AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
War and Peace instal the new for mac12/5/2023 And most tellingly, during the Korean War, US antiwar sentiment organized around the war and Jim Crow through a competing version of “peace.”Īs we potentially enter the fourth “peace regime” for Korea, it is important to understand the competing claims that have been made and to ask what a true peace on the peninsula might entail. The Korean War - which was devastatingly violent for all sides - was described as a “war for peace” by President Truman. The US military occupation in South Korea after partition (1945–1948) kept the Cold War peace through suppressing dissent. The many meanings have, in this context, been the battleground for discussing US power, wartime violence, and US racial politics. Nonetheless, the idea of a “peace regime” has long been employed in US–Korean relations. A regime is imposed from without, which begs the questions: whose peace, in this peace regime, is being insured, and who is subject to its imposition? To insist that such a regime is a kind of peace is to willfully forget the violence you are, in fact, wreaking. “Peace regime” is a particularly contrived usage, instructive in its tensions. Consider most recently when President Trump and Chairman Kim Jong-un met at a luxury resort in Singapore, the site of a former British colonial post, and signed a short statement promising that “The United States and the DPRK will join their efforts to build a lasting and stable peace regime on the Korean Peninsula.” Similar to “democracy” or “freedom,” its political usage has been stretched beyond the breaking point. Peace has always been a tortured, malleable term.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |