The Korean War

Product Information

One of the problems I had while choosing to read a particular history of the Korean War was this. Most history books which are available in English today are written by American or British historians. Occasionally, we might find a French or German book in English translation, but otherwise this is it. (There are lots of books on Indian history in English by Indian historians and writers, but that is a unique case, and so I'm going to ignore that for the purposes of our discussion.) So, because of this, a typical history book in English is going to have a British or American bias. Of course, historians try to be neutral, and try to provide the relevant facts, with objective analysis, but the bias always creeps in. For example, a typical British or American version of the Korean War could go like this – "The army of the evil Chinese empire, joined together with the North Koreans and tried to take over the whole of Korea. The heroic American army intervened with the help of friends and helped the South Korean people. In a furious war waged between the armies of the free world and of the communist totalitarians, the noble armies of the free world triumphed. That is why we have a democratic, free South Korea today, which is one of the biggest Asian economies, while totalitarian North Korea is poor and primitive." This is the kind of history which is peddled by the international press, and media, and this is the history which most of us are aware of. So I was worried that a history of the war by an American or British historian would be a version of this. Maybe a sophisticated version, but still very similar to this.

Access-restricted-item true Addeddate 2012-02-28 21:03:04 Bookplateleaf 0010 Boxid IA178901 Boxid_2 CH119501 Camera Canon EOS 5D Mark II City New York Donor This is a very solid book, and an important read, because it also tries to go beyond the chessboard tactics and politics, and provide some insight into cultures, and the cultural clash, and the cardinal divide between the West and the East. It would be even better if there was more information from the other side, but again, the author laments a dearth of material from the "other" side. Even so, it's a top notch work of history.In 2008 he received the Westminster Medal of the RUSI for his lifetime contribution to Military Literature, and in 2009 the Edgar Wallace Trophy of the London Press Club. I have mixed emotions - Hastings is a superb historian and one I recommend. His wide view treatment of the Korean War is excellent. He lays out the political, military and ideological factors that led to the war and sustained it for the three years it ran, the inextricably interlaced influences of the leadership and decision making personalities, the tactics and strategic considerations - examined from the perspectives of both sides, the US, Britain, South Korea and the UN on one side and the Soviets, Red Chinese and North Koreans on the other. It is illuminating, and perceptive - and well worth reading the book. In addition to the conflict as a whole, he also devotes chapters to specialized topics such as the air war, intelligence, prisoners of war, that nicely examine their dedicated topics within the larger, wider narrative of the war as a whole to which the bulk of the book is devoted.

The essence of McCloy's argument, which would serve as the justification for all that was done in Korea in the three years that followed, was that it was an idealistic fantasy to suppose that the United States could merely hold the ring, serve as neutral umpires while Koreans worked out their own destiny. Some Korean leaders must be singled out from the mob of contending factions and assisted to win and retain power. It must surely be the men on the spot, Hodge and his staff, who were best qualified to decide which Koreans these should be. The American military rulers employed no further deceits to dignify the process by which they now set about installing a congenial regime. Just as the Russians, at this period, were securing control of North Korea for a Communist regime, so the only credentials that the Americans sought to establish for the prospective masters of South Korea were their hostility to communism and willingness to do business with the Americans. If this appears a simplistic view of American policy, the policy itself could scarcely have been less subtle.

CIA has its beginning. They do a lot of low-tier operations. Mostly people desert them or are killed. The operations are rushed and overly optimistic. Still they keep getting more money. The Koreans themselves make for terrible agents. Initial war. Lots of focus on South Korean citizens and the butchery of Communists and how much violence they were causing. Even towards people who hate the South Korean dictatorship and initially wanted the Communists to come. They kill people if their family owned land or industry. In 2019 he received the Bronze Medal for the US Council on Foreign Relations Arthur Ross Award for VIETNAM: An Epic History of a Tragic War. Hastings argues that China’s intervention in the war was, to a large degree, motivated by a sense of patriotism, rather than a reflexive pro-Communist ideology. The Americans had, of course, committed naval forces to Formosa, which the Chinese viewed as a threat to their sovereignty; crucially, they also thought the defeat of US forces in Korea could resolve the Formosa issue. Hastings also argues that the chief aim of the Soviet Union’s Korean policy was to avoid a direct confrontation with the US, and that the Chinese acted unilaterally (more recent research into the issue has largely reached the same conclusion). Although Soviet-North Korean relations cooled as the war ground on, Soviet diplomatic and military support had, in a very real sense, made North Korea’s aggression possible.

