VZCZCXRO6147
OO RUEHGH
DE RUEHUL #1905/01 3370824
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 030824Z DEC 09
FM AMEMBASSY SEOUL
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 6400
RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC 9477
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHINGTON DC
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC//DDI/OEA//
RHHMUNA/USCINCPAC HONOLULU HI//FPA//
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC
RUEKDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC//DB-Z//
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 0571
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 7005
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 7064
RUEHGH/AMCONSUL SHANGHAI 1560
RUEHSH/AMCONSUL SHENYANG 5382
RUEHIN/AIT TAIPEI 4314
RUEHGP/AMEMBASSY SINGAPORE 7527
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 1800
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 3102
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 2180
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 2786

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 SEOUL 001905 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL PGOV MARR ECON KPAO KS US
SUBJECT: SEOUL - PRESS BULLETIN; December 3, 2009 
 
TOP HEADLINES 
------------- 
 
Chosun Ilbo 
President Lee Instructs Officials Not to Yield to Rail Strikers' 
Demands and to Increase Alternative Workers 
Capable of Running Trains 
 
JoongAng Ilbo 
Child Sex Offenders May Face Up to 50 Years in Prison 
 
Dong-a Ilbo 
Obama's "Afghan Gamble" 
 
Hankook Ilbo, All TVs 
Damage Mounts as Railway Strike Continues 
 
Hankyoreh Shinmun 
President Lee's "Deviant View" of Labor Unions; He Denies Labor 
Unions' Right to Collective Action Guaranteed 
by Constitution 
 
Segye Ilbo 
Fair Trade Commission Fines Six LPG Providers 
668.9 Billion Won for Price-Fixing, 
the Largest Fine Ever Imposed Domestically 
 
Seoul Shinmun 
"Delicate Change" on Sejong City; Prime Minister Says, 
"We are Open to All Possibilities" 
 
 
DOMESTIC DEVELOPMENTS 
--------------------- 
 
Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan, in a Dec. 2 forum, said that Seoul 
will not accept the peace treaty that North Korea is seeking solely 
with the U.S. to replace the armistice that ended the Korean War. 
(JoongAng) 
 
The ROKG and the ruling Grand National Party (GNP) agreed yesterday 
to seek to send around 320 Korean troops to Afghanistan next July 
for a two-and-a-half-year mission. (JoongAng, Dong-a, Hankook, 
Segye, Seoul) 
 
 
INTERNATIONAL NEWS 
------------------ 
 
President Barack Obama, in a Dec. 1 major speech, announced that he 
would send an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan in coming 
months and start bringing American forces home in July 2011. (All) 
 
 
MEDIA ANALYSIS 
-------------- 
 
-President Obama's speech on Afghanistan 
----------------------------------------- 
President Obama's speech on Afghanistan continued to capture the 
attention of the ROK media.  The media offered mostly 
straightforward reporting on President Obama's decision to send an 
additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan in coming months and to 
start bringing American forces home in July 2011. 
 
Coverage highlighted the President's statements: "I believe this 
argument (Afghanistan is another Vietnam) depends on a false reading 
of history.  Unlike Vietnam, we are joined by a broad coalition of 
43 nations that recognizes the legitimacy of our action;" and "It 
must be clear that Afghans will have to take responsibility for 
their security, and that America has no interest in fighting an 
endless war in Afghanistan." 
 
SEOUL 00001905  002 OF 004 
 
 
 
Newspapers carried the following headlines: "Obama's Gamble: 
'Concluding Unpopular War in 18 Months'" (conservative Chosun Ilbo); 
"Obama's 'Afghan Gamble;' Obama Intends to End War One and a Half 
Years before Next Presidential Election... He Seems Aiming to Use 
Afghan Achievement for His Reelection" (conservative Dong-a Ilbo); 
and "Obama Plans Afghan Pullout in July 2011" (moderate Hankook 
Ilbo, left-leaning Hankyoreh Shinmun, conservative Segye Ilbo, 
moderate Seoul Shinmun) 
 
Dong-a Ilbo editorialized: "Troop pullout without mopping up Taliban 
and al-Qaida remnants would endanger world peace and U.S. security. 
In that sense, it is natural that President Obama has decided to 
send additional troops to Afghanistan. ...  During last month's 
visit to Seoul, President Obama hinted at the possibility that some 
USFK troops may be redeployed to Afghanistan.  In order to prevent 
this from happening, creating a security vacuum, it is important for 
the ROK to provide assistance to Afghanistan." 
 
