Korea is at the Heart of the Struggle Between Freedom and Tyranny
It is absolutely ironic that the divided nation of Korea should serve as a vortex of global confrontation. Yet, It represents for the entire world to see an age-old standoff between tyranny and freedom.
By Dennis Jamison – June 25, 2019
Not long after the smoke had cleared and the dust had settled from the battles of World War II, President Harry S. Truman, reorganized the United States’ military for protecting America and for the preservation of America’s values in the world. Truman wanted the Armed Forces to be capable and ready to defend the nation, or to defend the friends of freedom when needed. Truman’s vision was to create a more unified department of national defense. Truman’s actions provided incredibly intuitive preparation for the U.S. military to be ready when North Korea invaded their southern neighbor without any real warning on June 25, 1950.
Of course, for many Americans under the age of 50, the Korean War (previously known as the “Korean Conflict” in politically sanitized language) may not be understood as a major military confrontation like the U.S. involvement in Vietnam. Nevertheless, this conflict was a global war. When one considers that the Soviet Union, the newly formed Communist regime of the People’s Republic of China (P.R.C.), as well as North Korea (the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea – D.P.R.K.), all participated in fighting to take over South Korea against the joint military forces of the participant nations of the United Nations. It was limited to the nation of Korea, but It definitely represented a global confrontation – quite unlike the Vietnam War.
The world was much different in the 1960s as compared to the 1950s – very different almost everywhere. But, one of the biggest differences between what took place in Korea and what took place in Vietnam was that the U.N. took action to intervene in the Korean War. The conflict in the tiny nation of Vietnam can be viewed as Korea – Take 2. Vietnam was taken by the Communists, but their desire to take over South Korea was thwarted by the U.N. In Vietnam, the U.N. Security Council was not able to act because of the Soviet Union’s use of the veto. This in itself is a drastic indication that the U.N. Security Council was emasculated by the 1960s.
Just as World War II exposed the fundamental flaws of the League of Nations, the conflict in Vietnam exposed a fundamental flaw of the United Nations. The original vision of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill, in discussing the ideals of the United Nations was doomed from the outset. The original ideals were conceived when the two leaders met and agreed upon the principles of the Atlantic Charter, which declared that peace was an essential foundational goal of the UN: “… they hope to see established a peace which will afford to all nations the means of dwelling in safety within their own boundaries, and which will afford assurance that all men in all lands may live out their lives in freedom…” But, the Communists sought more important ideals.
In reality, trusting Joseph Stalin and the Soviet Union as a member of the Security Council proved to be the same as the proverbial wolf trusted to protect the hen house. While the League of Nations could do little to stop Mussolini, or the Japanese Imperial Army, or Adolf Hitler, the U.N. has also been unable to do little to stop the spread of Communism throughout the world. To truly believe Stalin supported the concepts of freedom and peace in the world proved to be extremely naive when the U.N. Charter was signed in 1945. There was only the presumption of a commonly held definition of world peace. The Communists believed in the concept of peace in the way the old Roman Empire established the Pax Romana—absolute control created peace through fear.
According to the original U.N. charter, the Security Council was the organ at the heart of the U.N.’s effort to maintain stability and security in the world. The five major allies: Great Britain, France, Nationalist China, the Soviet Union, and the United States became the five permanent members of the Security Council. …” Having the Soviet Union, a nation controlled by a dictator, with a desire to establish world dominion, within the core five nations that formed the U.N. Security Council meant that the idea of “united nations” was sure to be an underlying misnomer.
Having a permanent seat on the Security Council enabled Stalin to do whatever he wanted in his quest for world domination through the establishment of International Communism. Originally, old “Uncle Joe” Stalin appeared to the world as the victim of Hitler, and had joined the Allies to fight the Nazis. But this was only after his secretive and failed efforts to unite with Hitler through the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact (Nazi-Soviet Non-aggression Pact). Only too late, the world would come to know what Russians knew of Stalin’s repressive dictatorship. Yet, it was too good to be true for the dictator Stalin. His intent was not in alignment with the vision of Roosevelt and Churchill.
Soon after World War II, the foundation of the Berlin Wall was built at the instigation of Moscow. While the Security Council could not act in the forced detention of East Berliners because the Soviets used their veto power extensively while Stalin continued installing repressive dictatorships throughout the Eastern European nations and in North Korea. When Stalin initiated the blockade of the major Western nations supply routes to occupied Berlin in 1948, the United States through the Berlin Airlift resolved the problem to ensure that Berlin would remain free.
The Security Council could not act when Stalin refused to withdraw Soviet troops from Eastern Europe, and the “Iron Curtain” fell between those Eastern European nations and the rest of the Free World. The Security Council could not act when Communists instigated a civil war in Greece. President Harry Truman and the U.S. assisted Greece, Turkey, and most of Europe through serious investment in the Marshall Plan. The United States also took an active role in helping to rebuild Europe into an economically and politically strong Europe.
Amazingly, when North Korea invaded South Korea in June of 1950, the Security Council was able to act because the Soviet Union’s ambassador was absent. But, it was good old “Uncle Joe” Stalin who gave the consent to Kim Il Sung to invade the south. June 25th was a Sunday, and President Harry Truman had been visiting his home in Independence, Mo. He received a telephone call from Secretary of State Dean Acheson who informed Truman that the North Korean government of Kim Il Sung had launched a surprise invasion of South Korea. In the moment, President Truman seemed ready to return to Washington, D.C., but Acheson told him that the commander in chief should get some sleep, and the secretary would provide relevant updates.
The following morning, Truman visited his brother while his wife and daughter attended local church services. A second call from Acheson that afternoon prompted Truman to fly back to Washington, D.C. President Truman ultimately decided to support U.N. Resolution 82, which requested troops from member nations to assist the Republic of Korea in defending its freedom. Actually, the armed intervention into the Korean peninsula represented only one of the possible moments in the history of the U.N. in which the organization fulfilled its purpose. The ideals of the world at peace has eroded over time due to the fear the Communists have inculcated in the world, even to simply challenge their tyrannical authority. Communism has successfully been able to undermine American authority in Cuba, Vietnam, in Africa, and in Central America. And now, Cuba, China, and the remnant of the Soviet Union is flexing muscle in Venezuela.
It is absolutely ironic that the divided nation of Korea should serve as a vortex of global confrontation. Yet, It represents for the entire world to see an age-old standoff between tyranny and freedom. The two nations are almost symbols for the two political realities that exist in the world today. The confrontation could be resolved peacefully, but it may ultimately be the will of the people that will determine their own fate. Over 200 years ago, a nation was created based upon the notion that all people were endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights. That nation should recognize more than any other the desire “…to see established a peace which will afford to all nations the means of dwelling in safety within their own boundaries, and which will afford assurance that all men in all lands may live out their lives in freedom…”
Formerly a contributor to the Communities at the Washington Times and Fairfax Free Citizen, his more current articles appear in Canada Free Press and Communities Digital News. During the 2016 presidential primaries, he was the leader of a network of writers, bloggers, and editors who promoted the candidacy of Dr. Ben Carson. Jamison founded “We the People” – Patriots, Pilgrims, Prophets Writers’ Network and the Citizen Sentinels Network. Both are volunteer groups for grassroots citizen-journalists and activists intent on promoting and preserving the inviolable God-given freedoms rooted in the founding documents.
Jamison also co-founded RedAmericaConsulting to identify, counsel, and support citizen-candidates, who may not have much campaign money, but whose beliefs and deeds reflect the role of public servants rather than power-hungry politicians.