May 21, 2013

You are here: Home / Archives for Jarrod Chlapowski

The Fight is Not Always the Same

April 11, 2011 by

On March 31, the South Korean Constitutional Court upheld a 1962 law describing homosexual activity between two consenting adults as reciprocal rape, reversing on appeal a 2010 decision by a military court declaring the law to be unconstitutional. The military court held that homosexuality was strictly a personal issue and not subject to persecution, whereas the Constitutional Court cited concern with discipline throughout the South Korean military. Specifically, the Constitutional Court was concerned with superiors harassing subordinates if homosexual behavior were allowed.

The fight for allowing open service within South Korean ranks is a bit different from the fight in the U.S. South Korean youth are forced into mandatory conscription with no recognition of conscientious objection, so recruiting shortages are not a driving issue. In fact, not fulfilling one’s military obligation by taking advantage of various deferrals or work-arounds is seen as a sign of cowardice, in many cases severely limiting one’s societal rise. When asked about their sexual orientation in pre-service psychological questioning, many South Koreans opt to lie and endure three years of silence rather than risk social ostracization.

The South Korean gay rights movement overall is about thirty to forty years behind its U.S. counterpart. The first gay South Korean magazine just started printing in 1998, gay themed clubs are mostly restricted to a single avenue in Seoul, and mainstream television is just beginning to incorporate openly gay characters. One thing to consider, however, is the influence of social media on South Korean social progression, as well as South Korea’s overall fast-track pace in catching up to the West. What results is a late but quickly evolving gay rights movement that is more defined by generation than overall societal views.

Because LGBT acceptance in South Korea is largely generational and military service is mandatory, the lower enlisted will naturally consist of non-military careerists who will likely be tolerant of the gay rights movement, while the career upper-enlisted and officer ranks will more often consist of those with homophobic views. So it is no surprise that the Constitutional Court’s view of possible disarray was framed in the context of superior-subordinate relationships, when the U.S. concept of detriment to unit cohesion more focused on peer-to-peer relationships.

The battle for open service within the South Korean military has been ongoing for quite a few years now. The current threat to watch for in South Korean politics is a more overt law discouraging open service in response to the growing LGBT rights movement in South Korea, similar to the situation in the U.S. in 1993, which resulted in “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

The hope is that progress in South Korea will maintain its current pace so that the result will not be further discrimination codified into law. Regardless, this is an interesting situation to watch, especially while the U.S. military undergoes its own transition toward a policy of open and honest service.

Filed Under: Contributors, Defense Policy Magazine, Senior Contributors Tagged With: , ,

The Regional Implications of Japan in Crisis

March 29, 2011 by

The current regional turmoil precipitated by the wave of disasters in Japan presents fantastic opportunity for North Korea to take advantage of that turmoil for its own gain. However, why the DPRK instead chooses a relatively amicable stance at the moment should be reason for pause.

A Perfect Monsoon

As Northeast Asia goes, the beginning of 2011 was dominated by a scramble to clean up the mess left in late 2010 after a November strike on the South Korean island of Yeonpyeong by the North Korean military. Subsequent barking to appease respective constituencies aside, the saber rattling of a country about to take on a new heir and desperately seeking demonstrations of strength was not at all surprising.

A February 11 attempt to ease tensions between the two Koreas inevitably broke down amid accusations of aggression by both sides – North Korea for initiating the attacks on Yeonpyeong and South Korea for conducting annual exercises recently adapted for dealing with a potential North Korean regime implosion.

North Korea has good reason to conduct itself aggressively in the region. A country known to consider three meals a day gluttony and which reserves its best rations for its expansive military is experiencing its worst food crisis in years due to unfortunate weather and the reduction in aid from the South.

With the North facing donor fatigue, dwindling in-country food production capacity, and  few resources that it can exchange for food, the relative showering of aid that normally comes with holiday celebrations did not occur, further reducing faith in the regime. But loudly threatening “War!” or “Nukes!” is a surefire way to encourage an inflow of external resources in an effort to maintain the regional status quo.