(Ed. Note:  In his Remarks to the Troops at Osan Air Base, Korea on 
November 19, 2009, the President thanked the troops for their 
individual personal sacrifices and service and said: "Many of you 
served in Iraq.  ... Others among you served in Afghanistan.  ... 
Others among you will deploy yet again. "   (Source: 
Whitehouse.gov.)  There was no reference about pulling USFK troops 
off the Korean peninsula.) 
 
Hankook Ilbo editorialized: "The deployment of additional troops, 
which will bring the total number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan to 
over 100,000, can be seen as a dangerous gambit.  If (this move) 
does not prevent the Taliban's expansion of power, the U.S. will 
lose justification for the war.  However, the (U.S.) public is 
opposed to the troop increase.  President Obama laid out a timeline 
for a troop pullout, but it is doubtful that the tide of war will 
turn in favor of the U.S. and its allies in just one and a half 
years.  ...   Observers say that the additional troop deployment has 
just turned 'Bush's war' into 'Obama's war.'" 
 
An editorial in left-leaning Kyunghyang Shinmun argued: "We worry 
that this U.S. troop increase will result in the U.S. sinking deeper 
into the 'Afghan quagmire.'  ...  The U.S. has achieved little for 
eight years since it started the war shortly after the 9/11 terror 
attacks.  ...   The war has only inflicted huge losses without 
achieving Afghanistan's democratization or punishing (the Taliban.) 
...  President Obama also requested additional contributions from 
U.S. allies, including NATO countries, saying that the Afghan war is 
an international issue.  However, this will not be easy.  The 
'Obama's war' is highly likely to become the U.S.'s lonely war." 
 
-N. Korea 
--------- 
Right-of-center JoongAng Ilbo quoted Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan 
as saying in a Dec. 2 forum in Seoul that the ROKG will not accept 
the peace treaty that North Korea is seeking solely with the U.S. to 
replace the armistice that ended the Korean War.  He was further 
quoted: "Our basic position is that any discussion on a peace deal 
must be centered on the two Koreas, with the U.S. and China also 
involved. ... North Korea talking about a peace deal seems intended 
to buy time and divert attention while it continues to develop 
nuclear weapons." 
 
 
OPINIONS/EDITORIALS 
------------------- 
 
OBAMA TAKES GAMBLE WITH AFGHAN STRATEGY 
(Hankook Ilbo, December 3, 2009, Page 39) 
 
U.S. President Obama announced a plan to send additional troops to 
Afghanistan to stabilize the situation there.  The deployment of 
additional troops, which will bring the total number of U.S. troops 
in Afghanistan to over 100,000, can be seen as a dangerous gambit. 
If (this move) does not prevent the Taliban's expansion of power, 
the U.S. will lose justification for the war.  However, the (U.S.) 
 
SEOUL 00001905  003 OF 004 
 
 
public is opposed to the troop increase.  President Obama laid out a 
timeline for a troop pullout, but it is doubtful that the tide of 
the war will turn in favor of the U.S. and its allies in just one 
and a half years. 
 
In his speech, President Obama said, "We must reverse the Taliban's 
momentum and deny it the ability to overthrow the government." 
Obama noted that his new Afghan strategy is to secure key population 
centers and partner with Afghan security forces.  However, if 
history is any guide, it will be very hard for foreign forces to 
gain control of Afghanistan.  Observers say that the additional 
troop deployment has just turned "Bush's war" into "Obama's war." 
 
The ROKG, which is ready to dispatch its troops to Afghanistan, 
should look closely at the developments of the war and any changes 
in the situation (in Afghanistan) that may occur due to the U.S.'s 
new Afghan strategy. 
 
 
WE CANNOT HAND AFGHANISTAN OVER TO TERRORISTS 
(Dong-a Ilbo, December 3, 2009, Page 39) 
 
U.S. President Barack Obama said on December 1 that he had decided 
to "send an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan" and to 
"begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 
2011."  In order to directly deliver his strong determination to win 
the war in Afghanistan to the people, President Obama announced the 
decision at his first address to the nation since his inauguration. 
He even "had his retreat cut off" by advancing a timeline for the 
troop pullout to a date much earlier than January of 2013, when his 
term in office expires. 
 
The war in Afghanistan started when the U.S. military launched an 
air attack against Afghanistan on October 7, 2001, to punish 
al-Qaida and the Taliban, which protects al-Qaida, for the September 
11 terrorist attacks.  A U.S. troop pullout without mopping up 
Taliban and al-Qaida remnants would endanger world peace and U.S. 
security.  In that sense, it is natural that President Obama has 
decided to send additional troops to Afghanistan. 
 
