By Mark Peterson
The news recently that a Chinese-made movie has been blocked from being shown in Korean theaters tells us a lot about what is going on in Asia currently. China seems to be doing everything wrong, and the glorification of the Chinese role in the Korean War, a war that didn't go well for China at all, seems an obtuse move at best.
For example, the Chinese were defeated soundly in Gapyeong twice ― in April and again in May of 1951. The first battle of Gapyeong was fought between the British Commonwealth nations of Canada, Australia and New Zealand and the Chinese. The second battle of Gapyeong was between the Utah National Guard and the Chinese. The outcome of both battles was an overwhelming, lopsided defeat for the Chinese.
The current Chinese story on film is in sharp contrast with a film I am personally working on. I've come to look into the story of the second battle of Gapyeong, also called the "Miracle Battle of Gapyeong." In my film, a documentary, not a feature film with a healthy degree of both fantasy and propaganda, we are factually telling how a Utah National Guard battalion defeated a Chinese "human wave" regiment by a score of 350 to 0.
There were 4,000 Chinese in the attack in the middle of the night of May 26, 1951 and 240 Utah National Guardsmen on the line defending one of the main routes to Seoul. The Chinese lost 350 men, while the national guardsmen lost none. None. There were a few injuries, but no deaths. It was a real miracle.
The story of the Utah artillery battalion ― the 213th Armored Artillery Battalion ― has been swallowed up in another battle at Gapyeong (old spelling Kapyong) where the Canadians and the Australians defeated a similarly overwhelming number of Chinese. The Australian/Canadian battle at Gapyeong is well-covered in media ― videos, online articles, and commemorations at an international level every year when the ambassadors from Australian and Canada bring attention to their battles. The Canadian/Australian "Battle of Kapyong" was a major accomplishment. But what distinguishes the Utah battle is its miraculous nature ― no deaths.
Both battles were lopsided. In the Canadian/Australian battle in April, the reported Chinese deaths were around 1,000. In the Utah battle in May, there were 350. In the first battle, the Aussies lost 32 soldiers, while 59 were wounded and three captured. The Canadians lost 10, while 23 were wounded. In addition, there were three Americans killed and 12 wounded and New Zealand lost two and five were wounded. The April battle saw 47 killed, and several wounded. In the May battle, none were killed and there were only a few wounded.
The Utah battalion was an artillery unit composed of five "batteries" ― the equivalent of "companies" in infantry units. Artillery units usually support infantry from positions several miles behind the lines, since artillery shells can be fired a distance of five miles or more. But the history of artillery units is not a happy one in Korea. My military history associates tell me that several artillery units were overrun and destroyed in the Korean War. In the first battle of Gapyeong as well, the New Zealand unit was an artillery unit, and two of their soldiers died. This makes the miracle of the second battle of Gapyeong, no deaths, all the more remarkable.
Why is the Utah battle at Gapyeong, the second battle, not as well known or as well publicized as the first battle of Gapyeong? The main reason is that the Utah National Guard was one of many units in the American Army's contribution to the war. The Utah unit was "nationalized" when it was mobilized. This is unlike the situation today where American National Guard units in Afghanistan and Iraq were deployed as whole units and returned all together.
The 213th artillery was mobilized from the Utah National Guard, but was "brought up to strength" by adding over 50 percent of its complement from regular army personnel from around the country. It was fighting as a "nationalized" unit, and as such, its story has been swallowed up in all the other American combat units.
A total of 1,780,000 American soldiers fought in the Korean War, and the battles and the stories are numerous. The American ambassador cannot commemorate each of the many battles. By contrast, there were a total of 26,000 Canadians, 18,000 Aussies, and 4,700 New Zealanders. All together, the three commonwealth countries represent 2.7% of the American commitment. They make the most of their only major battle, the first battle of Gapyeong. And the second battle of Gapyeong has been largely overlooked.
But no more! The documentary we are making will help. And we are going to get more of the story reported online and in the media ― including this article.
In the meantime, China is starting to tell its story with the full-length feature movie that tells of the heroism of their soldiers in Korea. That's not quite the way I see it. And on top of that, what kind of thought process are the Chinese steeped in to think that a movie glorifying their losing cause in Korea would be accepted in Korean theaters? They seem to be missing something on the "self-awareness" scale.
