Danger of premature cheering
WASHINGTON ― The celebrations over the killing of Osama bin Laden were spontaneous and near-universal, at least in the western hemisphere. Fraternity brothers at the University of Virginia stopped watching sports on ESPN long enough to go to the nearest bar and imbibe a round of beers. Bicyclists rode to the White House to cheer the President after the subways stopped running after midnight. Normally critical newscasters, from left to right, agreed the demise of the demon was a great victory for the U.S., democracy and the free world.
In the cold light of another day or two of headlines, however, the death of Osama bin Laden conjures some not very pleasant memories. Mine go back to Nov. 2, 1963, when many people, fed up with the U.S.-backed Saigon regime, cheered the assassination of President Ngo Dinh Diem and his younger brother, Ngo Dinh Nhu, in a coup that had the backing of the CIA. Oh, the circumstances were very different. Diem had not committed any immense crime against the American people, as had Osama in ordering and planning the attacks of Sept. 11, 2011, that killed about 3,000 people. In fact, he had been America’s boy for nearly a decade until it became clear he was a liability who was as likely to persecute his political foes in South Vietnam as he was to go after the Viet Cong at a time when the Vietnam War was still a guerrilla struggle.
Still, joining a small group in front of a television set at someone’s house near my home in New Jersey, watching the black-and-white images of the slain brothers, the people cheering, the statements of the Vietnamese responsible for the assassinations, which had not been part of the CIA plot, I had the sense that a new age was dawning. We would now have leaders in Saigon whom we could trust, and democracy would finally take root there as the best antidote to communist aggression. Just how false these hopes were became clear very quickly. By the time I arrived in Saigon in September 1965 the leader of the South was Nguyen Cao Ky, a former Vietnam Air Force pilot who sported a purple scarf around his neck and talked foolishly of bringing the war to the North and uniting the country. Ky himself survived, leading the government for two years in an atmosphere of widening war and rising protest.
The drama of the raid on bin Laden’s compound will no doubt be the stuff of movies and books for years to come, but it’s easy to imagine scenarios of disillusionment and disaster as new leaders rise to replace him. Possibly the most unsettling reminder of hubris is that of the banner, ``Mission Accomplished,” that we all saw on TV screens behind President George W. Bush as he reveled in the triumph of the end of Saddam Hussein and the triumph of U.S. forces in Iraq eight years ago. The toppling of the statue of Saddam on Firdhos Square in Baghdad was a rare moment in the history of victorious American forces. By the time I got to Bagdad in July 2004, bombs were exploding down Haifa Street from my hotel. It was not unusual for a correspondent to go to an appointment in a car with special steel paneling on the underside, a bodyguard or two in the back seat and a chase car close behind. I took my chances in a car provided by a driver whom I had met on a previous trip, which was probably just as well. Improvised Explosive Devices ― a term never used in Vietnam were capable of blowing up U.S. armored vehicles and shredding any steel-plated car.
The euphoria over the success of the raid on bin Laden’s compound raises disturbing memories in Korea as well. The ups and downs of the Korean War form one of the darkest chapters in U.S. military history. The hubris of General Douglas MacArthur, after the success of the landing of U.S. marines at Incheon in September 1950, offers a cautionary tale for any military commander inclined to make inflated claims of success. The triumph over the North Koreans who had invaded the South in June 1950 was followed by the defeat and retreat of American forces in the face of Chinese troops whose entry into the war was never anticipated by senior American officers whose careers rested on their ability to flatter MacArthur in his old age.
All that said, however, the image of highly trained U.S. troops descending on a compound near the Pakistan capital of Islamabad does raise intriguing questions about where they might strike next. Bin Laden may be a hero to terrorists across the Arab world, but no one can deny the Americans carried out their mission with stunning aplomb. So then, who or what might be next on the list? If American electronic gadgetry, from satellite imagery to email eves-dropping, is so awesome just think how much the Americans know about the fun and games played by Kim Jong-il and the ruling elite of generals, Workers’ Party officials and government bureaucrats. May we assume U.S. intelligence experts have their eyes on all Kim Jong-il’s residences, on every move he makes, and on his son and heir Kim Jong-un as well? For decades the U.S. and South Korea have been in dire need of accurate Intel on the North. Might they now be as capable of striking at the heart of the Kim dynasty as they were of taking out Osama bin Laden?
Not that anyone thinks that’s going to happen. Skirmishes in the Middle East would be in the category of minor flare-ups compared to a second Korean War. Still, it would be interesting to know what high-tech is doing to strip North Korea of its secrecy. It’s safe to assume the North Koreans are wondering too.
The writer is an author and journalist in Korea for a number of years. He wrote three books on Korea: ``Korea Betrayed,” ``Kim Dae-jung and Sunshine,” and ``Korean Dynasty” featuring Hyundai Group and its founder Chung Ju-yung. He can be reached at kirkdon@yahoo.com.