He states North Korean soldiers were "savage hoards" while U.S. soldiers were "restrained platoons." Those "savage hoards" had their country invaded. I guess they should have politely asked for the invaders to leave. And the "restrained platoons" killed women and children so they didn't have to care for any prisoners of war. How very restrained of them! To the relief of the committee in Washington, the Russians readily accepted the 38th Parallel as the limit of their advance. Almost a month before the first Americans could be landed in South Korea, the Red Army reached the new divide -- and halted there. It is worth remarking that, if Moscow had declined the American plan and occupied all Korea, it is unlikely that the Americans could or would have forced a major diplomatic issue. To neither side, at this period, did the peninsula seem to possess any inherent value, except as a testing ground of mutual intentions. The struggle for political control of China herself was beginning in earnest. Beside the fates and boundaries of great nations that were now being decided, Korea counted for little. Stalin was content to settle for half. At no time in the five years that followed did the Russians show any desire to stake Moscow's power and prestige upon a direct contest with the Americans for the extension of Soviet influence south of the Parallel. Everything is biased from a western perspective. He notes Chinese propaganda but not the U.S. propaganda. All fault lies with the North Koreans and Chinese and none with the U.S. He criticizes the Chinese for the same things he applauds the U.S. for. On its face, this is a standard, establishment account of the Korean War. However, once you actually dissect much of what Hastings says and insinuates, you realize this book is filled with inconsistencies, disgusting romanticizing of war, and propaganda. Some of the main issues:

Prison camps. Largely Chinese prisons as North Koreans just killed prisoners. The prisons were extremely poor and many Westerners died. But later China tried to improve their image by giving the prisoners a bit basic healthcare. They tried to make the prisoners communists, but they used terrible tactics. Perhaps this is inevitable with the Korean War which the author describes with much caustic comment in which Cold War superpower geopolitics alone escalated a regional conflict into an undeclared superpower war that narrowly missed precipitating WWIII. As the author describes, with UN troops in the field and the easily war wearied home fronts in America and Britain feeling little personal investment in the war’s nominal cause – the defense of a corrupt and unpopular S. Korean dictatorship – the war could be interpreted (as Hastings does) as a preview for the south Asian conflict a generation later. Hastings’ narrative is particularly poignant when recalling the similarities between the two especially the implication that the U.S. learned little to nothing for all the blood, sweat, and tears shed on the Korean peninsula – don’t wage an unpopular war to prop up a corrupt regime with no support in their own country much less yours, high tek fire and air power doesn’t work as well on a low tek enemy, don’t underestimate the foe just because they’re “gooks,” and more. Please note: without maps and diagrams to indicate troop dispositions and battlefield maneuvers, this audiobook is likely to disappoint arm chair generals but I find the attention to the war’s larger context more than compensates. I remember seeing this in bookshops when it was first published in the 80s. I thought about buying it at that time but decided I didn’t have enough of an interest in the subject. It’s quite topical now though… Suk Bun Yoon, the fourteen-year-old schoolboy who had twice escaped from Seoul under communist occupation, was living with the remains of his family as suppliants upon the charity of a village south of the capital in the spring of 1951. A government mobilisation decree was suddenly thrust upon the village: twenty able-bodied men were required for military service. Suk’s family was offered a simple proposal by the villagers: if the boy would go to the army in place of one of their own, they would continue to feed his parents. urn:lcp:koreanwar00hast:epub:3ae4067f-6aed-44c7-a949-4ffab90169ab Extramarc The Indiana University Catalog Foldoutcount 0 Identifier koreanwar00hast Identifier-ark ark:/13960/t1vd7rp0p Isbn 0671528238