Also encouraging North Korean aggression is the pending leadership changeover from Kim Jung Il to his son, Kim Jung Eun, who has not had the benefit of the pre-coronation deification that his father enjoyed. While internal propaganda is in overdrive right now, frantically rewriting history to artificially create Kim Jung Eun’s rise to prominence and power, it will be years yet before the younger Kim has the support he needs to replicate Kim Jung Il’s firm grasp.

But in the meantime, the regime is certainly working towards that goal. Kim Jung Eun must appear strong, and do so in a way that stands out from his father. And actions such as those on Yeonpyeong Island go a long way in generating a perception of strength.

Now fast-forward to March. The U.S. is preoccupied with the Middle Eastern proletariat explosion. Russia is just recovering from its own economic crisis and likely not eager to take on any additional obligations. Japan has embarked on a long road to recovery from the recent earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear radiation crisis, the damage from which still is unknown. China has been a tepid on quelling North Korean aggression due to its reluctance to don the mantle of regional leader just yet. And South Korea is still miffed about the island incident from last year. There would seem to be no better time for four-star general Kim Jung Eun to flex his mad dictator muscles.

And what does North Korea do? It gives Japan tsunami victims an unspecified “fund” and invites South Korean officials into country to investigate Mt. Paektu for potential volcanic activity. Huh?

The Significance of Mt. Paektu

Mt. Paektu has enormous regional significance for both Koreas. It is featured in the South Korean national anthem and is the supposed birthplace of Kim Jung Il. If the volcano were to erupt, it would have significant cultural implications. More imminent is the geography of the volcano itself, including a large lake with significant potential to flood local areas and cause widespread destruction. Floods breed disease, famine spreads disease, and a devastating humanitarian crisis results.

So North Korea caved in on the standoff, and talks, which were delayed since February, have resumed for humanitarian as opposed to political purposes. However, there may be deeper considerations in North Korean actions.  In a standoff with South Korea in which stubbornness indicates regime strength, being the first to back down no matter the reason risks losing significant capital.  Therefore, potential damage from a volcanic eruption aside, it would seem the political risk of not pre-empting a potential humanitarian crisis outweighs the risk of looking weak in a standoff.

The interpretation: Kim Jung Eun’s succession is not as secure as the regime would like to pretend, and a diseased and malnourished population may very well rise up and choose a different leader.

The US and South Korea have already adjusted their joint military exercises to accommodate possible political turmoil during the upcoming North Korean leadership change. And it is very possible that the transition could not have come at a better time. Until then, it is not unreasonable at all to expect a friendlier North Korea, which would be unusual in any other context.

Filed Under: Contributors, Defense Policy Magazine, Senior Contributors

The APFT: Perspective and Practicality

March 7, 2011 by
If you ask a typical male soldier in a candid environment about his perspective on females serving, he’ll likely tell you that he knows a few “hardcore” females, but most get by on performing at a minimum standard. Regardless of whether this perception is realistic or not (fyi: female standards on military physical fitness tests are notoriously easier than those for male counterparts), the lower minimum standards set females aside as “less” in the minds of many male soldiers. The few “hardcore” females are seen that way because they perform at a level that is beyond the minimum passing standard even by male standards. 

The Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) itself has never been a perfect test of soldier performance.  The ability to perform sit-ups depends more on the strength of one’s hip-flexors than strength in one’s core abdominal muscles. Push-ups can be more dependent on upper body weight more than strength. And the endurance required for running 2 miles does not test the much more essential ability to perform quick bursts of speed in uneven terrain. Addressing these issues with the APFT are two new TRADOC tests that theoretically do a better job of testing one’s ability to perform in combat environments.

The Army Physical Readiness Test (APRT) will include 5 events (to replace the current 3 of the APFT): a 60-yard shuttle run, a one-minute rower, a standing long-jump, one minute of push-ups, and a 1.5 mile run, all testing anaerobic capacity. The separate Army Combat Readiness Test (ACRT) will incorporate fitness drills emulating combat environments – done in full battle rattle.

