Residents should stop protests for protests' sake
Seongju, North Gyeongsang Province, where advanced U.S. missile interceptors will be deployed, has turned into a land of lawlessness.
Protesting residents pelted visiting Prime Minister Hwang Kyo-ahn and his entourage with eggs and water bottles Friday. Hwang tried to deliver an apology for not informing the residents of the deployment in advance, and was forced to escape into the county office in the face of angry protestors, where he was holed up for six-and-half hours before he escaped. In the melee, a police commissioner got a cut above his eyebrow from a thrown water bottle. The residents have made it clear that they will not stop protesting until the government backs down on the deployment plan for the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery in their town.
They are right to fear possible adverse health effects from electronic pulses from the radar that comes with the system and about a potential devaluation of their property as a result. But violent protests are not the answer and should not be used to challenge this national security decision.
They should let the government explain its THAAD deployment plan and have it vetted by experts, who would raise questions, if there are any. The government, for its part, should address them to leave no doubts. Depending on the situation, residents' concern about their devalued properties also can be tackled.
But their protests for protests' sake cannot be tolerated indefinitely.
The THAAD system is aimed at boosting our capability to cope with North Korea's missile attacks. On this account, the government and military should be entrusted for their integrity on their decision for the site selection.
Cliché as it may sound, it should be borne in mind what pain and sorrow the people without a nation are destined to suffer. To protect what the nation stands for, all its members should be ready to play their part.
Still, we are not ready to go to the length of calling the Seongju residents' protests a selfish act of "not-in-my-backyard" phenomenon, because their behavior is the result of our society's immaturity.
Society often harks only to the loudest of all ― the strident minority gets its way at the cost of the silent majority.
Second, the people are left with few other options than protesting violently when their interest is in jeopardy. This dates back to a series of dictatorships in the 1970s and 1980s when generals-turned-strongmen were in power, forcing their will on the people, leaving them with little recourse but mass protests. The nation ― people and government ― has not learned the better mutually acceptable way of resolving disputes.
Now, the Seongju case poses a new challenge for dispute resolution.
On this challenge, it should start with the government. THAAD deployment is a national security issue and the government should keep channels for dialogue open but act resolutely to maintain law and order, because the issue differs from the Sewol ferry sinking, the result of a systematic failure for which the government should take the blame. If the government shows any sign of confusing Seongju with Sewol, as shown by Prime Minister Hwang's ill-prepared visit, it would only cause the THAAD issue to become out of proportion. The test is still not finished.
Seongju, North Gyeongsang Province, where advanced U.S. missile interceptors will be deployed, has turned into a land of lawlessness.
Protesting residents pelted visiting Prime Minister Hwang Kyo-ahn and his entourage with eggs and water bottles Friday. Hwang tried to deliver an apology for not informing the residents of the deployment in advance, and was forced to escape into the county office in the face of angry protestors, where he was holed up for six-and-half hours before he escaped. In the melee, a police commissioner got a cut above his eyebrow from a thrown water bottle. The residents have made it clear that they will not stop protesting until the government backs down on the deployment plan for the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery in their town.
They are right to fear possible adverse health effects from electronic pulses from the radar that comes with the system and about a potential devaluation of their property as a result. But violent protests are not the answer and should not be used to challenge this national security decision.
They should let the government explain its THAAD deployment plan and have it vetted by experts, who would raise questions, if there are any. The government, for its part, should address them to leave no doubts. Depending on the situation, residents' concern about their devalued properties also can be tackled.
But their protests for protests' sake cannot be tolerated indefinitely.
The THAAD system is aimed at boosting our capability to cope with North Korea's missile attacks. On this account, the government and military should be entrusted for their integrity on their decision for the site selection.
Cliché as it may sound, it should be borne in mind what pain and sorrow the people without a nation are destined to suffer. To protect what the nation stands for, all its members should be ready to play their part.
Still, we are not ready to go to the length of calling the Seongju residents' protests a selfish act of "not-in-my-backyard" phenomenon, because their behavior is the result of our society's immaturity.
Society often harks only to the loudest of all ― the strident minority gets its way at the cost of the silent majority.
Second, the people are left with few other options than protesting violently when their interest is in jeopardy. This dates back to a series of dictatorships in the 1970s and 1980s when generals-turned-strongmen were in power, forcing their will on the people, leaving them with little recourse but mass protests. The nation ― people and government ― has not learned the better mutually acceptable way of resolving disputes.
Now, the Seongju case poses a new challenge for dispute resolution.
On this challenge, it should start with the government. THAAD deployment is a national security issue and the government should keep channels for dialogue open but act resolutely to maintain law and order, because the issue differs from the Sewol ferry sinking, the result of a systematic failure for which the government should take the blame. If the government shows any sign of confusing Seongju with Sewol, as shown by Prime Minister Hwang's ill-prepared visit, it would only cause the THAAD issue to become out of proportion. The test is still not finished.
