
to Taiwan. In case of the USA Taiwan could keep the embassy building. (In
case of Seoul the site belonged to Cina already since the Ching dynasty, but
the building has been built and maintained by Taiwan. The ROC should be com-
pensated for that.)

Don't put the blame on China. If China was that much able to influence Korea's
actions, that wouldn't be a good start for a friendship between equals. Actu-
ally, I  d o  believe, that China (PRC) dealt with the whole matter in a very
smart way and of course behaved, as any superpower would do. But I had to
face quite some critizism in this newsgroup, when I claimed, that Korea had
to follow, what China dictated. Who knows the "truth"?  :-)

You may draw some satisfaction from the fact, that also the Taiwan government
fumbled. But now they make the best out of the situation. Many economocal
agreements between Taiwan and Korea where not based on reciprocity (i.e.
Taiwan could not operate Korea<->Japan shipping routes whereas Korea made
business on Taiwan<->Japan sea links as well) in order do give some incentives
to Korea. Now it is much easier for Taiwan to talk plain business.

I have personal experience with ROK government polititians admitting, that
mistakes had been made. Of course I can't proove it :-)  But what I know is
enough for me[A[A[A[A[A[B[B[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[D[B[B[B[C[C[C[C[C[C[C[C.

OOPS, noisy line...

So, I  d o  think, that the gouvernments here acted amateurish. That is
just in line with what you see worldwide. In my country (Germany) or USA or
Japan or ..., more and more voters don't know, whom to vote for, or why to
vote or wether they just simply should throw up. Why should Korea or Taiwan
do a better job? (Why? Of course for the people in these countries, but who
cares anyway? Brazil is everywhere.)


So far my "truth", how wonderfull it would be, if I am wrong.
Goetz
Seoul 1992/09/05
anlyyao@igc.apc.org