One Attack Can Tarnish, But Can't Break an Alliance
By Steven Borowiec
Living in Korea as a foreign journalist means living with the possibility of breaking news at any moment. News can break and flip a day’s, even a week’s, schedule on its head at a moment’s notice.
Usually the news is fairly benign. North Korea firing missiles into the waters off its east coast, or some official making uncouth comments about a ‘sensitive’ topic. The article(s) get filed, the news is dissected and the public’s attention moves on.
On rare occasions, the news is genuinely horrifying, as it was on Thursday morning when it was learned that U.S. Ambassador Mark Lippert had been attacked by a blade-wielding assailant, suffering serious wounds to his face and wrist. He was rushed to hospital and underwent surgery to repair a deep wound on his cheek. Doctors said that had the cut to his face been slightly deeper, the attack could have been fatal.
Lippert was attacked by Kim Ki-Jong, a 55-year-old extreme nationalist with a history of violence. In 2010 Kim lobbed blocks of concrete at the then-Japanese ambassador to Seoul, and once attempted to light himself on fire outside the Blue House. (‘Too bad he didn’t succeed’, some probably thought on Thursday morning.)
Kim has been described in the media as an ‘activist’, which he is, in the sense that he liked to stand around in public places holding placards and shouting slogans. But he represents no organized political movement. His online community ‘Woori Madang’, or ‘Our Garden’, is said to have had little more than a dozen active members.
His and his few colleagues views’ are fringe to say the least. He was supportive of North Korea and its xenophobic ideology of closing Korea off to all foreign influences. He considers the U.S. presence in South Korea an obstacle to inter-Korean dialogue and eventual reunification.
In attacking Lippert, Kim probably believes that he was acting in the tradition of lionized Korean independence activists such as Ahn Jung-geun, who committed acts of violence against Korea’s colonial overlords as a act toward achieving independence. By forcibly removing foreign influences, such reasoning goes, Koreans are left free to reconcile among themselves.
Since arriving in South Korea last fall, Lippert had received plenty of positive attention. He was friendly and outgoing, appearing often in public, sometimes with his cute dog, Grigsby. He was raising his newborn son in Seoul and studying the Korean language.
After the attack, South Koreans were eager to show their sorrow for such a vicious act. Outpourings of grief and well-wishes followed immediately.
Koreans have a tendency to feel implicated in the actions of any fellow citizen: pride when a fellow Korean succeeds, shame at the misdeeds of a compatriot.
It’s important to keep in mind that along with representing no credible agenda, Kim is certainly not representative of the Korean people. He acted alone, with no backing or organized support. He is literally one in 50 million South Korean citizens. But all it takes is one lunatic to stain an entire country.
Lippert is recovering and has already voiced his eagerness to get back to work advancing the U.S.-ROK alliance. He can expect that for the rest of his time in Korea, the people of this country will try harder than ever to show the positive side of their country. Thursday’s incident was an attack on one man trying to do good work, and on the spirit of international cooperation.
Kim’s actions may have temporality disrupted a country and an alliance, but after the news cycle has moved on, both will move ahead stronger than before.
Steven Borowiec is a Los Angeles Times special correspondent in Seoul.