Mark Peterson (markpeterson@byu.edu) is professor emeritus of Korean, Asian and Near Eastern languages at Brigham Young University in Utah.
 |
For example, the Chinese were defeated soundly in Gapyeong twice ― in April and again in May of 1951. The first battle of Gapyeong was fought between the British Commonwealth nations of Canada, Australia and New Zealand and the Chinese. The second battle of Gapyeong was between the Utah National Guard and the Chinese. The outcome of both battles was an overwhelming, lopsided defeat for the Chinese.
The current Chinese story on film is in sharp contrast with a film I am personally working on. I've come to look into the story of the second battle of Gapyeong, also called the "Miracle Battle of Gapyeong." In my film, a documentary, not a feature film with a healthy degree of both fantasy and propaganda, we are factually telling how a Utah National Guard battalion defeated a Chinese "human wave" regiment by a score of 350 to 0.
There were 4,000 Chinese in the attack in the middle of the night of May 26, 1951 and 240 Utah National Guardsmen on the line defending one of the main routes to Seoul. The Chinese lost 350 men, while the national guardsmen lost none. None. There were a few injuries, but no deaths. It was a real miracle.
The story of the Utah artillery battalion ― the 213th Armored Artillery Battalion ― has been swallowed up in another battle at Gapyeong (old spelling Kapyong) where the Canadians and the Australians defeated a similarly overwhelming number of Chinese. The Australian/Canadian battle at Gapyeong is well-covered in media ― videos, online articles, and commemorations at an international level every year when the ambassadors from Australian and Canada bring attention to their battles. The Canadian/Australian "Battle of Kapyong" was a major accomplishment. But what distinguishes the Utah battle is its miraculous nature ― no deaths.
Both battles were lopsided. In the Canadian/Australian battle in April, the reported Chinese deaths were around 1,000. In the Utah battle in May, there were 350. In the first battle, the Aussies lost 32 soldiers, while 59 were wounded and three captured. The Canadians lost 10, while 23 were wounded. In addition, there were three Americans killed and 12 wounded and New Zealand lost two and five were wounded. The April battle saw 47 killed, and several wounded. In the May battle, none were killed and there were only a few wounded.
The Utah battalion was an artillery unit composed of five "batteries" ― the equivalent of "companies" in infantry units. Artillery units usually support infantry from positions several miles behind the lines, since artillery shells can be fired a distance of five miles or more. But the history of artillery units is not a happy one in Korea. My military history associates tell me that several artillery units were overrun and destroyed in the Korean War. In the first battle of Gapyeong as well, the New Zealand unit was an artillery unit, and two of their soldiers died. This makes the miracle of the second battle of Gapyeong, no deaths, all the more remarkable.
Why is the Utah battle at Gapyeong, the second battle, not as well known or as well publicized as the first battle of Gapyeong? The main reason is that the Utah National Guard was one of many units in the American Army's contribution to the war. The Utah unit was "nationalized" when it was mobilized. This is unlike the situation today where American National Guard units in Afghanistan and Iraq were deployed as whole units and returned all together.
The 213th artillery was mobilized from the Utah National Guard, but was "brought up to strength" by adding over 50 percent of its complement from regular army personnel from around the country. It was fighting as a "nationalized" unit, and as such, its story has been swallowed up in all the other American combat units.
A total of 1,780,000 American soldiers fought in the Korean War, and the battles and the stories are numerous. The American ambassador cannot commemorate each of the many battles. By contrast, there were a total of 26,000 Canadians, 18,000 Aussies, and 4,700 New Zealanders. All together, the three commonwealth countries represent 2.7% of the American commitment. They make the most of their only major battle, the first battle of Gapyeong. And the second battle of Gapyeong has been largely overlooked.
But no more! The documentary we are making will help. And we are going to get more of the story reported online and in the media ― including this article.
In the meantime, China is starting to tell its story with the full-length feature movie that tells of the heroism of their soldiers in Korea. That's not quite the way I see it. And on top of that, what kind of thought process are the Chinese steeped in to think that a movie glorifying their losing cause in Korea would be accepted in Korean theaters? They seem to be missing something on the "self-awareness" scale.
Mark Peterson (markpeterson@byu.edu) is professor emeritus of Korean, Asian and Near Eastern languages at Brigham Young University in Utah.