Now, while these new standards may adequately address the outdated standards introduced in 1980 with the APFT, it still remains to be seen how female standards are to be taken into account with the new APRT and ACRT. If the new tests truly measure the ability to perform physical tasks in combat environments, the standards should be gender neutral. However, in order to ensure females and males are promoted at equal rates, grades of performance on these tests should not be weighted as heavily as they are with the current APFT.

A possible compromise would be to award 200 promotion points on physical fitness for just passing both the APRT and ACRT, matching the current maximum points awarded for APFT scores. Those performing well on both tests could earn rewards at the company level that would not affect career trajectory – passes, coins, etc. A solution like this would not only truly account for a soldier’s ability to be, well, a soldier, but it could further assist with the gender integration of the Army, which remains imperfect and to some degree stagnant.

Filed Under: Contributors, Defense Policy Magazine, Senior Contributors Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

Egyptian Democratization? You Got It.

February 6, 2011 by

For years the West has espoused the virtue of democratization – that the ability for peaceful protest, equal representation, true upward mobility in a fair economy is the essence of political evolution, and anything else is less. While the reality is likely not as rosy as might be painted, the level of oppression experienced by the majority of the Egyptian population – the average income of half the population at $2 or less a day – is surely worse than whatever will result from these riots and demonstrations. These folks have experienced true poverty unlike anything on the streets of America’s major cities, and all they want is the ability to move out of it.

Many academics, politicians, and pundits are concerned that the situation in Egypt is regionally inconvenient, and that the instability is bound to make Israel uncomfortable. The solution to maintaining regional peace and stability, however, is not the oppression of neighboring populations by autocratic regimes. As inconvenient as the situation may right now be for regional stability, from the perspective of the millions of Egyptians living in abject poverty, not much could be worse than the current situation.

Ultimately, a democratized Egypt should be a positive thing, reducing conflicts with the West and with Israel. Are we not witnessing the exact domino effect predicted in various iterations of Democratic Peace Theory? If Western countries are so concerned about what will fill the leadership vacuum, then they should provide the resources, influence, infrastructure, etc. so that the worst case scenario does not occur. Regardless, it is the right of the Egyptian people to demand the same freedoms afforded most Westerners, and it is not the right of the West to oppress those demands for the sake of political convenience.

Filed Under: The Crossfire Tagged With: , , ,

“Crisis” Between Koreas Averted…Again

January 26, 2011 by

After a much contested artillery incident that left four South Koreans dead in November, tensions on the Korean peninsula have steadily rose. Joint US/South Korean military exercises – always a cause for North Korean barking even on a regular schedule – heightened those tensions, but not to the point of openly causing a breakdown into all out war. Amid barks back and forth and skirting ever so close to conflict, a date for resuming negotiations has finally been proposed by South Korea to occur in the next few weeks, coinciding with a visit from a senior US diplomat among other high-level meetings.

Regional leaders (including de facto regional member, the United States) have all vaguely insisted that North Korea commit to a less violent stance before proceeding in the talks, though it is unclear what exactly the less violent threshold will be. Given North Korea’s tendency to loud barking in order to receive a continuous supply of foreign aid, it is doubtful that whatever draw-down occurs will be permanent.

However, no original member of the 6-party talks is likely eager to change the status quo beyond quelling the current standstill between the Koreas. A US presence in Korea allows a certain control over the region and solidifies agreements beneficial to trade. China has thus far been able to avoid directly admonishing North Korea, a situation inconvenient to its current growth cycle. The regional stability the US provides allows Japan to avoid the difficulties of recreating a standing military. The North Korean regime depends on an everpresent enemy to bark at and bring in resources which it finds in the US. And of course South Korea benefits strongly from the security the US provides.

All this means is that the threshold for what qualifies as a less-violent North Korea will invariably be low, of which North Korea is well aware. In solidifying its heir-apparent – Kim Jong Eun – as a strong leader, North Korea will be very much inclined to bark, and bark loudly, over the next few months or so. The result is a collision of complimentary interests that will create a situation that will look much more dangerous than it really is, provided each country does not paint itself in to dark a corner. The talks on February 11th are a positive step out of this tangle, though likely the situation will repeat itself again soon.