To Afghan President Hamid Karzai, President Obama stressed, "The 
days of providing a blank check are over."  He warned that the U.S. 
will stop providing largesse to an inefficient and corrupt Afghan 
government.  In order to establish peace in the war-torn country, 
the Karzai Administration must first shape up. 
 
Despite Washington's additional troop dispatch decision, the 
situation in Afghanistan is not getting better.  The Taliban gave up 
an all-out attack and is harassing the U.S. and allied forces with 
guerilla warfare.  The capital Kabul is so dangerous that, when ROK 
lawmakers visited the city as Presidential envoys last month, they 
were not able to stay at a hotel there.  The Afghan people are tired 
of the prolonged war.  In order to win a victory over the Taliban, 
both military operations against the militant group and civilian 
reconstruction operations should be mobilized.   It is necessary to 
send combat troops at the same time that assistance in the 
reconstruction of Afghanistan and training of local self-defense 
forces  is provided. 
 
There are many areas in which our Provincial Reconstruction Team 
(PRT) can make contributions.  In particular, the ROK's plan to 
train local police is desperately needed to ensure that Afghanistan 
stands on its own feet.  The deployment of additional 30,000 troops 
is a heavy burden for the U.S.  During last month's visit to Seoul, 
President Obama hinted at the possibility that some USFK troops may 
be redeployed to Afghanistan.  In order to prevent this from 
happening, creating a security vacuum, it is important for the ROK 
to provide assistance to Afghanistan.  (Ed. Note:  In his Remarks to 
the Troops at Osan Air Base, Korea on November 19, 2009, the 
President thanked the troops for their individual personal 
sacrifices and service and said: "Many of you served in Iraq.  ... 
Others among you served in Afghanistan.  ...  Others among you will 
deploy yet again. "   (Source: whitehouse.gov.)  There was no 
reference about pulling USFK troops off the Korean peninsula.) 
 
SEOUL 00001905  004 OF 004 
 
 
 
 
U.S. SINKING DEEPER INTO AFGHAN QUAGMIRE 
(Kyunghyang Shinmun, December 3, Page 31) 
 
In his first speech to the U.S. public on his plan for Afghanistan 
on December 1, President Obama announced that the U.S. will send an 
additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan.  The USG had been deeply 
considering whether to dispatch additional troops after Afghanistan 
Commander General Stanley McChrystal submitted a report requesting 
additional troop deployment in September.  Still mindful that a 
considerable number of Americans are opposed to the U.S.'s increased 
military presence, Obama set a specific timeline, saying "After 18 
months, our troops will begin to come home."  It seems that he wants 
to quell concerns that Afghanistan may become a second Vietnam. 
 
However, the prospects (that the troops will return on time) are 
very dim since it is unlikely that this timeline can be easily 
realized as President Obama and the U.S. public hope.  We worry that 
this U.S. troop increase will result in the U.S. sinking deeper into 
the 'Afghan quagmire.'  There are clear reasons that justify this 
concern.  We need to ask two questions.  What has the U.S. gained 
from this war?  Why has the U.S. decided to increase its troop 
levels in Afghanistan? 
 
The U.S. has achieved little for eight years since it started the 
war shortly after the 9/11 terror attacks.  Osama Bin Laden is still 
alive.  The Taliban was not routed from power but has strengthened 
its hold.  Has Afghanistan achieved democracy?  The answer is no. 
It seems that the U.S. is providing support to corrupt President 
Karzai.  Over the duration of the war so far, the war has cost 1,532 
lives of allies including 929 U.S. soldiers.  The war has only 
inflicted huge losses without achieving Afghanistan's 
democratization or punishing (the Taliban.)  Obama reminded us of 
the victims of the 9/11 terror attacks, stressing that the U.S. 
should reverse the tide of the war and that additional troop 
deployment is aimed at transferring responsibility to the Afghans. 
However, there is a slim chance that this will be realized.  The 
Soviet Union collapsed after it lost the 10-year Afghan war. 
 
President Obama also requested additional contributions from U.S. 
allies, including NATO countries, saying that the Afghan war is an 
international issue.  However, this will not be easy.  France made 
it clear that it will not increase its troop levels and Germany has 
expressed reluctance to dispatch additional troops.  Immediately 
after the 9/11 terror attacks, people in the world proclaimed, "We 
are all Americans," but now their attitude has changed drastically. 
'Obama's war' is highly likely to become the U.S.'s lonely war. 
 
 
STEPHENS