June 19, 2002

THE CUP RUNNETH OVER

By Tom Plate

Geopolitics takes the playing field in U.S.-Korean match

(C) 2002 Asia Pacific Media Network

LOS ANGELES --- If ever a game were more than a game, this was it. Yes, it was difficult to watch the World Cup showdown between South Korea and the United States earlier this week (June 10) without envisioning larger geopolitical overtones.

That’s not to say you caught a glimpse of Henry Kissinger on the sidelines whispering in the ear of the U.S. coach, or a wizard geopolitical professor from Seoul National University plotting the next strike on a chalkboard.

And, yes, as a pure football game, it was titanic for the countless fans glued to their TVs the world over -- not to mention the partisan crowd roaring in the stands of the glisteningly modern South Korean stadium. And what a show it was!

A star Korean player was hit in the head and, bandaged and bleeding, was thrust back into the game. A lanky U.S. goalie stretched his body halfway to the parking lot to knock down a scorching shot that, had it scored, probably would have won the contest for the Koreans. Later, an utterly fair referee threw a furious penalty yellow card at a U.S. player for dangerous play.

It was everything a World Cup match should be, but it was more. Yes, on one level, it was a peaceful, rule-based sports conflict between two teams representing countries that are fundamentally allies. But on another, the intensity of the combat was exceptional, even by high-stakes World Cup standards. For the ferocity of the face-off on the field seemed to mirror the deep unease in the Seoul-Washington relationship -- and the growing anti-Americanism in South Korea.

This bilateral relationship just isn’t what it used to be. That truth surfaced last year. Even after the White House threw cold water on the South Korean government’s engagement policy with the North, the Blue House continued to cultivate ever warmer relations with Beijing. This continues to cause consternation in Washington and to engender annoyance in Taipei.

These are not small matters. Much has changed in two years. The Clinton administration’s Korean peninsula policy evolved into a triangular diplomacy among Seoul, Pyongyang and Washington. The goal was to cultivate good relations among all -- much like, in fact, China’s policy toward those three. But the Bush administration, in its general hatred of the few remaining Communist governments and its ambition to be different from the previous Democratic administration, initially turned its back on both Koreas. The Bush people, looking at North Korea and Cuba, sincerely wish to bring to closure the Reagan vision of expunging communism from the face of the Earth. But for many South Koreans, the Cold War really is over -- even as Communists pathetically keep hanging on to power in the North.

A half-century ago, many American soldiers died to keep the entire Korean peninsula from going Communist, but the truth is that only the older generation remembers and reveres that extraordinary U.S. sacrifice. And, today, decreasing numbers of Koreans honor America for its current commitment of some 37,000 U.S. troops to deter northern aggression.

Though it’s hard for some Americans to understand, dependency is not the preferred posture of any proud people, no matter how noble the foreign power’s motive.

That national pride was on clear display during the World Cup game as the favored South Korean team struggled not to overreact to the pro-Korean and anti-American emotions of the more than 60,000 hyped-up fans at the scene. But the pent-up emotion led to a curious anomaly. The U.S. team played with more unified discipline and commitment than the Koreans, who played an individualistic game. With the Americans in effect adopting an Asian style and the Koreans vice versa, the final score was a draw -- 1 to 1 -- in a game that most experts thought the Koreans would win.

America is far from a superpower in soccer. What would have happened if the Korean team had played more like disciplined Koreans and left the free-lance style to the Americans? Probably it would have won.

There’s a larger lesson there somewhere.

Previous Columns:

Metamorphosizing Out of a Cocoon (June 12, 2002)

Wanted: A New Vision for South Asia (June 5, 2002)

A Singer, a Capitalist Leader and a Currency Raider (May 29, 2002)

The Protectionist Circus in Washington (May 22, 2002)

(C) 2002 Asia Pacific Media Network