Filed Under: Contributors, Defense Policy Magazine, Senior Contributors Tagged With: , , , , ,

Praying for Rain after the SOTU

January 26, 2011 by

The 2011 State of the Union (SOTU) address was rife with motivating statements, applause moments, wild cheers, and statements that will be torn apart, each interest group holding up their favorite lines as if they were the most important of the night while ignoring the rest. Many of these interest groups will be just as angry towards promises unfulfilled as they are jubilant tonight, and much of this anger will be ignored by their peers. Still, key defense items came up that may or may not lead to a number of short media cycles, frenzies, and/or flavors of the day.

The President committed to open service for gay and lesbian troops this year. The phrasing did not point to certification of a repeal plan, but to full open service, so one can presume the necessary former will occur soon to leave time for the latter. However, the wording is vague enough such that failure to deliver can be blamed on contextual distractions and poor political timing. Inclusion of open service in the SOTU is a good sign, but certainly not indicative of any sort of time line for the full technical repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the implementation of open service.

The President also indicated a beginning to a withdrawal from Afghanistan in June of this year. A full time line was not provided, and the justification of the withdrawal was based on dubious claims that the situations in both Afghanistan and Pakistan are on a positive trajectory. Of course, this is not to say that a withdrawal is not planned or that it would not happen. The sharp contrast to probable reality, however, suggests political pandering that could easily transform into delayed or shifted action.

Bottom line: the SOTU accomplished what it was designed to accomplish – a few political hits; some motivating, pandering moments; and a number of seeds planted that may or may not come to fruition. It is now up to groups interested in growing those seeds to plow the ground and pray for rain.

Filed Under: Contributors, Defense Policy Magazine, Senior Contributors Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Filibuster Reform, Finally

December 13, 2010 by

For quite a while the filibuster has been used to prevent the majority from using it’s overwhelming authority to keep the minority at bay. Usually associated with a strong, media-gaining spectacle to shame wavering votes into backing down – Strom Thurmond’s 24-hour marathon filibuster against civil rights reform is among the best known – lately it has been used as a lazy means to obstruct. When legislation that is seen as controversial by the minority is introduced by the majority and there really isn’t time to deal with a full-blown, traditional filibuster threat, there is very little incentive to call the minority out and force them to read phone books or their grandma’s biscuit recipe. Instead, we get attempted cloture votes that fail time and time again.

This is why the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (NDAA) failed in September and again in November, and why we’re probably going to be stuck with a continuing resolution this year with a few items on NDAA voted on as stand-alone votes. This is also a major reason why “compromise” and “middle ground” are such bad words in partisan Washington at the moment.

Enter Fix the Senate Now, an internal uprising to change filibuster rules to overcome the partisan gridlock that has defined US politics the past few years. Check out the site for more detailed info. Key to look at are the site’s 8 principles:

  1. On the first legislative day of a new Congress, the Senate may, by majority vote, end a filibuster on a rules change and adopt new rules.
  2. There should only be one opportunity to filibuster any given measure or nomination, so motions to proceed and motions to refer to conference should not be subject to filibuster.
  3. Secret “holds” should be eliminated.
  4. The amount of delay time after cloture is invoked on a bill should be reduced.
  5. There should be no post-cloture debate on nominations.
  6. Instead of requiring that those seeking to break a filibuster muster a specified number of votes, the burden should be shifted to require those filibustering to produce a specified number of votes to continue the filibuster.
  7. Those waging a filibuster should be required to continuously hold the floor and debate.
  8. Once all Senators have had a reasonable opportunity to express their views, every measure or nomination should be brought to a yes or no vote in a timely manner.

This is catching steam. However, it’s hard to see how this could build up enough momentum over the lame-duck to really accomplish its stated goal.

Filed Under: Contributors, Defense Policy Magazine, Senior Contributors Tagged With: , , , , ,
Social Buttons by Linksku