ope-l-0701: [OPE-L] SV: [OPE-L] North Korea

From: Martin Kragh (Martin.Kragh@HHS.SE)
Date: Sat Jan 27 2007 - 04:37:14 EST

Dear Chai-on

Many thanks for your e-mail, you have clarified many issues I think. However, I also believe that you, and others on the list, are barking up the wrong tree. I have never said anything that contradicts a nation's right to self defence against foreign aggression. What I opposed was the Swedish government's plans to export weapons to Saudi Arabia, since it is a country that oppresses its own population in a direct way (physical punishment, slavery etc). I do not think sending them weapons is very progressive, and when North Korea all of a sudden was debated, I repeated my former statement - No, I do not support any country who would support their military campaign. It is perhaps a moral statement, not grounded in a proper understanding of the global war on terror, who knows...that is however what I feel.

I support people's right to bear arms. But weapon industry is just as any other branch of industry subject to the value form; there is no big conspiracy, it is simply many different actors in the world being subject to the same social mode of organization. Government's pushing for profit of war. And yes, Kalashnikov is the best rifle ever made Jerry. Media do not necessarily blindly follow the White House, they first and foremost sell news. This is also why I do not think saying "this country is imperialist", and this country "is not" really clarifies much. I think all nation states pursue what could be labeled imperialist strategy; I think it is a contradiction inherent to the nation state per se. If you do not ground your theory of imperialism in the historical settings of nation states, the term "imperialism" simply becomes a term you can label your opponent and it becomes a tautology. But I might be using a foreign terminology here.

Then I was asked about WMD:s, what I thought about them etc. Well, I oppose any country having them. But I do think a country like North Kore and a personal leader like Kim Jung Ill would be more likely to use those, and that would be against their closest neighbours, especially if the US would attack, or threaten to do so. The regime is highly unstable, as are all dictatorships, and those weapons might end up in the wrong hands. This last part was also repeated in my former e-mail, and it is a reflection obviously of a more personal opinion about for example Kim's psychological status. Wasn't the great leader's portraits suddenly removed from all public buildings about 2 years ago? And then put back just a few days later? We might very well see a regime change from inside North Korea quite soon, why I think the best recipee is patience, as always.

I would also like to appologize to other list members that have been drowned in a-mails the last few days. I can personally say I did not wish for this debate to escalate. The other day I decided I would not reply to Jerry and Paul, because the debate wasn't going anywhere. And I also think Jerry and Paul have at times ripped my statements out of their context so to make me look bad. They seem actually to be quite upset. I might be horrible wrong however, I know what electronic debates can be like. If that's the case, I appologize.

A week ago I posted a mail about the archives containing the former MEL-institute's holdings. Much material found there will for obvious reasons be in German, English or French, which is why I thought it might be a good idea for you to know about it. I would be glad to help anybody who would like to know more about what is required for access to these holdings. Hopefully, I can continue to pursue the quest for a deepend knowledge in political economy, which is what this list is for in the first place. For example, I plan to post info about previously unknown material by I.I. Rubin.

----- Original Message -----
From: ì´ì±„ì–¸
To: Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 9:46 PM
Subject: [RE]Re: [OPE-L] North Korea

Hi, Martin,

As I am a South Korean citizen, I am well alerted to the recent situation
of North Korea.

Talking about North Korea, all the academic wisdoms suddenly change into
silly and stupid enough persons, as they do not know how to exploit their
own logical capabilities.

One thing is evident.

Mr Kim has been following neuclear programs not secretly but openly since
after 15 years ago.

They said to USA, "We shall start a neuclear program unless USA stop
threatening us militarily"

Clinton stopped threatening and thus stoopped him persuing the program.
Bush resumed the threatening and Mr Kim also resumed the program. Kim
finally showed his neuclear capability after 6 years' noticement.

Bush disregarded Kim's announcement that neuclear weapons were already
ready. I respect highly Mr kim because he was the first person in the
histroy of warfare to have openly noticed his intent of weapon development
and he foretold a week before his own neuclear test schedule.

Unfortunately, however, nevertheless, Bush and the west have never shown
any of their logical capability against Kim's neuclear capability. This
story is very significant. It shows USA's intelligence incapabilities,
their misinformation, their misjudgement. In the war against North Korea,
USA has already lost, I believe. They have no knowledge at all about what
their own enemy is like.

However militarily strong you are, you can lose if you have no choice.
Think about a chess, you cannot win with many solders and generals. You
will lose if the king have no choice.

In solidarity,

Chai-on

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 31 2007 - 00:00:05 EST